Malcolm_X
27-03-03, 22:50
Ik hoor vaak mensen zeggen dat de islam niet democratisch is...en dat het dictatoriaal is etc......nou ik heb een groot verrassing voor die mensen...de islam kwam al 14 eeuwen geleden al met de democratie, genaamd de SHURA:
1. Democratic Systems in Islam
The Quran says, “Obey God, obey the Prophet and obey those in authority among you.” [4:59] The primary sources of Islamic law are therefore the words and commands of God as laid out in the Quran, the sayings and traditions of the Prophet (ahadith), and the rulings of political and religious leaders.
The Holy Quran is the highest standard by which man can order his life. As such, it is a model only the Prophet of God could uphold to its fullest. Yet, it is still not possible for the average Muslim to follow the Prophet’s example directly. Muslims therefore rely on the authority of their leaders to guide them in upholding the principles of law laid out in the Quran and the traditions. The Prophet himself stated, “Whoever is chosen by the people after me will be the caliph, and you must listen to and obey him.”[1] Those in authority include the rulers of the nation, its religious scholars and its judges.
1.1 Shura: Consultation and the Adaptability of Islamic Law
Rule in Islam is based on the concept of shura, a term which has two meanings in Islamic governance:
1. Shura is a referendum on which the majority of people agree, and is the basic method for choosing the ruler in Islam. Similarly, it is the means to approve his decisions. Muhammad Abu Zahra in The History of Islamic Thought and Leadership in Politics and Belief, writes:
2. “All the Muslims, including the Shi`a and all the different schools of thought, [which at one time number over 470] agreed that leadership as defined by the Prophet, in the saying ‘If you are three make one your leader’ can only be implemented by election. That is done in every district, (hayy), at the state level (wilayat) and above that by the federal authority, (al-idara al-markaziyya).”
3. The advisory board (al-majlis ash-shura), which advises the ruler, is a group of elected experts. The task of such groups is to observe and oversee the ruler (muraqabat as-sultan). They are in this position to form an opinion of the ruler and his rule, and to control any aspirations he may have to override the rights of the people. They must be aware of the variations in these rights within ethnic, cultural and environmental norms. This system is like that being implemented in America today, where we have the federal system, the state and local governments, and municipalities. The judicial system acts to check the executive and legislative branches, ensuring fair and correct implementation of law. We also have the free press, which acts as a watchdog over the government, issuing warnings at the slightest sign the interests of the people are being betrayed.
Everything that impacts human life accounted for in the law and falls under the jurisdiction of the ruler. Yet the ruler himself has no personal choice in ruling, as do contemporary monarchs. The Prophet prohibited the ruler, who has been chosen or appointed, to usurp authority he does not possess. He is tied to the law, which as the ruler is his duty to enforce. The majlis ash-shura ensures that he does so.
In the Shari`ah there are laws that are immutable or nearly so, similar to the constitutional basis of Western democracy and the US Bill of Rights. However, the remainder of the law is adaptable, changing with:
1. The practical application of the “immutable” law, established in the earlier rulings of judges; ie. case law.
2. Society’s evolving needs.
It is the job of the Dar al-Ifta, the Center for Legal Rulings, to form the basis for new laws that will address innovations in technology and custom. The Prophet did not demand that a particular rule be imposed on new innovations, but allowed the people to develop a law as needed, based on the precedent established in his lifetime and by Islamic scholars in succeeding generations. The evolution of the law was left in the care of the people for laws must take into account geography, environment, ethnic and cultural considerations, and variations in belief and understanding.
Baruch Spinoza said, “Everyone varies in their view of individual life.” Each person has a different opinion on every matter, therefore the implementation of shura, or election by majority, is essential in the formation of a new law that will successfully and effectively govern the people.
1.2 Democratic Election of Leaders
From the beginning, Islam has mandated democracy through a shura (elected council of leaders), a process through which people sit together, consult with one another, and select one person to represent them. This process was recently employed in Afghanistan where, according to a fifteen-century old tradition, the people choose representatives who then gathered to choose not only a leader, but a cabinet and national assembly. The recent loya jirga that confirmed Hamid Karzai as president of Afghanistan, demonstrated once again that Islamic rule is based on democratic choice.
A clear example of democracy’s role in Islam is manifest in the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) passing without appointing a successor to rule the Muslim state. He intentionally left it to the Muslims to come together to make this crucial decision based on what he had taught them.
