Islam, Democracy and Worldly Systems

By Fethullah Gulen


Islam establishes fundamental principles that orient a government’s general character.

Religion, particularly Islam, has become one of the most difficult subject areas to tackle in recent years. Contemporary culture, whether approached from the perspective of anthropology or theology, psychology or psychoanalysis, evaluates religion with empirical methods.

On the one hand, religion is an inwardly experienced and felt phenomenon, one mostly related to life’s permanent aspects. On the other believers can see their religion as a philosophy, a set of rational principles, or mere mysticism. The difficulty increases in the case of Islam, for some Muslims and policy-makers consider and present it as a purely political, sociological, and economic ideology, rather than as a religion.

If we want to analyze religion, democracy, or any other system or philosophy accurately, we should focus on humanity and human life. From this perspective, religion in general and Islam in particular cannot be compared on the same basis with democracy or any other political, social, or economic system. Religion focuses primarily on the immutable aspects of life and existence, whereas political, social, and economic systems or ideologies concern only certain variable, social aspects of our worldly life.

The aspects of life with which religion is primarily concerned are as valid today as they were at the dawn of humanity and will continue to be so in the future. Worldly systems change according to circumstances and so can be evaluated only according to their times.

Belief in God, the hereafter, the prophets, the holy books, angels, and divine destiny have nothing to do with changing times. Likewise, worship and morality’s universal and unchanging standards have little to do with time and worldly life.

Therefore, when comparing religion or Islam with democracy, we must remember that democracy is a system that is being continually developed and revised. It also varies according to the places and circumstances where it is practiced. On the other hand, religion has established immutable principles related to faith, worship and morality. Thus, only Islam’s worldly aspects should be compared with democracy.

The main aim of Islam and its unchangeable dimensions affect its rules governing the changeable aspects of our lives. Islam does not propose a certain unchangeable form of government or attempt to shape it. Instead, Islam establishes fundamental principles that orient a government’s general character, leaving it to the people to choose the type and form of government according to time and circumstances.

If we approach the matter in this light and compare Islam with today’s modern liberal democracy, we will better understand the position of Islam and democracy with respect to each other.

Democratic ideas stem from ancient times. Modern liberal democracy was born in the American (1776) and French Revolutions (1789-99). In democratic societies, people govern themselves as opposed to being ruled by someone above. The individual has priority over the community in this type of political system, being free to determine how to live his or her own life. Individualism is not absolute, though. People achieve a better existence by living within a society and this requires that they adjust and limit their freedom according to the criteria of social life.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) says that all people are as equal as the teeth of a comb. Islam does not discriminate based on race, color, age, nationality, or physical traits.

The Prophet declared: ”You are all from Adam, and Adam is from earth. O servants of God, be brothers (and sisters)”. (Abu Dawud, At-Tirmidhi and Al-Bayhaqi)

Thus, those who are born earlier have more wealth and power than others, or belong to certain families or ethnic groups have no inherent right to rule others.

Islam also upholds the following fundamental principles:

1- Power lies in truth, a repudiation of the common idea that truth relies upon power.

2- Justice and the rule of law are essential.

3- Freedom of belief and rights to life, personal property, reproduction, and health (both mental and physical) cannot be violated.

4- The privacy and immunity of individual life must be maintained.

5- No one can be convicted of a crime without
evidence, or accused and punished for someone else’s crime.

6- An advisory system of administration is essential.

All rights are equally important, and an individual’s right cannot be sacrificed for society’s sake. Islam considers a society to be composed of conscious individuals equipped with free will and having responsibility toward both themselves and others. Islam goes a step further by adding a cosmic dimension. It sees humanity as the ‘motor’ of history, contrary to fatalistic approaches of some of the nineteenth century Western philosophies of history such as dialectical materialism and historicism.

Just as every individual’s will and behavior determine the outcome of his or her life in this world and in the hereafter, a society’s progress or decline is determined by the will, world-view, and lifestyle of its inhabitants.

The Qur’an says: God will not change the state of a people unless they change themselves (with respect to their beliefs, world-view, and lifestyle). (Ar-Ra`d 13:11)

In other words, each society holds the reins of its fate in its own hands. The prophetic tradition emphasizes this idea: ‘You will be ruled according to how you are.’ This is the basic character and spirit of democracy, which does not conflict with any Islamic principle.



Fethullah Gulen is an influential Turkish Muslim intellectual who inspired a series of social activities, including a transnational education and business network, interfaith and multicultural dialogue forums. He is author of more than forty books voicing the cries and laments, as well as the beliefs and aspirations, of Muslims in particular and of humanity in general.

Soucre Link

The Difference between Shura and Democracy



By Sheikh `Abdullah Bin Bayyah

Shura (consultation) and democracy differ in the following points:

First, the reference of Shura:












Second: The polls




Third: Media




Source: Taken with modifications from

Soucre Link

Enforcement of Shura in the Islamic Ruling System


Shura was applied in the most serious issue, namely, the sovereign power.

By Sheikh `Abdullah Bin Bayyah

The first test for the awareness of this Ummah and its ability to apply the principle of Shura (consultation) was after the death of the Prophet (peace be upon him), for he did not appoint a successor after him. He explicitly assigned a deputy with regard to leading people in Prayer, but He left the appointment of the caliph and the head of the state to the nation. His companions were divided into two groups: the group of Al-Ansar (the Supporters), who were the original inhabitants of Median, and the group of Al-Muhagirin (the Emigrants), the people of Makkah. They convened in the house of the leader of Al-Ansar and exchanged opinions and arguments.

Then alliance was paid by the public at the mosque and in other places that Islam reached such as Makkah.

Muhammad Asad, an Austrian Muslim, claimed that this was the first democratic experience. It may not be democratic in the Western sense, but it was at any rate a great human experience. Such noble, half-Bedouin people, who were strong fighters, convened without arms to discuss without any use of insulting words or threats to agree on selecting one of them. The one they selected said in his first public speech after assuming presidency, “I have been elected to be in authority over you, though I am not the best among you. Obey me as long as I obey Allah. However, if I disobey Him, no obedience will be due to me upon you.” Moreover, the fact that Sa`d ibn `Ubadah, the head of Al-Anasar, refrained from paying alliance, though his son paid it, and none said a word or objected to him indicates that something big has changed in the life of the Arabs. The age of Shura has started.

Al-Mawirdi (a Muslim scholar) has determined the functions of the head of the state in ten points; some of them are religious responsibilities, such as watching over good practices of the obligations of the religion including Prayer, Fasting, and Hajj-pilgrimage; and some are secular functions, such as collecting money, protecting the borders of the state against any external or internal aggression and ensuring internal security through the application of the Shari`ah to protect souls and properties and ending disputes through the appointment of judges.

Shura was applied in the most serious issue, namely, the sovereign power. But it was practiced also in many of the issues, as the caliph had counselors for every affair. But sometimes he sought the opinion of the public. `Umar informed people with his intention to set a maximum limit for the dowry paid for women, whereupon a woman quoted in response the Qur’anic verse that says, “And you have given the first of them [as much as] a [heap of] gold in dowry.” `Umar then submissively said: A woman spoke the truth and `Umar spoke wrong.

Let us admit that during the period of the guided caliphs Shura concerning serious issues of the state was the task of prominent persons and influential people from among the Emigrants and the Supporters. But it was a pioneering experience in the old heritage of humanity. But the flexibility of the experience and the various forms it took made it developable beyond ready-made forms. The principle affirmed strongly, as clarified by `Umar in his last speech, was that “No one shall be given the pledge of alliance without people consent lest he may be killed along with those who follow him”, as reported in Sahih Al-Bukhari.

This simply means that people’s consent is a must, because contravening this leads to turmoil and fighting.

Shura meets with democracy in the point of looking for a peaceful solution. The system of Shura pours into one stream, which is Islamic justice that is able to secure for man a good end.

How was Shura practiced?

This is quite a legitimate question. I mentioned before that the reference of this paper is Islam. Islam is an ideal that should be reached; and the closer we come to it the better justice will be achieved and the happier man will become.

This system is not rigid or stiff but developable and can benefit from human experiences that respect invariables and authoritative references and assess priorities together with social and security necessities.

In the early period of Islam there was the system of headmen and foremen, as found in the accounts of the prophetic biography. The Prophet (peace be upon him) commanded people to choose those who would speak in their name, as in the case of the pledge of alliance given the headmen of the Helpers in Makkah–known as Bay`at al-`Aqabah. Similarly, in the case of the battle of Hunayn he (peace be upon him) said, “Let your foremen inform me”, because he did not know the attitude and content of the people with regard to his suggestion and so he ordered that they should choose those who would convey their opinion concerning the prisoners of the war with Hawazen. This account is in Sahih Al-Bukhari.


Source: Taken with modifications from

Soucre Link

Islam: No Place to Immunity

…Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of God is the most righteous of you… (Al-Hujurat 49:13)

Neither wealth nor property or power can be taken into consideration when judging people.




He also says:

Oh you who believe, be persistent in standing for justice as witnesses to God; even if it be against yourselves, parents, or other relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, God is more worthy than anyone. So don’t follow personal inclination, lest you be unjust. (An-Nisaa’ 4:135)

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said:

“God, the Almighty, does not consider how your appearances or how rich you are, rather He looks to your hearts and your deeds”. (Ahmad)

It can be said after these proofs from the Qur’an and the Sunnah that there is no place in Islam for preference based upon wealth, power, or family.

These preferences will definitely hinder the way of achieving justice. Islam on the contrary, encourages achieving justice as soon as possible to the best of our ability. Neither wealth nor property or power can be taken into consideration when judging people. It rather depends upon how righteous one is. God says:

And whoever does righteous deeds, whether male or female, while a believer – those will enter Paradise and will not be wronged in the least b (An-Nisaa’ 4:124)

There is no discrimination in Islam based on sex, racism, or nationality. Everyone is equal in the eyes of God and everyone deserves their rights equally. Islamic History is a witness to that fact in many instances. For example: `Ali ibn Abi Talib (may God be pleased with him), the fourth Caliph (and the Prophet’s son in Law and cousin), commanding a Muslim state as big as China, misplaced his shield that he used in defending Islam and the Muslims years before when Muslims were persecuted in the days of the Prophet.

He found a Jewish man with his shield. And had the police confiscate it. The matter was taken to court and Ali’s only evidence that the shield was his, was his word. On the other hand the Jewish man described it and brought witnesses saying they knew it to be his and so forth. The judge ruled in favor of the Jewish man for the evidence provided. Ali accepted the court ruling to not be unjust as someone else who challenged the court wouldn’t be successful.

It should be noted that the reason we know this story is because that Jewish man later went to Ali and asked him why he didn’t kill him and take it back. Ali says the courts were made to uphold justice and he was lacking in evidence. The Jewish man handed him the shield and said ‘I bear witness that God is one and that Muhammad is His messenger’.

This statement converted him from a Jew to a Muslim. `Ali asked him: ‘What lead you to such a great decision?’ He replied: ‘We are told that Muhammad can’t be a Prophet because he wasn’t Jewish, but I know that it is only the Prophets who can leave a law which its adherents so sincerely apply it in Justice’. Ali then gave him back the shield and told him: ‘This is a gift for your having received guidance’.

Soucre Link

Islam’s Tolerance towards Non-Muslims

By Yasir Tag Ad-Din Hamed

Translated by the Editorial Team                                                      


Islam has taken into account the tolerance towards people from other religions.

Islam has taken into account the tolerance towards people from other religions. Almighty God says:


The verse tells us how Islam distinguishes between those who fight against it and others who do not , as it commands good treatment to the last ones. Moreover, Islam has stressed the protection of the Christians, Jews and everyone under the protection of the Muslim country and allowed them to practice their rituals freely. This good treatment has been reiterated in many places of the Qur’an and hadith as well as the conduct of Muslim leaders throughout the Islamic history.

