Should Muslims vote in the next election?

[saq333]

Salam Calaykum to all

Brother let me put your question like this.

I regret the day I ever set foot in the United States.

Wsalaam Bro,

the only problem with that is, most of us have already been born here, whether we like it or not, we're citizens here.

So, its probably better to do what we can, rather than let the kuffar decide our fate.

And remember, wherever you live, chances are that the decisions that are made here in the US have a virtually direct impact on you. US global Hegemony has penetrated every "Muslim" land such that most metropolitan cities in Muslim countries are run by corporate america.

*If* there was a lesser of 2 evils, id say go for it.
This year, its a total gamble. But might as well try someone new.

salaamz
saqib

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

Salaam

This opnion is from a Sheikh. Ill have his name.
However, to be more specific, this is the Hizb-ut-tahrir opinion.
In fact it isn't an opnion it's fact.

Voting for kufr regimes is shirk.

as salamu alaykum

anything more specific than 'hizb-ut-tahrir'?

does the author of the article know arabic?

does he know arabic grammar?

does he know tafsir al-qur'an?

has he the prerequisite knowledge to issue a fatwa?

i think the answer to the all the above will wither be:

1. you don't know
2. you will find out (thats what HT always say)
3. its not relevant (they say that too)
4. hizb-ut-tahrir has many scholars (they say that too)

in terms of point 3 - it IS relevant. i will leave that to your own intellect to work out.

[General_Mujahid]

The author is not giving a fatwa. This is the Hizb-ut-tahrir comment on voting.

You dont need a fatwa really. Very simple. You are voting for a kaffir president. You are giving your elaigence to a kaffir and a kaffir system.

A sin is not cencelled out by a good deed. NO matter what your intentions are...voting for this kuffr system is haraam.

Hizb do have scholars. If you want me to name them i will.
I am not from the Hizb.
So don't make assumptions the fact that i agree with some of their points.

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

'giving a comment' - is that a hukm? or do you believe this issue is qati?

lets follow your logic...

1. 'you are voting for a kafir president.' - true, he is kafir, and as such is not expected to rule by shari'a and is not accountable for not doing so.

2. 'you are giving your allegiance to a kafir and a kafir system' - this is such a false assumption it makes me cringe.

just because we vote for person x the 'kafir', it does not mean we prefer him over a khalifah, nor does it mean that we prefer the system of democracy over the islamic system. this is what is available, and in times can be the most beneficial for the Muslims at large.

while i personally have difficulty in voting, it is not because i belive it is haram; but because i believe it is in most cases of no difference.

The scholars of ahl al-sunna have accepted that the HT 'opinion' is an acceptable one, albeit an extreme one, and not always the best opinion to take. I would refer you to the pdf article i posted earlier, or the work of Shaykh Abdallah bin Bayyah.

without cut and paste akhi, in your own understanding, what is the proof that voting is haram - and tell me in your own words and quote from the qur'an if you wish?

you can name the scholars, the problem is - noone knows of them with the exception of a few- and they are not exactly people of authority in the community of scholars of ahl al-sunna. this is a well-known fact in places like Shaam, Egypt, Morocco, Jordan and Yemen etc where this party operates.

furthermore, can you tell us who these scholars studied under, and what qualifications in the deen they have, whether they have ijazas or isnad in any field?

can you name any british scholars they have? the ones who print and distribute material solely for the uk?

[al-Shami]

Sometimes figuring out who to vote for is a problomatic but I think it's well worth doing.

Breaking foreign hegemony, and getting people to respect your religous obligations and freedom of worship starts at home.

I'll be voting green since their leader Caroline Lucas has been on the marches and supports freedom for palestine etc, and they have a good chance of winning in my area.

I would normally also keep a eye out normally for who mab recommends.

http://www.mabonline.net/media/news/...te05.06.04.htm

[General_Mujahid]

ELECTIONS IN ISLAM

uploaded 11 Feb 2001


The Prophet Muhammad (saw) said, "Islam started as something strange and will again return as something strange. So give glad tidings to the strangers who will revive the Sunnah after it became corrupted."

The resurgence of the Islamic Ummah and her demands to return to the Islamic way of life in all her affairs has become apparent for all the people to witness. This has manifested itself in the revival of Islam as a political Deen, which seeks to implement itself over the affairs of man. In fact, the discussion that Islam is political and the need for Khilafah in order to apply the Islamic rules and laws that have been detailed in the Qur'an and the Sunnah are foregone conclusions. The revival of Islam started as something "strange" in the new secular world order, but it is now whole-heartedly adopted by the Islamic Ummah as her cause.

