A R C H I V E S
Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board
|Voting for man made law|
|05/03/05 at 18:32:01|
The Islamic alternative to voting for man-made law
By Jalaal Akram Muhammad & 'Abd ul-Mutakabbir
Since voting for man-made law is a clear-cut prohibition and an act of apostasy in Islam, many people frequently ask the question; what is the alternative to voting and how are we going to elect a government unless we vote?
It is very shallow and naďve to assume that the only form or mechanism of electing a government is through democracy or voting (for man-made law). As Muslims, it is part of our creed to believe that the Sharee'ah of Allah (Islamic law) is perfect, complete, and has no contradictions. Allah (swt) says in the Qur'aan:
"This day, I have perfected your Deen (way of life) for you…" (EMQ al-Maa-idah, 5: 3)
Therefore our Sharee'ah has been completed for us by almighty Allah (swt); and he has left no sickness without a cure, and no problem without a solution. Anybody who believes that Islam is not complete and does not give a solution for every single matter has committed kufr (apostasy) and left the fold of Islam. This is because Allah (swt) says in his book:
"And we have sent down to you the Book (i.e. the Qur'aan) as a clarification (and solution) for all matters…" (EMQ an-Nahl, 16: 89)
For argument's sake, if there is any issue or matter which arises in the future and we cannot find a solution or answer for it in the Qur'aan or Sunnah, we must believe that there is one but we cannot find it (based upon our own limited experience or resources etc.). Statements such as, "Islam does not say anything about this issue", or "there is no Sharee'ah stance on this matter" etc. are all kufr (non-Islamic) statements which imply that the Deen of Allah (swt) is incomplete and does not provide a solution for every single matter.
The Islamic alternative to voting is quite clear and simple. The messenger Muhammad (saw) and his companions (ra) never voted for the Quraysh or any other Kaafir political party. The way they implemented the Sharee'ah was by interacting with society and calling them to Islam. If the people rejected, by either fighting against the believers or arresting them, the solution was to move to a different place; and this is exactly what our beloved messenger of Allah did. When he found that the Makkans were stubborn and intolerant of Islam (just like the British government), he left Makkah and migrated to Madeenah.
It was in this city where he (saw) built a strong Muslim community who rejected to live by the laws of the Kuffaar, and implemented the Sharee'ah. The messenger of Allah (saw) never voted for the Kuffaar in order to have a voice or position amongst the Mushrikeen of Makkah. Instead, he sought the Islamic alternative which was to migrate and implement Islam in his own province, and then later (almost immediately) expand this ideology via the use of Jihaad.
As Muslims who follow the Saviour Sect (the messenger of Allah [saw] and his companions [ra]), we are obliged to do the exact same thing. The solution for Muslims in the UK, Europe and all over the world is to live together as a community and implement Islam, regardless of the consequences. This is because implementing Islam is an obligation upon every single Muslim, and anyone who dies without giving allegiance to the Khaleefah (leader of the Muslims) will die the death of Jaahiliyyah (polytheism).
This Islamic alternative may sound difficult or "impractical" for those who are deviant or have a disease (hypocrisy) in their hearts; but who said that Jannah (paradise) was ever going to be easy? By living as a community we can implement the Sharee'ah, build a solid body of Muslims and people who are willing to sacrifice their lives for the sake of Allah (swt), and then carry this Deen to the whole of mankind. There will never be any shortage or problem with halaal food, health, safety, education, finance, nudity, etc. as Islam will be in power and all forms of corruption will be eradicated.
We do not remove one Taaghout (such as Tony Blair) by voting for another Taaghout (such as George Galloway)! We are supposed to reject, hate and disassociate ourselves from the Tawaagheet, not vote for them! It is completely ludicrous to say that since there is no option or alternative, we must vote. It's like saying, "If I can't find a wife, the only alternative is to find a male partner!" We do not do munkar (evil i.e. anything which God has forbidden) in order to achieve good. Aims do not justify the means; it is only the fool who believes so.
|05/03/05 at 19:21:18|
this article sounds really impractical... so all the Muslims of U.S./U.K./Canada should move to where exactly???
those calling to khilafah are missing a huge step... where are the dedicated muslims that will implement khilafah?? there aren't any because most of the muslim world is illiterate and poverty-stricken, not to mention in a state of ongoing war.
so let's deal with the problems we have and change the state of islam and muslims through means of dawah and education before we go off trying to implement an islamic state
|05/04/05 at 07:48:33|
|[slm] let me ask the question differently:|
voting [i]against[/i] man made law
Now you see the difference. We should participate in politics so that the shari`ah is upheld, and Satan does not win by default.
There are many man made laws that are useful, and not in conflict with the sharia`ah, may even be supportive of it.
for example, the laws of driving.
and then there are laws that are in conflict with the shari`ah, and must be opposed.
for example, the laws permitting same-sex marriages.
the point is that we do not withdraw from society, until it is made impossible for us to worship Allah (saw). As long as we are able to, we must call the society to Islam, and at the same time participate in those activities that are not unIslamic.
Voting is one of them.
I hope I have been clear :)
|05/04/05 at 09:19:41|
|Spit on Democracy!|
|05/04/05 at 10:06:39|
|Who saw that episode of The Simpsons where two Aliens disguised themselves as the president of America and the leader of the opposition? They went about holding hands and saying the same things about taking over earth after either of them wins. |
If someone refused to vote for them they would say, “Go ahead waste your vote by voting Ross Parro”.
