Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board
| notonlyisDemocracykufranddisbelife it doesnt work! |
|---|
| jehad |
| 02/15/01 at 10:30:06 |
| I have looked at the arguments "for". They are not connected to Islam, they are based on alleged benefit. It is a fact that countries of the west are not ruled by the people, for the people, with the people. this is a lie to fool the foolish. Democracy is a myth, it is the opium of the masses to make them tolerate oppression. Cause they are told they are the ones ruling, so if they go against the will of the oppressor they go against them selves. The west is run by the rich, for the rich with the rich. in America and Britain, there are only two parties able to get elected. Rich business men make donations to both of them. The major parties are only loyal to the people who pay their advertising budgets, as the people are so thick they will believe what ever they are told to believe, if enough has been spent to convince them. When people have been lied to they will forget it, if enough is spent to make them forget. The polices of any country are made for the benefit of that country, our benefit does not overlap with theirs. We are the Muslim nation, we want to destroy their democracy, freedom, capitalism, secularism, and all of their perversions they are so pleased to export to our countries. They know this,, shame many Muslims don't. They will never do any thing good for Muslims unless their is benefit for them in it, they worship benefit, that's their god, ours is Allah, please oh Muslims don't forget this. We want Islamic state, when this comes the cheep oil that the prosperity of the west is based on will end. Their wealthy way of life will end. Petrol prices will go up and taxies taken from petrol will go down. Oil fired power stations will close down due to becoming uncompetitive and new power plants will have to be built to replace them. At the same end the revenues taken in due to oil, will be spent on the Muslim Ummah and Islam, not in Arab playgrounds like Edgware Rd. Today billions from Muslim are being wasted in the west, while our nations starve of investment. The west will never do any thing that will bring about Islamic state and will do all it can to prevent it. Even if America and Britain gain Muslim majorities, they will never let this happen. The World has many nations with Muslim majorities, do any of them do any thing for Islam? when Muslim vote for something in the Muslim world that the rulers don't like has it ever come about? No! elections are cancelled and the rules of voting are changed to prevent a repartition. What makes you think America and Britain are any different? Do you really think the rich business men who run America and Britain care about what people want? All democracy does is change the face who lies to the people, it will have no effect on any policies that matter. All Muslims do by voting is make a demonstration of their hypocrisy. In Islam Allah is the lawmaker, in democracy it is the people. If democracy was perfect by voting we are excepting that the people as a whole have the right to dictate what is lawful and unlawful, this is shirk. In reality by voting we are giving legitimacy to the lying perverts who run the west, so it can steal as much as possible from the Muslim lands. |
| Re: notonlyisDemocracykufranddisbelife it doesnt work! |
|---|
| jade |
| 02/16/01 at 02:42:38 |
| Salaamu alaikom, Jehad, there is nothing wrong with having a democraticly elected government. Both Abu Baker & Omar were elected democraticly. Or do you prefer dictatorship? no true muslim believes we can vote away Allah's laws. |
| Re: notonlyisDemocracykufranddisbelife it doesnt work! |
|---|
| jehad |
| 02/16/01 at 14:23:16 |
| Alakum Salam, Democracy and dictatorship are the same!!! I Prefer Allah being the only law giver. Democracy means rule by the people, voting is just one of the means used to elect the leader in to office. What makes democracy kufr is that it gives the people the right to make laws. From the Islamic viewpoint democracy and dictatorship are the same. In a dictatorship, one person has the right to form and end laws, This is shirk. And in democracy, theoretically all the people have the right to form and end laws; this is just as shirk. What's the difference? In Islam Allah is the only lawgiver. In Islam just as one man has not got the right to decide which laws should be made and which should be ended, all the people together have not got this right. It is true that in Islam the bayah is a condition of the khalif entering in to office. The bayah is the ummah's pledge that they will follow him. This can be done in many ways, voting is just one of them. If the khalif is elected in to office, this does not mean the khilafah is a democracy, because he and the people who elected him have no right to make up laws or end laws, all laws have to be derived from Islam. When Umar ra invaded the greatest empire of the time(Persia), the Muslims became a minority in the state, due to the large number of new citizens. The laws of the state were still intirely from Islam. Even though the Mushriks hated it. The large number of Persian citizens did not change the law of the state; the mushriks seeing the beautiful laws of Allah changed themselves to