IS DEMOCRACY A MODERN-DAY SHIRK?

 IS DEMOCRACY  A MODERN-DAY SHIRK?

 P.Jainulabideen

In India and in majority of the countries of the world, people elect their leader democratically.In democracy , a majority of the people cast votes and elect their leader.

In Monarchy, When a king dies, his heir comes to the throne.In this system of governance of monarchy , people have no rights to select their leader.

But in the system of democracy,also called the people’s government, People elect their leader by themseleves.That is to say as people have the authority to elect their leader by themselves,it is called as People’s government.

If it is questioned whether this type of democratic goverment in which the majority of people choose their leader, is against islam? No ,Never at all.

The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) was both the spritiual leader and the ruler of the country.Therefore at his time period,there was no need for people to elect any leader.

Before his death,Prophet (PBUH) did not make any statements concerning anyone that so and so should be the next ruler after him.Eventhough there are several instances where Prophet (PBUH)  himself  identified Abubakr next in status to him,Prophet(PBUH) never said explicitly that Abubakr should become the leader after his death.

So, after the prophet’s death, there was tumult in electing the next ruler.After a period of commotion people elected Abubakr as their ruler and pledged allegiance to him.His successors were chosen in this method as well.This is mentioned here to make it clear that the democratic form of governance is not against islam.

But few say that democracy is not permitted in islam and casting votes is kufr.Be it an organistation or a country, only a majority can chose their leader.There will not be any Wahi(Divine revealation) for choosing their leader.

Few, with no in-depth knowledge of Islam lead innocent Islamic youth into a delusion by arguing that democracy is a modern-day shirk.But this delusion did not last long, even for those who argued in its favour.The reason for this is they wander to contest in the elections which is held democratically.

Today we see them contesting in elections,the same people who authored the article “Democracy is modern-day shirk“ thereby deluding the muslim youth.

 All those who argue democracy as shirk,have after a period of  time opted democracy.It doesnt stop here!, the funniest thing here is that they have fallen into the deep pit , engaging in politics and begging people for  votes.

This has now become a routine in the society to gather people in large numbers and once they have a large crowd, they utilise the same people and fall into the shirk.

Those who argue democracy as shirk delude people  by misinterpreting few Quranic verses.Let us now discuss all the arguments putforth by those who label democracy as a modern-day shirk.

"You do not worship besides Him but only names which you have named (forged) - you and your fathers - for which Allah has sent down no authority. The authority is for none but Allah. He has authorityed that you worship none but Him; that is the straight religion, but most men know not.

The Noble Qur’an 12:40

And judge, [O Muhammad], between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their inclinations and beware of them, lest they tempt you away from some of what Allah has revealed to you. And if they turn away - then know that Allah only intends to afflict them with some of their [own] sins. And indeed, many among the people are defiantly disobedient.Then is it the judgement of [the time of] ignorance they desire? But who is better than Allah in judgement for a people who are certain [in faith].

The Noble Qur’an 5:49, 50

The decision is only for Allah.' The Noble Qur’an
6:57, 12:40, 12:67

 In these verses it is said that both the authority and the right to legislate belongs only to Allah.But according to Indian democracy system of government both the authority and the right to legislate belongs to people.So democracy is against Qur’an.Since in democracy the right of Allah is handed into the hands of people,it is a modern-day shirk.This is their argument.This is no new argument. The  Khawarij(a sect) quoted the same verses and putforth a similar argument,just like these people. Khawarij who interpolated opinions of their ownself with the quran, were uprooted by Ali (r) and Mu’aviya (r).

If even a little of this history is learnt, we can clearly identify the modern-day  Khawarij.

The then Islamic Khalifa Usman(r) was killed in the capital city of Madinah.Then Ali(r) was chosen as a ruler. Despite the support of a significant number of people,still a huge mass of crowd was opposing his rule.Those who opposed Ali(r) were not unanimous.

Few opined that Ali(r) had influenced and supported the murderers of Usman(r).

