disappointed wiht france


revert of many years
MONDAY, 16 April 2012 Front Page Middle East International Analysis Business & Technology Features Blogs Variety Sports Web TV Contact
Breaking News »

Home Last Updated: Sun Apr 15, 2012 12:33 pm (KSA) 09:33 am (GMT) ‘I am disappointed with France’: Muslims feel stigmatized in vote debate
Sunday, 15 April 2012

The dawn sweep was the second high profile wave of arrests of suspected Islamists in the wake of murders by a self-proclaimed al-Qaeda member from Toulouse that shocked France. (File photo) inShare0By AFP
When police kicked in Mohamed Asbol’s door at dawn and hauled away his son on suspicion of being an Islamist radical, he saw it as further proof that he was not considered fully French.

The 64-year-old was born in Algeria but came to France as a teenager, took French nationality, worked for decades as a welder, paid his taxes and quietly brought up his family in the northern city of Roubaix.

But, he insisted, as a friend arrived to help him fix the door on his modest red-brick terraced house, he is still seen as an outsider and he believes the policies of President Nicolas Sarkozy are reinforcing that prejudice.

“They broke my dignity. I am disappointed with France. It’s obvious that he is stigmatizing Muslims to get votes,” said Asbol, just a week before the first round of voting in France’s presidential election.

“Just because my son has a beard, wears a djellaba and goes to the mosque doesn’t mean he’s a terrorist!” he said, indignantly.

His 28-year-old son Said’s arrest came during a series of police raids on April 4 that netted 10 individuals in cities across France.

The dawn sweep was the second high profile wave of arrests of suspected Islamists in the wake of murders by a self-proclaimed al-Qaeda member from Toulouse that shocked France.

The first wave netted deactivated assault rifles and other weapons and a number of people were kept in custody on terrorist-linked charges.

But the second round, conducted under the glare of deliberately invited television cameras, came to nothing. Said Arbol and the nine others were released without charge.

This led to claims that Sarkozy was using the raids to burnish his tough-guy anti-immigrant credentials and to poach votes from erstwhile supporters of the anti-immigrant National Front party.

Such criticism is particularly trenchant in Roubaix, a city of around 95,000 people on the Belgian border that has the biggest ethnic mix of any French city outside Paris and also happens to be France’s poorest town.

Many of the city’s residents are Muslim, and many feel particularly angry at Sarkozy, who bluntly announced last month in his first major campaign interview that there were “too many foreigners” in France.

Sarkozy has consistently trailed his Socialist rival Francois Hollande in the opinion polls.

“They have attacked us on all fronts -- the burqa, halal meat, young people,” said 34-year-old Moussa Gacem as he stood behind the counter at the Roubaix snack bar where he worked.

Gacem, a French national born here of North African parents, was referring to a law Sarkozy passed banning the full-face veil that had been worn by a tiny minority of Muslim women in France.

Sarkozy has also sparked protests from both Jewish and Muslim leaders, who complained that their communities were being used as pawns in the election, after the president criticized the production of halal and kosher meat.

“If Islam can be used as a target then Sarkozy will do that,” said Gacem.

Salima Saa, a Roubaix local who is on Sarkozy’s campaign team and is herself a candidate for his UMP party in legislative elections due in June, agrees that many in Roubaix feel stigmatized by her party leader’s policies.

Saa, whose father was an Algerian who made a career in the French army, said that, while the police raids earlier this month were exploited for electoral purposes, there were radical Islamists in Roubaix who escaped arrest.

She also distanced herself from some of the UMP’s more outspoken members, such as one lawmaker who said that the only thing French about the Islamist killer in Toulouse, a Frenchman of Algerian descent, was his identity card.

That same comment could be applied to Saa or to the millions of other people of foreign origin in France, which is home to Western Europe’s largest Muslim minority, officially estimated at least four million.

France has been debating for years how far it is willing to go to accommodate Islam, the country’s second religion, and both Sarkozy and National Front leader Marine Le Pen have made the question a key campaign issue.

In Roubaix, which has one of the youngest populations of any city in France, that debate is heated, with many maintaining that being of immigrant stock or being Muslim means you face discrimination.

“A large part of the youth here is confronted with the glass ceiling of discrimination,” said Slimane Tir, a local official who is standing on a Green ticket in June’s legislative elections.

He notes that the city’s unemployment rate is around 30 percent, three times higher than the national average, and that youth unemployment is as high as 50 percent.

Young people in Roubaix are angry and they are right to be angry, said Tir.

“They have been thrown to the lions ... to satisfy an electoral panic that comes from the highest level of the state,” he said.



Assalaam walaikum,

Why be disappointed? The French have not changed. They are running scared.

finding light

Ya Rab! Forgive me..

It's really really sad how such things happen openly and the world just watches on by. Humans have not changed. Open racism, open discrimination, open murder.

