I don't think I have ever posted in this section, and I am not sure that it is the right place for this thread. If mods want to move it to a better place, that will be fine.
Perhaps that's something that has been discussed at length before, but it certainly isn't something I have given much thought until now.
Below is a quote from the article, which was taken from an interview with Maajid Nawaz. I describes a view which was presented to him by Islamic scholars he met in prison. Their view argues that Islam has always been meant to be secular, and that sharia has always been meant to be a voluntary code, rather than one enforced by law.
For the duration of the trial, he was placed in a cramped cell with 40 of Egypt's most famous political prisoners. There were row after row of beds with only a thin crack between them to inch through. Maajid was thrilled to discover two of the men who had conspired to murder Anwar Sadat – Omar Bayoumi and Dr Tauriq al Sawah – had recently been moved to this dank cell. "This is like meeting Che Guevara – these great forerunners and ideologues who I can now get the benefit of learning from," he says. But "they were very fatherly, and they had been spending all these years studying and learning. And they told me I had got my theology wrong".
After more than 20 years in prison, they had reconsidered their views. They told him he was false to believe there was one definitive, literal way to read the Koran. As they told it, in traditional Islam there were many differing interpretations of sharia, from conservative to liberal – yet there had been consensus around once principle: it was never to be enforced by a central authority. Sharia was a voluntary code, not a state law. "It was always left for people to decide for themselves which interpretation they wanted to follow," he says.
These one-time assassins taught Maajid that the idea of using state power to force your interpretation of sharia on everyone was a new and un-Islamic idea, smelted by the Wahabis only a century ago. They had made the mistake of muddling up the enduringly relevant decisions Mohamed made as a spiritual leader with those he made as a political ruler, which he intended to be specific to their time and place.
Maajid's ideology crumbled. "I realised that the idea of enforcing sharia is not consistent with Islam as it's been practised from the beginning. In other words, Islam has always been secular, and I had been totally ignorant of the fact." But he says he found this epiphany excruciating. "I knew if I followed these thoughts wherever they would lead," he says, "I would go from being HT's poster boy to being their fallen angel."
I would be interested to hear people's views.
Is the view presented correct?
If not, why not?
Thank you.
Peace glo
Here I stand.
I can do no other.
May God help me.
Amen.
Come, let us worship and bow down •
and kneel before the Lord our Maker
[Psalm 95]
But Shariah law is more of a system to foster and preserve the Islamic way of life on earth, as opposed to a magical umbrella for which everyone who lives beneath it gets into Heaven.
Muslims nowadays are by no means unanimous on how Shariah can or should be implemented considering that, in my opinion, it does need to be updated or at least consolidated with the changes that have gone on in society as a whole, globalisation being a huge part.
It's quite incorrect and unknowledgable to say these things.
First off, Islam seems in your mind to be confused with man-made ways of life. Your comprehension seems epitomized by:
There is nothing blasphemous in saying that Shariah needs to be updated, for it is partly man-made is it not?
The answer is an absolute flat NO!
Three facts need to be understood:
1- Muslims are not a group of people following tradition they developed over hundreds or thousands of years. They are following in and believing God's message that was delivered in full during the lifetime of the prophet -pbuh- and is not subject to the opinions of clerics or churches. Scholars are only working to authenticate what the message WAS, and with missing pieces here and there and with different methodologies, in minor side matters the schools findings differ. That does not mean that they are all right, but in the absence of compelling evidence it is acceptable to follow the measured opinions until compelling evidence is found and its rulings are agreed upon as to what THEY WERE as stated by the prophet, not come up with manufactured or man-made rulings that think SHOULD BE.
2- No group of wise men "came up" with Shariah. Shariah is a half-arabic term for "Shariatu Allah", which literally means God's Legislation. Unlike churches where clerics find what is politically appropriate or in their opinions would pass as good to call God's Legislation, Islam is saved from manipulation or human intervention, and the flat ruling regarding changes is straightforward deviance. Only in absence of a ruling can an opinion be "measured", but rulings that exist and evidenced to come from the prophet's Quran or hadith or his Sunnah and actions, cannot be changed.
