Carcano said:
Thanks for your efforts. Personally it all seems like a colossal stretch to try and equate any of Islamic history from Muhammed on to the ideals of western democratic governance.
It didn't exist during the time of the prophet himself, who was not elected by 'the people' , nor at any time after his death. What I've read of the subject indicates a heriditary or military lineage of dictatorship.
There may be some ideals derived from later books written by interpreters (who were not themselves prophets), but of course, this is light years from any reality.
There seem to be people who are what you could call 'Koran-only' muslims who reject all later commentary based on the notion that its merely human opinion, not divinely inspired revelation.
No the Prophet was not elected by the people, but nor did he use his position to install a dictatorship. Mohammed was the first one to create orphanages in the Arab world; he was also the one who indicated the use of a tax (zakat for Muslims and jizya for non-Muslims) as a portion of the wealth of the rich people to be given for the use of the 3 groups in society:
1. poor relatives and friends
2. widows & orphans
3. destitutes
This practice is still followed by Muslims who give 2% of income as tax. Women are also not exempt from this tax and also have to pay tax on gold jewelry.
In addition there is the sadaqah, which is a contribution willingly given from your own pocket for anyone who is in need.
There is also the hadiyah or gift, given to friends and employees on special occasions.
During Ramadan, the breaking of the fast is a special occasion. Mohammed initiated the practice of having a communal breaking of the fast where richer people in the community take turns providing food, fruits, juices, etc. for those people in the community whoo could not afford it. This is also in practice until today.
He banned the practice of female infanticide and made it possible for women to remarry after divorce or widowhood. Women were also given complete control over their own wealth with not even the husband having any rights on a woman's property.
Since he always consulted the four companions (who later became the Caliphs) and his wives, his decisions were usually based on the opinion of the people. His wife Khadeja was his guide when she was alive while Ayesha was a consultant for years after his death. He even went to war against his own judgement on one occasion on the recommendation of the Caliphs. .During his time, usury and monopoly in business practices was not allowed and nor was begging or unemployment.
Also by abolishing the distinction between black and white, color and race, he was the first to insist on the unity of man as one race. This is evident in Hajj when the only thing men are permitted are the same two white pieces of cloth, nothing else.
The only later interpretations are those collected 200-400 years after his death and compiled as the Hadith. I personally do not consider them as reliable as the Quran for that very reason. Also the qadis who used the Hadith and compiled the Shariah were frequently accused of corruption and favoritism, which is why I also do not have faith in the Shariah (not to say that all parts of either are all dubious but 200 years after the fact, how much of it can you really believe in?)
But if you follow the Quran with the history and circumstances of the revelations, the spirit is democratic and practical with indications for personal, social and political conduct.
And there are of course as many opinions as there are people, but I believe that change is good; keeps people questioning and gets more people out of fundamentalism.