1st Danish veiled politician attends council meet

hafeezanwar

Junior Member
First Danish veiled politician attends council meet



A Danish politician of Palestinian origin on Wednesday became the first woman to attend a local council meeting wearing a hijab, the Muslim veil.

Asmaa Abdul Hamid, 27, took part in a meeting in the city of Odense as a substitute for a member of the Unity List, a left-wing grouping.

Abdul Hamid has attracted attention because of the fact that she chooses to wear the hijab and refuses to shake hands with men. She led the voting list for her party at the 2005 local elections.

"I would like to be judge on what I have in my head, not on it, for the politics that I defend, my opinions and not what I wear or how I greet (people)," she told the large media pack that had turned out for the occasion.

" I would like to be judged on what I have in my head, not on it, for the politics that I defend, my opinions and not what I wear or how I greet (people) "
Asmaa Abdul Hamid

Abdul Hamid is also on her party's parliamentary list and is already down as a stand-in for their existing deputy, Johanne Schmidt-Nielsen.

The possibility that she might appear on his behalf in the parliament building has, since the November 2007 election, created a political stir, particularly among the far-right.

Peter Seeberg, an academic at the University of Odense, said her participation in the council meeting was a landmark event in Danish politics.

"She will influence the debate (of recent years) on Islamic veils, because we have now an example of a veiled Muslim woman taking part in an elected assembly, showing that things are evolving in Danish society," he told the online edition of the regional daily Fyens Stifstidende.

Earlier this week, Dalia Mogahed, an Egyptian-born American who heads the Gallup American Center for Muslim Studies, became the first Muslim veiled woman to be appointed to a position in the White House. Mogahed has been appointed as an interfaith advisory in the new administration of U.S. President Barack Obama.

--Agencies
 

ahmed_indian

to Allah we belong
alhumdulillah that danish ppl are accepting muslim women in veils.

but is it permissible to take part in un-Islamic politics as they dont rule according to Quran and sunnah?
 

Hard Rock Moslem

I'm your brother
alhumdulillah that danish ppl are accepting muslim women in veils.

but is it permissible to take part in un-Islamic politics as they dont rule according to Quran and sunnah?

But you need a voice. Today we are oppressed becaused muslim nation do not have permanent seat in the UN Security Council. Likewise in every parliment or senate houses we must have representatives (good muslims).

Alhamdulillah. The more they provoke muslim the stronger we are getting.
 

ahmed_indian

to Allah we belong
But you need a voice. Today we are oppressed becaused muslim nation do not have permanent seat in the UN Security Council. Likewise in every parliment or senate houses we must have representatives (good muslims).

Alhamdulillah. The more they provoke muslim the stronger we are getting.

we are not oppressed becoz we dont have UN seat but the reason is we dont have sharia laws in our lands.

we dont fear Allah and ppl dont fear us.
 

Abdulhalim

New Member
People (White or Black, Poor or Rich) should not fear the Muslims, but respect us... I think that is the right word. The Prophet Peace be upon Him and His Companions are not feared but RESPECTED..
Jazakumullaho Khairan...
we are not oppressed becoz we dont have UN seat but the reason is we dont have sharia laws in our lands.

we dont fear Allah and ppl dont fear us.
 

Muhammad_A

Penguin fancier
But you need a voice. Today we are oppressed becaused muslim nation do not have permanent seat in the UN Security Council. Likewise in every parliment or senate houses we must have representatives (good muslims).

Alhamdulillah. The more they provoke muslim the stronger we are getting.

It's a bit of a stretch to say Muslims are oppressed because we don't have a permanent seat on the UN Security Council. In case it's slipped your attention neither do India, Brazil, Japan, NIgeria or South Africa. And no one says they're oppressed because of that.

Besides... Who'd actually represent us? Pakistan?... Indonesia?... Egypt?... Malaysia?... Saudi? Or would the seat just be rotated between the members of the Islamic Conference?

Actually, since the main (and only) criterium for being on the UNSC is being one of the winners of WW2 and owning lots of nuclear warheads only Pakistan (winner by virtue of being part of the British Empire at the time) really qualifies :p
 

Muhammad_A

Penguin fancier
Then there's the problem of the veto. A Muslim UNSC representative can put forward as many resolutions condemning Israel (for example) and calling for sanctions against it as s/he likes, but as long as the US is in the Zionists pocket it ain't ever getting passed.
 

abdullah khan

Junior Member
It's gonna change!!!