Allah save us from all these difficulties in this world and grant patience and strength to all Muslims around the world suffering in such countries. If i was the president of a Muslim country and I had a big house and lots of money, I would invite all Mulims to be with me. But alas....


Why Labeling all muslims an al qaeda bcoz to get us into trouble ???


Label:al qaeda???
Instead:A fraud one
Reason:mad: just to get him/she into trouble!

Sad and pity this world has turn too
just bcoz of some people!!!

~May Allah swt help,protect and guide all muslims~Amin!

Thank you
for sharing this news



John Smith

Junior Member
Lets hope our French brothers & sisters use their vote wisely and remove Sarkozy from power.

I hate that muppet.


Assalaam walaikum,


There is opinion that you can participate in the form of government until the laws are in direct conflict with Islam.
Remember what you are saying is that Egypt and Syria are in the wrong at this moment.
Where does is specifically say voting is shirk. How does one come to a decision if there is not some form of consensus?

*pink niqaabi*

Junior Member
Walaikum salaam wa rahmatullah, heres a brief video:


From all the lectures i've read, and the books of tawheed & shirk by Abdul Wahhab and the fatwas from the fiqh council, i have never read of an opinion that permits voting and democracy.

Once you have done all this it will become crystal clear voting/democracy is haram. I will see if i can post some more stuff for you inshallah and can you explain what you meant by Egypt and Syria inshallah?


Assalaam walaikum

Please find something specifically about voting.

Egypt is in a crisis about elections. Check out the link I posted. As well as Syria. It's all about democracy and voting, sister. They are not sure they want Sharia.

*pink niqaabi*

Junior Member
Ah ok wasn't sure which route you were going down when you were talking about Egypt and Syria..like i really don't wanna get onto the whole issue of uprisings, the khawaarij and Islam, have had enough headaches talking to peeps about that lol!
I get the general jist of whats going on over there but if the uprisings (which have no place in islam) hadnt happened in the first place and people actually practiced the deen we wouldn't be in this predicament....anyway i'll be quiet about that and get back to the point inshallah. Gimme a bit and i will have a look through some texts inshallah...


Assalaam walaikum,


There is a lot of information on TTI. Take a moment and read through some of the links.

*pink niqaabi*

Junior Member
Beware - may Allaah show you His Mercy and protect you - that the American elections and Voting process offered to you in America are an innovation in the Islamic religion, imitation of the kufaar, and can lead to kufr (disbelief) since they are part of the democratic system. Additionally, the American candidates are disbelievers and, of course, have no intention of ruling by the book of Allaah and the Sunnah - the complete and perfect legislation that the Lord of all that exists sent down to His final Messenger Muhammad (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) so that the pious amongst mankind and jinn may be guided.

Shaykh Abu Nasr Muhammad ibn 'Abdullaah ar-Raymee al-Imaam (hafidhahullaah) stated,

"Elections enter into association of partners with Allaah and that is Shirk of obedience, since elections are from the democratic system. And this system was established by the enemies of Islaam for the purpose of turning the Muslims away from their Religion. So whoever accepts it, being pleased with it, propagating it, believing it to be correct, surely he has obeyed the opponents of Islaam in opposition to the command of Allaah, the Mighty and Majestic. And this is the very essence of associating partners with Allaah with regard to obedience. Allaah has said:

"Or have they partners with Allaah (false gods), who have instituted for them a religion which Allaah has not allowed. And had it not been for a decisive Word (gone forth already), the matter would have been judged between them. And verily, for the Dhalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers), there is a painful torment. You will see (on the Day of Resurrection), the Dhalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers, etc.) fearful of that which they have earned, and it (Allaah's Torment) will surely befall them.." (Ash-Shura, ayat 21-22)

So if they say: "They [elections] are from the legislation of Allaah,"

then that is insolence and a lie upon Allaah..."


Regarding voting and Elections, Shaykh Muqbil (rahimahullaah) said,

"And I say: Are elections not, except the path of democracy? ...Democracy is disbelief (kufr) because it means that the populace rules itself by itself. It means there is no Book [Qur`an] and no Sunnah and no Islaam, and the allowing of fornication and homosexuality."


When Shaykh 'Ubaid Al-Jabiree (hafidhahullaah) was asked if it was permissible for the Muslims in the lands of disbelief [such as America] to enter into elections from the aspect of being "the lesser of the two evils", the shaykh responded:

"Elections are not from the Sunnah (the way of the Prophet, salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) that is known by the Muslims and that which the Salaf (the first three generations after the revelation of the Qur`an) traversed upon from the time of the Companions and the Imaams of the Taabi'een, and those who came after them. Rather, it is a newly invented matter in Islaam, so it is a bid'ah (innovation), and if it is a bid'ah (innovation) then it is muharram (unlawful)."