One of them wan the elections and all the humans were enslaved. Homer said to Marge “it wasn’t my fault I voted for the other one”.
This is what elections are all about! Who ever wins, it’s still the Zionists who rule!
How does putting a little Cross on a bit of paper every five years change anything?
When the Conservatives ruled, they killed Muslims and support Israel, now that labour rules, they kill Muslims and support Israel. So what do we do, put the conservatives back, so some one other then labour kills Muslims?
Some, people waste their vote by voting Liberal Democrats, they have no chance of winning, but if they do, they would kill Muslims and support Israel too!
Galloway’s Respect Party is standing in 25 seats. George Galloway is a Roman Catholic so does not believe in Abortion, but his supports it! Because that’s the stand of the Party he made. Even though he is a Christian, he ignores his religion by supporting the lowering of consent for homosexuality!
So he supports what he doesn’t believe in, in the name of Politics, just like all other politicians! He tells us what we want before the elections to get our votes, and once his got them he can do what ever he wants!
Jannah I agree that the Muslim world is messed up. But what is the cure. How would putting a cross on a bit of paper every 5 years educate and unify the Muslims? If anything it would disunity the Muslims!
As well as saying Shiah Muslims and Sunni Muslims, Sufi Muslims and Selafi Muslims, Extremist Muslims and Moderate Muslims, Religious Muslims and Secular Muslims, we would be saying Labour Muslims, Conservative Muslims, Liberal Democrat Muslims, Green Muslims and Respect Muslims!
There are already Mosques that support each of these parties and they invite Kaffer politicians from each of them to give speeches in the Mosque after Jummah!
Today we see Muslims working with Godless Secularists, giving out their literature, funding their propaganda, and calling for their Kuffer!
The only parties that we can support are those calling for Sharia (Khilafah).
And all the parties in democracy are calling for kufr.
The only way to solve the problems we face is with Khilafah. We are disunited, and we will continue to be disunited unless we have a single leader to unite behind.
The people who work with godless secularists refuse to work with Islamic groups, they give out godless literature but refuse to give out Islamic literature, they spend their wealth to call for Kufr but refuse to spend it to call for Islam, they call for kufr to be implemented in the land but don’t call for Allah laws to be implemented in the land!
These aren’t the people who would bring khilafah, they are the people who would block it. It was their forerunners who fought against and destroyed it. Some of them are the grandchildren of the soldiers that fought the khilafah and destroyed it to remove Allah laws from earth and create Israel!
If voting changed anything the Zionist who rules us would have made it illegal!
Voting is the opium of the Masses, making them think they can change things by this useless action. This makes them think that there is no need to work for Khilafah so prevents them from doing deeds that will make a difference!
All the Political Parties Accept the UN as a God. The ones that support the war and Israel say they do so because the UN. The ones that are against the war and Israel say they are because of the UN. While the Jews who rule the UN refuse to follow any of the laws which they themselves make! They spit at the UN while Muslims hail it!
|voting for man made law|
|05/04/05 at 18:40:17|
As Muslims we must take into consideration the Divine ruling for every action that we do, we, therefore, cannot commit something Haram or Kufr while intending from it some good, as the ends do not justify the means. Allah (swt) informed us that he will account us for EVERY Deed - "By your lord, we will account all that they do, so call openly whatever I ordered you and turn away from the mushrikeen, Allah is enough to deal with the mockers." [EMQ Hijr: 92-94]
The following issues are a reality of voting which i am sure you will agree with:
- Calling people to vote so that the person who seeks the vote can legislate law on their behalf representing their interests
- Calling people to vote for a KUFR party.
- Calling people to vote for a KAFIR to be a ruler over them
- Calling people to vote for so that the person seeking the vote will rule over their constituency by the British KUFR law (even if you DISAGREE with even ALL of the party's views or not)
- Calling people to delegate 'their' right of legislation to parliament.
- Not wishing to rule by Islam
- Not wishing to open the Qur'an in parliament and implement legislation from Islam AT ALL
- Not wishing to change this country to an Islamic State
- Not wishing to implement ANY aspect of Islam using the election
- The Manifesto of each and every party is not based AT ALL on the Qur'an and Sunnah, but rather on the ration and minds of the KUFR party concerned.
The list is endless...
All the above are in direct contradiction to Islaam. Believing that Allah (SWT) is the only legislator is a matter known from the Deen of Islam by necessity. Allah (SWT) says:
‘They imitate the sayings of the disbelievers, Allah(SWT)’s curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth; They took their Rabbis and their Monks to be their Lords and Legislators besides Allah(SWT) and took the Messiah, the son of Mary, while they were commanded to worship, obey and follow none but one God/Allah; none has the right to be worshipped or followed and to legislate but he, praise and glory be to him from having the partners they associate with him ’[EMQ 30:31]
The circumstances in which this ayah was revealed are as follows:
It has been reported by Huzaifah in Ahmad, Tirmizi and Ibn Jarir that the Messenger Muhammad (saw) was reciting this verse and Udayy (ra) said to Him (saw): ‘Oh Rasoul Allah, they do not worship the Rabbis and the Monks’ To which He (saw) replied: ‘The Rabbis and Monks make that which is lawful unlawful and that which is unlawful lawful and they i.e. the people, follow them, and by doing so they worship them’
In addition, Allah (SWT) says in another clear-cut and explicit evidence that obeying any man-made system knowingly with consent for its source, different to Allah (SWT) is apostasy. For Allah (SWT) says;
‘Eat not, Oh believers, of that meat on which Allah (SWT)’s name has not been pronounced at the time of slaughtering the animal, for surely it is Fisq (a sin and disobedience of Allah) and certainly the evil do inspire their friends to dispute with you and if you were to obey them by making a dead (un-slaughtered) animal lawful and eating it, then you would indeed be Mushrikoun (polytheists)’ [EMQ 6:121]
In the above Ayaah Allah (SWT) is describing obedience in a matter of legislation in the example of making the unlawful un-slaughtered meat lawful, as an act of shirk although people did not worship idols or pray to them. Even so God calls them Mushriks! As for the circumstances of this verse, it has been reported in Al-Haakim upon the authority of Ibn Abbas (RA) that this verse was addressing Muslims when a group of Mushriks were debating with them on the issue of legislating. The Mushriks said: ‘You call the sheep upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned; dead, who is the one who killed her?’ The Muslims said: ‘Allah’ So they replied: ‘So what Allah has killed or slaughtered by a gold knife is haram and what you have slaughtered with a metal knife is halal?’ To which Allah (SWT) revealed the above ayah.
