A Comparative Approach to Islam and Democracy

Berrin Last Updated on Wednesday, 14 June 2006 14:00
Written by Fethullah Gülen
Thursday, 04 November 2004 14:09

Religion, particularly Islam, has become one of the most difficult subject areas to tackle in recent years. Contemporary culture, whether approached from the perspective of anthropology or theology, psychology or psychoanalysis, evaluates religion with empirical methods. On the one hand, religion is an inwardly experienced and felt phenomenon, one that, for the most part, is related to the permanent aspects of life. On the other hand, believers can see their religion as a philosophy, a set of rational principles, or mere mysticism. The difficulty increases in the case of Islam, for some Muslims and policy-makers consider and present it as a purely political, sociological, and economic ideology, rather than as a religion.
If we want to analyze religion, democracy, or any other system or philosophy accurately, we should focus on humanity and human life. From this perspective, religion in general, and Islam in particular, cannot be compared on the same basis with democracy or any other political, social, or economic system. Religion focuses primarily on the immutable aspects of life and existence, whereas political, social, and economic systems or ideologies concern only certain variable social aspects of our worldly life.
The aspects of life with which religion is primarily concerned are as valid today as they were at the dawn of humanity and will continue to be so in the future. Worldly systems change according to circumstances and so can be evaluated only according to their times. Belief in God, the hereafter, the prophets, the holy books, the angels, and divine destiny have nothing to do with changing times. Likewise, worship and morality's universal and unchanging standards have little to do with time and worldly life.
Therefore, when comparing religion or Islam with democracy, we must remember that democracy is a system that is being continually developed and revised. It also varies according to the places and circumstances where it is practiced. On the other hand, religion has established immutable principles related to faith, worship, and morality. Thus, only Islam's worldly aspects should be compared with democracy.
The main aim of Islam and its unchangeable dimensions affect its rules governing the changeable aspects of our lives. Islam does not propose a certain unchangeable form of government or attempt to shape it. Instead, Islam establishes fundamental principles that orient a government's general character, leaving it to the people to choose the type and form of government according to time and circumstances. If we approach the matter in this light and compare Islam with the modern liberal democracy of today, we will be better able to understand the position of Islam and democracy with respect to each other.
Democratic ideas stem from ancient times. Modern liberal democracy was born in the American (1776) and French Revolutions (1789-1799). In democratic societies, people govern themselves as opposed to being ruled by someone above. The individual has priority over the community in this type of political system, being free to determine how to live his or her own life. Individualism is not absolute, though. People achieve a better existence by living within a society and this requires that they adjust and limit their freedom according to the criteria of social life.
The Prophet says that all people are as equal as the teeth of a comb.[1] Islam does not discriminate based on race, color, age, nationality, or physical traits. The Prophet declared:
You are all from Adam, and Adam is from earth. O servants of God, be brothers [and sisters.]"[2]
Those who were born earlier, who have more wealth or power than others, or who belong to certain families or ethnic groups have no inherent right to rule others.
Islam also upholds the following fundamental principles:
1.Power lies in truth, a repudiation of the common idea that truth relies upon power.
2.Justice and the rule of law are essential.
3.Freedom of belief and rights to life, personal property, reproduction, and health (both mental and physical) cannot be violated.
4.The privacy and immunity of individual life must be maintained.
5.No one can be convicted of a crime without evidence, or accused and punished for someone else's crime.
