Democracy vs. Islam ....you decide

First Responder

MPA (400+ posts)
Democracy
a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority
b : a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy

No consensus exists on how to define democracy, but legal equality, political freedom and rule of law have been identified as important characteristics.[6][7] These principles are reflected in all eligible citizens being equal before the law and having equal access to legislative processes.

For example, in a representative democracy, every vote has equal weight, no unreasonable restrictions can apply to anyone seeking to become a representative [according to whom?], and the freedom of its eligible citizens is secured by legitimized rights and liberties which are typically protected by a constitution
While holding free and fair elections is an integral part of a true democracy but holding a free and fair elections does not necessarily mean having a true democracy. The examples are Iran and now some gulf states.

In a true democracy the sovereignty belongs to people. Practically speaking if 51% people or their representative law making body decides to make something lawful (Gay marriage or Alcohol) then it will become legal and if they decide to make something unlawful and punishable then they can do that. They also have the right and privilege to decide punishments and penalties.

Islam:
Literally means to submit to the will and pleasure of your creator: Allah

Surah Baqara:208
2_208.png




O you who have believed, enter into Islam completely [and perfectly] and do not follow the footsteps of Satan. Indeed, he is to you a clear enemy.

Ale Imran: 19
3_19.png


Indeed, the DEEN(System a society lives by) in the sight of Allah is Islam. And those who were given the Scripture did not differ except after knowledge had come to them - out of jealous animosity between themselves. And whoever disbelieves in the verses of Allah , then indeed, Allah is swift in [taking] account.

In an Islamic state the law making authority is Allah alone. He alone has the authority to declare something lawful/legal or illegal. Not even 100% people in the state can decide to make Alcohol or Gay Marriage legal. People do have the right to make day to day decisions for running the affairs, such as building roads, making schools, etc. This can be done by consultation/shura with the veto in the hands of the Khalifa(similar to the Presidential veto in American system).

There is no formal system of selecting a shura/council or a Khaleefa prescribed. This is left up to the people, for this it is suggested that elections can be held and a presidential form of ruler can be adopted.

When it comes to legal equality, political freedom and rule of law, as in a democracy, Islam upholds all these values, in fact, Islamic state has pioneered and championed these values when the rest of the world was immersed in the darkness of Kingships and monarchies.

Democracy had existed for about 200 years in the city state of Rome but then it was nowhere to be found till about 200 years ago. In this interval Islamic state/states existed with the concept of legal state (Potentially the law was supreme and the same law was applicable to the Khalifa as well), this concept was unique and foreign in the rest of the world.

The entire world outside the folds of Islam was under some form of a monarchy, where the monarch was above the law and he/she had the ultimate authority to make or break laws. Indeed even today in the democracies there is Presidential pardon and Presidential immunity or some other form of immunity for people in power.

This is not to say that there was no corruption or all the Islamic states were perfect. The individual Khaleefas did frequently usurp the powers and became monarchies. The system of Islamic Khilafat was never intended for it to be a monarchy, hence the struggle and the shahadah of Imam Hussain (RA). The struggle of Imam Hussain (R.A.) was to stand against this concept of Ameer Muawiah appointing his son as the Khaleefa, where as the Khilafa belonged to the muslims collectively
 
Last edited by a moderator:

First Responder

MPA (400+ posts)
The purpose of this thread is to have a healthy debate and try to understand the differences in the two systems.
Me being a muslim do have a bias in favor of Islamic system.
 

Pukaar

Senator (1k+ posts)
The purpose of this thread is to have a healthy debate and try to understand the differences in the two systems.
Me being a muslim do have a bias in favor of Islamic system.

Democracy is a part of Islam. When Allah created Adam (A.S), He gathered Malaika and asked them of their opinion. Majority of them didn't vote for Hazrat Adam (A.S) however, Allah over ruled them (Surah Baqarah 30-39)
 

Afaq Chaudhry

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Government of the people,by the people and for the people according to the Allah's order,and government of the people by the people and for the people under human's order is just insult of humanity, where there is no concept of Allah, The Supereme, WHO is the CREATER of human beings is Allah.
This is Islam and no other alternative in the world aganist Islam.
 