In this ayah Allah (SWT) has declared as Mushrik the one obeys anyone other than Allah(SWT), even if one does not make sujood to him/her. So what can we say about the one who obeys or votes for another to legislate law and order for them? Allah (SWT) says:
‘Or have they partners with Allah, who have legislated for them what Allah (SWT) has not decreed and had it not been for a decisive word the matter would have been judged between them and verily for the Polytheists and wrongdoers there is a painful torment’ [EMQ 42:21]
Moreover we know very well that Allah (SWT) says:
‘And He made none share in his decision or rule’ [EMQ 18:26]
It is well known in Islam that any law different to the law of Allah (SWT) is Taghout and Allah (SWT) rejects us to refer to Taghout:
‘Have you seen those who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you and that which has been sent down before you and they wish to go for judgement in their dispute to the Taghout i.e. false Judges etc… while they have been ordered to reject them but Shaytaan wishes to lead them far astray’ [EMQ 4:60]
It has been reported concerning the circumstances of the above ayah that some hypocrites claimed to be Muslims and yet in their own disputes they tried to refer to the man-made decision of some contemporary MP’s as legislators such as Amru Bim Luhay, Al-Khuzaa’ie and Ka’ab Bin Al-Ashraf with other Monks, Priests and MP’s who used to legislate for them, instead of going to the Messenger of Allah and seeking the legislation of the almighty Allah.
As for those people who have been misled and have fallen down in this clear-cut apostasy and crime, the Messenger Muhammad (saw) said: ‘One of the things I fear strongly for my Ummah is mis-guided Imaams who will lead part of my Ummah to worship Idols and they will lead others of my Ummah to follow the Mushrikeen’
Therefore whoever votes or follows any of those mis-guided legislators and gives them the vote enabling them to legislate has in fact chosen a lord to legislate for him and this is associating with almighty Allah another legislator and commander. Allah (SWT) says:
‘Are many different Lords better or Allah, the one the irresistible, you do not follow, obey, worship beside him but only figures which you have named, you and your fathers for which Allah has sent down no authority, Verily the Command and the Judgement and the power of legislation is for none but Allah, he has commanded that you worship and follow none but him, that is the true path but most people know not’ [EMQ 12:39 & 40]
This is the reality of the new Deen and Lordship, which declares sovereignty for man which most of the people have embraced. This is why whatever man does as a good Deed and whatever a Muslim does as prayer or fasting and other good deeds and afterwards commits this apostasy and does not repent from it, thereafter all his deeds will be abolished, for Allah (SWT) says:
This is the guidance of Allah with which He guides whomsoever he wills of his servants but if they have joined or associated in worship others with Allah all that they used to do as good will have been of no benefit to them’ [EMQ 6:88]
In light of the above, brothers and sisters - Please do not vote for the sake of your imaan. It is not worth it.
And Allah SWT knows best.
|Voting "against" man made law :)|
|05/05/05 at 11:51:14|
You live in a country where non-Muslims form a majority.
What are the rules for living there?
Did the Muslims stay away from all decision-making, abandoning that to the kuffar of the Quraish?
How many of those in the UK who are Muslim haven't sworn an oath of allegiance to the Queen to get the citizenship?
The unemployed Muslim youth are quite ready to take unemployment benefits.
The National Health Service is made use of.
Jobs in the government are applied for and accepted.
Asylum seekers seek asylum under the same laws.
no sister, do vote, but ask your Muslim MPs to vote according to the shariah, and your non-Muslim MPs to guard your rights as a citizen.
|to vote or not to vote|
|05/11/05 at 14:14:58|
Sr. Safiyyah, I urge you to research this topic a bit further. Voting in a non-Muslim society (such as Europe or the US) does not imply agreeing to be ruled by other than the Law of Allah i.e. kufr. The issue is, at best, a matter of ikhtilaaf among the ulamaa, and thus, we cannot make a blanket statement of takfeer for those who vote and participate in the Western political process. There are *many* articles and essays on this topic, but here are a couple. I hope you will take some time out to read them:
In addition to what appears in the above articles, Shaykh Muhammad AlShareef (a graduate from Madina University with a bachelors in Shari'ah) said the following on the AlMaghrib forums regarding this issue in January, 2004:
[quote]I heard from Shaykh Salah As-Saawee [see below] that if there is some benefit to come back to the Muslims community in doing something such as a block-vote, then it would be permissible. At the very least, even if it does not bring benefit to the Ummah, at least it may protect them from some harm.
