|
|
|
|
|
By
Michael Johnathan McDonald
Copyright © 2004
When one
takes a religious person and places him in the command of authority, position of
power or rule of law over the land, he must make his decisions based upon a
prophet who had received Gods revelations. When that prophet delivers his set of
beliefs, values, and practices, claiming it as the law of the land, to his
chosen target base and bases his or her own interpretation on revelations, from
a divine being, or God, then ultimately the prophet is mixing his or her own
infallibility of that message onto society.
Law in the Islamic world has not
progressed toward a separation of church and state. Therefore, religious leaders
have a large sway in the politics of the Arab-Islamic world. So much so that the
emotionalism that faith of any particular religion brings will cloud
pragmatically decisions needed to run any a civilization. In the beginnings laws
were created by families, then tribes, to protect their own people. Later laws
protected the community of many families who decided to live together. Laws were
important so that the community could protect their own power. Over time various
tribes within a certain area warred too often bringing a necessity to either
unify or keep on warring forever. Religions played a central role in taking out
the human aspect of who would be the ultimate leader of those groups and placing
it onto an unforeseen identity in which ideals ran those unified groups. The
same can be said of most of the religious institutions that begun in history.
Usually one or two people began a religion and later others set up laws to
govern and protect that new religion, i.e. protect their tribal power. As people
began to populate and settle down a new invention emerged pushing the groups
into comminutes and ultimately settling down to create civilizations. Religion
played a large part in unifying large groups of tribes, and or communities in
these new civilizations. Yet, not everyone believed in religion as an idea. This
eventually led to civic laws that covered the behavior of all people in society.
This eventually begot a need by the proponents of theocracy to institutionalize
religion and combine there two separate ideals. Institutionalized religions have
always been set against a group of laws constituting its base for expansive as
well as comprehensive control of a group of peoples. This did not play well with
civic law. There were, in fact, too many people that did not have faith in the
unforeseen. Faith was the backbone of religion, yet law’s backbone was not
faith. The two should not be entwined. Many people resented being forced to
believe in a deity not in the physical. There are always a percentage of people
who would never have faith in a religion. Yet they had to comply with the laws
of the civics. There are many questions that came up in society that have
nothing to do with faith of that religion. This is evident in all cases in
history in civilizations. Problems must be solved by a practical system. Usually
religion is not a practical system. Usually religion is practiced with zeal or
conscientious devotion, whereas law is practiced with patience and pragmatic
solutions for the good of the civilization.
Civilizations are combinations of institutions and ideas by
which a large number of people conduct their complex-collective way of life over
an extended period of time. In order for a civilization to run smoothly it needs
basic common sense laws. As religion progressed some advanced in separating the
zeal or conscientious devotion and common sense while others chose to keep the
two entwined. The progressive religions allowed for inclusion of diversity of
groups to join its folds as the other regressive religions kept to themselves
remaining exclusive to who could join its folds by law. They felt threatened
they would lose their power. As populations of the earth grew and people began
to fill up the lands there came needs for diverse religions to join
international laws to govern basic needs to run civilizations. This is evident
in the world community in which we all live now.
For the Islamic movement that came out of the Middle Ages
the new religion of the world stage chose to keep its law in the hands of the
word of God. At the same time in the west, the Catholic Church was beginning to
exert itself as the law on the main continent of Europe. It would be about 500
more years before the real separation of Church and State movements began in
England to make baby steps to separate themselves in society in the west that we
enjoy today. When Muhammad unified the Arabs under his new religion, he brought
forth the only laws he knew of at the time. Those of Arab decent, being
theocratic heritage, and the many Jewish tribes living in Medina at the time who
also lived a theocratic lifestyle, were his examples of civics. For Muhammad,
the Prophet of Islam, Law and Religion were inseparable. The ideas of separation
of church and state had not come into play yet in history until well after the
Islamic law code was codified.
Before Muhammad died he had planned on dictating an
addition of the Qu’ran. “Much of it was recorded
before hand at the various friends during Muhammad’s conquests, mainly his
secretary who was a fifteen year old boy, named Zaid
ibn Thabit, who wrote it
all down (120,000 words in all) equivalent to a book of three hundred pages on
bones and stones that lay around the living quarters of Muhammad and his wives
and many concubines” (Fergosi 61). Muhammad had said
prior to his death that he […] “would issue an addition to the
Qu’ran to prevent his disciples from lapsing into
error” What errors are these? This statement has long troubled some Muslims” (Fergosi
61).
“Unscrupulous scribes inserted
their own verses into the suras. A
sura is any of the 114 chapters or sections of the
Qu’ran. One of the most famous
Qu’ran falsifiers was named Abdullad
ibn Saad, who later
became an admiral and commanded the Muslim expedition to Cyprus in 649, when a
young man wrote his own verse in the revelations that Muhammad was dictating to
him, perhaps to enliven the unwise enough to tell his friends in Medina the
story of his misdeeds as if it were a great joke. This story of indiscretion was
repeated to an enraged Muhammad and the Prophet, who was not man enough to
forgive an offence lightly, particularly if it made him look ridiculous, tried
to have the man murdered” (Fergosi 62). The young
man ran as fast as he could to Mecca to escape the assassination. It would be
Othman [Uthman], Muhammad's son in law, who would
manage to win him a pardon.
The final version of the
Qu'ran came in four different versions. Still more
variations would be delivered down the pike until three of the versions are
destroyed on purpose the self controlled version kept by
Uthman ( third rightly guided caliph) who
established the first published version of the Qu’ran
(Koran). He decides that the other three versions were not to his liking. This
is the one we have today. Some scholars believe the Qu'ran
was like a news paper gathering of what Muhammad had said. Like journalists
recording the Prophet’s daily thoughts and meetings he held. Not all Muslims are
convinced about the eternal, uncreated and nonchangable
nature of the Qu'ran.
At first the
Qu'ran was the main book of a source for guidance of
the Islamites, but after new problems arose for
Islam and nothing in the Qu'ran could be cited to
guide them, the leaders of the movement decided to look toward the collected
traditions of the reports and sayings of the Prophet outside of the
Qu'ran. In addition, new converts wanted to know
more about Muhammad, the man himself, and the collected body of traditions was a
subsidiary authority to the Qu'ran. For the first
century and a half after Muhammad has passed on the Qu'ran
was alone in its legal authority. The
Hadith (a’hadith)
had to be verified for the many stories that were gathered and to put together
to form the Hadith. The
Hadith is the record of sayings of the Prophet Muhammad's precepts
(deeds), actions, and life, which constitute his Sunna.
This was also together with the tradition of its chain of transmission. There
was one main goal in authenticating the traditions. This was called the “chain
of authority”. Who heard what from whom? This eventually split the Arabs into
different camps. The Sunni’s and Shiites, already split by political disputes,
then various other off-shoots, all disputed what the chain of authority was.
“At the time of Muhammad’s death
(632) there were no less than 600,000 stories of the Muhammad. “Al-Bukhari,
the most famous of the researchers a little more than two hundred years after
Muhammad had gone throughout some 593,000 of them. We can only imagine what was
in them. The surviving 7,275 anecdotes were gathered in a book which he called
“The Correct Book” [Hadith] (Fergosi
64). Although, the system to ascertain the authenticity of what is called the
traditions was highly disputed even unto today. “One gentleman called
Ibn Abi al-Awja,
who was put to death in Iraq in 772, confessed before his execution that he had
made up no fewer than four thousands traditions” of Muhammad for print (Fergosi
64).
Early in Islam groups accused
scholars and leaders on the validity of the Qu’ran.
These groups fought for the establishment of secularism in Islamic conquered
territories. There were many problems with tolerance of others and this created
many problems in administrating conquered lands. Conquered peoples revolted
over the strictness of the codes of exclusiveness of privilege found the
Qu’ran. The subjects were treated like slaves and
taxed heavily by their masters. This placed a burden on the
Umyyads, the rulying dynasty at the time.
Many changes in society were needed as subjects, and some
arabs began to revolt in disfavor of the new
standards of the Qu’ranic law. Umar
II (Ruled 717-720) an Umayyad Caliph realized that the domination of one ethnic
caste over the other peoples was anachronistic. The animosity between the Arabs
and the non-Arabs would have to be dissolved. He brought in the
term Muslimization. This meant that inorder to the conqured people to become
unified and work as a whole for the good of the civilization, they would have to
convert to Islam. The inclusion of divere groups was slowly allowed, yet they
would not become full citizens even after converting to Islam. Much of this
plaed out in the interpretations of the Qu’ran and the leaders who followed it
to the point. Frankly the Qu’ran did not deem people who were not Islamic to be
honest and thus some played the view that sinse they were not Islamic by birth
then the could not be trusted by the administration of being practitioners of
Islam. This ment they were allowed many privleges except from a special subject
tax and full citizenship. Full citizenship brought speacil priledges only for
Islamites. Under extreme political pressure ( That
is religious as well) Umar had to enforce the Sharia. He had to
clamp down on apostates. While Umar's reign was very short, he was considered
one of the finest caliphs in Islamic History, second only to the Four Rightly
Guided Caliphs. Although, many muslims now being educated by influence of the
conqured terrirtories saw that exclusiveness of the religion in the Qu’ran
brought heavy societal trobles.
As early as 757, less than a
century after Muhammad's death, the Muthazilites
arose, a group of theologians, who denied that the Qu'ran
was eternal and asserted that when its contents went against reason and common
sense, it should be read symbolically only. They helped create and an atmosphere
of the separation of Church and state withing the
capital of the Abbasids. This thesis was tolerated for less than a hundred years;
but in 847 Al-Mutawakkil
Ala Allah Jafar bin al-Mu'tasim, an Abbasid Caliph who
was unlike his brother and father who tolorated divercity
changed the toloration standards, either under pressure by religious factions,
such as the shiites, or general sentament between the citizens who thought that
their power was daminishing in the face of divercity. In addition,
Al-Mutawakkil was not known
for having a thirst for knowledge. He declared the
Muthazilites belief heretical and that the eternal existence of the
Qu'ran was the law of the land. The
Muthazilites
lost and so did Islam. The Abbasid Empire slowly eroded as the somewhat
separation of Church and State was abolished completely and foreigners were
persecuted. For the early Islamic period the Abbasid capital of Baghdad
progressed to the closest point of what is known as a free society. As for the
problem that ultimately brought it down, was religious fundamentalism. To day we
see this as political fundamentalism that some religious organizations try to
enforce political views on the state. The Law won out, but it was not the law
that won but Religion mixed with law. Still as many saw the problems with
theocracy, and the difficulties that the Qu’ran has
little to do with law during this period Islamites
turned to the collected traditions that later became one in authority to the
Qu’ran.