However, confusions still exist within certain elements of the Islamic Ummah, who, whilst sincere in their efforts and noble in their goals, have failed to understand the error of the path they tread. They cannot distinguish between the elections as a process of determining the consent of the masses in its selection of a ruler and the system of Democracy.

Democracy: The Rule of Man versus the Rule of Allah

Democracy, in principle, means that man has a free hand in determining rules and laws as he pleases, and he is in total control of this i.e. he is the sovereign master of himself. Hence, man can decide to enact a piece of legislation that pleases him. For example, in some Muslim countries (including Indonesia) nightclubs were closed for Ramadhan and reopened after Ramadhan! Or, there is legislation that is still being considered in Bangladesh as to whether to legalise prostitution. In Pakistan it has taken years to decide whether Riba is forbidden! While in the West, they have been having trouble deciding whether to permit homosexual relationships at sixteen or eighteen and whether to have an un-elected chamber that can accept or reject legislation.

In democratic societies, people feel that they have the right to decide whether to accept liberal values, terminate the life of a baby, exterminate populations in 'humanitarian' wars such as Iraq, or severely place a people in hunger such as in Afghanistan. The fundamental principle here is that man possesses the right to legislate and make rules and laws. Individuals are appointed in parliaments and legislative houses to debate, scrutinise and enact law. The basis of legislation is the majority decision of these selected people, who will vote according to their own personal experiences, their party line, their business interests (more often than not) and the like.

This is something that is contradictory to the very foundations of Islam and its basic beliefs. Here, there is a total disregard for Allah (swt) the Sovereign Master, and thus, the only One (swt) that may lawfully determine legislation and rules for the rest of creation. Mankind has no right but to hear and obey the orders of Allah (swt).

In Surah Yusuf we find the ayah, "The right of Rule is solely for Allah." [TMQ Surah Yusuf: 40] This clearly establishes that He (swt) is the sole Legislator. In fact, it is a principle of Aqeedah that Allah (swt) is the source of all of Ahkam (laws).

In Surah al-Maida we find the verse, "and whosoever does not rule by what Allah has revealed then such are the kafireen (disbelievers)." [TMQ Al-Maida: 44]

Ibn Abbas (ra) stated in his Tafsir of this verse that anybody who denies a definitive judgement of Allah (swt) contained in the Shariah is a Kafir. Ibn Jarir at Tabari says that this is agreed upon. Ibn Abbas (ra) went on to say that anyone who says that the Rule of Allah (swt) does not have to be established, then he is a Kafir. The one who says that the rule of man is better than the Rule of Allah (swt) is a Kafir. The one who states that the rules of man are just as good as the Rule of Allah (swt) is a Kafir. He (swt) also said that the one who does not deny Allah's (swt) Hukm, but believes that it is allowed to rule by other than what Allah (swt) has revealed, he is also a Kafir because he is denying that the right of Rule is solely for Allah (swt). This is the case even if he says that the rule of Allah (swt) is better than the rule implemented by man.

However, if someone rules by the rules of Kufr, and does not believe in them, and even hates them, then what he is doing is a major sin. Such a person would have committed Kufr doon Kufr, a Kufr which is less than Kufr. In other words, it is a major sin that is definitely haram, but he is not a Kafir. This is the soundest position in our view, but others have held different positions

Al Hafidh Ibn Katheer (ra) in his tafsir of verse 151 of Surah an-Nisa made reference to the Tartars at his time, "…who put together for them a law book extracted from different laws of the Jews, the Christians and the Deen of Islam. It also contained many rules taken only from their own opinion and desires that later became a system of law followed by the people and given precedence over the Book of Allah (swt) and the Sunnah of his Messenger (saw) so the ruler who does that is a Kafir." Taken from Tafseerul Quran ul Atheeem.

Whilst the position that we adopt is not quite as harsh as that adopted by Ibn Katheer (ra), it makes it clear that any notion of ruling, supporting, or voting for a political party that will endorse the rules or legislation of other than Islam, is clearly haram.

This should be obvious then, that voting or taking part in elections in a democratic system for any of the Kufr parties is something that is at least a major Haram, regardless of the benefit (Maslaha). This conflicts with the very Aqeedah of the Muslim.