As for voting for the 'sake of voting', that's where a problem may arise since that voter has no goal in putting in the vote and Aqeedah (matters of faith) might conflict with that.
And Allah knows best.[/quote]
Shaykh Salah As-Saawee is a well-known scholar of Al-Azhar University, currently residing in the DC area. He is a professor at Umm al-Quraa University in Saudi Arabia and the VP of American Open University. He is also the Secretary General of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America. You can read more about him here:
Finally, Shaykh Abu Ammaar Yasir Qadhee (a well-known student of knowledge from Houston, Texas who did his bachelors in Hadith from Madina University and is currently pursuing his Masters in Aqeedah) said the following regarding the issue of voting on the AlMaghrib forums. This appeared in April, 2005:
[quote]I said in class that those who believe that others besides Allah have the right to legislate have committed kufr, regardless of whether they vote or not.
The issue comes regarding those who vote, fully understanding the concepts we went over and believing in them, thinking that they are averting a greater evil at the expense of a lesser one. They fully realize what taghoot is, and only wish to vote in order to 'minimize' (in their eyes) its evil. As I said, in my humble opinion, its a bit naive, but its not kufr. From their perspective, someone will get elected and legislate ANYWAY, so they think '...we might as well try our best to get Mr. X instead of Mr. Y, as we think he'll be better for the Muslims.'
Since he has not, in his heart, given them the right po legislate, and he realizes that only Allah has this right, this cannot be kufr. He is not 'helping or supporting' the system directly, for his vote or lack of it will not change the infrastrucuture. In fact, to be blunt, someone who keeps his money in a bank actually helps and supports the interest-run system MORE than a true muwahhid's vote will help and support modern democracy (since, in the first instance, his money will actually help support riba, whereas in the second his vote will not actually change or aid the status-quo).
Also FYI this is the opinion of Sh Uthaymeen as well, with whom I personally conversed about this issue for quite a while, the year before he passed away.
In any case, I also said in class that those who make a blanket statement of 'kufr' on all such participation are closer to the truth, and more correct in their understanding of aqeedah, than the opposite. I just feel that it is a bit too extreme, and Allah knows best.
I believe I was pretty clear in my opinion, and this is what I still stand by. To willingly aid in the promotion of kufr is without a doubt kufr, but there are some fuzzy lines as well. Do we as Muslims who live in the West not, with our very presence, help these societes to some degree or other, with our taxes, efforts and jobs? No doubt it is not as direct as voting, but there is some benefit that these systems gain with us. So where do you draw the line?
A person who hires a hit-man, encourages him to kill someone, and then pays him the money to do so and even supplies him with the plan and weapon to do so does not, according to our Sharee'ah, become a murderer himself (he is punished in a different way, not the qisas). Also, a person who goes to a magician and asks him to do some magic does not, according to the vast majority of scholars, become a mushrik himself (as long as he does not believe in the permissibiilty of magic). Yet, he has paid this magician, helped him, encouraged him to do kufr, and knew what he would do. So not every sin of kufr necissitates a ruling of takfeer on one who, in some fashion, aids in bringing it about.
The issue of irjaa does not play a role in what I am saying. Certain actions are major kufr in and of themselves, such as knowingly and willingly prostrating to an idol. Others are NOT major kufr, even if they help or otherwise lead to major kufr. Does voting count as major kufr in and of itself? According to the 'scholars' that you are quoting, it counts as the first type. According to those whom I personally look up to as being more worhty of taking fatwa from, and far more reserved and cautious in pronouncing takfeer on others, such as Sh. Ibn Baaz and Ibn Uthaymeen and Abd al-Muhsin al-Abbaad and many many many others, voting in and of itself, understanding the true perspective of tawheed, is not kufr. Again, I re-iterate, in my opinion its a sheer waste of time, and getting involved with a lot of shubuhat, and its evils far far outweigh its good, and the way it exists and is practiced in the minds of many Muslims is closer to kufr, and insha Allah you will never find me promoting it, etc, etc... but in and of itself its not kufr.
Lastly, this is my opinion and the opinion of those whom I respect. Yes there are others, some whom I regard as scholars and some whom I don't, who hold a more stricter opinion. If anyone wishes to follow them, that's their business.[/quote]
Wassalamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuh
|05/11/05 at 14:19:52|
|05/11/05 at 18:31:33|
I thought we discussed this some time ago. I guess it will always be an ongoing issue that we can’t all vote on….ahem…
“It is completely ludicrous to say that since there is no option or alternative, we must vote.”
Uhh…I don’t remember voting for that law. No one makes us vote. Voting is an option and in my opinion an obligation. Wait…wait…before you go and bite my head off…
We live in unIslamic country right? Well, I do anyways. So every chance I get to vote for something that is Islamic, heck yeah, count my vote in. It’s already an Allah (SWT) given “Universal” law and if kuffar humans want to make it their law as well “legally” then I’ll definitely vote for “No gay marriages”. Because 1 vote could make a difference and if I did not vote for that law and “Gay marriages” were allowed, OMG!!! You know what I mean?
Or what about voting for a leader? Someone who is appointed to lead us. I can’t take another 4 years of George Bush, but the other option though I might not agree with him either is the alternative. But we don’t have to vote and that’s why GWB is still president.
