× Register Login What's New! Contact us
Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Caplets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    388
    Threads
    156
    Reputation
    978
    Rep Power
    5
    Likes (Given)
    210
    Likes (Received)
    108

    Condemnation of The Democratic Process (cont.)

    Report bad ads?


    السلام عليكم

    Condemnation of the Democratic Process, Voting, and the Islāmic Stances on these Issues


    Continued....


    Du'ā To Allāh For Consolidation Of A Seat In Parliament



    Now another question: If you forbid the elections, then is it permissible for you to make Du’ā’ to Allāh, to consolidate, to consolidate for a man a seat in the parliament instead of electing him?

    It means, this is a fallacy. A desire might come in the heart of the Muslim for someone, that he wishes in his heart for this one to be victorious over this one, due what there is in that from the suppression of the other one, or the enemy of the Muslims. So this is an issue that differs from the issue of, or Du’ā’, so that it won’t be said that he went far away, that it comes in your heart that this one is victorious, then you make Du’ā’ that He gives victory to this one over this one.

    But in reality, all of this does not prevent that reaching, that electing this man, placing the ballot for him, is a choosing, like they call it, a choice, voting, voting is choosing, you have chosen him as a representing god.

    So, you wishing for this one, for you to wish for this one to be the representative of them in Ulūhiyyah, because of the fact that he is less of an evil for the Muslims, this is one thing, and for you to wish for this one to be a representative for you, a god, is another thing. I will repeat the discussion so that it will be clear. You, when you make Du’ā’, if we hypothesize that it is allowed for you to make Du’ā’, then you have made Du’ā’ to Allāh to give victory to this parliamentarian over this parliamentarian, then you have chosen between, that you see that this one is a god who is more evil than this one. This one is a legislator, this one is a legislator for them who is less in evil than this one, then it has, these words are for them, not for you. Contrary to if you chose that this one is a legislator for you.

    It means, that I could make Du’ā’ to Allāh, “O Allāh, establish this one, because he is less in evil for them, and in his misguidance and in his kufr for them.” But for, for you to vote for this one to be a god for you, then this is another issue, as you see, it differs with complete difference.

    It means, it could, just as it is in, we are not allowed, in another form, so that we will see the form of difference. You, it is not allowed for you to be ruled by, it is not allowed for you to accept the ruling of a kāfir upon you, it is not allowed for you to accept the ruling of a kāfir. But, is it allowed for you to make Du’ā’ to Allāh to consolidate for this kāfir who is less in evil for the Muslims, and close to the Muslims, and who does not harm the Muslims, over other than him? The answer is yes, but you, in this Du’ā’, you did not choose him as a ruler for you, but, because if you chose him as a ruler for you then you would have disbelieved.

    The one who accepts the ruling of a kāfir over the Muslims, even for a moment, disbelieves, as is clearly stated, in the books of the People of Knowledge, “Al-‘Aqīdah At-Tahāwiyyah”, 12Sharh Al-‘Aqīdah At-Tahāwiyyah”, by Ibn Abī Al-‘Izz Al-Hanafī. 13

    So, but for you to say, “O Allāh, give consolidation to this kāfir so he will not hurt
    the Muslims, (and) so he will be better for his people and therefore his people will be better for the Muslims”, then this is another issue.

    For you to choose a god is a different than you hoping for this one to be the closer one to them. Because the false gods are kufr, and they are at different levels in, and they are at different levels in their falsehood, and are at different levels in their fisq and their fujūr.

    There is a difference between it being said, for a person to say “My god is great, and he is in the sky”, and he imagines him in the image of a man, for example, with the image of (having) a beard, and there is a difference between him saying “My god is a cow.” So both gods are false, yet there is a difference between this one and this one.

    And the People of Knowledge have mentioned among the misguidances of the people of Wahdat Al-Wujūd, is that the Christians are better in their religion than the religion of the people of Wahdat Al-Wujūd. Because the people of Wahdat Al-Wujūd believe that their god can be manure, and can be – may Allāh honour you
    Najāsah. Whereas the religion of the Christians, they believe that their god is
    ‘Īsā, عليه السلام , so he is better.

