MANIFESTO for Islamic Reform
-
The Quran recognizes and protects the freedom of choice, freedom of rejecting God's message. Besides it recognizes the freedom to apply different laws. What we learn from the Quran that Muhammad was the leader of a FEDERALLY secular democratic system, in whish there were multiple jurisdictions, such as of Nasaras, Yahud, and Mushriks.
If in a land, there is such a freedom, freedom of cohice and application of law based on those choices, then there is democracy, not authoritarian regime.
Peace,
Edip -
Hi,
There seem to be a mix-up between authoritarianism and democracy in the fact that the ultimate law is laid down once and for all. I.e. the ultimate constitution is fixed and can not be altered. This is decided by the ultimate authority, in perfect harmony with the physical World. These two parts are inseparable, and the relation is absolutely maximized.
Within this fixed frame, or constitution, we have total freedom to form our own bi-laws to govern our lives.
If democracy is perceived as absolute and total freedom for people to form every aspect guiding our own lives, then democracy is misunderstood.
Democracy will always be democracy within a certain frame.
Difference between the various democracies we have tried out and the democracy under Gods System is that in the latter, the frame is perfect, whereas for the others it is not.Regards,
Ali Omar
-
Dear Edip,
Your points are very well put.
However, I am left with a feeling of something taken out and not replaced.Will not most people feel that they loose their footing in their lifelong practices of sermons and cultural belongings, and be left hanging without much to replace this?
I am now talking about practical things in everyday life, like how to prepare a sermon for somebody who has passed away, how to perform a wedding sermon, how to.......How to bridge the gap that many will feel when dropping religious sermons and getting into something more real and different from the old customary ways?
Regds
Ali Omar
-
The Quran recognizes and protects the freedom of choice, freedom of rejecting God's message. Besides it recognizes the freedom to apply different laws. What we learn from the Quran that Muhammad was the leader of a FEDERALLY secular democratic system, in whish there were multiple jurisdictions, such as of Nasaras, Yahud, and Mushriks.
If in a land, there is such a freedom, freedom of cohice and application of law based on those choices, then there is democracy, not authoritarian regime.
Peace,
EdipDemocracy is the rule of the majority. And according to Ayman, Quran says Majority is always wrong.
Regards,
-
Peace,
I agree with TheNabi, it's one of the drawbacks of democracy...
Within this fixed frame, or constitution, we have total freedom to form our own bi-laws to govern our lives.
What would this fixed frame be? If the quran, would it be open to interpretation?
Nadia
-
Hi,
There exists a range of various systems called democracy, but basically it is not the rule of the majority; it is the rule of an ?elite? ?chosen? by the majority, which is neither hand nor foot. We choose and find it didn?t work so well, and have the ?freedom? to choose again......., and again..........., and again..........., constantly making the same or similar mistakes.
These are, however, the ?best? of the systems of government we can think of.Imbeciles! ?
Choices should be made by reason, not by blind majority, or by a minority who has managed to scrape together a majority vote, by hook or by crook. Lying, cheating, you name it, you've got it! lol
Further it should be based on the principles set down by the ultimate laws governing the Universe, and everything in it.
This is the fixed frame, not the Qur?an, as such, or any other scripture etc., although the Qur?an is part of it.
The Qur?an itself tells us to look at any, and all, the ?signs? in the World, wherever we find them, and reflect on them and find the ?best? solutions, bearing in mind the principles brought forth from the ?almighty something?.Democracy, anyone! Cheap.... cheap....., on sale now!
Regds
Ali Omar
-
Peace Ali,
Further it should be based on the principles set down by the ultimate laws governing the Universe, and everything in it.
This is the fixed frame, not the Qur?an, as such, or any other scripture etc., although the Qur?an is part of it.
The Qur?an itself tells us to look at any, and all, the ?signs? in the World, wherever we find them, and reflect on them and find the ?best? solutions, bearing in mind the principles brought forth from the ?almighty something?.Pretty abstract, but yeah i think i might agree, if I understood you right that is
-
Peace LT,
Democracy is the rule of the majority. And according to Ayman, Quran says Majority is always wrong.
Why are you debating for Ayman? ? I'm sure he can represent himself just fine.Hey?
Whats wrong with refering to Ayman's analysis of the Quran, since he has he himself has given his thoughts on this matter of democracy and the Quran on the "absurdity of theocracy" thread?
If Ayman has a problem with me refering to his analysis then I think he can speak for himself! -)
Thanks.
