Kwa kutumia wazo la kutenganisha dini na maisha, Magharibi wamejipa haki ya kutunga sheria. Wao wanaona kwamba mwanadamu lazima aishi maisha yake apendavyo, si kama wengine wanavyotaka; kulingana na matamanio yake mwenyewe, si kwa mapenzi ya wengine. Waliona kwamba mwanadamu hawezi kutumia haki hii mpaka afurahie uhuru wake. Hili limepelekea uhuru wake kuwakilishwa kama uhuru wa imani, umiliki, maoni na uhuru binafsi. Wameuchukulia wazo hili la uhuru kuwa takatifu.

By resorting to the idea of separating religion from life, The West has given the right of legislation to itself. It takes the view that man must live his life as he pleases and not as others would like; in accordance with his own whims and not the will of others. They took the view that man cannot practice this right until he enjoys his freedom. This has led his freedom to be represented as the freedoms of belief, ownership, opinion and personal freedom. It considered this idea of freedoms as sacred.

Uhuru hizi zina maana maalum za kiufundi.

These freedoms have specific technical meanings.

Uhuru wa imani unamruhusu mtu kuamini dini anayoichagua. Au unamruhusu kuhama kutoka itikadi moja kwenda nyingine, hata kama jambo hilo lingekuwa likitokea kila siku. Pia unamruhusu kukataa dini zote kabisa.

Freedom of belief allows the individual to believe in the religion he chooses. Or it allows him to move from one creed to another, even if it was a daily occurrence. It permitted him to reject religions altogether.

Uhuru wa umiliki unamruhusu mtu kumiliki chochote anachotaka, na kwa njia yoyote anayotaka. Pia ana haki ya kutumia mali yake kwa namna yoyote anayopenda. Kama anataka kumpa mbwa wake zawadi na kuwazuia warithi wake wasipate sehemu yake, basi hakuna mtu anayeweza kumzuia kufanya hivyo.

Freedom of ownership allows the individual to own whatever he wants and through any means he wants. He also has the right to dispose of with his wealth in any manner he wishes. If he wants to give it as a gift to his dog and prevent his inheritors from it, then nobody can stop him from doing so.

Uhuru wa maoni humruhusu kusema chochote anachotaka, iwe ni kweli au uongo, bila kizuizi wala ufuatiliaji. Anaweza kukiuka au kukosoa maoni yoyote yanayopingana na ufahamu wake au matamanio yake.

Freedom of opinion allows him to say whatever he wants, whether it is true or false, without any obstacle or monitoring. He can violate or criticize any opinion that goes against his understanding or whims.

Uhuru wa kibinafsi huwaruhusu watu binafsi kuendesha mambo yao ya kibinafsi bila kuzingatia maadili, vikwazo vya kimaadili wala vizuizi vya kiroho.

Personal freedom allows individuals to run their personal affairs without any consideration for values, ethical constraints or spiritual restrictions.

Dhana hii ya uhuru, ambayo ni mahitaji ya msingi ya Demokrasia, imesababisha maadili ya wale wanaoitetea kushuka hadi kiwango cha chini zaidi kuliko cha wanyama.

This idea of freedoms, which are basic requirements of Democracy, has caused the values of those who advocate it to decline to a level lower than that of animals.

Uhuru wa imani umesababisha dini kupoteza umuhimu wake katika jamii za kibepari. Umeidharau dini kwa kiasi kikubwa pale uliporuhusu watu binafsi kubadilisha dini zao kama wanavyobadilisha nguo zao.

The freedom of belief has made religion lose its importance in capitalist societies. It belittled religion greatly when it permitted individuals to change their religion the way they changes their clothes.

Kwa kuenea kwa fikra za kimaada na kubanwa kwa fikra za kidini, maadili, utu na thamani za kiroho zimetoweka. Nafsi za watu zimekosa huruma, na wameishi kama mbwa mwitu, ambapo wenye nguvu huwatawala wanyonge.

With the spread of the materialistic thought and the restriction of the religious thought, the ethical, humanitarian and spiritual values have disappeared. The souls of the people have become devoid of compassion, and they have come to live like wolves, where the strong subjugate the weak.

