George Banna, Moufid Bitar
14-10-2026
Al-Julani refrained from using the word “democracy” in order to emphasize his rejection of democracy and his reliance on the concept of “their affairs are conducted by consultation among themselves.” It can be concluded that the alternative to the democracy rejected by al-Julani has become consultation among themselves, given the scarcity of countries and societies that operate by consultation among themselves. It can be assumed that those countries and societies did not pay attention to what Bin Laden and his successor al-Julani discovered regarding the concept of “their affairs are conducted by consultation among themselves.”
We were very surprised that the concept of democracy, with all its meanings, implications, contents, and intellectual foundations, was taken on an equal footing with the concept of “Shura,” that is, considering it a political means with contents that convinced most of the 8 billion people, equivalent to the concept of Shura, which only convinced a small number of the 8 billion in the world. The reason is that the issue of Shura among them has no content, meaning, or proven benefit. How can democracy be placed on the same level as Shura? Knowing that they are two things that are different to the point of contradiction and have no connection between them at all. All of this indicated that the concept of Shura was not clear to people, as was the concept of democracy, that is, there is ignorance among some of both concepts.
Democracy is a product of the Roman Senate, roughly ten centuries before the advent of Ibn Abdullah. Since then, democracy has meant the rule of free people by themselves. This is something that scholars of Islamic jurisprudence have failed to grasp, because they are inherently ignorant and uninformed, and because they have never engaged with it. Consequently, they have been unable to differentiate between democracy and Shura (consultation), that is, between the Muhammadan system and democracy of Greco-Roman origin. Scholars are not experts in politics and governance, so they cannot evaluate democracy, which is absent from their cultural and intellectual framework. They don’t even have a translation for the word “democracy,” which was adopted as is and written in Arabic instead of Latin. Therefore, it can be said that al-Julani is ignorant of the implications of democracy, and even of the implications of Shura, which differs from democracy. This criminal of bombings and assassinations, al-Julani, has not cared about any of these matters. Even if he had cared, his efforts would have yielded nothing. He is incapable, with his limited cultural and intellectual capacity, of understanding such matters. The very limited understanding of democracy is that democracy is a thought, and thought requires a mind. Consultation is obedience and submission, and it does not require the existence of a mind. Therefore, Al-Julani, in a sermon partially quoted from Abu Bakr, demanded obedience… Obey me!!!
If al-Julani had at least been able to understand Shura (consultation), he would have known that it is an ancient Arab system, known to the tribes of the Arabian Peninsula before Islam, where the tribal sheikh had a Shura council. The Shura council was composed, according to the will of the tribal sheikh, of men who were characterized by sound judgment according to his standards. This system was associated with religion, like other systems that prevailed in the pre-Islamic era. In the Quran, it is said in Surah Al Imran, “And if you had been harsh and hard-hearted, they would have dispersed from around you. So pardon them and ask forgiveness for them and consult them in the matter. And when you have decided, then rely upon Allah. Indeed, Allah loves those who rely upon Him.” So whoever relies upon Allah does not need to rely upon reason. God commanded His Messenger to consult his companions regarding a problem that occurred after the defeat at Uhud. Therefore, God revealed to His Prophet a verse, “And consult them in the matter,” etc.