Few others opined that : Ali(r) had neither any role nor gave any support to the murderers of Usman’s (r).But Ali(r) is not rigorous in finding the murderer;His attitude with the murderers was more compassionate.

Both Aisha(r) and Mu’aviya(r) were of this opinion.

Even the opinions of the supporters of Ali(r) were not on consensus.Among them few had complete faith in Ali(r) and saw him as an eligible leader.

There were also people who had  role in Usman’s(r) murder,but then acted as supporters of Ali(r) , just to escape prosecution.

 Mu’aviya(r) ,the relative of Usman(r) and who was made the governor of Syria by Usman(r) also did not accept the leadership of Ali(r).Mu‘aviya made Syria as an independant nation and made himself the ruler of the state.Ali(r) fought against Mu’aviya(r) to seize the land which is under Mu’aviya(r) so that he has full control and an union is achieved.The Battle between the two parties occurred in a place named ‘Siffeen‘.Due to this battle,both the sides had to face heavy casualty.

On both sides there were good people who were deeply saddened on what has occurred.These people  were responsible for creating harmony between the two parties by peaceful agreements with their efforts.On both the sides a person should be appointed as judge and these two judges should examine and take a good decision.Both the sides should accept that decison.This was the peaceful plan  putforth.

Both the sides accepted this idea.Based on this, two judges Abu Musa(r) from Ali’s(r) side and Amr bin ‘aas (r) from Mu’aviya’s side were selected.Eventhough the good people from both the sides were happy on this, the murderers of  Usman and those who were by their side were terrorised by what‘s happening.They feared that they could never escape if a consensus is reached between both the sides by this effort.

 At the same time they were very much aware that if they oppose this peaceful agreement, they will earn hatred from people.So they plotted to break this plan by disguise.They were forced to invent a doctrine,to gather people against Islamic governance.They putforth an argument stating that this peaceful agreement is against islam and rejected the leadership of both Ali(a) and Mu’aviya(r).In islamic history these people are called as  Khawarij.

Let us discuss in detail as to how they have coated such a poisonous thought as an Islamic thought.

The authority is for none but Allah:

The Noble Qur‘an 6:57, 12:40, 12:67

By quoting the above verses ,they opposed the peaceful agreement. Their argument was While Qur’an states Authority is Allah’s , to give it into the hands of two judges from both the sides is against the Qur’an.They made their basement in a place called Harura to oppose both Ali(r) and Mu’aviya(r).They even issued fatwa stating that both Ali(r) and Mu’aviya(r) and the people with them are kaafirs because they appointed two humans as Judges, opposing Allah’s authority.

If any do fail to judge by what Allah has revealed, they are Unbelievers.

The Noble Qur’an 5:44

By misquoting this verse inappropriately they alleged all the good people as kaafirs.They did not stop with their fatwa of declaring all of them kaafir,they even furthered to say that we should fight against such kaafirs;Kaafirs should be killed;Their next stance was killing Ali(r) and Mu’aviya(r) in the name of Jihad.

They Justified it by misquoting Jihad related verses from the Noble Qur’an.As they made exegesis of the Qur’an according to their whims and desires and decided to kill even the muslims in the name of Jihad, Ali(r) battled against them at Harura and subdued them.Later, Mu’aviyah(r) battled against them thereby completely uprooting them.

Lo! Ponder now!

Just like how khawarij argued that accepting human judgements is kufr,these modern-day Khawarij call democracy as modern-day shirk. Just like the olden days khawarij and their use of Quranic verses at wrong places , these modern day Khawarij also use those Quran verses exactly at the same place.

Let us now see whether this arguement of theirs and their predecessors is justified.

Its true that -The authority is for none but Allah .But these verses never give any such misguided meaning as they explain it.

These verses only talk about the authority of Allah about which Allah tells is His.When it comes to the authority which Allah Himself  has given into the hands of people,this does not contradict the above verses.In case of dissension between humans, Allah has permitted humans to intervene it and create harmony.

In several problamatic issues they themselves acted upon it,but  to save themselves , they acted in such a fashion contrary to their consciousness.

