MANIFESTO for Islamic Reform
-
Salaamun alaikum,
Nurul AminDemocracy is an idea but it doesn't seem to be working very well today! Look at the state of the world, something clearly went wrong with democracy, and this is not the first time democracy has failed, lets hope it'll be the last major failure for a long time.
Brother, democracy doesn't exist to begin with. 'Labour' and 'conservative' are but names now, not actual policies. It's akin to people calling themselves 'muslims' but not actually identifying the essence of the meaning.
i agree that democracy is not right .
but how about a "democratic theocracy" ? .
because ppl will have different understandings of the koran . so who will decide which understanding to follow ?The person who has carved out a domain of power will decide. Of course, he can accept or reject advice from others. If others reject him, they are also free to leave.
Jaxal So if the people see that their leader is unfit to lead them, they can choose to throw him out and put someone in who they agree is more fit to lead them.
They cannot do this if it's HIS domain. In today's terms, lets say you establish an organisation and the HQ is your building. Can people vote you out of your own building? They are of course free to leave but they can't kick you out of your ownership.
Jaxal Ok... its called voting. It happens in every democratic country. The people CHOOSE who will lead them. Unlike pre-war Iraq where saddam was the only ruler. Now, Iraq is democratic coz it can choose its own leader. And i dont find anything in the Quran that contradicts that.
Contradicts ? The quran clearly tells us how David attained mulk/power. Please see 2/251. He didn't attain power by being voted into power. He attained it. The illusion of the state gives only illusory notions of power. In truth, people who hold the cards are the financiers.
-
SaLaM mquran
They cannot do this if it's HIS domain. In today's terms, lets say you establish an organisation and the HQ is your building. Can people vote you out of your own building? They are of course free to leave but they can't kick you out of your ownership.
If someone establishes an arganisation, people wont just come to him and look at him as a leader. Nobody can just come into power. Nobody can just stand up and become a leader. Unless ofcourse its Bush. In which case people dont even have to vote for him to become the president Lollllllll
Contradicts ? The quran clearly tells us how David attained mulk/power. Please see 2/251. He didn't attain power by being voted into power. He attained it. The illusion of the state gives only illusory notions of power. In truth, people who hold the cards are the financiers.
He was David. Not some Tom Dick or Harry. He was David. Unfortunately, time have changed. Now people choose their leader. Unless ofcourse its the third world countries. In which case the dictatorship is forced on them. And i highly highly doubt that David' kingship was forced onto people. People CHOOSE him coz of his power and wisdom. Just like people choose Blair and Arafat to lead them. Quran is completely democratic. God even says not to force your belief on another. God teaches democracy. That is why he is GOD. Quran teaches Democracy. Its the book of GOD
"To you is your religion, and to me is my religion."
-
Salaam Jaxal,
If someone establishes an arganisation, people wont just come to him and look at him as a leader. Nobody can just come into power. Nobody can just stand up and become a leader. Unless ofcourse its Bush. In which case people dont even have to vote for him to become the president Lollllllll
I'm not sure where you're getting your negations from but if that's your experience, well and good for you. I was privy to a founding of such an organisation only 9 months ago.
He was David. Not some Tom Dick or Harry. He was David. Unfortunately, time have changed. Now people choose their leader. Unless ofcourse its the third world countries. In which case the dictatorship is forced on them. And i highly highly doubt that David' kingship was forced onto people. People CHOOSE him coz of his power and wisdom.
Well if you feel times have changed, then you're quite free to reject the example of David. I refuse to do so for myself as Allah has declared thier stories to be a detailed explanation for everything (12/111). As for 'forced upon the people', nowhere did Allah say it was forced upon the people. 2/251 said Allah gave him power. He wasn't voted into power and people didn't choose him. I don't know what verse you were reading there but in general, the word 'vote' isnt in the Quran.
Just like people choose Blair and Arafat to lead them. Quran is completely democratic. God even says not to force your belief on another. God teaches democracy. That is why he is GOD. Quran teaches Democracy. Its the book of GOD
Its all well and good to assert something, but onless you actually quote the verses to prove it, it will remain your flights of fancy. As for forcing one's belief, you're quite right but what has this to do with democracy ?
Democracy simply means (in normative language) that the people have unlimited power to legislate. Al-Quraan tells us not to place our wilayat/trust-for-protectorship in the hands of those who conceal the truth (5/51) and that most people will not believe (12/103). This means that most people will end up rejecting concepts from al-quraan. If you think 'god teaches democracy' after that, then I think you would wait a long time for islaam to actualise in your surroundings.
