Editing Islam and democracy (section)

==Traditional political concepts==
{{Main|Political aspects of Islam|Shura}}

===Quran===
Muslim democrats, including [[Ahmad Moussalli]] (professor of [[political science]] at the [[American University of Beirut]]), argue that concepts in the Quran point towards some form of democracy, or at least away from [[despotism]]. These concepts include ''[[shura]]'' (consultation), ''[[ijma]]'' (consensus), ''al-hurriyya'' (freedom), ''al-huqquq al-shar'iyya'' (legitimate rights). For example, ''shura'' ([[Al Imran]] – Quran 3:159, [[Ash-Shura]] – Quran 42:38) may include electing leaders to represent and govern on the community's behalf. Government by the people is not therefore necessarily incompatible with the rule of Islam, whilst it has also been argued that rule by a religious authority is not the same as rule by a representative of God. This viewpoint, however, is disputed by more traditional Muslims. Moussalli argues that despotic Islamic governments have abused the Quranic concepts for their own ends: "For instance, shura, a doctrine that demands the participation of society in running the affairs of its government, became in reality a doctrine that was manipulated by political and religious elites to secure their economic, social and political interests at the expense of other segments of society," (In ''Progressive Muslims'' 2003).

===Sunni Islam===
Deliberations of the [[Caliphate]]s, most notably the Rashidun Caliphate, were not democratic in the modern sense rather, decision-making power lay with a council of notable and [[Sahabah|trusted companions]] of [[Muhammad in Islam|Muhammad]] and representatives of different tribes (most of them selected or elected within their tribes).

In the early Islamic Caliphate, the head of state, the [[Caliph]], had a position based on the notion of a [[Succession to Muhammad|successor to Muhammad's]] political authority, who, according to [[Sunni Islam|Sunnis]], was ideally elected by the people or their representatives,<ref>''Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World'' (2004), vol. 1, p. 116–123.</ref> as was the case for [[Abu Bakr|the election of Abu Bakr]], [[Omar|Umar ibn Al Khattab]], [[the election of Uthman|Uthman]], and [[Ali as Caliph]]. After the [[Rashidun]] Caliphs, later Caliphates during the Islamic Golden Age had a much lesser degree of collective participation, but since "no one was superior to anyone else except on the basis of piety and virtue" in Islam, and following the example of Muhammad, later Islamic rulers often held [[public consultation]]s with the people in their affairs.<ref>{{cite book |last=Weeramantry |first=Christopher G. |date=1997 |title=Justice Without Frontiers: Furthering Human Rights |publisher=Kluwer Law International |location=The Hague |pages=135 |isbn=90-411-0241-8}}</ref>

The legislative power of the Caliph (or later, the [[Sultan]]) was always restricted by the scholarly class, the ''[[ulama]]'', a group regarded as the guardians of [[Islamic law]]. Since the law came from the legal scholars, this prevented the Caliph from dictating legal results. Sharia rulings were established as authoritative based on the ''[[ijma]]'' (consensus) of legal scholars, who theoretically acted as representatives of the [[Ummah]] (Muslim community).<ref name=Feldman2008>{{cite news |last=Feldman |first=Noah |date=March 16, 2008 |title=Why Shariah? |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/magazine/16Shariah-t.html?&pagewanted=all |newspaper=The New York Times |access-date=2008-10-05 |archive-date=December 11, 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191211171453/https://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/16/magazine/16Shariah-t.html |url-status=live }}</ref> After law colleges (''[[madrasa]]s'') became widespread beginning with the 11th and 12th century CE, a student often had to obtain an ''[[Ijazah|ijaza-t al-tadris wa-l-ifta]]'' ("license to teach and issue legal opinions") in order to issue legal rulings.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Makdisi |first=George |date=April–June 1989 |title=Scholasticism and Humanism in Classical Islam and the Christian West |journal=Journal of the American Oriental Society |volume=109 |issue=2 |pages=175–182 [175–77] |doi=10.2307/604423|jstor=604423}}</ref> In many ways, classical Islamic law functioned like a [[constitutional law]].<ref name=Feldman2008 />