6.An advisory system of administration is essential.
All rights are equally important, and the rights of the individual cannot be sacrificed for the sake of society. Islam considers a society to be composed of conscious individuals equipped with freewill and having responsibility toward both themselves and others. Islam goes a step further by adding a cosmic dimension. It sees humanity as the "motor" of history, contrary to the fatalistic approaches of some nineteenth century Western philosophies of history, such as dialectical materialism and historicism.[3] Just as the will and behavior of every individual determine the outcome of his or her life in this world and in the hereafter, a society's progress or decline is determined by the will, worldview, and lifestyle of its inhabitants. The Qur'an says:
God will not change the state of a people unless they change themselves (with respect to their beliefs, worldview, and lifestyle). (Ar-Rad 13:11)
In other words, each society holds the reins of its fate in its own hands. The prophetic tradition emphasizes this idea: "You will be ruled according to how you are."[4] This is the basic character and spirit of democracy; an idea which does not conflict with any Islamic principle.
As Islam holds individuals and societies responsible for their own fate, people must be responsible for governing themselves. The Qur'an addresses society with such phrases as: "O people!" and "O believers!" The duties entrusted to modern democratic systems are those that Islam assigns to society and classifies, in order of importance, as "absolutely necessary, relatively necessary, and commendable to carry out." The sacred text includes the following passages:
Establish, all of you, peace. (Al-Baqara 2:208)
Spend in the way of God and to the needy of the pure and good of what you have earned and of what We bring forth for you from the Earth. (Al-Baqara 2:267)
If some among your women are accused of indecency, you must have four witnesses (to prove it). (An-Nisa 4:15)
God commands you to give over the public trusts to the charge of those having the required qualities and to judge with justice when you judge people. (An-Nisa 4:58]
Observe justice as witnesses respectful for God, even if it is against yourselves, your parents and relatives. (An-Nisa 4:135)
If they (your enemies) incline to peace (when you are at war), you also incline to it. (Al-Anfal 8:61)
If a corrupt, sinful one brings you news (about others), investigate it so that you should not strike a people without knowing. (Al-Hujurat 49:6)
If two parties among the believers fight between themselves, reconcile them. (Al-Hujurat 49:9)
In short, the Qur'an addresses the whole community and assigns it almost all the duties entrusted to modern democratic systems.
People cooperate with one another by sharing these duties and establishing the essential foundations necessary to perform them. The government is composed of all of these basic elements. Thus, Islam recommends a government based on a social contract. People elect the administrators and establish a council to debate common issues. Also, the society as a whole participates in auditing the administration. During the rule of the first four caliphs (632-661) in particular, the fundamental principles of government mentioned above—including free elections—were fully observed. The political system was transformed into a sultanate after the death of Ali, the fourth caliph, due to internal conflicts and the global conditions at that time. Unlike the caliphate, power in the sultanate was passed down through the sultan's family. However, even though free elections were no longer held, societies maintained other principles that are found at the core of liberal democracy of today.
