Are you equating Fiqh-e-Hanfia with some sort of political system? The excerpt says that the head of the state of the time (how will he be elected, that is another point you are yet to clarify) decided to bestow official recognition upon a legal system devised by an individual heading a council of jurists. It does not answer a single one of my questions. How is that council of jurists formed? How are its members elected? How is the head of the council decided? What is the mechanism of the head of the state adopting the laws of a council? Nothing on any of this.

The second link talks about the international law devised by Muslims in the 8th century and its influence on the future lawmakers of the world. Without answering my questions, it raises further issues. Is the international law devised in the 8th century (when the concept of nationhood, international organizations, treaties, and scores of other factors peculiar to the modern world did not exist) to be implemented in the 21st century?

That is beside the point. First you have to clarify what is the Islamic way of electing the members of the other two houses (if two houses is what Islam prescribes. Does it?).

doesn't increasing yield per acre decreases shortage of food?

i began my argument by speaking of Islamic economic system. if you are calling it ethics that is up to you.

think about it, you have assumed that the economy can't run without a bank. abolishing the interest rate is giving you the jitters or is it not? you are happy with the status quo and I am asking you to do something new.

and even if there is no scarcity why would food be free? i.e. if there is scarcity. has all the land been cultivated now? has all the earth been mined? has the ocean bed been explored? have you mined the moon? has mars exploded?

if i am self sealing my argument why did you come to tell me that?
roza tou nahi lag gaya

think about it again, what will happen if you abolish interest rate? do not stop at the first step.

will it magically solve our problems? na. but with time it will

which paras have you been reading?
here are the two again.

Thus came about this historical reality that a system of law devised by a private legislative council became the law of countries and empires on the strength of its merits and the moral prestige of those who framed it. It had also another important consequence in that it opened up for Muslim thinkers new lines for the codification of Islamic Law. The chief legal systems devised later may have differed from it in their methods of deduction and in their results, but they were all inspired by and based on this model.


it is interesting to note that the Muslims as a people always kept legislation (and so also judiciary) separate from the executive. The develop¬ment of Muslim Law as deduced from the Qur'an and the Hadith has always been the work of private savants and jurists. Tradition has insisted that the State should not interfere with this work, much less monopolize it. It is the freedom of juristic judgment which creates conflicting opinions and alternative solutions, and these provide the coming generations with raw material for sound judgment. These conflicting opinions have given rise to different schools of jurisprudence; yet in one's comparative study of international law in Sunnite, Sh'i'ite, and Kharijite schools and their sub-schools one is agreeably surprised that, despite their water-tight divisions, there are practically no differences of vital significance.


if a fake degree holder can sit in the parliament why can't a mulla who has read books for eight years?
if the politician can be elected so can be the member of the council. or you can devise a competitive exam for them
the legislative council can sit as third house of the parliament

you wanted examples of a voluntary legislature, i gave you example of that above. what you think a legislature is anyways?

as far as the two houses are concerned is it farz to have two houses, you can have one or three or four if you like. as for their election they can by voted I do not think Islam has anything to say against that.

the problem with the modern democracy is that it is controlled by capitalists. whether it is a developing nation or a developed nation. you need to tweak it a bit to make it fair to everyone.

i hope that answers your question
if it does not, let me know again
regards

It’s the same with modern democracy, isn't it? However, it is not Islam that asked Muslims to keep these three branches separate. It was decided by later Muslims as per the requirements of the time. Is that not so?

That is what I have been asking about. How is that laws devised by private savants and jurists will be implemented in today’s world? How will the consensus arrive that certain private individuals are to frame the laws of the state? Who will decide the authority of those individuals to make laws? The king did that in the medieval ages, who will do it now? Islam does not give any specific instructions, and thus we have to devise methods according to our own times, and that is what I have been talking about. Is that so hard to understand?

How will be the international law expanded upon for today’s world and who will do that? And no, there is not a political system in any school of thought, including all of the above. They do provide guidance for certain legal matters to quite an extent but for modern political requirements there is hardly anything at all.

A clergyman who has not read a single book can also sit (and does sit) in the parliament, no one is stopping him from doing that.

Right, finally you came to the point. Finally, you have extended the courtesy of a direct answer to my question. And what is that answer? We can devise any appropriate method. Does that not mean that Islam does not prescribe any clear method of the election of legislature? Does that not mean that we have to devise ways according to the needs of our own times?

A ‘voluntary’ legislature of ‘private jurists’, as you example makes it clear, might have worked in the 8th century. How it will work today, you tell me.

Again, no clear guidance/requirements from Islam in this regard, right?

‘Tweak’ is the catch-world. It’s not necessary that democracy is driven by blind capitalism. It can be tweaked and safeguards imposed for keeping in check the monopolistic tendencies.

