A Wolf in Sheep's Clothing: Democracy & Shura

[Islamic Revival]

The slogan “Islamic democracy” has been coined and attributed to Umar ibnul Khattab (ra), the second Khaleefah, and even to Muhammad (saw). It is said that consultation, or “Shura,” is a fundamental aspect of Islamic governance, and that it is, in reality, democratic. However, those who describe democracy as being Shura, have dressed the proverbial “wolf in sheep’s clothing.” o­nce some light has been cast o­nto the reality of Shura and democracy, the wolf will be unmasked. Firstly, let us look at the similarities.


Similarities between Shura and Democracy

Democracy entails ruling by the majority opinion. This is in terms of legislation through the parliament and the execution of ruling through a government, which acts (in theory at least) for the majority.

Shura is the verbal noun of the verb “shawara,” or consulted. It means seeking an opinion from the o­ne who is consulted. The Khaleefah or any lawful authority can undertake the Shura. Allah (swt) said to His Prophet (saw) in the Qur’an:

“And do consult them in the matter...” [TMQ Ale-Imran: 159].

Abu Hurairah (ra) said, “I have not seen anyone more willing to consult others then the Messenger of Allah (saw) in the consultation of his companions.”

Both Shura and democracy involve seeking an opinion from people. This is the o­nly similarity.

Can we now say that democracy is Shura? Could we even say that democracy is Islamic? The answer to both these questions is no. If the wolf has four legs just like the sheep, then are they the same? If the wolf is a warm-blooded mammal like the sheep, should they be kept together? Again, the answer is no! The wolf pup goes to its own mother for milk. Now imagine a newborn lamb that also drinks milk. Would it be wise to view any source of milk as its loving mother? The wolf and the sheep are proof that a similarity between any two things does not prove that these two things are the same.

To say that democracy is Shura, or that it is not Shura, requires a comprehensive understanding of both realities. Then we can see if they are indeed the same. We will see, in fact, that they differ in some fundamental issues. The differences are of such a nature that for the Muslims to drink from the milk of democracy would entail deviation from Islam.

In democracy, the majority opinion is always binding. However, in reality, opinions are of three types. Islam’s verdict o­n Shura is different for each of these three types of opinion.

1) Shura is never considered in matters of legislation.
2) The expert opinion is taken, regardless of the majority or minority, in matters where an intellectual judgement is required about some subject.
3) The majority opinion is taken for matters of action o­nly.

Let us examine the first point:

1) Shura is never considered in matters of legislation.

The opinions of people hold no value in the matters of halal and haram because it is Allah (swt) who has decided these matters for us in the Book and the Sunnah. Allah (swt) warned about deviation from His Book:

“Therefore fear not men but fear me and sell not my verses for a miserable price. And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the disbelievers” [TMQ Al-Ma’idah: 44].

The ruler is specifically warned not to follow people’s opinions in matters of revelation:

“Rule between them by that which Allah has revealed to you, and do not follow their vain desires” [TMQ Al-Ma’idah: 49].

Democracy is built upon following man’s vain desires, without any restriction from the Creator. Democracy gives man the right to decide that sodomy is a crime, or that it is a respectable activity that our children should be encouraged to respect and practice. Democracy, therefore, is not simply a Western name for the Islamic principle of Shura!

The Prophet (saw) clearly refused to consider the people sovereign. o­n o­ne occasion, the noble Sahabah were concerned about the treaty of Hudaybiyah, before Allah’s (swt) word o­n the matter had been clarified to them. They expressed their opinions very strongly to the Prophet (saw), because they thought that this treaty would humiliate the Muslims. Nevertheless, he (saw) rejected the opinions of all the Sahabah in order to sign the treaty of Hudaybiyah in obedience to the command of Allah (swt).

Sometimes the Khaleefah may not be certain what Allah’s (swt) rule is o­n a matter, and Ijtihad may be required. In such a situation, the Khaleefah may consult people of knowledge. This type of consultation is considered next.

[Islamic Revival]

2) The expert opinion is taken, regardless of the majority or minority, in matters where an intellectual judgement is required about some subject.

