Eversince The UK-based Sharia proponent, Anjem Chodrary attempted to come toAmerica to promote sharia law, Some Americans have been frantic over thenon-existent threat of Islamic jurisprudence. Recently, seventy percent of Oklahoma citizensvoted for an amendment that would ban the courts from implementing Sharia law.In addition law makers in Tennessee, the same state that experienced contentionbetween Muslims and other Tennesseans over the contentious MurfreesborosMosque, has decided to enforce a law that would make it a felony to practice Sharia.
Itis within this rich climate of Islamaphobia that North Carolina front runnerNewt Gingrich has rang the clarion call against Sharia.
"a person who belonged to any kind of belief in Sharia, any kind of effort to impose that on the rest of us, would be a mortal thrate to the survival of freedom in the United States and the world."NewtGingrich said in response to a question about appointing a Muslim as president.Although, Gingrich did acknowledge that a Muslim could become president if herelinquished his association with Sharia. It is the same rhetoric Herman Cainused when he was running for the GOP nomination.
Its politics. The problem isthat Muslims don’t have nearly the same amount of political capital Christianshave.Gingrichgives an interesting response given this verse in the Hadiths of Bukhari andMuslim:
“Donot run after an office. If you do so, you would be lost in discharging yourduty. However, if an office is assigned to you, God would help and support you.”
Idoubt any of the critics of Sharia are versed in Islamic jurisprudence. Most ofthese critics look at the dismal human rights record throughout the MiddleEastern as a reason to contain the spread of sharia. The truth is that theapplication of Sharia law is based on the tribal ethnic context from which itis implemented.
STRAINSOF MODERNISM
Criticslike to use these countries as a yardstick to measure Islam but ignore moremoderate countries like Indonesia and Turkey. During one of Indonesia’s parliamentary elections many Muslimorganizations such as the NU, and the Muhamadiyah focusedon issues that united the country and downplayed Islamic fundamentalism. In2004, the Muslim parties were able to garner a third of the parliamentaryvotes. Similarly, the AKP Muslim partyin Turkey regulated its position because of the strong secular presence inTurkey.
Theintersection between religion and politics is constantly evolving in Turkey.For example, in 2010 the head of the Religious Affair Department Ayse Sucu was replaced by MehmetGormez. The liberally-minded Sucu Created a number of initiatives supporting women's rights. On the otherhand, the more religious minded Gormez criticized secular activists forprotesting the slaughter of millions of sheep for an Islamic holiday.
THECALIPHATE IS COMING!
MiddleEastern countries like Saudi Arabia are not the only sources of informationabout Sharia law. Last year Glenn Beck ran a serious of segments warning of thegrowing Caliphate movement. On one showBeck discussed a constitution formed by a radical Islamic group which included Jihad, killing of apostates, and aprohibition on trade with Israel as some of its amendments. According to Beck, an Islamic state cannotpossibly coexist with other religions.
Beck’s understanding of the Caliphate is lacking. While critics of Sharia are quick to use SaudiArabia as a case study, the historical governance of the four Caliphs isignored. Moreover, Islamic rulers such as Saladin, who was often described byscholars as a man with a “colorful character” and “a man of great warmth andcharm,” are also ignored, as well as Sulyeman the Magnificent. According to the Islamic historical scholarStephen R. Humphreys:
“We should not assume that the subjects of Muslimautocrats were worse off than their Christian counterparts in Western Europe…Infact European observers of the Middle East as late as the seventeenth centurytell us just the opposite.”
I wonder who to believe? A former conservativepundit on Fox News or an Islamic scholar who is even respected by Daniel Pipes?
POLITICS AND RELIGION
FurthermoreIslam is not the only religion to mix with politics. The Bharaatiya JanataParty in India blends Hinduism with politics. Similarly, The Buddhist Sangha inSri Lanka has played a significant role in the small country’s politicalsphere. Also, Islam is not the onlyreligion to serve as an instrument for intolerance in a religiously oriented society. Take for example the influential ultra-religious organization theHaradei in Israel. This group of ultra-orthodox Jews believes that men andwomen should be kept separate. Young girls are often harassed for simply beingmembers of the opposite sex. What is thedifference between the Wahhabi extremist in Saudi Arabia or the Mullahs from Iranand the Haredi in Israel in this regard.
Of course there is no Christians in America calling for a Christian-governed nation? It would be an outright contradiction.
TheMuslim Brotherhood and similar Islamic groups aren’t the only religious groupswith a political platform. Interestingly, politicians who want to restrict thegrowth of Sharia law are eager to have the bible supplement the constitution.
“WhereasFrance, Germany, and Italy permit the formation of a religious party Egypt isproud of the fact it does not have one,” said a member of the violent terroristorganization Islamic Jihad, an organization that believes in using violenceagainst infidels.
Radicalgroups are eager to point out how the Muslim Brotherhood is still victimized bythe Egyptian regime even though they denounce terrorism.
“Thelegal channels didn’t help them (members of the MB) from being handcuffed, tried in militarycourts and dragged to prison.”
TheIslamic Response
Unlike other religious societies political Islam didnot emerge out of a vacuum. According to Islamic scholar and terrorism adviserQuintan Wiktorowicz, the marriage between politics and Islam re-emerged becausethe mosques were one of the few places where political opinions could beexpressed openly. Since 1945 manycitizens throughout the Middle East have been victims of brutal regimes such asthe Baathists in Syria, the Shah in Iran, and Nasser’s Egypt.
It is quite ironic to note how some Americans arefearful of Sharia law being imposed in America yet conveniently forget howwestern laws were imposed on citizens throughout the Middle East. Businesseswere regulated under the code of Napoleon and courts were staffed by both Europeansand locals in spite of non-Muslims preferences for Sharia law when applied tocommerce and trade.
Throughout the Middle East both civil and criminalcodes from Beligian, and the Swiss were adopted while simultaneously Sharia wasreduced to the realm of private affairs. Most of the rights afforded by theSharia were eviscerated and replaced by foreign rules. This resulted in the violationof numerous civil rights including arbitrary arrest lengthy detention withoutcharges, torture rigged trials and systematic suppression of democracy.
Amore concrete example occurred when Dr. Sa’ad Eddin Ibrahim was arrested simplybecause he questioned the practice of nepotism within the Mubarack regime.
THEOCRACY in the MAKING
It is important to note that even countries like Saudi Arabia have not always been ruled under Sharia law. It was only until 1932 the country became a theocracy. Similarly, Iran did not become a theocracy until the fall of the Shah. The Sharia that is practiced today is a blend of tribalism, patriarchy and politics. Much of the laws governing parts of rural Afghanistan have no basis religious precedent.
If anything theocratic regimes use Islam to control their populations. For example, criticism of the Monarchy in Morocco can result in imprisonment or fines.Islam has been used as tool to crush dissidentmovements throughout the Middle East. According to Article 175 of the 1979Iranian constitution, the media is under the control of the government. Astrong example of this is the Khomeini’s education policy. According to the titular leader thecurriculum was reformed to conform to the ideology of the Islamic revolutionand to purge out western influences. If Khomeini can control the educationpolicy in Iran who is to say that the supreme leader will not use this power tosuppress any criticism of the regime.
Itis under these pretenses that misunderstandings emerge. One of thosemisunderstandings is that Sharia law regulates women to sub-ordinated positionsin society. A cursory look across the Middle East might support this idea.Reports of women in Saudi Arabia being punished via flogging for leaving withouta male relative, or the Taliban in Afghanistan that has forbidden girls toattended school. Perhaps one of the worst forms of abuses on females is honorkilling. Yet, the fact is that these misogynistic laws and customs have nobasis in Islam.
Ina speech delivered by former Pakistani Prime Minster Benazir Bhutto during heryears in exile, Bhutto provided ample evidence that Islam is egalitarian andthat it is the Islamic scholars that are distorting the true nature. Both Aishaand Khadija clearly demonstrate the potential for women to play exemplaryleadership roles within Islamic society and not to be limited to the household.According to Bhutto the interpretation of Islam is based on patriarchy andtribalism.
Non-Muslimsare also perceived as the victims of Sharia law. Although many religiousminorities such as Christians, Buddhists, Jews, and Bahais have been persecutedunder Islamic law, despite the fact that there are many verses that suggestIslam is tolerant of other religions.
With so much ignorance encompassing the debate over Sharia is it any wonder that mostof those who vociferously complain of Sharia ignore the fact that most of whatthe Quran and Hadith states is in contradiction to how Islamic law is practicedthroughout the Muslim world. Take for example apostasy, while Glenn Beck is quickto use surah 5:33 which says very little of apostasy yet ignores verses thatstate “there is no compulsion in religion” and “To you your religion and to memine.”
Yetunfortunately the critics are right to some degree. There are incidences ofMuslim converts to Christianity being charged with apostasy and sentenced todeath. For example, the Taliban has ruled that an Afghanistan man who convertedto Christian after working with a Christian relief organization for Afghanrefugees should be put to death. This also occurred in Iran despite the factthe men in both cases converted over a decade ago. These are not the onlyexamples. Another high profile cases involvedboth Salman Rushdie, Tujan al_Faisal andAbu Zayd. The latter two were simply convicted for having different views onIslam.
Theconnections that Gingrich establishes between Sharia Law and the burning downof Churches by Islamic radicals is weak.
Accordingto the Hadith by Abu Dawud
“Inan Islamic State pledge to protect the lives the belongings and honor of allNON_MUSLIM citizen if anyone wrongs them deprives them of their rightsoppresses, them or usurps their belongings I would take up these victims caseat God’s court.”
Notice how the author does define non-Muslims as Jews orChristians but can apply to any religion.
Thereare two reasons why this misunderstanding occurs. The first reason istranslation. The Quran is written in Arabic, a language that is not native tomany countries that practice Islamic law. The second reason is the rate ofliteracy forces the poor to invest trust in the interpretation of the Quranfrom the religious leaders.
AsMuslims become more educated they are able to interpret their religion ratherthan have the scholars interpret it for them. The best way to counter fundamentalistinterpretations of Islam is for educated moderate Muslims to challenge theinterpretation of Sharia by clerics through the practice of itjihad. Fazlur Rahman implored this technique to argue against polygamy. The goal of Rahman was not to make minor changes but to challenge the underlying understanding of Islamic law, as was the Rasion detre for the Protestant reformation for the Christian world. Religious understanding should not be limited to the ecclesiastical.
Thetruth is that Islamic law is just as complicated as any other kind of law.There is more to Sharia law then administering draconian forms of punishment.There are many laws in Islam that regulate economic activity including enteringcontracts, commerce, property laws which were preferred by Jewish and Christianmerchants in the early 19th century because “Decisions made anddocuments registered in Islamic courts would be fully backed by the authorityof the state.” Yet none of the critics have said anything about this.
What Muslims and non-Muslims should understand is that Islamic law is complicated and includes the Quran and over twenty different books on what the Muhammad said called Hadiths. According to Humphreys "Sharia is not a fixed coded but a vast amphorous, ever changing record of debate. In case of fraud and extortion there is a wide range of ways to punish the guilty."
Forexample, there is a chapter in the Riyad-us-Saliheen that describes thequalities of a just ruler. Interestingly enough the following section describesthe “undesirability” of being in positions of authority.
Furthermore,the Hadith known as the Muslim states that rulers have an obligation treattheir citizens with dignity and respect.
“Thatruler who causes hardships to the public would be harshly punished by God. Onthe contrary, one who is kind and affectionate to his subjects would be blessedwith God’s mercy in the Hereafter.” Another Hadith states that rulers who do not take good care of theircitizens would be dragged to hell.
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder