Does the Quran support Theocracy?

[Leonardo17]

   My first critic to this idea is a spiritual one. It is always easier to start criticizing other people instead of doing the spiritual work ourselves. If we do that on a local level we end up fooling ourselves and if we do that on larger scale we end up harming ourselves and others. Any spiritual practitioner will reaffirm this idea: The spiritual quest is an inner quest; the spiritual work is an inner work because the spiritual truth is an inner truth. Anyone who denies this fact is either deceiving you or is being self-deceived.
 
And the religious perspective on that is even more radical than that. See God’s reaction to idolatry (Go to 3:10):
 



 
The symbolic meaning here is very strong.
 

---

 
As of the Quran, here is what is says in Al-Baqarah 213:
 
“In the beginning all the people followed the same way. (Afterwards there came a change and differences arose). Then Allah sent Prophets to give good tidings to those who followed the Right Way and warnings to those who swerved from it. And He sent down with them the Book based on the Truth so that it should judge between the people concerning their differences. (Differences arose not because people were not given the knowledge of the Truth in the beginning, nay), differences arose between those very people who had been given clear teachings, and (for no other reasons than that) they wanted to tyrannize over one another. So Allah, by His leave, guided those who believed in the Prophets to the Truth about which they had differed; AIIah guides whomever He pleases to the Right Way.”
 
https://myislam.org/surah-baqarah/ayat-213/
 
(Abdul Ala Mauduli Translation = very Similar and even better than the Y.N. Ozturk translation I am using here)
 
So the Lord / Allah is giving a religious teaching to mankind. People agree with this teaching. But some people want to misuse these teaching for their ego-based / selfish behaviors. Yet Allah still guides the faithful to the truth = He destroys the Golden Calf in them and still keeps guiding them to the Ultimate Truth.
 

---

 
Other elements are also present. Theocratized religion is an idol. God does not like idols.
 
Also: the Quran includes warnings on fake teachers or fake Guru’s who will lead us away from the path of God.
 
(Fatir 5)
 
“O mankind, indeed the promise of Allah is truth, so let not the worldly life delude you and be not deceived about Allah by the Deceiver.”
 
In my Turkish Translation it reads: “May no one deceive you with Allah” or “May the Deceiver (the Devil) not deceive you by my teachings.”
 
(Al-Araf 3)
 
“Follow what has been sent down to you from your Lord, and do not take others as guardians besides Him. How seldom are you mindful!”
 
This is a huge theme in Islam (and in Reformed Christianity). There is no Guardian or authority or intermediate person other than God himself. (There are other verses in that direction but I will keep it short).
 
More on this (more spiritual) definition of idolatry:
 
In Luqman 13 it is said:
“And ˹remember˺ when Luqmân said to his son, while advising him, “O my dear son! Never associate ˹anything˺ with Allah ˹in worship˺, for associating ˹others with Him˺ is truly the worst of all wrongs.”
 
https://quran.com/31
 
There are many other instances in which the Quran warns us on Idolatry. The simplistic definition of Idolatry is paganism and/or atheism. The deeper definition is more different that:
Y.N. Ozturk has three definition of idolatry.
1) Believing in divine beings that are different than God himself (we all know about that).
2) Surrendering to a being other than God himself (what I have been talking about in this post until now).
3) Worshiping a being that is other than God himself. That’s the deeper / more spiritual definition that we use in spirituality. Like worshiping power. Thinking that money is the solution to everything. Seeking happiness / salvation in something other than God. Like body cult, obsession with material things like cars for instance, being obsessed with food, or seeking comfort in superficial sexual relations for instance.
 
To sum up: There is no “divine ruler” As Jesus has said “My kingdom is not of this earth” +   “Then give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and give to God the things that are God's.” (Luke 20:25)
 
The meaning of “There is no God but God Himself” in Islam is very deep in that sense. Even a Monarch or a pope or any other institution are either human beings (like us) or institutions that were created by men or women (like us). So what happens if you say either of these things are “divine by nature”?
- It will not work. Not in the spiritual way of seeing things.
 
+ Atheism is not even mentioned in the Quran. So accusing atheists of “waging war on God” by entities like the IRI has absolutely no spiritual basis.
 
So I think we all agree on that.
But, is there an intermediary (institution or individual) with God?
 
I already shared my view on this. And here is what the Quran says (zumer 3):
 
Indeed, sincere devotion is due ˹only˺ to Allah. As for those who take other lords besides Him, ˹saying,˺ “We worship them only so they may bring us closer to Allah,” surely Allah will judge between all1 regarding what they differed about. Allah certainly does not guide whoever persists in lying and disbelief.
 
- So no one can “bring you closer to Allah”. There are teachers and/or masters in many spiritual traditions. Yet the word “Guru” in Hindu means just “teacher”. In India the kids call their primary school teachers “Guru”. These are people you can have spiritual discussions if you want to. You can E-mail them your questions if you are a novice of medium level learner. You can feel sad or cry after them when they leave this mortal plane. But that’s the only thing they are. Human beings with whom you have a teacher-pupil relationship.
 
   So there is no class of “intermediaries”. Not in spiritual terms. And even less in Political terms.
 
But what I said here did not stop Earlier Ottoman rulers from having some spiritually advanced persons as their advisors and personal spiritual teachers (yet that was in the better times of the Empire. All of that disappeared in the regression era of the empire).
 
In Rum-31 it says:
 
˹O believers!˺ Always turn to Him ˹in repentance˺, be mindful of Him, and establish prayers. And do not commit idolatry —˹like˺ those who have divided their faith and split into sects, each rejoicing in what they have.
 