-
SaLaM mquran
I'm not sure where you're getting your negations from but if that's your experience, well and good for you. I was privy to a founding of such an organisation only 9 months ago.
I literally meant it as a king. No one can just stand up and be a king over night. ITs not possible.
2/251 said Allah gave him power. He wasn't voted into power and people didn't choose him. I don't know what verse you were reading there but in general, the word 'vote' isnt in the Quran.
So if he didnt force him into power and he wasnt voted by the people, how did he become a leader? Sure God gave him the power and all, but that dont mean he had a shiny halo around his head denoting he is a leader. And he didnt walk in and suddenly everyone realised he was a leader. No one become a leader JUST LIKE THAT. Either people choose and agree on him/her. Or he/she forces his/her power over the people. Like Saddam.
Its all well and good to assert something, but onless you actually quote the verses to prove it
Verse 109.6
what has this to do with democracy ?
As i said, no one can just come into power. Either people choose him/her or he/she forces her power on the people. How do u suppose David became a leader? Ok God gave him power and wisdom. God gives power and wisdom the person who created TV or the Telephone. But do u see Graham Bell being a president? Obviously no. If David became a leader it was become the people who he was a leader to, choose him. You are asking me to state the obvious here. He didnt become a leader over night.
-
The person who has carved out a domain of power will decide. Of course, he can accept or reject advice from others. If others reject him, they are also free to leave.
Carved out a domain of power? You mean people like Stalin and Saddam?
mquran for a while I thought you were harmless with your barmy outpourings but I am begining to think you are not.They cannot do this if it's HIS domain. In today's terms, lets say you establish an organisation and the HQ is your building. Can people vote you out of your own building? They are of course free to leave but they can't kick you out of your ownership.
This is even barmier as barmier as it gets!
Regards,
-
Jaxal I literally meant it as a king. No one can just stand up and be a king over night. ITs not possible
In your experience, you mean. It appears that you're quite confident that your experience is the last word on things so I wish you luck with that.
So if he didnt force him into power and he wasnt voted by the people, how did he become a leader? Sure God gave him the power and all, but that dont mean he had a shiny halo around his head denoting he is a leader. And he didnt walk in and suddenly everyone realised he was a leader. No one become a leader JUST LIKE THAT. Either people choose and agree on him/her. Or he/she forces his/her power over the people. Like Saddam.
Jaxal, can you please read the verse? Unless FM has drastically changed , the last time I looked, this was a Quranic discussion. Here's the verse for your convenience
By God's will they routed them; and David slew Goliath; and God gave him power and wisdom and taught him whatever (else) He willed. And did not God Check one set of people by means of another, the earth would indeed be full of mischief But God is full of bounty to all the worlds (2/251)
The slaying of Jaluut led to Allah conferring to him mulk wal hikmah. Jaluut was the overwhelming enemy of Bani Israil at the time (his name comes from the root jalaa and its cousin 'tajalli' has been used in the Quran to denote Allah's presence to Musa)
Verse 109.6
Would you care to actually analyse this verse before throwing it into the discussion? This verse is to al-kafireen, people who absolutely reject God's laws. You are telling them to you is your DEEN, to me is mine. In other words, if you use this for people in your domain, you are telling them 'feel free to practise mischief on earth in our domain'. In your envisioned democracy, are people allowed to loot, pillage and plunder ? Because people with such personalities will do just that.
As i said, no one can just come into power. Either people choose him/her or he/she forces her power on the people. How do u suppose David became a leader? Ok God gave him power and wisdom. God gives power and wisdom the person who created TV or the Telephone. But do u see Graham Bell being a president? Obviously no. If David became a leader it was become the people who he was a leader to, choose him. You are asking me to state the obvious here. He didnt become a leader over night.
How did Graham bell have power? not following you there.
-
This is even barmier as barmier as it gets
And since that is the most intelligent statement coming from you, I would be doing myself a huge disservice by continuing to respond. I came to this forum to exchange information, learn new things and if I have anything to offer, offer my own understanding. When that fails and all that remains is just rantings without any solid fact from people who refuse to even state thier own opinion but instead hide behind the backs of others, then to continue is a waste of time.
Lote Tree, lets continue when you can state what a 'muslim' is. If you can't even do that, then there's no point.
-
SaLaM mquran
In your experience, you mean. It appears that you're quite confident that your experience is the last word on things so I wish you luck with that.
