Tuesday, February 26, 2008

Part XVII: Intro to the Shari'a (Sharia, Shari'ah, Shariah)

Part XVII: Intro to the Shari’a
by Abu Daoud

During a recent five-month sojourn in the West I had the opportunity to do a good amount of teaching on Islam, and there was one question that people kept asking: what exactly is the shari’a? Where does it come from? These are the questions I want to tackle in this paper:

Generally one hears the word shari’a translated as “law” but that’s not quite right. It would be more like the Jewish understanding of Torah in fact. It does contain positive laws (thou must) and negative law (thou shalt not), but it also has a whole series of other classifications, including things that are recommended but not mandatory (certain prayers, for example) and things that are frowned upon but not forbidden (smoking, entering churches). There are also categories for things that are neutral, and a category for things upon which there is no judgment.

The shari’a then is like law with a whole body of advice thrown in for good measure. Moreover it is not mutable. While there are several schools of shari’a its origin is divine and thus the shari’a is immutable like God. For example, its provisions about slavery, stoning adulterers, slaying the one who offends the Prophet, the inferiority of Christians and Jews under Muslims, or the permanent injunction to wage jihad—none of these things can be repealed or changed.

Furthermore the shari’a touches on every single aspect of life. It is not then a “law” in the Western understanding of law, which is established to protect social order and freedom (or what have you). Some of the aspects of it make sense to the human mind, but ultimately its nature is not like ours and our obligation is not to understand it but simply to obey it. It is not meant for Muslims alone, but for all of humanity, and indeed it is the vision of Islam and the purpose of jihad to make the world submit to the shari’a of God. So there really is a cosmic dimension to this concept. Much of the shari’a simply stands beyond understanding.

The source of the shari’a is revelation. In Islam revelation takes two forms: the Qur’an and the sunna. The Qur’an does contain rules about things like divorce, inheritance, the value of certain witnesses, the division of the spoils of jihad, gambling, alcohol, and so on. But much is left unanswered, which is where the second source becomes so important: it is found in the collection of sayings and deeds of the Prophet and his companions. These deeds and sayings are individually called “hadith” and the plural in Arabic is “ahadith.” After Muhammad had died and Islam was growing quickly several Muslim scholars went about collecting these ahadith, and it become important to form a chain of witnesses from the present to Muhammad, so they will often start, “Ahmad heard from Yusef, who heard from Yaqub, who heard from Omar, that the Prophet used to eat dates on the morning” or something like that. Some of most important collections of ahadith are those done by Al Bukhari, Abu Dawood, and Muslim, but there are many others.

Since the Prophet was the perfect man or ideal man, it followed that even his words and way of being (sunna) were in themselves a form of revelation regarding Allah’s will for humanity. So this is the second form of revelation that forms the bedrock of the shari’a.

Through centuries of Islamic jurisprudence, Quranic interpretation (ijtihad), and the use of analogy, the shari’a finally reached a form around the 13th Century (some say earlier) where it basically was considered to be complete in that it had all the resources needed to make judgments on any topic. Thus further revision via new interpretations of Revelation (Qur’an and the sunna) were no longer permitted or needed.

In conclusion the shari’a is Allah’s will for all of humanity revealed in the Qur’an and the way of life (sunna) of Muhammad. It is complete and immutable and has been so for many centuries. The society that abides by the shari’a will be prosperous, just, and powerful. It is the will of Allah that the whole of humanity be made to submit to the shari’a.

5 comments:

I.J. AbdulHakeem said...

its provisions about
slavery,stoning adulterers,
slaying the one who offends
the Prophet,

Most Scholars attribute the low Saudi Arabian crime rate mainly to the strong influence of Islam in various spheres of life in Saudi society, particularly to the implementation of Shariah.

