indahnesia.com - Discover Indonesia Online

    
You are currently in > Forum > General chat > View topic

17-01-2015 18:16 · [news] Three more bodies of AirAsia victims to Surabaya hospital  (1 reaction)
17-01-2015 01:23 · [news] Fuel prices lowered, again  (2 reactions)
17-01-2015 00:14 · [news] President dismisses Sutarman as national police chief  (0 reactions)
16-01-2015 12:44 · [news] Alleged terrorists shot dead three villagers in Poso  (3 reactions)
16-01-2015 02:15 · [news] Indonesia to execute six drug convicts  (0 reactions)

Jantje
User
spacer line
 


On 14-07-2006 12:24 searching wrote:
And how about the dress code according to Sharia Law and modern system?
Dont try to fool people, thinking they dont know much about sharia law.

Searching

www.faithfreedom.org



Hi searching,

Thanks for the link. This site is a revelation. Emoticon: Yes!



Yogya-Bali
User
User icon of Yogya-Bali
spacer line
 


On 15-07-2006 06:35 AbahFairus wrote:
to learn to discuss in “academic based manner”.


Well sorry, for me there's nothing academic about talking or discussing about religion. In my eyes believers in one of these middle-east originated religions are primitive people. Who still believes in some MALE creature somewhere up above, is for me no partner in any discussion. The fact that I live in a country where having a religion is an obligation, makes me feel that I'm living in a primitive country with a primitive government.
There's nothing academic about religion and introducing a religious law (whether it is sharia or some other religion-based law) makes people in my eyes ignorant, primitive people. If religion is nowadays necessary in Indonesia to regulate the live of common people, than Indonesia is making a lot of steps backwards instead of forwards to a civilized society.
Religion always divide, especially these primitive middle-east originated religions. Let these religions stay where they come from. They don't belong in either the western world nor in the asian world. It was ment for Jews and Arabs and not for anybody else. But the agression of these religions and their adherents made it spread all over the world and destroyed so many cultures everywhere.
It becomes time that someone stops these religions and send it to hell where it is coming from (if there's a hell below).




searching
User
spacer line
 

AF,
----
Searching : Now I want to ask you, what is the punishment of those who converts from Islam to other religion according to Sharia Law? Compare it to modern system.

I reply : Firstly, There are no punishments in Sharia, Sharia is not just a “Penal code”. You are confusing Sharia with “Islamic Penal code”/ Criminal law/ hukum pidana. If you are questioning what is the punishment for any criminal act in Sharia, you will not get the answer. This is the same with if you are questioning, what is the punishment for Bank Robbery according to “UUD 45”. Or……….. Do you want to know what is the punishment for credit card fraud according to “The Declaration of independence” of USA.

Secondly, there is no such punishment for anybody who convert from Islam to other religion in any “mainstream” Islamic law (fiqih). Even quitting from Islam is not considered as a crime in mainstream fiqih.
----


Oh, really? So what is your basis for saying this? Aren't the Sharia law is Islamic Law? I really wonder about your source. I always think that Sharia Law is Islamic Law, which of course, are applied in many islamic country. One of the REAL application of Sharia Law was done in Afghanistan, during the Taliban Regime.
So, if you have another Sharia Law concept, I really would love to know.
I also would like to ask, if you use Quran only or Quran and Hadihts. But I think you are a Quran and Hadiths believer, because Sharia Law was based on the practice done by what your prophet did in 7 AD.

----

I reply :
Again, The word sharia and the word LAW aren't fit to each other.
Regarding the dress code, the only “dress code” according to Islamic Dress Code is that Muslimeen ( male Muslim ) and Muslima ( female Muslim ) are recommended to dress modestly.

If you are interested discussing Islamic dress code you can create a new forum to discuss this issue. It would be very interesting, don't you think ?
I'm sure that the members/readers of this forum would like to know your ability to counter the statement that “Islamic dress code” is a “Rational Dress Code”.