3- Most importantly Shariah is not intended to provide a sweet mortal life. It is the law by which adherence will be obedience regarding God's limits and societal rules, and by which muslims are to treat each other to meet God in the afterlife without a sinful transgressional burden. Muslims can live a hard life, avoiding things that many people might regard to be normal or unevil (like eating slaughtered meat that did not get the name of God mentioned on it) and most pious people stick by those rules, because it is their religious duty to do so in obedience to God. So it's not up to humans to decide what God requires from us or what is "better" for society. Like you said: "And men - scholars - no matter how respected and eminent and pious they were, were still prisoners of their own times, and by extension, the prominent thoughts and customs which existed in those times."
Hope that clarified
format_quote Originally Posted by glo
Those are very profound statements. I have never heard Muslims say this.
That is because muslims won't say such things.
format_quote Originally Posted by ardianto
Maybe I am the only participant in this topic who agree with you.
Shariah need and possible to be updated. In fact, some rules in Shariah law has updated at least in my country.
Ardianto, no scholars can change a ruling in Islam, and if they do then they have commited a severe act of deviance and does not at all allow it to be permissible for people to follow what they said: "They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; yet they were commanded to worship but One Allah."[9:31]
Man's (or if stated in marriage contract then the woman or either) divorce with the word is an inambiguous ruling extracted from Quran and confirmed in Hadith to be the orders and example of the prophet. I haven't heard of a country with a muslim majority (not even crazy Egypt) who neutralized Islamic divorce by the whims of scholars. If they indeed have done that then they commited a grave deviance by the statement, and yet no muslim is given leniancy if he follows such a "fatwa" if that is what they call it.
Divorce by man (or woman or either if stated in the contract) is by personal desire and pronouncement of a statement, not by administrative procedures. They might as well say that a person is not muslim unless he fills out applications and they get approved. In both cases it is complete hogwash that counts as nothing in light of muslims adhering to Islam.
Just an additional note ardianto, and I do not mean it as an attack at all, but to clarify it: The Khawaarij and extremists have the false belief that not applying Shariah as it was 100% is kufr. That is not true of course. However what IS true and stated by the majority of scholars of Islam that DISBELIEF in Shariah as being ordained and required by God to follow, or attempt at editing it or changing it because of an opinion that a different ruling is better than what was ordained in Islam, is indeed Kufr and scars a muslim's faith (according to Ibn Abbas along with the Jumhoor of Ulama).
Please remember, what men (like muslim thinkers and philosophers) think of and build in terms of philosophy and opinions based on Islamic principals for the mortal good of mankind, is just that, their thoughts. Islam is God's religion and just like Quran, it is not subject to man's adjustments.
And God knows best and may we be guided to the best of our mortal life as well as our much more important eternal afterlife.
_____________________________________________
Iblis's eternal destination in the Hellfire is due to Arrogance, not Disbelief.
enlighten us what kind of updates and why those updates?
Do you know anything about ramfication of tabdeel and istihlal in Islam?
Updating is different than changing.
In Islamic rule, a Muslim must shalaah 5 times per day and night.
If a Muslim makes a new rule, shalaah 8 times per day and night, that's means this Muslim change the rules of Allah. This is strictly prohibited.
But updating is different. Some rule in Islamic laws are possible and even need to be updated to makes it compatible with current situation.
In example. Several years ago a Muslim astronaut from Saudi went to outer space, a place where there's no day and night and this became a trouble for Muslim in shalaah.
Regarding to this situation, Ulama updated the rule of shalaah. In this updated rule, a Muslim can shalaah in outer space follow Ma'kah time.
Now imagine, if Ulama are not allowed to update the rule of shalaah, how can Muslim astronaut shalaah in outer space ?.
Brother, although I say Sharia possible to be updated, we are not allowed to update any rule in Sharia law because we are not Ulama. Only Ulama can updates these rules, even the have done it many times but we never realized it because we know this updating with another name,.....fatwa.