Shaykh Al-Jabiree added that the only exception to this is if the Muslims were forced - meaning if they don't vote, they would not receive any rights [of course, this is not the case in America]. In that case, they could select a pious, knowledgeable and wise man amongst them to speak on their behalf and look after their rights. Then he concluded by advising us of that which is better, saying, "But if the Muslims were patient upon the hardships and loss of their rights in the way of abandoning this innovated matter, it is better for them and more desirable. And Allaah knows best."

When asked via phone two years ago about voting in America, Shaykh Ahmad An-Najmee (rahimahullaah) said, "Oh my brother, is it permissible for the Muslims to enter into innovations and join and work with the disbelievers to obtain something that may take place, or may not?! This is not correct in my opinion."

Shaykh Salih al-Fawzaan (hafidhahullaah) said, "... And as for the elections [that are] well known [and implemented] today in the various nations, then they are not from the Islamic order. Chaos, personal aspirations enter into them, as do greed and favoritism (bias). Tribulations and the shedding of blood result from them, and the desired goal is not attained by them. Rather, they are just a ground for bids (i.e. campaigns), buying and selling and false claims." [3]

The personal aspirations Shaykh Fawzaan mentioned is the candidates' desire and putting themselves forward for leadership and authority - an act the Prophet (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) prohibited. Abu Musa (radiallaahu 'anhu) narrated: Two of my cousins and I entered the apartment of the Prophet (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam). One of them said: Messenger of Allaah, appoint us rulers of some lands that the Almighty and Glorious Allaah has entrusted to your care. The other also said something similar. He (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) said, "We do not appoint to this position one who asks for it nor anyone who is covetous for the same." [4]*

Abdur-Rahman ibn Samwah (radiallaahu 'anhu) narrated: Allaah's Messenger (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) said to me, "'O 'Abdur-Rahman! Do not ask for leadership, since if you are given it - having requested it - then you will be all alone to discharge it. But if you are given it without requesting it, you will be helped (by Allaah) in it." [5]

Shaykh Rabee' bin Hadee al-Madkhalee (hafidhahullaah) said:

"Rather the ones to be chosen are those who are suitable in [Islamic] knowledge, don't have a desire for such a position, and are pious. Then, we must also benefit from this Prophetic methodology in our education and training. So we should not bring up the youth to have love for leadership, authority and position. If we bring them up upon love of these things, then we have acted contrary to the way and guidance of Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam)... Then what success can we expect in this world or the Hereafter if we act contrary to the methodology of Allaah's Messenger (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam)?" [6]

Either maliciously or ignorantly, some falsely accuse the Messenger and his companions of holding elections. Of course, this is a lie - and a lie on the Prophet (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) is disastrous to one's hereafter. The Messenger (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) would sometimes consult companions, setting in motion some of the battles and raids, and other times he would not. Either way, he never held elections. And as for 'Umar (radiallaahu 'anhu), while dying, he appointed a shura to decide the third calipha. Furthermore, this shura was made of six companions [and a seventh - Abdullaah ibn 'Umar - to decide the matter in case it was yet unresolved]. And as you can see - may Allaah show you Mercy - the decision was left to the knowledgeable and pious and those who didn't seek leadership.

This is in contrast to the evil, corrupt, and fraudulent elections in America, where the vote of the ignorant and disbelieving carries more weight than that of the knowledgeable and pious, since each is given a vote and, of course, the knowledgeable and muttaqun are unquestionably the minority. And, likewise, democracy is the rule of the majority, whereas Allaah has revealed (what means): And if you obey most of those on earth, they will mislead you far away from Allaah's Path. They follow nothing but conjectures, and they do nothing but lie. (Al-An'aam, ayah 116)

Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abdullaah ar-Raymee al-Imaam was asked regarding the statement of some: "Democracy and voting are equivalent to the Islamic Shura (Counsel)." The shaykh responded, "By Allaah, if we did not fear that the ignorant would be influenced by the likes of these words, then it would be obligatory to avoid even responding to this (statement). At any rate, democracy and voting is not combined with the Islamic Shura that Allaah has legislated, not in the fundamentals of the religion nor its subsidiary branches, neither in totality nor in part, not in meaning or in foundation." And then the shaykh - may Allaah preserve him for the benefit of the Ummah - brought eight detailed evidences in refutation of this statement, at the head of them being that Allaah legislated the Islamic Shura, whereas the people of disbelief, crimes and ignorance legislated democracy. [7]

The Shaykh also said that a shura is to consult with one another mutually in cooperation upon the understanding of truth, devoid of fabricated rulings from other than the Divine Legislation.

And know - may Allaah guide you - that democracy, which is to govern oneself by man's laws (instead of what Allaah revealed), is disbelief (kufr), rejecting Allaah's Laws and accusing it of deficiency.

Allaah says (what means): Verily, this Qur`an guides to that which is most just and right and gives glad tidings to the believers (in the Oneness of Allaah and His Messenger, Muhammad, etc.). who work deeds of righteousness, that they shall have a great reward (Paradise). (Al-Isra', ayah 9) Shaykh 'Abdul-Azeez Bur'aee (hafidhahullaah) points out the above aya shows that the Qur`an has in it all that is good - for all places and all times and all issues, such as mannerisms, economics, da'wah, or other than that.

