234. Do we need to bind ourselves by man made laws?
Verses (4:65, 5:44, 5:45, 5:47, 5:50, 6:57, 6:114, 12:40, 12:67, 24:48, 24:51, 40:12) say we are bound only by laws of our Creator.
Some are propagating the view, that Muslims living in non Muslim ruled states need not respect the laws of the land and also not take part in their governments. They allege it deviates from the policy of obeying God only and owing allegiance to democracy amounts to disobeying God and creating an equal to the only One God.
We need to be clear about such things.
Most of the countries of the world including India follow the democratic way to elect rulers.based on majority votes.
In monarchy the heir of the deceased occupies the throne, with no part being played by the people.The subjects do not have any right in the choice of their rulers.
But in a democracy, people are entirely responsible in deciding who their rulers are. Since the decision to choose the rulers are in the hands of the people, it is called the people’s government.
The democratic method of deciding the rulers based on majority votes is not against Islamic principles.
During Prophet Muhammad’s days he was the head of the state as well the spiritual head. There was no need for any one to elect him as the leader because of this reason.
Prophet Muhammad passed away without naming his successor. There were many instances when Abu Bakr (R.A) was indirectly projected as next in line, from the words of Prophet Muhammad, though not openly declared.
Hence there was a difficulty in choosing a successor after the demise of Prophet Muhammad.After much debate Abu Bakr was chosen as the successor to Prophet Muhammad with people overwhelmingly supporting him. In the same way the successive rulers were chosen by people’s mandate. From this it could be understood the policy of choosing rulers in a democratic way is not against Islam.
Some maintain there is no place for democracy in Islam, and voting in public elections is denying God.
The leader for any movement or a country can be chosen only by the majority of members of the said movement or by the support of the majority of its people. No divine message will be delivered from God in the form of a wahee. Hence the argument by these people is misguided.
The leaders of movements who argue that practicing democracy is infidelity were not installed by divine message.But were made so with the concurrence of the majority of its members.Holding on to the posts as leaders, and elected based on democratic norms, and calling the norms practice by infidels needs to be taken note of.
The people who argue democracy is a form of practice of disbelief in God substantiate by putting forth verses (5:49, 50, 6:57, 12:40, 12:67) of the Quran, that say the government and the power to rule belongs to Allah.
Whereas the democratic principles in India say the government and the power to rule belongs to the people, hence democracy is against the Quran,whereby the power of Allah is being snatched and handed over to the people, to commit a modern day disbelief.
This not the first time something of this kind we find in the history of Islam. The Karijiyas of the time did the same in showing the same verses to substantiate their version, that is necessarily not what the Quran conveys.They were totally annihilated by Ali (RA) and Muawiya (RA).
On perusing the Islamic history we can to a certain extent recognise the modern day Karijiyas.
Usman (RA) who was the leader of the Islamic Republic of the time was killed in the Islamic capital city of Madina.
Following which Ali (RA) was chosen as the successor.Though majority of the people supported him, there were equal number of people against him..People who supported Ali (RA) were not consistent in their stand.
They were under the illusion that Ali had a role to play in the assassination of Usman (RA).
Even though Ali (RA) did not have any role in the murder of Usman (RA), the likes of Ayisha (RA) and Muawiya (RA) were of the view that Ali was hesitant in taking action against the perpetrators of the crime, and kind towards them.
The stance taken by supporters of Ali (RA) was not unified though people who had total confidence in him were there.
People involved in the murder of Usman (RA) pretending to be Ali’s supporters mingled among them to save themselves.
Muawiya (RA) who happens to be a relative of Usman (RA) and appointed by him as the governer of Syria refused to accept the leadership of Ali (RA) declared Syria as a separate country and anointed himself as its leader. As a reaction to this development Ali (RA) initiated a war against Muawiya to bring all the lands under his control within a single (his) leadership. This battle took place in Siffin in Syria and both sides suffered heavy losses.
