Fight Hudood, Protect Women

Re: # 108

You said something intelligent which is rare from your ilk so ill respond. Islamic punishments are not one size fits all. We have precedence that HUD is applied after a court case. Arguments are heard and then the judge decides, the scenario that you are illustrating wil definitly land the rich man in hot-waters if there was an honest qazi with a good understanding of Shariah. Habitual thieves and people that are stealing as a last resort to put food on the table for a dying offspring will definitly be treated differently.

Re: # 112

This is partly true. The verses about the standard and number of witnesses, the verses about slander and libel accusing chaste women 9and men), which form the basis of Islamic law of Qazzaf were revealed after the incidenct. I do not remember the chronology of the punishment verses even though they appear in the 2nd verse of the chapter.

But on the other hand the verses about the prohibition of fornication and adultery (in Chapter The Women (4)) were revealed very early in the Medinite period. Since at that time there was no Islamic state appratus established hence the prohibition was just a moral prohibition.

Even though when Quranic laws were being revealed, the Qura`n repeatedly told Muslims as ``what is done is done`` (in these very words) but at that time munafiqs like yourself would go to new belivers and made fun of them by saying ``Lo ji abb tau aap bhi haraami ho gayay``. I see that the tradition of those munafiqs continue to this day.

Re: # 111

My sister in Islam;

I do not know why you are so angry but punishment of rape is very clear. Even one case of rape was prosecuted by Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself.

As in Zina the rape is prosecuted and perpetrator is punished by either Hadd or Ta`azir Punishment:

Hadd

Perpetrator is given Hadd of 100 lashes if he is single or stonned to death fulfilling either of two conditions:

1. He confesses (given three occassions to recant)
2. Four adult male witnesses or three adult male witnesses an two female witnesses of good reputation saw the incident with their own eyes in an unhidered view.

Taazir

If neither condition 1 or 2 as listed above is met but charge is proven by forensic, or by the testimony of less than four witnesses, the perpetrator is given a sentence as chosen by the society - which could be from community service (just kidding) to less than 100 lashes in public, fine, exile, and incarceration or a combination thereof.

......it is pretty much impossible to implement any kind of shariah, without use of force.......for the simple reason that there are as many interpretations of the quran as there are muslims.......islam, having outlawed the clergy let out a genie, which despite the efforts of the clergy cannot be put back in.........

.....due to this, whichever faction of the clergy can gain political power or street power in any area will implement its own shariah........while in another area, the implementation will be completely different........as will be the behavior of muslims.......the behavior and rules regarding religion are completely different in saudi arabia and in turkey......though both have overwhelmingly muslim populations.........

.....if urstruly takes control, shariah will be one thing, if hamidm2 takes over it will be something other, and if take over it will be a third thing.......the outlawing of a clergy is, in my opinion, one of the biggest achievement of islam as a religion.......it allows me to study the religion on my own, sitting in a barnes and noble, if i want.........while totally disregarding anything said by anyone claiming to be part of a clergy........

.......the other problem in shariah is that quran is quite difficult to interpret on direct issues.......quran talks in abstracts.....it tells stories etc.....the few details it goes into are expressed strictly in the timeframe the quran arrived........there is, thus, no frame of reference, based on which to interpret the quran syntactically..........

......for example, the following part of a verse describes the timings of a fast: ``.....You may eat and drink until the white thread of light becomes distinguishable from the dark thread of night at dawn. Then, you shall fast until sunset........[2:187]``

........now suppose someone is living on the north pole.....if they start following the above instructions syntactically, rather than abstractly, they will die..........for the simple reasons that the north pole receives 24 hours of sunlight during certain time and 24 of darkness during certain time........someone could start fasting and never be able to break the fast, as the sun will never set, thereby, starving to death........

.....what if there is a moon colony someday.....or if there is a colony in another solar system..........what if there is no sun there........how will people fast........etc. etc....

.....the other interpretation, at an abstract level, would be that islam asks muslims to fast for a certain amount of time.....that amount of time would be equivalent to the amount of time the sun is (was?) up and down during the days in saudi arabia, circa 6th century....let`s say around 11 hours plus/minus seasonal changes......so every muslim, whether on the north pole or space colony in the delta quadrant (someday) or in chicago, should fast for a certain amount of time, based on that, regardless of whether there is a sun or not, or whether it is setting or not.........

.......the former definition is a literal syntactic interpretation, which will prefer people dying on the north pole (or maybe even in norway) and will not allow them to eat at all for weeks.......the later is an abstract interpretation, which takes into account the time the quran arrived and the current situation..........the former is based on syntax, the later is based on common sense........

Re: # 114

Truly Sahib, with all due respect, that’s exactly the point I was also trying to raise. Quran is a metaphysically written guide for muslims (according to our beliefs, a word of God) and each and every verse needs to be taken in the context it was revealed (according to my Islamic teaching). What has gone on is that it has been given in the hands of Jahil Molvis that have twisted and turned into whatever form that suits them. That’s all. What you accuse me of doing is what is being practiced pretty much as a standrad operating procedure by your Molvis.

Re: # 117

``Quran is a metaphysically written guide for muslims (according to our beliefs, a word of God) and each and every verse needs to be taken in the context it was revealed ``

I was of this opinion once, when I had no education and I was a jahil. But as I studied it became clear that Qura`n itself establishes the criteria of when its verses should be taken literally, figuratively, or as an eternal guidance. These issues were debated about 1400 years, consensus emrged, and laws were established. The laws remained in practice in Muslim world until most of it succumbed to Western colnialism. It is not something that we or ``corrupt mullah` are trying to create out of nothing in this day.

Re: # 116

Your contention is not entirely true. I would recommend you to read Mufti Mohammad Taqi Usmani`s book titled ``Pakistan maiN Nifaaz-e-Shariat ke Tiqazay or Masail``. This guy is no idealist but a true pragmatist since he was one of the main architects of Islamization not only during Zia but also Bhutto`s time. So he talks in terms of actual constitutional clauses and articles of law.

For a layman his argument is this:

In Pakistan about 80% of population is Sunni among which 99% subscribe to the jurispridence of Imam Abu Hanifa -regardless of whether one is deobandi, brelvi, or ahl-e-hadith. About 15% population is Shia who subscribe to the jurisprudence of Immam Jafar Sadiq. The shia and sunni fiqah is almost 90% compatible, whereas differences exist only in the matters of doctrine which has nothing to do with law. The most contentious issue between Shia and sunni could have been the method and rate of collection of Zakat, which was resolved in Zia era, other issues are minor. Hence he sees no problem establishing a uniform code of justice and law with in Pakistan with minor exemptions given to shias. As a matter of principle, non-Muslims are exempt from Muslim law hence they can have their secular jurisprudence.

Re: # 119

Truly Sahib, who made that idiot the sole decider for what law to be implemented in Pakistan? Do you in all honesty believe that Shias will want to be ruled under your version of “Islamic” law? I mean really. When this same guy is on the record saying that Ahmadis are wajib-al-Qatl, what stops him from asking for Shias to be wajib-al-Qatl, since he is on the Wahabi payroll, and hated like worse than a dog in Iran. If you care, I can show you some references.

Re: # 120

Taqi Usmani is not a sole decider, however, because of his position and knowledge he is only more visible. At ideological level Dr. Mohammad Hamidullah has contributed immensely towards formulation of several laws and he was not even a Paksitani. Horror of horrors he was a Frenchman. Dr, Yusuf Goraiya is another prominent name. So what if there is opposition to Islamic law or to those who are trying to re-establish them; every man lives by an ideology and sometimes or most ofetn idolgies collide. I do not see it as a moral handicap.

There is absolutely no ideology in world to which everybody unanimously agrees to. Do you have one?

Urstruly #119: ``This guy is no idealist but a true pragmatist...``

.......according to whose definition......what if someone considers him not to be a pragmitist......what if someone excercises their islamic right and considers anything he writes to be useless?.....

.....as i pointed out earlier, if you want to argue issues within an islamic domain, you need to understand that islam does not allow any human, any organization, any group etc the authority to force their views, their fatwas etc. onto other muslims.......there is, in fact, in islam, a direct relation between each individual and God........to the best of my knowledge the quran does not state that we must follow taqi usmani or his interpretations and ideas (or anyone else`s for that matter)......

......on the other hand, if you are impressed by him, then you have a right to follow him.......however you do not have a right to force him onto other muslims in any form or manner, be it through a shariah court or through a revolution or through a political movement......

.......you can, however, try to convince anyone you want that taqi usmani is a great guy and everyone should listen to his religious ideas and interpretations of islam and views on shariah........i.e. you can preach it........after that, it is upto other muslims to decide whether they listen to taqi`s ideas or not.......

.....within an islamic context, it is indeed a great sin to try to force one`s interpretations of religion onto others........it is also a sin to given anyone any authority based on religion........every muslim, according to islam is equal in front of God.......

Re: # 122

``This guy is no idealist but a true pragmatist...``

.......according to whose definition......what if someone considers him not to be a pragmitist......what if someone excercises their islamic right and considers anything he writes to be useless?..... ``



Most of your post is akin to urdu saying ``itraaz brai itraaz`` or in Punjabi which translates into ``picking bones from certain part of anatomy``, but since I have sometime at hand today I will answer it.

The answer is that while you and me are sitting here arguing over nothing this guy has been instrumental in constitutional ammendments and formulating and establishing laws in the country. He didn`t just write books or post blogs on the internet he actually did something that has influenced generations in Paksitan. But you or anyone can argue that Roman Empire never existed but would it change anything. So Pahleez...

Re: # 122

I think you are confusing the issues here. When something becomes a law of the land and in my opinion it must thru democratic process then it`s not ``To you your religion and to me mine``, if we are champions of laws and democracy thru out the world then lets give the same respect to Muslim countries. What urstruly is saying that once some injunction becomes a law of the land and according to him there can be a consensus amongst the great majority of pakistan than issues can be resolved. It all comes back to giving people the right to decide what they want for themselves. Why can`t we all agree on this basic principle?

urstruly #123: ``The answer is that while you and me are sitting here arguing over nothing this guy has been instrumental in constitutional ammendments and formulating and establishing laws in the country. He didn`t just write books or post blogs on the internet he actually did something that has influenced generations in Paksitan.``

....you are not answering the question.....i never asked you what this guy did or didn`t do......i simply asked you what if someone does not agree with your defintions of who is a pragmitist islamically and who isn`t......are they still bound to listen to taqi usmani and his interpretations of the quran, according to islam?......

......there are many individuals who have been instrumental in making constitutional amendments and formulating laws and in influencing generations in pakistan.......do you follow all of them?.........were all of them great men whose interpretations of law and religion we are bound to follow?........certainly this cannot be used as a creiteria for forcing others to follow anything taqi usmani or anyone else says on islam.......

........as i have pointed out to you, islam does not give any muslim the right to force their personal interpretations of islam onto others, through any mechanism......taqi usmani may be the greatest guy in the world....but he does not have the right to force his views onto others.......it is upto the others to follow his interpretations or reject them........

Re: # 125

Abu Safwaan has answered your contention adequately.

A few clarifications are in order:

Quranic verses Urstruly posted (#109) apply to fornication as well as adultery. Following is translation from Yusuf Ali …

”The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.” (24:2).

Here’s some more on adultery/fornication …

According to Quran 4:25, half of full punishment is prescribed for slave women (half of 100 lashes is 50 lashes, but half of “death” is not possible.)

Urstruly, nice try … but you are misquoting Quran.

Re #118: Issue of Issa-ibne-Marriam too has been discussed over centuries. And your ullema’s verdict is that he resides above clouds, in flesh and blood, and will one day descend down to earth!

Need I say more?

Bulleya

Religious interpretationism is a hopelessly slope.

Do you consider the Quran (+something) the final arbiter of what a Muslim should do. If so, then Quran (+something) cannot be made subject to individual-level interpretation.

(in other words, telling people that they have a direct and unfettered link to God may not be much better, in practical terms, than asking them to listen to scholars/mullahs)