The Azhar scholar Dr. Abu Zahra said:
“The Prophet never gave a single word or sign indicating who his successor would be… and in the meeting which took place to elect the calipha, the Companions were in utter disagreement as to who should succeed the Prophet, but in the end were able to choose Abu Bakr as-Siddiq by the consensus of the majority.” [2]
Essentially, there were three groups who differed in who should succeed the Prophet:
§ The Ansar, the Prophet’s supporters in Madinah, who felt the leadership should fall to one among them as they supported the Prophet when he immigrated from Mecca.
§ Another group, led by Abu Bakr and Umar, believed that the immigrants (Muhajiroon) who came with the Prophet to Madinah should lead, because they were the first to enter Islam.
§ The third group called on Ali to lead, due to his familial relationship with the Prophet.
The disagreement did not last long, as through shura the three groups quickly reached the consensus that Abu Bakr had the highest credentials to take the reins of leadership. The majority voted for him, and the Islamic precedent for peaceful transition between rulers was introduced. Once the majority had decided, the individual citizens ratified the selection by pledging their allegiance one-by-one to the new head of state.
In electing a candidate from among the three parties vying for succession, the first, most exemplary Muslims imprinted their stamp of religious authenticity on the electoral system. The fact that the Companions (Sahaba) did not establish a monarchy or a dictatorship irrevocably demonstrates that leadership in Islam is the choice of the people.
Once a selection is made by the shura council, each individual Muslim has the option to accept their choice or not. This is known as taking a pledge of allegiance (baya’). If a group feels the choice was made unjustly, they may refuse to accept it and form an opposition party. In the end however, a judge accepted by both sides must make a final arbitration and choose between the two parties based on the validity of their claims.
The executive aspect of governance is also conducted through consultation. The ruler, chosen by the shura and confirmed by the citizen’s individual pledge of allegiance, is obliged to consult on executive decisions. He therefore consults with a council, parliament or advisory group whose specific role is to advise.
Whenever the Prophet (peace be upon him) had to make a decision that would affect the Muslim nation in whole or part, he gathered his followers to conduct a shura. In one instance, before the onset of a battle, one of the companions asked the Prophet if the location of the Muslim camp should be chosen through Divine inspiration or consultation. The Prophet answered that it should be the product of consultation, and proceeded to follow the group’s recommendation to settle beside the nearest water well.
Umar, the second caliph, said, “Whoever is chosen by the people after me will be the caliph, and you people must listen to him and obey him.”[3] Upon Umar’s passing, the shura chose Uthman, and after Uthman’s assassination, they chose Ali.
With the election of Ali there arose a dispute, and Muawiya took over the caliphate. Later the rule went to his son, and the system thereby changed from democracy to a monarchy. Thereafter, the selection of the ruler was dynastic and remained so through the time of the Ottoman caliphs.
Muawiya separated the political and religious systems. However he regularly consulted with Ibn Abbas and Ibn Umar, who possessed vastly greater knowledge. The system thus changed into a political leadership advised by religious leaders.
1.3 The constitution of Madinah
The democratic election of a leader was the model on which the city of Madinah was founded. The Prophet, while invited by Muslims from that city, became its ruler by the choice of all its citizens, which included Jewish and polytheist tribes. He then developed a binding social contract, a pact signed by all the tribal leaders naming Muhammad as the leader, and establishing laws binding the tribes to cooperation, assistance in defense of the city, and the protection of its inhabitants.
It reads in part:
“The Jews of Banu ‘Awf are one nation with the Muslims. The Jews have their religion and the Muslims have theirs, their freedmen and their persons shall be protected except those who behave unjustly or sinfully… Each must help the other against anyone who attacks the people of this document. Their condition must be one of mutual advice, consultation and charity… No man is liable for a crime committed by his ally. Support must be given to him who is wronged… To every small group belongs the share which is their due, as members of the larger group which is party to this covenant….”
This document, The Constitution of Madinah, establishes the importance of consent and cooperation for governance in Islam. According to this pact, Muslims and non-Muslims are equal citizens of the Islamic state, with identical rights and duties. Communities of different religious orientations enjoy religious autonomy, which is essentially wider in scope than the modern idea of religious freedom. The principles of equality, consensual governance and pluralism are beautifully enmeshed in the pact of Madinah.
Since then, this lengthy document has proven an exemplary historical model of a binding social pact in which a multi-religious, multi-cultural society was bound by one law. Note that, in signing the contract, the non-Muslim parties did not accept the Prophet as their religious leader, but rather signed with the conviction that he would provide the leadership needed to build an ideal society. In later centuries, the system of governance in Madinah became the basis of the ideal city, a detailed model developed by al-Farabi and later scholars.
A tradition in Islam states: “Whatever the body of Muslims collectively sees as good is also considered good by God, and what they see as bad is also considered bad by God.” Just as culture, geography and natural circumstances impact our needs, the Prophet recognized the importance to develop a system that would be useful for that time or those circumstances. He stated, “Majority opinion is best.”[4]
1. Democratic Systems in Islam
The Quran says, “Obey God, obey the Prophet and obey those in authority among you.” [4:59] The primary sources of Islamic law are therefore the words and commands of God as laid out in the Quran, the sayings and traditions of the Prophet (ahadith), and the rulings of political and religious leaders.
The Holy Quran is the highest standard by which man can order his life. As such, it is a model only the Prophet of God could uphold to its fullest. Yet, it is still not possible for the average Muslim to follow the Prophet’s example directly. Muslims therefore rely on the authority of their leaders to guide them in upholding the principles of law laid out in the Quran and the traditions. The Prophet himself stated, “Whoever is chosen by the people after me will be the caliph, and you must listen to and obey him.”[1] Those in authority include the rulers of the nation, its religious scholars and its judges.
1.1 Shura: Consultation and the Adaptability of Islamic Law
Rule in Islam is based on the concept of shura, a term which has two meanings in Islamic governance:
1. Shura is a referendum on which the majority of people agree, and is the basic method for choosing the ruler in Islam. Similarly, it is the means to approve his decisions. Muhammad Abu Zahra in The History of Islamic Thought and Leadership in Politics and Belief, writes:
2. “All the Muslims, including the Shi`a and all the different schools of thought, [which at one time number over 470] agreed that leadership as defined by the Prophet, in the saying ‘If you are three make one your leader’ can only be implemented by election. That is done in every district, (hayy), at the state level (wilayat) and above that by the federal authority, (al-idara al-markaziyya).”
3. The advisory board (al-majlis ash-shura), which advises the ruler, is a group of elected experts. The task of such groups is to observe and oversee the ruler (muraqabat as-sultan). They are in this position to form an opinion of the ruler and his rule, and to control any aspirations he may have to override the rights of the people. They must be aware of the variations in these rights within ethnic, cultural and environmental norms. This system is like that being implemented in America today, where we have the federal system, the state and local governments, and municipalities. The judicial system acts to check the executive and legislative branches, ensuring fair and correct implementation of law. We also have the free press, which acts as a watchdog over the government, issuing warnings at the slightest sign the interests of the people are being betrayed.
Everything that impacts human life accounted for in the law and falls under the jurisdiction of the ruler. Yet the ruler himself has no personal choice in ruling, as do contemporary monarchs. The Prophet prohibited the ruler, who has been chosen or appointed, to usurp authority he does not possess. He is tied to the law, which as the ruler is his duty to enforce. The majlis ash-shura ensures that he does so.
In the Shari`ah there are laws that are immutable or nearly so, similar to the constitutional basis of Western democracy and the US Bill of Rights. However, the remainder of the law is adaptable, changing with:
1. The practical application of the “immutable” law, established in the earlier rulings of judges; ie. case law.
2. Society’s evolving needs.
It is the job of the Dar al-Ifta, the Center for Legal Rulings, to form the basis for new laws that will address innovations in technology and custom. The Prophet did not demand that a particular rule be imposed on new innovations, but allowed the people to develop a law as needed, based on the precedent established in his lifetime and by Islamic scholars in succeeding generations. The evolution of the law was left in the care of the people for laws must take into account geography, environment, ethnic and cultural considerations, and variations in belief and understanding.
Baruch Spinoza said, “Everyone varies in their view of individual life.” Each person has a different opinion on every matter, therefore the implementation of shura, or election by majority, is essential in the formation of a new law that will successfully and effectively govern the people.
1.2 Democratic Election of Leaders
From the beginning, Islam has mandated democracy through a shura (elected council of leaders), a process through which people sit together, consult with one another, and select one person to represent them. This process was recently employed in Afghanistan where, according to a fifteen-century old tradition, the people choose representatives who then gathered to choose not only a leader, but a cabinet and national assembly. The recent loya jirga that confirmed Hamid Karzai as president of Afghanistan, demonstrated once again that Islamic rule is based on democratic choice.
A clear example of democracy’s role in Islam is manifest in the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) passing without appointing a successor to rule the Muslim state. He intentionally left it to the Muslims to come together to make this crucial decision based on what he had taught them.
The Azhar scholar Dr. Abu Zahra said:
“The Prophet never gave a single word or sign indicating who his successor would be… and in the meeting which took place to elect the calipha, the Companions were in utter disagreement as to who should succeed the Prophet, but in the end were able to choose Abu Bakr as-Siddiq by the consensus of the majority.” [2]
Essentially, there were three groups who differed in who should succeed the Prophet:
§ The Ansar, the Prophet’s supporters in Madinah, who felt the leadership should fall to one among them as they supported the Prophet when he immigrated from Mecca.