Islam is an inclusive religion. It is based on the belief in one God as the Creator, Lord, Sustainer, and Administrator of the universe. Islam is the religion of the whole universe. That is, the entire universe obeys the laws laid down by God; everything in the universe is "Muslim" and obeys God by submitting to His laws. Even a person who refuses to believe in God or who follows another religion has to be a Muslim perforce as far as bodily existence is concerned. Our entire life, from the embryonic stage to the body's dissolution into dust after death, every tissue of the muscles, and every limb of the body follows the course prescribed for each by God's laws. Thus, in Islam, God, nature, and humanity are neither remote from one another nor are they alien to one another. It is God who makes Himself known to humanity through nature and humanity itself, and nature and humanity are two books (of creation) through which each word of God is made known. This leads humankind to look upon everything as belonging to the same Lord, to whom it itself belongs, and therefore regarding nothing in the universe as being alien. His sympathy, love, and service do not remain confined to the people of a particular race, color, or ethnicity. The Prophet summed this up with the command, "O servants of God, be brothers (and sisters)!"
A separate but equally important point is that Islam recognizes all religions that came before it. It accepts all the prophets and books sent to different peoples in different epochs of history. Not only does it accept them, but it also regards belief in them as an essential principle of being Muslim. In this way, it acknowledges the basic unity of all religions. A Muslim is at the same time a true follower of Abraham, Moses, David, all the other Hebrew prophets and Jesus. This belief explains why both Christians and Jews enjoyed their religious rights under the rule of Islamic governments throughout history.
The Islamic social system seeks to form a virtuous society and thereby gain God's approval. It recognizes right, not force, as the foundation of social life. Hostility is unacceptable. Relationships must be based on belief, love, mutual respect, assistance, and understanding instead of conflict and the pursuit of personal interests. Social education encourages people to pursue lofty ideals and to strive for perfection, not just to run after their own desires. Justified calls for unity and virtues create mutual support and solidarity, and belief secures brotherhood and sisterhood. Encouraging the soul to attain perfection brings happiness in both worlds.
Democracy has developed over time. Just as it has gone through many different stages in the past, it will continue to evolve and improve in the future. Along the way, it will be shaped into a more humane and just system, one based on righteousness and reality. If human beings are considered as a whole, without disregarding the spiritual dimension of their existence and their spiritual needs, and without forgetting that human life is not limited to this mortal life and that all people have a great craving for eternity, democracy could reach the peak of perfection and bring even more happiness to humanity. Islamic principles of equality, tolerance, and justice can help it do just this.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* This article originally appeared in SAIS Review, 21:2 (Summer-Fall 2001):133-38.
[1] Abu Shuja' Shirawayh ibn Shahrdar al-Daylami, Al-Firdaws bi-Ma'thur al-Khitab [The Heavenly Garden Made Up of the Selections from the Prophet's Addresses], Beirut, 1986, Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiya, 4:300.
[2] For the second part of the hadith see the sections "Nikah" (marriage Contract) in Abu 'Abdullah Muhammad ibn Isma'il al-Bukhari, ed., al-Jami' al-Sahih [A Collection of the Prophet's Authentic Traditions], Istanbul: al-Maktabat al-Islamiya, n.d., ch. 45; "Birr wa Sila" (Goodness and Visiting the Relatives) in Imam Abu Husayn Muslim ibn Hajjaj, ed., al-Jami' al-Sahih, op. cit., ch. 23; and for the first part see "Tafsir" (The Qur'anic Commentary) and "Manaqib" (The Virtues of the Prophet and His Companions) in Abu 'Isa Muhammad ibn 'Isa al-Tirmidhi, al-Jami' al-Sahih, Beirut, Dar al Ihya al-Turath al-'Arabi, n.d., chs. 49 and 74, respectively. The original text in Arabic does not include the word "sisters" in the command. However, the masculine form used refers to both men and women, as is the rule in many languages. An equivalent in English would be "humankind," which refers to both men and women. By saying "O servants of God," the Prophet also means women, because both men and women are equally servants of God.
[3] See Karl R. Popper, The Poverty of Historicism, trans. Sabri Orman, Istanbul, Insan Yayınları, 1985.
[4] 'Ala al-Din 'Ali al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, Kanz al-'Ummal fi Sunan al-Aqwal wa al-Af'al [A Treasure of the Laborers for the Sake of the Prophet's Sayings and Deeds], Beirut, Mu'assasat al-Risala, 1985, 6:89.