As the traditionalists were
collecting traditions and attempting to clarify who said what to whom. A man,
who some called a genius, came out and called out all disputing parties that
when people spoke of the Book of Wisdom (referred to the
Qu'ran) one who also include the collected traditions of Muhammad as a
code of Law ( The Correct Book). Al-Shāfi’i
made his voice clear to the Islamites, even though
others had been stating this for some time. Thus was born Islamic Law. Yet, the
leaders had more sway than the intellectuals of the day; for they had recognized
some of the books that compiled the body of tradition, which had grown
tremendously and enormously, as fabricated. This was a statement to how
important the traditional sayings had become. Some were so obviously fictitious
that they were pulled out. Others, cleverer to the undedicated could clearly
pass. It is not know how much is really credited to be
Muhammads words known that much of his recordings were on bones lying
about because their was no paper to write down his daily sayings. However, the
Hadith
(a’hadith) is a major source for Islamic law
and its importance is paramount in understanding Islam in general.
“Muhammad
ibn Idris al-Shafi'i
(d. 819) was concerned about the variety of doctrine and sought to limit the
sources of law and establish a common methodology for all schools of Islamic
law.3 His efforts resulted in the systemization of usul
al-fiqh, the following four sources of Islamic law:
the Quran; the sunna or
tradition of the Prophet; qiyas or analogies;
ijma or unanimous agreement. Throughout history
these sources were used in descending order by Muslim jurists in determining the
legality of an issue. If the legality was not based on an explicit command in
the Quran, then the jurists turned to look for
explicit commands in the hadith, and so on”( The
Muslims Women League).
Unlike the
Hadith, The Qu'ran contains little
perspective legislation but many principles and schemata for morality. The
Hadith provides the day to day sayings of the
prophet almost written as newspaper accounts in which much law is interpreted
through his daily decision makings (The Hadith is
the record of sayings of the Prophet Muhammad's precepts (deeds), actions, and
life, which constitute his Sunna). This helps the
Theocratic movement to guide their law system. Authenticating the sources for
Muhammad’s words became an extremely important institution. An elaborate system
of chain of commands on who told what to who reads like a maze. In the Islamic
religion, the Sahaba are the companions of the
Prophet Muhammed. A Sahaba
knew or saw the Prophet, believed in his teachings, and died a Muslim. Some
major Sahaba include:
Abu Bakr,
Umar, Uthman, Ali, al-Zubayr
ibn al-`Awwam,
Talha, `Abd al-Rahman
ibn 'Awf, Abu -Ubayda
ibn al-Jarrah,
Sa`d ibn
Abi Waqqas, and
Sa`id ibn
Zayd ibn `Amr,
Muawiyah, Khalid
ibn Walid,
Ibn Umar, and many
many others.
Each of the
Sahabbis had a unique school of jurisprudence, but these schools were
gradually consolidated or discarded so that there are currently four recognized
schools: Maliki, Hanafi,
Shafi'i,
Hanbali. For example, Hanbali is one
of the four schools of Fiqh or religious law within
Sunni Islam. It is considered to be the most restrictive of the four schools.
The school was started by the students of Imam Hanbal.
Hanbali is predominant among Muslims in the Arabian
Peninsula, although students of Islam throughout the world study and may choose
to observe its conclusions about Islamic practice. Hanbali
is followed by less than 5% of the world's Muslim population. “Maddhab
(ăĐĺČ) is an Islamic term that refers to a school of
thought or religious jurisprudence (fiqh). Islamic
jurisprudence, Fiqh (ÝŢĺ)
in Arabic, is made up of the rulings of Islamic scholars to direct the lives of
the Muslim faithful. The next level of law is the Ahlul
Bayt. These are the progeny of the Prophet
Muhammed through his daughter Fatima's marriage with
his cousin Ali resulting in their children Hasan and
Hussein” (Brill). Khabar ( news,
information) is sometimes used of tradition from the Prophet, sometimes from
Companions or Successors. Athar, pl.
āthār (trace, vestige), usually refers to tradition
from Companions or Successors, but is sometimes used from the Prophet.
Sunna (Custom) refers to a normative custom of the
Prophet of the early community.