Yes, but only to some extent, and you have only agreed with me. It makes clear there are no clear instructions from Islam in a lot of matters, particularly political, and so there is no such thing as “political system” of Islam.

Finally I amam a patient person so keep your horizon at least to a hundred years and answer me. Thanks for your sharing.
Regards

Yes, but the legislature is not the exclusive privilege of the PM and his cabinet. If you are talking about exclusiveness of both, that has not existed in the history of Islam either. It was the prerogative of the executive (king) to give final word as to the adoption or rejection of laws devised by ‘voluntary’ legislature. And the whims of the king could also result in hanging/persecuting the law-makers which is not a very good example.

And who is going to decide the capability of an individual?

Yes.

Yes, times are changing. And it is perfectly appropriate, in fact the only reasonable course, to interpret Qur’an according to the requirements of time. Human thinking and intellect evolves. Needs of the times also change. What do you say? Humans needs and intellectual capabilities remain same over all time?

Here’s an example: Qur’an gives instructions about slavery. But we don’t have slavery anymore? Why? Changing needs. Women could not vote in the early history of Islam. Why should we not do that again? Changed needs. Qur’an does not say anything about the mutual relations of nations. What to do about that? In the same way, Qur’an does not say anything about the mechanism of electing the legislative. How to do that? And the list goes on. Did we have UNO, international treaties, war conventions in the time of the Prophet? No, so how do we deal with them? Again, changing needs. We are dependent for education, technology, economy, and scores of other factors on kafirs. How to manage these needs of changing times? And so on.

Refer above for examples of changing times and requirements. As for enacting laws in the light of Qur’an, that is not the point, and no one is disputing that. The point is, does Qur’an provide clear guidance about the political system that should be followed? That answer is no, it does not. Basic guidelines are provided and upon them we have to construct the system according to, yes, the changing needs of the time.

And that is what I have been yammering about for three days.

Of course, structural changes can be made. As for the suggestions about it, that is a different topic.

Is it even relevant?

there is no islamic economic system as already mentioned by Aqib and Gypsified. A couple of injunctions about money doesn't make it an economic system. Also check out how Islamic Banking is a big fraud.

Yes, a market based economy can't be run without a bank.

There are costs involved in doing all that. Mine the moon? Bhai roza aap ko lag raha hai, zera costs calulate kero sub ki. Economics is a science of scarcity anyway

Because you're doing that.

I have thought about it.

Wishful thinking.

You haven't answered what will be incentives to give loans when there is no interest rate and money is depreciating. Second, there is little growth in periods of high inflation and none during hyper inflation. In the long run things are going to get worse. Third, if the idea of zero interest rates had been as rosy and so amazing as you have pictured why come the rest of the world is not practicing it? And Americans which have been so experimental with their economy, why didn't they settle for it? Feds did push short-term interest rate to zero during the Great Recession of 2007. Did that help? Businesses weren't even willing to take that.

__________________
He that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow (Ecclesiastes 1:18)

but i will try again here, so bear with me a little longer.
1. have you heard of the Phillips curve? it is a negative relation between unemployment and inflation. i.e increase inflation and reduce unemployment. now these are the two ills you want to cure right? so what are you going to choose? in the long run (sorry unemployment comes back to its original level at a higher inflation! the solution is to reduce the long run unemployment level. how? by supply side economics: build schools and institutions, infrastructure etc. how are you going to do that? by investment? where will that investment come from? foreign loans or domestic loans? or are we going to wait for foreign countries to take pity on us?
2. Inflation is something you will have to live with. today the policy rate was announced at 10 % (or was it yesterday?). why? because inflation has been constant at 8.6%. now tell me why do we have inflation presently? is it right to have it or not? is it affecting the poor? the hell with the poor. aren't resources scarce? let them die. economics does not care as it is a positive science right? or does it care?
3. were there banks in the beginning? no. was the world working? yes. why do we have banking system now? changing needs you might say. efficiency of paper money you would say. was there inflation before banks were introduced? if yes give an example. if no then does it not mean that banks are a cause of inflation?

@ Gypsified Quran has injunctions about International Relations
http://www.ips.org.pk/faith-a-societ...-international

i have also sent you a mial
regards

You're denying there isn't any scarcity! Well I must stop here. Once you come to realize there is, we can have this discussion again. There's a reason you're sticking to food examples because you couldn't think of any other. As far as your examples of American grains are concerned, if they are true they must be seen in the context and taken as an exception because they're an exception. And they didn't bust the fact that there is scarcity. Instead of blindly taking the word of Islamic economists, whoever they are, take your time to think about it.

__________________
He that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow (Ecclesiastes 1:18)