Muslims. You say no true Muslim will vote against Islam, Islam does not give them the right to even try. There are many people today who claim to be Muslim, and hate parts of Islam. In a democracy if these people become the majority the laws will be changed. In the khilafah it does not matter if all the people become like this, cause Allah is the only lawgiver. It's a fact that evil people can change the mind of the public to love evil and hate good. A few years ago being a fag was illegal here in England. People used to be arrested for it. Today it is legal, and teachers teach young children in schools its ok to be a fag, and fags are able to adopt children and normal people are often denied the right to look after kids if they say they will not tolerate kids in there care becoming fags. These are the fruits of freedom and democracy. It may be true that no true Muslim will vote against Islam, but he will if he does not know that it is Islam. In democracy people use propaganda to lie to people. I don't think you really believe in democracy, as no true Muslim I have spoken to those. Most of them get mixed up between democracy and voting. They are two different things. Voting is used in some of the countries that claim to be democratic to elect a leader or representatives who will rule by their vain desires. It is also one of the means available to the Islamic state to elect a khalif, who will rule by Islam. If the khalif ever decide to rule by his vain desires or the will of the people above Allah's laws, there is a mechanism in the state called the madhallim, to warn him and then remove him and even execute him if he does not return to Allah's deen. |
| Re: notonlyisDemocracykufranddisbelife it doesnt work! |
|---|
| Kashif |
| 02/16/01 at 18:35:26 |
| [quote]Salaamu alaikom, Jehad, there is nothing wrong with having a democraticly elected government. Both Abu Baker & Omar were elected democraticly. Or do you prefer dictatorship? no true muslim believes we can vote away Allah's laws. [/quote] Wa alaikum us-salaam Just a slight correction. Neither Abu Bakr, Umar or even the third Khalif Uthman (radiyallahu `anhum) were elected democratically. As for Abu Bakr, his selection was implied even by the Prophet sallallahu alaihi wa sallam, during his last illness, when Abu Bakr led the Muslims in prayer. Furthermore, when the confusion regarding who should be the first Khalifah arose, it was Umar alone who took a hold of Abu Bakr's hand and pledged his allegiance and then the people of the Ansar & the Muhajireen followed suit. As for the selection of Umar, this was not democratic either. He was selected by Abu Bakr to take over the position of Khalifah. As for Uthman, he was selected by one person, and one person alone: Abu Ubaidah ibn al-Jarrah, and the rest of the people agreed to this. Kashif Wa Salaam |
| NS |
| Re: notonlyisDemocracykufranddisbelife it doesnt work! |
|---|
| Arsalan |
| 02/17/01 at 01:04:28 |
| Assalamu alaikum, [quote]As for Uthman, he was selected by one person, and one person alone: Abu Ubaidah ibn al-Jarrah, and the rest of the people agreed to this. [/quote]Just as a slight correction ... :) Abu Ubaidah al-Jarrah (r.a.) died during the Caliphate of Abu Bakr (r.a.) [see comment below]. Umar (r.a.), before dying, chose a committee of 6 people to decide on the next Caliph. The head of the committee was Abdul Rahman ibn Awf (r.a.) who eventually ended up choosing the next Khalifa to be Uthman (r.a.). All others obeyed his judgment without any hesitation, including Ali (r.a.). Wassalamu alaikum. P.S. I've always thought how interesting things would have been if Abu Ubaidah (r.a.) had lived till the end of Abu Bakr's time. He would have been the next Khalifa. Two reasons for this: a. He was among the two people who Abu Bakr (r.a.) offered to the Ansaar as the first Khalifa (the other one was Umar). b. He was greatly respected by Umar. We know this from many sayings of Umar. One example is the famous incident when Umar asked some companions to name their most passionate wish. After they all named their wishes, he told them his. He said, "I wish I had a room full of people like Abu Ubaidah al-Jarrah." Subhan Allah! |
| Re: notonlyisDemocracykufranddisbelife it doesnt work! |
|---|
| Kashif |
| 02/17/01 at 03:51:57 |
| wa alaikum us-salaam Arsalan jazakallahu khair for the correction. If there are two blessed companions whose names i always mixup, its Abdur-Rahman ibn Awf & Abu Ubaidah ibn al-Jarrah. Even while i was writing my comments yesterday i was thinking, "was it Abdur-Rahman or Abu Ubaidah?" but i settled on the latter. PS Ibn Kathr has a paragraph about selecting the Amir ul-Mu'mineenwhich i'll try to type up a little later insha'llah. Kashif Wa Salaam |
| NS |
| Re: notonlyisDemocracykufranddisbelife it doesnt work! |
|---|
| Kashif |
| 02/17/01 at 08:41:24 |
| assalaamu alaikum Arsalan Here is a short article written by Ali Timimi which includes the narration you refer to. Kashif Wa Salaam ~~~~ Make a wish. [Do Muslims need more empty structures?] ~~~~ Recently, I called a mosque to ask at what time they pray Salaat udh-Dhuhr and the answer I was given was, "We don’t really." I was a bit shocked and then thought perhaps they have some legitimate excuse for not praying the prayer in congregation, Allaah knows best… And I was also thinking about the fact that here in the city we have over 20 masaajid, three of them very close to each other. As is known, the practice of building masaajid in a vicinity is not in accordance with the practice of our righteous predecessors, but there is more that should raise our concern and cause us to worry… Dr. Mustafa as-Sibai, raHimahullaah, wrote in his biography of Rasoolullaahi, Sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam, that, "Is it not true that Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Khalid, Saad, Abu Ubaidah, and their likes from among the greats of the Islamic history were but students of Muhammad’s school which was headquartered in the Prophet’s mosque?" Clearly the mosque is the most important institution we have. Also, as I quoted Shaykh Safar al-Hawali not long ago, it is the only thing we really have. But, what is it that constitutes a mosque? A nicely built, solid structure? A minaret? A dome? The sad fact is that we at times spend literally millions in building such nice, solid structures. Still, alHamdulillaah that we have masaajid. However, are such costs justifiable if we do not use these buildings properly - as, at times, we do not even establish prayer in them. It seems to me, and Allaah, subhaanahu wa ta`aalaa, knows best, that we are once again not prioritizing our resources in the best way. With all the structures already built, into what should we really be investing the next million (or whatever is the sum to be collected)? AlHamdulillah, Muslims like to donate for building masaajid, for Allaah’s sake and seeking His reward, however we should reflect for a moment, have we neglected something? Perhaps the following wisdom from `Umar ibn al-Khattaab, radhiallaahu `anhu, will make the priorities clear. Abu Nu`aim related in al-Hilyat ul Awliyaa’ that Bishr bin Moosa narrated that `Umar ibn al-Khattaab was sitting with a group of his companions and he asked: "Let each one make a wish!" Someone said: "I wish if this house was filled with gold and which I would happily spend on God’s path." `Umar asked the people again: "Make a wish!" Someone else said, "I wish that this house was filled with pearls, chrysolites, and with every kind of precious gems that I would most happily spend in charity on God’s path." `Umar asked again, "Make a wish!" They replied: "O Ameer ul-Mu’mineen, we truly do not know what to wish for!" `Umar then said, "I wish that this house was filled with men like `Abu `Ubaydah bin al-JarraaH." Allaahu Akbar. A beautiful narration. One thing we can understand from it is the importance of investing into people, great men like Abu `Ubaydah ibn al-JarraaH, in whose reference, it is worth mentioning, it was revealed, "You will not find among the people who believe in Allaah and in the Last Day, someone who loves those who resist Allah and His Apostle, and even if they were their fathers, their sons, their brothers, or their nearest kindred. Allaah has inscribed faith in their hearts, and He strengthened them with a spirit of His own. He will admit them to gardens beneath which rivers flow, wherein they will dwell for ever. Allaah will be pleased with them, and they with Him. They are the party of Allaah. Truly it is the party of Allaah that will achieve (true) felicity." [Qur’aan 58:22] So it may be that we Muslims should start investing our resources in raising da`wah workers, rather than in structures alone. Else, how will we have Muslim youth be at all like Abu Bakr, `Umar, `Uthmaan, `Ali, Saad…, if all that they are offered is structures. Muslim nation, alHamdulillaah, is a young nation. If thestatistics given by al-Azhar’s Population Study Centre are correct, 43% of Muslims are under 5 years old. Even if the figure were 25%, who will educate these youth? Brick structures certainly won’t. I hope in shaa’ Allaah that we will realize the importance of investing into Muslim teachers and du`aat who will teach Muslims the `ilm they need - first and foremost `ilm pertaining to our Deen. In a hasan hadeeth, we find that Muhammad sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam praised teachers, by saying, "Verily Allah, His angels, the inmates of the heavens and the earth, even the ant in its hole and the fish in the sea send salutation on the one who teaches good to the people." Investing the amount of money it takes to build another masjid into scholarships for Muslims to study the Deen, to pay already qualified Muslim imams and teachers to actively work in da`wah, in order to revive our mosques and to teach Muslims, is likely to be a good investment, in shaa’ Allaah. But one of the first steps to take, I believe, is to open ways for Muslim youth who wish to study the Deen. Ibn Abee Jamra, raHimahullaah, said that when a child shows an inclination or interest for something, then that is his/her purpose. "Rabbanaa, maa khalaqta haadhaa baaTilan, subHaanak." Our Lord, you have not created this in vain, glory be to You! Their inclination and interest to study the Deen was not created as something baaTil. If we help our enthusiastic youth in pursuing their interest to acquire Islamic knowledge, then, in shaa’ Allaah, we will have great Muslims who will establish prayer in the masjid, teach people good, and raise new `Umar's, Abu `Ubaydah’s and Khaalid's, who will, in turn, raise high the banner of Islaam once again. In shaa' Allaah. |