Casualties and suffering by people made sensible good people on both sides sorrowful, they initiated to bring in a truce between the warring factions. They were successful in their attempt. One person from each side was appointed with the responsibility of analysing ways to bring in a truce to be respected and implemented by both sides.
At the same time if they oppose the truce openly they knew they will earn the displeasure of the people, hence they decided to wear a different mask to oppose the truce, by declaring the truce as against Islamic principles. Under the garb of ideological grounds they totally turned against (Ali RA) and Muawiya (RA).They are known as rebels (Kharijites) in Islamic history.
Let us look into how they painted a religious colour to their poisonous ideas.
They argue, when the Quran says all powers rests with Allah, the idea of allowing two intermediaries to usurp the powers of Allah is contradicting the Quran. .
These people who altogether were against Ali (RA) and Muawiya (RA) set up their base in a place called Harura. They issued a Fatwa indicting Ali (RA) and Muawiya (RA) and people with them of acting against the Quran and declared them as infidels.
They misconstrued verse 5:44 and declared all good people as infidels and also instigated war against them. They declared both of them as well as people with them deserved to be killed under the banner of Jihad.
They justified their stand citing verses from the Quran on Jihad. Since they misinterpreted the Quran as per their whims and fancies and ventured to kill good muslims, Ali (RA) raided their base in Harura and annihilated them. Please note the following:
The modern day Kharijites now argue in the same way the Kharijites did by saying accepting judgments by men is akin to being an infidel.These people wrongly use the same verses in the same context as done by the Kharijites of those days.
Let’s analyse the argument of these people as well as that of their predecessors the Kharijites.
Of course what the Quran says about all powers being with Allah is absolutely true, but whether the verses give the same message as misinterpreted by these people is false.
These verses talk about the very same powers that God claims as His own. The very same power Allah says been granted to men when given to them will not amount to contradicting the Quran.
Allah has permitted men to arbitrate among themselves to find solutions to various disputes they come across. These also followed the same principles while facing disputes among themselves. They argue against their own conscious in spite of following such principles of the Quran while settling disputes amongst them.
The worrisome fact is some followed these people believing their arguments were in consort with the principles of Islam. We can find their arguments absurd from the following Quranic verses.
The Quran says when there is dispute between a married couple, they are required to accept the verdict of two intermediaries. This cannot be considered as against the verse that says ‘all powers rest with Allah alone’.
Allah says in the Quran to pass verdicts in a just manner, in disputes. This cannot be considered as against “ all powers vested with Allah alone”.
Verse 5:95 of the Quran says “ Two among you who are just be the judge (in disputes). Again this cannot be considered as contradicting “all powers vested with Allah alone.”
Verses 38:21, 21:78, of the Quran say “We were witness to Dawood and Sulaiman verdicts”.This cannot be considered as against “ all powers vested with Allah alone.
Verse (49:9) of the Quran clearly permits saying “ disputes among people should be resolved by involving co-habitants in a just manner.”
This clearly explains the meaning of “all powers vested with Allah alone.”
Allah when talking about “ all powers rest with Allah alone “ refers to the power to set rules regarding worship, halal and haram ,etc . Other than these powers Allah says about powers granted to men in the above cited, and various other verses.
Prophet Muhammad was sent to show ways to be victorious in the hereafter, and not to show ways to live a materialistic life in this world. The knowledge and power to be used in this world is naturally present in men.
When Prophet Muhammad came down to Madina he came across a habit of those people growing dates by grafting. He suggested growing dates by grafting to be stopped,on which the people of Madina immediately gave up the practice.As a result the harvest was low that year. On hearing about this Prophet Muhammad asked the people what happened to their trees that bore the dates, the people reminded him about his suggestion to stop growing dates by grafting, to which Prophet Muhammad told them, you have better knowledge about worldly life than me.
Hadith Book: Muslim 4713, 4711, 4712.
This hadith clearly shows the difference between the powers of Allah and that of men.