Shaykh Bur'aee said:

"Democracy opposes Islaam in the equality between people, making equal the kufaar to the Muslims, whereas Allaah says (what means): Shall We then treat the (submitting) Muslims like the Mujrimun (criminals, polytheists and disbelievers, etc.)? What is the matter with you? How judge you? (Al-Qalam 68:35-36) In democracy, the righteous scholar is equal to the homosexual or the one who passes corruption upon the Earth - and this is a great injustice."

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Salih al-'Uthaimeen (rahimahullaah) said, "Because anything which opposed the judgment of Allaah, the Most High, and that of His Messenger (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) is tughyan (wrong-doing, injustice, oppression, tyranny) and transgression against the judgment of Him to Whom judgment belongs and to Whom all matters return (for final judgment) and that is Allaah. He, the Most High, says (what means): Indeed your Lord is Allaah, Who created the heavens and the earth in Six Days, and then He Istawa (rose over) the Throne (really in a manner that suits His Majesty). He brings the night as a cover over the day, seeking it rapidly, and (He created) the sun, the moon, the stars subjected to His Command. Surely, His is the Creation and Commandment. Blessed be Allaah, the Lord of the 'Alameen (mankind, jinns and all that exists)! (Al-A'raf, ayah 54)." [8]

Read - may Allaah guide you - the following three verses and their subsequent tafseer.

Allaah says (what means): And whosoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the Kaafirun. (Al-Ma`idah, ayah 44) And whosoever does not judge by that which Allaah has revealed then they are wrong doers. (Al-Ma`idah, ayah 45) And whosoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed then they are the sinful. (Al-Ma`idah, ayah 47)

The companions understood these ayat to mean: believing - upon knowledge - that a law other than Allaah's is superior or equal to Allaah's Sharee'ah, or is permissible to rule by, is kufr (disbelief). Of course, if the person does so out of ignorance, then he's not a kafir. He is taught and advised. Furthermore, Ibn 'Abbaas (radiallaahu 'anhuma) said: "Whoever rejects what Allaah has revealed, will have committed Kufr, and whoever accepts what Allaah has revealed, but did not rule by it, is a Dhalim (unjust) and a Fasiq (rebellious) and a sinner.' Ath-Thawri narrated that Ibn Jurayj said that 'Ata' said, "There is Kufr and Kufr dunee (less than) Kufr, dhulm and dhulm less than dhulm, Fisq and Fisq less than Fisq.'' [9]*

It is exclusively Allaah's right to prohibit something or make something lawful, as we learn from the following hadeeth.

Imaam Ahmad, At-Tirmidhi and Ibn Jarir At-Tabari recorded a hadeeth via several chains of narration from 'Adi bin Hatim (radiallaahu 'anhu) who became Christian during the time of Jahiliyyah. When the call of the Messenger of Allaah (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) reached his area, 'Adi ran away to Ash-Sham, and his sister and several of his people were captured. The Messenger of Allaah (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) freed his sister and gave her gifts. So she went to her brother and encouraged him to become Muslim and to go to the Messenger of Allaah (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam). 'Adi, who was one of the chiefs of his people (the tribe of Tai') and whose father Hatim At-Ta'i was known for his generosity, went to Al-Madinah. When the people announced his arrival, 'Adi went to the Messenger of Allaah (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) wearing a silver cross around his neck. The Messenger of Allaah (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) recited this Ayah - They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allaah (At-Tawbah, ayah 31). 'Adi commented, "I said, 'They did not worship them.'' The Prophet (salallaahu 'alaihi wa sallam) said, "Yes they did. They (rabbis and monks) prohibited the allowed for them (Christians and Jews) and allowed the prohibited, and they (Christians and Jews) obeyed them [in that]. This is how they worshipped them."

Prior to that, 'Adi had thought of worship as only bowing and prostrating, and hadn't thought of obedience as an act of worship.

Shaykh Fawzaan said about this aya and hadeeth that explains it:

"Following scholars or anyone else in changing the rulings of Islamic Law is an act of Shirk ul-akbar (Major Polytheism)." Again, the Shaykh stressed that it is Major Polytheism only "if the follower knows that these enacted laws differ from those of Allaah."

