DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Andromino** · 09-04-2012, 12:21 AM

Abu Musa narrated – I entered upon the Messenger of Allah with
two men from the bani umaay,so one of the two men said – O
Messenger of Allah appoint me over some of that which Allah made
you responsible for, and the other man also said something similar
So the Prophet replied “I swear by Allah I would not appoint over
this work anyone who asked for it nor anyone who covets it”
(Muslim)

Commentary
a. To seek positions of ruling for the authority they bestow is not the
characteristic of a leader, and hence anyone who has such aspirations
is not suitable for the position.
b. These principles are in contrast to the non-Islamic political bodies
where politics is seen as a profession and a way to make money and
garner power, and hence becomes coveted and competed over
amongst anyone irrespective of their capabilities.

There could be other reasons against democracy, but this one is simply flawed.

Indeed, seeking power is a lack of humblesness and lack of humility. This is something thats generally understood ethical consideration. Yet if your going to extend this argument to say that somone cannot take part it politics, then by such standards its impossible for humans to even form a civilization. Every job is a "seeking of power" in one way or the other. Politics is similarly a job in service of the people. If the intention of the politician is to serve the community and not merely seeking power, then politics is just like any other job and people have right to be part of politics just as the people have right be seek the ppower of a doctor or engineer or scholar or anything else.

Secondly, 90% of the leaders iin Islamic history would be one who ssought for power. Do we say all of them are haram prohibited governments? What level of prohibition is this hadith about? Is it a personal prohibition like prohibition of having pride? Or is this one that requires public law controlling it ?

Thirdly, how exactly is one man autocratic government free of being subject to this hadith ? How do you say that the autocrat cannot be someome who was seeking for power? How could it be possible that a revolutionery movement wanting to impose a autocratic governement would be free of power seeking, when such revolutions by nature has to have a goal to seek power ?

09-04-2012, 12:21 AM	#15
Andromino Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 540 Senior Member	Abu Musa narrated – I entered upon the Messenger of Allah with two men from the bani umaay,so one of the two men said – O Messenger of Allah appoint me over some of that which Allah made you responsible for, and the other man also said something similar So the Prophet replied “I swear by Allah I would not appoint over this work anyone who asked for it nor anyone who covets it” (Muslim) Commentary a. To seek positions of ruling for the authority they bestow is not the characteristic of a leader, and hence anyone who has such aspirations is not suitable for the position. b. These principles are in contrast to the non-Islamic political bodies where politics is seen as a profession and a way to make money and garner power, and hence becomes coveted and competed over amongst anyone irrespective of their capabilities. There could be other reasons against democracy, but this one is simply flawed. Indeed, seeking power is a lack of humblesness and lack of humility. This is something thats generally understood ethical consideration. Yet if your going to extend this argument to say that somone cannot take part it politics, then by such standards its impossible for humans to even form a civilization. Every job is a "seeking of power" in one way or the other. Politics is similarly a job in service of the people. If the intention of the politician is to serve the community and not merely seeking power, then politics is just like any other job and people have right to be part of politics just as the people have right be seek the ppower of a doctor or engineer or scholar or anything else. Secondly, 90% of the leaders iin Islamic history would be one who ssought for power. Do we say all of them are haram prohibited governments? What level of prohibition is this hadith about? Is it a personal prohibition like prohibition of having pride? Or is this one that requires public law controlling it ? Thirdly, how exactly is one man autocratic government free of being subject to this hadith ? How do you say that the autocrat cannot be someome who was seeking for power? How could it be possible that a revolutionery movement wanting to impose a autocratic governement would be free of power seeking, when such revolutions by nature has to have a goal to seek power ?
	Quote