“It's like saying, "If I can't find a wife, the only alternative is to find a male partner!"
Uh uh….you are comparing oranges to apples. Besides finding a male partner is NOT NOT NOT an alternative. Never was and never will be. You’ll just have go with “no wife”. Voting for something that is good or voting for something that is “the better choice” to something that is evil is not “Forbidden” in Islam.
What is our rule: If you see something that is bad, first change with hand (your actions). If you can’t change with your hands, then change it with your mouth (announce the wrong and enounce the right). If you can’t change with your mouth, then feel it in your heart (feel that if you were brave enough to change with your hand, you would). This is the weakest method.
I believe “Voting” is our “hands” to change the wrong. Even if it is a man made law, the answer to it is somewhere in our Qur’an and we can distinguish whether the law is wrong or right and vote accordingly. And I do believe that our Prophet (SAW) practiced “voting”. Isn’t there a hadith somewhere where it says that “Majority rules”?
“We do not do munkar (evil i.e. anything which God has forbidden) in order to chieve good.”
This is true and the opposite would not make sense and it will never make sense. No way can anyone do something that Allah (SWT) has forbidden and make it into something good. Do people actually really think that it’s possible?
Which reminds of me of the movie “The Kingdom of Heaven” where this knight was given a choice to marry the princess and raise as the King of the Kingdom of Heaven or just be a loyal knight and protect the people of the Kingdom of Heaven. The catch to the first option was that the princess was already married and if he had accepted the proposal, the current king would execute her current husband and ALL of her husband’s army in order for him to raise. He refused the first option. When the princess found this out she said to him “You would’ve wished to have done a little evil for the greater good.” Now this would make the above statement a false one.
However, in my mind, executing her husband and his men would have not been an evil deed so the above statement would still stand truthful.
We all know that Allah (SWT) is our Creator and we all know that we do not associate anyone or anything to Him (SWT, by Him (SWT), or with Him (SWT). We all know as true Muslims that the Qur’an is perfect and has all the answers. To vote for someone or a law does not mean we deny or go against Allah (SWT) or Islamic law.
There is one Surah in the Qur’an that has all the answers and it only has 3 verses. Al-Asr. Read it and think about it. It even includes osmething about "voting".
Allah (SWT) bless….
|05/11/05 at 18:45:45|
|All About Voting|
|05/12/05 at 04:42:02|
|All About Voting |
Haytham bin Jawwad al-Haddad
In the name of Allâh, and in Him we seek assistance, and all praise is due to Allâh, Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is no deity worthy of worship besides Allâh alone, without any associate, and there is nothing comparable to Him. And I testify that Muhammad is His servant and final Messenger.
When we discuss the issue of voting or any other similar contemporary issue we should try to understand its reality before coming up with a conclusion about its ruling, this is what is termed as fiqh al waqi’(being aware and understanding the environment and factors surrounding the topic of concern) which is mentioned by the scholars. Ibn al-Qayyim considered understanding fiqh al waqi’ as one of the prerequisites of the mufti alongside fiqh al mas’alah (possessing proper perception of the issue at hand and its related rulings) that were necessary in order to arrive at a legal opinion about a certain issue of concern.
Let us commence by considering the following scenario: we have a ruler and his subjects and the ruler leaves it to the people to decide, giving them two choices, either the law of Allah or man-made law. In this situation there are three parties involved:
1- The ruler himself who puts the law of the Creator (Shari’ah) in question or debate between people; there is no doubt that this ruler committed an act of kufr for he is obliged to rule by the law of the Creator . Allah says, “Legislation is for none but Allah. He has commanded that you worship none but Him.” [Qur’an, 12:41]. To him this ayah is addressed, “And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the Kafirun (disbelievers).” [Qur’an, 5:44].
2- The subjects who were asked to select between the Shari’a and man-made law; they have to choose the Shari’a. The mechanism of choosing the Shari’a may take various forms; voting is one form, demonstrations are another form, and sending letters is a third form. People must do their best in order to choose Shari’a and make it dominant. Can any one say, here, that it is impermissible for people to vote to choose the Shari’a since voting is part and parcel of democracy which in turn is kufr? If we say that then we do not correctly conceptualised the issue at hand. Saying that such voting is an act of kufr is total nonsense. Imagine the case when a person is consulted, as happens in some countries, whether he wants to take his case to the Shari’a court or a court that will rule on the basis of man-made law. Should this person say I do not want to choose since choosing is voting and voting is part of democracy which is Kufr!? What shall he do? Shall he abstain from doing anything? What if the constitution states that the judicial system is man-made law unless the person opts for the Shari’a court in which case he is allowed to do so. Can we say in this case that this person is obliged to vote or choose the Shari’a court? Can we also say that abstention from voting means that the person implicitly accepted the man-made law as the judicial system and this is an act of kufr? From this discussion we can conclude three important points:
a. Voting means, in many cases, choosing or selecting.
b. Participation in a kufr system does not necessarily mean participation in kufr. It depends on the nature of this participation.
c. Abstention from voting some times causes more damage or harm than voting itself.
3- The people who want to be part of the legislative executive like those who want to be members of parliament. This issue requires a separate detailed study and is beyond the scope of discussion here
Let us also take another important scenario. It is when the inhabitants of a country, who have the Shari’a as the dominant system, want to choose a leader for their country; say they have four candidates to choose from. They employ elections as a mechanism to select the leader, can we say this is democracy and it is an act of kufr?
Brothers and sisters, from the above discussion we conclude that it is absolutely wrong to generalise the ruling by saying that democracy is an act of kufr. We should instead say something that makes sense to people which reflects that we understand what we are talking about. Leave alone the issue of accusing some one of kufr being a major sin and that is why we should be extremely careful before doing such. The prophet e says “The one who accuses his brother of kufr then surely one of them is such”.
Democracy originally meant people’s ruling. However these days it has various ways of implementations. It is used as a selection mechanism. That is why we see another term is being introduced now which is liberal democracy. Some observers believe that it was introduced to emphasise that Muslim countries should not only use this mechanism to select the rulers while the constitution remains Islam rather they should vote for the constitution which in their case is Islam itself. So democracy from this perspective means the constitution itself has to be subject to selection through a democratic mechanism.
Muslims living under Kufr system:
Muslims living under a dominant democratic system which they can not change in the near future should understand their situation in all its various facets. Muslims believe that ultimate justice, peace and coherence can not be achieved unless the divine system is dominant. In many cases they are unable to achieve this in the foreseeable future. So what shall they do until they reach this stage?
They are living under a kufr system where either party A, B or C will be in power. People have the privilege to choose among these parties. If you do not choose any of them you are not going to change the system since one of them will still be in power. You might say that if all people were not to choose any of them then the system will change. This might be true; however it is almost impossible for this to take place in the foreseeable future in all so called democratic non-Muslims countries. So the question arises that until the system changes, what shall we, the Muslims do?
Any sane person would say that abstaining from selecting the least evil option would only leave room for the more evil option to win. It is a very simple and straight forward equation.
Here let us answer various queries forwarded by those brothers who are against selection through voting. However, before doing so, in our discussions we should identify why we are against voting, is it because it is an act of kufr i.e. the ruling of voting from the Shari’a point of view or because it is harmful and damaging for Muslims? Such a distinction is crucial to have a fruitful academic debate. If the reason is the first, then we should refer to the first part of this article. If the reason is the second then let us examine the possible arguments and respond to them:
1. Doesn’t selecting one of these parties ultimately endorse their policies that are based on man made laws (kufr law).
The answer is No, this is not necessarily the case for the following reason:
Choosing an option means that you endorse it only if there are better options offered. But if the other choice is worse, then actually you are endorsing the difference between this and the less harmful option. Take for example eating unslaughtered meat for a starving person. He is allowed or even obliged to do so, yet does it mean that he is endorsing eating unslaughtered meat? Rather, he is endorsing the difference between these options which in this case is saving his life. Saving his life by eating unslaughtered meat is good compared to starving to death. That is why this is an agreed upon principle. So quoting each party’s statements that they are going to do so and so if they win separately and without comparing this with what other parties say is not a very honest approach since it does not give the audience the full picture. This becomes worst when the alternative presented is just a hypothetical solution.
So I urge the brothers and sisters not to accuse any body of kufr or sins just because they vote for one of these parties in such a situation. Such accusations reflect ignorance as well as naivety in comprehension.
1- By voting you are involved in the political system which is a step towards integration which ultimately means loosing the identity of Muslims living under western countries.
I agree that integration in its wider meaning leads to the loss of identity and it is a hidden agenda by the enemies of Islam to deceive Muslims so they loose their identity. However, this is not necessarily an implication of voting. I agree that full political participations might lead to major problems for Muslims and we have to be very careful when stepping into this arena. However, ticking the box for one of the candidates does not mean full political participation.
I would like to mention here that I also advise our brothers who are involved in leading Muslims in terms of politics to be aware that some Muslims might understand that voting means full involvement in the game of politics which is full of lying and tricks as has been realised by many non-Muslims themselves. So they should use careful language and words when encouraging Muslims to vote. Statements such as: voting is the only way for Muslims in this country, voting is the lifeboat, voting is part of our belief, voting means citizenship, and so on should be avoided. Such emotional and extreme statements lead to converse statements and reactions that are equally emotional and extreme.
2- It is not true that we do not have another option. We have to strengthen our Muslim community and work hard for our independence.
I think no one disagrees that the Muslim community needs to strengthen themselves and build their own organizations and schools etc. However, this is not an option that is incompatible with having party A,B or C in power. This is one matter and that is another, there is no contradiction between the two options. We can vote to select the best option while we are working for our community and our future.
3- We are not going to get anything by voting while it might be impermissible so it is better to abstain from it.
It is not easy to come up with such a conclusion. We need a deep thorough study and analysis to confirm that all parties are nothing but different faces of one coin. I also agree that voting is not the lifeline for Muslims in this country as represented by some Muslims. I have asked parties on both sides of the voting argument to come up with an academic study to prove their points. However, it is difficult to say that all parties are exactly the same in internal and external policy. Logically, not all non-Muslims are the same, even the kuffar of Makkah were different. Abu Talib, the uncle of the Prophet is totally different from Abu Jahl. Abu Talib helped the Prophet e and sheltered him while the other one used to torture the Prophet and the companions. Should we not do our best to choose the one that is less evil and better for humanity?
Also, I would like to clarify here that abstention from voting is actually indirect voting. Let me explain this by the following example. Imagine that 6 people were to vote for two parties named A and B. A says in his manifesto that he will legalise pornography, ban faith schools, kill 1000 Muslims, prevent Muslims from Hijab and other rights. While B said that he will legalise pornography but allow faith schools and kill 500 Muslims. 3 of us vote for A and 2 vote for B and Me as a Muslim believing that voting is kufr abstained from doing so. Then what will happen? A will win, however if I vote for B, then no one will win. So I participated in lessening the evil. Let us now say that we have 2 more people, either they vote for B or abstain. Abstention will not change the situation while encouraging them to vote for B, who will do all these filthy things, will mean that A will loose which means that we saved the life of 500 Muslims and had a chance to have faith schools and practice hijab! So whether we vote or note, we actually vote since we are part of the population. This is how the system works, at least in Britain. If someone disagrees with this then he should prove this to us and bear in mind that he should be systematic in his approach and clear in presenting his case. In his abstaining to vote he has implicitly accepted the principle of voting when it is proved that abstention from voting is indirect voting.
4- If we vote we will not bring any Muslim to power?
It is true, but who said that our aim in the near future is to bring a Muslim into power. Our realistic aim in the near future is to have a better person with a better system in power. It is impossible and impractical to think of having a true Muslim leader in the near future in most or even all the non-Muslim countries. Our ultimate aim is to help those who are better than their co-politicians into power.
5- Boycotting elections is better for Muslims since it sends a strong message to the politician that we are not happy with them and their system. Moreover it will show the ineligibility of this round of elections.
This might be true but as I said earlier we need a deep study and understanding of the complicated political international situation to confirm such conclusions. I urge those brothers who believe in this to produce a provisional work proving this point. In the mean time we should know that such boycotting will not be effective unless all Muslims do so. That is why, before we arrive at such conclusions a deep discussion with all Muslims involved in politics and other related fields should take place. It should not be an individual opinion of a single party or so. However, we should bear in mind that if a decision were taken to boycott elections, then we should be clear why we do so. Is it because of the original ruling of voting and elections or because of the impracticality of it?
I would like to conclude here by urging the brothers and sisters to be united in their decision. Such unity is the only way for their voice to be effective. Unity here means following one strategy whether we decided to vote or to boycott elections. Once we decide to vote, which is the decision now at least in the UK, then we should appoint one main body to lead us in this decision. I believe that we, Muslims in UK, should follow the opinion of the Muslims Association of Britain. They have prepared a good strategy for Muslims to use. You may find it on their website www.mabonline.net
25th Rabiee al Awwal 1426
4th May 2005.
|07/05/05 at 16:35:40|
I read this interesting article and thought I would share it with everyone here. Before you all bite my head off...I am not making takfeer (Bro Abu Hamza in particular). As far as I understand we are all entitled to express our opinions and I don't believe there is anything wrong withg me sharing mine. Maybe we can agree to disagree..
If you don't like this country…why don’t you get out of here!?
A debate between a Kaafir (or Secular "Muslim") and a Muwahhid (Monotheist)
The Kaafir (or Secularist) once said: "If you don’t like this country why are you still here!? Get out and go back to your own country!"
The Muwahhid replied: "This is my country! Who on earth told you that we hate this country!? Dare us to hate any of Allah's creations (without a divine permit). Who created this land which we both stand on today? Was it not almighty Allah (swt)? We love this country and every other country in the world because they are all creations of Allah (swt).
Our problem is not with the land, rather it is with the kufr law which is in complete contradiction with our Tawheed in Allah (swt), and the Almighty has ordered us to reject it and to make our utmost effort to eradicate it from the face of this earth.
Furthermore, why should we leave!? We are more than capable of fulfilling our Islamic duties here. You are the ones who should leave as you are not able to maintain your Tawheed and Walaa and Baraa (alliance with the believers and disassociation from the disbelievers). In Islam it is well known that if you cannot fulfil your duties in any country or land you are obliged to make hijrah (migration). Therefore you are the ones who should leave."
The Kaafir (or Secularist) said: "BUT…"
The Muwahhid said: "No! Wait…I've not finished yet. Have aadaab (Islamic etiquettes)!"
The Kaafir (or Secularist) said: "OK, go on, sorry about that…"
The Muwahhid said: "OK, no problem. As I was saying, before you rudely interrupted me…Why should we leave when we are more than capable of doing all of our Islamic duties!? You are the ones who should leave because your Deen (way of life i.e. Islam) has been severely affected.
Also, nowadays there is no difference between this country and any Muslim country! All countries today implement kufr law. Therefore there is no difference between this country and, for example, Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. Wherever we go today, we will face the same problem.
The Kaafir (or Secularist) said: "Yes but you were born here, therefore you should live by the laws in this country!"
The Muwahhid said: "A'oudhubillah (I seek refuge in Allah)! Let me first ask you a question…Is the law in this country Islamic or Kufr?"
The Kaafir (or Secularist) said: "Well…Umm, hmm, well, actually it is kufr."
The Muwahhid said: "Subhaanallah! So are you telling me to obey kufr law!?"
The Kaafir (or Secularist) said: "Well, I wouldn’t put it like that…"
The Muwahhid said: "What do you mean, 'I wouldn’t put it like that'!? Stop beating around the bush and beat George Bush directly! The law of this land is kufr, and you are asking me to become Kaafir by telling me and other Muslims to obey the kufr law.
Did you know that Allah (swt) says: "O Prophet (and believers), fear Allah and do not obey the Kaafireen and the Munaafiqeen!" (EMQ 33: 1)
Therefore Allah (swt) has made it prohibited for us to obey any law other than his or any person other than him. In fact, to obey someone other than Allah is known as Shirk ut-Taa'ah (the Shirk of associating with Allah in obedience), and this will take you outside the fold of Islam!"