The corpus of laws constituting
the 'sharī'ah is usually divided into twelve
departments: rituals and liturgy, personal status, contracts, torts, criminal
law, constitutional law, taxation and public finance, administration law, land
law, law of trade and commerce, international law and ethics and personal
conduct (Fârűqî). However, Muhammad did not codify
the law. He was too busy unifying the Arabs. This means that some Islamic
countries, such as Egypt, today rely 100% on the Qu’ran
while the stricter countries, like Iran and Saudi Arabia include the
a’hadith which has more examples of jurisprudence as
their law. This brings up the questions of a law that most believe is the
pivotal law of Islam. This law involves what is called the
Kufr. “Kufr is a key concept in Islam and many scholars believe it to be
the pivotal point because the Islamic system based on theocracy. The Word
denoted in Arabic means “disbelief.” However, it derives from the basic roots
“‘k-f-r’, whose basic sense is ‘to cover,’ to conceal’ or by its extension ‘to
ignore,’ to reject’ and or ‘to disbelieve.’ (Esposito 439).
“The people of the book are called Kuffār (infidels) in the Qu’ran” (Esposito 441). To
confuse things more another word was used in the Qu’ran
to call people of the Book. That word was “ahl-i
kitab “("The People of the Book": Jews and
Christians). This is a main sticking point for apologists of the
Qu’ran, and for the critiques citing the various
examples of non-tolerance to people of the Book, especially exemplified in the
daily reports that are the a’hadith. Many critiques
have asked “Moreover what could have been the reason leading Abu
Bakr to execute the apostates? How can the legality
of the execution of the apostates be demonstrated rationally?(
Mawdudi).
“While discussing the issue of
apostasy in Islam, probably no verse is more frequently cited to decide the
issue, especially by Muslims in the West who advocate freedom of religion, than
Qur'an 2:256: ‘There is no compulsion in religion” (Mawdudi).
During the time of Abu
Bakr a woman named Umm Qarfa
became a kafir after accepting Islam. Abu
Bakr requested that she repent but she did not. Abu
Bakr had her put to death. (Mawdudi).
The prophet Muhammad failed to
clarify the Apostacy law of Islam. The issue of
apostasy in Islam is a very complex and sensitive issue. He either failed to
establish clearly the law of Apostasy or he calculated his words for a variety
of interpretations so that other Muslims after him could use it as a weapon for
good or for evil. Sura 4:137,
clearly shows that God will not forgive the apostates, but no mention of a
earthly punishment is made. On the other hand, two
Sura’s clearly states an earthly punishment is due
for leaving Islam once one has converted. “During Muhammad's lifetime, and the
lifetimes of the next 4 "Rightly Guided Caliphs", a number of Muslims left the
faith of Islam. The punishment for leaving Islam was death. Those that had
left the faith were either killed outright, or were given a few days to turn
back to Islam. If they persisted in leaving Islam they were put to death.
Today this laws is observed by some, [not by others] and this death sentence is
in effect whether or not the apostasy occurred in an Islamic state or not”
(Silas) Two Sura’s 009.074
and 009.074 address this issue in the Qu’ran:
They swear by Allah that they
said nothing (evil), but indeed they uttered blasphemy, and they did it after
accepting Islam; and they meditated a plot which they were unable to carry out:
this revenge of theirs was (their) only return for the bounty with which Allah
and His Messenger had enriched them! If they repent, it will be best for them;
but if they turn back (to their evil ways), Allah will punish them with a
grievous penalty in this life and in the Hereafter: They shall have none on
earth to protect or help them.” (Sura
009.074 USCa).
The phrase “a grievous penalty
in this life” has caused many troubles in the interpretation. The
Ulema (Muslim scholars trained in Islam and Islamic
law), could clearly define a punishment applicable to their own wishes, as long
as the interpretation read “a grievous penalty in this life.” Another
interpretation also says about Apostasy that “Allah will chastise them with a
painful chastisement in this world” (Sura
009.074 USC). The phrase “a painful chastisement in this world” also has
caused much troubles in the interpretation because
the preposition ‘in’ denotes that here and now a punishment must be given now.
Christianity focuses on God’s
punishment after death. Five hundred years earlier the Book of John would speak
about this dilemma that may have been an ancient law that Jesus knew would
return some day: "In fact a time is coming when anyone who kills you will think
he is offering a service to God"... John 16:2 ( Bible).
Killing people who did not follow ones religion or chose to leave was never
sanctioned by Christianity. Although, the Qu’ran
does not specifically announce that murder should be the crime, the crime to
a apostate is clearly punishable in context of the
laws. Many different Christian sects fought over the severity and methods of
punishments over apostasy, yet all have in common the theme of punishment after
death. In Sura 9:73,74
Allah urges Muhammad to "make war" on the people who have left Islam. This
clearly denotes the here and now. It also reiterates that "Allah will punish
them in this world, and in the world to come".
"Prophet, make war
on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal rigorously with them. Hell shall
be their home: an evil fire. They swear by God that they said nothing. Yet
they uttered the word of unbelief and renounced Islam after embracing it. They
sought to do what they could not attain. Yet they had no reason to be spiteful
except perhaps because God and His apostle had enriched them through His
bounty. If they repent, it will indeed be better for them, but if they give no
heed, God will sternly punish them, both in this world and in the world to
come. They shall have none on this earth to protect or help them." [trns.
Dawood] (Silas).
