You are here

Sharia

Summary:


Sharia Law: Islam’s Warden

I think the best way to begin is with how Sharia is the life-force of Islam. 

To be sure, we must understand why Sharia is the life-force of Islam, and why Islam must impose (by force, if needed) Sharia to the entire world. Once we grasp this tenet, then we can understand how and why myriad specific Sharia laws affect lives.

The basic tenets of Sharia emanate with the assumption that Allah has chosen the believers (i.e., the Muslims) to rule the world. It might sound fascistic, but make no mistake: the Qur’an is absolutely determined to hand over the rule of the world to the followers of Islam: more specifically, to the Bedouin Arabs. Because Islam = Arabism. In the Qur’an (3:104, 3:110) Allah says that Arabs are the best of people ever created.

http://www.real-islam.com/abulkasem/Sharia-Laws-Islam-Warden.htm

Country: 
Belgium
News Date: 
06/04/2018
Summary: 

For the second time in 6 years the ‘Islam’ party will participate in Belgium’s municipal elections. The party wants to create an Islamic State and separate men and women in public transport, Belgian newspaper HLN reports. “Our goal is a 100% Islamic State, but we don’t mean we want to oblige the headscarf,” the party’s founder Redouane Ahrouch says.

Country: 
India
News Date: 
08/09/2017
Summary: 

“Those who oppose, question or do not accept the Sharia or Islam, we will explain these things to them also. If they still are not convinced, then they will be ex-communicated from the religion and not be considered as Muslims.”

Comparable declarations saying that jihad terrorists will be excommunicated and not be considered Muslims have been rare, at best.

Note also the implications of this for Islamic reformers, and for Islamic apologists in the U.S. who insist that Sharia stonings and amputations, misogyny, and oppression of non-Muslims have nothing to do with Islam.

In our opinion, the Imams and Islamic scholars have failed to make the case that the jihad currently practised by ISIS and other groups is not sanctioned by Islamic texts. The critics have broken the very rules they accuse ISIS of not following when they try to make their case by ignoring abrogation and parts of Islamic texts that are inconvenient to their argument.

They have also tried to substantially misrepresent the way Islam was spread after the initial conquest of the Arabian peninsular as been by defensive wars and peaceful invitations to people to become Muslims. The historical record shows a very different picture.

Similarly with slavery, their claim that Islamic states have abolished it (under pressure from Western countries it must be said) is technically accurate, however slavery is still legal under Islamic Sharia law and it is still widely practised in several Islamic states. There is no will or movement in Islam that we are aware of to change Sharia law to abolish slavery and that such a movement is most unlikely to occur as Muhammad kept slaves himself and the Qur'an itself says that captured women may be used as sex-slaves:

[Quran (33:50) - "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee thy wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee" Also Quran (23:5-6) , Quran (4:24) , Quran (8:69) ]

Fatwa: https://islamqa.info/en/20802

Blog: http://abdullahsameer.com/blog/does-islam-allow-sex-with-female-captives-of-war/

The critics have also implicitly endorsed the principle of Sharia hadd punishments (Stoning, flogging, amputation) provided correct [Islamic] procedure has been followed. That these senior figures of Islam, many in the West, who purport to be moderate implicitly endorse such punishments rather than flatly rejecting is troubling.

The most troubling aspect however is that a multitude of senior Islamic figures are unable to make clear and unambiguous case against Islamic jihad and an Islamic caliphate that all, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, can clearly understand. The truth is that this letter appears to be mostly a public relations exercise designed to quiet growing Western fears regarding Islam. To that end, this letter is just another example of 'jihad by the pen' and one our governments have been quietly complicit in since 9/11 as this white paper on Reversing the Ostrich Complex makes clear.

As the article from 2013 by Tom Holland says - “It is not enough to engage with the jihadis solely on the battlefield. They must be defeated as well in mosques, and libraries, and seminar rooms. This is a battle that, in the long run, can only be won by theologians.” On the basis of this very serious effort by these Muslim critics of ISIS, we appear to be a long way from that happening, if indeed that case can be made in any unambiguous way?

Author(s):

Summary: 

Source: “Annual Report 2003 of the European Court of Human Rights, Council of Europe”

Noting that the Welfare Party had pledged to set up a regime based on sharia law, the Court found that sharia was incompatible with the fundamental principles of democracy as set forth in the Convention. It considered that “sharia, which faithfully reflects the dogmas and divine rules laid down by religion, is stable and invariable. Principles such as pluralism in the political sphere or the constant evolution of public freedoms have no place in it”. According to the Court, it was difficult to declare one’s respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverged from Convention values, particularly with regard to its criminal law and criminal procedure, its rules on the legal status of women and the way it intervened in all spheres of private and public life in accordance with religious precepts.

ECHR Judgement Summary: "sharia law is incompatible with democracy and human rights"

Source: “Annual Report 2003 of the European Court of Human Rights, Council of Europe”

Summary: 

Muslims are increasingly running for political office. We have the perfect forum for asking well crafted questions about Sharia. They may say that Sharia is just a religious concept or that there are parts of Sharia they don’t practice. However, only part of Sharia is about how to practice Islam. But it is not enough to reject a particular part of Sharia. All of Sharia is based on the Koran and the Sunna of Mohammed. If you reject Sharia you must also reject the underlying Koran and Sunna.