Transnational and comparative criminology
By Professor Sheptyckis and Professor Wardak
Pg 94-95



the inferiority of Christians
and Jews under Muslims,


see the renowned scholar Yusuf Al Qaradawi's article on the subject

"This was the norm throughout Islamic history. Muslims entered the land of the Magi (Persia), the Hindus (India), and the Buddhists (China); some of these people converted to Islam and others did not. The latter paid jizyah to Muslims who allowed them to keep their religion. This lasted for centuries and no Muslim scholars rejected or criticized it."

http://www.onislam.net/english/shariah/contemporary-issues/interviews-reviews-and-events/412153-al-qaradawis-fiqh-of-jihad-book-review-811.html#T4

see also
http://www.onislam.net/english
/shariah/contemporary-issues
/islamic-themes/432406.html

I.J. AbdulHakeem said...

the permanent injunction to
wage jihad


Shiekh al Qaradawi says

"The third category of proof is the meticulous correction and interpretation of the contemporary scholars on the subject of jihad. They have invested more time and effort than the preceding scholars, clarifying the issue beyond the shadow of a doubt, thus eliminating controversies. It was unanimously agreed that all the Prophet’s forays were only for the purpose of self protection and in order to safeguard the religion, and this is not a conjecture but a certitude"

http://208.43.71.196-static.reverse.softlayer.com/english/shariah/contemporary-issues/islamic-themes/424694.html


I.J. AbdulHakeem said...

After Muhammad had died and
Islam was growing quicklyseveral
Muslim scholars went about
collecting these ahadith, and it
become important to form a chain
of witnesses from the present to
Muhammad, so they will often
start, “Ahmad heard from Yusef,
who heard from Yaqub, who heard
from Omar, that the Prophet
used to eat dates on themorning”
or something like that.

That is not entirely accurate. Thats a very elementary understanding. This articles gives a better (yet still introductory understanding)
http://www.onislam.net/english/shariah/hadith/hadith-methodology/455415-ignorance-perceptions-a-mis-perceptions.html

One Non-muslim scholar even said:



"But their careful scrutiny of the chains of transmission and their meticulous collection and preservation of variants in the transmitted narratives give to medieval Arabic historiography a professionalism and sophistication without precedent in antiquity and without parallel in the contemporary medieval...even the more advanced and complex historiography of Greek Christendom still falls short of the historical literature of Islam in volume, variety and analytical depth"


Islam in History: Ideas, People, and Events in the Middle East
pg 105

By Bernard Lewis Professor Emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton University


I.J. AbdulHakeem said...

it basically was considered to
be complete in that it had all
the resources needed to make
judgments on any topic. Thus
further revision via new
interpretations of Revelation
(Qur’an and the sunna) were no
longer permitted or needed.



Shiekh mashhoor hasan al salman was asked a question regarding this and he replied:

"Allah's virtue is not a monopoly for anyone as Allah opened up the way for some of the later scholars which he did not open up for the earlier scholars...so why would
Allah restrict and limit his value."

http://www.salafimanhaj.com/pdf/SalafiManhaj_DoorOfIjtihad.pdf

I.J. AbdulHakeem said...

slaying the one who offends
the Prophet,

Lets first quote a famous commentary to clarify the issue:

according to a consensus of Muslim jurists, it means vilification that is done to insult and belittle Islam and Muslims, openly and publicly. Honest intellectual criticism while conducting research into problem and rulings remain exempt from its perview.

Maariful quran ;
Commentary on
9: 12-16

You can find similar views of this in the early United States history.
While it was rarely punished, blasphemy that was meant to insult Christianity was a crime.

For example, the famous 19th century Chief Justice Shaw has been described as:

He defended the coexistence of the constitutional provisions relating to freedom of religion and freedom of speech and press and the blasphemy statue…

Repressive Jurisprudence in the Early American Republic.

page 332-334
By Phillip I. Blumberg ,dean of law at the University of Connecticut



See also
Crime and punishment in American history
Pg 100

By Lawrence Meir Friedman , Stanford Professor of law who is the leading expositor of the history of American law