Imam Shatibi (ra) said in his al Muwaffaqaat fee Usul al Ahkam volume page 25, "The objective behind the Shariah is to liberate the individual from his desires in order to be a true slave of Allah and that is the legitimate Maslaha (Benefit)…Violating the Shariah under the pretext of following the basic objectives or values (maqasid) of the Shariah is like the one who cares about the spirit without the body, and since the body without the spirit is useless, therefore the spirit without the body is useless too."

Elections

Voting for any political party that is going to work within a democratic framework and voting for or against legislation in a parliament, regardless of the apparent credentials, is haram. As for voting for a secular party in the Western systems, regardless of a noble goal and the correctness of the intention, this is something that contradicts the foundations of what it means to be a Muslim; without a shadow of a doubt, it is Haram.

This does not mean that in principle elections are not permitted. Rather, elections that aim to gain the consent of the Ummah or the representation of the Muslims as a whole, such as in selecting the Majlis of the Ummah (in the legitimate Khilafah), are valid. Furthermore, elections ashan likely be one of the mechanisms that the Khilafah, whose return is imminent Inshallah, would utilise since it facilitates the expression of the opinion of the masses. Imam Muslim narrates in his Saheeh that when Umar ibn al Khattab (ra), who was then Khaleefah, was returning from an expedition, he overheard the Muslims saying that when Umar (ra) passes away they would appoint such and such. This concerned Umar (ra), so he called for a gathering of all the Muslims, including the Sahabah (ra), in which he stated regarding the one who appoints someone in authority without consulting the Muslims, "kill him and kill the one who he appointed!"

This was something that all the Muslims witnessed; yet, although the permission to spill Muslim blood was granted, they acknowledged the truth of the statement. This demonstrated the Ijma (consensus) of the Sahabah. It clarified the message to the masses that they must select the ruler and not the opinion of a minority faction.

Today, however, we are living without the Khilafah and the right of Muslims in appointing and selecting the Amir of the Mumineen has been taken away. Tyrant rulers have been appointed by the Kuffar who promote the secular democratic and autocratic systems in our land.

We are therefore required to work to establish the Khilafah and give Bayah to a Khaleefah so that this right of selecting the ruler can be returned to the Ummah.

Imam al Ghazali (ra) when writing of the consequences of losing the Khilafah stated, "The Judges are suspended, the wilayaat (authorities) are nullified, … (and) the decrees of those in authority can not be executed and all humans are on the verge of Haram". [al Iqtisad fil Itiqad page 240]

So we ask you, dear Muslims, do seek the Islamic rule regarding voting in a kufr system, and not to follow the nafs (desires). Instead we ask you to wait patiently for the return of the Khilafah that will be a guide to all of humankind, East or West.

"So rule between them by what Allah has revealed and follow not their vain desires, diverging from the truth that has come to you." [TMQ Al-Maida: 49]

Source: Jalaluddin Patel & Rashad Ali

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

akhi, please refrain from the cut and paste. why not just post the link? or summarise what you understand with your own words, as most users will not read through this.

and please try to answer my questions, and also the questions of jinnzaman...

while on face value, deomcracy would appear haram; there is a lot misunderstanding about democracy by Muslims. have a read of the attached article by an ex-HT member who was quite influential in the party in the 90s. he knows all the arguments given by HT inside out. its worth finding such people and discussing these matters with them - i personally know two or three such people who were very 'high' up in the party at one time (in the uk) who have now left.

[General_Mujahid]

http://www.*************/home/categor...D=1022&TagID=2

If you want to comment on this article....

info@*************

[Omar HH]

If you are angry, lay down and do wudu.

Quit arguing.

Go read what the Sunni ulemaa say, and go out and make your own decisions.

It's always safest to take the harder position, but the easier position is valid and sometimes is stronger.

May Allah (SWT) bless all of you,

Jazakallah wa Khayrun

[Shaykhs-Pir Sahib]

as salamu alaykum

since you have chosen not to answer our questions, i shall attempt to show some of the flaws of the above article you posted, although i am no scholar.

<<In Surah Yusuf we find the ayah, "The right of Rule is solely for Allah." [TMQ Surah Yusuf: 40] This clearly establishes that He (swt) is the sole Legislator. In fact, it is a principle of Aqeedah that Allah (swt) is the source of all of Ahkam (laws).>>

accepted. there is no disagreeing with the Qur'an. so can you explain why the dhimmi has the permission to have his own court and laws within an islamic state. furthermore, the dhimmi is permitted to worship other than Allah! also, does this ayat apply to the Muslims or the non-Muslims?