Allaah also revealed: [Yusuf said to his companions of the prison:] The command (or the judgment) is for none but Allaah. He has commanded that you worship none but Him (i.e. His Monotheism), that is the (true) straight religion, but most men know not. (Yusuf, ayah 40) Legislation is for none but Allaah; it is His right alone, so this rules out a "mixture" of Sharee'ah and democracy. Ibn Katheer (rahimahullaah) said, "He then affirmed that the judgment, decision, will and kingdom are all for Allaah alone, and He has commanded all of His servants to worship none but Him." [10]

Additionally, Allaah revealed: And when it is said to them: "Come to what Allaah has sent down and to the Messenger (Muhammad)," you (Muhammad) see the hypocrites turn away from you (Muhammad) with aversion. (An-Nisa, ayah 61) This is proof that the one who is called to ruling by the Qur`an and Sunnah and he refuses, then he is from the hypocrites - and this hypocrisy is the more serious hypocrisy in i'tiqad (belief).

The only saying of the faithful believers, when they are called to Allaah (His Words, the Qur`an) and His Messenger, to judge between them, is that they say: "We hear and we obey." And such are the prosperous ones (who will live forever in Paradise). (An-Nur, ayah 51) The Muslim should say, "We hear and obey."

May Allaah show you Mercy. Do you not see that ruling by the sharee'ah of other than Allaah leads to mischief and corruption in the land, whereas ruling by what Allaah revealed is a cause of correcting the affairs of the creation? Look at Arabia - where the law of the land is Allaah's Sharee'ah - and the peace found therein, maa shaa` Allaah.

Shaykh Fawzaan, a resident of Arabia, said, "As for our country - walHamdulillaah - then it differs from the other countries on account of what Allaah has granted it of goodness, such as calling to Tawheed, putting an end to shirk, establishing an Islamic Government which judges by the sharee'ah. We do not say the country is perfect from every single aspect; however it has - walHamdulillaah - never ceased to be established upon goodness. Enjoining the good and forbidding the evil is to be found in it, likewise the establishment of the hudood punishments, and also ruling by what Allaah has revealed..." [11]

And if we as Muslims in America sufficed ourselves with what Allaah has revealed, we would in sha` Allaah see without obstruction - may Allaah bless you - that we have absolutely no need for these kufaar candidates, as we in America are not prohibited from going to the masaajid to learn 'aqidah and offer our obligatory salat except by our own laziness, and the women are not prohibited from wearing hijab except by their refusal to obey Allaah in that matter.

And if we sufficed ourselves with the Qur`an and authentic Sunnah, then the ignorance of those who invite eloquent politicians to the masaajid to lure Muslims into bid'ah will become apparent and shunned instead of applauded and followed.

As Imam Malik (rahimahullaah) said:

Is it that every time a man comes who is more eloquent in arguing than another man we leave that which Jibreel 'alayhi salaam brought to the Messenger sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam?

My brothers and sisters in Islaam, the only One we need and should rely on is Allaah, The Mighty and Majestic, who says (what means): Allaah! Laa ilaaha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He), and in Allaah (Alone), therefore, let the believers put their trust. (At-Taghabun, ayah 13) Tawfeeq (success) comes from Allaah, and we are commanded to use only legislative means. My dear fellow Muslims, if we correct our 'aqidah, and enjoin Tawheed and the Sunnah while forbidding shirk and bid'ah, Allaah will make us the successors upon the earth, as He promised in Surat An-Nur:

Allaah has promised those among you who believe, and do righteous good deeds, that He will certainly grant them succession to (the present rulers) in the earth, as He granted it to those before them, and that He will grant them the authority to practice their religion, that which He has chosen for them (i.e. Islaam). And He will surely give them in exchange a safe security after their fear (provided) they (believers) worship Me and do not associate anything (in worship) with Me. But whoever disbelieved after this, they are the Fasiqun (rebellious, disobedient to Allaah). (An-Nur, ayah 55)

Know - may Allaah bless you - that Allaah created all of mankind and jinn to single Him out with all worship (making du'aa to Allaah alone, seeking refuge in Allaah alone, sacrificing for Allaah alone, seeking deliverance from Allaah alone). And Allaah will judge us on the Day of Judgement based on our submission to His commands and the commands of His Messenger (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam), about whom Allaah said (what means): Nor does he speak of (his own) desire. It is only an Inspiration that is inspired. (An-Najm, ayat 3-4)

Submission to Allaah's revelation leads to rectification in this wordly life, and Allaah's pleasure and Paradise in the hereafter. Denying/disbelieving in what Allaah revealed - even one ayah or one authentic hadeeth - leads to oppression in this wordly life, and torment and the fire in the hereafter.

May Allaah unite the Muslims upon the Qur`an and authentic Sunnah (upon the specific understanding that Allaah sent down to His Messenger to convey to the companions), and guide us to hold onto the Qur`an and authentic Sunnah with our molars, and guide us to avoid placing our opinions and desires above what He revealed to Muhammad (sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam). May Allaah guide all the Muslim rulers, and may Allaah continue blessing Arabia and any country that follows it in ruling by what Allaah revealed for the sole purpose of pleasing Allaah alone.

[1] From Shaykh Muhammad al-Imaam's book Tanweerudh-Dhulamaat bi Kashf Mafaasid wa Shubahaat Al-Intikhabaat (Illuminating the Darkness in order to uncover the corruptions and doubts concerning Voting), pages 39-40.

