How is sharia to be implemented, in Muslim countries?

format_quote Originally Posted by Scimitar

Also, in the next town down from where I live - we have a shariah court. In London England.

Yeah.

It's for births, deaths and marriage related issues and advice.

Traditionally, even in the time of the Prophet pbuh, when Jews were found guilty of crimes, they wanted to be judged by shariah law - but the Prophet pbuh ruled according to their own Mosaic Law of Judaism... this proves to me that each law system is for its people.

For Muslims, it's shariah.

You can't have shariah for the Americans because that is not a Muslim nation - it's just a nation with Muslims in it. The Muslims of America can lobby for a shariah court for their own very Muslim related issues, though. Just like we did here in England. UK.

Gosh.

I keep thinking of examples - but I'm gonna stop.

Scimi

...relevant to the subject of cohabitation, coexistence and civil/criminal law?

1) Brother, is your brain working right? Why are you not able to understand this simple point: Regardless of the reason why, Muslims pay taxes in the country that they live in. That is how the world works. So when the Muslims are the ruling party, the Kuffaar pay Jizyah. Why can't you understand this? Also, you are unable to understand that the "tax" which the Kuffaar pays is lower than the Zakaah paid by the Muslims.

2) The Kuffaar living under Muslims in an Islaamic government are free to follow their own religion; they are not forced to change it.

3) There is no such thing as a "non-Muslim country". All the countries on earth belong to Allaah Ta`aalaa and must necessarily be governed by the Divine Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa, NOT the laws of people. This is another thing which, for some reason, you are unable to comprehend. Do you or do you not accept and believe that Allaah Ta`aalaa Alone is the Creator and that every land on earth belongs only to Him? The lands belong to Allaah, not to people.

4) Nowhere have I said that all Kaafirs will be forced to accept Islaam. I said that every country must be ruled by the Sharee`ah; the inhabitants of those countries, if they are Kuffaar, are free to keep their religions and follow them. But the laws of the country must be the Divine Laws, not man-made laws.

5) The "picture" of Islaam which I am depicting is the picture which the Qur'aan and Sunnah depicts. There is no other "picture". There is only the true and original Islaam, the Islaam which is pure and undiluted. Your wish is for the `Ulamaa to water down Islaam to some diluted, Baatil form which the Kuffaar may become pleased with, and that they reject the Aayaat of Qur'aan and Ahaadeeth in the process, those Aayaat and Ahaadeeth which are displeasing to the Kuffaar. This will never ever happen. There will always be a group of `Ulamaa who are on the Haqq - separate to the Ulamaa-e-Soo who are agents of the Kuffaar - who will propagate the Haqq without fearing anyone besides Allaah and without fearing the blame of any blamer, or the criticism of any critic.

6) What is your definition of "co-existence"? According to Islaam, the countries are to be ruled by the Sharee`ah, and be under a Khilaafah. The Kuffaar living there are free to keep their religions, their churches, their synagogues, etc.

7) Again, deliberate altering of what I have said, because your Nafs and Shaytaan are deceiving you and causing you to reject the truth because you find it "bitter". Let me tell you, the truth is generally bitter. You deliberately altered what I said. I said that all countries are to be ruled by Islaam, I did not say - ANYWHERE in my messages - that all or even Any of the Kuffaar would be forced to change their religions. If they do not accept Islaam as their religion, they don't have to. They are free to keep their religions. I am speaking about the ruling power. I am speaking about the laws governing the country. I am saying that the laws governing any country can never ever be man-made laws, because this entire issue of legislation is directly linked to Tawheed. Perhaps if you had studied Tawheed and attended classes on Tawheed, you would have understood. The issue of Tawheed Haakimiyyah (Oneness of the right to legislation). The right to legislate belongs only to Allaah Ta`aalaa. Allaah Ta`aalaa says:

ومن لم يحكم بما أنزل الله فأولئك هم الكافرون

{"And whosoever does not rule by what Allaah has revealed, they it is who are the Kaafiroon."}