Pukaar

Senator (1k+ posts)
Democracy is often interpreted as the "RULE OF THE MAJORITY"; It is not.... It can't be... Democracy is just taking consensus; giving people a chance to have their say. That is all.
Popular Vote doesn't always wins. But at least in a true democracy, people have the chance to vote.
 

Pukaar

Senator (1k+ posts)
Government of the people,by the people and for the people according to the Allah's order,and government of the people by the people and for the people under human's order is just insult of humanity, where there is no concept of Allah, The Supereme, WHO is the CREATER of human beings is Allah.
This is Islam and no other alternative in the world aganist Islam.

If the constitution is created according to Allah's orders and the human orders according to Allah's will than its is Islamic democracy. The key is that democracy is the government of the people, not the government of a tyrant like in Kingdom and ISIS's Khilafat
 

Afaq Chaudhry

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)

If the constitution is created according to Allah's orders and the human orders according to Allah's will than its is Islamic democracy. The key is that democracy is the government of the people, not the government of a tyrant like in Kingdom and ISIS's Khilafat

Its so simple, Allah has created us, so HE knows well for HIS creature how to live in the world, as well as concerned the constitution of Pakistan is , there are words about the Supermacy of Allah and promised by the members of assembly to implement the islamic law (shaa'ria). if rulers don't follow the law they are responsible for their deeds.
Siasat or politics is just part if Islam(DEEN).
 

First Responder

MPA (400+ posts)

Democracy is a part of Islam. When Allah created Adam (A.S), He gathered Malaika and asked them of their opinion. Majority of them didn't vote for Hazrat Adam (A.S) however, Allah over ruled them (Surah Baqarah 30-39)

Brother that is an interesting take on this Ayat, I have to admit I never looked at it from that angle. However, when you read those Ayats, the impression you get is that Allah (SWAT) informed them rather take an opinion from the Malaika. In fact, when the Angels (Malaika) were ordered to bow down to Adam, there was no choice, and when Iblees dissented, he was punished. So it is my opinion we should not confuse the absolute authority that Allah has with out system of democracy.
 

First Responder

MPA (400+ posts)
Democracy is often interpreted as the "RULE OF THE MAJORITY"; It is not.... It can't be... Democracy is just taking consensus; giving people a chance to have their say. That is all.
Popular Vote doesn't always wins. But at least in a true democracy, people have the chance to vote.


Voting for a representative government is just one part of Democracy.
An important element of the current "Western Democracy" entails that the majority opinion as expressed by their representatives becomes law. AS evidenced by "Gay marriage " or abolition of alcohol and then legalization, etc in USA and then there are several exam, etc.
 

First Responder

MPA (400+ posts)
Brother that is an interesting take on this Ayat, I have to admit I never looked at it from that angle. However, when you read those Ayats, the impression you get is that Allah (SWAT) informed them rather take an opinion from the Malaika. In fact, when the Angels (Malaika) were ordered to bow down to Adam, there was no choice, and when Iblees dissented, he was punished. So it is my opinion we should not confuse the absolute authority that Allah has with out system of democracy.


This system of democracy is designed to overcome the weakness of us humans, since authority corrupts and absolute authority corrupts absolutely.
 

QaiserMirza

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
بات یہ ہے کہ انسان جب بھی الله کے قانون پر اپنے قانون کو نافذ کرے گا تو ظلم اور فساد ہی پھیلے گا
الله کا قانون انسانیت کی بھلائی اور فلاح کی ضمانت ہے باقی سب فساد ہے


آج کی نام نہاد جمہوریت دراصل سرمایہ داری نظام کی حفاظت کے لیے بنایا گیا ہے
جس میں غریب عوام کو کچلا جاتا ہے اور امیر کی تجوریاں بھری جاتی ہیں

دنیا کی بہترین جمہوریت پاکستان میں ہے
جہاں حکمران دن رات اپنی دولت بڑھانے کے لیے ہر ممکن تگ و دو کرنے میں گزار دیتے ہیں
کل کے فٹ پاتھیے آج دنیا بھر میں محلات کے مالک ہیں
اور غریب کارخانوں میں زندہ جلایا جا رہا ہے
 
Last edited:

First Responder

MPA (400+ posts)
I would like to further clarify that the current democracy as practiced by the West means that the 51% majority has the right to make or change any law.
 

