Featured Post

قرآن آخری کتاب Quran : The Last Book

Don't Discard Quran: Quran is the Only Last, Complete, Protected Divine Book of Guidance, without any doubt, all other books are h...

1.5.17

Islam and slavery


We often hear Christian missionaries criticizing Islam and accusing it because Islam permitted slavery, and saying that this is a transgression against man’s freedom and rights. How can we respond to these people?

1.      Discussing slavery and asking questions about it on the part of those who promote Christianity and try to divert people from following the religion of Islam is something that annoys the wise person and makes him point the finger of accusation towards the ulterior motives that lie behind these questions.

2.      That is because slavery is well established in Judaism and Christianity, where it has taken unjust forms. They have many books which discuss that in detail and condone it. Therefore it makes you wonder: how can these churchmen call people to Christianity when Christianity condones and legitimizes slavery? In other words: how can they stir up an issue when they themselves are up to their necks in it?!

3.      The issue of slavery is completely different when discussed from the angles of Christianity and Islam, and when compared with the situation that prevailed at the advent of Islam.

4.      Hence we must discuss this topic in some detail with reference to what is said in Judaism, Christianity and contemporary culture on this matter, then we will speak of slavery in Islam.

5.      Many lies have been fabricated about Islam on this topic, at a time when criminals with lengthy track records are safe and nobody points a finger at them.

Islam and slavery: 
6.      Islam affirms that Allaah, may He be glorified and exalted, created man fully accountable, and enjoined duties upon him, to which reward and punishment are connected on the basis of man’s free will and choice.

7.      No human being has the right to restrict this freedom or take away that choice unlawfully; whoever dares to do that is a wrongdoer and oppressor.

8.      This is one of the basic principles of Islam. When the question is asked: why does Islam permit slavery? We reply emphatically and without shame that slavery is permitted in Islam, but we should examine the matter with fairness and with the aim of seeking the truth, and we should examine the details of the rulings on slavery in Islam, with regard to the sources and reasons for it, and how to deal with the slave and how his rights and duties are equal to those of the free man, and the ways in which he may earn his freedom, of which there are many in sharee’ah, whilst also taking into consideration the new types of slavery in this world which is pretending to be civilized, modern and progressive.

9.      When Islam came, there were many causes of slavery, such as warfare, debt (where if the debtor could not pay off his debt, he became a slave), kidnapping and raids, and poverty and need.

10.      Slavery did not spread in this appalling manner throughout all continents except by means of kidnapping; rather the main source of slaves in Europe and America in later centuries was this method.

11.      The texts of Islam took a strong stance against this. It says in a hadeeth Qudsi: “Allaah, may He be exalted, said: "There are three whose opponent I will be on the Day of Resurrection, and whomever I oppose, I will defeat … A man who sold a free man and consumed his price." Narrated by al-Bukhaari (2227).

12.      It is worth pointing out that you do not find any text in the Qur’aan or Sunnah which enjoins taking others as slaves, whereas there are dozens of texts in the Qur’aan and the ahaadeeth of the Messenger ﷺ which call for manumitting slaves and freeing them.

13.      There were many sources of slaves at the time of the advent of Islam, whereas the means of manumitting them were virtually nil. Islam changed the way in which slavery was dealt with; it created many new ways of liberating slaves, blocked many ways of enslaving people, and established guidelines which blocked these means.

14.      Islam limited the sources of slaves that existed before the beginning of the Prophet’s mission to one way only: enslavement through war which was imposed on kaafir prisoners-of-war and on their womenfolk and children.

15.      Shaykh al-Shanqeeti ؒ  said: The reason for slavery is kufr and fighting against Allaah and His Messenger. When Allaah enables the Muslim mujaahideen who are offering their souls and their wealth, and fighting with all their strength and with what Allaah has given them to make the word of Allaah supreme over the kuffaar, then He makes them their property by means of slavery unless the ruler chooses to free them for nothing or for a ransom, if that serves the interests of the Muslims. End quote from Adwa’ al-Bayaan (3/387).
a.      He also said: If it is said: If the slave becomes Muslim then why keep him as a slave, when the reason for slavery is kufr and fighting against Allaah and His Messenger, so this reason no longer applies? 
b.      The answer is that the well-known principle among the scholars and all wise people, which is that the previously established right cannot be erased by a right that is established later, and that what came first takes precedence, is obvious.
c.      When the Muslims captured kuffaar, their right to possession was affirmed by the law of the Creator of all, Who is All Wise and All Knowing. So this right is confirmed and established. Then if the slave became Muslim after that, his right to escape slavery by embracing Islam was superseded by the mujaahid’s prior right to take possession of him before he became Muslim, and it would be unjust and unfair to annul the prior right because of a subsequent right, as is well known to all wise people.
d.      Yes, it is good for the master to free the slave if he becomes Muslim. The Lawgiver enjoined and encouraged that, and opened many doors to it. Glory be to the Most Wise, the All Knowing. “And the Word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice. None can change His Words. And He is the All Hearer, the All Knower” 
[al-An’aam 6:115]. 
“in truth” means in what He tells us, and “in justice” means in His rulings.
e.      Undoubtedly this justice refers to owning slaves and other rulings of the Qur’aan. How many people criticize something sound when their problem is their own misunderstanding. 
End quote from Adwa’ al-Bayaan (3/389).