Imaam ibn Taymiyyah said:

"And it is known by necessity from the Deen [Religion] of the Muslims, and the agreement of all the Muslims, that whoever permits the following of a Deen other than Islaam or following a Sharee`ah other than the Sharee`ah of Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم, then he is a Kaafir, and it is like the Kufr of one who believes in part of the Qur'aan and disbelieves in part of the Qur'aan, as Allaah said [The meaning of which is]:


"Indeed those who disbelieve in Allaah and His Messengers, and wish to distinguish between Allaah and His Messengers, and say we believe in some and disbelieve in some, and wish to take a way between that, all those are truly the Kaafireen, and We have prepared for the Kaafireen a humiliating punishment."

Allaah Ta`aalaa says in the Qur'aan:

وَلَا يُشْرِكُ فِي حُكْمِهِ أَحَدًا

{"And He does not allow for anyone a partnership in His Rulership."}

Allaahu Akbar. Have you read the Qur'aan? What Aayah is clearer than this on this issue? The very word used in this Aayah, "Laa Yushriku", is from "Shirk", so it is derived from this that those who permit the rule of other than Allaah's Rule have committed Shirk. Shirk in what? Shirk in the Haakimiyyah (Rulership) of Allaah Ta`aalaa, because according to the QUR'AAN, only Allaah Ta`aalaa may rule. You are denying something which is from the Fundamentals of Tawheed! From the very foundations of Tawheed!

Legislation is from the Huqooq (Rights) of Allaah Ta`aalaa, not the Huqooq of people.

Read this:

https://islamissunnah.wordpress.com/...l-haakimiyyah/

Do you understand the meaning of the word Taaghoot? Brother, you are speaking from Hawaa (desires). Taaghoot is anything which is worshipped besides Allaah, or obeyed besides Allaah. So when a person appoints himself as a ruler, and gives rulings which are in contravention to the Sharee`ah of Islaam, then he has become a Taaghoot, and when you obey that Taaghoot, thereby going against the Sharee`ah of Allaah, then this falls under "worshipping Taaghoot".

These are from the fundamental aspects of Tawheed which need to be taught to the people.

https://salafmanhaj.wordpress.com/20...ufr-and-shirk/

Rulership, Divinity, etc, Attributes, worship and lordship.

All are the exclusive Rights of Allah, whom He does not share with anyone. So no one is allowed to rule by anything except Shariah Law. These are fundaments of Tawheed.

They apply to Muslims, but what about Dhimmis who live under IS (Islamic State - abbreviation)?

The jist of it all is:

A) convert to Islam,
B) pay Jizyah
C) Fight.

If they pay the Jizyah, they can live under Islamic State, and have their own religion. They are not forced to change it. Afaik.

It is not a "Convert or Die" tactic. Forceful conversion will just breed hypocrisy - one of the greatest enemy of Islam.

Allahu alam.

@huzaifa ibn Adam : Brother, I've no personal issues with you. Now you've retracted from your stand so I wish to give rest to this topic. You are advised to Depict the real picture of Islam-- as a religion of peace, not a religion of violence.... You need to improve your manners and etiquette. Calling others jahil doesn't make anyone knowledgeable, rather proves him arrogant ignorant. Every member of the forum is knowledgeable and respectable.... We are brothers in Islam, so we should represent Islam as a better Muslim as non Muslims take our opinions as evidence.

Does Shariah Law apply to Kuffaar? If so, what does?

format_quote Originally Posted by M.I.A.

...relevant to the subject of cohabitation, coexistence and civil/criminal law?

These are not issues we can contend with in the judiciary systems of the foreign lands which are non muslim governed. We live according to the law of the land unless it prohibits us from practicing our religion - in the west, I can practice freely.

For a Muslim army to reach the UK and demand the citizens become muslim or pay jizya or else, is an act of aggression. And will be met with aggression.

Kiss goodbye to the jizya dream lol.