Some could clearly argue that
being excommunicated in Europe in the middle ages would bring punishment for
doing so on this earth, yet this was a law made up by the Catholic Church and
was not part of the New Testament. In other words it was not part of
the progressed religion that many in the west has
adopted. Sura 47:23-28 brings us to the same wording
of the law. It reads: "If you renounced the faith, you would surely do evil in
the land, and violate the ties of blood. Such are those on whom God has laid
His curse, leaving them deaf and sightless.... Those who return to unbelief
after God's guidance has been revealed to them are seduced by Satan and inspired
by him. […] (Silas). Taken in this manner and not of
sound judgment, these Sura’s
can be used by an Islamic militant persons who might believe their law permits
murder of anyone who leaves Islam.
To further complicate things in
this Muslim law one looks to the second most influential book of Islam often
called the collection of a’hadith. “Sahih
Bukhari is a collection of sayings and deeds of
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), also known as the
sunnah. The reports of the Prophet's sayings and
deeds are called ahadith.
Bukhari lived a couple of centuries after the Prophet's death and worked
extremely hard to collect his a’hadith. Each report
in his collection was checked for compatibility with the
Qur'an, and the veracity of the chain of reporters had to be
painstakingly established. Bukhari's collection is
recognized by the overwhelming majority of the Muslim world to be one of the
most authentic collections of the Sunnah of the
Prophet (pbuh). Bukhari
(full name Abu Abdullah Muhammad bin Ismail bin
Ibrahim bin al-Mughira
al-Ja'fai) was born in 194 A.H. and died in 256 A.H.
His collection of a’hadith is considered second to
none. He spent sixteen years compiling it, and ended up with
2,602 a’hadith (9,082 with repetition). His
criteria for acceptance into the collection were amongst the most stringent of
all the scholars of a’hadith. It is important to
realize, however, that Bukhari's collection is not
complete: there are other scholars who worked as Bukhari
did and collected other authentic reports” (Khan a).
Many Laws in the
Hadith from the Bukhari
volumes makes the case that leaving Islam means you are subject to die:
Bukhari, volume 9, #17, volume 9, #37, volume 9,
#57, volume 9, #58, volume 9, #64, volume 9, #271, and Chapter 26, from the Book
of Mutual Consultation, page 339, following Hadith #
461. The Book of John would speak about this dilemma that may have been an
ancient law that Jesus knew would return some day: "In fact a time is coming
when anyone who kills you will think he is offering a service to God"... John
16:2 (Bible). However, the fact that this interpretation problem could be argued
in defense that murder of an Apostate of Islam was never a mandate, we look to
Ali, the fourth leader of Islam, or the fourth “Rightly Divine Caliph” to give
us an example of how to interpret the law. “Once a person enters into the fold
of Islam, the rules change (Rizvi).”
Some
Zanadiqa (atheists) were brought to 'Ali and he burnt them. The news of
this event, reached Ibn 'Abbas
who said, "If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah's
Apostle forbade it, saying, 'Do not punish anybody with Allah's punishment
(fire).' I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah's Apostle,
'Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'" “ (Khan
USC :Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57 USC Narrated 'Ikrima:).
“Now even the question of apostasy,
irtidăd [equal to treason] or
deserting of one's faith, for a Muslim, becomes a shar'í/
[sic] religious issue-even in this issue he is governed by the laws of Islam.
And Islam clearly says: No! You cannot become an apostate" (Rizvi).
Examples from Islamic quotes
contained in the Hadith show that ill will is
proclaimed on people of the Book. “Allah's Apostle said, "When the Jews greet
anyone of you they say: 'Sam'Alaika (death be upon
you); so you should say; 'Wa 'Alaika
(and upon you)'"( Khan USC :
a’hadith. Volume 9, Book 84, Number 62:
Narrated Ibn 'Umar).
To make matters worse, a quote from Abu Bakr[a] in
the Hadith Hadith No.7,
Vol. 8 states the prophet’s sayings of the greatest sins of Islam is to be in
the presence of someone who is not Islamic.
The Prophet.
said, "The biggest of the great sins are: To join
others in worship with Allah, to be undutiful to one's parents, and to give a
false witness." He repeated it thrice, or said, "....a false statement," and
kept on repeating that warning till we wished he would stop saying it.
(Khan USC :
a’hadith.
Volume 9, Book 84, Number 54: Narrated Abu
Bakra:
This is also in
Sahih
Bukhari, Book 84: Number 53 and 55 quoting the
prophet’s mention that the greatest sin is to engage in worship with others who
are not Islamic.
When the Verse: 'It is those who believe and
confuse not their belief with wrong (i.e., worshipping others besides Allah):
(6.82) was revealed, it became very hard on the companions of the Prophet and
they said, "Who among us has not confused his belief with wrong (oppression)?"
On that, Allah's Apostle said, "This is not meant (by the Verse). Don't you
listen to Luqman's statement:
'Verily! Joining others in worship with Allah is a great wrong indeed.' (Qu’ran
31.13) (Khan USC :a’hadith.
Volume 9, Book 84,
Number 53: Narrated 'Abdullah).
There are numerous cases in which apostasy is
discussed in the a’hadith, with similar
circumstances where the reverser away from Islam once he has accepted can be
murdered by law, the critics like to point out
entomologically that this is not the case.