16.      Capture of prisoners during war was the most common way of acquiring slaves. Prisoners would inevitably be captured during any war, and the prevalent custom at that time was that prisoners had no protection or rights; they would either be killed or enslaved. But Islam brought two more options: unconditional release or ransom. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “Thereafter (is the time) either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom), or ransom (according to what benefits Islam)”
[Muhammad 47:4].

a.      During the battle of Badr the Prophet ﷺ accepted ransoms from the mushrik prisoners of war and let them go, and the Messenger ﷺ let many of the prisoners go for free, releasing them with no ransom.

b.      During the conquest of Makkah it was said to the people of Makkah: “Go, for you are free.”

c.      During the campaign of Banu’l-Mustaliq, the Messenger ﷺ married a female prisoner from the defeated tribe so as to raise her status, as she was the daughter of one of their leaders, namely the Mother of the Believers Juwayriyah bint al-Haarith ؓ . Then the Muslims let all of these prisoners go.

17.      Islam is not thirsty for the blood of prisoners, nor is it eager to enslave them.

18.      Thus we may understand the limited ways that can lead to slavery. Islam did not abolish it altogether, because the kaafir prisoner who was opposed to truth and justice was a wrongdoer, or was a supporter of wrongdoing or was a tool in the execution or approval of wrongdoing. Letting him go free would give him the opportunity to spread wrongdoing and aggression against others and to oppose the truth and prevent it reaching people.

19.      Freedom is a basic human right which cannot be taken away from a person except for a reason. When Islam accepted slavery within the limits that we have described, it put restrictions on the man who exploits his freedom in the worst possible way. If he was taken prisoner in a war of aggression in which he was defeated, then the proper conduct is to keep him in reasonable conditions throughout his detention.

20.      Despite all that, Islam offers many opportunities to restore freedom to him and people like him.

21.      The principle of dealing with slaves in Islam is a combination of justice, kindness and compassion.

22.      One of the means of liberating slaves is allocating a portion of zakaah funds to freeing slaves; the expiation for accidental killing, zihaar (a jaahili form of divorce that is forbidden), breaking vows and having intercourse during the day in Ramadaan, is to free a slave.

23.      In addition to that, Muslims are also encouraged in general terms to free slaves for the sake of Allaah. 
This is a brief summary of some of the principles of dealing with slaves in a just and kind manner:

a.      Guaranteeing them food and clothing like that of their masters. It was narrated that Abu Dharr ؓ  said: The Messenger of Allaah ﷺ said: “They are your brothers whom Allaah has put under your authority, so if Allaah has put a person’s brother under his authority, let him feed him from what he eats and clothe him from what he wears, and let him not overburden him with work, and if he does overburden him with work, then let him help him.” 
Narrated by al-Bukhaari (6050).

b.      Preserving their dignity: It was narrated that Abu Hurayrah ؓ  said: I heard Abu’l-Qaasim ﷺ say: “Whoever accuses his slave when he is innocent of what he says will be flogged on the Day of Resurrection, unless he is as he said.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (6858). 
Ibn ‘Umar ؓ  manumitted a slave of his, then he picked up a stick or something from the ground and said: There is no more reward in it than the equivalent of this, but I heard the Messenger of Allaah ﷺ say: “Whoever slaps his slave or beats him, his expiation is to manumit him.” 
Narrated by Muslim (1657)

c.      Being fair towards slaves and treating them kindly: It was narrated that ‘Uthmaan ibn ‘Affaan ؓ  tweaked the ear of a slave of his when he did something wrong, then he said to him after that: Come and tweak my ear in retaliation. The slave refused but he insisted, so he started to tweak it slightly, and he said to him: Do it strongly, for I cannot bear the punishment on the Day of Resurrection. The slave said: Like that, O my master? The Day that you fear I fear also.

d.      When ‘Abd al-Rahmaan ibn ‘Awf ؓ  walked among his slaves, no one could tell him apart from them, because he did not walk ahead of them, and he did not wear anything different from what they wore.

e.      One day ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab ؓ  passed by and saw some slaves standing and not eating with their master. He got angry and said to their master: What is wrong with people who are selfish towards their servants? Then he called the servants and they ate with them.

f.      A man entered upon Salmaan ؓ  and found him making dough – and he was a governor. He said to him: O Abu ‘Abd-Allaah, what is this? He said: We have sent our servant on an errand and we do not want to give him two jobs at once.

24.      There is nothing wrong with slaves having precedence over free men in some matters: With regard to any religious or worldly matters in which he excels over him. For example, it is valid for a slave to lead the prayer. ‘Aa’ishah ؓ  the Mother of the Believers had a slave who would lead her in prayer. 
Indeed the Muslims have been commanded to hear and obey even if a slave is appointed in charge of their affairs.

25.      A slave may buy himself from his master and be free:
a.      If a person is enslaved for some reason but then it becomes apparent that he has given up his wrongdoing and forgotten his past, and he has become a man who shuns evil and seeks to do good, is it permissible to respond to his request to let him go free? Islam says yes, and there are some fuqaha’ who say that this is obligatory and some who say that it is mustahabb.

b.      This is what is called a mukaatabah or contract of manumission between the slave and his master. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): “And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of emancipation), give them such writing, if you find that there is good and honesty in them. And give them something (yourselves) out of the wealth of Allaah which He has bestowed upon you”
[al-Noor 24:33]

c.      This is how Islam treats slaves justly and kindly.

26.      One of the results of these guidelines is that in many cases, the slave would become a friend of his master; in some cases the master would regard him as a son. Sa’d ibn Haashim al-Khaalidi said, describing a slave of his: He is not a slave, rather he is a son whom [Allaah] has put under my care. He has supported me with his good service; he is my hands and my arms.

27.      Another result of the Muslims treating slaves in this manner is that the slaves became part of Muslim families as if they were also family members.

28.      Gustave le Bon says in Hadaarat al-‘Arab (Arab Civilization) (p. 459-460): What I sincerely believe is that slavery among the Muslims is better than slavery among any other people, and that the situation of slaves in the east is better than that of servants in Europe, and that slaves in the east are part of the family. Slaves who wanted to be free could attain freedom by expressing their wish. But despite that, they did not resort to exercising this right. End quote.

29.      How did non-Muslims treat slaves? Attitude of the Jews towards slaves: 
a.      According to the Jews, mankind is divided into two groups: the Israelites form one group and all of mankind is another group.  
b.      As for the Israelites, it is permissible to enslave some of them, according to specific teachings contained in the Old Testament. 
c.      As for people other than the Israelites, they are a low-class race according to the Jews, who may be enslaved via domination and subjugation, because they are people who are doomed to humiliation by the heavenly decree from eternity. It says in Exodus 21:2-6: “If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free. 5 But if the servant declares, 'I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free,' 6 then his master must take him before the judges. He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life” 
d.      As for enslaving non-Hebrews, this is done by taking them captive or overpowering them, because they believe that their race is superior to others, and they try to find a justification for that slavery in their distorted Torah. So they say that Ham the son of Noah – who was the father of Canaan – angered his father, because Noah was drunk one day and became naked as he was sleeping in his tent, and Ham saw him like that. When Noah found out about that after he woke up, he got angry and he cursed his progeny who were descendants of Canaan, and he said – according to the Book of Genesis 9:25-26): “Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will he be to his brothers.’ He also said, ‘Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem! May Canaan be the slave of Shem.’”  In the same chapter (v. 27) it says: “May God extend the territory of Japheth; may Japheth live in the tents of Shem, and may Canaan be his [or their] slave”. 
e.      In the Book of Deuteronomy 20:10-14, it says: “When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves”

30.      Attitude of the Christians towards slaves: 
a.      Christianity confirmed slavery as it had been affirmed beforehand by Judaism. There is no text in the Gospels that prohibits or denounces slavery. It is remarkable that the historian William Muir criticized our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) for not immediately abolishing slavery, whilst overlooking the attitude of the Gospels concerning slavery, as there is no report from the Messiah, or from the Disciples, or from the churches concerning this issue. 
b.      Rather, in his Epistles, Paul advised that slaves should be loyal to their masters, as he says in his Epistle to the Ephesians, where he enjoins slaves to obey their masters as they would obey the Messiah: “5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. 6 Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but like slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7 Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not men, 8 because you know that the Lord will reward everyone for whatever good he does, whether he is slave or free” (Ephesians 6:5-9). 
c.      In Grand Larousse encyclopédique, it says: It comes as no surprise that slavery has continued among Christians until today; the official representatives of the faith have affirmed its validity and accepted its legitimacy. … to sum up: the Christian religion approved fully of slavery and still does so today. It is very difficult for anyone to prove that Christianity strove to abolish slavery. 
d.      The saints affirmed that nature makes some people slaves. Churchmen did not prevent slavery or oppose it; rather they supported it, to such an extent that the philosopher saint Thomas Aquinas supported the philosophical view that agreed with the view of religious leaders, and he did not object to slavery, rather he praised it because – according to the view of Aristotle – it is one of the conditions in which some people are created naturally, and it does not contradict faith for a man to be content with the lowest position in life. Haqaa’iq al-Islam by al-‘Aqqaad (p. 215). 
e.      In the Dictionary of the Bible by Dr. George Yousuf it says: Christianity did not object to slavery for political or economic reasons, and it did not urge believers to oppose their generation’s views with regard to slavery, or even debate it, and it did not say anything against the rights of slave owners or motivate the slaves to seek independence; it did not discuss the harm or harshness of slavery and it did not enjoin the immediate release of slaves.  It did not change anything in the nature of the relationship between master and slave; on the contrary, it affirmed the rights and duties of both parties.

31.      Contemporary Europe and slavery 
a.      It is the reader’s right, in this era of advancement and progress, to ask questions about the pioneers of this progress and the numbers of people who died because of the way in which they were hunted, and who died on their way to the coast where the ships of the English Company and others would wait, then the rest died due to changes in climate. Approximately 4% died as they were being loaded onto the ships, and 12 % during the journey, let alone those who died in the colonies. 
b.      The slave trade continued at the hands of English companies that obtained the right of monopoly with the permission of the British government, then gave free rein to British subjects to enslave people. Some experts estimate that the total number of people seized by the British during slavery and exiled to the colonies between 1680 and 1786 CE was around 2,130,000. 
c.      When Europe made contact with Black Africa, this contact led to human misery during which the black people of that continent were faced with a major calamity that lasted for five centuries. The states of Europe came up with evil ways of kidnapping these people and bringing them to their lands to serve as fuel for their revival, where they burdened them with more work than they could bear. When America was discovered, the calamity increased and they became slaves in two continents instead of just one. 
d.      The Encyclopaedia Britannica says (2/779) on the topic of slavery: Hunting slaves in the villages that were surrounded by the jungle was done by lighting fires in the straw of which the corrals surrounding the villages were made, then when the villagers fled to open land, the British hunted them down with whatever means they had at their disposal.

e.      During the period from 1661 to 1774, for every million Black Africans who reached the Americas, a further nine million died during the hunting, loading and transportation. In other words, only one tenth of those who were hunted survived and actually reached the Americas, where they found no rest or relief, rather they were subjected to hard labor and torture. 
f.      At that time, they had laws which any wise person would be ashamed of. Among these evil laws were those which said that any slave who transgressed against his master was to be killed, and any slave who ran away was to have his hands and feet cut off, and he was to be branded with hot iron; if he ran away again, he was to be killed. How could he run away if his hands and feet had been cut off?! 
g.      It was forbidden for a black man to become educated, and the jobs of whites were forbidden to coloureds. 
h.      In America, if seven black people gathered together, that was regarded as a crime, and if a white man passed by them it was permissible for him to spit at them and give them twenty lashes. 
i.      Another law stated that the blacks had no soul and that they possessed no smartness, intelligence or willpower, and that life existed only in their arms. 
j.      To sum up, with regard to his duties and service to his master, the slave was regarded as sane, responsible and punishable if he fell short, but with regard to his rights, he had no soul and no being, and he was not more than a strong pair of arms!

k.      Finally, after many centuries of enslavement and oppression, there came the protocol to abolish slavery and strive to put an end to it, in a resolution issued by the United Nations in 1953 CE.
32.      Hence their consciences did not awaken until the last century, after they had built their civilization on the corpses of free men whom they had enslaved unlawfully. What fair-minded person can compare this with the teachings of Islam, which came fourteen hundred years ago? It seems that accusing Islam with regard to this topic is like the saying, “She accused me of her problem then walked away.” 

And Allaah knows best.

See: Shubahaat Hawl al-Islam by Muhammad Qutub; Talbees Mardood fi Qadaaya Khateerah by Shaykh Dr. Saalih ibn Humayd, the Imam of the Haram in Makkah.
Islam Q&A
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~
Humanity, Knowledge, Religion, Culture, Tolerance, Peace
انسانیت ، علم ، اسلام ،معاشرہ ، برداشت ، سلامتی 
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
بلاگز، ویب سائٹس،سوشل میڈیا، میگزین، ویڈیوز,کتب
سلام فورم نیٹ ورک  Peace Forum Network 
Join Millions of visitors: لاکھوں وزٹرز میں شامل ہوں 
Salaamforum.blogspot.com 
سوشل میڈیا پر جوائین کریں یا اپنا نام ، موبائل نمر923004443470+ پر"وہٹس اپپ"یا SMS کریں   
Join 'Peace-Forum' at Social Media, WhatsApp/SMS Name,Cell#at +923004443470
     
  
Facebook: fb.me/AftabKhan.page

28.3.17

Corona & Attitude of Ulema of Pakistan - Point to Ponder



Faith is entirely a personal matter, which cannot be measured or quantified. Anyone who declares to believe in 6 Fundamentals and 5 Pillars of Islam is considered as a Muslim even if he lacks in practice.
 کرونا اور علماء پاکستان کا رویہ - لمحہ فکریہ:پاکستان اس وقت  تک ترقی نہیں کر سکتا  جب تک ہم اس جاہل ، مزہبی انتہا پسند طبقے کی اس زہنیت سےچھٹکارا  نہیں حاصل  کر لیتے جو مساجد ، مذہب کو کنٹرول کرکہ  زیادہ جاہل عوام کو گمراہ  کرتے ہیں۔  اسلام کو ان جہلا کے شکنجے بچایا جانا صروری ہے۔ .....[....]

We find many people looking "more Muslim" than others due to their outlook and activities in display, yet it's not a measuring  tool for their level of faith , which is only known to Allah. However they consider ONLY themselves  to be entitled to  exercise control on religion, which is contested because authenticity of any opinion on religious matter is conditional to the reference and authority from Holy Scripture. 
Allah has not authorized anyone to present their personal opinions to be Divine. The Jews and Christians were condemned for taking their scholars indulging in such practices as Lord (Rabb) (9:31). (Hence such blind following is Shirk,  polytheism)

To control the spread of Corona Panadamac, experts advise preventive measures like social distancing and Quarantine. This have been out rightly rejected by Pakistani religious contractors. No amount of  references from Holy Books or logic could convince them to temporarily  suspend the prayer (Salah) congregations, though in the two Holiest Mosques,  in Middle East,  Turkey,  Far East and all around the world  these measures has been implemented without any debate. 

The President of Pakistan contacted Al-Azhar which issued Edict (Fatwa) to suspend prayer congregations for public safety. Even this has been resisted by our  Holy (Hollow)  Men, who have no regard for public life. 

There is need to deeply analyse this religious mindset of Pakistani clergy,  which is fatal for this nation and country. 

The Powerful Religious Establishment ( yes don't be surprised,  it's reality ) mafia supported TTP, overtly and covertly (many big names)  resulting in public sympathy despite huge loss of public life (over 70,000 lives lost in terrorism and over  $100 Bn loss to economy). Some genuine Scholars opposed and were martyred by terrorists.

We cannot move forward as Pakistani and Muslim, unless we tackle this menace of this ignorant , extremist class who are in full control of religion and mislead more ignorant  public. Islam is to be rescued. 
Those who claim to be genuine Scholars of Islam should not sit home in silence like hypocrites. They must come forward and debate to convince ignorant ulema.  

This requires deep study and concrete  result oriented short term and long term measures  at  intellectual, governmental and societal level. 
Keep reading full >>>>> <<here>>
Must Read : [Facilities and Facilities in Islam]


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~
Humanity, Knowledge, Religion, Culture, Tolerance, Peace
انسانیت ، علم ، اسلام ،معاشرہ ، برداشت ، سلامتی 
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
بلاگز، ویب سائٹس،سوشل میڈیا، میگزین، ویڈیوز,کتب
سلام  نیٹ ورک  SalaamOne Network 
Join Millions of visitors: لاکھوں وزٹرز میں شامل ہوں 
سوشل میڈیا پر جوائین کریں  
Join 'Us' at Social Media
WhatsApp سلام 
     
  
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SalaamOne

26.2.17

The problem with ‘Islamism’, the Political Islam

Image result for islam and modernism


A valuable contribution to recent critical analyses of Islamism as it is not limited to its ideology. Taking human rights and Islamic law as the context of the Islamist discourse, it has been able to observe the significant tension between idealism and activism. Activism pushed the Muslim Brotherhood to come into conflict with the Al Azhar Ulema who had been at the forefront in Tahrir Square, not to challenge but to replace its authority. The author concludes that this activism is among the factors that have obstructed Islamic law reform and the expansion of human rights. Reading this book I was reminded of similar tensions and compromises in Pakistan between Islamism and modernism on the one hand and with orthodoxy on the other.

Exploring: "Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam" (by Dr.M.Iqbal)

Islamism, especially the ideology as formulated by the Jamaat-i-Islami (JI) in South Asia and the Muslim Brotherhood in the Arab world and that called for an Islamic state, has been attracting critical attention from scholars. The JI in Pakistan and Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt both began political life as critics of the traditional approach to politics, stressing upon the sovereignty of God and enforcement of Sharia. In practical politics, they gradually adopted the concepts of the nation-state and democracy where they differed with traditional Islamic thought, but with reference to Islamic law they not only incorporated traditional fiqh into the concept of Sharia, but also its sectarian interpretation. The tension between sectarian and national conceptions of law posed crucial challenges to the concept of democratic rule of law, but Islamists justified it because they defined democracy as majority rule, even if it meant tyranny of the majority.

Scholars such as Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im (Islam and the Secular State: Negotiating the Future of Sharia) faulted Islamists for their rejection of the secular state and found it problematic for the future of Sharia in Muslim countries. For the same reasons, but interpreting them differently, Wael Hallaq (The Impossible State: Islam, Politics, and Modernity’s Moral Predicament) concluded that the Islamic state based on Sharia as law is an “impossible state.” Most other academic studies also found Islamism paradoxical in its approach to the modern state. Hallaq, however, missed some very important inner developments in Muslim societies.

Humeira Iqtidar (Secularising Islamists? Jamaat-i-Islami and Jamaat-ud-Dawa in Urban Pakistan) observed that despite their vehement opposition, Islamists have been, in fact, facilitating the secularisation of Muslim societies. She argued that Islamists placed religion in the public life and forced Muslims to engage critically with it. By focusing on the state, Islamist movements accelerated the process of secularisation further. Projects to Islamise laws and knowledge could not resolve the tensions between sectarian Islam and secularising societies and added to the frustration of religious politics. These frustrations led to not only local, but also international faith-based and sectarian violence. Calls for an Islamic state eventually turned into clashes between the sects.

The ideology is detrimental to the progress of Islamic law argues a new book
The Arab Spring in 2010 was commonly regarded as a revolt against tyrannical regimes in the Arab world. Contrary to general expectations, it was Islamism that gained prominence in this revolt. Islamist parties in the Arab world adopted slogans of democracy and liberty and emerged more powerful than the others. They took it as an opportunity for establishing an Islamic state, but failed as soon as they came into power. According to Bassam Tibi (The Sharia State: Arab Spring and Democratisation), Islamists hijacked the Arab Spring with their rhetorical commitments to democratisation in order to win elections. They failed because rather than reducing, they quickened the tension between Islamic law and human rights as they imposed their conception of limited religious freedom. Rached Ghannouchi, the leader of al-Nahda, had already moved to separation between religion and state (Public Liberties in the Islamic State). Al-Nahda, which came to power after the Arab Spring in Tunisia, opted for a secular interpretation of an Islamic state. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt failed to resolve that tension. Moataz El Fegiery explores the story of this failure in his book Islamic Law and Human Rights: The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

El Fegiery finds that Islamism retarded the progress of Islamic law and human rights. The Muslim Brotherhood came into political prominence during the post-Hosni Mubarak era, winning half of the seats in the 2011 elections. They formed a government with Mohamed Morsi as president in June 2012. The Muslim Brotherhood enjoyed unprecedented political freedom until 2013, but Morsi was dethroned by a popular uprising that ended with military dictatorship. Examining its thinking on the relationship between Islamic law and human rights in Egypt, El Fegiery finds that the Muslim Brotherhood failed because it justified democracy in terms of a tyranny of the majority.
El Fegiery explains that Islamism is based on two assumptions: first, that Islam mandates Muslims to establish an Islamic state in which Islamic law regulates all aspects of state and society and, second, that the normative content of Sharia must comply with the methods developed by mainstream traditional Muslim jurists. The Muslim Brotherhood legitimised human rights in the traditional framework of Islamic law; it benefitted in coming to power but failed in the cultural practice of human rights.

This book offers a thorough analysis of the conceptual and theoretical issues about religion and human rights in general and studies major issues such as the supremacy of Sharia, political pluralism, freedom of opinion, minority rights, conversion and apostasy, and family law. The book concludes that management of political diversity is not possible in the Islamist framework.

El Fegiery finds the Muslim Brotherhood’s approach to human rights too theoretical to proceed within the framework of traditional Islamic law. Human rights developed historically with the evolution of international law and treaties. They adjusted universality with cultural diversity. Islamism failed to adjust with the concept of human rights because Islamists believe that the nature of Islamic law is not compatible with the idea of the nation-state. In fact, Islamic political theory has been quite pragmatic since the first four caliphs and has been adapting to changes in the Muslim body politic. Islamic law has limited the boundaries of Sharia and the doctrine of Siyasa [political science] has given more privileges to the rulers than the Islamists allow.

The Egyptian constitution recognises Islam as the religion of the state. The Muslim Brotherhood believes that Islam does not separate religion from politics, rather Islam is state. To them, the only legitimate method of interpreting Islamic law is traditional. The problem is that state law is a modern project, but not all human rights are normative in Sharia. This tension became obvious in the changed political context in the post-Mubarak era. Islamist policies to dominate and impose limitations on public liberties created mistrust in society. Freedom of religion and expression in the modern state requires pluralism. The Egyptian constitution also allowed the establishment of political parties. A focus on the unity of the Ummah in classical Islamic political theory prohibited dissent and considered it fitna and sedition. Although Islamists were divided on this issue, the political discourse by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt generated hate and violence against liberals, the left, the secular, and NGOs. Questioning their sincerity and piety, the regime declared these groups heretic and ignorant. Equal rights for non-Muslims as citizens also remained questionable. The Muslim Brotherhood evoked conflict between Islam and the West to justify restrictions on freedom.

El Fegiery finds that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt had two different positions on religion and freedom of expression depending on whether they were in opposition or in power: while in opposition they operated as a pressure group that proclaimed freedom but restricted it on issues such as modesty for women and censorship of artists and intellectuals. In power, in 2012 the regime imposed further restrictions, persecuting writers and artists in blasphemy cases.

This created tension for the Muslim Brotherhood in practice. They adopted orthodox criteria and targeted those who challenged Sharia as state law, and used censure to restrict arts. Activism, informed by this unclear and ambivalent criterion, made Morsi’s regime intolerant towards intellectual pluralism and gender equality.

The book is a valuable contribution to recent critical analyses of Islamism as it is not limited to its ideology. Taking human rights and Islamic law as the context of the Islamist discourse, it has been able to observe the significant tension between idealism and activism. Activism pushed the Muslim Brotherhood to come into conflict with the Al Azhar Ulema who had been at the forefront in Tahrir Square, not to challenge but to replace its authority. The author concludes that this activism is among the factors that have obstructed Islamic law reform and the expansion of human rights. Reading this book I was reminded of similar tensions and compromises in Pakistan between Islamism and modernism on the one hand and with orthodoxy on the other, but that is beyond the scope of the present review.

NON-FICTION: The problem with ‘Islamism’
MUHAMMAD KHALID MASUD-
Islamic Law and Human Rights: The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt By Moataz El Fegiery Cambridge Scholars Publishing, UK ISBN: 978-1443894791 340pp.

The reviewer is a former chairman of the Council of Islamic Ideology

Published in Dawn, Books & Authors, February 26th, 2017
https://www.dawn.com/news/1316817/non-fiction-the-problem-with-islamism

Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Modernism
  1. Dual Islam  دو اسلام : ڈاکٹر غلام جیلانی برق کی شہرہ آفاق کتاب ......  Are there two Islams, one in theory and one in practice. The Original Message of Allah (Quran) remained a theory and a parallel Islam emerged centuries ago?.. >>>

Islam And Modernism By: Mufti Taqi Usmani : Free Download ...

https://archive.org/details/IslamAndModernismByMuftiTaqiUsmani

Jul 2, 2011 - Islam And Modernism By: Mufti Taqi Usmani. Topics Islam, And, Modernism, By:, Mufti, Taqi, Usmani,. Mediatype texts. Identifier ...

Islam & modernism - Newspaper - DAWN.COM

www.dawn.com/news/1128387

Aug 29, 2014 - But the hateful beliefs of Muslims against non believers and concept of Jihad to kill non muslims goes back to about 1000 AD. Historically, that is the time when Islamic renaissance stopped and the religion took a turn against modernity and advancement to its present form.

Modernism in Islam - ilaam.net

www.ilaam.net/Opinions/Modernism.html

Modernism in Islam. by Jamaal al-Din Zarabozo. Based on "Modernism in Islam" lecture series by Sh. Zarabozo. WHAT IS MODERNISM AND WHERE DID IT ...

Islam and Modernism by Abdus Sattar Ghazali

ghazali.net/book4/

An online book by Abdus Sattar Ghazali; examines movements of regeneration and/or revival in the Muslim world from the 18th to the 20th centuries; includes an ...
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~
Humanity, Knowledge, Religion, Culture, Tolerance, Peace
انسانیت ، علم ، اسلام ،معاشرہ ، برداشت ، سلامتی 
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
بلاگز، ویب سائٹس،سوشل میڈیا، میگزین، ویڈیوز,کتب
سلام فورم نیٹ ورک  Peace Forum Network 
Join Millions of visitors: لاکھوں وزٹرز میں شامل ہوں 
Salaamforum.blogspot.com 
سوشل میڈیا پر جوائین کریں یا اپنا نام ، موبائل نمر923004443470+ پر"وہٹس اپپ"یا SMS کریں   
Join 'Peace-Forum' at Social Media, WhatsApp/SMS Name,Cell#at +923004443470
     
  
Facebook: fb.me/AftabKhan.page

24.2.17

A return to reason: how Islamic reformers kept the faith

Image result for islam and modernism

The question of why so much of the Islamic world has kept missing its rendezvous with modernity has taxed scholars and diplomats, travellers and writers, at least since Napoleon appeared at the mouth of the Nile in 1798. Sample the FT’s top stories for a week You select the topic, we deliver the news. Select topic Enter email addressInvalid email Sign up By signing up you confirm that you have read and agree to the terms and conditions, cookie policy and privacy policy. At the time of the French invasion, there were just 20 schools in Cairo, compared to 75 at the turn of the 15th century. Al-Azhar, one of the oldest universities in the world, “suspected science, despised philosophy, and hadn’t produced an original thought in years”, says Christopher de Bellaigue, an acclaimed writer on Iran and Turkey.

The French occupation was short-lived but seminal, bringing to Cairo a taste of the “most self-consciously modern society on earth”. Along with his irresistible invasion force, Napoleon was accompanied by an army of savants — a “pop-up brains trust”, as de Bellaigue has it. This collision led to a stream of education “missions”, bringing to Europe a succession of bright, young, usually religion-schooled students from Egypt, Iran, and the Turkic heart of the Ottoman Empire — the three countries that are the subject of this vivid study. The Islamic Enlightenment is, de Bellaigue says, a tale of reform and reaction, innovation and betrayal, and — in the words of the book’s subtitle — “the modern struggle between faith and reason”. It is about a civilisation in sharp decline from the golden age of Islam (roughly the eighth to the 13th century).

In those days, as Europe was plunged into its Dark Ages, Islamic scholars had kept safe the treasures of Hellenistic thought and science, adding great learning of their own, especially in mathematics and medicine. By the 19th century, however, reaction had set in. The west was viewed with deep ambivalence, despised as predatory and corrupt, with its cultural, technological and military accomplishments the source of both admiration and fear.

The effects of this intellectual retreat were profound. Bubonic plague raged unchecked throughout the Ottoman Empire well into the 19th century, 200 years after the last major outbreak in Europe, because the higher Muslim clergy or ulema insisted this was not a matter of hygiene or quarantine but of God’s will. Helmuth von Moltke, the Prussian general appointed by the late Ottomans to modernise their army, concluded that “as long as there is an ulema, the pestilence will go on”.

Jamāl al-Dīn al-Afghānī, the towering Muslim moderniser of the mid- to late-19th century, was inclined to say that Islam needed a Martin Luther to dispel the thickets of superstition from Muslim minds. All the same, the common western refrain that Islam had no Reformation and no Renaissance and therefore no Enlightenment is inadequate and Eurocentric. Even after suffering the twin cataclysms of the 13th century — the Christian Reconquista of Muslim Spain at one end of the Islamic world and the Mongol devastations that ended centuries of Abbasid civilisation at the other — Muslims would still go on to establish three new mega-states: the Ottoman, Mughal, and Safavid empires. Yet it is true that in the wake of these 13th-century disasters Islam went from being a confident culture and creed to a defensive one. Bleak milestones include the rise of the theologian Ibn Taymiyya — hammer of Muslim heretics in the mould of Christian inquisitors like Torquemada — and the abolition of ijtihad, the process of reasoning by analogy that was intended to help Islam accommodate developments unforeseen in the Koran. Certainty of faith and the imposition of scholastic legalism replaced the honest doubt of reason and inquisitive philosophy. In the world of Ibn Taymiyya, forerunner of the puritanical and sectarian Wahhabi creed the Saudis would later impose in central Arabia, “the goal of the believer was not to know God but to obey him”.

Nevertheless, throughout the 19th century and beyond, Muslim thinkers, emphasising Islam as a civilisation as well as a religion, sought to upgrade their culture and recapture its old élan. A central idea, from Afghani onwards, is that modern ideas and values now considered universal existed in embryonic form in early Islam. This was the genius of Islam. That Janus-like looking backward as well as forward easily detoured into defensive ideologies of resistance, including Islamist extremism, under pressure from the European powers that thrust into Muslim lands in the 19th and 20th centuries. Helmuth von Moltke concluded that ‘as long as there is an ‘ulema’, the pestilence will go on’ Two other, related handicaps — the predominance of the ulema and absence of a literate print culture of the kind that lit up the Reformation in Europe — enabled the Muslim clergy to maintain its monopoly of knowledge for far longer than its Christian counterpart. Islam had no William Tyndale as well as no Martin Luther. When printing got properly under way in the mid-19th century, introduced at the same time as the telegraph, it was a revolution as electrifying as the internet, and de Bellaigue tells the story well. His cast of characters — “the Muslim pioneers we never thought existed” — is presented with flair and an acute eye.

There are several classic accounts of Islam’s engagement with modernity, but the originality of this book is to tie together the Arab Awakening or Nahda with the Persian and Turkish enlightenment of the 19th century. He is good at capturing the contradictions of his characters. Sayyid Qutb, ideologist of the Muslim Brotherhood, is a “salivating prude”. De Bellaigue writes of the 19th-century Egyptian intellectual Rifaa al-Tahtawi that “five years in France convinced him of the need for European sciences and technologies to be introduced into the Islamic world, but he chose not to enquire about the link between a free intellect and a free spirit, or whether the inquisitiveness he admired in the French people might be in some way connected to their quest for political liberty”. He portrays Afghani as a chameleon, the first pan-Islamic moderniser, a showman who would receive guests in a cloud of cigar smoke or turn up at the Moscow opera in full clerical regalia, an “accomplished political insurgent” who divined British designs in Egypt and Iran, a man for whom “expediency and ambiguity were . . . lodestars”. This is a civilised and beautifully written story of the advances and reverses of a great civilisation that lost its own way, was shunted into cul-de-sacs by predatory European imperialists — and yet was and is constantly searching out ways to bounce back. The Islamic Enlightenment: The Modern Struggle Between Faith and Reason, by Christopher de Bellaigue, Bodley Head, RRP£25, 398 pages David Gardner is the FT’s international affairs editor Photograph: Getty: https://www.ft.com/content/623c5188-f75c-11e6-bd4e-68d53499ed71

Also read: http://islam4humanite.blogspot.com/2017/02/the-problem-with-islamism-political.html
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~


~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~
Humanity, Knowledge, Religion, Culture, Tolerance, Peace
انسانیت ، علم ، اسلام ،معاشرہ ، برداشت ، سلامتی 
Books, Articles, Blogs, Magazines,  Videos, Social Media
بلاگز، ویب سائٹس،سوشل میڈیا، میگزین، ویڈیوز,کتب
سلام فورم نیٹ ورک  Peace Forum Network 
Join Millions of visitors: لاکھوں وزٹرز میں شامل ہوں 
Salaamforum.blogspot.com 
سوشل میڈیا پر جوائین کریں یا اپنا نام ، موبائل نمر923004443470+ پر"وہٹس اپپ"یا SMS کریں   
Join 'Peace-Forum' at Social Media, WhatsApp/SMS Name,Cell#at +923004443470
     
  
Facebook: fb.me/AftabKhan.page