The Muslims couldn't even band together to defeat the occupiers of Palestine less than a century ago - to dream of this kinda crap is nonsensical, we do not live in draconian times anymore - the world now has real weapons of MASS DESTRUCTION and trigger happy politicians just looking for an excuse to bomb yet more, Muslims in their homes.

format_quote Originally Posted by Serinity

Does Shariah Law apply to Kuffaar? If so, what does?

It never has.

Scimi

well its almost a non issue..

the western idea of taxation... here anyway.. is income based.

which allows for taxation based on income...

which means that the poor pay less tax than the rich.

which means discrimination based on faith is a non issue..

which seems pretty fair.

maybe we have issue with how taxation is spent? (i dont..maybe you do)

but the ideals of it make logical sense. upkeep of communal areas and roads and government... and healthcare.. and subsidised living..

the only difference is that muslims pay tax to the government rather than zakat to where ever they choose..


the irony is that most families... or those capable of paying zakat still follow that islamic principle..

which is great really.

never seen a more generous lot.


we have little to complain about.. seems like a system that accomplised what zakat and jizya set out to do..

although in a different setting.


in my own experiences.. its usually big business and outside immigrants that most dislike the system.

both seem to miss the obvious point.


the next version of the matrix should include competent get back to work schemes.

these are just observations.


you know its unfathomable how things are brought to life of their own accord..

i dont think we put "in god we trust" on the money but it applies to everything..

anything you pick up.

there is no denying it.. just pray for the time to understand.

and forgiveness of our nature.


the alternative to countless blessings is in the lesson of countless generations destroyed.

...it is not a viable alternative.


it does not bear thinking about.

i may be wrong though lol, im sure you will prove it to me at some time or later.

With regards to the question: "Does Sharee`ah law apply to the Kuffaar?"

The answer is that the Sharee`ah law applies to the land in which they (the Kuffaar) are living in but they (the Kuffaar) are not bound to follow what the Sharee`ah has made obligatory upon Muslims or what it has made Haraam upon Muslims. So obviously, things like making Salaah, paying Zakaah, going for Hajj, fasting, Jihaad, etc. does not apply to the Kuffaar. So, this is a matter which people need to understand properly. When we say that the land must be ruled by the Sharee`ah, it does not mean that a) the Kuffaar inhabitants are forced to change their religions, or b) that their places of worship are destroyed, or c) That any of them get harmed if they agree to pay the Jizyah; rather, they are protected by the Muslim government, or that d) they are ordered to carry out the duties which have been enjoined upon the Muslims, such as performance of the Faraa'idh, Salaah, Zakaah, Sawm, Hajj, Jihaad, etc.

So once again, what we are saying is that all lands belong to Allaah Ta`aalaa and thus it is only right that the lands of Allaah Ta`aalaa be ruled according to His Laws, for this is from the Rights of Allaah which no one from His creation has any part in. No person has the right to legislate. Legislation belongs to Allaah Ta`aalaa Alone.

In fact, what I am saying here, even Christians and Jews who are honest and true to their religions will agree with whole-heartedly. If a Christian or Jew who really believes in his religion were to be asked, "What do you prefer the world be ruled by: The Divine Laws of God, or the laws of man?" Then any Christian or Jew that really believes in his religion will undoubtedly say, "The Divine Laws of God."

When a person says that it is fine for a land to be ruled by Kaafir law, that person needs to analyze what he is saying. Allaah Ta`aalaa has, for example, made drinking alcohol, and committing adultery and fornication, and homosexuality, and sodomy, and Ribaa, etc. Haraam. What this person is then saying is that it's okay for a Kaafir to say, "I am making it permissible." They are saying that it's okay for this Kaafir to oppose Allaah Ta`aalaa and make Halaal what He has made Haraam, or make Haraam what He has made Halaal. This is a very dangerous matter. In Islaam, Tahaakum (rulership) is connected to Uloohiyyah (Godhood). It is part of the Divine Rights of Allaah Ta`aalaa which no human being has a part in. Only Allaah Ta`aalaa can legislate. This is known as Tawheed Haakimiyyah, and some of the `Ulamaa have put it under the category of Tawheed Uloohiyyah, whereas others have put it as a fourth and independent category of Tawheed.