The matters of hereafter life are not decided on the opinion of people in democratic countries.
The rulers of countries would make laws including matters prohibited by Islam, we need to avoid them ourselves.Instead of understanding in such simple terms some follow Kharijites in misleading the gullible.
Their actions expose their misguidance and the way they propagate Islam against their conscience.
They argue against granting powers to men which Allah has bestowed upon them, at the same time giving powers that exclusively belong to Allah to men.
Prophet Muhammad has clearly shown the way to success in the hereafter life, where as these people follow different sects (Madhabs) to mean the power to dictate laws in worship belong to the Imams and not with Allah.
.They will perform salah the way shown by the madhab imams .
The way they declare granting of powers to men in worldly affairs as disbelief in monotheism , they do not follow the same stand when it comes to following humans in worshipping Allah.
They will commit all kinds of transgression including celebrating Milad (Prophet Muhammad’s birthday) which does not have any precedence shown by the prophet of Islam.conveniently forgetting “ all powers are vested with Allah alone “ at such times.
What do we come to understand from the acts of these people? They are trying to deny Allah’s exclusive powers in certain matters.
They are denying men the powers granted to them by Allah.From this we come to understand their ignorance and being scoundrelous.
We find them liars from their acts in this regard.
These people who argue on their terms, while purchasing a property either in their name or in the name of their movement, do not follow the norms set by Allah or his prophet, where once the payment is done by the purchaser he becomes the owner.
But paying stamp duty and getting it registered in the records of the government is a law made by men.
The people who argue that “all powers are vested with Allah” should violate such laws and get the property transaction written in a white paper the Islamic way.
Not one person who argues get it done the Islamic way.The same power which they deny men in their argument, they find themselves bound by it and without their knowledge they declare it.
Islam permits us to to construct a builing for our own use to be used as a office or a house or a masjid for that matter.
But man made laws have stipulated many requirements such as the extent of the building , materials used in the construction, height of the building, the number of storeys etc; of the building . A plan has to be submitted to the authorities well in advance to get it approved.
Now these people based on their argument should refuse the man made laws and carry on to build their premises by saying there is no need to get permission from any authority. But what we find is the total submission to man made laws by implementing them.Their argument that ‘all powers are vested with Allah is again conveniently forgotten.
They run weekly and monthly magazines to propagate their views. Islam has permitted such activities, but these people to avail the meagre postal benefits get their magazines registered with the authorities and get permission from different authorities.
And they print the numbers allotted to them in the magazines run by them to inform that they are bound by man made laws as required by law.
What do these people do when cheated by others, they either file complaints or cases against the perpetraters under appropriate sections of man made laws.
They own up to their absurdness by resorting to resolving disputes under man made laws. They should actually refuse the relief that results from man made laws.
When a theft takes place in their houses, where lakhs of rupees goods are stolen Islam stipulates the hand of the thief be severed, but man made laws in India punish him with a few months of imprisonment.
Ispite of the knowledge that Indian laws are against divine laws , these people lodge complaints in police stations ,and make a fervent plea the render justice to them.What does this say about their argument only God’s laws to be followed in the world ?
To perform the religious duty of Haj there is no need to seek anyone’s permission in Islam, but man made laws require there is need for a passport and visa to do so.
Will they take a decision not to perform Haj under man made laws or carry on under such requirements.
These people make use of currency to carry on all kinds of financial transactions.
Gold and silver have an inherent natural value and there is no harm in carrying out transactions based on their value.
And carrying on a barter system of trade cannot be found fault with, because goods by themselves carry a value as per their nature.
But currency notes do not have an inherent value in them, if at all they are said to have any value it is the cost of printing them. Even that value is lost once the government demonetised the same. Since the Reserve Bank of India guarantees the person who carries 1000 rupees currency note goods worth the value of rupees 1000 ,there is an artificial value added to it.
Here we find one issuing a statement, he can live without man made laws in this world, at the same time making use of currency notes in all his transactions.
They also agree man made laws hold good in the case of issue of family ration cards, driver’s license, ID cards, traffic rules and various other matters. It can be very clearly understood that man cannot survive without following these rules.
They are under the impression that if they propound a theory not revealed by any they can be the crowd pullers. But these people make a fool of the gullible public and do not have any truth in their arguments.
Their arguments may stand good for boycotting elections, ant do have any use in all other matters.
They have earned the ignominy of contradicting themselves.
The opening of liquor shops and birth control laws are pointed out by these people as additional reasons against gemocracy.
Opening of liquor shops does not necessarily mean it is imperative for every Muslim to drink liquor, and no government in the world can draft laws that can compel its people to drink. We have the right to remain a teetotaler.
In the same way there is no forcible law to implement the policy of birth control, there are millions of people living in various countries that are ruled by man made laws.
We can protest and get rid of a few laws drafted against Islam and forced on muslims.
When a law was drafted against Islam requiring to pay alimony to divorced women, the same democratic values were the reason to rescind those laws.
If the Muslims desire to live a true Islamic way of life no laws could stop them.
Man has been granted with power to make laws in matters in this world except in worshipping of God Almighty. There is no harm in utilizing such opportunity to draft laws in this world that do not go against the tenets of Islam.When it turns out such man made laws are against Islam we have the right to protest against them, and totally confiscating such God given rights from men is not our work.
We need to view this in yet another angle.
These people who say “all powers are vested with God” run madrasas and commercial establishments, where they take the reins in drafting laws.
They take the responsibility of making laws in the running of their institutions like the colour of the uniform dresses by students etc.
They also take charge of setting rules and regulations for running their commercial undertakings.
A family head takes the responsibility of setting up do’s and don’ts for his family members. Similarly all men in their sphere of life take into their hands the responsibility of drafting of power.
Likewise the rulers who are entrusted with the responsibility of running their countries are granted powers to enact laws which deem fit.
In countries where Muslims are a minority will not be in a position to form a government to implement Islamic laws. In such countries a political party aspiring to form a government may be of lesser evil than another.
We can avoid a political party with a greater evil by exercising our democratic rights, and if we ignore our duty in this aspect we may be the reason for having given an oppertunity to political parties with greater evil. These people failed to recognise this.
Leaving alone voting governments based on man made laws, we have permission to be part of such governments.
Prophet Yusf’s life history is a model for us to illustrate that whenever we get a chance to take part in government without our self respect , our ideology, honour being compromised we must seize hold of the oppertunity.
For those who question, Allah says there are examples to follow in the life history of Prophet Yusuf.
In Spite of Prophet Yusuf being a messenger of God, he demanded and got a berth in the government with man-made laws.THe Quran 12:55.
Please refer to explanation points 233, 237, for more details.
These people present another evidence to substantiate that democracy is show of infidelity
Democracy means decisions made on the strength of the majority, but Quran in many places warn about being guided by majority rule.Hence being bound by majority decision is against the Quran, these people claim. This is also a misguided approach.
The stand of Quran being not bound by majority applies only to basic ideology, worshipping, halal, haram etc;.
Prophet Muhammad did not go against the majority in following the food habits of people of those days ,nor did he go against majority seeking remedy for sicknesses.
And the prophet did not profess nudity when the majority were dressed.
Even today we follow the majority in carrying on certain manifestations.
But there are no polls conducted in any democratic country as to whether salah has to be performed two or four rakats.
Whatever be the movements, its leaders are selected on the basis of majority vote.The leaders of Tablighi and Tarika movements are nominated on the basis of the acceptance by their majority members though not directly elected.When there is an objection from the majority members they cannot become the leader.
How did they turn out to be leaders of their movements , did Allah nominate them by means of Wahi or were the majority of the members instrumental in making them their leaders. Hence it can be concluded democracy is not infidelity.