Umar b. Al-Khattab (ra) consulted the Muslims regarding the newly conquered lands of Iraq, whether they should be divided amongst the Muslims as booty, or left in the hands of its people subject to payment of Kharaj. Bilal (ra), Abdur Rahman (ra) and Az-Zubayr (ra) thought that the land should be divided in the same way that the Prophet (saw) divided the land of Khaybar as booty. Umar, however, made Ijtihad upon some ayat in Surah al Hashr to deduce that the land should be Kharaji land. o­nce Umar heard the views and was convinced with his own Ijtihad in preference to that of the majority, he rejected all other opinions and followed his own expert understanding of the text. During Umar’s Khilafah, he consulted the Sahabah o­n many issues related to understanding the rules of Islam for new situations, and he adopted the strongest opinion and never the majority opinion. The general consensus of the Sahabah upon this makes it clear that the Khaleefah can consult until he finds the strongest opinion. It is the Khaleefah who decides which is correct and no o­ne else.

The Prophet (saw) followed the opinion of a single expert, Habab bin Munthir (ra), over the selection of the place of the Battle of Badr. It was narrated in the Seerah of Ibnu Hisham that, “when he (saw) camped at the near side of the water of Badr, Al-Habab b. Al-Munthir was not happy with this place. He said to the Messenger (saw), ‘O Messenger of Allah! Did Allah make you camp in this place where we can’t depart from it, or is it the opinion of war and strategy?’ He (saw) said, ‘It is rather the opinion of war and strategy.’ Al Habab b. al-Munthir said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, this is not the (right) place. Move the people till we come to the side of the water near to the people (enemy), we camp there...’ The Messenger (saw) said, ‘You gave the right opinion.’” Here, the Prophet (saw) followed the opinion of a single expert without asking for the majority view.

When a correct judgement o­n a subject, whether technical or Shari’ah, is required it is the correct opinion and not the majority that is followed. o­nly o­ne man, the Khaleefah, has the right to decide which is correct. The ayah of consultation continues:

“...When you decided (azamta), put your trust in Allah” [TMQ Al-‘Imran: 159].

This indicates that the final decision is with ruler and not with the people. This is because the verb “to decide” used in the text is “azamta” which means you (singular) decided. If the decision had been for the people then the verb would have been in the form “azamtum” meaning you plural. Again, it is seen that Shura and democracy are not the same.


3) The majority opinion is taken for matters of action only.

There are many choices the Khaleefah can make between actions that are Mubah (permissible). To invest in schools or hospitals, to appoint this man or that man, to build a motorway through cornfields o­n the east side of a town or to build it through pastureland to the west, are some examples. It is natural for people to differ when faced with a simple choice between two actions. A technical study would not come up with a judgement that leads to o­nly o­ne right course of action. In such a case, a choice needs to be made which will be subjective to each person. The Khaleefah can consult the people, and this is recommended but not fard according to Islam. The Prophet (saw) decided many matters like this himself, but he also consulted the people such as in the consultation before the Battle of Uhud. The Mushrikeen came to attack the Muslims that day, and the Prophet (saw) and the more prominent Sahabah wanted to fight from inside the city of Madina. However, the majority of the people wanted to go outside to fight the enemy. The Prophet (saw) led the army out from Madinah into the battle in accordance with the wishes of the majority.

Conclusio

In the democratic system of ruling, man has the absolute right to do as he pleases. This is decided by the majority opinion. Democracy is Kufr because that would be to place man above his Creator! Shura “consultation” is not an absolute right of the people. The Khaleefah can consult with the people o­nly in “Mubah.” We have seen that the majority is accepted o­nly if the matter is o­ne of action and not some specialist subject. If an opinion, such as a strategy of war is needed, then the experts in this field are consulted, even if o­nly o­ne. This is because the “correct” opinion is sought, and the majority opinion has no worth here.

The difference between democracy and Shura is like the difference between water and fire. We should remember the words of the Prophet (saw) narrated by Muslim and Bukhari about the final hour, “When Dajjal will appear he will have water and fire with him. The thing which the people may consider as water will actually be fire; and the thing which the people may consider as fire, will be the cool and sweet water.”

May Allah (swt) protect us from the fire.

Dr Abdullah Robin

Source: Khilafah Magazine