Brother lets not make it personel. Give me an example where a leader came into power without choosing or without forcing himself.
Jaxal, can you please read the verse? Unless FM has drastically changed , the last time I looked, this was a Quranic discussion. Here's the verse for your convenience
I simply cannot see how that verse address the issue. Unless im overlooking something, in which case, please point it out to me coz i have googly eyes.
This verse is to al-kafireen, people who absolutely reject God's laws
So brother, in your opinion, God is saying that dont force your belief on a non-believer, but leave no space in forcing it on a fellow muslim? Sunnis and free-minders. Do u think since you are both muslims, u think its ok for each of you to be forcing your belief on each other? Wont you look at the verse 109.6?
In other words, if you use this for people in your domain,
I dont know what this has to do with being democratic. There is a difference between being democratic and being a criminal.
How did Graham bell have power? not following you there.
Sorry i think it was a lousy example. but my point was, God has given many people wisdom and knowledge. Yet they are not in power. So either people didnt choose him. Or the power and wisdom he recieved was of a different nature.
-
What a surprise! What a dissapointment!
It seems that the brains of Muslims are so polluted with the authocratic or tyrranical teachings and culture, even some of the so-called Quran Alone brothers and sisters are still defending monarchies or oligarchies in the name of God.
This cultural pollution plus confusion about the nature of democracy (many assume that the US is a democraticly governed country, which is for most part is NOT), needs much more attention than I expected....
I was very navie to assume that any student of the Quran would see the obvious Quranic precepts promoting Democracy. I will inshallah try to write an article on this issue before the end of this year.
For those who wish to push their religion or system on me or others in the name of God, "your system is for you and my system is for me."
Peace,
Edip -
Dear Edip,
It's surprising to see you turn to intellectual cowardice. Instead of presenting the more beautiful arguments (16/125) you accuse those who disagree with you of 'authocratic or tyrranical teachings'. It seems you're only good at debating sunnis but when it comes to Quranic arguments, you turn tail and hide behind a decontextualised verse.
'To you your religion to me mine' is something to say to an 'al-kafir', a person who has absolutely rejected God's law. Without even a quoting a single verse in support of your democratic nonsense, you accuse others of being kafir? A kafir is one who conceals/rejects God's laws and God's laws are in al-quraan. Haven't I been a quoting from al-quraan?
As for poor David and Solomon, I guess they shouldn't be in the Quran. Maybe your fellow 19ers can continue thier omitting exercise and excise David and Solomon too. Or perhaps we CAN make distinctions among the messengers, something which you 19 ppl have been against all these years and deemphasise David and Solomon who were probably kings because of some cultural nonsense even though Allah mentioned it. Anything to ingratiate ourselves to the powers that be, right Edip?
And while we're at it, maybe we should also tell Musa to first confer with the faasiq Bani Israil before he leaves them outright. Or maybe ar-rasul, instead of just conferring with believers in 3/159 (but making his decision solely , fa iza azamTA, dont forget) , he should start conferring with the disbelievers too? We should make all these corrections quickly Edip, before the powers that be think we're too regressive for thier post-modern ways.
Pathetic.
-
Salaam Jaxal,
Brother lets not make it personel. Give me an example where a leader came into power without choosing or without forcing himself.
Brother, YOU'RE making it personal. You've never experienced something like this and therefore you think it's impossible. I trust al-quraan's narrations and this is how I believe things run in the world.
I simply cannot see how that verse address the issue. Unless im overlooking something, in which case, please point it out to me coz i have googly eyes
.The verse tells us that David, after destroying the overwhelming enemy, was granted power. To attain power in the same way, we must do the same thing.
So brother, in your opinion, God is saying that dont force your belief on a non-believer, but leave no space in forcing it on a fellow muslim? Sunnis and free-minders. Do u think since you are both muslims, u think its ok for each of you to be forcing your belief on each other? Wont you look at the verse 109.6?
No one is forcing belief on anyone. All im saying is, when you enter a dominion run on Quranic laws, you obey those laws. If you feel those laws are burdensome, then leave. Its as simple as that. Your definition of 'muslim' seems to have a religious connotation whereas Quranically, a muslim is one who obeys Allah's laws and the laws must be operational in a given dominion.
I dont know what this has to do with being democratic. There is a difference between being democratic and being a criminal.
Once again, being a 'democract' in the normative sense of the word means that everyone is consulted in the process of unlimited legislation. Unlimited legislation is simply not possible if one is a muslim. I dont understand how this very simple deduction can be controversial.
-
SaLaM mquran
The verse tells us that David, after destroying the overwhelming enemy, was granted power. To attain power in the same way, we must do the same thing.
What kind of power did David attain. If he was made a leader of the people, then why do u expect that same scenario to happen again? Many men destroy armies for their country. Not all become leaders. Infact, they are kept out of becomming a leader. Its just not the same thing.
Your definition of 'muslim' seems to have a religious connotation whereas Quranically, a muslim is one who obeys Allah's laws and the laws must be operational in a given dominion.
There are many sunnis who dont follow Hadiths and they call them selves sunnis. I was simply giving an example between two different sects who follow Allah. But never the less, is it fair for a sunni to come to a shia and force his belief on him? or vice versa? You think that verse is only meant for the unbelievers. Does that give the sunni the right to force his belief on a shia?
Once again, being a 'democract' in the normative sense of the word means that everyone is consulted in the process of unlimited legislation. Unlimited legislation is simply not possible if one is a muslim. I dont understand how this very simple deduction can be controversial.
So you are saying, that say in the near future, All the people who beleive in Quran Alone form a country. The leader of that country will be chosen by.... what? A random draw? Or will someone have to destroy armies before that peson is chosen a leader? Tell me brother, how will that go?
-
Peace MQ,
I disagree with your interpretation on a single leader.
My view from reading the Scripture is that only God can appoint a king/sole ruler as that person would be under divine influence to rule and judge in accordance with God's law.
As for us normal humans, choosing a single leader would place us in the category forewarned by the queen of Sheba as recorded in the Scripture
"She said ?When the kings enter a town they destroy it and make its most noble people humiliated. It is such that they do.? (The Message 2736)
We are to be governed by the Book of God, under which we would place a commitee (shura) which is chosen from the people based on intelegence and rightousness...It is then upto that Council to rule in accordance with God's law and they may appoint a single person (Prime Minister) to ease the day-to-day management of the nation, on condition that that PM would be answerable to the Council.
Book of God-------> Council (elected from the people) --------> PM -------> Government
-
Salaam Br Layth,
You make it seems so easy but in the real world it isn't and we know it.
We know that often it exist only a few candidates to choose between and no one of them are good enough to be the leader.
And all this can only be possible if we live in an islamic society based on God Alone---Quran Alone.
But when do it exist a society like this?
Until that i will not vote for any politician because all of them are same crap and don't speak about the monarcy, I wish all such house would disappear because what is the point to keep them.
Peace
Sis Majidah -
Salaamun alaikum Jaxal,
Very relevant questions indeed.
What kind of power did David attain?
We can understand the nature of power by looking at the word 'mulk' in quranic usage. 'mulk' is used in several places and each place gives a shade of meaning. Im currently onto this research myself.If he was made a leader of the people, then why do u expect that same scenario to happen again?
Not only do I expect it, I fully believe that if all elements of the equation are in place, it will happen again. That's what the Quran is for, guidance. Not a mathematical wonderment book to gawk and keep counting for donkey's years.There are many sunnis who dont follow Hadiths and they call them selves sunnis. I was simply giving an example between two different sects who follow Allah. But never the less, is it fair for a sunni to come to a shia and force his belief on him? or vice versa? You think that verse is only meant for the unbelievers. Does that give the sunni the right to force his belief on a shia?
Once again, this is not about BELIEF. I will you an analogy.
You are now living in the state of the United Kingdom. Do you believe that our taxes should be given to alcoholics for them to buy moderate amounts of booze while they are in the process of giving up? I don't but because I am in this domain, I will submit to its laws.
in 2001, they released 2 boys convicted of murdering a 2 year old in 1993. Most of the UK citizens were against it but they did it anyway. So whatever our opinion, we submit to those who have power in the domain.
This is not about belief, this is about our submission.
So you are saying, that say in the near future, All the people who beleive in Quran Alone form a country. The leader of that country will be chosen by.... what? A random draw? Or will someone have to destroy armies before that peson is chosen a leader? Tell me brother, how will that go
I don't know because I will never participate in the formation of a country or a state . The word 'dawlah' or Arabic for 'state' doesnt exist in al-quraan. What we have is 'ummah' which is an organisation embodying the principles of motherhood (ummah comes from the root 'umm') to its members. An ummah has no geographical boundaries.
many thanks for your relevant questions there.