| NS |
| Re: notonlyisDemocracykufranddisbelife it doesnt work! |
|---|
| jade |
| 02/17/01 at 14:41:38 |
| Salaamu alaikom, I guess it depends on how you define democracy. in my opinion both Abu Bakr & omar were elected democraticly. As you have said: "Umar alone who took a hold of Abu Bakr's hand and pledged his allegiance and 'then the people of the Ansar & the Muhajireen followed suit' " (note the last statment) and as far as I know even Omar (even after being chosen by Abu Bakr) had to wait for the people to accept. these are all forms of democracy. The people have the final say on who will be the leader. they understood that you can not force yourself on the people. as for voting away laws, as far as I know you can't do that. in America (correct me if I am wrong) laws are made or revoked from the supreme court or congress and state laws are made in similar bodies. but that isn't the essence of demoracy. the democracy practiced in a secular country like america would be different to democracy practiced in an islamic country. in which laws would ofcourse be derived from the Quran and the sunnah. |
| Re: notonlyisDemocracykufranddisbelife it doesnt work! |
|---|
| Kashif |
| 02/17/01 at 16:19:08 |
| The selection of Abu Bakr ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ...The people wept loudly, and the Ansar were assembled with Sad bin 'Ubada in the shed of Bani Saida. They said (to the emigrants). "There should be one 'Amir from us and one from you." Then Abu Bakr, Umar bin Al-Khattab and Abu 'baida bin Al-Jarrah went to them. 'Umar wanted to speak but Abu Bakr stopped him. 'Umar later on used to say, "By Allah, I intended only to say something that appealed to me and I was afraid that Abu Bakr would not speak so well. Then Abu Bakr spoke and his speech was very eloquent. He said in his statement, "We are the rulers and you (Ansars) are the ministers (i.e. advisers)," Hubab bin Al-Mundhir said, "No, by Allah we won't accept this. But there must be a ruler from us and a ruler from you." Abu Bakr said, "No, we will be the rulers and you will be the ministers, for they (i.e. Quarish) are the best family amongst the 'Arabs and of best origin. So you should elect either 'Umar or Abu 'Ubaida bin Al-Jarrah as your ruler." 'Umar said (to Abu Bakr), "No but we elect you, for you are our chief and the best amongst us and the most beloved of all of us to Allah's Apostle." So 'Umar took Abu Bakr's hand and gave the pledge of allegiance and the people too gave the pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr... Bukhari: Volume 5, Book 57, Number 19: *I* don't understand how this can be democracy. If we are to understand democracy using the one person-one vote system, then how can a collection of men in one tent choosing a leader for the Islamic Empire be called democracy? Furthermore, what about all the other tribes of Arabia? Why weren't they consulted? This is what Ibn Kathir writes: "We should state here that Imamah occurs by either naming a successor, as a group among Ahl us-Sunnah scholars said occurred - by the Prophet sallallahu alaihi wa sallam - in the case of Abu Bakr, or hinting to a successor. Or, the current Khalifah names a certain person as Khalifah after him, as Abu Bakr did with Umar. Or, the Khalifah might leave the matter in the hands of the Muslim consultative council, or a group of righteous men, just as Umar did. Or the people of authority could gather around a certain person to whom they give the pledge of allegiance, or they could select one among them to choose the candidate, according to the majority of scholars." [Tafsir Ibn Kathir (Abridged), Vol. 1 pg 183-4] The movers and shakers of society who are referred to above are a group of people collectively named "ahl al-halle wal `aqd" [those who release and bind]. You can hear more about this topic in an audio lecture entitled "Muslims and their Political Process" by Salim Morgan at http://www.islaam.com/audio/lectures/morgan/ |
| Re: notonlyisDemocracykufranddisbelife it doesnt work! |
|---|
| jehad |
| 02/18/01 at 17:40:49 |
| asalm walakum I have said this before. looks like i need to say it again. democracy and voting are not the same thing. Voting is just a means that is oftion used for many difFrent things. Democracy is a right given to Human beings to make and end laws for themselves. alot of securist systems give humans this right, in a dictatorship and monachy, one person has the right, in democracy the people as a whole have the right. Islam does not give humans or any other created being this right. only allah has the right to make and end laws. as mohummed pbh is the last ,messinger, There will be no more new legislation and none of our laws will end. including the laws hated by the dunya lovers like the laws on riba, and the laws hated by the people who want to imatate western women like the laws on hijab, and the laws hated by the kaffar like the obligation of JIHAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
Individual posts do not necessarily reflect the views of Jannah.org, Islam, or all Muslims. All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster and may not be used without consent of the author.The rest © Jannah.Org |