shafique Interesting - but I think that the author has missed a fundamental point. Islam does not advocate any one system of governance, but rather it advocates how those in power should act. The article does list these principles - but seems to miss the point that these principles can be applied to democratic government as well as monarchies, dictatorships and pretty much every other form of government. The flexibility of Islam on this point is one of the beauties of Islam, in my opinion. Cheers, Shafique event horizon I haven't read the article, but to me, it is obvious that Islam is incompatible with a democracy or a republic. If Islamic law were actually applied as shafique explained, then if the citizens voted in favor of same sex marriage, for example, the mechanisms of an Islamic theocracy would prevent the wishes of the majority to be applied. This carries over to a number of other issues, such as an appeal to the prohibition of gambling, alcohol, drugs (including the harmless ones), 'immoral' behavior, etc., Worse than that, because democracy is nothing more than mob rule in any event, is the stifling of democratic principles, such as the freedom to mock and/or criticize prophet Muhammad or any of the Biblical prophets - which is punishable by death in a number of hadith. So, unless one perverts the ideals of democracy and a constitutional republic, an Islamic theocracy and parliamentary democracy are mutually exclusive. shafique

event horizon wrote:
I haven't read the article, but to me, it is obvious that Islam is incompatible with a democracy or a republic.

You have many 'obvious' views that don't seem to be based on any evidence... eg:
1. Baruch Goldstein was motivated by the Quran (!) and yet shouldn't be condemned by you as a terrorist.
2. There are no contradictions in the NT despite Biblical scholars telling you otherwise.
3. Gibbon didn't show that the NT was corrupted by Pauline Christians - by showing that earliest manuscripts don't contain the later insertions.
4. The Quran teaches that all Jews and Christians should be fought against, despite your own argument that the other Quranic verses contradict this view.
5. Less than 10 (so far) actual Muslim convert terrorists is greater than the 200+ Christian convert terrorists over the same period....
6. Early Muslim conquests were characterised by massacres when Hugh Kennedy, a military historian you quote, says the opposite...
So - another quaint belief to add to the list - but at least here you've admitted to not having read the arguments. ;)
Cheers,
Shafique event horizon

Gibbon didn't show that the NT was corrupted by Pauline Christians - by showing that earliest manuscripts don't contain the later insertions.

Back to your favorite straw-man I see.
The challenge has so far been unmet but I see you are fond of distorting quotes.
Here is my actual question:

which NT passages are historically inaccurate based on the contemporary sources written at the time outside of the NT?

I'm not sure how to make my request any clearer to you. Perhaps you have an unknown reading comprehension problem that does not allow you to understand such a straightforward post?
In any event, please tell me what you *think* my post quoted above is asking and I will correct your misunderstanding and explain this to you in another way. shafique Wrong thread - and incidentally answered in the relevant thread (a few times already). The NT contains fabricated verses inserted by Pauline Christians. No one seems to dispute this. These fabrications were inserted to falsify the historical record in relation to what Jesus taught. Gibbon showed that the earliest manuscripts (primary sources) did not contain the Pauline Christian verses that were added later. Therefore, to argue that NT historical accounts in favour of Pauline Christian tenets is to base a view on a quaint notion that the Bible is historically accurate when it comes to these issues. As shown by the various Biblical scholars quoted recently, Gibbon was quoted only because he highlighted these facts hundreds of years ago - so this is nothing new. But, hey - let's not discuss all of your quaint beliefs here - each has its own thread! This one is about democracy and Islam. Cheers, Shafique event horizon

The NT contains fabricated verses inserted by Pauline Christians. No one seems to dispute this.

Again with the strawman.

These fabrications were inserted to falsify the historical record in relation to what Jesus taught. Gibbon showed that the earliest manuscripts (primary sources) did not contain the Pauline Christian verses that were added later.

strawman.

Therefore, to argue that NT historical accounts in favour of Pauline Christian tenets is to base a view on a quaint notion that the Bible is historically accurate when it comes to these issues. As shown by the various Biblical scholars quoted recently, Gibbon was quoted only because he highlighted these facts hundreds of years ago - so this is nothing new.

