US consumers could have any colour they wanted for their motor vehicles as long as it was black - Henry Ford,

The thinking Maldivians are in a big dilemma regarding their stance in the new political paradigm shaped by the West using their deceptive cultural agents. The recently inaugurated multi party show is run by two camps - the government and the so called 'anti' camp. These two groups have been hijacked by the West to steer the people's thinking away from Islam and instill western concepts into their mindset. The survival or success of these groups depend on how well they market democratic concepts to the people and the constant wrangling between these groups serve as the marketing process to sell western culture as a panacea to the ills of the current status quo. Thus both act as if they are in a competition to prove who is more closer to democratic values ? The arrest of the 'anti' camp chairman was one of the stunts performed in the theatrical build up to the introduction of multi party system. It was reported that he was arrested to protect the 'reform' process which the government has been pursuing assiduously. The 'anti' camp chairman responded with a similar stunt by giving a interview to the BBC and announced that it was his party that is striving to 'reform' the political process ? The truth of the matter is the reform process was not initiated from within the country's political organs, this is also the case in the rest of the Muslim world. The whole setting for this drama was designed by the West by using the Sept20th event as a catalyst to steer the events along a designated political path. The 'anti' camp was groomed by the West to play the role of opposition alongside the government camp. Ironically both argue on the BASIS set by the West and their frenzied rivalry serves the designated objective of preventing the revival of Islam as democratic system is gradually becoming arbiter in life's affairs. Also, some of the issues raised by the 'anti' camp against the government, to whip up support for democracy, are actually the symptoms and malaise of democracy itself. What should a thinking Muslim do when he is presented with a choice of two political parties whose ideology is more or less similar in substance ?

Al-Bukhari narrated about Bisr bin Ubaydullah al-Hadhrami that he heard Abu Idrees al-Khoolani say that he heard Hudhayfah bin al-Yaman saying: ''The people used to ask the Prophet of Allah (saw) about the good and I used to ask him about the bad in fear that it might catch me. So I said: O Prophet of Allah! We were in times of jahiliyyah and mischief then Allah brought us this good, so is there any mischief after this good? 

He (saw) said: Yes. 

I said: Will there be any good after that mischief? 

He (saw) said: Yes, and it has smoke 

I said: What is its smoke? 

He (saw) said: People guiding but not on my guidance. You recognise some (from them) and deny some. 

I said: Will there be any mischief after that good? 

He (saw) said: Yes, callers (read political parties) who invite at the doors of Hellfire. They throw him into it (hell) whoever accepted their invitation. 

I said: O Prophet of Allah, describe them to us. 

He said: They are of our own skin (of our people) and talk our language. 

I said: What do you order me to do if that (matter) caught me? 

He (saw) said: Adhere to the jama'ah of Muslims and their Imam. 

I said: What if the Muslims have no jama'ah (Islamic State or community) nor an Imam (appointed  leader of Muslims) ? 

He (saw) said: Then separate from all those groups, even if you (have to) bite the root of a tree till death comes to you as such.'' 

This hadith is clear in its expression that the Prophet (saw) orders Muslims to adhere to the jama'ah of Muslims and  to leave those who invite people to the doors of hell. The questioner asked him what he has should do in relation to those callers at the doors of Hellfire in the situation wherein the Muslims have no Imam (the Islamic ruling system) and no jama'ah; thereupon the Prophet (saw) ordered him to separate from all these groups, not to disassociate himself from the Muslims nor to abstain from the action for establishing Islam. So his order is clear ''Separate from all those groups'', and he emphasised the separation from those groups even to the extent that his isolation from them would make him clench to the trunk of a tree until death comes to him. Its meaning is to adhere to your deen and keep away from the misguiding callers who are at the doors of Hellfire. In this hadith there is no excuse or permission (for anybody) to abandon the dawah work , it is, rather, confined to the command of adhering to the deen and abandoning the callers at the doors of hell, and the sin will remain on him if he does not work to establish the Islamic system. So he is ordered to abandon the misguiding groups in order to save his deen from the callers of the misguidance, even if he had to bite the root of a tree, but not to distance himself from the Muslim community and abandon the work for reviving the community.

Conclusion

Therefore, it is prohibited for a Muslim to dirty his hands in any regime changing operation that leads to the continuity of non-Islamic ruling system. This is not because such actions are against the written constitution of the country. But due to the fact, it contradicts the divine rules regarding political actions. We should seek the correct daleel for every action we undertake by studying the reality of issue. We can engage in political struggle if such actions can lead to overhauling the entire system and implement Islam completely. The other permissible political action is replacing a corrupt ruler with a just ruler, by applying force, within the Islamic ruling system (which does not exist today).

Archive

Democracy or Elitism