The most painful thing to be mentioned here is, few believed their argument and followed them thinking that as a part of  religion.The following verses explain us  how futile and vain are their arguments.

And if you fear dissension between the two, send an arbitrator from his people and an arbitrator from her people. If they both desire reconciliation, Allah will cause it between them. Indeed, Allah is ever Knowing and Acquainted .

The Noble Qur’an  4:35

When there is a conflict between husband and wife Allah tells us to accept the judgement of the two appointed judges appointed from both the sides.This cannot be considered contradictory to the verse authority belongs to Allah alone.

Indeed, Allah commands you to render trusts to whom they are due and when you judge between people to judge with justice. Excellent is that which Allah instructs you. Indeed, Allah is ever Hearing and Seeing.    The Noble Qur’an  4:58

So if they come to you, [O Muhammad], judge between them or turn away from them. And if you turn away from them - never will they harm you at all. And if you judge, judge between them with justice. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly. The Noble Qur’an  5:42

Allah tells when you judge between people it should be Just.Never is this contradictory to the verse“Authority belongs only to Allah.

O you who have believed, do not kill game while you are in the state of ihram. And whoever of you kills it intentionally - the penalty is an equivalent from sacrificial animals to what he killed, as judged by two just men among you as an offering [to Allah ] delivered to the Ka'bah, or an expiation: the feeding of needy people or the equivalent of that in fasting, that he may taste the consequence of his deed. Allah has pardoned what is past; but whoever returns [to violation], then Allah will take retribution from him. And Allah is Exalted in Might and Owner of Retribution. The Noble Qur’an  5:95

Allah tells “as judged by two just men among you”, this also is not contrary to the statement, authority belongs to Allah alone.

And has there come to you the news of the adversaries, when they climbed over the wall of [his] prayer chamber - When they entered upon David and he was alarmed by them? They said, "Fear not. [We are] two adversaries, one of whom has wronged the other, so judge between us with truth and do not exceed [it] and guide us to the sound path.

The Noble Qur’an  38:21, 22

And [mention] David and Solomon, when they judged concerning the field - when the sheep of a people overran it [at night], and We were witness to their judgement.

The Noble Qur’an  21:78

Allah tells that he was the witness to the judgement of  David and Solomon.Verily, this is not contradictory to authority being Allah’s alone. 

And if two factions among the believers should fight, then make settlement between the two. But if one of them oppresses the other, then fight against the one that oppresses until it returns to the ordinance of Allah . And if it returns, then make settlement between them in justice and act justly. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly. The Noble Qur’an  49:9

These verses explicitly permit when in case of any (dissensions or) fight  among the believers, every common man has the right to intervene and make settlement between the two.

All these verses imply that Humans can Judge;and even command humans to Judge.Based upon the verse“ Authority belongs to Allah“ , it can never be said that  human-judging  is false even when it is done justly.

Yet they keep quoting quranic verses inappropriately both against their consciousness and the Qur’an and mislead people.In reality humans differ from all other living beings by sagaciousness,sense.Using this sense he can find many good things.

Also several verses command us to ponder.As it is possible to distinguish between right and wrong by pondering, God commands us to ponder.When a  person  finds a solution by pondering , other people can accept it, this meaning as well is contained within these verses.Now we can very clearly understand the meaning of ,“The authority belongs to Allah alone“.

 Allah means only those legislations by which one can attain victory in the hereafter like determining what halal and haram are and all other acts of worship.Only Allah has authority on this.Other than this humans have other authorities, is what is said in the above verses and many other verses of the Quran explicitly.

Prophet Muhammad (p) was sent only as a guide for us to attain victory in the hereafter.He was not sent for us to guide us in other worldly matters.Knowledge and authority about worldly matters has been already bestowed on humans naturally by Allah.

After arriving in Medina, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) passed by some people who were fecundating some date palms, so he asked them what they were doing. When they told him, he said, “I don’t think that will provide any benefit,” or in another narration, “It would be better if you didn’t do that.”

So they refrained from doing it, and that year the crop was not as good. They mentioned it to him (peace and blessings be upon him), and he replied:

“You know better of your worldly affairs.” Muslim  4358

And in yet another narration “I am only a human: if I command you to do something in your religion, then take it; but if I tell you to do something based on personal opinion, then [realize] that I am only human,” Muslim 4357,

And in another narration, “Yet if I inform you of something from Allah, then do it, for indeed I will never convey an untruth on behalf of Allah Mighty and Majestic,”  Muslim 4356

This hadith very clearly establishes as to what is the authority of Allah? What is the authority of humans?.In countries with democracy as a system of government, no one decides what is right or wrong for the hereafter by people’s decision.We do not decide how to pray based on the consensus of the majority of people.Democracy is being used only to decide issuses over which Allah has given authority to humans.But in certain matters the rulers may frame laws permitting certain issues which is prohibited in islam.In such case, we have to refrain from that alone.This is understandable so easily, but they follow the khawarij and mislead the people.

At this point we can very clearly see how they contradict their own consciousness and interpolate their opinions into the Quran.

While arguing that humans do not have any authority which is given by Allah, they handover the authority of Allah into the hands of people.

They will support and follow Madhhab even while the prophet (PBUH) of Allah has very clearly stated that all the affairs related to the victory in the hereafter belongs only to Allah.

What does this support mean? Does that not mean that the Imams have the authority to ordain issues related to worship?And Allah does not?

They will pray only based on Madhhab.All other worships as well they will perform only based on Madhhab.According to their argument, even to handover the authority to humans in worldly matters is shirk, then is it not a bigger shirk to handover the authority related to worship into the hands of people?.

They will take part in all the Bidhaa‘ including Miladh celebrations.Bidhaa‘ is to  do anything which Allah and His messenger has not taught us.The meaning of this is whatever humans innovate in matters related to worship does not become islam.So why have they forgotten now the verse „“Authority belongs to Allah alone“.

What do we understand from this? In the matters where Authority belongs to Allah alone , they try to inverse it.

In matters Wherein Allah Himself has given authority to humans, they  negate it and say authority belongs to Allah alone.From this their ignorance is put to light.

Their own actions falsify their belief.

Consider those who argue such, when buying a property for their own organisation or even for themselves.After bargain when the amount of money is finalised , they pay the money to the owner, and possess it.Still if they wish to confirm it more, they may write the same and maintain the record.This is what Qur’an and hadith tell us.

But to buy a stamp paper, and to write on it and to register it in the registrar office are laws made by humans.

If they are truthful in their arguement, those who argue such , they should breach such man made rules.They should write it only in a white sheet of paper and keep it as a record!

Not even a single person who argues such, ever does it. When they themselves abide by the laws they earlier negated i.e about the authority being given to humans, now even without realising  they already falsified their own argument by themselves.

Those who argue such, they plan  to build an office for their organisation or even for  their personal use or to build a mosque.Islam gives the right to a person who owns a piece of land to build anything on it.

But man-made laws have innovated several laws and regulations for it.

Even before constructing any building, we are supposed to pre-plan about the size of the building, materials that shall be used for construction, the height and width of it ,number of floors it may contain and then submit the same to the officials at different levels .Only after their agreement can we construct a building.This is man-made law.

If they were true to their claim what should they be doing? They should say that it is their own land and they need not take anyone‘s permission for any construction.But what we see is they completely abide by the man-made rules,thereby falsifying their own arguments.Now they forget that “Authority belongs to Allah alone“!.

To propagate their dogma, they run their own monthly and weekly magazines.Islam gives the rights for it.But they register the names of their magazines to benefit from the inexpensive postal service, and they obtain approvals in various sectors for it.

They  mention register numbers for it, which itself signifies that they abide solemnly to the man-made laws.Herein they accept that humans have the authority to make laws!.

When those who argue such, face any transgresssion what do they do?They file a complaint based on the Indian criminal laws or Indian Judicial system.They file a case in court.Their approach to the court expecting a just judgement based on the man-made laws is suffficient enough for us to understand how futile are their arguments,which they agree it themselves.Why don’t they say? : If I have to abide by this man-made laws to get back my lost money from the transgressor, I don’t need such money?.