Assalamu Alaikum,
It's really doesn't matter how many Muslim women(with hijab) or Muslim men have got the seat in parliament and it won't change the situation of Muslim Ummah, democracy is haram in Islam, so if we want to make it halal and defend ourselves that at least someone is representing Islam, Islam will never gain except,Allahu Aleem.
People cannot be believers until they submit to the law of Allah and accept it without any reservations.
Allah says: But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you, [O Muhammad] judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in [full] submission. [al Nisa 65]
 

ahmed_indian

to Allah we belong
People (White or Black, Poor or Rich) should not fear the Muslims, but respect us... I think that is the right word. The Prophet Peace be upon Him and His Companions are not feared but RESPECTED..
Jazakumullaho Khairan...

the good non-muslims can respect us but ppl who are anti-islamic by heart can never do that!

did abu jahl, abu lahab, umayyah respected muslims? no indeed!

we need to be stong in faith and power to keep the anti-islamic voice silent!

if not respect then fear!
 

Hard Rock Moslem

I'm your brother
Then there's the problem of the veto. A Muslim UNSC representative can put forward as many resolutions condemning Israel (for example) and calling for sanctions against it as s/he likes, but as long as the US is in the Zionists pocket it ain't ever getting passed.

This is what I was thinking about.
 

warda A

Sister
Assalamu Alaikum,
It's really doesn't matter how many Muslim women(with hijab) or Muslim men have got the seat in parliament and it won't change the situation of Muslim Ummah, democracy is haram in Islam, so if we want to make it halal and defend ourselves that at least someone is representing Islam, Islam will never gain except,Allahu Aleem.
People cannot be believers until they submit to the law of Allah and accept it without any reservations.
Allah says: But no, by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you, [O Muhammad] judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in [full] submission. [al Nisa 65]

:salam2:

democracy is haram in Islam

Most people say that but could you explain how? define democracy.
what kind of democracy are you talking about?
the western type or people do whatever they want , or how a ruler rules.
am thinking that the prophet (salallahu alaihi wasallam) ruled in the most democratic way because he listened to what the ummah was talking about and to what problems they had.

i just need clarification.
 

abdullah khan

Junior Member
Democracy is hypocrisy

Assalamu Alaikum to everyone.
Democracy is a system of governance that is different than the Islamic system of government and is opposed to it and is being spread by the West in the Muslim world by force as an alternative to the Islamic Sharia law.


Democracy is man made law,and Islamic shaira is a laws of Allah(swt),In Islamic sharia establish by Khalifa and also has got shura,brother can anyone remeber who were the members of Umar(R) Shura.................i)Abbas(r)ii)Abdullah ibn Abbas(r)iii)Abdur rahman Ibn Aaof.iv)Usman ibn Affan v)Ubaid ibn Kaab vi)Jaid bin Tabit(r)vii)Ali(r). Brother please read the biography above those companions of Prophet(pbuh). His goverment was justice and equality
.

''Do you then seek the judgement of the days of Ignorance? And who is better in judgement than Allaah for a people who have firm faith''-[Quran 5:50]

Walaahi there is no hikmah in democracy whatsoever…For Allaah’s sake Muslims, wake up!! Allah(swt) prescribe Sharia for us.


From: Errors made Concerning Tawheed: By, Shaykh Abdul Aziz ar-Rayyis (Student of Shaykh Bin Uthaimeen and Al-Fawzaan)
15- The 15th error people make concerning Tawheed is abandoning ruling by what Allaah has revealed, and altering it so that one rules by man-made laws. This is regardless if they have been derived from the countries of kufr or other than them. From the examples of this is what some tribes do of ruling in accordance to their customs in affairs that they have agreed upon. And all of this is prohibited, as Allaah taa’ala has stated: Is it the rule of Jahiliya that they desire? And who is better than Allaah in ruling over the affairs for a people who have certainty? (Al-Ma’idah 5:50) And in this is a reason for safety and security to be lost, and for the downfall of the economy. And in this is an indication of weakness of their [practice] of the religion and the intellect. As for the religion - The Deen - then this is because it is in contrast to the religion and in it is disobedience to the Rabb, our Lord, subhanahu wa taa’ala. And as for the intellect, then this is because the Lord of mankind is the most knowledgeable about what is best for mankind. So He has laid out laws and religious verdicts in rules that are appropriate for them. So how can they abandon His rule, and then follow the rule of the human beings who are human beings just like them? So we ask Allah to guide our Muslim rulers, so that they establish the legislation of Allaah and follow the guidance of the the Messenger of Allaah (صلى الله عليه وسلم), for in this is their might and valor in this life and the hereafter, if they only knew. And from those things that are perplexing - and there are many things that are perplexing - is abolishing and distancing oneself from the religion of Allaah in the name of the religion. So that one makes this claim of democracy, and then he calls it “Islamic.” And this is something that is a lie against the sharee’ah that was revealed to Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم). And in summarizing democracy, it is the people ruling over themselves, so whatever the majority chooses, then that is what is ruled with - even if it is in contrast to the legislation of Allaah. And this, concerning the sharee’ah of Allaah, is kufr (disbelief). And Allaah stated: And whosoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the Kaafiroon. (Al-Ma’idah 5:44) And this is the case, regardless if the majority of the people agree with it or not.

{To each among you, We have prescribed a law and a clear way}-[Quran 5:48]

And this Final DEVINE law is in NO NEED of any other law,….

{This day i have perfected your way of life for you, COMPLETED my favour upon you, and have chosen Islaam as your way of life}-[Quran 5:3]

Nor of YOU in need of any other law other than Islaam, except only a foolish person seeking it….

{And who turns away from the religion of Ibraaheem (i.e Islamic monotheism) except him who befools himself?}-[Quran 2:130]

It is shirk to vote for kufr governments, clear cut and only someone whos following their desires and going for this life rather than the hereafter (once proof has been shown to them),




So it is shirk to vote. For more information and detailed analysis please see: http://www.kalamullah.com/Books/DemocracyReligion.pdf and http://www.kalamullah.com/manhaj02.html
 

abdullah khan

Junior Member
Democracy is hypocrisy!!

The Disbelief (Kufr) Of Electing Legislators Besides Allah (Fatwa)
Shaykh Abdullah bin Muhammad al-Ghunaymaan

The Shaykh, may Allah (swt) preserve him, says: “All creatures are the slaves of Allah (’ibaad Allah), the Majestic and High, and He created them so that they may become worshipers of Allah, the Majestic and High. The slave must act according to the commands of His Master and a follower of His Speech and Shari’ah (Law), and not (become) a lord or a rival to Him in the legislation (tashree’a) and the judgment (hukm) between the creation. If he is like this, (then) he becomes a competitor with Allah to the same degree that Fir’awn (Pharaoh) and his fellow greater tawagheet did (i.e. those things which have transgressed the limits of Tawheed and are worshipped besides Allah).”

He also said: “And concerning that which makes a creature, which the people establish, choose and say that ‘this act is on my behalf’ or ‘I chose this’ – after which he becomes a legislator of laws which he judges by – (then) he came with something which negates his iman (belief) and he must review himself and seek repentance so he does not fall into shirk, which is the greatest of sins.”

Those who elect legislators along with Allah claim they do so because their intention is not to make them partners with Allah, but rather reformers. The answer of the Shaykh concerning this question which was addressed to him (is as follows): “If one does an action which is the opposite of the Shari’ah, his intention does not benefit him. The one who elects the legislator and (then) he says, ‘I only elect him to become a reformer’, although the action of this legislator is to be a partner along with Allah in terms of His legislation, which is against the Book of Allah and His legislation – (then) verily, the hukm (legislation) is for none but Allah (swt). However, the intention may be accepted if the action is permissible within the Shari’ah.

He also said, may Allah preserve him, “Yes, if a person knows that he elected this person so he can become a legislator, and he knows that (the right of) legislation is for none but Allah alone, the Majestic and High, and he said, ‘I want this person (as a legislator) because I know that he is a righteous person and he will establish righteousness which will prevent the Mufsideen (those who cause corruption) from taking over, and therefore I elect this person’, that will indeed not benefit him.”

He also said, “Although he claims his intention is righteous, it will not benefit him, even if it is righteous. This is because electing him on this basis is not permissible, and due to that he has fallen into a negating factor from among the negating factors of belief (iman).”

He also said in his answer to the question that if the person enters in legislative council and said he will not start legislating and will not practice any forms of legislation, but will only take the position of legislation (what is the ruling upon such a person)? He said, may Allah preserve him: “If he enters the government which consists of legislation and laws, he is surely content with it, and being content with laws from other than Allah, the Majestic and High, is kufr (disbelief). For example, if he allowed himself to become a legislator, that in itself is not only kufr, but he also becomes one of the heads of the tawagheet; and the tawagheet are many. He is one of the tawagheet because he lets the hukm be with him and not with Allah, the Majestic and High.”