Strawman.
Dumbest. poster. ever. Roadtester Shafiqe to be honest i dont feel the Quran is given the same theosophical criticism that the bible is. If an individual was as critical as academics in the west expect to be then they would be arrested. There are bits in the Quaran that give the impression it has also been changed, though I understand you believe 100% that it is all perfect as this is what is expected of your belief. shafique You'd be surprised how much debate there is over the teachings of the Quran. One unique feature of the Quran as a scripture is that it is both accessible and read by all Muslims - from cover to cover. There is no hiding or effective censorship of parts of the Quran. The Bible, according to some estimates, is self-censored to the extent where 70% or more of it isn't read in Church or studied by laypeople - let alone being followed. Some of the more extreme verses are just plain rejected by scholars nowadays. You are quite right that I believe the Quran's claims that it is a perfect set of revelations from God - but I would maintain that this is not a blind belief but one that I openly ask to be challenged. I refuse to believe in any injunction or law that is illogical - my personal view is that God would not create logic and then ask a believer to violate this logic. I therefore question all beliefs and refuse to accept something on the basis of 'faith alone'. Even the existence of God, for me, has to be based on logical arguments. I don't advocate that everyone needs logical arguments - far from it, I argue that everyone should be free to believe in the illogical. That is just my personal view. Cheers, Shafique Roadtester I would be as we get the opposite impression, richard dawkins can talk about the fallacy of god and yet salman rushdie still has a current fatwa. There is a lot of difference in debate ie. 'what it means' vs 'its wrong'. I disagree on the accesability in the west you can get hold of a bible with relative ease, and most hotels will have copies that have been left by the Gideons, and with the web now you can pull it all off there as well. Again it sounds like your trashing the bible but not holding the quran to the same level of criticsim. I just cannot believe that it hasn't been changed or even mis-transcripted over time. People pick up holes like numbers of angels quoted etc. But muslims get all angry and think your are attacking the 'whole' text when your not. We are saying that there is a possibility that 'parts' of it not all could have been changed by scholars at the time to please rulers etc.

1 Dubai Jobs .com The First Place to Find a Job in Dubai
shafique I agree with a lot of what Dawkins has to say in 'God delusion' - it's just his last leap of faith at the end that he uses to justify his belief that it is probable that there is no sentient creator that I would question. When I said there is a lot of debate in Islam, I did (and do) mean a 'what it means' debate. From outset there have been issues that aren't clear cut in the Quran and other literature. One on-going debate is whether the Quran is a created object or not, for example. These discussions take place in both Sunni and Shia schools of thought. The point about the Quran being accessible is more a function that it is read cover to cover by Muslims, which contrasts starkly with the Bible. The Bible probably still holds the record for most published book - but it can't (IMHO) claim to be the most read - that surely must go to the Quran. It is read hundreds of million times a year, cover to cover. Also, the accessibility of the Quran has been from outset - whereas the Bible's accessibility was relatively recent. I also understand that it seems incredible that the Quran's claims that it will be protected by God Himself - and the fact it contains no punishment for anyone changing the text, but rather a promise that it will be safeguarded - could in fact be true, and the Quran is unchanged. It is a bold claim and smacks of something that should be 'disprovable'. Certainly there are those who have tried to put forward arguments that the Quran is not internally consistent, or has been changed or was written later than the histories record. I've discussed each of these classes of allegations here in the past and a search should reveal the evidence I presented and arguments I made. As I said, I personally don't take anything at 'faith value' and do subject my beliefs to the test of logic. Cheers, Shafique Berrin

Islam does not advocate any one system of governance, but rather it advocates how those in power should act. The article does list these principles - but seems to miss the point that these principles can be applied to democratic government as well as monarchies, dictatorships and pretty much every other form of government.

Since quran’s message is universal, as you say, I agree that types of government doesn’t have much significance as long as the rulers and prominent citizens of society reach to its message and objectives to apply…
And I don’t think the author would solely argue against this…But even then any government achieves these principles wouldn’t just be any government but in todays terms would be a democratic kingdom or something like a democrat dictator….. Now, how could someone be both democrat and dictator, I don’t know. Hence we can say that if something is democratic then words like the kingdom or dictatorship would loose it meaning or essence in that sense…
I personally don’t approve any government style in which ruling is hereditary as in medieval kingdoms without the elected cabinet, nor if based on governance by the power of wealthy and classed.
This is against the nature of creation and against the human capacity from birth and I know that if the government is not in the hands of a healthy and wise man than people have the risk of being mismanaged on political terms and can easily be undermined against their will or God's will... Berrin

I just cannot believe that it hasn't been changed or even mis-transcripted over time. People pick up holes like numbers of angels quoted etc. But muslims get all angry and think your are attacking the 'whole' text when your not. We are saying that there is a possibility that 'parts' of it not all could have been changed by scholars at the time to please rulers etc.

