Islam and the Challenge of Democracy: A "Boston Review" Book / Edition 1

Paperback (Print)
Rent from
(Save 59%)
Est. Return Date: 04/02/2015
Buy New
Buy New from
Buy Used
Buy Used from
(Save 37%)
Item is in good condition but packaging may have signs of shelf wear/aging or torn packaging.
Condition: Used – Good details
Used and New from Other Sellers
Used and New from Other Sellers
from $6.99
Usually ships in 1-2 business days
(Save 74%)
Other sellers (Paperback)
  • All (18) from $6.99   
  • New (7) from $14.98   
  • Used (11) from $6.99   


The events of September 11 and the subsequent war on terrorism have provoked widespread discussion about the possibility of democracy in the Islamic world. Such topics as the meaning of jihad, the role of clerics as authoritative interpreters, and the place of human rights and toleration in Islam have become subjects of urgent public debate around the world. With few exceptions, however, this debate has proceeded in isolation from the vibrant traditions of argument within Islamic theology, philosophy, and law.

Islam and the Challenge of Democracy aims to correct this deficiency. The book engages the reader in a rich discourse on the challenges of democracy in contemporary Islam. The collection begins with a lead essay by Khaled Abou El Fadl, who argues that democracy, especially a constitutional democracy that protects basic individual rights, is the form of government best suited to promoting a set of social and political values central to Islam. Because Islam is about submission to God and about each individual's responsibility to serve as His agent on Earth, Abou El Fadl argues, there is no place for the subjugation to human authority demanded by authoritarian regimes. The lead essay is followed by eleven others from internationally respected specialists in democracy and religion. They address, challenge, and engage Abou El Fadl's work. The contributors include John Esposito, Muhammad Fadel, Noah Feldman, Nader Hashemi, Bernard Haykel, Muqtedar Khan, Saba Mahmood, David Novak, William Quandt, Kevin Reinhart, and Jeremy Waldron.

Read More Show Less

Editorial Reviews

Philadelphia Inquirer
In a just world, Khaled Abou El Fadl would get as much publicity as Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Bin Laden and Zarqawi blow up buildings and slaughter fellow Muslims. Abou El Fadl blows up everything those two terrorists supposedly believe in.
— Carlin Romano
The Jerusalem Post - Bezalel Stern
What El Fadl achieves in his short book is noteworthy primarily because he brings the concept of democracy home, literally, for the world's Muslims. By giving democracy a technical and legal basis in Islamic law, El Fadl provides it with a certificate of authentication that secular writers . . . cannot.
Philadelphia Inquirer - Carlin Romano
In a just world, Khaled Abou El Fadl would get as much publicity as Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Bin Laden and Zarqawi blow up buildings and slaughter fellow Muslims. Abou El Fadl blows up everything those two terrorists supposedly believe in.
From the Publisher
"What El Fadl achieves in his short book is noteworthy primarily because he brings the concept of democracy home, literally, for the world's Muslims. By giving democracy a technical and legal basis in Islamic law, El Fadl provides it with a certificate of authentication that secular writers . . . cannot."—Bezalel Stern, The Jerusalem Post

"In a just world, Khaled Abou El Fadl would get as much publicity as Osama bin Laden and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Bin Laden and Zarqawi blow up buildings and slaughter fellow Muslims. Abou El Fadl blows up everything those two terrorists supposedly believe in."—Carlin Romano, Philadelphia Inquirer

The Jerusalem Post
What El Fadl achieves in his short book is noteworthy primarily because he brings the concept of democracy home, literally, for the world's Muslims. By giving democracy a technical and legal basis in Islamic law, El Fadl provides it with a certificate of authentication that secular writers . . . cannot.
— Bezalel Stern
Read More Show Less

Product Details

  • ISBN-13: 9780691119380
  • Publisher: Princeton University Press
  • Publication date: 3/8/2004
  • Edition description: New Edition
  • Edition number: 1
  • Pages: 136
  • Product dimensions: 5.52 (w) x 8.44 (h) x 0.45 (d)