He said, may Allah have mercy upon him, in an advice he gave to the voter (for man-made law): “My advice to you is to cling to the commands of this deen (religion), and to be steadfast upon the Tawheed of Allah (swt). And if you fall short of this, (then) you must repent and seek refuge and renew your iman. And the world does not benefit you, so the person must leave these matters and renew his deen should he have fallen into one of the negating factors which negate iman.”

Regarding the validity upon praying behind those voters who elect creatures in the position of legislation, he said, may Allah preserve him: “If one has fallen into that and he knows; praying behind him is not valid. One must pray behind those who have correct ‘aqeedah (creed/belief) and have not fallen into one of the negating factors which negate iman.”

[Taken from a recorded lecture delivered by Shaykh al-Ghunaymaan entitled: 'And (agree) that none of us shall take others as lords besides Allah.' (Aali 'Imraan 3:64)]

Other ‘ulema (scholars) who support Shaykh al-Ghunaymaan in what has been mentioned above include Shaykh Muhammad al-Ameen ash-Shinqiti, Shaykh Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Furraaj, Shaykh Naasir al-’Umar, Shaykh al-Muhaddith Abu Ayyub al Barqawi, Imam Abu ‘Isa ar-Rifa’ee and many others. We will now cite some of what they have said:

Shaykh al-Qahtaanee said: “Because the source of (the legislation in) democracy is the people, then what remains for Allah (swt)? Therefore, democracy, which is built upon this, is definitely kufr (disbelief) which takes you out of Islam…Democracy, by the definition of its people, is clear kufr (kufr buwaa).”


Shaykh ‘Abdullah as-Sad also said: “There is no doubt that democracy is kufr (disbelief), and I ask Allah (swt) to take us away from these things…The people of democracy will not allow you to join them unless you swear to act according to their law, and this is kufr (disbelief). Those people who implement Shaytaan’s law, and who call for democracy and elections, they only want to attract the anger of the Muslims…”

Shaykh Bishr al-Bishr also said: “If anyone is given the right to make law, his is a taghut (false god) because he is calling the people to worship him.”

Shaykh ad-Deebaan said, “From what I know about the Parliament, it is a committee (gathering) of tawagheet and it is not permissible for anyone to enter this on the basis of ‘benefit’ (maslaha) for the Muslims…”
 

abdullah khan

Junior Member
Democracy is hypocrisy!!

Sayings of the 'Ulamaa Regarding Ruling By Other Than What Allah Has Revealed

Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah said:
"And it is known by necessity in the Deen of the Muslims and by the agreement of all the Muslims that whoever follows a Shari'ah other than the Shari'ah of Muhammad then he is a disbelieves in some of the Book." Kaafir and it is like the Kufr of the one who believes in some of the Book and and disbelieves in some of the Book."


–"Al-Fataawa", Vol. 28/ 524




Al-Haafidh Ibn Katheer said:
"So whoever leaves the clear Shari'ah, which was revealed to Muhammad Ibn Abdullah, the Seal of the Prophets, and takes the Hukm to other than it from the laws of Kufr which are abrogated, he has disbelieved. So what about the one who takes the Hukm to the 'Yasiq' (the law of the Tartars which mixed Shari'ah rulings with invented rulings) and puts it before it?! Whoever does that, he has disbelieved by the Ijmaa' of the Muslims."



– "Al-Bidaayah wa Nihaayah", Vol. 13/ 119


Shaikh 'Abdul-'Azeez Ibn 'Abdullaah Ibn Baaz said:
"There is no Eemaan for the one who believes the laws of the people and their opinions are superior to the Hukm of Allah and His Messenger or that they are equal to it or that they resemble it or who leaves it or replaces it with fabricated laws and institutions invented by people, even if he believes that the laws of Allah are more encompassing and more just."



– "Risaalat Wujoob Tah'keem Sharee'at Allah' Pg. 39, which follows the "Risaalat Tah'keem Al-Qawaneen" Published by "Daar Al-Muslim"


Shaikh Muhammad Ibn Saalih al-'Uthaymeen said:
"The first type is when the Hukm of Allah is removed and replaced with another Taghuutee Hukm, so that the Hukm of the Shari'ah is eliminated between the people and he puts in its place another Hukm from the fabrication of the humans and they remove the laws of the Shari'ah concerning the Mu'amalah (i. e. the general actions between people) and they put in its place fabricated laws and this, without doubt, is Istib'daal (i. e. replacement) of the Shari'ah of Allah subhaanahuu wa-ta'ala, with other than it. And this is Kufr which removes one from the Milla because this person put himself at the level of the Creator because he shara'a (legislated) for the slaves of Allah that which Allah ta'ala did not give permission for and that is Shirk in His, ta'ala's saying:
"Or have they partners with Allâh (false gods), who have instituted for them a religion, which Allâh has not allowed?" (Ash-Shu'ara, 21)