A person robs in their home.They lose millions of rupees.As per Shariah(Islamic law) the hands of  the thief should be cut.But in Indian law, only a few months sentence to jail is possible.

Even after Knowing that the Indian criminal law is against the legislation of Allah, they file a complaint in the police station.They plead to get justice even by the man-made laws.Now what happened to all of the arguments that they putforth?

For performing Hajj we need not take permission from anyone but man-made laws mandate Passport, Visa and other formalities.

As they need to abide by these man-made laws to perform hajj , will they arrive at a decision that it is not mandatory to perform hajj or Will they say that we should abide by these man-made laws to perform hajj?

For all of their financial transactions,they use the Indian rupee currency. Gold and Silver are valuable by default.If they make transactions using these, no one can criticise,or even if they exchange by barter transaction, still no one can criticise.Because by default goods are valuable as well.

But by default the Indian rupee currency does not have any value whatssoever.The real value of 1000 Rupees is nothing but the cost it takes to  produce  it.That is to say if it only takes 10 rupees to for making 1000 rupees, then that is its real value!!If  for instance the government orders that there will be no value for 1000 rupees currency, then it becomes worthless the very second.!

But if the government were to annul  the value of gold silver, rice, pulses, only that order will become valueless!!!

The  reserve bank of India which is based on man-made laws, certifies that the one who brings this 1000 rupees ‘note‘ may buy what he wants, within that value-limit.The Reserve bank of India guarantees  for it and its value increases artificially.

Everytime he uses rupee notes for transaction, its like articulating that I cannot live without abiding by  man-made laws.

They agree that humans have the authority to make laws on thousands of issues such as ration card,driving licence, identity card,traffic rules etc.. Its explicit to the extent  that without abiding by these laws no humans can live.Thinking that they can gather a huge crowd if they putforward a naive philosophy which has never been said before by others,they make people fools and there is no truth or sincerity in their arguments at all.

Only to reject the elections can their arguments be used and on nothing else at all.

They insult themselves by self-condracting their own arguements.

Only due to man-made laws liquor shops are opened .Family planning and other such policies are also brought into practice only because of democracy.Hence they make these as

Sub-reasons to reject democracy.

If government permits liquor-bars, it does not mean that each and every muslim should drink it compulsarily.No single country can constitute laws to make drinking liquor compulsary.We have our rights to not  drink as well.

Similarly there is no rule stating that family-planning is mandatory.In several countries where man-made laws are the system of government, billions of people do live without family planning.

If only one or two laws are against islam and imposed on muslims, we can fight back against those laws alone and can get it cancelled.

When alimony (Court-ordered support paid by husband to his wife after they are separated) was made mandatory in our country,all the muslims united together and fought back annuling this law. This was made possible due to democracy.

If  Muslims desire to live as real Muslims, no human law can refuse it and that is the reality! Except for acts of worship, humans have been permitted to make laws.When these laws that they make are not against islam, then there is no sin when one abides by the same.But if they legislate against islam,then we are obliged to fight back and nothing more.We cannot invalidate all the rights that Allah has given to humans and surely that is not our job.They should understand this.

We should think the other side of this as well.

Several of  those who argue about man-made laws run “madhrasa“ and schools.They run many companies and businesses.At all these places they take up the right to legislate! How can it be?

By instructing the students in their school to wear the uniform dress in a particular colour,they take up the right to legislate.

On the companies they run, they make rules for workers therein, regarding the reporting time to the office and  work duration.By doing this they take into their hands the right to legislate.

The head of the family(A man) frames certain rules and regulations for his own wife and children.Similarly almost all persons take up the right to legislate within their limits.

Just like this, those who rule a country also have the right to legislate. They don’t even have this simple knowledge yet they argue.

In countries where muslims are only a minority population ,they cannot make a government and constitute laws according to Islamic Shariah. In these countries, a political party which tries to come to  power may commit more evil and the opposing political party may also commit evil, but to a smaller extent.