Meet the Author

Khaled Abou El Fadl is Professor of Law at the UCLA School of Law. His recent books include "The Place of Tolerance in Islam". Joshua Cohen is the Leon and Anne Goldberg Professor of the Humanities at Massachusetts Institute of Technology and coeditor of the "Boston Review". Deborah Chasman is coeditor of the "Boston Review".
Read More Show Less

Read an Excerpt

Islam and the Challenge of Democracy

A Boston Review Book
By Khaled Abou El Fadl

Princeton University Press

Khaled Abou El Fadl
All right reserved.

ISBN: 0691119384

Chapter One

Chapter 1



A Muslim jurist writing a few centuries ago on the subject of Islam and government would have commenced his treatise by distinguishing three types of political systems. The first he would have described as a natural system-like a primitive state of nature, an uncivilized, anarchic world where the most powerful tyrannize the rest. Instead of law there would be custom; instead of government there would be tribal elders who would be obeyed only so long as they remained the strongest.

The jurist would then describe a second system, ruled by a prince or king whose word is the law. Because the law would be fixed by the arbitrary will of the ruler and the people would obey out of necessity or compulsion, this system, too, would be tyrannical and illegitimate.

The third and best system would be the caliphate, based on Shari'ah law-the body of Muslim religious law founded on the Qur'an and the conduct and statements of the Prophet. According to Muslim jurists, Shari'ah law fulfills the criteria of justice and legitimacy and binds the governed and governor alike. Because it is based on the rule of law and thus deprives human beings of arbitrary authority over each other, the caliphate system was considered superior to any other.1

In espousing the rule of law and limited government, classical Muslim scholars embraced core elements of modern democratic practice. Limited government and the rule of law, however, are only two elements in the system of government with the most compelling claim to legitimacy today. Democracy's moral power lies in the idea that the citizens of a nation are sovereign, and-in modern representative democracies-they express their sovereign will by electing representatives. In a democracy, the people are the source of the law, and the law in turn ensures the fundamental rights that protect the well-being and interests of the individual members of the sovereignty.

For Islam, democracy poses a formidable challenge. Muslim jurists have argued that law made by a sovereign monarch is illegitimate because it substitutes human authority for God's sovereignty. But law made by sovereign citizens faces the same problem of legitimacy. In Islam, God is the only sovereign and the ultimate source of legitimate law. How, then, can a democratic conception of the people's authority be reconciled with an Islamic understanding of God's authority?

Answering this question is extraordinarily important but also extraordinarily difficult, for both political and conceptual reasons. On the political side, democracy faces a number of practical hurdles in Islamic countries-authoritarian political traditions, a history of colonial and imperial rule, and state domination of the economy and society. But philosophical and doctrinal questions are important too, and I propose to focus on them here as the beginning of a discussion of the possibilities for democracy in the Islamic world.

A central conceptual problem is that modern democracy evolved over centuries within the distinctive context of a post-Reformation, market-oriented Christian Europe. Does it make sense to look for points of contact in a remarkably different context? My answer begins from the premise that democracy and Islam are defined in the first instance by their underlying moral values and the attitudinal commitments of their adherents-not by the ways that those values and commitments have been applied. If we focus on those fundamental moral values, we will see that the tradition of Islamic political thought contains both interpretive and practical possibilities that can be developed into a democratic system. To be sure, these doctrinal potentialities may remain unrealized: without willpower, an inspired vision, and a moral commitment there can be no democracy in Islam. But Muslims, for whom Islam is the authoritative frame of reference, can arrive at the conviction that democracy is an ethical good, and that the pursuit of this good does not require abandoning Islam.