Uhuru wa maoni umewaruhusu watu kusema wanachotaka na kutoa wito wa chochote wanachotaka. Kwa hiyo, kila maoni ya uongo, ya ajabu na ya kipumbavu yanapatikana katika jamii zao; hawana kipimo chochote cha ukweli. Pia utasikia mtu wa kawaida akimtukana Mtume ﷺ, bila sheria yoyote ya kumzuia; kama Salman Rushdi, anayetumia uhuru wa imani kama kisingizio na kujificha chini ya uhuru wa kusema.

Freedom of opinion has permitted the people to say what they like and to call for whatever they want. So, every false, strange and crazy opinion is to be found in their societies; they are devoid of the truth any criteria for it. You also come to hear any common person blaspheme against the Messenger 􀁕, without any law to prevent him from this; like Salman Rushdi, who uses freedom of belief as a pretext and hides under freedom of speech.

Kuhusu uhuru wa umiliki na vigezo vyake vya manufaa, uhuru huo umezaa uovu wa Ubepari, ambao umetumia ukoloni kama njia ya kudhibiti mustakabali wa watu, kuteka rasilimali zao, kunyonya utajiri wao na kumwaga damu ya watu wao. Hii ni kwa ajili ya kushindana na wengine katika kupata mapato ya Haram, kufanya biashara kwa damu ya Waislamu, kuchochea vita vya ndani na vita kati ya mataifa ili kuuza bidhaa zao na zile za viwanda vyao vya kijeshi, ambavyo vimepata faida kubwa. Mataifa haya ya kibepari yamejivua thamani yoyote ya kiroho, ya kimaadili au ya kibinadamu. Badala yake, hutumia dini, pale wanapolazimika, kufunika maslahi yao na kudai kuwa na thamani za kimaadili na za kibinadamu ili kuficha sura yao mbaya na harufu yao chafu.

As for freedom of ownership and its criteria of benefit, it has created the monstrosity of Capitalism, which has taken colonialism as a method to control people’s future, and to seize their resources, exploit their wealth, and spill the blood of their peoples. This is to compete with others for the Haraam earning, to trade with the blood of the Muslims, to fuel civil wars and wars between nations so as to sell their products and those of their military industries, which have made huge profits. These capitalist states have stripped themselves of any spiritual, ethical or humanitarian values. Rather they use religion, if compelled, to cover their interests and claim to have ethical and humanitarian values to conceal their ugly face and putrid smell.

Kuhusu uhuru wa kibinafsi, umezigeuza jamii katika nchi za kidemokrasia kuwa jamii zilizoporomoka na kuwa za kinyama. Zimeshuka hadi kiwango cha uasherati wa kuchukiza ambao hata wanyama hawajafikia.

As for personal freedom, it has transformed societies in the democratic countries into declined animalistic societies. They have descended to a level of disgusting licentiousness that even the animals have not reached.

Sheria yao imeruhusu mahusiano ya kingono yasiyo ya kawaida na yenye makosa.

Their legislation has permitted abnormal and erroneous sexual relations.

Unaona miongoni mwao desturi ambazo hata miongoni mwa wanyama hazionekani. Wanafanya ngono ya kikundi (kwa pamoja) na zinaa ya kindugu na mama zao, binti zao na dada zao. Wanafanya ngono hata na wanyama. Kwa sababu hiyo, magonjwa yanayotokea miongoni mwao ni yale ambayo hayakuwepo hapo awali. Kuvunjika kwa familia kunaonekana katika jamii zao, na heshima ya pamoja kati ya wanafamilia wa familia moja imepotea. Uhuru wa kibinafsi ni uhuru wa kuondoa vizuizi vyote; kuruhusu aina yoyote ya maadili na uhuru wa kuharibu familia. Ni kwa jina la uhuru ndipo dhambi zote kubwa hufanywa na makatazo yote huhalalishwa.

You see amongst them practices that you do not see even amongst animals. They practice group sex and incest with their mothers, daughters and sisters. They practice sex even with animals. Hence diseases appear amongst them that never existed before. The break up of the family can be seen in their societies and the mutual respect between the members of a single family has been lost. Personal freedom is the freedom to do away with all restrictions; allowing any kind of values and the freedom to destroy the family. It is in the name of freedom that all the grave sins are committed and all the prohibitions are permitted.