    And, of course, does this mean that when we declare this god better than this god, in a declaration of being better amongst disbelievers, does this mean that I have made it permissible for me, myself, to take this god (as my own)? As you see, this matter is in need of sincerity in the presentation.

    ---------------

    12 Trans. Note: Written by Abū Ja’far Ahmad Ibn Muhammad Ibn Salāmah Ibn Salamah Ibn ‘Abdil-Malik Al-Azdī Al-Hajrī Al-Misrī At-Tahāwī. He was born in the year 239 H. and died in the year 321 H. From his works besides “Al-‘Aqīdah At-Tahāwiyyah”, are “Sharh Ma’ānī Al-Āthār”, “Sharh Mushkil Al-Āthār”, and “Mukhtasir At-Tahāwī Fī Al-Fiqh Al-Hanafī”, among others.
    13 Trans. Note: He is Sadr Ad-Dīn Abul-Hasan ‘Alī Ibn ‘Alī Ibn Muhammad Al-Athra’ī Ad-Dimashqī As-Sālihī Al-Hanafī, know as Ibn Abī Al-‘Izz. Born in the year 731 H. and died in the year 792 H. From his works besides his Sharh of “Al-‘Aqīdah At-Tahāwiyyah”, are “Al-Itbā’”, as well as “At-Tanbīh ‘Alā Mushkilāt Al-Hidāyah” and “An-Nūr Al-Lāmi’ ‘Alā Mā Yu’mal Bihi Fī Al-Jāmi’”, both of which are not found today.
    Last edited by Caplets; 12-14-2019 at 11:35 PM.
    Condemnation of The Democratic Process (cont.)

    “Your soul is just like your enemy; if it finds you serious, it will obey you. But if it finds you weak, it will take you as a prisoner.”

  2. Report bad ads?
  3. #2
    Caplets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    388
    Threads
    156
    Reputation
    978
    Rep Power
    5
    Likes (Given)
    210
    Likes (Received)
    108

    Re: Condemnation of The Democratic Process (cont.)


    The Stance Towards Those Who Hold The Opinion Of Permissability In Voting In The General Legislative Elections


    He says, “What is the correct stance that is upon us to take towards those who are of the opinion of the permissibility of voting in the general legislative elections?”

    We, as you see, that the issue of the legislative elections, with us, is an issue that is related to Tawhīd and it is not a Fiqhī subject. And those who contradict in it,
    contradict for (a number of) reasons. From them, those who contradict, are at (different) levels.

    From them are those who see the permissibility of electing because he does not
    see that the Hukm is for Allāh
    , rather it is allowed for us to take rulings from
    other than Allāh, according to that which is agreeable to humans. And this, no, we have seen them, even from Jamā’ahs that claim Islām. Rather, they have said that we accept for ruling over us, rather, they said that we accept for ruling over us that which the people accept. Those ones are kuffār even if they claim Islām.

    And there are those who do not know the reality of electing, and he sees it as a means, as we discussed. So those ones, the difference with them is slight, because they have not comprehended its reality. So they, their Usūl are correct, but they differed in knowing the reality of electing. So they thought that it is a means to electing that which is better for the sake of running the state, for example. And they permit the elections for the running of the state. And they see that in the action of Abdur-Rahmān (Ibn) ‘Awf when he put ‘Uthmān forward, that he (said), “O Alī, I did not see anyone equal to him, to ‘Uthmān, anyone, not you nor any one other than him.” 14 So he sees that this is a kind of voting. So he, this one is differed with in (it).

    And there are those who see that it is permissible, despite this, he sees that it is allowed to enter this door for the sake of legislating for Islām, to put forward the image of Islām, to call to Allāh, to support Islām. So those ones, those ones are a lesser level than the, a lesser level than the first type that sees the permissibility of giving the legislation to, to the parliament, and it is allowed for the rulings to be issued by way of the parliament. But they are also not at the position of the third level, so they are (in the) middle.