– "Fiqh Al-'Ebaadaat", #60



Shaikh Muhammad Naasiruddin Al-Albaanee:
Who said, in one of his earlier cassette recorded lessons, wherein he is describing an argument he had with someone about the Takfeer of Mustafa Ataturk, the secularist who converted the constitution of Turkey from the Hanafee code Shari'ah, to the man-made laws. So Shaykh Al-Albaanee said:

"I made clear to him (i.e. his opponent) that the Muslims did not make Takfeer to Ataturk who was Muslim. No. (They did so) when he freed himself from Islaam when he implicated upon the Muslims an institution other than the institution of Islaam. And from that was the example of his equalizing between the inheritance of the male and the female. But Allah says according to us, 'And for the male is the share of two females. ' And then he obligated upon the Turkish masses, the Qobah (i. e. a Turkish-style hat)."

– "Fataawa Ash-Shaykh al-Albaanee wa-Maqara'netihah bi'Fatawaa Al-'Ulaama", Pg. 263 from his cassette #171.


Shaikh Mahmood Shaakir said:
So their question wasn't the 'Ebadeeyah's question to Abee Majliz about the Tafseer of this Aayah – about that which the Mub'tadah of our time agree with concerning the judgement in money andblood with a law that opposes the Shari'ah of the people of Islaam and not concerning implicating a law upon the people of Islaam and forcing them to take the judgement to other than the rule of Allah in His Book and upon the tongue of His Prophet. So this action is turning away from the Hukm of Allah and from His Deen and putting the laws of the Kuffar above the law of Allah, subhaanahuu wa-ta'ala and this is Kufr. No one from the people of the Qiblah with their difference, doubts the Kufr of the one who says or calls to this."


– From his commentary of At-Tabaree ("Tafseer At-Tabaree" Vol. 10/ 348)


Alaamah Muhammad Al-Ameen Ash-Shanqeetee said:
"And with these Heavenly texts that we have mentioned, it becomes quite clear that the ones who follow the fabricated laws, which the Shaytaan has legislated upon the tongues of his 'Auliya and which oppose that which Allah, jala-wa'ala has legislated upon the tongues of His Messengers, peace be upon them, that no one doubts their Kufr and their Shirk except him who Allah has removed his sight and has blinded them to the light of the revelation as they are!"


– "Adhwaa Al-Bayaan", Vol. 4/ 82-85


Shaikh Saalih al-Fowzaan said:
"So whoever takes the Hukm to other than the legislation of Allah from all of the institutions and the man-made laws, then has taken the implicators of these laws and the ones who rule with them as partners with Allah in his legislation. He, ta'ala said:

'Or do they have partners who have legislated for them what Allah has not allowed?

And He said:

'And if you obeyed them, then you are Mushrikeen. '

"Al-Irshaad ila'Saheeh Al-' Atiqaad ", Vol. 1/ 72.




And then again, after narrating what Al-Haafidh Ibn Katheer wrote concerning the Tartar's and "Al-Yasiq", he said, "And the likes of the law that he mentioned from the Tartars, and judged upon with Kufr, those who put in the place of the Islaamic Shari'ah, are the fabricated laws, which have – in our time – been established as sources of laws in many countries and the Islaamic Shari'ah has been disregarded in favor of them except in what they call 'personal matters'."

– "Al-Irshaad ila'Saheeh Al-' Atiqaad ", Vol. 1/ 74



Shaikh 'Umar al-Ashqar said:
And from this explanation it becomes clear to us that there are two types of people who have fallen into Kufr about which there is no doubt. The first, the ones who legislate that which Allah did not reveal, and those are the ones who fabricate the laws that oppose the legislation of Allah they implicate it upon the people and the Ijmaa' is upon their Kufr without doubt."

– "Al-Shari'ah Al-Eelaheeyah", Pg. 179


'Alaamah Muhammad Ibn Ibraaheem Aal-Ash-Shaykh said:
"… The fifth, and it is the greatest and the most encompassing and the clearest opposition of the Shari'ah and stubbornness in the face of its laws and insulting to Allah and His Messenger and opposing the courts of the Shari'ah on their roots and branches and their types and their appearances and judgements and implementations the references and their applications. So just like the courts of the Shari'ah there are references, all of them returning back to the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger like that, these courts have references, which are laws that are assembled from many legislations and laws like the laws of France and America and England and other laws and from the Metha'hib of some of the innovators who claim to be under the Shari'ah.