So once again, in summary, what we are saying is that the lands are meant to be ruled - all of them - by the Divine Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa. "The Divine Laws of God", and not "man-made laws and constitutions".

Also, why would a person want man-made law instead of Sharee`ah? Any Muslim, I mean. If you are looking for merciful laws, than the laws of the Sharee`ah are the most merciful. If you are looking for justice, then the laws of the Sharee`ah are the most just. If you are looking for what is best for humanity as a whole, then Allaah Ta`aalaa is the Creator of human beings and He knows what is best for them, and thus the Laws which He has laid down will bring them the best of this Dunyaa and the best of the Aakhirah, and the most happiness in both worlds, and will ward off harm from them which would come to them as a result of following laws made by a man with his deficient and limited intellect, his near sightedness, influenced by his lowly, bestial desires, his greed and his corrupted heart. There is no corruption in the Laws of Allaah Ta`aalaa. But in the laws of man, there will always be corruption and evil, because evil is part of their nature. Greed, Nafsaaniyat, selfishness, all of this is part of their nature. So the rules made by them will be influenced by this.

Was-Salaam.

The following is a very important and beneficial article written by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-Munajjid, and I advise the brothers to read it, In Shaa Allaah:

https://islamqa.info/en/118135

Some excerpts from the article:

----------------

Al-‘Allaamah Muhammad al-Ameen al-Shanqeeti (may Allah have mercy on him) said: From verses such as that in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning) “and He makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule” [al-Kahf 18:26], it may be understood that the followers of those who promulgate laws other than those which Allah has ordained are associating others with Allah (shirk). This understanding is explained clearly in other verses, such as the verse which speaks of those who follow the laws of the Shaytaan in permitting dead meat, claiming that it has been killed by Allah [and thus should be permitted]:“Eat not (O believers) of that (meat) on which Allaah’s Name has not been pronounced (at the time of the slaughtering of the animal), for sure it is Fisq (a sin and disobedience of Allaah). And certainly, the Shayaateen (devils) do inspire their friends (from mankind) to dispute with you, and if you obey them [by making Al‑Maytah (a dead animal) legal by eating it], then you would indeed be Mushrikoon (polytheists)”[al-An‘aam 6:121]. Here Allah clearly states that they would be mushrikoon by obeying them. This is associating others with Allah in terms of obedience and following laws that are contrary to that which Allah has ordained -- which is what is meant by worshipping the Shaytaan in the verse in which Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):“Did I not command you, O Children of Adam, that you should not worship Shaytaan (Satan). Verily, he is a plain enemy to you.61. And that you should worship Me [Alone Islamic Monotheism, and set up not rivals, associate‑gods with Me]. That is the Straight Path”[Ya-Seen 36:60-61].

--

As for the legal system that is contrary to the laws prescribed by the Creator of heaven and earth, ruling according to it constitutes disbelief in the Creator of heaven and earth, such as the claim that giving precedence to the male over the female in inheritance is not fair and it is necessary to make them equal in inheritance, and the claim that plural marriage is unjust, or that divorce is unfair to the woman, and that stoning, cutting off the hand and so on are barbaric acts that should not be done to people, and so on. Making this kind of system rule the lives of people in society and their wealth, honour, lineage, reason and religion, is disbelief in the Creator of heaven and earth and a transgression against the divine system prescribed by the One Who created all things and Who knows best what is in their best interests; may He be glorified and exalted far above having any lawgiver besides Him.“Or have they partners with Allaah (false gods) who have instituted for them a religion which Allaah has not ordained?”[al-Shoora 42:21]“Say (O Muhammad to these polytheists): ‘Tell me, what provision Allaah has sent down to you! And you have made of it lawful and unlawful.’ Say (O Muhammad): ‘Has Allaah permitted you (to do so), or do you invent a lie against Allaah?’”[Yoonus 10:59]“Say: ‘Verily, those who invent a lie against Allaah will never be successful’”[Yoonus 10:69]. End quote from Adwa’ al-Bayaan, commentary on the verse (interpretation of the meaning): “and He makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule” [al-Kahf 18:26].