    The point is that we treat each position according to it (i.e. its levels). But here is an issue: Someone might say, “Why, do you make Takfīr and give them the excuse of ignorance?”

    I say, no, us, we do not make Takfīr to them in the first place. We do not make
    Takfīr to those who said it is permissible, we do not make Takfīr based upon the Fatwā (of the one) that says “I rely upon the ruling of Allāh.”, then makes a mistake. Because from the characteristics of the People of Bid’ah is that they say “You have disbelieved” if he contradicts him, from the characteristics of the
    People of Bid’ah. Rather, what is correct is for it to be said that “You have made a mistake.”

    We see that the vast majority of those who issue Fatwas upon it (i.e. the permissibility of voting, etc.), he only issues the Fatwā, either out of ignorance
    regarding the reality of the actuality (of democracy), and those ones are many, like when he says that it is allowed if you have to make your intention sincere. So it is as if he is speaking about an issue that is permissible in origin, but it is in need of rectification of the intention. Because the rectifying of the intention is discussed in the permissible issues, like if you say, “Pray with the correct intention.”

    So we do not say that those ones have disbelieved and we have given them the excuse of ignorance, because they, in reality, are those who gave Fatwas of permissibility, because they, in reality, did not give a Fatwā of kufr, but they made a mistake, they made a mistake in understanding the actuality.

    And this has taken place throughout history many times. Is it allowed for us to say that the one who permitted the consumption of certain substances, meaning, when the people differed regarding Qāt, 15 so some of the people said (it is) Halāl, and some of the people said (it is) Harām. Those who said (it is)Halāl, (said so) because they did not see it as intoxicating, and those who said (it is) Harām, (said so) because they saw it as intoxicating. Indeed, one of the two sides is correct.

    Is it allowed for anyone to say, “You have disbelieved because you have forbidden that which Allāh made Halāl?” And the other to says, “You have disbelieved because you permitted an intoxicant?” The issue here is a difference in the actuality, while they agree on the fundamental.

    I hope that I have clarified, even though I feel that the discussion is condensed, due to the necessity of the situation.

    ---------------

    14 Trans. Note: This story is as follows: Al-Bukhārī narrated in “The Book of the Virtues of the Companions (Sahābah)”: “Chapter: The Event of the Pledge of Allegiance (Al-Bay’ah) and the Agreement Upon ‘Uthmān Ibn ‘Affān.”

    And in that chapter, was (the incident of) ‘Umar (may Allāh be pleased with him) leaving the Khilāfah after him, to the six (selected) members of the consultation (Ash-Shūrā). So three declined (to be the Khalīfah) until ‘Abdur-Rahmān Ibn ‘Awf, ‘Uthmān and ‘Alī remained. ‘Amr Ibn Maymūn, the narrator of the Hadīth, said, ‘So ‘Abdur-Rahmān said, “Now which of you two is willing to give up his right of candidacy so that we may give it to him, and Allāh and Islām will be upon him (as witnesses), that he will look to who is better in his self.’ So both the two Shaykhs (i.e. ‘Uthmān and ‘Alī) remained silent. So ‘Abdur-Rahmān said, ‘Do you both leave this matter to me, and Allāh is upon me (as a witness), that I will not choose except the better one from you.’ They both said, ‘Yes.’