Although Muslim jurists debated political systems, the Qur'an itself does not specify a particular form of government. But it does identify a set of social and political values that are central to a Muslim polity. Three values are of particular importance: pursuing justice through social cooperation and mutual assistance (49:13, 11:119); establishing a nonautocratic, consultative method of governance; and institutionalizing mercy and compassion in social interactions (6:12, 6:54, 21:107, 27:77, 29:51, 45:20). So, all else being equal, Muslims today ought to endorse the form of government that is most effective in helping them promote these values.

The Case for Democracy

Several considerations suggest that democracy-and especially a constitutional democracy that protects basic individual rights-is that form. My central argument (others will emerge later) is that democracy-by assigning equal rights of speech, association, and suffrage to all-offers the greatest potential for promoting justice and protecting human dignity, without making God responsible for injustice or the degradation of human beings. A fundamental Qur'anic idea is that God vested all of humanity with a kind of divinity by making every person the viceroy of God on this earth: "Remember, when your Lord said to the angels:'I have to place a vicegerent on earth,' they said:'Will you place one there who will create disorder and shed blood, while we intone Your litanies and sanctify Your name?' And God said: 'I know what you do not know'" (2:30). In particular, human beings, as God's vicegerents, are responsible for making the world more just. By assigning equal political rights to all adults, democracy expresses that special status of human beings in God's creation and enables them to discharge that responsibility.

Of course, God's vicegerent does not share God's perfection of judgment and will. A constitutional democracy, then, acknowledges the errors of judgment, temptations, and vices associated with human fallibility by enshrining some basic moral standards in a constitutional document-moral standards that express the dignity of individuals. To be sure, democracy does not ensure justice. But it does establish a basis for pursuing justice and thus for fulfilling a fundamental responsibility assigned by God to each one of us.

In a representative democracy some individuals have greater authority than others. But a democratic system makes those authorities accountable to all and thus resists the tendency of the powerful to render themselves immune from judgment. This requirement of accountability is consistent with the imperative of justice in Islam. If a political system has no institutional mechanisms to call the unjust to account, then the system itself is unjust, regardless of whether injustice has actually been committed. If criminal law does not assign punishment for rape, then it is unjust, quite apart from whether that crime was ever committed. It is a moral good in and of itself that a democracy, through the institutions of the vote, the separation and division of power, and the guarantee of pluralism at least offers the possibility of redress.

We have a provisional case for democracy, then, founded on a fundamental Islamic idea about the special status of human beings in God's creation. It is provisional because we have not yet considered the great challenge to that case: how can the higher law of Shari'ah, founded on God's sovereignty, be reconciled with the democratic idea that the people, as the sovereign, can be free to flout Shari'ah law?

God as the Sovereign

Early in Islamic history the issue of God's political dominion (hakimiyyat Allah) was raised by a group known as the Haruriyya (later known as the Khawarij) when they rebelled against the fourth Rightly Guided Caliph 'Ali Ibn Abi Talib. Initially the supporters of 'Ali, the Haruriyya turned against him when he agreed to arbitrate his political dispute with a competing political faction, which was led by a man named Mu'awiya.

'Ali himself had agreed to the arbitration on the condition that the arbitrators be bound by the Qur'an and give full consideration to the supremacy of the Shari'ah. But the Khawarij-pious, puritanical, and fanatical-believed that God's law clearly supported 'Ali. So they rejected arbitration as inherently unlawful and, in effect, a challenge to God's sovereignty. According to the Khawarij, 'Ali's behavior showed that he was willing to compromise God's supremacy by transferring decision making to human agency. They declared 'Ali a traitor to God, and after efforts to reach a peaceful resolution failed, they assassinated him. After 'Ali's death, Mu'awiya seized power and established himself as the first caliph of the Umayyad Dynasty.

Anecdotal reports about the debates between 'Ali and the Khawarij reflect unmistakable tension about the meaning of legality and the implications of the rule of law. In one such report members of the Khawarij accused 'Ali of accepting the judgment and dominion (hakimiyya) of human beings instead of abiding by the dominion of God's law. Upon hearing of this accusation, 'Ali called on the people to gather around him and brought out a large copy of the Qur'an. 'Ali touched the Qur'an while instructing it to speak to the people and inform them about God's law. Surprised, the people who had gathered around 'Ali exclaimed, "What are you doing? The Qur'an cannot speak, for it is not a human being!" Upon hearing this, 'Ali exclaimed that this was exactly his point. The Qur'an, 'Ali explained, is but ink and paper, and it does not speak for itself. Instead, it is human beings who give effect to it according to their limited personal judgments and opinions.2

Such stories are subject to multiple interpretations, but this one points most importantly to the dogmatic superficiality of proclamations of God's sovereignty that sanctify human determinations. Notably, the Khawarij's rallying cry of "Dominion belongs to God" or "The Qur'an is the judge" (la hukma illa li'llah or al-hukmu li'l-Qur'an) is nearly identical to the slogans invoked by contemporary fundamentalist groups.3 But considering the historical context, the Khawarij's sloganeering was initially a call for the symbolism of legality and the supremacy of law that later descended into an unequivocal radicalized demand for fixed lines of demarcation between what is lawful and unlawful.

To a believer, God is all-powerful and the ultimate owner of the heavens and earth. But when it comes to the laws in a political system, arguments claiming that God is the sole legislator endorse a fatal fiction that is indefensible from the point of view of Islamic theology. Such arguments pretend that some human agents have perfect access to God's will, and that human beings could become the perfect executors of the divine will without inserting their own human judgments and inclinations in the process.

Moreover, claims about God's sovereignty assume that the divine legislative will seeks to regulate all human interactions, that Shari'ah is a complete moral code that prescribes for every eventuality. But perhaps God does not seek to regulate all human affairs, and instead leaves human beings considerable latitude in regulating their own affairs as long as they observe certain minimal standards of moral conduct, including the preservation and promotion of human dignity and well-being. In the Qur'anic discourse, God commanded creation to honor human beings because of the miracle of the human intellect-an expression of the abilities of the divine. Arguably, the fact that God honored the miracle of the human intellect and the human being as a symbol of divinity is sufficient to justify a moral commitment to protecting and preserving the integrity and dignity of that symbol of divinity. But-and this is 'Ali's central point-God's sovereignty provides no escape from the burdens of human agency.4

When human beings search for ways to approximate God's beauty and justice, then, they do not deny God's sovereignty; they honor it. They also honor it in the attempt to safeguard the moral values that reflect the attributes of the divine. If we say that the only legitimate source of law is the divine text and that human experience and intellect are irrelevant to the pursuit of the divine will, then divine sovereignty will always stand as an instrument of authoritarianism and an obstacle to democracy.5 But that authoritarian view denigrates God's sovereignty.

I develop this argument later, but to make the case more compelling and accessible, I first lay a broader foundation for Islamic political and legal doctrines.


If, as many Muslim fundamentalists and Western Orientalists contend, God's dominion or sovereignty means that God is the sole legislator, then one would expect a caliph or Muslim ruler to be treated as God's agent or representative. If within a political system God is the only sovereign, then the ruler ought to be appointed by the divine sovereign, serve at His pleasure, and implement His will. But just as the meaning and implications of God's sovereignty were the subject of an intense debate in premodern Islam, so were the powers of the ruler and the place of law in circumscribing those powers. And some lines of argument in the debate resonate with modern democratic ideas.

Ruler and Ruled

It is well established, at least in Sunni Islam, that the Prophet died without naming a successor to lead the Muslim community. The Prophet intentionally left the choice of leadership to the Muslim nation as a whole.6 A statement attributed to the Rightly Guided Caliph Abu Bakr asserts, "God has left people to manage their own affairs so that they will choose a leader who will serve their interests."7

The word khalifa (caliph), the title given to the Muslim leader, literally means successor or deputy. Early on Muslims debated whether it was appropriate to name the leader the Caliph of God (khalifat Allah),but most scholars preferred the designation Caliph of the Prophet of God (khalifat rasul Allah). But the Caliph-whether the Prophet's successor or God's deputy-did not enjoy the authority of either the Prophet or God, whose powers of legislation, revelation, absolution, and punishment cannot be delegated to any other. But how much of the Prophet's authority does the Caliph enjoy? And to whom does the Caliph answer?