Fear Allah ya akhee, inna lillahi wa inna ilayhi raaji'oun! So for centuries Islam was unfair - the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions (may Allah be pleased with them) practiced and preached unfairness? No one for centuries deemed this as unfair but now you people suddenly poped up after 14 centuries with such knowledge and wisdom that you could pin point the unfairness? Do you realize the ramification of your heretical statement? If I were you, I would offer two nafal rakaat immediately and cry in front of Allah.
secondly, you should know that in the Shari'ah, there are limitations on when a man can divorce her wife and there is guideline on how he should be doing it. For example, uttering all three divorces at once is a bida'a
Honestly, why do you people consider themselves as some sort of helpers and authorities in Islam while you have no clue about it?
Jazak Allah khair, brother.
Insha Allah, I will offer two nafal rakaat because I am not free from sin and unfairness. I am not prophet but ordinary ummah.
But, let me tell you a story.
There was a man who married a shaleehah woman who always obey him, serve him and his children very well. However, few years later when the wife going old, the husband feel bore to his wife. Then the husband say immediately "I divorce you !", and he send his wife back to her parents then marry a young girl.
Story like this was really happened. Although some people say that divorcing is valid according to Sharia law, actually that is not fair for the wife. That's why Ulama need to update this divorcing rule.
In the updated rule, if a husband want to divorce his wife, he must has a reason why he need to divorce his wife. In example, the wife ignore her duty to serve her husband and ignore her duty to take care her children. Then the husband go to Sharia court and tell his complain to Sharia court officer. Therefore, Sharia court judge call the wife and witnesses from both sides, and collect some evidences. If the husband's accusation is right, the husband can say "I divorce you" in the front of judge, then the wife get divorced. However if the husband's accusation is not true, the judge must punish the husband because the husband has making fitnah.
I think this system is more fair and not against Islamic law.
Brother, I am really sorry if my previous post was very provocative. Honestly, I am sick to see some people make strange rule in Sharia law. In example, Taliban. They made rule that ban women have a job. And when people say that rule is against Islamic women right, their supporter always say that rule is the rightest Sharia rule.
Btw you're not widowed if you're divorced. As Muslim Woman said, you're a divorcee. You're a widow when your husband dies.
You are right sister. The correct word is divorced woman.
I am not native English speaker. In my language widow is 'janda', and divorced woman is also 'janda'.
Thanks for your correction.
By the way, you can read my post above. Insha Allah you will understand what I mean with 'update'.
Shari'a is more of a general set of principles than specific laws, some like to cling to the past though, hence our state...
Turkey in it's current form is more 'Islamic' than many of our despot run countries, democracy is more or less the reason for that, food for thought.
such thought leads us to nothing but heresy, meaning hell fire. We like to save ourselves from hellfire; so, please keep your food of thought to yourself. we do not need such methodology whose asl is based upon manhaj of shaytan
format_quote Originally Posted by ardianto
Updating is different than changing.
akhee
depending on the context, the words can mean two different things or they can be synonyms.
format_quote Originally Posted by ardianto
In Islamic rule, a Muslim must shalaah 5 times per day and night.
If a Muslim makes a new rule, shalaah 8 times per day and night, that's means this Muslim change the rules of Allah. This is strictly prohibited.
this is updating just as changing - it is simply a game of playing words akhee
format_quote Originally Posted by ardianto
But updating is different. Some rule in Islamic laws are possible and even need to be updated to makes it compatible with current situation.
akhee, you are simply using wrong words and terminologies to get your point across. and this has much to do with your lack of knowledge or maybe people from whom you take things. In Islam, the point you are referring to wouldn't be labeled as change or update rather as ijtihad. And ijtihad is based upon previous rulings or general text and situation or environment.
format_quote Originally Posted by ardianto
In example. Several years ago a Muslim astronaut from Saudi went to outer space, a place where there's no day and night and this became a trouble for Muslim in shalaah.
Regarding to this situation, Ulama updated the rule of shalaah. In this updated rule, a Muslim can shalaah in outer space follow Ma'kah time.
Now imagine, if Ulama are not allowed to update the rule of shalaah, how can Muslim astronaut shalaah in outer space ?.
Brother, although I say Sharia possible to be updated, we are not allowed to update any rule in Sharia law because we are not Ulama. Only Ulama can updates these rules, even the have done it many times but we never realized it because we know this updating with another name,.....fatwa.
akhee al-kareem, this is not called updating the Shari'ah; this is ijtihad
In Islamic world, updating/changing Shari'ah means that you are talking about changing an already established law. Whereas rulings on new things or situations, like your example, come under the heading of ijtihad because we never faced them before neither there is an explicit text in Shari'ah about it. Hence, the scholars look general text, already established rulings, other environmental/situational factors and make ijtihad and give fatawa.
format_quote Originally Posted by ardianto
But, let me tell you a story.
There was a man who married a shaleehah woman who always obey him, serve him and his children very well. However, few years later when the wife going old, the husband feel bore to his wife. Then the husband say immediately "I divorce you !", and he send his wife back to her parents then marry a young girl.
Story like this was really happened. Although some people say that divorcing is valid according to Sharia law, actually that is not fair for the wife. That's why Ulama need to update this divorcing rule.
my brother this is a very dangerous statement and we strongly strongly advice you to not utter it again. It is a statement of kufr, please rectify from it and seek repentance from Allah. This is like saying Allah revealed an unfair law and the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companion (may Allah be pleased with them) preached it. Fairness and unfairness is not legislated by man because man is flawed and we do not operate on this methodology. Our methodology is to submit to rulings of Allah: we hear and obey.
This is what we call changing the Shari'ah and making halal things haraam and haraam thing halal. Who gave permission to humans to do this?
format_quote Originally Posted by ardianto
In the updated rule, if a husband want to divorce his wife, he must has a reason why he need to divorce his wife. In example, the wife ignore her duty to serve her husband and ignore her duty to take care her children. Then the husband go to Sharia court and tell his complain to Sharia court officer. Therefore, Sharia court judge call the wife and witnesses from both sides, and collect some evidences. If the husband's accusation is right, the husband can say "I divorce you" in the front of judge, then the wife get divorced. However if the husband's accusation is not true, the judge must punish the husband because the husband has making fitnah.
I think this system is more fair and not against Islamic law.
brother, Shari'ah did not define any such conditions for the man. Under an Islamic state if the man is not looking after his children then his wife can go to court and complain and judge will issue the ruling. However, no where in the Shari'ah it is defined that a man should tell his reasons for divorcing his wife in the court. Under Shari'ah they can take the matter to court; however, it is not binding upon the man to divorce his wife only under court's supervision after giving legitimate reasons.
Secondly, who will define these legitimate reasons? Will it not be based upon flawed human reasoning? How certain are we that they will be fair? And which criteria will we use to judge that they are fair? Is it going to be your criteria or my criteria or some other group's criteria? How is this different from secularism? Today, you are complaining about divorce, tomorrow someone will complain about other shari ruling and day after someone else. Where will we stop: will it be when we left with no Shari'ah? And is this just for the heck of making sure that rulings are logical according to our flawed understanding and reasoning? When was Islamic rulings were based upon human understanding and reasoning?
This is nothing but arrogance - it should be enough for man to understand that it is Allah who legislated these rulings. However, due to our arrogant nature, we want to understand everything and know the reasons and making sure they are logical and make sense to us.
We are not more wise and knowledgeable than Allah and His Prophet (peace be upon him). This alone should seal the deal! There are number of authentic ahadith from the Prophet (peace be upon him) in which he said that at the end times there will be people who will say things which you never heard from your ancestors. This is exactly what is happening in our times: many heretical groups have emerged and propagate the idea of updating the Shari'ah which in reality is kufr and apostasy.