The Kaafir (or Secularist) said: "Yes, but you people are hypocrites because you attack this country's government and yet you take benefits from them!"
The Muwahhid said: "Yes we do take benefits from them, and so does your mother and father! Taking benefits is halaal therefore are you condemning us for doing something halaal?"
The Kaafir (or Secularist) said: "Yes it is halaal, and my parents do take benefits. But what I'm saying is that you guys are hypocrites for attacking the government and benefiting from them at the same time!"
The Muwahhid said: "NO! You are the hypocrite for declaring Laa ilaaha illallah and yet you commit shirk and contradict your Shahaadah by obeying Allah AND somebody else! In fact, another way in which you are a hypocrite is that you too are against this government!
Your organisations lobby, picket and demonstrate against the policies of this government because you are displeased with certain laws and policies in this country! So based upon your own arguments, you are the true hypocrites! You take benefits from this country yet you demonstrate against the laws of this land and you condemn the Prime Minister or President! And this is exactly what we do too! However, the major difference between us and you is that we follow the Sunnah of the messenger of Allah (saw) whilst you follow the Sunnah of the Kuffaar and your own evil satanic desires!
Furthermore, rizq (provision) is from Allah (swt)! Therefore they are not the providers…it is almighty Allah (swt)! I thought you knew this basic principle in Islam!? Also, the messenger Muhammad (saw) used to attack the Quraysh openly and publicly, yet he still used to take benefits from them! Are you saying that he was a hypocrite too!?"
The Kaafir (or Secularist) said: "No, we are not saying that! (The Kaafir changes the subject) but you guys are minorities! How do you expect to change anything when nobody listens to you?"
The Muwahhid said: "Yes we are a minority, and so was Rasoul-Ullah (saw), yet Allah (swt) gave him and his Companions (ra) victory and authority on earth. Besides, the majority of people will go to Hell…why would we want them to be with us!? Allah (swt) says: "And if you obey the majority who are on earth, they will lead you far astray from the path of Allah. They follow nothing but conjectures and they are nothing but liars." (EMQ 6: 116)
Allah (swt) does not give us victory based upon numbers. Rather he grants victory to those who are sincere and have firm Eemaan – belief and actions based upon the Qur'aan and Sunnah."
The Kaafir (or Secularist) said: "How could you say that the majority of people will go to Hell!? You people are complete lunatics and extremists!"
The Muwahhid said: "You have just proven to me that we are on the haq (truth) and you are on the baatil (falsehood)! The Quraysh used to say the exact same thing to Rasoul-Ullah (saw) therefore you are just like them. They used to call him (saw) magician, lunatic, terrorist, extremist, poet etc. and now you have just given us the same titles! Thank you very much!
You have not been able to bring any proof for any of your statements. I have not heard you quote the Qur'aan or Sunnah once; rather all your arguments have been from your own rational desires. For this reason, I would like to end this discussion here as we are getting nowhere. As-Salaamu 'Alaikum wa-Rahmat Ullah..."
The Kaafir does not reply to the Salaam and walks off huffing and puffing.
|07/05/05 at 18:36:36|
that conversation is a little wack and again simplistic and completely unrealistic, and even funny in parts:
"Have aadaab (Islamic etiquettes)!" and then he says "As I was saying, before you rudely interrupted me"
lol now that's ironic
and seriously if anyone wants to battle kufr laws etc why don't they start with the Muslim countries, if they truly want to implement Allah's laws they should move to a Muslim country and start working for khalifah there
it's always interestign that these people want to focus on non-Muslim countries strange
btw there are opinions that we are OBLIGATED to follow the law in non-Muslim countries and again we are OBLIGATEd to help change what is around us that is detrimental to islam and Muslims... so those people who are picketing and lobbying are probably doing something alot more correct than the arm chair writers of conversations like the above (which btw seems like a stronger argument for the kafir because none of the arguments there make any sense and despite being clothed in islamic garb does not have prove to have any support either in quran and sunnah)
|07/06/05 at 17:32:15|
Jannah...I have already quoted ayah from the Quraan and hadith of Prophet SAWS to back my earlier statements. As for obeying the law of the land:
Allah swt states, “O Prophet! Keep you duty to Allaah and obey not the disbelievers and the hypocrites (i.e. do not follow their advice).” (Al-Ahzaab: 1).
In addition to this in many occasions Allah swt has stated, "Do not obey the Kufaar".
The famous incident of the slaughtered meat is a clear example. The jews came to Muhammad (saw) and "RATIONALISED", 'when you slaughter the animal by your hands it is halaal, yet how is it that when Allah takes the life by his hands it is not halaal?'. Allah swt responded by commanding not to obey them and if you do, 'you have gone far far astray' (Dallum Ba'ieedah), which has been explained as kufr Akbr i.e. Major Kufr.
If you look at the life of Prophet SAWS he never obeyed the Quraysh, even when they offered him money, power, women - Prophet SAWS rejected it all. It was after these incidents that Surah Kaafirun was revealed (when he was offered to rule for one year i.e. share power). This is reinforced by the opinion of all the classical scholars (Ibn Taymiyyah, 4 imaams).
Who is the best example we should be following? Remember - Allah SWT has warned us not to follow our hawah.
It seems that we are going round in circles. There is not much further that I can add apart from saying that Allah SWT knows best - we have individual accountability and may Allah SWT guide us all on the straight path...ameen.
Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board