Condemnation of the Democratic Process [Archive]

terrorthreat

21st March 2006, 06:44 AM

*******

http://www.at-tawheed.com/gallery/files/4/2/9/Cover13_247280.jpg

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

Recording by: Shaykh Abu Qatādah
Answering Questions Exclusively for At-Tibyān
(May Allāh Free Him)

I seek refuge with Allāh from the accursed Shaytān,

In The Name Of Allāh, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful.

All Praise is for Allāh, praises which are abundant, pure and blessed, and may the Blessings and Peace be upon the best of the creation, Muhammad, and upon his fine and pure family and upon his Companions; Al-Gurr Al-Mayāmīn [1], and whoever follows them in goodness and guidance until the Day of Recompense.

As to what follows:

Our Brothers from “Dār At-Tibyān” have come to me with some questions, and they requested from the poor slave to answer them with his voice, and they are recorded to their letters upon papers handed over to me. So I ask Allāh, Subhānahu Wa Ta’ālā, to help me clarify the point of truth in them and to achieve that which Allāh, Subhānahu Wa Ta’ālā, in what He loves and is pleased with.

And I ask Allāh, Subhānahu Wa Ta’ālā, to reward the Brothers with the best of rewards, and to forgive them for what they hoped from their Brother and that which they assumed about him.

I say: In the first question, they say; “Our Noble Shaykh, to begin with, some of those who spread (the idea of) Parliamentarian elections, and that they are permissible, have come with a new doubt which they have relied upon. And this doubt is based upon a Hadīth, the Text of which is the following:

From Umm Salamah Bint Abī Umayyah Ibn Al-Mughīrah, the wife of the Prophet, صلى الله عليه وسلم , she said, “When we arrived in the land of Al-Habashah, we were given the protection of the best neighbour, An-Najāshī.” Until she said, “So by Allāh! We were upon that (peace and security) until a person came upon him, – meaning one who disputed him in his kingdom –.” She said, “So by Allāh! We did not know grief that was more severe than the grief that we grieved at that point out of fear that that one would defeat An-Najāshī, so a man come not acknowledging our rights as An-Najāshī would acknowledge them.” She said, “And An-Najāshī went ahead (to engage with him in a battle), while between them was the width of the Nile.” She said, “So the Companions of the Messenger of Allāh, صلى الله عليه وسلم, said, ‘Who is a man who will go out and observe what takes place between the people, then come to us with the news?’” She said, “So Az-Zubayr Ibn Al-‘Awwām said, ‘I will.’” She said, “And he was among the youngest of the people.” She said, “So they blew into a water skin for him, then he placed it upon his chest, then he swam on it until he arrived at the place in the Nile River where the meeting place of the people was, then he went until he witnessed them.” She said, “So we made Du’ā’ to Allāh for An-Najāshī, to have dominance over his enemy, and consolidation for him in his country. And the matter of Al-Habashah was sought to be made stable through him. So we were with him in the best of homes, until we came back to the Messenger of Allāh, صلى الله عليه وسلم, and he was in Makkah.” 

The questioner says, “Ahmad and Al-Bayhaqī narrated it, and this phrasing is that of Ahmad, from the path of Ibn Is’hāq, who said, Az-Zuhrī narrated to us (Haddathanā), from Abī Bakr Ibn Abdir-Rahmān Ibn Al-Hārith Ibn Hishām, from Umm Salamah [2].

So the method of using this as evidence according to them, is that they made Du’ā’ to Allāh to give An-Najāshī consolidation in the land, and he was a kāfir at that time, as they said. And if Du’ā’ is the highest levels of support, then whatever is less than it like voting, is included in it from a more deserving point. Then they said, if you forbid (participating in) the elections, then is it allowed for you to make Du’ā’ to Allāh to consolidate a seat in parliament for a man, instead of voting for him? So what is your opinion with in the way the evidence is used, and what is the correct stance which it is upon us to take towards those who are of the opinion of the permissibility of voting in the general legislative elections, Wa Jazākum Allāhu Khayr.”