Kwa hiyo, uhuru wa zinaa, ushoga, usagaji, uchi, na unywaji wa pombe, pamoja na kufuatilia kila kitendo bila kujali jinsi kilivyo cha chini au cha kuchukiza, vyote hufanyika kwa uhuru kamili bila shinikizo wala kulazimishwa.

So the freedom of fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, nudity, and alcohol, and the pursuit of every action no matter how low or despicable it may be, is all done with the utmost freedom without any pressure or compulsion.

Haya ni matokeo ya Demokrasia. Ni bidhaa ya matamanio ya mwanadamu wala si kutoka kwa Allah 􀀬, wala hayatokani na wahyi unaoteremka kutoka mbinguni. Hayana uhusiano wowote na dini yoyote ile. Tukirudi kwenye kitu kilichoiweka Demokrasia katika akili za wanaoitetea na wanafikra wake, na mazingira ambamo ilizaliwa, itakuwa wazi sana kwamba ilijengwa juu ya msingi wa kufuru na ilianzishwa kama jibu kwa kauli kama zile za Louis XV: "Hatukupokea taji ila kutoka kwa Mungu", na Louis XIV: "Mamlaka ya wafalme yanatokana na ukabidhi wa Mungu. Mungu ndiye chanzo chake pekee wala si watu. Wafalme hawawajibiki kwa jinsi wanavyotumia mamlaka yao, isipokuwa mbele ya Mungu." Wasomi walieleza nadharia ya mkataba wa kijamii ya Jean Jacque Russo kuwa, 'Biblia ya mapinduzi ya kisekula ya Kifaransa.' Kutokana na haya yote, upingamizi kamili wa Uislamu na Demokrasia unakuwa wazi kwetu, kuhusiana na chanzo ilikotoka, itikadi ilikotokana, msingi unaosimama juu yake, na mawazo na mifumo iliyoleta.

These are the effects of Democracy. They are the product of man’s whims and not from Allah 􀀬, and they are not derived from the revelation that comes from the heavens. They have nothing to do with any religion whatsoever. If we return to the thing that established Democracy in the minds of its advocates and thinkers, and the circumstances into which it was born, it will become very clear that it was founded on a kufr basis and it was established as a response to sayings such as those of Louis XV; “We did not receive the crown except from God”, and Louis XIV; “The authority of the kings derives from the delegation of God. God is its exclusive source and not the people. Kings are not accountable for how they practice their authority, except before God.” The intellectuals described the theory of the social contract of Jean Jacque Russo as, ‘the Bible of the French secular revolution.’ From all of this the complete contradiction of Islam with Democracy becomes clear to us, in regards to the source from which it came, the creed from which it emanated, the basis on which it is founded and the thoughts and systems it has brought.

- Chanzo ambacho kimetoka kwake ni mwanadamu. Yeye ndiye mtawala anayerejelewa katika kutoa hukumu juu ya vitendo na mambo, kwa kuvihukumu kuwa ni husn (vizuri/vinastahili kufanywa) au qubh (vinastahili lawama). Hili si chochote zaidi ya kufuata matamanio na hawa ya nafsi. Mizizi ya kuumbwa kwake iko kwa wanafalsafa wa Ulaya.

- The source from which it has come is man. He is the ruler who is referred to in issuing judgments on actions and things, in respect of them being husn (pretty/worthy of doing) or qubh (reprehensible). This is nothing but following one’s whims and desires. The roots of its creation lie with the philosophers of Europe.

Kwa upande wa Uislamu, ni kinyume cha hayo. Umetoka kwa Allah 􀀬. Yeye 􀀬 aliufunua kwa Mtume Wake Muhammad ﷺ, Mja Wake na Mtume Wake 􀁕. Mtawala katika Uislamu hurejea Shari'a katika kutoa hukumu, si akili. Nafasi ya akili imewekewa mipaka katika kuelewa maandiko ya Shari'ah.

As for Islam, it is opposite to that. It is from Allah 􀀬. He 􀀬 revealed it to His Prophet Muhammad, His Servant and Messenger 􀁕. The ruler in Islam refers to the Shar’a in issuing rules and not to the mind. The role of the mind is restricted to understanding the Sharee’ah texts.