[2] Nasaa`ih Wa Fadaa`ih, page 17; Tuhfatul-Mujeeb, page 303.

[3] The Ruling on Elections and Demonstrations Al-Jareedat ul-Jazeerah, Issue 11358, Ramadaan 1424.

* In the case of Prophet Yusuf ('alaihi salam), Ibn Katheer said, "Yusuf praised himself, for this is allowed when one's abilities are unknown and there is a need to do so." [Tafseer Ibn Katheer (Tafseer of Surat Yusuf, Vol. 5).]


[6] Manhaj ul-Anbiyaah fi ad-Da'wah ilal-Laah (Methodology of the Prophets in Calling to Allaah).

[7] From Shaykh Muhammad al-Imaam's book Tanweerudh-Dhulamaat bi Kashf Mafaasid wa Shubahaat Al-Intikhabaat (Illuminating the Darkness in order to uncover the corruptions and doubts concerning Voting), pages 31-35.

[8] Fatawa Arkan-ul-Islam (Islamic Verdicts), Vol. 1

[9] Tafseer Ibn Katheer (Tafseer of Surat al-Ma`idah, Vol. 3)
* Ibn Baaz said: The rulers who judge by other than what Allaah revealed are divided into different categories, according to their beliefs and to their deeds. One who judges by other than what Allaah has revealed, believing that it is better than the Law of Allaah, is a kaafir by consensus of all the Muslims, as is the one who judges by man-made laws instead of the Law of Allaah, and claims that this is permissible. As for the one who judges by other than what Allaah has revealed, because he finds it convenient to do so, or because of bribery, or due to enmity between him and the person being judged, or any other reason, in the full knowledge that he is acting in disobedience to Allaah and that it is wajib for him to judge by Allaah's Law, he is considered to be one of the disobedient ones and a perpetrator of a major sin and he has committed minor kufr and minor dhulm and minor fisq, as has been reported on the authority of Ibn 'Abbaas (radiallaahu 'anhuma), Tawoos, and a number of righteous salaf. This is what is well known to the people of knowledge. And Allaah is the Granter of Success. [Fatawa Islamiya (Vol. 1)]

[10] Tafseer Ibn Katheer (Tafseer of Surat Yusuf, Vol. 5.)

[11] (al-Ajwibah al Mufeedah no. 24)

[Note: This treatsie is based on the stronger of the two opinions, the opinion followed by the overwhelming majority of the scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah wal Jama'ah. Those in the minority who said it is "the lesser of two evils" provided no proof for their statements, and ijtihaad is not exercised when the majority of scholars have already refuted an issue. And of course, scholars are not followed in their mistakes. This would be blind-following. Even then, those with the weaker of the two opinions stipulated that their opinion was based only if the Muslims do not have full rights to practice their religion, which is not the case in America, and to Allaah belongs all Praise.]

Subhanak Allaahuma wa bihamdika ash-hadu anlaa illaaha illa anta astaghfiruka wa atubu ilayk

If I said anything correct, then it is from Allaah (subhanahu wa taa'ala), and if I erred, then that is from me and shaytan.


Assalaam walaikum,

You have concentrated on the US.

You need to go back and look at Egypt and Syria right now with the words you quoted.

Now, you did not differentiate between voting and democracy.

Where in Islam does it say a Muslim can not vote?

So my question to you is this: How do Muslims living in non-Muslim majority lands govern themselves as part of the larger society. Muslims do not live in enclaves that are segregated from society.


Junior Member
Walaikum salaam wa rahmatullah, heres a brief video:


From all the lectures i've read, and the books of tawheed & shirk by Abdul Wahhab and the fatwas from the fiqh council, i have never read of an opinion that permits voting and democracy.

Once you have done all this it will become crystal clear voting/democracy is haram. I will see if i can post some more stuff for you inshallah and can you explain what you meant by Egypt and Syria inshallah?

Assalamou Alaikoum Wa Rahamtaullahi Wa Barakatuh

Well sister let's say that the Ulama differ or better that there must be special circumstances for a muslim to be allowed to participate in elections even if the candidate is a non- believer.

There is for example Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen rahimahullah who said or wrote:
أنا أرى أن الانتخابات واجبة ، يجب أن نعين من نرى أن فيه خيراً ، لأنه إذا تقاعس أهل الخير ، مَنْ يحل محلهم ؟ سيحل محلهم أهل الشر ، أو الناس السلبيون الذين ما عندهم خير ولا شر ، أتباع كل ناعق ، فلابد أن نختار من نراه صالحاً .
فإذا قال قائل : اخترنا واحداً لكن أغلب المجلس على خلاف ذلك .
قلنا : لا مانع ، هذا الواحد إذا جعل الله فيه البركة وألقى كلمة الحق في هذا المجلس سيكون لها تأثير ولا بد ، لكن الذي ينقصنا الصدق مع الله ، نعتمد على الأمور المادية الحسية ولا ننظر إلى كلمة الله عز وجل .... فَرَشِّحْ مَنْ ترى أنه خير ، وتوكل على الله

"I think that elections are obligatory; we should appoint the one who we think is good, because if the good people abstain, who will take their place? Evil people will take their place, or neutral people in whom there is neither good nor evil, but they follow everyone who makes noise. So we have no choice but to choose those who we think are fit.