“Even the terms used by the
shari'a for apostates give the idea of treason to
this whole phenomenon. "Murtad"
means apostate. Murtad can be of two types:
fitri and milli. (1)
Murtad Fitri means a
person born of a Muslim parent and then he rejects Islam.
Fitri means nature or natural. The term "murtad
fitri" implies that the person has
apostated from his nature, the nature of believing
in God. (2) "Murtad Milli"
means a person who converted to Islam and then later on he rejects Islam.
Milli is from millat
which means a community. The term "murtad
milli" implies that the person has
apostated from his community “(Rizvi).
Being that a person has chosen by free will to
move away from worshipping god, this law does not seem to hold a balanced
outlook in regards of running a society. Not all people believe in a God. The
concept is purely based on ones faith or non-faith. This makes allowing these
passages to carry weight detrimental to civic laws in general.
Yusufali, one of the more used interpenetrations of
the Quran translates this Suru
to be Muhammad proclaiming that anyone worshiping anything other than himself or
the Islamic god is of the greatest of sins: “Behold, Luqman
said to his son by way of instruction: "O my son! join
not in worship (others) with Allah: for false worship is indeed the highest
wrong-doing" (Khalid
, Hussein, Al-Hussein and
Ahmad Hussein Sakr
USC). Yet this is a harmful comparison to Jesus’s
reiteration of the first commandment being the most important. Yet with what has
been seen as the consequences of forgoing your relationship with religion in
Islam can have grave health hazards, so to speak, for you.
The
Yusufali translation puts this law into perspective with its
clarification in the Qu’ran. “They swear by Allah
that they said nothing (evil), but indeed they uttered blasphemy, and they did
it after accepting Islam; and they meditated a plot which they were unable to
carry out: this revenge of theirs was (their) only return for the bounty with
which Allah and His Messenger had enriched them! If they repent, it will be best
for them; but if they turn back (to their evil ways), Allah will punish them
with a grievous penalty in this life and in the Hereafter: They shall have none
on earth to protect or help them.” (Qu’ran
Sura
009.074 Kahn USCa). Another interpretation
also says in this world “Allah will chastise them with a painful chastisement in
this world” (Qu’ran
Sura 009.074 Khan
USC). The only question left is what is the “painful
chastisement in this world?”
In 1981 the General Assembly of
the United Nations accepted a declaration eliminating any form of intolerance
and discrimination on the basis of religion or faith. It is thus not easy to
understand how such a declaration may be compatible with the Islamic Declaration
of Human Rights." The Islamic law of apostasy is a symptom of a strong and
pervasive traditional Muslim attitude, religious and political, toward
non-Muslims and the non-Islamic world. Despite the legal pronouncement of Islam
upon Salman Rushdie the West has hardly recognized
the law of apostasy in Islam. It is imperative that Westerners, especially with
the intensifying orthodox Islamic revival throughout the world and the continued
growth of Muslim presence in the West, become more familiar with this law also”(
Pyrce-Jones).
To further complicate areas of
modern laws of common sense. We look to Jihads roots in reference to laws of
apostasy. The “[…]majority of
Shi'a mujtahideen do not believe in
initiating a jihăd without the clear permission of a
ma'sūm Imam.” (Rizvi).
Jihăd must have been initiated by an oppressing
force or factors which “ […] prevent the Divine
message from reaching to the masses” (Rizvi).
According to the new imperialism this would account for a legitimate reason
under the new interpretations of Islam. In the interpretation the reasoning is
as follows: “Jihăd cannot be used for imposing Islam
on others; it is just for putting an end to the aggression on Muslims or for
helping the oppressed non-Muslims” (Rizvi).
Although, the Qu’ran states a general meaning that
can be taken in other ways by radicals; in other words, Muhammad clearly left
the interpretation open for a liberal interpretation so that either good or evil
could interpreted by the concerned. “O ye who believe!
Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness
in you […] (Qu’ran 9:123 Khan USC).
The law, in question could be interpreted
as the haves and have-nots and who has what the other wants is right. In history
clearly there are abundant cases in which the Islamites
went out warring against innocent peoples and there are clearly abundant cases
that they were picked upon first, and it was not their fault. The Umayyad,
Abbasids and Ottomans and other lesser Arabian dynasties used aggression on
other people throughout their existence, under the guise of Islam sometimes
called Jihad (striving). Although, the term Jihad means striving, it has been
adopted by both Muslims and non-Muslims, alike, to indicate “holy-war”. The
Qu’ranic law of this reasoning equates their right
to abuse others at their own reasoning that they are being suppressed. Also, the
fuzzy, non clarity gives the right for an opportunist interpreter to say that
the Qu’ran means offensive posture, in regards to
imperial conquests. Usually, in history their own rulers have suppressed them.
Thus in much of the western civilization, the banding together of the common
people rose to over though their corrupt leaders. The Arabs have been mostly
exempt of this practice in their history. Many have tried, but the law is too
strong. The extremist among Islam have decided that corruption is always linked
to other religions. Why? Because their law tell them so.
This blindness has stopped them from turning on their own leaders in times of
crisis.
"Fight in the cause of Allah against those who fight against you, but do not
transgress limits. Lo! Allah loves not aggressors. ... And fight them until
persecution is no more, and religion is for Allah. But if they desist, then let
there be no hostility except against transgressors." (Qu’ran
2:190,193 Fergosi
).