And these courts are now fully operational in the settlements of Islaam, people entering them one after another, their rulers judge upon them with what opposes the Sunnah and the Book with the rules of that law and they impose that on them and approve it for them. So what Kufr is there beyond this Kufr and what nullification of the Shahaadah of Muhammadar Rasool-Allah is there beyond this nullification?!



– "Tah'keem Al-Qawaneen"





Shaikh 'Abdur-Razzaaq al-'Afeefee said:
"Thirdly: The one who is attributed to Islaam and knows its laws and then fabricates for the people, laws and makes them an institution for them to conduct themselves by and to take their judgements to and he knows that it opposes the laws of Islaam. Then he is a Kaafir out of the Milla of Islaam. And like that is the Hukm concerning the one who orders a committee or committees to be formed for that and the one orders the people to take their judgements to these institutions or laws or makes them take the judgements to them, while he knows that they oppose the Shari'ah of Islaam. And like that is the one who judges with it and implicates it upon the matters and the one who obeys them in these judgements out of his own choice, while he knows that it opposes Islaam. So all of these are partners in their turning away from the Hukm of Allah."

– "Shubu'haat Howl As-Sunnah Wa-Risaalat Al-Hukm bi'Ghayr ma'Anzal-Allah", Pg. 64


Imaam Ahmad Shaakir said:
"The matter in these fabricated laws is clear with the clearness of the sun. It is clear Kufr and there is nothing hidden about it and there is no excuse for anyone who attributes themselves to Islaam, whoever they may be, to act according to it or to submit to it or to approve of it. So each person should beware and every person is responsible for himself. So the 'Ulamaa should make the truth clear and tell what they have been ordered to tell without concealing anything."

– "Umdaat At-Tafseer Mukhtasar Tafseer Ibn Katheer of Ahmad Shaakir", Vol. 4/ 173-174



Imaam Ibn Jareer At-Tabaree said:
"He ta'ala says, whoever conceals the Hukm of Allah, which He revealed in His Book and made it a law between the slaves – so he hides it and rules with other than it like the Hukm of the Jews concerning the married fornicators with whipping of the guilty and blackening their faces and concealing the Hukm of stoning and like their judging upon some of their murdered with full blood-money and some with half of their blood-money. And concerning the noble people, they would have Qisaas but the commoner would only get the blood money. But Allah made all of them equal in the Tauraat: …such are the Kâfirûn. They are the ones who concealed the truth, which was upon them to uncover and make clear. And they hid it from the people and they showed something different to the people and they judged according to that (changed Hukm) because of a bribe they took from them." (* So the point of At-Tabaree here is that he considers this Ayaah general for anyone who does what the Jews did and hold this Ayaah meaning of Kufr Akbar upon anyone who does what they did.)


– "Tafseer Al-Tabaree" Vol. 4/ 592



Shaikh Muhammad al-Ghunaymaan was asked:
"The one who leaves the Hukm by what Allah revealed; if he makes the general judgements with the fabricated laws, does he disbelieve? And is there a difference between that and the one who judges with the Shari'ah but then he opposes the Shari'ah in some of the matters due to desire or bribery or other than that?"

So he answered, "Yes, it is Waajib to differentiate between them. There is a difference between the one who throws away the Hukm of Allah, jala-wa'ala and replaces it with the judgements with the laws and the judgement of mankind. This is Kufr, which takes one outside the Milla of Islaam. But the one who is Multazim (i. e. religiously committed) upon the Deen of Islaam except that he is disobedient and a Thaalim by following his desires in some of the Ah'kaam and goes after a benefit from the Dunya, while accepting that he is Thaalim with this, then this is not Kufr, which takes you out of the Milla. And whoever sees the Hukm with the laws to be equal to the Hukm of the Shara' and makes it Halaal, then he also disbelieves with the Kufr that takes one outside the Milla, even if it is in one instance."

– "Mujaalit Al-Mishkaat", Vol. 4/ 247



Shaikh Ibn Qaasim said:
Like the ones who rule with the laws of Jahiliyyah and the international laws, rather, even one who rules by other than what Allah revealed, whether he rules with the laws or with something which has been invented that is not from the Shara' or affirmed in the Hukm, then he is a Taghuut from the greatest Tawagheet."

– From his commentary on "Usool ath-Thalaathah", Pg. 96


Shaikh Hamd Ibn 'Ateeq an-Najdee said:
"And the Fourteenth Matter is Taking the Hukm to Other than the Book of Allah and His Messenger. " And then he mentions the Fatwaa of Ibn Katheer under the Aayah: "Is it the Hukm of Jahileeyah which they seek?", which we have narrated earlier. Then he said, "And like this is what the general people of the Bedouins and those like them fell into with regards to taking the Hukm to the customs of their forefathers and that which their ancestors established from the accused customs, which they label 'The Shari'ah of Reefawah' they put it before the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger. So whoever does that; then he is a Kaafir and it is Waajib to fight him until he returns to the Hukm of Allah and His Messenger."

– "Majmoo'at At-Tawheed ", Pg. 412


Shaikh Muhammad Hamid al-Faqeeh said:
And like or (even) worse than this are the ones who take the words of the Kuffaar as laws, which they judge with in matters concerning blood and wealth and they put that before that which they know and that is has been made clear to them from the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger. So he, without a doubt, is a Mortad if he continues upon that and does not return to the Hukm of what Allah revealed and he will not be benefited by any name which he labels himself with and neither by any outward action that he does from Salaat or Siyaam or anything else!"


– From the Hamish (i. e. margins) of "Fat'h Al-Majeed", Pg. 406



'Abdul-Lateef Ibn 'Abdur-Rahmaan (Muhammad Ibn 'Abdul-Wahhab's great-grandson):
When asked concerning what the Bedouins judge with according to the customs of their fathers and grandfathers. "Do we label them with Kufr after it is made clear to them (that this is not permissible and when they continue)?"


So he answered, "Whoever takes the judgement to other than the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger after it is made clear to him (that this is not permissible), then he is a Kaafir. He, ta'ala said:

'And whosoever does not judge by what Allâh has revealed, such are the Kâfirûn. '

(And He ta'ala also said)

'Is it other than the Deen of Allah that they seek? '

(And He ta'ala also said)

'Have you seen those (hyprocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Tâghût (false judges, etc.) while they have been ordered to reject them. '

'And the Aayaat with this meaning are many."


– "Dur'ur As-Saneeyah fi'Al-Ajwibah An-Najdeeyah", Vol. 8/ 231 Published by "Dar Al-Iftaa' bil'Saudeeyah" 1385 H



'Abdur-Rahmaan Ibn Hasan (Muhammad Ibn 'Abdul-Wahhab's grandson) said:

"So it is made clear with this, that the Ayaah (9:31) proves that whoever obeys other than Allah and His Messenger and turns away from taking from the Book and the Sunnah, concerning making Halaal what Allah made Haraam or making Haraam what Allah made Halaal or obeys him in the disobedience of Allah and follows him in what Allah did not give permission for, then he has taken him as a lord and something worshipped and made him a partner with Allah and that contradicts the Tawheed which is the Deen of Allah that the words of Ikhlaas: La Illaaha il-Allah, have indicated. (This is) because the Ilaah is the thing which is worshipped, and Allah, ta'ala labeled their obedience as worship towards them and called them lords.


Like He, ta'ala said:

'And He does not order you to take the angels and the Prophets as lords… '

In other words, '… as partners with Allah in His worship… ' –

'Does He order you to do Kufr after you were Muslims? '

And this is the Shirk because anything which is worshipped is a Lord and all things, which are obeyed or followed concerning other than what Allah or His Messenger have legislated, then he has been taken by the obedient one or the follower as a Lord and a thing to be worshipped.



Shaikh Muhammad Shaakir Ash-Shareef said:
In his "Chapter concerning making clear when the one who rules by other than what Allah revealed is a Kaafir; with the Kufr that does not take one outside the Milla."


Then he said, "He does not disbelieve with three conditions:


[1] That he is Multazim (i. e. religiously committed) and accepts upon the outside and the inside every Hukm or Tashree' (legislation) which has come from Allah subhaanahuu wa-ta'ala or His Messenger –sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam.


[2] That he accepts and confesses that he has left the Hukm with what Allah subhaanahuu wa-ta'ala has revealed in that matter or that specific instance that he judges in that he is sinful and that his Hukm is a mistake and that the Hukm of Allah is the correct.


[3] That the opposing Hukm is a Hukm in specific instances and not in full general matters and this third condition is the one, which many of the contemporary people have not understood and paid attention to.



– "In'Allah Huu'al-Haakim", Pg. 88-91 published by "Daar Al-Waton", 1413 H.


Shaikh Saalih Ibraaheem al-Layhee:
Who said, concerning the meaning of the "Daleel", "So the ruling with the fabricated laws, which oppose the Islaamic Shari'ah is atheistic and Kufr and Fasad and Thulm among the slaves because the security is not ensured and the Shara'ee rights are not preserved except by acting upon the Islaamic Shari'ah in its entirety in the 'Aqidah and worship and ruling and etiquettes and the conduct and institutions, because the 'Ruling by Other Than What Allah Revealed' is ruling with a created action upon a creation like it. And it is ruling with the laws of the Taghoot and there is no difference between the individual conditions and the general and specific; and whoever differentiates between them in the Hukm, then he is an atheist/ Zandeeq (i. e. Hypocrite in denial)/ Kaafir in Allah Al-' Atheem!"


– "As-Salsabeel ", Vol. 2/ 384, which is his commentary upon "Zaad Al-Mutaqnah ".
 

warda A

Sister
.

That's not what democracy is. Democracy has been practiced by the Sahaaba, such as when `Umar, may God have been pleased with him, nominated six Sahaaba to choose from to succeed him. The six wanted the public to vote for one of them. `Abd-ur-Rahmaan ibn `Awf (ra) withdrew his nomination and volunteered to go door to door to collect people's votes for one of he remaining five. `Uthman (ra) got the most votes. That's democracy.

A well established Islamic institution that has been implemented in many places even at the town level, is Ahl-ul-Halli wal `Aqd (People who decide to accept or reject projects and amendments). That's what a parliament is. That's democracy.

The difference between Islamic democracy and, say, American democracy is in the constitution that governs it and the laws it enforces. In Islam, the constitution is the Quran and the Sunna and the law must stem from the Sharee`a. In America, the constitution was agreed on by the founding fathers and the laws are drafted by the Congress whom people vote for.

jazakaAllahu kheiran brother Ayman, i was talking about that same democracy using Quran & sunnah, not the western idea of man made democracy laws or whatever.
 

massi

Junior Member
jazakaAllahu kheiran brother Ayman, i was talking about that same democracy using Quran & sunnah, not the western idea of man made democracy laws or whatever.
:astag::astag::astag:
:salam2:
there is no such democracy in Quran or Sunnah and as we Muslim we have to avoid to use these words to show if we are open mind or not :astag:
we have SHURA according to the law of Islam ...ect
besides ...
Allaah says :
" Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with thee unless thou follow their form of religion. Say: "The Guidance of Allah, that is the (only) Guidance," wert thou to follow their desires after the knowledge which hath reached thee, then wouldst thou find neither Protector nor Helper against Allah." Baqarah /120

 

warda A

Sister
salam massi
you misunderstood me
please read what was said and also brother Ayman's excellent post, that is what i was talking about
do not confuse the meaning of democracy with the western idea of what democracy is.
 

abdullah khan

Junior Member
That's not what democracy is. Democracy has been practiced by the Sahaaba, such as when `Umar, may God have been pleased with him, nominated six Sahaaba to choose from to succeed him. The six wanted the public to vote for one of them. `Abd-ur-Rahmaan ibn `Awf (ra) withdrew his nomination and volunteered to go door to door to collect people's votes for one of he remaining five. `Uthman (ra) got the most votes. That's democracy.
can you please give the refference for above quote,InshAllah.


Brother please don't say like this, Democracy is a word has been choose by western world against Sharia law, Democracy is work by majority, and sharia works by command of Allah(swt),2 different and opposite things. There is no such word in Islamic sharia, good democracy:astag:, Islamic government only go for majority of opinions when something comes after ''Ijma'', and obviously those members of Shura have to be strong Ikhlas and understanding of Quran and Sunnah.
brother please read the government system of rightly guided Khalifah, especially Umar(RA) and Abu Bakar(RA) inshAllah. did they practice Good Democracy or laws of Allah(swt)???
Therefore our Sharee’ah has been completed for us by almighty Allah (swt); and he has left no sickness without a cure, and no problem without a solution. Anybody who believes that Islam is not complete and does not give a solution for every single matter has committed kufr (apostasy) and left the fold of Islam. This is because Allah (swt) says in his Quran
“And we have sent down to you the Book (i.e. the Qur’aan) as a clarification (and solution) for all matters…” ( an-Nahl, 16: 89)
jazakAllah khairan.

[yt]PTGp53YEcz0[/yt]
 
Top