Summary: 

From very early on, Sharia judges utilized a “near endless list of ambiguities” that functioned as an “escape hatch” from corporal punishment. Even in the few Muslim majority nations where Hudud sentences are still applied (e.g., Nigeria, Sudan, Iran, and Saudi Arabia), they are infrequently carried out:

Between 1981 and 1992, there were four executions by stoning in Saudi Arabia and forty-five amputations for theft. In a one-year sample (1982-83), out of 4,925 convictions for theft, only two hands were cut off. The rest of the guilty were punished by taʿzīr [discretionary sentencing applicable to lesser crimes]. In the same time period, out of 659 convictions for Hudud-level sexual crimes, no one was stoned. Many death sentences are the result of political punishments, not the Hudud. In Nigeria’s northern states, all of which have adopted Shariah-based legal codes, a few amputations for theft have taken place. There have been at least two sentences to death for adultery, but in all cases so far ambiguities were found to release the guilty party.

Admin: Four executions by stoning and 45 amputations in a decade seems to be an acceptable price to pay for liberals to try and exculpate sharia. This article also erroneously implies sharia only appiies to Muslims when the manual of sharia clearly states that, with a few exceptions, it does apply to non-Muslims. The article also ignore the many people slaughtered by sharia vigilantes for 'blasphemy', insulting Islam etc.

Country: 
Pakistan
News Date: 
05/03/2018
Summary: 

The petitioner maintained that Sharia provides solution for all ills confronted by Pakistan and asked the court to order the respondents to amend the Constitution to implement Islamic laws.

015 under Article 184(3) of the Constitution through his counsel Tariq Asad.

The Registrar office of the Supreme Court had turned down the plea in February 2016 by declaring it as non-maintainable. The cleric had challenged the rejection.

Summary: 

Sharīʿah, also spelled Sharia, the fundamental religious concept of Islam, namely its law, systematized during the 2nd and 3rd centuries of the Muslim era (8th–9th centuries CE).

Total and unqualified submission to the will of Allah (God) is the fundamental tenet of Islam: Islamic law is therefore the expression of Allah’s command for Muslim society and, in application, constitutes a system of duties that are incumbent upon a Muslim by virtue of his religious belief. Known as the Sharīʿah (literally, “the path leading to the watering place”), the law constitutes a divinely ordained path of conduct that guides Muslims toward a practical expression of religious conviction in this world and the goal of divine favour in the world to come.

...

In classical form the Sharīʿah differs from Western systems of law in two principal respects. In the first place the scope of the Sharīʿah is much wider, since it regulates an individual’s relationship not only with one’s neighbours and with the state, which is the limit of most other legal systems, but also with God and with one’s own conscienceRitual practices, such as the daily prayers, almsgiving, fasting, and pilgrimage, are an integral part of Sharīʿah law and usually occupy the first chapters in the legal manuals. The Sharīʿah is also concerned as much with ethical standards as with legal rules, indicating not only what an individual is entitled or bound to do in law but also what one ought, in conscience, to do or refrain from doing. Accordingly, certain acts are classified as praiseworthy (mandūb), which means that their performance brings divine favour and their omission divine disfavour, and others as blameworthy (makrūh), which means that omission brings divine favour and commission divine disfavour; but in neither case is there any legal sanction of punishment or reward, nullity or validity. The Sharīʿah is not merely a system of law, but a comprehensive code of behaviour that embraces both private and public activities

...

Offenses against another person, from homicide to assault, are punishable by retaliation (qiṣāṣ), the offender being subject to precisely the same treatment as his victim. But this type of offense is regarded as a civil injury rather than a crime in the technical sense, since it is not the state but only the victim or his family who have the right to prosecute and to opt for compensation or blood money (diyah) in place of retaliation.

For six specific crimes the punishment is fixed (ḥadd): death for apostasy and for highway robbery; amputation of the hand for theft; death by stoning for extramarital sex relations (zinā) where the offender is a married person and 100 lashes for unmarried offenders; 80 lashes for an unproved accusation of unchastity (qadhf) and for the drinking of any intoxicant.

See also: http://www.shariawatch.org.uk/?q=content/can-islamic-law-evolve

Summary: 

While many secular advocates, right-wing parties and orthodox Islamic groups hold tight to the idea of a static, unresponsive and irrational Islamic law, the traditional framework of Islamic Legal Theory boasts otherwise. Here, the neglected principle of ijtihād is analysed.

The evolutionary vs. immutable nature of Islamic law has been a controversial topic for centuries abound. Can Islamic law develop in response to the ever changing demands of human life? Or have its dictates been determined once and for all, binding it to a complete, static and indisputable set of laws? Is Islamic law an ancient, outdated system that lives in an era far away from our so-called modern times or can it evolve in response to new challenges and circumstances? As Islam becomes an increasingly hot topic of discussion in the media, amongst universities, work places and the general public, such questions are crying out for attention. So, here is my abridged analysis of the notion that lies at the heart of this discussion: ijtihād.

...

But this assumption rests upon an excessively reductive and shallow perception of the nature of Islamic law. Islamic law can be divided into two spheres: the fixed and the flexible. Both spheres grow from the roots of Islam (Sharī’a) but differ in nature.

The fixed sphere constitutes the core of Islamic law and can be seen as encompassing those areas of law related to the rights of Allāh over the Muslim community. This includes acts of worship, prescribed penalties and all areas of law that are directly expressed in the Qur’ān and Sunnah, either explicitly or implicitly by way of strict analogy. Examples include daily prayers and the prohibition of interest. Signifying the absolute limits of the law, these rulings are fixed and unalterable; they cannot be revised or renewed at any period, regardless of the circumstances that pertain. This sphereconstitutes the basic laws of Islam and provides the boundaries within which the rest of the law is to be developed.

See also: http://www.shariawatch.org.uk/?q=content/islamic-law

Pages

Subscribe to Sharia