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



[1] Trans. Note: This phrase literally means, “The Blessed White Ones”. The “…White Ones…” is referring to the Hadīth of Abū Hurayrah, may Allāh be pleased with him, that the Prophet,صلى الله عليه وسلم, said, “Verily, my Ummah will be called on the Day of Resurection as Ghurran Muhajjalīn, due to the effects of the Wudhū’” Narrated by Al-Bukhārī, Muslim, and others. “Ghurran” refers to a brightness or whiteness that appears on the heads of horses, and “Muhajjilīn” refers to a brightness or whiteness that appears on the limbs of horses. 

[2] Trans. Note: This Hadīth was narrated by Ahmad in his “Musnad”, and was declared “Hasan” by Al-Wādi’ī in “As-Sahīh Al-Musnad”, #1672 and an almost identical phrasing was declared “Sahīh” by Ahmad Shākir in his Takhrīj of “Musnad Ahmad”, Vol. 3/180. 

<div align="center">Download links:</div><div align="center">http://www.megaupload.com/?d=HTH7PVS8</div><div align="center">
http://www.sendspace.com/file/slx659</div><div align="center"></div><div align="center">The file Democracy.zip contains the recording in MP3 format
and the translation in English in PDF format.</div>

<div align="center">Translated by At-Tibyān Publications</div>

gag order

25th March 2006, 11:37 AM

"one of the foremost principles of jahiliyyah was that they were decieved by following the majority, using that majority as proof of the correctness of their view"

muhammad ibn abdul wahhab - massail ul jahiliyyah

statement attributed to the 18th century reformer and revivalist,*******it would be interesting to know the context of this statement and its verification.

discuss.......................**************

Abu Qital al Muwahid

4th June 2007, 05:24 AM

New Link:
http://www.sendspace.com/file/yt3xd2

MOSABJA

29th June 2007, 01:31 AM

As far as democracy is concerned MAJORITY should be taken in account in certain matters and some times not .FOR eg
MAJORITY CANNOT CHANGE THE LAWS OF ALLAH

But majority should be taken in confidence in selecting the ruler Because

WHEN PROPHET MUHAMMAD(P.B.U.H) WAS ASKED WHO SHOULD BECOME CALIPH AFTER HIM .HE(S.A) SAID THE PEOPLE WILL THEM SELVES DECIDE IT

Abu Qital al Muwahid

6th December 2007, 05:37 PM

Permanent Link can be found here:

http://tibyan.wordpress.com/2007/08/21/condemnation-of-the-democratic-process-voting-and-the-islamic-stances-on-these-issues/

abumuwahid

6th December 2007, 05:43 PM

As far as democracy is concerned MAJORITY should be taken in account in certain matters and some times not .FOR eg
MAJORITY CANNOT CHANGE THE LAWS OF ALLAH

But majority should be taken in confidence in selecting the ruler Because

WHEN PROPHET MUHAMMAD(P.B.U.H) WAS ASKED WHO SHOULD BECOME CALIPH AFTER HIM .HE(S.A) SAID THE PEOPLE WILL THEM SELVES DECIDE IT

Is this a hadith and if so what is the reference.

TN_Cat

14th December 2007, 01:51 AM

"one of the foremost principles of jahiliyyah was that they were decieved by following the majority, using that majority as proof of the correctness of their view"

muhammad ibn abdul wahhab - massail ul jahiliyyah

statement attributed to the 18th century reformer and revivalist,*it would be interesting to know the context of this statement and its verification.

discuss.......................**

As-salamu'alaykum, Akhe

Some countries clearly have a Muslim majority. Turkey....Indonesia. Here the majority of Muslims are being lorded over by a secular minority. Do you think democracy can be used as a stepping stone to create an Islamic State eventually under full shareeah?
........provided the US State Department keeps thier noese out of the workings.

I wonder.

Abu Qital al Muwahid

25th March 2008, 07:55 PM

Its pretty clear from many questions and discussions occurring on this forum that most members have not read this document.

sultanmuradII

26th March 2008, 02:22 PM

What do expect from an article which is overwhelmed with un-necessary islamic jargon and less substance in terms of arguments.

Abu Qital al Muwahid

26th March 2008, 05:18 PM

Which part of the article doesn't make sense to you?