This is understood as an opposition to sectarian divisions. God being singular, we are called to respect the belief of EHl-I-Kitap people (other Abrahamic [+ perhaps other] religions). The egotic sense of superiority toward other groups is not approved of. So there cannot be no clergy or religious caste. There cannot be special sects, sheikhs, Gurus etc. to divide us and give us a “better form of religion” either. This obviously includes Al-Qaida, Hamas, ISIL, the IRI and any political party claiming a monopoly on faith, a “Caliph” or other divine ruler, divine monarch, and anything like that.
 
Here is E-Nam 153
 
Indeed, that is My Path—perfectly straight. So follow it and do not follow other ways, for they will lead you away from His Way. This is what He has commanded you, so perhaps you will be conscious ˹of Allah˺.”
 
   This means that sects and religious institution have the potential of creating more than one path. Yet the path to God is singular. So again: There is no intermediary between God and the individual.
 
The discussion can be dragged on and on. But I will end this with a mention of the Prophet Mohammad. He is said to have cursed 3 types of people in his lifetime:
1) Those who value material things (money) more than their own humanity.
2) Those who destroyed the earth toward “The end of times” (us).
3) Those who misuse his teachings for their own ego-oriented purposes.
 

---

 
Conclusion:
 
The Quran talks about the integration of Political / economic / religious power in a rather negative manner (see my thread on “The Pharaoh”).
 
While Jesus too made this separation between divine and earthly power or kingdom. It was one of his disciple who said that:
 
“The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3”
(Book of Paulus; Romans 13/ 1-7)
 
   And many Islamic “scholars” did not fail to follow suit, seeking for ways to integrate the will of their powerful and wealthy patrons with the teachings of the prophet Mohammad.
 
   I do not agree with anything like this at all. Something that is irrational cannot be a spiritual truth. As Descartes said: “Reason is the signature of God”. The Quran ask perhaps more than dozen of time “don’t you use your reason? Don’t you ever cogitate on this?”.
 
   So those who claim otherwise are deceivers or the “Friends of the Deceiver”. I could go deeper into this but this “Friend of the Deceiver” or “Preacher of the Deceiver” is also a major theme of the Quran.
 
   The main idea here is: A spiritual path is a spiritual path. And politics is politics. It’s not like we don’t care about politics. In fact many of us do care a lot about politics. But there is no “divine rule” or “divine regime” or “divine regime” or anything like that. It doesn’t exist.
 
 
 

[Foxaèr]

A religion is to theocracy as wet is to water.

[The Grand Nudger]

Islamists aren't doing islam wrong Leo. You can come at this from any angle you want. Theocracy is baked into authoritarian faiths.

[Anomalocaris]

“revelation” type religions would absolutely never come into being unless those who partookin their creation ejaculated at every thought of a theocracy in which they are either the theocrats or wield the power behind or around the theocrat.

[Thumpalumpacus]

The real question is "do the people support theocracy?" What book they appeal to is a niggle.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

I don't understand why this is even a question.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

It's a question because Leo is in the process of retconning islam.

[Fake Messiah]

Does the Quran support Theocracy? What else do you think it supports if not theocracy? Democracy maybe?

[Leonardo17]

My approach is mostly based on the idea that humans are evolving and that they have to evolve and change (mutate) in order to survive.

---

   It’s just that nothing (including religion) cannot be business as usual anymore. 500 years ago we canons, longbows, muskets etc. SO what we could do to ourselves, to one another, to the environment had its limits. Everyone is forgetting that Putin has nuclear bombs in his arsenal. Not Cossacks and foot soldiers
  
   So I’m not really “revising” or “correcting” religion. It’s just that there has never been a single way of understanding the message of any religion. So a rational and (according to me) more beneficial approach to scriptures is also possible.

    On your Atheist argument: “Religion is a fairy tales to alleviate the fear of death whose main function is to sedate ordinary people” (the Marxist approach: “Religion is the Opium of the People”). I agree with it. I would never have subscribed to this forum if I didn’t see it this way. That’s a practical / empirical truth. 

   Still: This approach is not the only possible approach. And it’s not the only possible approach in Islam either. In fact my “school” if you like dislikes political divisions based on faith and condemns the usage of religion for political goals and for other worldly goals. 

   And my position is not some subtle / philosophical position. I am decisive in my belief and I will confront people who have a more “political” approach to religion. 

   To me it’s very clear: Religion and/or the study of spiritual realities is a personal path / a personal choice. No one can force you in or out of it. And the progress in that path is very personal. No one can teach you anything because it’s just you and your perceived reality of God. There can be spiritual friends / mentors etc. but the path is 99% a solitary individual path. 

   The fact that you live in a theocratic country or that you are a part of a group with some fundamentalist interpretation of religion is seen (in my “school”) as a hindrance to spiritual progress. Because it’s like learning philosophy. In that kind of environment you cannot do your studies, have your discussions, make your personal mistakes, unlearn, re-learn, debate, have inner conversations etc. 
   And that’s a 20th century pedagogical approach: As I said. We are changing as a species and religion has to evolve as well.

   One thing I hate for instance is the guilt thoughts or thoughts of “original sin”. See old-style parents were very authoritarian toward their kids. (like in the song “When the Man comes around” by Johny Cash). People had to know who was in charge and guilt and fear were constantly used to keep everyone in check.

   We don’t do that anymore. We don’t spoil our kids but we talk to them “as friends” and we try to act in a democratic manner so that they don’t hate us when they turn 15 or so. When we have a problem with teachers we don’t lower our head and say “yes mistress” while looking at the floor because she might hit us with her stick etc.

---

   So that’s the main idea here: evolution   

[The Grand Nudger]

You can hear Mo the Joe talking when he tells his creation story. He built the heavens with might, and he's certainly expanding it. Told the smoke to come out willingly or by force and the smoke surrendered.

Gangster shit, hooah!