Regards,
-
SaLaM LT
Just to let you know, its not according to Ayman, its according to GOD that the majority will be wrong. Here is a verse
And if you obey the majority of those on earth they will lead you astray; that is because they follow conjecture, and that is because they only guess.
-
SaLaM LT
Just to let you know, its not according to Ayman, its according to GOD that the majority will be wrong. Here is a verse
And if you obey the majority of those on earth they will lead you astray; that is because they follow conjecture, and that is because they only guess.
Thanks for the verse.
Here is what Ayman's has written
But the book itself is "anti-theocracy". Organized religion is generally not looked on positively in the book.
If you talk about using a "democratic model" then this is diametrically opposed to the book because democracy is "rule of the majority" and we are told in the book that the majority is wrong.
Ayman can correct if I have misquoted him.
Thanks.Regards,
-
Democracy is the rule of the majority. And according to Ayman, Quran says Majority is always wrong.
I am rarely suprised to see how majority of people lack knowledge about many things. I am also rarely surprised to seing that minorities (subgroups comprising the majorites) do not differ in their lack of knowledge in many things; the orange, yellow, or blue minority, each are members of the majority and their average hitting rate cannot not be better.
What always suprises me is to see some who see themselves on top of the mountain, disdaining the majority of people, while themselves hit the ball less than the average member of the majority.
Let me cut the chase short.
The Quran blames majority for failing regarding their belief system, regarding their opion on God, resurrection, and related metaphisical issues. Thus, the Quran never asks the prophet or submitters to consult others regarding their philosophical conviction; they must seek the truth on their own. However, in matters that involve practical decisions that effect other people in this world, such as the tax code, traffic law, city ordinances, treaties with other nations, etc.; in this case we are instructed to get the concent of others.
Thus, I will never change my philosopical and moral conviction because of the vote of the majority, but I have to respect their decision in matters involving OUR worldly lives. The mutual respect, or social contract, is what we call democracy.
What Ayman promoting is oligarchy, and oligarchy ALWAYS end up increasing injustice, corruption and hypocricy.
As Elena nicely asked with two words, "whose decision?" Perhaps Ayman believes that his decision is better than the majority of the people, and he assumes a divine right to be the leader. What Ayman does not know is that this is the exact modus operandi of all tyrants in history. Pharoah too thought that way. On my part, I will never let the self-appointed aristocrats like Ayman take government by force. I will be on the side of the majority fighting against their "benevolent" tyranny.
Peace,
Edip -
Peace The Nabi,
In my opinion, a majority decision is not necessarily a platform to assume that the correct choice has been made.
Let's say that assertion is negative. Could you give us a positive assertion or idea or something regarding the government of the nations?
-
While i agree to the text presented, there is one thing i dont fully understand. If we are to agree with the majority for getting along, are we supposed to accept when our governments enter pirate crusades with the support of the majority?. With the current democratic situation given, what is the correct way to respond to it do you reckon?
Peace
Noah -
While i agree to the text presented, there is one thing i dont fully understand. If we are to agree with the majority for getting along, are we supposed to accept when our governments enter pirate crusades with the support of the majority?. With the current democratic situation given, what is the correct way to respond to it do you reckon?
Peace
NoahFirst of all, I think American constitution fails in recognizing expressly many of the rights recognized for its citizens. This racist/nationalist discrimination is now exploited by Crusader to legally justify their barbaric treatment of prisoners.
I believe that constitutions should be automatically subjected to referandum for every generation, approximately every 20 years. Thereby, it can be more legitimate and reflective of social progress or change.
As for condoning the decision of majority, not necessarily. I am against the war in Iraq and I have constitutional right to express my dissent. Unfortunately, being a citizen I contribute to the tax that supports the wrong wars. So, as an indvidual I try to change public mind regarding wrong and unjust policies.
I do not expect to find paradise here. I know that I am responsible according to my means and I know that I should stand for justice and truth.
Peace,
Edip -
Peace All,
The message is good, it calls for unity. The only problem I have is that it is not very universal although the book from the Most High is, it still promotes 'Islam' with a capital I. I know that a few people refer to the secterians faith as Hislam but either way Islam is the label used. Why try so hard to defend the label?! Why are names even important?!
Language is very important I think, key priniciples should be outlined and all this 'Islam' and 'Quran' is unnecessary, I know that it won't be altered but this is my opinion, these are all just names created and loved, its just unneccesary.
The most important thing is to just promote the search for knowledge and peace, to promote this glorious book we have too. Maybe I am being too fussy but I personally feel that the language could be better.
Nural