-
Salaamun alaikum Layth,
My view from reading the Scripture is that only God can appoint a king/sole ruler as that person would be under divine influence to rule and judge in accordance with God's law.
2 questions to you then
-
Can that appointment by God happen again?
-
How does that appointment happen ? (surely we dont expect God to come down to earth and crown the new king, hehe...so what do we expect to see?)
As for us normal humans, choosing a single leader would place us in the category forewarned by the queen of Sheba as recorded in the Scripture
"
She said When the kings enter a town they destroy it and make its most noble people humiliated. It is such that they do. (The Message 2736)Its actually 27/34, Layth so you might want to check if there's a mistake.
My questions
-
Normal humans ? So the nabiyeen weren't normal humans ? Please see 18/110.
-
Was the queen of sheba absolutely correct? If so what about David and Sulaimaan. Note that the same word is used. Sheba used 'muluka' in 27/36 and David and Solomon had 'mulk'. Sheba HERSELF was a 'malika' . So if you look at context, maybe what Sheba was trying here is that Maliks shouldnt make decisions without advice first?
We are to be governed by the Book of God, under which we would place a commitee (shura) which is chosen from the people based on intelegence and rightousness...It is then upto that Council to rule in accordance with God's law and they may appoint a single person (Prime Minister) to ease the day-to-day management of the nation, on condition that that PM would be answerable to the Council.
Book of God-------> Council (elected from the people) --------> PM -------> Government
Would you mind proving this process from al-quraan itself ? I just cant seem to find it. There's nowhere in al-quraan where people take a vote to appoint thier leader. Please do quote the verses for me and I'd be happy to rescind my views.
-
-
I simply cannot see how that verse address the issue. Unless im overlooking something, in which case, please point it out to me coz i have googly eyes
.The verse tells us that David, after destroying the overwhelming enemy, was granted power. To attain power in the same way, we must do the same thing.
peace brother mquran.
i THINK this verse isnt saying that David attained power by destroying the enemy . it is only telling that Allah had granted him power and wisdom . its not saying that it is because of killing the enemy that he attained power and wisdom .
he didnt need to kill enemies to attain WISDOM , right ? neither do we .
what do u think ?
peace . -
Salaamun alaikum,
i THINK this verse isnt saying that David attained power by destroying the enemy . it is only telling that Allah had granted him power and wisdom . its not saying that it is because of killing the enemy that he attained power and wisdom .
he didnt need to kill enemies to attain WISDOM , right ? neither do we .
what do u think ?I don't think this is the only way to attain al-hikmah (what you call as wisdom, but has its own quranic definition), no.
However, you cannot disconnect the attainment of al-mulk from the vanquishing of Jaloot. if it were 2 seperate things, it wouldnt be so intimately placed.
Joseph was given almulk as well . If a king were to be elected one like Joseph seems a likely candidate.
Once again, this isn't an elected 'mulk' reciever. Yusuf was given mulk from the king himself, by appointment.
-
SaLaM mquran
Im currently onto this research myself.
Brother, When you do completel your research then plz share it with me.
Not only do I expect it, I fully believe that if all elements of the equation are in place, it will happen again. That's what the Quran is for, guidance. Not a mathematical wonderment book to gawk and keep counting for donkey's years.
My grandfather was a general during the war of 1947 in the army. When pakistan seperated, my Grandfather was fighting the war. No doubt he did many great things for his country and no doubt he killed many enemies. But he is no president. On the other hand, Muhammad Ali Jinah and Mahatma Ghandi who were both opposed to the violence became the leaders. What you saying is that you expect the same conditions to be in place. From the time David did this, up to now, how many times have the conditions been the same? And how many times have the people who fought for their country bacame leaders? Plenty. But not ALL who killed armies became leaders. Very very few.
You are now living in the state of the United Kingdom. Do you believe that our taxes should be given to alcoholics for them to buy moderate amounts of booze while they are in the process of giving up? I don't but because I am in this domain, I will submit to its laws.
in 2001, they released 2 boys convicted of murdering a 2 year old in 1993. Most of the UK citizens were against it but they did it anyway. So whatever our opinion, we submit to those who have power in the domain.
This was just wrong. There are many rapist who go unpunished. There are many killers who go free. The world is unfair. Life, my dear brother, is unfair.
An ummah has no geographical boundaries.
So if an ummah doesnt have no geographical boundries, again, how do you propose to select a leader? If the people cant choose, do we wait for a revelation from God saying that So and So is your leader? Thats what Rashid Khalifa did. It got him killed.