If someone were to say: We chose someone but most of the parliament are not like that,

We say: It does not matter. If Allaah blesses this one person and enables him to speak the truth in this parliament, he will undoubtedly have an effect. But what we need is to be sincere towards Allaah and the problem is that we rely too much on physical means and we do not listen to what Allaah says. So nominate the one who you think is good, and put your trust in Allaah".

("Liqaa’aat Al Baab Al Maftooh, no. 210).

Source: http://www.ibnothaimeen.com/all/soun...le_16230.shtml

The scholars of the Standing Committee on voting



هل يجوز التصويت في الانتخابات والترشيح لها ؟ مع العلم أن بلادنا تحكم بغير ما أنزل الله؟

"Is it permissible to vote in elections and nominate people for them? Please note that our country is ruled according to something other than that which Allaah revealed?"


"لا يجوز للمسلم أن يرشح نفسه رجاء أن ينتظم في سلك حكومة تحكم بغير ما أنزل الله ، وتعمل بغير شريعة الإسلام ، فلا يجوز لمسلم أن ينتخبه أو غيره ممن يعملون في هذه الحكومة إلا إذا كان من رشح نفسه من المسلمين ومن ينتخبون يرجون بالدخول في ذلك أن يصلوا بذلك إلى تحويل الحكم إلى العمل بشريعة الإسلام ، واتخذوا ذلك وسيلة إلى التغلب على نظام الحكم ، على ألا يعمل من رشح نفسه بعد تمام الدخول إلا في مناصب لا تتنافى مع الشريعة الإسلامية"

"It is not permissible for a Muslim to nominate himself in the hope that he can become part of a system which rules according to something other than that which Allaah has revealed and operates according to something other than the Sharee’ah of Islam.

It is not permissible for a Muslim to vote for him or for anyone else who will work in that government, unless the one who nominates himself or those who vote for him hope that by getting involved in that they will be able to change the system to one that operates according to the sharee’ah of Islam, and they are using this as a means to overcome the system of government, provided that the one who nominates himself will not accept any position after being elected except one that does not go against Islamic Sharee'ah".

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz,
Shaykh ‘Abd al-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi,
Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ghadyaan,
Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Qa’ood.

("Fataawa Al Lajnah Al Daa'imah", 23/406, 407).

Shaikh Albani rahimahullah
Questioner: Some students of knowledge issued a verdict permitting voting for the best of the available Christian candidates based on the premise that this is from choosing the lesser of two evils. Is this permissible?

In addition, isn’t this considered to be increasing their numbers which may in turn have a negative effect on the public's opinion of Muslims?

Shaykh: I have been asked this question on more than one occasion, and I believe that it is incomplete. So if you want to complete this unfinished question by bringing further clarity [then do so]...

Questioner: What is the permissibility of voting for the best available candidate, particularly if they are Christian?

Shaykh: This question is incomplete just as it was when presented by other than you. I will now say what I think is intended by the question.

In the event that there are a number of Christian candidates who are imposed upon the Muslims, meaning that one of them has to be elected whether the Muslims like it or not, the previously mentioned principal is applied: namely, choosing the lesser of two evils. For example, there are four Christian candidates in a certain country and it is inevitable that one of them will be the winner (elected).

Hypothetically speaking, if it were only the Muslims voting [for these candidates] and no one else - not even one other person is voting - such that if the Muslims refrained from voting they wouldn't be elected, then it is not permissible to vote for them.

Is it clear up to here?

Questioner: Yes

Shaykh: However, if the situation is contrary to this, and this is what I think the question is referring to, then one of them must be selected due to the electoral process established today. It is upon you to know that this system is not Islamic in any way whatsoever...[The Shaykh then begins to explain some of the ills of democracy and the harm of giving power to someone who requests it, in contrast to the beauty of the Islamic shooraa]

Discussing these issues is lengthy. However, the point is that it has been imposed upon the Muslims living in that particular country to choose a candidate just as it is imposed upon them that some of the elected politicians be Christian. Why? Because there are Christian citizens. The government takes into account the percentage of Christian citizens in the country and makes calculations. They compare, for example, the ratio of Muslims to Christians. Do they consider the Jewish citizens in this process? I'm not sure. Based on these calculations they conclude that the country should have, for instance, two Christian politicians.