Islamic Law got off to shaky
start. As some community leaders in Mecca and Medina were trying to codify new
laws, when the Islamic authority was dividing at the same time resulting in many
of them took off conquering regions that they never knew of before. This meant
that before an establishment of law was provided another problem arose. What to
do when hosting a foreign people to your new territory – they had laws – now you
the new owner do not even have your own laws set up and you want to rule over
many with no idea. The Muslims quickly adapted for the most part.
Still part of the codification
was in place under a man named 'sharī'ah as Judge,
who Umar I appointed. In one particular case, Ali
had lost his war shield and recognized it in the trust of a Jew. 'Sharī'ah
commanded that Ali produce a witness and bring this discrepancy to the new
court. Ali produced his witnesses to prove his claim. Ali brought forth his own
son. 'Sharī'ah realizing this could be a conflict
showed no preferential treatment to the great leader. “According to 'Sharī'ah
the testimony of son in favor of his father was not admissible, hence he ordered
Ali to present another witness. When Ali was unable to do so, 'sharī'ah
dismissed the claim” (RiyadulJannah). Even though
Ali at the time was the Caliph, in which he could have order a 1000 shields for
free for himself, the legend tells of the high degree of justice in the early
Islamic era.
This was the first Principle of
the 'sharī'ah. “ Rendering
justice to those who seek it is both Islamic duty and inevitable”(Fārūqī
225). The second principle states that the court of law all men are equal. This
leads to the third law in that the […] “burden of proof falls on the
complainant; that of any swearing on the defendant”(
Fārūqī 225).
When the burden of proof falls on the defendant, the
accused would like a speedy trial. Yet when the accused is convicted he often is
given many appeals that tie up the speeds of resolve. For example, problems in
speeds of trials were common in the 1980s in Egyptian courts. So much so that
public outcry made the media react by covering the issue. The “radd
al-qudi “ was a motion
that one wishes to delay the course of the judge to be rescued in a case. It was
only used sometimes, but there was no limit to how many times one could ask for
it. “ Procedural reforms receives much attention, with proposals focusing on
limiting rights of appeals, restricting “radd al-qudi”
motions, and constructing a mechanism to prevent frivolous or inappropriate
cases from reaching courts lawsuits”(Brown 193). For example, a false claim that
a key piece of evidence, such as a document, was forged would result in a delay
for a year until an expert was found and judged qualified enough to examine the
document and make his judgment. Since no such false claims resulted in
penalties, an unscrupulous litigant can charge forgery seeking only a delay”
(Brown 192). Other instances of exclusivness in Ilsmaic rule are keeping the
race pure. This law is clearly outdated in the west. In Judaism the children
take after the mother’s religion, yet in Islam the Children take after the
father’s religion. This means that “[…] Islamic women cannot marry a non-Muslim
man, since her children will be non-Muslim; however, Muslim men can marry either
a Jewish or Christian Women because their children will be Muslim” (Selma).
Although this is religious practice that could be optional, it is not because
the a’hadith and their Qu’ran
is law of the land for Muslims. When the new imperialism was taking place and
later the west found oil in the middle east a push to
modernize the courts of Islam drew much attention from the western powers.
National
Mohammedan Association in 1856 and Mohammedan Literary Society in 1863.
An effort to train a new generation of Muslim for political
responsibility in western-type education. “Aligarth
(University) was meant to be the Eton of India” (Lapidus
625). English and Muslim language was taught, and laws.
Sayyid Ahmad Khan favored modernization of Islam religion to make it
comply with technology advances. The Universities focus was to adopt Muslim to
British rule, because the Muslim didn’t have a system in place to deal with
issues that the age of enlightenment had brought out.
Generally, alongside the revival
and re-politisation of Islam, a tendency of
introducing shari'ah law has been recorded in recent
decades. This mainly concerns countries such as Sudan, Nigeria, Pakistan, Iran,
Saudi Arabia and Bangladesh. For most Muslims, shari'ah
is an indispensable part of their faith in connection with the revelations of
the Qur'an and other fundamental Islamic sources of
law. A contradiction is felt between the understanding of the UN declarations
and the regulations of shari'ah, particularly
concerning issues such as religious freedom, gender equality and cruel and
inhuman forms of punishment. In religiously mixed countries such as Nigeria
these tensions divides the nation (Germany).
For the Jewish people, the Minor
Prophets set up moral and ethical procedures that western civilization slowly
adopted. Other Jewish Patriarchs focused on establishing established civil
laws. Moses, for example, set up social and political laws for the early Jews.
However, the Jews had set up their own exclusionary laws that are practiced by
strict Jewry. Jesus turned on the Mosesianic laws,
the exclusiveness of the Jewish laws and abolished them introducing a new
convenient (Set of Laws) that aptly expanded a wider range of acceptance for
different types of people.