Actually a lot people who don’t read to understand islam or have no belief in religion gets stuck over this idea that nothing can remain unchanged through time and therefore quran cannot stay without distortion either…
However God himself in quran confirms that it has been preserved from change; in chapter 15:9 He says, "We have, without doubt, sent down the Message; and We will assuredly guard it (from corruption)". and in chapter 41: 41-42 He says, ' for indeed it is an unassailable Book. Falsehood cannot come at it from before or behind it. (It is) a revelation from the Wise the Owner of Praise."
Further reading on protection of quran:
&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam%2FAskAboutIslamE%2FAskAboutIslamE
To my mind convencing an unbeliever in this matter is not an easy task unless they submit themseves to the existance and oneness of God.
At the end of the day, they have free will to judge, but as I said if they deny quran being the true message then I always ask if they really believe in God as the ultimate creator, and being the all powerfull on everthing in this universe?
The answer to it is the breaking point…in my mind….
Because if they admit to God as being all powerful, than they should have no excuse to dismiss God’s promise in quran…..Why? because God has control over humans and the souls of humans…
Humans are given limited abilities to tamper on the human body, physical flesh but not on the souls.
This means that anyone or any group of people acting contrary to gods will, will have their life terminated here.. Or else God will not give any sort of inspiration or intentions to people's hearts and mind to alter it, neither give them personal capibility to do it. And how this happens is another area very well explained in Islam…
you can read about "divine decree" and related links here:
&pagename=Zone-English-Discover_Islam/DIELayout&cid=1154235124002
and also about “divine and human will” here…
&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam%2FAskAboutIslamE%2FAskAboutIslamE
I’d also like to mention that God in quran gives us the stories of those tribes, nations and how they had been destroyed or enfeeebled when they acted against his will and against prophets message.
As far as angels concerned, yes people are able to pick up holes if compare them to eachother that’s becouse Islam restores what has been distorted before.. Roadtester Interesting conundrum - how can you confirm soemthing has been written and cared for properly if it was written by someone else afterwards, with most people illiterate at that time. ;) Also I stand by my belief that the fact that you have suni/shia/wahabi/sufi/bahha etc and the same for the christians, methodist, catholic, protestant, baptist, orthodox etc that there has been change in the original text. Doens't it say in the Quaran that all the books e.g torah, new testament and Quran are to be respected equally? I believe there is something to life, its just maybe i prefer one of the other messengers/djins. ;) Berrin

how can you confirm soemthing has been written and cared for properly if it was written by someone else afterwards, with most people illiterate at that time.

Well we have no option but to believe in God being all powerfull to enable this….
In quran God says…. [2:117] The Initiator of the heavens and the earth: to have anything done, He simply says to it, "Be," and it is.
Now if you believe that an illiterate poet can speak poems spontaneously from heart than there is no reason why prophets can’t do the same upon the inspiration comes from God…or via the angels communicating to the prophets… the same can be said for some people being very good at drawing pictures and singing while others not…pure talent or duty comes from creation/birth upon God’s will…plus there were a lof literate people in those days as well especially poets...
On the following web site there are many answers and articles regarding quran’s authenticity…
&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam%2FAskAboutIslamE%2FAskAboutIslamE

Also I stand by my belief that the fact that you have suni/shia/wahabi/sufi/bahha etc and the same for the christians, methodist, catholic, protestant, baptist, orthodox etc that there has been change in the original text.

Not necessarily… in islam, as the human nature is as it is, there has arisen over the centuries differing interpretations of some of the verses of the Qur’an and of the meaning of some Prophetic traditions, and these have caused a few sects to be formed within the fold of the Muslim community…
Further reading on this issue and related articles….
&cid=1123996016634

Doens't it say in the Quaran that all the books e.g torah, new testament and Quran are to be respected equally?