If the Muslims do not choose between them, then their own people will choose. In either case, one of them is going to be elected. But as we said earlier there may be four or five candidates. The Muslims in that country must consider it like this: The first candidate is a Baathist and a non-Muslim, the second is a communist and a non-Muslim, the third is an atheist and a non-Muslim and so on. The last is a practicing Christian who does not harbor animosity towards the Muslims. If there is no way around the fact that one or two of them are going to be elected, then what should the Muslims do? Should they say, "We are not going to get involved? They are Christians. Let them fight each other." No, this is not the case, because two of these candidates will be elected regardless.

So O Muslims, O you who have sense, is this principle to be applied in this scenario or not? I say yes, because the Muslims in this case are between two evils. Similarly, this is the case if the candidates were Muslims, since amongst the Muslims are Communists, Baathists and so on. Okay, do we just sit back and watch or should we choose the one whose harm is less?!"

Source:Silsilatul Hudaa wan-Noor (Series of Guidance and Light), Tape #284 starting at approx 54mins. and continuing on tape #285

Shaikh Albani rahimahullah
Shaykh: "Elections emanate from a non-Islamic principle. In fact, they stem from a Zionist principle, namely, the ends justify the means.

However, I distinguish the issue of a Muslim who runs for office from the issue of voting for one whose harm in that office may be less than others.

The distinction between the two issues is essential even in the major elections. Jamaa'atul-Inqaadh in Algeria sent me a question about elections so I wrote them a detailed clarification. I mentioned to them, as I have mentioned previously, that elections and Parliaments are not Islamic and that I do not advise any Muslim to nominate himself as a representative in Parliament because he will never be able to do anything for Islam. Rather, the movement will overcome him just as it has happened with all of the existing governments in the Arab countries.

Even with that being the case, I noted that in all of the Muslim lands, regrettably, there are Muslims who nominate themselves to Parliament claiming that they will reduce evil. We can not forcefully prevent them from campaigning; all we can do is advise, clarify, and convey [the truth]. Hence, if a Muslim is going to nominate himself as opposed to a Christian or Communist, whether it be for major or minor elections (according to your terminology) then we vote for him.

Why? Because there is an Islamic principle upon which I have based my answer. If a Muslim is placed between two evils he chooses the lesser of the two evils. There is no doubt that having a Muslim as the president (mayor) of local government is less harmful - and I don't say better - than having a mayor that is a disbeliever or an atheist.

However, this politician destroys himself without even realizing it. When he nominates himself with the claim that he desires to lessen the evil - and he may do so - he doesn't know that he is being burnt from another angle. His example is that of the scholar who does not act according to his knowledge. The Prophet said, "The example of the learned one who does not act according to his knowledge is like that of a lamp [lit. a burning wick]; it burns itself while providing others light."

For this reason we differentiate between voting and campaigning. We do not campaign for office because we will burn. As for the Muslim who insists on burning himself, be it mildly or severely, by running for office, then we vote for him as opposed to the disbeliever or the atheist using the principle of repelling the greater evil with the lesser evil.

Questioner: Our Shaykh, I understand from this that as it relates to Parliament and even local elections that if a there is a Muslim candidate it is permissible to vote for him.

Shaykh: Yes, however based on the principle, and memorize what I am saying, based on the principle of repelling the greater evil with the lesser evil; not because he is better".

Source:Silsilatul Hudaa wan-Noor (Series of Guidance and Light), Tape #660 starting at approx 20mins. 40secs.

Shaykh Abdul Muhsin Abbaad hafidhahullah on voting
Questioner: There is a question from America related to the ruling of Muslims living in non-Muslim countries who vote in local elections. Is it permissible for these Muslim minorities to vote in local elections if they believe that one of the candidates can benefit the Muslims by giving land, allowing them to give dawah, or other benefits?

Shaykh: There is no harm in voting for candidates who will be of more benefit to the Muslims than the others. In this instance, voting for them is an example of doing the lesser of two evils to avoid the greater evil. All of the candidates are disbelievers and, therefore, harmful. However, the candidate who is less harmful to the Muslims is better than the candidate whose harm is far greater.

Questioner: For the one who says that voting is from the innovated means, for example ... ?

Shaykh: In any event, this is something evil with which the people have been afflicted. If people have two choices, one being abhorrent and the other also detestable but of less harm, which should the people choose? The people should choose the lesser of the two evils, correct? Even though the Roman Christians and the Persians are all disbelievers, the people were happy when the Roman Christians were victorious over the Persians.

Questioner: Some people oppose this by mentioning that they are not forced to vote in the first place?

Shaykh: What I have mentioned is based on the premise that some benefit for the Muslims may be attained by voting. However, if there is no benefit then they should not participate.

And I'm quite sure that Shaikh Saleh Al-Luhaydan hafidhahullah (I can't find it at the time.) also permitted muslims taking part in election but like I meantined above there need to be certain circumstances fullfilled.

If there should be any mistake then I'm sorry and Allahs knows best.
Wa Alaikoum Assalam Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh.