Is voting shirk?

[DojaKhat]

What the title says ^

I ask because my gut instincts tells me that it's absolutely laughable based on the reasoning used by the Salafi social media accounts that I've come across on my socials. They say voting (and democracy) is shirk and therefore takes you out of the fold of Islam because you are implicitly saying that you have the authority to make rules & laws instead of our Creator.

The logic used reminds me of this meme:

I find myself starting to dislike Salafis. I've always been neutral to them since they're still Sunni but what the hell is this primary school sounding logic being used here? Please explain.

 

[LiveFrom]

Cool meme, i cant offer islamic analysis, but politically,

using religion to maintain power in a state go together like bread and butter. It works great, because if you can get the population to believe that you are the ruler not because you have a 'monopoly on violence' but because it is gods will, theyre way less likely to complain about you ruling and taxing them. They might still complain, but if you keep them fed enough and distracted you can get a killer run of royals.

The gulf leaders got super lucky with the oil wealth such that they either dont tax or tax their populations very lightly. These leaders recognize their existential threats to the throne, and one of them will always be popular uprising. They saw what happened in the arab spring to long time dictators in large part due to social media and free information access

As a result theres been a concentrated effort to "salafizing" the internet, and more recently pushing madkhalism. They know their populations are online, seeing other peoples lives in diff countries, mixing ideas. They just want ideas friendly to them to be in that mix, and they will pay

If saudi arabians (and other gcc) quality of life isnt high, it becomes a security concern, so the cost is worth it

I imagine the gulf countries select their sheiks in a similar way that news agencies select reporters, they hire people that kind of already fit the views they need broadcasted.

Tldr nah i dont think votings shirk

 

[Omar del Sur]

People have to study these things scientifically.

A person might say something like "no, voting is not shirk lol"..... or "that sounds dumb".... unscientific ways of approaching a topic. (btw I don't think voting is necessarily shirk but I believe in some cases it is... however democracy is definitely unquestionably shirk).

A person has to approach these kinds of things from a scientific standpoint.

Many people they haven't really done their homework when it comes to the background knowledge they should know before they approach these topics. And part of it is people are deliberately kept in the dark for political reasons.

Sheikh Al-Ghariani wrote recently about how there is this push to make it so that... scholars deal with topics of marriage, menstruation, wudu.... but they are kept away from political issues.

Part of tawhid without any question is what has been referred to as tawhid al hakimiyyah. it is Allah's right to legislate. the hukm belongs to Allah. all this is absolutely true and it is part of tawhid. however people hear all about how grave worship violates tawhid but the topic of Allah's hakimiyyah tends to be deliberately downplayed. if we talk about the interconnection between tawhid and ruling by the shariah... there are a number of governments that this would be inconvenient for. therefore, for political reasons, people are kept in the dark on this.

I have a risaala from Raslan, the Egyptian preacher.... he is considered a figure of the "Madkhali" group.... if you read his risaala on la ilaha illa Allah

he criticizes people who talk about "al hakimiyyah".... he criticizes the ikhwanis and says they interpret la ilaha illa Allah as referring to hakimiyyah but ignore other aspects of la ilaha illa Allah. but even when he criticizes, even he admits that hakimiyyah is part of what is encompassed in la ilaha illa Allah. it is undoubtedly part of tawhid. he basically just emphazises that there are other aspects. we also have to perform ibadah, we also have to not commit shirk, etc. but part of tawhid is that the legislation belongs to Allah. democracy is absolutely unquestionably shirk.

voting... if you vote and you genuinely are okay with the democratic system, with some guy getting elected to legislate man-made laws that contradict the shariah..... I think that is shirk

but if you vote and you don't actually agree with man-made law, you believe the hukm belongs to Allah, you don't believe in democracy... but you simply believe one candidate is better than the other and you want to stop for example Modi from getting elected... is that really shirk? I don't think that's shirk. I personally have never voted but in that scenario I don't think it's shirk.

different salafi scholars have had different views on voting but I don't know of any salafi scholar denying that democracy is shirk. it blatantly is shirk.

 

[techsamatar]

Voting Is not Shirk, Full stop.

The same Imbeciles who say this 99.99% are Khariji and they in the west with their passports which is literally where they had to or their parents had to pledge allegiance to the state or monarch and to also follow laws of the land.