Oooo……before we continue the discussion about Islamic dress code in another forum, you need to know that The use of Hijab, Kerudung, Jilbab, Muslima dress by many Muslimas can not be said as a part of “Islamic dress code”, it is an “Islamic fashion” (you can say that way) instead.

Do you know what “The modern Dress Code” is? Is it a kind of “International dress code” that is used as a “global dress Code” recently ? Can you give us an example of the application of “Modern dress code system” ?

The use of the term “Modern” is a bit vaque isn't it ?

----

Mutar-mutar seperti Kapal Yaher.
Dress modestly in Islamic sense. Can you tell us as well the conceptual of 'AURAT"?

-----

Now I want to ask you, if THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SHARIA LAW AND THE "MODERN LAW" then why you insist that Sharia Law is applied in Atjeh, even for NON MOSLEMS? Why don't we use modern law?

Hmm...before continuing this discussion, I would like to know the concept of YOUR sharia law.

---

I reply : From the sentence above, we know that The obligation to follow the Islamic sharia is for muslims only(just read the sentence carefully) . If the writers of piagam Jakarta also wanted non-Muslims to follow Sharia. They might wrote the sentence in this way :
Ketuhanan yang maha esa dengan menjalankan syariat Islam bagi SEMUANYA. It is obvious that the writers of Piagam Jakarta wanted Sharia to be followed JUST by Muslims only.
Perhaps, the non-Muslims who protested didn't understand that by omitting the line, there is a possibility for non-muslims to have an obligation to follow SHARIA. Think about it !

---

Funny enough...why should a country basic principle (Pancasila) should mention anything about one of the religion in its country? That's why it was ommited.

But since the beginning of the independence....you, the moslems, love to gain adventage. Like in UUD 45 "Presiden...asli...beragama Islam..."
Luckily it was ommited as well.

Now it seems that slowly the moslems in Indonesia tried to impose their notion of Islam in Indonesia, even to non believer.

AF, read the title of this thread...it's about IMPOSING SHARIA LAW TO NON MOSLEMS. If you want to apply sharia law between yourself, go ahead. I don't give a damn. But what is the right to impose any Islamic Law to NON moslems?

If you want us to discuss here, may be we fist start with Sharia Law. How is that? You can bring your sources and I can bring my sources.

Janje, thank you. In fact, the people there are VERY knowledgable of Islam (some really live in Islamic Community and Ex-moslems).

searching


Find out the real face of Islam, read www. faithfreedom.org

searching
User
spacer line
 

AF,

Since you seem to try confusing people by differentiating Sharia and Islamic Law, let us see what Wikipedia says about Sharia:


Sharia (Arabic: شريعة‎ ​ transliterated: Sharī‘ah) refers to a body of Islamic law. In the Islamic state Sharia governs both public and private lives of those living within the state. Sharia governs many aspects of day-to-day life, including politics, economics, banking, business law, contract law, and social issues. Some accept Sharia as the body of precedent and legal theory before the 19th century, while other scholars view Sharia as a changing body, and include reform Islamic legal theory from the contemporary period. [citation needed]

Before the 19th century legal theory was considered the domain of the traditional legal schools of thought. Most Sunni Muslims follow Hanafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Shafii, while most Shia Muslims follow Jaafari (Hallaq 1997, Brown 1996, Aslan 2006).


Here is the link for all readers to read themselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia

Searching


Find out the real face of Islam, read www. faithfreedom.org

searching
User
spacer line
 

AF,

your own Quran stated that apostasy should be punished with death. So I don't know where you find your source.


4:88-89 Then what is the matter with you that you are divided into two parties about the hypocrites? Allah has cast them back (to disbelief) because of what they have earned. Do you want to guide him whom Allah has made go astray? And he whom Allah has made to go astray, you will never find for him any way (of guidance) 89 They wish that you reject (Faith), and thus that you all become equal (like one another). So, take not Auliya (protectors or friends) from them, till they emigrate in the way of Allah (to Muhammad). But if they turn back (from Islam), take (hold of) them and kill [q-t-l] them wherever you find them . . . .

See the bold.

Searching






Find out the real face of Islam, read www. faithfreedom.org

AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 

Yogya-Bali

YB said : Well sorry, for me there's nothing academic about talking or discussing about religion.

I reply : I am sure that you are misunderstanding the meaning of the word “academic” with the words like “rational” or “logical”.
Here is the definition for academic from a dictionary :
adj 1: associated with academia or an academy; "the academic curriculum"; "academic gowns" 2: hypothetical or theoretical and not expected to produce an immediate or practical result; "an academic discussion"; "an academic question" 3: marked by a narrow focus on or display of learning especially its trivial aspects [syn: donnish, pedantic].
According to the definition of the word “academic”, we can discuss any kind of topic ACADEMICCALY, eventhough the topic is not considered logical or rational according to one or more parties in a discussion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


YB said : In my eyes believers in one of these middle-east originated religions are primitive people.

I reply : Interesting ( but a bit judgmental ) point of view ! However, You are not the only person who have such kind of thought. You are more than welcome to participate in this discussion and show your view freely. I do think that as open minded people, we both can not negate the probability that, other’s opinion can be logically acceptable.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


YB said : Who still believes in some MALE creature somewhere up above, is for me no partner in any discussion.

I reply : Firstly, according to my definition of GOD, which is : The main Cause of everything in universe that is not caused bay anything else. The using of the word “creature” when referring to God is not accurate. You might choose CREATOR as opposite to CREATURE.
Secondly, according to Islam’s concept of Deity, The God is a genderless being. Which means not male nor female. Of course in English translation, and other languages that has gender pronomina (personal pronoun), It is difficult to use neuter pronominal. In this case the male pronomina, HE is commonly used for centuries, which is of course a bit inaccurate.
Thirdly, According to Islamic concept of deity, as the main caused or creator, God can not be affected to Its/his/her creations. According to Islamic concept, Space (ruang) dan time (waktu) are creatures so they can not affect God as their creator. Thus, portraying God in spatial positions like up above, down under, way up there are not considered appropriate In Islam.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

YB said : The fact that I live in a country where having a religion is an obligation, makes me feel that I'm living in a primitive country with a primitive government.

I reply : I do understand what you feel about this situation. According to Islamic teaching, there is no compulsion in Religion. You may take an internet research about this and get informations from both sides.




AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 

Yogya-Bali


YB said : There's nothing academic about religion and introducing a religious law (whether it is sharia or some other religion-based law) makes people in my eyes ignorant, primitive people.

I reply : Keep participating on this discussion, if you do think that your personal opinion is totally logically acceptable you may persuade everybody who has different opinion with you to accept your view, and vice versa.

-------------------------------------------------------------------


YB said : If religion is nowadays necessary in Indonesia to regulate the live of common people, than Indonesia is making a lot of steps backwards instead of forwards to a civilized society.

I reply : According to the world’s history textbooks ( I mean any textbook that is related to history), Religion or the faith of Supreme being has been always a part of any civilization.
From my standpoint, the word religion in Arabic term Ad-Dien has the meaning of “Jalan Hidup” or Way of life (in English).
The most important goal of religion is to create a civilized and just society.

--------------------------------------------------------------

YB said : Religion always divide, especially these primitive middle-east originated religions. Let these religions stay where they come from.

I reply : Please face the fact that those middle eastern religion has been spread all over the world and attracting so many adherents. I have

---------------------------------------------------------------


YB said : They don't belong in either the western world nor in the asian world. It was ment for Jews and Arabs and not for anybody else.

I reply : I don’t see any logical reason why those religions / way of life that are originated from one place do not belong to Another place. Would you please explain this further ?

-------------------------------------------------------------

YB said : But the agression of these religions and their adherents made it spread all over the world and destroyed so many cultures everywhere.

I reply : Spreading is more accurate than aggression since the term religion is not a being that has capability to make an aggression. It is the people who may aggress not religion itself.

