Looking for a New Islamic Fiqh

>>No essentially my attempt is exactly what India did with Hindu Family Laws in 1956 and what….

Manto… you don’t live in India, so get over it. And no one really wants to learn from an Ismaeli what they think of Islami Fiqh. You know that Jinnah was a whiskey drinking ham sandwich munching leader of the Islamic nation. If we can live with that, I am sure we can live with other discrepancies within our old Fiqh.

That’s just my opinion.

No essentially my attempt is exactly what India did with Hindu Family Laws in 1956 and what Pakistan did with Muslim Family Laws in 1961... except I propose an overhaul of the entire doctrine ...

Yasser Sahib..do you think that the old Fukas are outdated and are no longer applicable pretty muck like Islam itself?

If I am not mistaken...

The late Dr Rafique Zakaria, the archetypal Congress Muslim and ``Secularist``, once famously told our very own Farzana Versey that she would go to hell for being a bad and disobedient Muslim woman...

Some power play this new ``Secularism`` of India has ...

I see...

Ballu and other ``secular`` Indian nationalists need Imam Bukharis to keep a check on Shabana Azmis, E Ahameds, and Banatwalas... lest they get out hand...


But this article didn`t have anything to do with that...

Oh so now I have an Islamist agenda... because I say that we should update Islamic fiqh to suit the needs of modern times.... to allow Muslims to live in modern secular systems... to perhaps outlaw polygamy and give Muslim women the right to be imams ... etc

Meanwhile Congress and its toady mullahs continue to uphold reactionary and bigoted forms of Islam... where it is alright for a husband not to give alimony to his wife... but they are secular.

Beautiful logic... Ballu.

``I can see why a closet Hindu fanatic like yourself is so opposed to the idea of modernisation of the Islamic fiqh... It would mean game-set and match for those in India who seek to divide Muslims on the issue of fiqh by using Deoband Mullahs against Muslim politicians... ``

OTOH I can see you are speaking for the PAkistani Islamists...................and when you get exposed with your Islamist agendas you are willing to call others as apostate............No wonder you want to establish the grand Ulema Council and become its FOUNDING FATHER like Mr Jinnah....

No Mr Manto??

It would give you immense power to decide on the fate of the billions of muslims world wide when you would ask your Jehadi enforcers to terrorise those who do not accept the newly modern and deliberated Fiqhs of the grand modern Ulema on Shariat world wide???

You certainly suffer from the illusions of grandeaur like OBL..............just like your Mr. Jinnah!!!

About the Saudi Arabia issue..

Do you think that would be possible if Islam was allowed upgradation every 5 decades as is part of the Islamic faith.

Dear Blind man.. #18

Let me repeat what I wrote to you earlier:

I believe in complete secularisation of all states... as in states should not discriminate between citizens.. and there should be separation of church and state. This article had you cared to read had nothing to do with that. This is to modernise the workings of the ``Church`` (for the lack of a more apt description) of Islam- separately and distinctly from the state.


It is not about Fiqh vs Secularism you fool... It is about a Fiqh that accepts secularism and modernity vs a fiqh that doesn`t.

Honestly you have to incredibly stupid to even suggest that I have not brought up the question of secularism. I have harped on about secularism more than anyone else on chowk... and it is real secularism unlike your hindutva rehashed variety that you harp about.

There is no question of enforceability except through general will of the Muslims... if a fiqh is prepared ... it will go down as the fifth Sunni fiqh ... having an international council behind it would give it more credibility than the past. Your analysis is constantly couched and hindered by your rather lacking understanding of South Asian Politics...

But since you bring up the issue... let me disabuse you of some silly notions you seem to hint at. India actually has a AIMPLB which hinders progress and takes Muslims in the opposite direction... given that is dominated by the old Congress (Secular??) allies from Deoband..

Your vision is so clouded that you don`t see that ``Secular`` Congress in ``Secular`` India overturned the Shahbano case verdict... misusing old and outdated fiqhs ... I can see why a closet Hindu fanatic like yourself is so opposed to the idea of modernisation of the Islamic fiqh... It would mean game-set and match for those in India who seek to divide Muslims on the issue of fiqh by using Deoband Mullahs against Muslim politicians...

``However one thing is certain: today more than ever before Islam needs a new Fiqh to implement its Shariat. Not many Muslims today appreciate the difference between these two very important and distinct terms.``

This has been the founding principle of most of the efforts in legislation within Pakistan............how to fit the civil laws of the modern times with the Shariat...............so how is it different now??? don`t we have a huge corpus of shariat based jurisprudence within Paksitan and other Islamic countries???.........and all of them have come up with strange Fiqh.............

Read this in order to understand how the Fiqh works with the experts...........and let every body decide whether we need Fiqh or Secularism!!!!




Kerala man may lose eye under Saudi Arabian law

Kollam (Kerala): A man from Kerala jailed in Saudi Arabia for a brawl that partially blinded a Saudi national may lose an eye if the courts there decide to follow a new law.

Naushad, 34, got into a tiff with a Saudi national and damaged the latter`s eye in the ensuing fisticuffs in 2003. The Saudi man later lost his eyesight.

According to a new Saudi law, one of Naushad`s eyes could be gouged out for ``justice``.

Kerala Chief Minister Oommen Chandy Sunday promised to look into the matter.

``I will get in touch with the authorities in Saudi Arabia through the external affairs ministry,`` Chandy told IANS.

``If he loses his eye, we will commit suicide,`` said Naushad`s wife Sulekha, 30, who is bringing up a five-year-old son and a three-year-old daughter here.

Sulekha also looks after the aged parents of Naushad, who was the family`s sole breadwinner.

``Ever since he was jailed, we have been surviving on the mercy of his friends who send us money. His mother is also suffering from a heart ailment,`` Sulekha said, weeping.

Reports from Saudi Arabia indicated that a similar verdict was handed out to an Egyptian who threw acid in the eyes of a Saudi national.

Hanifa, a former colleague of Naushad, said a favourable settlement appeared remote as the Saudi man was adamant on the issue.

The Dammam court has handed over the case to Saudi Arabia`s Supreme Court.

``The ball now rests with the Supreme Court and we are all hoping for the best,`` Hanifa said.

Re: # 16


The issue is not whether different Fiqh-s come up with different solutions for differing practices within civil or family laws of the muslims world wide ........infact every ulema of the land or the accepted scholar of the colony is good enough to use his Fiqh to bring some advice on family matters to the extent they are mere recommendations.............................

the issue is about ENFORCEABILITY..................muslim politics has always used their Fiqh of the powerful and elites to turn their interpretations as ruling of some immutable law without any possibility of appeals...................it is about POWER over the unletterd muslims..............Compare this with the Christian world.........the Pope is DUD because he cannot enforce any ruling of his on family or civil matters in any country..............................this happens because the christian counteries are mostly secular.....Can you imagine the havoc the Pope and his interpretors through the council of elders or experts would wreck upon the modern societis through their rulings which would have to be enforced by the Christian States.............if it were not for secularism.................Secularism is definitely the major issue that needs to be addressed first in your proposal and which as usual you are not trying to bring up because of obvious reasons..................

Ballu Ballu Ballu...

Understand what ... that you don`t know what you are talking about? I am not bad mouthing you ... that you do adequately yourself.

I believe in complete secularisation of all states... as in states should not discriminate between citizens.. and there should be separation of church and state. This article had you cared to read had nothing to do with that. This is to modernise the workings of the ``Church`` (for the lack of a more apt description) of Islam- separately and distinctly from the state.

This article is about the internal mechanism of a faith... which needs to be updated... That mechanism was abandoned by Sunni Muslims in the 9th century.. This has nothing to do with terrorism, communal relations, Muslims` world view etc... but generally about how to keep the Islamic tradition of updation and upgradation going on.

ICC meets routinely to modernise Cricket for example... next you are going to tell us that is against the ``Secular state``.

Re: # 14

instead of bad mouthing me now.....try to understand what I am trying to say!!!


You are peddling in wares you should not be..............

Ballu Khan,

Clearly you don`t know as usual what you are talking about. Like many Indian Hindus, you must comment without actually understanding the issue at hand.

Secularisation of states has NOTHING to do with the issue I have raised. Is India NOT a secular state? Well it probably isn`t but atleast it claims to be?

Yet India faces the same issue of Muslim Family Laws. And even if the issue of family laws was resolved... believers would associate with fiqh or that fiqh. It is not even about extremism. Catholic Christianity does have a council... it elects the pope. Pope then makes the decisions about the faith. Now tell me if major catholic countries on the planet are not secular... Anglican Church has a similar council... most churches do.

May I suggest that if you don`t understand something you refrain from commenting... and making it into a perverse Hindu-centric bigoted attack on Pakistan.

-YLH

My initial reaction.............to solve the problem of political Islam with its different variants by involving eminent (muslims only?) people in the process of Fiqh is giving an interesting twist to the whole issue.........it is going to be like a grand council of the practicing christians trying to solve the recurring issues of christian extremist thought..............this may be interesting but actually counter-productive to people who believe that the issues do not pertain to faith but involve extremists using the faith and the gory traditions to begin fascist agendas of global domination .............I would suggest that we take a much simpler way.................ask for greater secularization of the Islamic states so that they drop this theocratic pretense of establishing pure lands on the foundations of a religious faith..........this would be much effective compared to running another GeoTV speactacle between Israr Ahmed-s and the other `secular civilians` on a world wide scale................