First Responder

MPA (400+ posts)
بات یہ ہے کہ انسان جب بھی الله کے قانون پر اپنے قانون کو نافذ کرے گا تو ظلم اور فساد ہی پھیلے گا
الله کا قانون انسانیت کی بھلائی اور فلاح کی ضمانت ہے باقی سب فساد ہے


Cannot agree with you more.

The problem now is that even "MUSLIMS" need to be convinced of this
 

Moonraker

Voter (50+ posts)
Brother that is an interesting take on this Ayat, I have to admit I never looked at it from that angle. However, when you read those Ayats, the impression you get is that Allah (SWAT) informed them rather take an opinion from the Malaika. In fact, when the Angels (Malaika) were ordered to bow down to Adam, there was no choice, and when Iblees dissented, he was punished. So it is my opinion we should not confuse the absolute authority that Allah has with out system of democracy.

You are correct. I have a question. When Allah asked Angels to bow down to Adam how can you come to the conclusion that Iblees dissented since he was not an Angle.
 

Qarar

MPA (400+ posts)
اسلامی دور حکومت کے پہلے تیس پیتیس سال مسلمانوں کے لیے ایک رول ماڈل کی حیثیت رکھتے ہیں ....اگر خلفاء راشدین کے ادوار کو دیکھا جائے تو تین چار چیزیں واضح نظر آتی ہیں
ایک ....خلیفہ کو ایک بادشاہ کے اختیارات حاصل ہیں ...گورنروں سے لے کر ہر ایک تعیناتی خلیفہ کا صوابدیدی اختیار ہے ...ہمیں کوئی ایسی مثال نہیں ملتی جس میں خلیفہ کا کوئی حکم کسی اور باڈی نے رد کر دیا ہو ...قاضی کو اختیارات کا ذکر تو ضرور ہے مگر قاضی بھی خلیفہ ہی نامزد کرتا ہے اور کوئی ایک مثال جس میں قاضی نے خلیفہ کے احکامات مسترد کردئیے ہوں؟ کوئی ایک بھی نہیں ...صرف حضرت عمر کی ایک مثال اکثر سامنے آتی ہے کہ کسی نے عمر سے چادر کے بارے میں سوال کیا تھا مگر خلیفہ کے اختیارات کو چلینج کرنا ممکن نہیں تھا اور اپوزیشن کا کوئی وجود نہیں ...ہر ایک پر خلیفہ کی بیعت کرنا لازمی تھا ....حضرت عثمان اور حضرت علی کے درمیان مقابلے میں جب عثمان ایک ووٹ کی اکثریت سے خلیفہ بن گئے تو سب سے پہلے حضرت علی کو عثمان کی بیعت کرنے کو کہا گیا ..جو انھوں نے کی ...حالانکہ وہ ایک اپوزیشن لیڈر ہوسکتے تھے مگر اسلامی حکومت میں اپوزیشن کا کوئی کردار نہیں

دو ...خلیفہ کو ہٹایا نہیں جاسکتا ...کوئی عدم اعتماد کی صورت نہیں...خلیفہ کی اقتدار سے علیحدگی صرف موت کی صورت میں ممکن تھی


تین ...خلیفہ کی سلیکشن میں عام عوام کا کوئی کردار نہیں تھا...ابو بکر کو چیدہ چیدہ صحابیوں نے منتخب کیا ....ابو بکر نے خود اپنے جانشین کا فیصلہ کیا اور اپنے بہترین دوست عمر کا انتخاب کرتے وقت ایک بھی شخص سے پوچھنے کی ضرورت محسوس نہ کی....عمر نے آٹھ دس صحابیوں کی ایک باڈی تشکیل دی جس نے عثمان کو انتخاب کرنا تھا مگر انہیں ملنے والے ووٹ بھی اکثریتی نہ تھے ..اکثر صحابہ نے ووٹ کا حق استعمال نہ کیا ...اور یوں عثمان ایک ووٹ کی اکثریت سے خلیفہ متخب ہو گئے جس میں ان کا خود اپنے حق میں ڈالا گیا ووٹ بھی شامل تھا ...جب کہ علی نے اپنا ووٹ نہیں ڈالا


چار ...رشتہ داریوں اور حسب نسب کی اہمیت ....حضور کے بعد ابو بکر اور عمر خلیفہ بنے ...دونوں حضور کے سسر تھے ....پھر عثمان اور علی ...جو دونوں حضور کے داماد .....حضرت عثمان کے دور میں تو ہر کلیدی عھدے پر ان کے قبیلے بنو امیہ کے لوگ فائز تھے جس نے عام صحابہ میں بے چینی پیدا کی اور ان کے آخری سالوں میں ان کے گھر کا محاصرہ بھی کیا گیا


مندرجہ بالا انفارمیشن کی موجودگی میں اسلامی نظام کو اچھا اور صحیح کہنا مناسب نہیں ...چیک اور بیلنس کا کوئی وجود نہیں تھا
 

First Responder

MPA (400+ posts)
You are correct. I have a question. When Allah asked Angels to bow down to Adam how can you come to the conclusion that Iblees dissented since he was not an Angle.

It is not clearly mentioned in the Quran what his status was, it does say in Surah Khahaf (18:50) that he was amongst the Jinns, but when you read all the different Ayats on subject/incident, you get a clear picture that he was also among the subjects/creatures? who were supposed to obey without any questions and he disobeyed. I think it is this confusion (in Christianity Iblees/Devil is a "Fallen Angel) that is clarified in Quran/Surah Kahf, that he was a Jinn and not an angel.
 

First Responder

MPA (400+ posts)
اسلامی دور حکومت کے پہلے تیس پیتیس سال مسلمانوں کے لیے ایک رول ماڈل کی حیثیت رکھتے ہیں ....اگر خلفاء راشدین کے ادوار کو دیکھا جائے تو تین چار چیزیں واضح نظر آتی ہیں
ایک ....خلیفہ کو ایک بادشاہ کے اختیارات حاصل ہیں ...گورنروں سے لے کر ہر ایک تعیناتی خلیفہ کا صوابدیدی اختیار ہے ...ہمیں کوئی ایسی مثال نہیں ملتی جس میں خلیفہ کا کوئی حکم کسی اور باڈی نے رد کر دیا ہو ...قاضی کو اختیارات کا ذکر تو ضرور ہے مگر قاضی بھی خلیفہ ہی نامزد کرتا ہے اور کوئی ایک مثال جس میں قاضی نے خلیفہ کے احکامات مسترد کردئیے ہوں؟ کوئی ایک بھی نہیں ...صرف حضرت عمر کی ایک مثال اکثر سامنے آتی ہے کہ کسی نے عمر سے چادر کے بارے میں سوال کیا تھا مگر خلیفہ کے اختیارات کو چلینج کرنا ممکن نہیں تھا اور اپوزیشن کا کوئی وجود نہیں ...ہر ایک پر خلیفہ کی بیعت کرنا لازمی تھا ....حضرت عثمان اور حضرت علی کے درمیان مقابلے میں جب عثمان ایک ووٹ کی اکثریت سے خلیفہ بن گئے تو سب سے پہلے حضرت علی کو عثمان کی بیعت کرنے کو کہا گیا ..جو انھوں نے کی ...حالانکہ وہ ایک اپوزیشن لیڈر ہوسکتے تھے مگر اسلامی حکومت میں اپوزیشن کا کوئی کردار نہیں

دو ...خلیفہ کو ہٹایا نہیں جاسکتا ...کوئی عدم اعتماد کی صورت نہیں...خلیفہ کی اقتدار سے علیحدگی صرف موت کی صورت میں ممکن تھی


تین ...خلیفہ کی سلیکشن میں عام عوام کا کوئی کردار نہیں تھا...ابو بکر کو چیدہ چیدہ صحابیوں نے منتخب کیا ....ابو بکر نے خود اپنے جانشین کا فیصلہ کیا اور اپنے بہترین دوست عمر کا انتخاب کرتے وقت ایک بھی شخص سے پوچھنے کی ضرورت محسوس نہ کی....عمر نے آٹھ دس صحابیوں کی ایک باڈی تشکیل دی جس نے عثمان کو انتخاب کرنا تھا مگر انہیں ملنے والے ووٹ بھی اکثریتی نہ تھے ..اکثر صحابہ نے ووٹ کا حق استعمال نہ کیا ...اور یوں عثمان ایک ووٹ کی اکثریت سے خلیفہ متخب ہو گئے جس میں ان کا خود اپنے حق میں ڈالا گیا ووٹ بھی شامل تھا ...جب کہ علی نے اپنا ووٹ نہیں ڈالا


چار ...رشتہ داریوں اور حسب نسب کی اہمیت ....حضور کے بعد ابو بکر اور عمر خلیفہ بنے ...دونوں حضور کے سسر تھے ....پھر عثمان اور علی ...جو دونوں حضور کے داماد .....حضرت عثمان کے دور میں تو ہر کلیدی عھدے پر ان کے قبیلے بنو امیہ کے لوگ فائز تھے جس نے عام صحابہ میں بے چینی پیدا کی اور ان کے آخری سالوں میں ان کے گھر کا محاصرہ بھی کیا گیا


مندرجہ بالا انفارمیشن کی موجودگی میں اسلامی نظام کو اچھا اور صحیح کہنا مناسب نہیں ...چیک اور بیلنس کا کوئی وجود نہیں تھا



Your critique is interesting but if one is to agree with you we have to assume that even the first 4 Khalfas were power grabbers and usurpers, which disagree with strongly.

First point: Yes Khaleefa did usurp the powers and did become a monarch in most cases. This was not intended.
There are several examples after the Khulufa Rashideen where the Great Ulamas did stand up against the Khaleefa against their opinion and they were severely persecuted and punished. I recommend the book by Prof: Noah Feldman: The fall and rise of Islamic state.
The initial system left behind by the prophetpbuh left us with some basic guidance and guidelines. There is indication from the ayat of the quran (24:55) that Khilafa/islamic state was supposed to be the collective responsibility and belonging of the muslims. The humanity was still evolving and no particular system of governance was prescribed.

Second point: This is an assumption that Khaleefa cannot be removed, there is nothing in the Quran or the Ahadees to suggest that. In fact according to one of the statements of Umar (RA), you not only can but must remove the Khaleefa if he is going against the Quran and Sunnah.
So according to several scholars, a system with limited terms is not only possible/allowable but would be more practical.

Third: If you take a look at your own statement, every Khaleefa was appointed in a different manner, the prophetpbuh, did not name or appoint any one, he could very easily done that. It is the opinion of some that it was left intentionally to keep door open for different modes of governments.
But there is no reason why a form of election can not be held to select the Khaleefa or other representatives.

Fourht: I think this disinformation is spread to confuse the uninformed muslims. If we believe this, then the Prophetpbuh failed in his mission, may Allah forgive me and you for saying this. Because even if his closest of followers, people who are promised paradise are at the end of the day just power grabbers and in the lust of this world, then what did they achieve. So Umar(RA), Usman(RA) and Ali (RA) were no different from the petty politicians of today.

Brother this is what the enemies of Islam want us to believe so they can justify their evil acts and put doubt in our hearts
 

First Responder

MPA (400+ posts)
بات یہ ہے کہ انسان جب بھی الله کے قانون پر اپنے قانون کو نافذ کرے گا تو ظلم اور فساد ہی پھیلے گا
الله کا قانون انسانیت کی بھلائی اور فلاح کی ضمانت ہے باقی سب فساد ہے


آج کی نام نہاد جمہوریت دراصل سرمایہ داری نظام کی حفاظت کے لیے بنایا گیا ہے
جس میں غریب عوام کو کچلا جاتا ہے اور امیر کی تجوریاں بھری جاتی ہیں

دنیا کی بہترین جمہوریت پاکستان میں ہے
جہاں حکمران دن رات اپنی دولت بڑھانے کے لیے ہر ممکن تگ و دو کرنے میں گزار دیتے ہیں
کل کے فٹ پاتھیے آج دنیا بھر میں محلات کے مالک ہیں
اور غریب کارخانوں میں زندہ جلایا جا رہا ہے

The entire system of the whole world is heavily in favor of the big corporate businesses and big businesses.
The World system is heavily against the individuals, specially poor individuals.
The nation states with borders are only for the poor. The rich and the coroporations can easily move from state to state/country to country, but the poor people cannot move and all the borders and laws are against them.
 

Altaf Lutfi

Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Both will fail in Pakistan. Democracy does not suit our psyche and we are not fit for Islamic system of governance.