If the Caliph's primary obligation is to implement divine law, then arguably the Caliph answers only to God. So long as the Caliph's actions are plausible interpretations of God's mandates, such interpretations must be accepted and the Caliph has fulfilled his duties to the people.


Excerpted from Islam and the Challenge of Democracy by Khaled Abou El Fadl Excerpted by permission.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.

Read More Show Less

Table of Contents

Islam and the Challenge of Democracy by KHALED ABOU EL FADL 3
Change from Within by NADER A. HASHEMI 49
Democracy and Conflict by JEREMY WALDRON 55
The Best Hope by NOAH FELDMAN 59
The Primacy of Political Philosophy by M. A. MUQTEDAR KHAN 63
The Importance of Context by A. KEVIN REINHART 69
Is Liberalism Islam's Only Answer? by SABA MAHMOOD 74
Popular Support First by BERNARD HAYKEL 78
Too Far from Tradition by MOHAMMAD H. FADEL 81
Revealed Law and Democracy by DAVID NOVAK 87
Practice and Theory by JOHN L. ESPOSITO 93
Islam Is Not the Problem by WILLIAM B. QUANDT 101
Contributors 129
Index 131

Read More Show Less

Customer Reviews

Be the first to write a review
( 0 )
Rating Distribution

5 Star


4 Star


3 Star


2 Star


1 Star


Your Rating:

Your Name: Create a Pen Name or

Barnes & Review Rules

Our reader reviews allow you to share your comments on titles you liked, or didn't, with others. By submitting an online review, you are representing to Barnes & that all information contained in your review is original and accurate in all respects, and that the submission of such content by you and the posting of such content by Barnes & does not and will not violate the rights of any third party. Please follow the rules below to help ensure that your review can be posted.

Reviews by Our Customers Under the Age of 13

We highly value and respect everyone's opinion concerning the titles we offer. However, we cannot allow persons under the age of 13 to have accounts at or to post customer reviews. Please see our Terms of Use for more details.

What to exclude from your review:

Please do not write about reviews, commentary, or information posted on the product page. If you see any errors in the information on the product page, please send us an email.

Reviews should not contain any of the following:

  • - HTML tags, profanity, obscenities, vulgarities, or comments that defame anyone
  • - Time-sensitive information such as tour dates, signings, lectures, etc.
  • - Single-word reviews. Other people will read your review to discover why you liked or didn't like the title. Be descriptive.
  • - Comments focusing on the author or that may ruin the ending for others
  • - Phone numbers, addresses, URLs
  • - Pricing and availability information or alternative ordering information
  • - Advertisements or commercial solicitation


  • - By submitting a review, you grant to Barnes & and its sublicensees the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable right and license to use the review in accordance with the Barnes & Terms of Use.
  • - Barnes & reserves the right not to post any review -- particularly those that do not follow the terms and conditions of these Rules. Barnes & also reserves the right to remove any review at any time without notice.
  • - See Terms of Use for other conditions and disclaimers.
Search for Products You'd Like to Recommend

Recommend other products that relate to your review. Just search for them below and share!

Create a Pen Name

Your Pen Name is your unique identity on It will appear on the reviews you write and other website activities. Your Pen Name cannot be edited, changed or deleted once submitted.

Your Pen Name can be any combination of alphanumeric characters (plus - and _), and must be at least two characters long.

Continue Anonymously

    If you find inappropriate content, please report it to Barnes & Noble
    Why is this product inappropriate?
    Comments (optional)