---

Among the things that he (may Allah have mercy on him) said concerning this matter is what appears in Sharh al-Usool al-Thalaathah, where he said: Whoever does not rule in accordance with that which Allah has revealed because he thinks little of it or looks down on it or believes that something else is better than it and more beneficial to people or is equal to it, is a kaafir whose kufr puts him beyond the pale of Islam. That includes those who promulgate laws for people that are contrary to Islamic laws, to be a system that the people follow. They only promulgate those laws that are contrary to Islamic laws because they believe that they are better and more beneficial for people, because it is known on the basis of reason and sound human nature that no one turns away from one path to a different path unless he believes that what he has turned to is better and what he has turned away from is lacking.

So, the UK is shariah compliant then

Whats the big deal?

This is what i been saying all along, just with less TLDR.

Scimi

https://islamqa.info/en/111836

I wonder if you are alluding to the idea that we must follow ISIS?

Because the narrative of "by force" (from the IslamQA link) is exactly what the ISIS retards have done.

What do you say to that?

Scimi

There's no alluding in my posts. They're completely clear and unambiguous.

Retracted voluntarily based on ignorance

Forgive my ignorance but can you explain:

By means of force and prevailing over others. When a man becomes caliph by prevailing over the people by the sword, and he establishes his authority and takes full control, then it becomes obligatory to obey him and he becomes the leader of the Muslims. Examples of that include some of the Umayyad and ‘Abbasid caliphs, and those who came after them. This method is contrary to sharee’ah, because it is seized by force. But because great interests are served by having a ruler who rules the ummah, and because a great deal of mischief may result from chaos and loss of security in the land, the one who seizes authority by means of the sword should be obeyed if he seizes power by force but he rules in accordance with the laws of Allaah.

Read the whole thing, In shaa' Allah.

Allahu alam

agreed... with retracted post lol.

you know from a completely logical and purely physical standpoint...

lets take alcohol for example..

its a destructive thing thats open to abuse.

it destroys lives.. physically and mentally.

so what do you do? no alcohol or else.

what you meant to say is that alcohol is open to abuse..

it destroys lives physically and mentally.

long term it does not benifit ones personal life.

and if a land cant prohibit it.. lookin at you murika..

then you tax it heavily..

because associated healthcare risks.

..or just start blowing stuff up?


so you associate alcohol with the west but in reality its frowned upon because it really does affect a persons involvement in real life.

and as things go by that view is also likely to change.

so who are you going to preach to?

personal choice does still exist but you have to ask yourself..

what the benefits of abstinence are?

physically, mentally and your role in society.

although things are a little more complicated than the appearance of things.


..or not.

i mean if they are better than you drunk then thats not even funny.

if they do worse for themselves then thats something different.


..im shocked to say that i dont think... i dont believe.. you could find a country where alcohol does not exist in some nook or cranny.


...the last time i ran my mouth so much i ended up failing.

format_quote Originally Posted by Huzaifah ibn Adam

There's no alluding in my posts. They're completely clear and unambiguous.

except the one I was referring to was you pushing a link, from IslamQA - the same Serenity has raised in question as I have.

It's neither clear nor ambiguous - but confusing - as I mentioned, it seems the scholars should all be for ISIS by that definition and I quote:

This method is contrary to sharee’ah, because it is seized by force. But because great interests are served by having a ruler who rules the ummah, and because a great deal of mischief may result from chaos and loss of security in the land, the one who seizes authority by means of the sword should be obeyed if he seizes power by force but he rules in accordance with the laws of Allaah.

Which is basically what ISIS have claimed they have done. So why not go join them if this is the narrative the scholars are pushing?

explain to me and others please - how the view copy pasted from IslamQA is not reflective of ISIS propaganda?

Scimi