 

[Omar del Sur]

anyways, even putting aside the tawhid vs shirk aspect of things.... they boast to you, "oh isn't our system so great?? we have given you democracy..." which they paint as being this holy, ulimate pinnace of governance... but in fact, it isn't even democracy..... in theory with democracy the hukm belongs to the people.... this is shirk and this is a wrong system but that isn't even what they give us... what they give us is representative democracy.... "we are giving the power to the people... and giving the power to the people means giving it to Trump, Joe Biden, etc. who will do a bunch of stuff that has nothing to do with what it even is that people want"... so democracy isn't even what it says it is on its packaging

 

[Omar del Sur]

Voting Is not Shirk, Full stop.

The same Imbeciles who say this 99.99% are Khariji and they in the west with their passports which is literally where they had to or their parents had to pledge allegiance to the state or monarch and to also follow laws of the land.

tell that to the permanent committee of Saudi scholars, you've just made them into khawarij....

the issue is way more detailed than you've made it out to be

"
As you know, here in Algeria we have what are called legislative elections. There are parties which call for Islamic rule, and there are others that do not want Islamic rule. What is the ruling on one who votes for something other than Islamic rule even though he prays?

They replied:

The Muslims in a country that is not governed according to Islamic sharee’ah should do their utmost and strive as much as they can to bring about rule according to Islamic sharee’ah, and they should unite in helping the party which is known will rule in accordance with Islamic sharee’ah. As for supporting one who calls for non-implementation of Islamic sharee’ah, that is not permissible, rather it may lead a person to kufr, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning)..."

https://islamqa.info/amp/en/answers/107166

 

[Fiqh]

Voting Is not Shirk, Full stop.

The same Imbeciles who say this 99.99% are Khariji and they in the west with their passports which is literally where they had to or their parents had to pledge allegiance to the state or monarch and to also follow laws of the land.

The hoops people go through to justify what is impermissible.

 

[cukaashe]

The hoops people go through to justify what is impermissible.

Would never expect someone from the .org to be here

 

[techsamatar]

Would never expect someone from the .org to be here

whats .org

 

[XuseenS]

Democracy is not against Islam. In fact, Islam promotes the idea of mutual consultation and consensus building. This is apparent in the way Uthman RA was elected as Khalifa. Both Uthman RA and Ali RA wanted to become Khalifa, but the votes were tied among the elite Sahaba. Therefore, they asked the general public to elect and Uthman RA won the majority of votes, making him the Khalifa.

"And those who respond to their Lord, establish prayer, conduct their affairs by mutual consultation, and donate from what We have provided for them" (Quran 42:38).

 

[CABDULWALI XASAN.]

Bro Ive really liked this guys amit senguptas take on Democracy, Basically he says with the fall of the soviet union, Communist ideals have infilitrated western society under something something like that this was a couple months ago but give the Amit Sengupta guy a watch on youtube, Hes a bit of a hindutva kinda guy but hes views on world politics are really nice

 

[Haragwaafi]

Democracy is not against Islam. In fact, Islam promotes the idea of mutual consultation and consensus building. This is apparent in the way Uthman RA was elected as Khalifa. Both Uthman RA and Ali RA wanted to become Khalifa, but the votes were tied among the elite Sahaba. Therefore, they asked the general public to elect and Uthman RA won the majority of votes, making him the Khalifa.

"And those who respond to their Lord, establish prayer, conduct their affairs by mutual consultation, and donate from what We have provided for them" (Quran 42:38).

Omar RA assigned 6 of the sahaba to be part of the committee that will elect the next caliph of the ummah and they were : Ali RA , Uthman ibn Affan RA . Abdulrahman ibn Awf RA , Talha ibn Ubayd Allah RA , Saad ibn Abi Waqas RA and Zubyar RA. When the 6 committee failed to come in unanimous decision to elect the next caliph, the sahabi Abdulrahman ibn Awf decided to consult the people to Medina and the rest of the Sahaba for 3 days and in the Saturday morning 23rd of Dhul Hija the day of the election Abdulrahman ibn Awf RA stood up in the minbar delivering a sermon to the people of medina and pledged his allegiance to Uthman RA as the majority of the people wanted him to be the next caliph and so everyone started doing the same pledging their allegiance to Uthman as the 3rd Amir al Mu'minin.

The public weren't given the authority to select or elect their next caliph as you have alluded to in your comment.