Kuhusu itikadi ambayo Demokrasia inatokana nayo, ni itikadi ya kutenganisha dini na maisha, ambayo ni itikadi inayotegemea suluhisho la maelewano. Itikadi hii haikukataa dini, lakini iliondoa nafasi yake katika maisha na katika Dola, na matokeo yake ikampa mwanadamu haki ya kuweka mfumo wake mwenyewe.

- As for the creed from which Democracy emanates, it is the creed of separating religion from life, which is the creed based on the compromise solution. This creed did not reject religion but abolished its role in life and State, and consequently gave man the right to lay down his own system.

Ilikuwa kwa msingi wa itikadi yake ndipo ustaarabu wake ulipoanzishwa na mwelekeo wake wa kifikra ukabainishwa.

It was on the basis of its creed that its civilisation was founded and its intellectual direction was defined.

Kuhusu Uislamu, mambo ni kinyume na hayo. Umejengwa juu ya 'Aqeedah ya Kiislamu inayoamuru mambo yote ya maisha, pamoja na Dola, yaendeshwe kwa mujibu wa amri na makatazo ya Allah (SWT). Kwa maneno mengine, maisha yanakwenda kwa mujibu wa kanuni za Sharee'ah zinazotokana na 'Aqeedah ya Kiislamu.

As for Islam it is contrary to this. It is based on the Islamic ‘Aqeedah that obliges all of life’s affairs, and the State to be directed according to the orders and prohibitions of Allah 􀀬. In other words, life proceeds according to the Sharee’ah rules that emanate from the Islamic ‘Aqeedah.

Ni kwa msingi wa 'Aqeedah yake ustaarabu wake ulijengwa, na mwelekeo wake wa kifikra ukabainishwa.

It was on the basis of its ‘Aqeedah that its civilisation was founded and its intellectual direction was defined.

Msingi ambao Demokrasia imejengwa juu yake ni kwamba mamlaka kuu ni ya watu. Watu ndio chanzo cha mamlaka. Kwa msingi huu, mifumo ya kidemokrasia iliunda mamlaka tatu: mamlaka ya kutunga sheria, mamlaka ya utendaji na mamlaka ya mahakama, ili kuonyesha kivitendo mamlaka yao kuu na uwezo wao.

- The basis on which Democracy is founded is that sovereignty is for the people. The people are the source of the powers. Based on this, the democratic systems created three powers; the legislative, executive and judicial powers, so as to practically express its sovereignty and authority.

Kwa upande wa Uislamu, mamlaka kuu iko kwa Shari'a, na Ummah hauna haki ya kutunga sheria. Hata hivyo, Uislamu umewawajibisha Waislamu kutekeleza amri na makatazo ya Allah (SWT), na umedhihirisha hilo kwa kuanzisha Dola ya Khilafah kama ilivyobainishwa na maandiko ya Shari'a.

As for Islam, sovereignty lies with the Shar’a, and the Ummah does not possess the right of legislation. However, Islam has obliged the Muslims to execute the orders and prohibitions of Allah 􀀬, and it manifested this through the establishment of the Khilafah State as defined by the Sharee’ah texts.

Demokrasia ilikuja na mifumo na mawazo yanayotegemea maslahi na kufuata matakwa ya nafsi, ilhali sheria ya Uislamu inategemea kufuata maandiko na kupata hukumu za Shari'ah kutoka kwayo, yaani inategemea kushikamana na kufuata mwongozo.

- Democracy came with systems and thoughts based on benefit and the following of whims, whilst the legislation of Islam is based on following the texts and deducing the Shar’eeah rules from them, i.e. it is based on the adherence to and following of guidance.

Madai kwamba Demokrasia ina vipengele vizuri ambavyo Uislamu unaweza kunufaika navyo hayana msingi na hayatokani na ushahidi. Tumeona baadhi ya athari za Demokrasia; imeunda hali mbaya isiyo na wema wowote. Ummah bora iliyotolewa kwa wanadamu hauhitaji kuchukua chochote kutoka kwa Demokrasia. Je, kuna upungufu katika Uislamu unaohitaji kufidiwa kwa kutoa dai kama hilo?

The statement that Democracy has some good elements from which Islam can benefit is baseless and is not based upon evidence. We have seen some of the effects of Democracy; it has created an evil situation that contains no goodness. The best Ummah brought forth to mankind does not need to take anything from Democracy. Is there a deficiency in Islam, which needs to be compensated for by making such a claim?