By using our democratic right we can prevent those who commit more evil from attaining  victory.They have also not realized that if we were to reject this by being foolish, those who do more evil will become the ruling political party.Now let alone voting during government elections, which is a system by which we select humans who will rule according to the man-made laws, we  are even permitted  to hold a position under this government, not only to vote !

If we were to get such a position without losing our respect ,dignity and doctrine, we can hold that position as well.It is permitted in Islamic shariah and the evidence for this is found in the story of Yusuf (PBUH) .

While mentioning about the story of Yusuf(PBUH) , Allah says it as“ the best of stories in what We have revealed to you “(12:3) and that “There was certainly in their stories a lesson for those of understanding” (12:111). .Even while being a prophet , Yusuf(PBUH) sought for a position under a reign governed by man-made laws.

[Yusuf] said, "Appoint me over the storehouses of the land. Indeed, I will be a knowing guardian." Qur’an 12:55

Moreover from the following verses we can clearly understand that he did not rule according to Islamic shariah.

He could not have taken his brother within the laws of the king except that Allah willed. Qur’an 12:76

These verses carry an important lesson for us all to learn.

Prophet Yusuf (PBUH) is being a minister in a country.He was not only in a condition to abide by the king and the laws of that country,but also to act upon it.Besides,He could not take his brother due to the laws of  his country.

Only because of this ,he asks to his brothers what is the punishment for one who steals in your country?. According to their country law ,they say we catch hold of such a person and confine him  and based on their reply he confines his brother.

The statement “ He could not have taken his brother within the laws of the king” is a sufficient proof that one may abide by the King’s law.

Moreover he asks them what is the law among the people of yaqoob (PBUH), only to confine his brother with himself.From these verses we may also know that when it comes to others (other than his brother) he has not been making use of the laws received from his father.

Therefore these verses prove that except in the worship-related issues, its not wrong if one lives under a non-muslim rule abiding and acting upon the laws of that country.

All the verses which state that only laws of Allah must be followed applies only when muslims become authoritiative on the land to form government. Therefore we should not understand these verses to contradict them.

They put-forward yet another arguement to substantiate democracy as shirk.

Democracy means to decide based on the opinion of the majority.But in several verses of the Qur’an  obeying the majority is prohibited.Therefore they say accepting the decision of the majority is against the Qur’an.

But the actual  meaning of  this is that one should not abide by the majority with regard to issues of  islamic doctrine, worship, halal, haraam and other affairs related to the success in the hereafter.What is said is while explaining the doctrine to those with contrary view,we should not abide by the majority. Not in the matters of the worldly living.

Our Prophet (PBUH) did not go against eating wheat, as the majority of them consumed wheat as their daily food. Our Prophet (PBUH)  did not go against therapeutics as the majority of them used medicines in case of  disease. Our Prophet (PBUH)  did not order nudity as the majority of them used to wear clothes.

Even today we do several activities which are done by the majority.

But no democratic country conducts any elections to decide whether to pray 2 Rak’ah or 4 rak’ah?.As the Prophet (PBUH) has acted in conformity to the majority on several issues which are unrelated to the religion, we also may do so.But on contrary, we find them supporting bid’ah,just because a majority of people do it.

 

Be it TNTJ or any other organisation, only the majority can decide the leader of  that organisation.Even though normal people do not elect leaders in tabligh or tareeqa, persons belonging to the same accept the canditate,and the leadership happens.But if the majority reject him,he cannot be a leader.How did you become a leader for your own organisation? Did you become a leader under Allah’s wahi(inspiration)? Or Did you become a leader as you have been selected and accepted by the members of  your organisation? Even from the answer they give to this question, we can easily deduce if democracy is shirk in Islam.

இந்த கட்டுரையை தமிழில் படிக்க இங்கே கிளிக் செய்யவும்

 

Published on: September 24, 2012, 12:22 PM Views: 1010


www.onlinepj.com © 2013 Developed by Mwinsys

Scroll To Top