§ Another group, led by Abu Bakr and Umar, believed that the immigrants (Muhajiroon) who came with the Prophet to Madinah should lead, because they were the first to enter Islam.
§ The third group called on Ali to lead, due to his familial relationship with the Prophet.
The disagreement did not last long, as through shura the three groups quickly reached the consensus that Abu Bakr had the highest credentials to take the reins of leadership. The majority voted for him, and the Islamic precedent for peaceful transition between rulers was introduced. Once the majority had decided, the individual citizens ratified the selection by pledging their allegiance one-by-one to the new head of state.
In electing a candidate from among the three parties vying for succession, the first, most exemplary Muslims imprinted their stamp of religious authenticity on the electoral system. The fact that the Companions (Sahaba) did not establish a monarchy or a dictatorship irrevocably demonstrates that leadership in Islam is the choice of the people.
Once a selection is made by the shura council, each individual Muslim has the option to accept their choice or not. This is known as taking a pledge of allegiance (baya’). If a group feels the choice was made unjustly, they may refuse to accept it and form an opposition party. In the end however, a judge accepted by both sides must make a final arbitration and choose between the two parties based on the validity of their claims.
The executive aspect of governance is also conducted through consultation. The ruler, chosen by the shura and confirmed by the citizen’s individual pledge of allegiance, is obliged to consult on executive decisions. He therefore consults with a council, parliament or advisory group whose specific role is to advise.
Whenever the Prophet (peace be upon him) had to make a decision that would affect the Muslim nation in whole or part, he gathered his followers to conduct a shura. In one instance, before the onset of a battle, one of the companions asked the Prophet if the location of the Muslim camp should be chosen through Divine inspiration or consultation. The Prophet answered that it should be the product of consultation, and proceeded to follow the group’s recommendation to settle beside the nearest water well.
Umar, the second caliph, said, “Whoever is chosen by the people after me will be the caliph, and you people must listen to him and obey him.”[3] Upon Umar’s passing, the shura chose Uthman, and after Uthman’s assassination, they chose Ali.
With the election of Ali there arose a dispute, and Muawiya took over the caliphate. Later the rule went to his son, and the system thereby changed from democracy to a monarchy. Thereafter, the selection of the ruler was dynastic and remained so through the time of the Ottoman caliphs.
Muawiya separated the political and religious systems. However he regularly consulted with Ibn Abbas and Ibn Umar, who possessed vastly greater knowledge. The system thus changed into a political leadership advised by religious leaders.
1.3 The constitution of Madinah
The democratic election of a leader was the model on which the city of Madinah was founded. The Prophet, while invited by Muslims from that city, became its ruler by the choice of all its citizens, which included Jewish and polytheist tribes. He then developed a binding social contract, a pact signed by all the tribal leaders naming Muhammad as the leader, and establishing laws binding the tribes to cooperation, assistance in defense of the city, and the protection of its inhabitants.
It reads in part:
“The Jews of Banu ‘Awf are one nation with the Muslims. The Jews have their religion and the Muslims have theirs, their freedmen and their persons shall be protected except those who behave unjustly or sinfully… Each must help the other against anyone who attacks the people of this document. Their condition must be one of mutual advice, consultation and charity… No man is liable for a crime committed by his ally. Support must be given to him who is wronged… To every small group belongs the share which is their due, as members of the larger group which is party to this covenant….”
This document, The Constitution of Madinah, establishes the importance of consent and cooperation for governance in Islam. According to this pact, Muslims and non-Muslims are equal citizens of the Islamic state, with identical rights and duties. Communities of different religious orientations enjoy religious autonomy, which is essentially wider in scope than the modern idea of religious freedom. The principles of equality, consensual governance and pluralism are beautifully enmeshed in the pact of Madinah.
Since then, this lengthy document has proven an exemplary historical model of a binding social pact in which a multi-religious, multi-cultural society was bound by one law. Note that, in signing the contract, the non-Muslim parties did not accept the Prophet as their religious leader, but rather signed with the conviction that he would provide the leadership needed to build an ideal society. In later centuries, the system of governance in Madinah became the basis of the ideal city, a detailed model developed by al-Farabi and later scholars.
A tradition in Islam states: “Whatever the body of Muslims collectively sees as good is also considered good by God, and what they see as bad is also considered bad by God.” Just as culture, geography and natural circumstances impact our needs, the Prophet recognized the importance to develop a system that would be useful for that time or those circumstances. He stated, “Majority opinion is best.”[4]