Imam Malik (rahimahullah) reported to have said that if something was not part of deen at the time of sahabas (may Allah be pleased with them) then it will never be part of deen at our time. If the people, who understood the Islam the most, did not practice Islam the way we are doing then our way is clearly wrong.
format_quote Originally Posted by ardianto
Brother, I am really sorry if my previous post was very provocative. Honestly, I am sick to see some people make strange rule in Sharia law. In example, Taliban. They made rule that ban women have a job. And when people say that rule is against Islamic women right, their supporter always say that rule is the rightest Sharia rule.
my dear brother, I understand what you mean but you need to learn from a knowledgeable trustworthy scholar and not relay on internet because it is not helpful. What you are saying and doing is not correct. Secondly, Shari'ah is not judged by what people do or how we understand things. Let us leave it to those who have knowledge and save ourselves from ignorant fatawas which may lead us to hell fire.
عن تميم بن أوس الداري أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: قال الدين النصيحة ثلاثا قلنا لمن يا رسول الله قال لله ولكتابه ولرسوله ولأئمة المسلمين وعامتهم - رواه مسلم
Brother, although I say Sharia possible to be updated, we are not allowed to update any rule in Sharia law because we are not Ulama. Only Ulama can updates these rules, even the have done it many times but we never realized it because we know this updating with another name,.....fatwa.
Horribly misguided and wrong. Fatwa is an arabic word that means nothing more than "provision of a consult". It is solely based on established shariah, or maybe ijtihad for a situation that did not arise before as brother Islamiclife explained. However under no circumstances can Ulama update or change or switch Islamic rulings. They fundamentally do not have the power or legitemacy to do so! It is as rediculous and inconsequential as a car driver declaring the speed limit to be 80 Miles/hour for him and calling the police to tell them so, so that they adjust their radar traps and don't bother him when he's driving at such a speed from now on.
format_quote Originally Posted by ardianto
But, let me tell you a story.
......
Story like this was really happened. Although some people say that divorcing is valid according to Sharia law, actually that is not fair for the wife. That's why Ulama need to update this divorcing rule.
Brother ardianto, you may be ignorant but that is no excuse: You are saying that God's ruling that is evident in the Quran and delivered by the prophet is not fair and you want to substitute it with a scholar's opinion. This is a clear statement of kufr you have just pronounced. حسبنا الله ونعم الوكيل
You need to immediately dismiss those people from being regarded as ulama if they dare tell people that such alterations are valid, and seek proper scholars to learn from, to learn what Islam really is.
_____________________________________________
Iblis's eternal destination in the Hellfire is due to Arrogance, not Disbelief.
I can't remember exactly the content of the hadith, but isn't there a hadith narrated by Abu Dawwud by Abu Hurayrah r.a. about how Allah SWT sends for the ummah every hundred years those who update (this is not a good term, something to do with "tajdid"?) the deen?
I think it says like this (in transliteration, more or less):
Innallaaha yab'atsu lihadzinil ummati 'ala raksi kulli mi ati sanatimmannyujaddi dulahum diiynahum
Yes there is such a hadith, authenticed by Abu Dawood. But it does not say update, it says revive.
Narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that he heard the prophet -pbuh- say: "Allah arranges for this ummah every hundred years someone who revives/renews its religion for it."
عن أبي هريرة رضي الله عنه
عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: ( إن الله يبعث لهذه الأمة على رأس كل مائة سنة من يجدد لها دينها ) ابو داؤد
As in when people go astray and deviance groups grow strong, or scholars fall victim to weak narrations and laypeople are being lead astray, someone will rise to revive the true sunnah, and renew the energy for ijtihad in new areas (like the Saudi who went to space, or ruling on use of nuclear weapons, or rules of Islamic finance). We don't know for sure but Al-Albani seems to be a grand example for our generation.
As you can see people (even on this forum) can say "why should we listen to people who died centuries ago?"
God save us from misguidance.
_____________________________________________
Iblis's eternal destination in the Hellfire is due to Arrogance, not Disbelief.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Quote
akhee
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Bookmarks