    So he (‘Abdur-Rahmān) took the hand of one of them (i.e. ‘Alī) and said, ‘You have the relation of the Messenger of Allāh, صلى الله عليه وسلم ,and one of the earliest Muslims as you know well. So Allāh is upon you (as a witness) to promise that if I select you as a ruler you will do justice, and if I select ‘Uthmān as a ruler you will listen and obey.’ Then he took the other (i.e. ‘Uthmān) aside and said the same to him. Then when he (‘Abdur-Rahmān) secured (their agreement to) this covenant (‘Ahd), he said, ‘O ‘Uthmān, raise your hand.’ So he (i.e. ‘Abdur-Rahmān) gave him (i.e. ‘Uthmān) the Pledge of Allegiance, and then ‘Alī gave him the Pledge of Allegiance and then all of the people of the house entered and gave him the Pledge of Allegiance (Al-Bay’ah).” Hadīth #2,700

    15 Trans. Note: Qāt, also known as Khat, Gat, Chat, and Miraa. It is a flowering plant native to tropical East Africa. Khat has been grown for use as a drug for centuries in the Horn of Africa and the Arabian Peninsula. Its fresh leaves and tops are chewed or, less frequently, dried and consumed as tea, in order to achieve a state of euphoria and stimulation. From those who have mentioned the forbiddance of Qāt are the following: Ahmad Ibn Hajr Al-Haytamī in his book “Tahthīr Ath-Thuqāt Min Akl Al-Kaftata Wal-Qāt”, Abū Bakr Ibn Ibrāhīm Al-Muqrī Al-Harāzī Ash-Shāfi’ī in his book “Tahrīm Al-Qāt”, Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Ibrāhīm Ibn ‘Abdil-Latīf Āl Ash-Shaykh, Shaykh ‘Abdil-‘Azīz Ibn ‘Abdillāh Ibn Bāz, Shaykh Abul-Hasan Mustafā Ibn Ismā’īl As-Sulaymānī, Shaykh Muqbil Ibn Hādī Al-Wādi’ī, and Shaykh Abū Nasr Muhammad Ibn ‘Abdillāh Al-Imām.
    Last edited by Caplets; 12-15-2019 at 12:11 AM.
    Condemnation of The Democratic Process (cont.)

    “Your soul is just like your enemy; if it finds you serious, it will obey you. But if it finds you weak, it will take you as a prisoner.”

  4. #3
    Caplets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    388
    Threads
    156
    Reputation
    978
    Rep Power
    5
    Likes (Given)
    210
    Likes (Received)
    108

    Re: Condemnation of The Democratic Process (cont.)

    Ruling On Salāh Behind Someone Who Deems It Permissible


    He says: “The second question is; Our Noble Shaykh, based on what you generously put forward, then what is the ruling of Salāt behind he who says it is permissible? Is it upon the one being led to repeat his Salāt prayer, or is it disliked (Makrūh), or is there no harm in it?

    All of this returns to knowing his condition. If he has made a mistake, if he has made a mistake in understanding the elections, then this one, we pray behind him, and there is no, and there is no harm, without any dislike, and even without any preference, meaning that we do not put forward other than him ahead of him, except for another reason, and not this reason.

    As for if he says it is permissible because he believes that it is allowed for the people to legislate for themselves and that we accept that which the parliament says, then those ones, we do not pray behind them at all. And the Salāt isn’t disliked, it is invalid (Bātil), we do not pray behind them.

    As for he who says that we enter in order to rectify, and we know that it is kufr, but we do not believe in this matter, and we do not see it, assuming that the issue returns to, the issue of the elections, to what he believes, and not to that which the Legislator implemented, which he is interacting with, and not that which the constitution implemented, then those ones, in reality, meaning, we pray behind them, even though other, other than them are more deserving of the Imāmah than them. - End



    Condemnation of The Democratic Process (cont.)

    “Your soul is just like your enemy; if it finds you serious, it will obey you. But if it finds you weak, it will take you as a prisoner.”

  5. #4
    Ahmed.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    London
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    922
    Threads
    10
    Reputation
    1027
    Rep Power
    74
    Likes (Given)
    854
    Likes (Received)
    508

    Re: Condemnation of The Democratic Process (cont.)

    It's always good to take a more moderate stance on takfir due to the hadiths in which Prophet (saw) says, if you get takfir wrong you yourself become kafir, so taqwa necessitates that we take a hesitant stance rather than being all gung ho about it

    Common sense, intellect and humility needs to be applied on the Islamic sources and only then the beautiful 'middle path' of Islam can be perceived

    Is it permissible for Muslims to vote for kaafirs who seem to be less evil?
    3062

    Question
    Some Moslems in a non Islamic country are asking if it is OK to participate in the elections there and vote for non Moslem groups or parties. They claim that it would serve the Moslem community there if a certain group won the elections?

    Answer

    Praise be to Allaah.

    This is a matter concerning which rulings may differ according to different circumstances in different times and places. There is no absolute ruling that covers all situations, both real and hypothetical.

    In some cases it is wrong to vote, such as when the matter will have no effect on the Muslims, or when the Muslims have no effect on the outcome of the vote. In this case voting or not voting is all the same. The same applies in cases where all the candidates are equally evil or where they all have the same attitude towards Muslims…

    It may be the case that the interests of Islam require Muslims to vote so as to ward off the greater evil and to reduce harmful effects, such as where two candidates may be non-Muslims but one of them is less hostile towards Muslims than the other, and Muslims’ votes will have an impact on the outcome of the election. In such cases there is nothing wrong with Muslims casting their votes in favour of the less evil candidate.

    In any case, this is the matter of ijtihaad based on the principle of weighing up the pros and cons, what is in the interests of Islam and what is detrimental. With regard to this matter, we have to refer to the people of knowledge who understand this principle. We should put the question to them, explaining in detail the circumstances and laws in the country where the Muslim community is living, the state of the candidates, the importance of the vote, the likely benefits, and so on.

    No one should imagine that anyone who says that it is OK to vote is thereby expressing approval or support for kufr. It is done in the interests of the Muslims, not out of love for kufr and its people. The Muslims rejoiced when the Romans defeated the Persians, as did the Muslims in Abyssinia (Ethiopia) when the Negus defeated those who had challenged his authority. This is well known from history. Whoever wants to be on the safe side and abstain from voting is allowed to do so. This response applies only to elections for influential positions. And Allaah knows best.

    Source: Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

    https://islamqa.info/en/answers/3062...o-be-less-evil
    Last edited by Ahmed.; 12-15-2019 at 09:10 AM.

  6. Report bad ads?
  7. #5
    Abu-Abdullah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    132
    Threads
    0
    Reputation
    557
    Rep Power
    0
    Likes (Given)
    34
    Likes (Received)
    18

    Re: Condemnation of The Democratic Process (cont.)

    Alhamdulillah due to partaking in this process Muslims were able to get UK out of the EU and put a stop to the large numbers of prostitutes being brought in from Eastern Europe which has turned their areas (poor inner city areas) into dumps!

  8. #6
    Caplets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Gender
    Male
    Religion
    Islam
    Posts
    388
    Threads
    156
    Reputation
    978
    Rep Power
    5
    Likes (Given)
    210
    Likes (Received)
    108

    Re: Condemnation of The Democratic Process (cont.)


    The Difference Between Shûrah In Islâm & Democracy








    Answer by Shaykh 'Abdul Azîz al-Tarîfî.
    Last edited by Caplets; 1 Week Ago at 07:07 PM.
    Condemnation of The Democratic Process (cont.)

    “Your soul is just like your enemy; if it finds you serious, it will obey you. But if it finds you weak, it will take you as a prisoner.”


  9. Hide
Hey there! Condemnation of The Democratic Process (cont.) Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Condemnation of The Democratic Process (cont.)
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Condemnation of The Democratic Process
    By Caplets in forum Aqeedah
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 12-12-2019, 06:01 PM
  2. Democratic System
    By divine_quran in forum General
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 03-31-2009, 06:50 PM
  3. *!* Condemnation of Pride and Self-Conceit *!*
    By Khayal in forum Manners and Purification of the Soul
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-19-2007, 10:27 AM
  4. Difference between condemnation of sin and backbiting
    By Medina83 in forum Worship in Islam
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04-02-2007, 11:44 AM
  5. Condemnation of terrorism?
    By seeker_of_ilm in forum General
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 06-16-2006, 07:07 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
create