----------------------------------------------------------------

YB said : It becomes time that someone stops these religions and send it to hell where it is coming from (if there's a hell below).

I reply : Some of the concepts from religion can be beyond the Limit of Human being collective experiences. There are two kinds of method to deal with this issue. First, by making a reliability study of other concepts that is exist in the main source of the teaching. Second, by experiencing. If you have to die to know the fact whether God, or Hell, or heaven is really exist or not, then you have to die first.

This would be an interesting topic ! THE PROBABILITY OF THE EXISTENCE OF GOD ACCORDING TO SCIENCE AND LOGIC. Any body care to create a new subforum to this subject ? Emoticon: Smile




AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 

Searching

Searching said : Oh, really?

I reply : Yeah ! Be happy with that ! Emoticon: Smile

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Searching said : So what is your basis for saying this? Aren't the Sharia law is Islamic Law? I really wonder about your source.

I reply : Just do some internet research on this matter, get as many sources as possible. You may get information from different angles, sometimes it may confuse you, but I’m sure this would be very interesting.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Searching said : I always think that Sharia Law is Islamic Law, which of course, are applied in many islamic country. One of the REAL application of Sharia Law was done in Afghanistan, during the Taliban Regime.

I reply : Hey, come on guy ! It’s okay for you to have such thinking. That’s why we are discussing this matter, because we have different opinion, way of thinking, impression, knowledge……etc. What we have to do is to make our own case so the other part would be convinced or do agree with us.

I don’t see any Islamic country or non Islamic country is applying Islamic Sharia or/and Islamic Fiqih in its purest way. Hmm…The term Islamic country is a bit unclear.

Do you think Taliban is applying Islamic Sharia ? Well, they may think that way, but I don’t agree with them. Many of their rules are contradicting Islamic teaching.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Searching said : So, if you have another Sharia Law concept, I really would love to know.
I also would like to ask, if you use Quran only or Quran and Hadihts. But I think you are a Quran and Hadiths believer, because Sharia Law was based on the practice done by what your prophet did in 7 AD.

I reply : I’m not the inventor of the concept so I wouldn’t say that It should be named after me.
It would be better for you to do a small research by yourself. Not that I don’t want to help you, but it would be not fair to direct you, okay ?

From my understanding, Sharia (Islamic legal system) is well explained in Qur’an. Regarding Fiqih (Islamic laws), I have said in my old post that Islamic scholars have for sources for determining Fiqih. Which are Qur’an, hadith, Ijma (Scholars agreement), and Qiyas (personal opinion).

Of course, Fiqih ( any kind of fiqih )should always be re-interpreted from time to time.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Searching said : Mutar-mutar seperti Kapal Yaher.

I reply : I didn’t ! I just tried to make an explanation. What is yaher ?


Searching said : Dress modestly in Islamic sense. Can you tell us as well the conceptual of 'AURAT"?

I reply : Of course I can. Try me ! ( sorry….Just kidding folks Emoticon: Smile )
In my opinion, aurat or awrah, is part of the body that should not be exposed to other people except their Muhreem.
Some scholars have different opinions in determining the area of aurat. This would be a long explanation, I should suggest you to create a special subforum. This would be interesting ! Why because we have different opinion !




AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 

Searching


Searching said : Now I want to ask you, if THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SHARIA LAW AND THE "MODERN LAW" then why you insist that Sharia Law is applied in Atjeh, even for NON MOSLEMS? Why don't we use modern law?

I reply : Sharia is quite fit with modern principles of how legal system should be. So it would be no different to use the name of Sharia system of Modern system that fit with sharia. Even non-muslims in other countries have accepted Sharia principles in their legal system ( regardless aware or not ).
I’m sure that I never insist anything in this discussion. What I’m trying to do is to convince you that Sharia is not laws and laws in islam’s term should be Fiqih.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Searching said : Hmm...before continuing this discussion, I would like to know the concept of YOUR sharia law.

I reply : There is no such Sharia Law. Do you mean Sharia Legal system and Fiqih law ?