The 20th century and
now the early 21st century has come to a new plateau of the question
of religious intolerance. The question is that a large body of people hold fast
to a law that both encompasses their ethical, moral and civic duties in which
they run their system of civilization. Truly the records of history have shown
that this doesn’t work. The two do not intertwine easily and thus we are faced
with dilemma that threatens mankind as a whole. How do we all get along in an
ever growing smaller world? Jesus preached some separation of Church and
State. He fully understood that the two could not cohabitate in civic society.
He stressed prayer in private, and respecting tax collectors of the state. In
other words “Give what is do unto Caesar and give what is do unto god,” (Bible)
Jesus said. It took a long time before the western civilization could
understand these principles which allowed persons living under ones faith,
Christianity (or others), and still respecting, and abiding the affairs and laws
of the state. This was truly a breakthrough for diversity and racial tolerance.
Diversity and freedom of choice does not coincide with the laws of Islam.
Hopefully Islam will progress to the freedoms of a permanent separation of
church and state, and tolerance and promote the more beautiful side of Islam in
the future. Many do not want understand the laws of Islam because frankly they
are scared. In the west, most of the governments have adopted relative forms of
freedom of religion, which is of course, in private establishments. So they
question remains, because many scholars have asked it before: “Under a truly
Muslim (Islam) rule should non-Muslims receive the same right to propagate their
religions as Muslims ought to receive to propagate their religion?”(
Mawdudi). Many in the west, and some believe
it or not Muslims, agree that the answer should be yes. Yet, the more
predominant question is: When?
Work Cited
Anabtawi, M.
F. Arab Unity in terms of Law. LL.B. University of Alexandria
LL.D.Univercity of
Groingen. Marinus
nijoff, The Hague, Netherlands. 1963.
Bible.
Gospels Communication International.
1995.2003. Matthew 22.15-21. Bible Gosplecon.net<
http://bible.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/bible?passage=MATT+22&language=english&version=NIV>2004
Brill, E.J Encyclopedia of Islam.
Lieden Netherlands, The Hague. (Year)
Brown, Nathan J. The Rule of Law in the
Arab World. Courts in Egypt and the Gulf. Cambridge University
Press.1997
Esposito, John L. The Oxford Encyclopedia
of Modern Islamic World. Vol 2 New York,
Oxford, Oxford University Press 1995. 200 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016.
Fârűqî,
Isma`îl R. & Lois Lamyâ`
al Fârűqî The Culture Atlas of Islam 1921.
Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.
Fergosi, Paul,
Jihad in the West.: Muslim Conquests from the 7th
Century to the 21st Centuries. Prometheus Books
1998.2004. ISBN 1 57392 247 1.
Khalid
, Hussein, Al-Hussein
and Ahmad Hussein
Sakr. The Noble Qu’ran.
University
of Southern California.
Islamic Server of
MSA-USC <http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/>)
2004.
Khan , M.
Muhsin. A Introduction
to Translation of Sahih Bukhari.
University of Southern California.
Islamic Server of MSA-USC
< http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/sbtintro.html>
2004.
Khan .
M. Muhsin
Dealing with Apostates Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57:
Translation of Sahih
Bukhari, Book 84:
University of Southern California.
<http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/084.sbt.html>2004
Lapidus,
Ira M.A History of Islamic Society: 2nd.
Edition. Cambridge University Press,
The Edinburgh Blvd. CB2 2RU, UK. 1998.2002.
Mawdudi,
Abul
Ala. The Punishment of the Apostate According to
Islamic Law Edited by Syed Silas Husain and
Ernest Hahn. 1994.< http://www.answering-islam.org/Hahn/Mawdudi/>2004.
The Muslims Women League.
Intellectual Background: Islamic Sources of Information and their Development
into Islamic Law Syracuse University Press, 1982
<http://www.mwlusa.org/publications/essays/sources.html>2004.
Pyrce-Jones, David. The Closed
Circle An Interpretation of the Arabs. Ivan R. Dee 1332
North Halssted Street, Chicago 60622.
Harper & Row 1989.2002.
RiyadulJannah.
‘High Degree of Justice’ 4.10 <http://www.riyaduljannah.com/ArticleView.asp?ArtId=1002>2004.
Germany, Ishr.
Shari'ah Law, Adultery and
Rape. International Society for
Human Rights.<http://www.ishr.org/activities/campaigns/stoning/adultery.htm>2004.
Rizvi, Sayyid
Muhammad Apostacy
(Irtidad) in Islam .
Islam Organization.
Ahlul
Bayt Digital Islamic Library Project.
2000.2003. < http://www.al-islam.org/short/apostacy.htm> 2004
Said, Edward W.
Interview with Edward W Said. Edited by
Gauri Viswanathan.
Gauri
Viswanathan Random House of Canada Limited, Toronto.
2001.
Salma
(Withheld) Personal interview. 18 May 2004
Silas “The Punishment for Apostasy for Islam is Death.”
1999.2004. Answering Islam <http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/apostasy.htm>
2004.
Sura
16. The Bees - An-Nahl.
The Noble Qur'an.2004 University of Southern California.
Islamic Server of MSA-USC
. Trans. Yusufali. <http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/016.qmt.html>2004
Date: May 19, 2004. (4:10 PST)
Copyright ©
2004 Bookoflife.org Michael Johnathan McDonald. All rights reserved.
|
|
INDEX
REV >
* >