<<In Surah al-Maida we find the verse, "and whosoever does not rule by what Allah has revealed then such are the kafireen (disbelievers)." [TMQ Al-Maida: 44]

Ibn Abbas (ra) stated in his Tafsir of this verse that anybody who denies a definitive judgement of Allah (swt) contained in the Shariah is a Kafir. Ibn Jarir at Tabari says that this is agreed upon. Ibn Abbas (ra) went on to say that anyone who says that the Rule of Allah (swt) does not have to be established, then he is a Kafir. The one who says that the rule of man is better than the Rule of Allah (swt) is a Kafir. The one who states that the rules of man are just as good as the Rule of Allah (swt) is a Kafir. He (swt) also said that the one who does not deny Allah's (swt) Hukm, but believes that it is allowed to rule by other than what Allah (swt) has revealed, he is also a Kafir because he is denying that the right of Rule is solely for Allah (swt). This is the case even if he says that the rule of Allah (swt) is better than the rule implemented by man.>>

ok. did the authors of the article also state that this ayat was revealed concerning Quraydha and Banu Nadir [two Jewish tribes in Medina]. When somebody from Banu Nadir would kill one from Quraydha he would pay half ofthe due blood money but when somebody from Quraydha would kill somebody from Banu Nadir he would pay the full blood money and thus they changed what Allah had revealed to them in the Torah. (Hashiya al-Sawi 'ala al-Jalalayn, 1:248, 'Isa al-Babi al-Halabi)

So does this verse only apply to the Jews as the entire context of these verses is regarding judging in accordance with the Torah and the Bible? The exegetes of the Qur'an have differed about this. Imam al-Alusi in his tafsir mentions from ibn 'Abbas, Abu Salih,'Ikrima and al-Dahhak - all early commentators of the Qur'an - that these verses apply specifically to the disbelievers and not to the believers. (Ruh al-Ma'ani fi Tafsir al-Qur'anal-Karim wa al-Sab' al-Mathani, 6:146, Dar li Ihya al-Turath al-'Arabi).

Al-Hakim, ibn Mundhir and al-Bayhaqi all relate in their respective hadith collectionsfrom ibn 'Abbas that he said concerning the first of these three verses, 'It is not a kufr thattakes one out of the religion. It is a kufr less than kufr.' Likewise it has been relatedfrom 'Ali ibn al-Husayn that he said, 'It is a disbelief not like the disbelief of associating partners with Allah, and a corruption not like the corruption of associating partners withAllah, and an oppression not like the oppression of associating partners with Allah.'These statements imply that the word 'disbeliever' here is used figuratively and notactually. Such figurative usage, to exaggerate the seriousness of a particular crime, is not uncommon to the texts of the Qur'an and the hadith.

<<However, if someone rules by the rules of Kufr, and does not believe in them, and even hates them, then what he is doing is a major sin. Such a person would have committed Kufr doon Kufr, a Kufr which is less than Kufr. In other words, it is a major sin that is definitely haram, but he is not a Kafir. This is the soundest position in our view, but others have held different positions>>

so what if that person is already a kafir??

<<Whilst the position that we adopt is not quite as harsh as that adopted by Ibn Katheer (ra), it makes it clear that any notion of ruling, supporting, or voting for a political party that will endorse the rules or legislation of other than Islam, is clearly haram.>>

this does not take into account whether there exists an islamic system or not. Granted if such a system existed somewhere, then such 'support' may be haram, as one would be denying the islamic option. while there is no islamic option, we are left with no other alternative. that is the nature and reality of the time we live in.

<<This should be obvious then, that voting or taking part in elections in a democratic system for any of the Kufr parties is something that is at least a major Haram, regardless of the benefit (Maslaha). This conflicts with the very Aqeedah of the Muslim.>>

regardless of the maslaha? is that a scholarly opinion based on ijtihad, or is it just their opinion? are you sure this is not a fatwa?


<<Voting for any political party that is going to work within a democratic framework and voting for or against legislation in a parliament, regardless of the apparent credentials, is haram. As for voting for a secular party in the Western systems, regardless of a noble goal and the correctness of the intention, this is something that contradicts the foundations of what it means to be a Muslim; without a shadow of a doubt, it is Haram.>>

lots of proof here.

<<Source: Jalaluddin Patel & Rashad Ali>>

do they know arabic, grammar etc. have they studies under scholars of tafsir?

brother, have a read of the attached article from sunnipath