The Messenger of Allah said, “Beware, if anyone wrongs a Mu`ahid (a person who is granted the pledge of protection by the Muslims), or diminishes his right, or forces him to work beyond his capacity, or takes from him anything without his consent, I shall plead for him on the Day of Judgment.” (Abu Dawud)

In the conquest of Makkah, the the masters of its people were brought to Prophet (peace be upon him) and Muslims. He said to the Makkans, “What do you think I will do with you?” They said, “You are a noble brother and son of a noble brother.” He said to them his well-known statement, “Go! You are free.”

The same action happened again at the time of the second Caliph, `Umar ibn Al-Khattab while conquering Jerusalem. He signed a document between him and the people of the city, as the pastor Colin Chapman quoted a part of it in his book Whose Holy City?: Jerusalem and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. It reads, “In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful, this is a guarantee granted to residents of “Elijah” by Allah’s slave `Umar. He guarantees them and their goods, churches, crosses and their worship in general. Their churches should neither be confiscated nor destroyed. There will be no restrictions upon them in matters of their religion and none of them will be subjected to any harassment.”

The view of the Jews to this document is recorded by the historian Angelus Rapoport in his book Histoire de Palestine (The history of Palestine) as he said: “We must recognize that such a declaration, at the beginning of the Middle Ages, which all Islamic armies have been committed to is full of equity indeed. It breathes fairness and tolerance. Actually, none of the Byzantium emperors or the bishops of the church never expressed similar feelings, even in the name of the one who invited them to the religion of love. The document of the Caliph `Umar was enough to cause a profound impact, not only in the spirit of the Jews, but also in the spirit of the Christians of Syria and Palestine. Some of those people were suffering from injustice and tyranny. Others suffered from the oppression of the state church if concealing beliefs that differed from the church’s course, not to mention the high taxes upon everyone in the country.

The same situation comes once again with Jerusalem, but this time with Salah Ad-Din (Saladin), the Muslim leader who set it free from the occupation of the Crusaders. James Reston briefly relates to us the way in which Salah Ad-Din recovered the city of Jerusalem. He says: “By the ideal behavior when they took over the reign of Jerusalem in the year 1187, Salah Ad-Din gained abundant praise for being a wise leader, especially when compared with the mass destruction and chaos that the first Crusaders made at their invasion of this city in 1099. His protection of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and other Christian holy sites, and his tolerance with other religions remained stuck in the minds of people for long time. It seems that his works defined what is meant to be a good Muslim; his pardoning of the enemies and other acts of goodness he did which kept for him an endless good reputation for his humanity and wisdom.

In this regard, Sir Thomas Arnold in his book The Preaching of Islam says: ” In view of the toleration thus extended to their Christian subjects in the early period of the Muslim rule, the common hypothesis of the sword as the factor of conversion seems hardly satisfactory, and we are compelled to seek for other motives than that of persecution.”  He added, “But of any organized attempt to force the acceptance of Islam on the non-Muslim population, or of any systematic persecution intended to stamp out the Christian religion, we hear nothing. Had the caliphs chosen to adopt either course of action, they might have swept away Christianity as easily as Ferdinand and Isabella drove Islam out of Spain, or Louis XIV made Protestantism penal in France, or the Jews were kept out of England for 350 years. The Eastern Churches in Asia were entirely cut off from communion with the rest of Christendom, throughout which no one would have been found to lift a finger on their behalf, as heretical communions. So that the very survival of these Churches to the present day is a strong proof of the generally tolerant attitude of the Muhammadan governments towards them.”

Thus, these certificates of non-Muslims continue to prove the advantages of Islam and refute the claims that others try to falsely disseminate about it. Islam’s tolerance and facilitation is unquestionable. There is no compulsion whatsoever in the Islamic faith or worship or any part of it.


Source: Taken with modifications from

Soucre Link

On the Concepts of Shura and Democracy



By Sheikh `Abdullah Bin Bayyah



The Reference of Democracy
















Source: Taken with modifications from

Soucre Link