Bangladeshi Islamic scholar [[Khandaker Abdullah Jahangir]] said in a scholarly interview about Islam and democracy that,
{{blockquote|Sovereignty means ownership. This is simple that sovereign means owner. For example, I am the owner of this land which is true. I can erect building here, I can demolish it, I can make partition, and I can sell it. I have this ownership. Again, this land belongs to Allah. This is also true. And the fact is, according to Islam, with this land I can do many things, but I cannot make a brothel here. People's ownership is limited; Allah's ownership is the supreme over all other sovereigns. My ownership is worldly, and if I put it over Allah's ownership, I will be offender to Allah. In the same vein, people are the owner of the country, it is a simple word. Those who say it is anti-Islamic to say people are sovereign and they are the source of all powers, I do not agree with them. Here by power, it does not mean power regarding storm-rain, or disease, it means the power of ministers, prime minister and above all state power. This power actually belongs to people. In Islam, power will be attained by the consent of the people. If in a society the chiefs of tribes consent and the mass people agree to it, it is ok, this is democracy. People's participation and share is mandatory in Islam which is democracy. Therefore, people are the owner of the state, and people are the source of power is not contradictory to Islam. However, if anyone thinks this ownership means that anyone can do anything; can make a haram (prohibited) a halal (legitimate), and a halal a haram, then obviously it is anti-Islamic.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Islam |first1=Md Nazrul |last2=Islam |first2=Md Saidul |title=Islam and Democracy in South Asia: The Case of Bangladesh |date=20 March 2020 |publisher=Springer Nature |isbn=978-3-030-42909-6 |page=87 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ci3YDwAAQBAJ&dq=quote%7CSovereignty+means+ownership.+This+is+simple+that+sovereign+means+owner.+For+example,+I+am+the+owner+of+this+land+which+is+true.+I+can+erect+building+here,+I+can+demolish+it,+I+can+make+partition,+and+I+can+sell+it.+I+have+this+ownership.+Again,+this+land+belongs+to+Allah.+This+is+also+true.+And+the+fact+is,+according+to+Islam,+with+this+land+I+can+do+many+things,+but+I+cannot+make+a+brothel+here.+People%E2%80%99s+ownership+is+limited;+Allah%E2%80%99s+ownership+is+the+supreme+over+all+other+sovereigns.+My+ownership+is+worldly,+and+if+I+put+it+over+Allah%E2%80%99s+ownership,+I+will+be+offender+to+Allah.+In+the+same+vein,+people+are+the+owner+of+the+country,+it+is+a+simple+word.+Those+who+say+it+is+anti-Islamic+to+say+people+are+sovereign+and+they+are+the+source+of+all+powers,+I+do+not+agree+with+them.+Here+by+power,+it+does+not+mean+power+regarding+storm-rain,+or+disease,+it+means+the+power+of+ministers,+prime+minister+and+above+all+state+power.+This+power+actually+belongs+to+people.+In+Islam,+power+will+%E2%80%A6&pg=PA87 |access-date=25 August 2022 |language=en}}</ref>}}

====Salafi view====
{{see also|History of Saudi Arabia}}
{{see also|Madkhalism}}
Salafism as an ideology and movement has close ties to Saudi Arabia. The Saudi monarchy from its beginning in the 18th century has partnered with Wahhabism as military tool and ideological support to their monarchical rule.<ref name="hal1">{{cite web |title=The Kingdom's Failed Marriage |url=https://halaqa.home.blog/2020/04/13/the-kingdoms-failed-marriage/ |website=Halaqa |date=April 13, 2020 |access-date=26 April 2024}}</ref> The ruling monarchy uses their scholars (termed salafis, wahhabis, and Najdis) to defend their authoritarian rule and subjugate the masses. Because the Saudi monarchs perceive democracy and the [[Muslim Brotherhood]] as a threat to their rule, they have occasionally used extremist Salafi scholars (e.g. [[madkhalism|madkhalis]]) to oppose democracy at home and in other Arab states, and claim that democracy is haram and even shirk.<ref name="islamqa1">{{cite web |title=Concept of democracy in Islam - Islam Question & Answer |url=https://www.islamqa.info/en/answers/98134 |website=[[islamqa.info]] |access-date=4 August 2022 |language=en |date=22 January 2015 |archive-date=April 28, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220428233423/https://islamqa.info/en/answers/98134/concept-of-democracy-in-islam |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="tandf1">{{cite journal |last1=Trauthig |first1=Inga Kristina |last2=Eyre |first2=Guy Robert |title='Quietist' Salafis after the 'Arab revolts' in Algeria and Libya (2011–2019): Between insecurity and political subordination |journal=Mediterranean Politics |pages=78–101 |language=en |doi=10.1080/13629395.2023.2272474 |date=29 October 2023|volume=30 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="islamweb1">{{cite web |title=Ruling on democracy and elections |url=https://en.islamway.net/article/13847/ruling-on-democracy-and-elections |website=en.islamway.net |access-date=26 April 2024 |language=en}}</ref> For example, after the election of [[Mohamed Morsi]], the Saudi authorities used their Salafi proxies in Egypt to counter the Muslim brotherhood, proclaim that democracy is shirk, and promoted terrorist attacks in the Sinai against the Egyptian military.<ref name="ds1">{{cite web |title=In Sissi's Egypt, Salafis are Saudi Pawns |url=https://www.dailysabah.com/opinion/2014/05/31/in-sissis-egypt-salafis-are-saudi-pawns/amp |website=Daily Sabah |access-date=26 April 2024 |date=31 May 2014}}</ref> The violence and destabilization caused by radical Salafi jihadist groups in the Sinai led to the ousting of Morsi and overthrow of democracy in Egypt.<ref name="ce1">{{cite web |title=Sinai's Role in Morsi's Ouster |url=https://carnegieendowment.org/sada/?fa=55313&lang=en |access-date=26 April 2024}}</ref> Thus, there are different opinions among Salafi scholars regarding democracy depending on the political climate in Saudi Arabia and freedom of expression. Over the decades, different Salafi groups around the world have changed and evolved, from initial quietism to fully embracing political engagement to promote their ideology.<ref name="setav1">{{cite web |title=Politicization of Salafism in Egypt |url=https://file.setav.org/Files/Pdf/20140626183955_politicization-of-salafism-in-egypt.pdf |access-date=26 April 2024}}</ref>

Some [[Salafi]] scholars opine that democracy is [[haram]] and [[wikt:shirk|shirk]] in Islam and allege that it overrules the Shari'a (e.g. by potentially permitting alcohol and [[riba]] if the people vote for it),<ref name="islamqa1"></ref> but they legitimize the opportunity to use democracy to come to power and to vote to establish Islamic rule<ref>{{cite web |title=Ruling on democracy and elections and participating in that system - Islam Question & Answer |url=https://islamqa.info/en/answers/107166/ruling-on-democracy-and-elections-and-participating-in-that-system |website=[[islamqa.info]] |access-date=4 August 2022 |language=en |archive-date=August 4, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220804001043/https://islamqa.info/en/answers/107166/ruling-on-democracy-and-elections-and-participating-in-that-system |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Ruling on democracy and elections |url=https://en.islamway.net/article/13847/ruling-on-democracy-and-elections |website=en.islamway.net |access-date=4 August 2022 |date=21 December 2012 |archive-date=March 19, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220319195058/https://en.islamway.net/amp/article/13847/ruling-on-democracy-and-elections |url-status=live }}</ref> and encourage voting to choose the better between evils, among these scholars are Shaykh [[Abd al-Aziz bin Baz]], Shaykh [[Muhammad ibn Uthaymeen]], [[Abdullah al-Ghudayyan]], Abdullah Quyud, Abdur Razzaq Afifi, Senior Scholars of [[Saudi Arabia]]: [[Grand Mufti]] [[Shaykh]] [[Abdulaziz Al Sheikh|Abdul Aziz Ash-Shaikh]], Shaykh Abdul Muhsin Al-Abbad, Shaykh Wasiullah Abbas and [[Saudi Arabia]]'s most senior fatwa panel of scholars, "[[Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta]]", all echoed similar calls to encourage Muslims to vote.<ref name="mwj1">{{cite journal |title=Scholars Urge Western Muslims to Vote: Saudi Arabia {{!}} MWJ |journal=Muslim World Journal |date=4 May 2015 |url=https://www.muslimworldjournal.com/scholars-urge-western-muslims-to-vote-saudi-arabia/ |access-date=4 August 2022 |archive-date=October 10, 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221010190359/https://www.muslimworldjournal.com/scholars-urge-western-muslims-to-vote-saudi-arabia/ |url-status=dead }}</ref>

[[Khandaker Abdullah Jahangir]] in his book ("Hadiser Namey Jaliyati") (Forgery in the Name of Hadith) says about the interpretation of Hadith of democratic Islamist parties about Islamic politics,
{{blockquote|A variation of lying in the name of hadith is to add or omit something from the translation without doing a literal translation or making the interpretation of what [Muhammad] said a part of the hadith. Almost all of us in our society are involved in this crime.  For self-purification, Pir-Muridi, Dawat-Tabligh, politics, etc., we provide evidence from Quran and Hadith to people of every group and opinion.  Providing such evidence is a very natural act and demand of faith. But usually we run this explanation in the name of [Muhammad]. For example, [Muhammad] governed the state, but did not do 'party politics' in the traditional sense, i.e. did not do anything like change of power through voting. Currently many scholars are doing democratic 'politics'. It is accepted as a new method of enjoining justice, forbidding injustice or Iqamat Deen.  But if we say that, 'Rasulullah (ﷺ) did politics', then the listener or reader will understand the conventional meaning of 'politics', i.e. the seizure of power through voting. And he did not do this politics. As a result, lies will be told in his name. That is why we should tell separately what he did and said and what we are interpreting<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.hadithbd.com/books/link/?id=4644 | title=৬. ৩. অনুবাদে, ব্যাখ্যায় ও গবেষণায় মিথ্যা | access-date=November 26, 2022 | archive-date=October 23, 2022 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221023203158/https://www.hadithbd.com/books/link/?id=4644 | url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Jahangir |first1=Khandaker Abdullah |title=হাদীসের নামে জালিয়াতি: প্রচলিত মিথ্যা হাদীস ও ভিত্তিহীন কথা (Forgery in the name of Hadith: common false hadith and baseless words) |date=September 2010 |publisher=As-Sunnah Publications |location=Jhenaidah, Bangladesh |page=84 |edition=4th |url=https://d1.islamhouse.com/data/bn/ih_books/single2/bn_Hadis_er_nam_e_jaliyati.pdf |access-date=24 November 2022 |language=bn |archive-date=March 8, 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230308074538/https://d1.islamhouse.com/data/bn/ih_books/single2/bn_Hadis_er_nam_e_jaliyati.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Jahangir |first1=Khandaker Abdullah |title=হাদীসের নামে জালিয়াতি: প্রচলিত মিথ্যা হাদীস ও ভিত্তিহীন কথা (Forgery in the name of Hadith: common false hadith and baseless words) |date=April 2017 |publisher=As-Sunnah Publications |location=Jhenaidah, Bangladesh |page=184 |edition=5th|isbn= 978-984-90053-3-9|language=bn}}</ref>}}

Conclusively, Salafi opinions on democracy can be categorized in the following ways, depending on the scholar and the context:
# That democracy is haram and perhaps even shirk if it is used to overrule fundamental tenants of the Shari'a, like making forbidden things permissible (i.e. making the haram legal), or if it is a threat to the rule of the Saudi monarchy.
# That participating in democracy outside of Saudi Arabia and the Arab world (e.g. in the West and India) is good (with a variety of opinions on the details) if the participant is voting for the lesser of two evils or for an Islam-promoting candidate.<ref name="mwj1"></ref>

===Shia Islam===
According to the [[Shia]] understanding, Muhammad named as his successor (as leader, with Muhammad being the [[Last prophet|final prophet]]), his son-in-law, and cousin [[Ali]]. Therefore, the first three of the four elected "Rightly Guided" Caliphs recognized by Sunnis (Ali being the fourth), are considered usurpers, notwithstanding their having been "elected" through some sort of conciliar deliberation (which the Shia do not accept as a representative of the Muslim society of that time). The largest Shia grouping—the [[Twelver]]s branch—recognizes a series of [[The Twelve Imams|Twelve Imams]], the last of which ([[Muhammad al-Mahdi]], the Hidden Imam) is still alive and the Shia are waiting for his "reappearance".