Yes, but……
The early scriptures, besides carrying the same basic message about Allah, the Master of the worlds, as well as about His creation, humanity, also brought specific instructions addressed directly to particular communities living in specific periods in history such as the Jews and Christians. Scriptures before the Qur'an were in many of their details situation-oriented and relevant to their particular frameworks.
It is also significant that the earlier scriptures were not meant for all time, as Allah Almighty in His infinite wisdom would reveal His complete Guidance at the right time, when humankind is mature to receive it. That is to say, the Guidance of God would attain its finality, when it would be universally applicable and relevant for all future time. And Allah Almighty sent Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) as the Last Messenger of God to humanity with the Final form of Divine Guidance called the Qur'an.
&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam%2FAskAboutIslamE%2FAskAboutIslamE
As Islam covers everthing revealed before in all the previous scriptures and books is the only reason why we are commanded to follow quran therefore islam..

I believe there is something to life, its just maybe i prefer one of the other messengers/djins.

By accepting islam you also believe in all the other profits before but if you deny the religion islam, the last prophet muhammed and the quran then God does not recognise or accept you as the follower of his true religion..
And Djins are another form of created beings and were not given prophethood seperatly and that they have the equal duty to worship God in the same way as the humans do in islam…
Why don’t you search the net on jinns in islam….. event horizon Did shafique accidentally log in to Berrin's account? :lol: Jamal aint even gonna bother to read the posts under the topic .... just gonna use the topic itself as the root to my response i think i said this before though ... but since its seems like the topic re-pop'd up,, im gonna have to say it again.... see its simple an plain .... if democracy an communisim which are both man made ways of governance could not co-exist .... then how in the hell do you expect islam which is from Allah to co-exist with somethin made up by man ... do not expect that too happen .... cause it never will ... so either eradicate islam an put up a total democratic system .. or follow islam completely without any outsourced input.. shafique Jamal - it appears you too have missed the fundamental point that I said the original author missed. Islam does not advocate any particular form of government - it does not say that the democracy is wrong, or that monarchy is wrong - rather it only gives instructions on how those in power need to behave. There is no tension between Islam and democracy - in fact, the need for consultation and a leader who acts in the best interest of the people, is closer to a democratic system than a monarchy in my opinion. Cheers, Shafique Roadtester Berrin - try not to cut and paste all the time as it makes it seem like your a muslim robot. What many people who dont know anything about islam want to know is how 'real' muslims actually interpret these things, as we get such mixed messages. Dont worry I know what jins are - and im sure they created the divisions of sunni/shia/wahabai/baptist/anglican/baptist/protestant/chassidic/orthdox/kabla etc.

shafique :lol: Wise words Roadster. Cheers, Shafique Berrin :D Ok if questions only asked to serve scepticism than I agree we should not do much of a copy and paste job but even than to overcome resistance, the best replies are always given in the form of well documented article…(I know it woun’t make much difference to the sceptic but will help the readers) if they have intentions to read and learn… I also think you would agree with met hat there must be difference between a student and a prof. talking over a subject in the same classroom.. Significans is in the expertise of knowledge to express how the subject should be understood rather than what’s understood (which differs the right from wrong in expression) And sometimes just a few sentence of explanation is not enough to have people understand the issue that are completly foreign to them.. I don’t claim that I am an islamic scholar(prof.) who’s studied the sacred books and teachings of prophets over many years to justify my opinion to be the correct one…(I may also be misleading and not all muslims are well informed about islam) hence “mix messages” as you say… But based on my basic knowledge of Islam, I then go and read the subject addressed from various sources and then put them across to you as what I also agree to be correct… I’ve been doing this copy and past job for he last few weeks and I must admit due to self research I learned so much more than I knew,by looking at issues from various angles.. Berrin

Dont worry I know what jins are - and im sure they created the divisions of sunni/shia/wahabai/baptist/anglican/baptist/protestant/chassidic/orthdox/kabla etc.

Well I am not sure if you know the difference between the satan(who is also a form of jhinn with purpose) and ordinary jhinns that are either choose to be muslims who are believers of islam and are those that refuse to belive islam therefore unbelivers. (just like humans)
:wink:
/