-------------------------------------------------------------

Searching said : Funny enough...why should a country basic principle (Pancasila) should mention anything about one of the religion in its country?

I reply : I have no Idea ! I am not old enough to be involved with the constituting of Pancasila….LOL..

--------------------------------------------------------

Searching said : That's why it was ommited.

I reply : You could be right.

------------------------------------------------------------

Searching said : But since the beginning of the independence....you, the moslems, love to gain adventage. Like in UUD 45 "Presiden...asli...beragama Islam..."
Luckily it was ommited as well.

I reply :
1. How do you know that I am a Muslim ? Emoticon: Smile
2. Muslims in this era have nothing to do with the making of original form of UUD 45.
3. Have you heard the term WASP ? ( White, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant ). There is a tendency in American presidential election to choose their president with WASP background. The only president who was catholic was John F. Kennedy. I’m sure that it would be a long time to see colored skin president in America, Or president with German or Poland or Japanese or Hispanic ancestry.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Searching said : Now it seems that slowly the moslems in Indonesia tried to impose their notion of Islam in Indonesia, even to non believer.

I reply : Maybe because they are tired involving with legal system that not purely fit with sharia legal system.
If the Muslims have some better legal system why not ? Is it because it name ? Then you can let the Muslims to call it Sharia, while you can call it Modern system.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Searching said : AF, read the title of this thread...it's about IMPOSING SHARIA LAW TO NON MOSLEMS. If you want to apply sharia law between yourself, go ahead. I don't give a damn. But what is the right to impose any Islamic Law to NON moslems?

I reply : Why we should be different ?

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Searching said : If you want us to discuss here, may be we fist start with Sharia Law. How is that? You can bring your sources and I can bring my sources.

I reply : I suggest you to do a small internet research first by yourself, and get information from different sources. That’s what I did.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Searching said : Janje, thank you. In fact, the people there are VERY knowledgable of Islam (some really live in Islamic Community and Ex-moslems).

I reply : The fact that they are Ex-Muslims and live among Muslims community can not negate the probability that they could be WRONG, vice versa.

I have opened the site two years ago. And I’m sure that the site is single sided view……right ? There’s nothing wrong with getting information from single sided site, but I do think that it is better for you to go to Discussion Board or the more better if you go to Debating Board.
In a discussion board you can get opinions from different view and different angles. In a debating board you can get the view of both Critics and Defenders of Islamic teaching.

I am sure that the other members of this forum would agree with me that it is better to go to discussion or debating board than to single sided view site.




AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 

Searching said :

Since you seem to try confusing people by differentiating Sharia and Islamic Law, let us see what Wikipedia says about Sharia:


Sharia (Arabic: شريعة‎ ​ transliterated: Sharī‘ah) refers to a body of Islamic law. In the Islamic state Sharia governs both public and private lives of those living within the state. Sharia governs many aspects of day-to-day life, including politics, economics, banking, business law, contract law, and social issues. Some accept Sharia as the body of precedent and legal theory before the 19th century, while other scholars view Sharia as a changing body, and include reform Islamic legal theory from the contemporary period. [citation needed]

Before the 19th century legal theory was considered the domain of the traditional legal schools of thought. Most Sunni Muslims follow Hanafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Shafii, while most Shia Muslims follow Jaafari (Hallaq 1997, Brown 1996, Aslan 2006).

Here is the link for all readers to read themselves.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia



I reply : Thank you for helping me. It seems that what wikipedia has wrote is indeed making my case. Let’s analyze line per line.

Line 1 : Sharia refers to “a body of Islamic Law”

Please, focus to the phrase A body of Islamic law. This means that Sharia has wider meaning than LAW.

Line 2 : In the Islamic state, Sharia Govern both public and private lives of those living within the sate. Sharia governs many aspects of day-to-day life, including politics, economics, banking, business law, contract law, and social issues.

This means that Sharia has branches like public laws and private laws, and contains many aspects of day to day life…….not just LAW.

Line 3 : Some accept Sharia as the body of precedent and legal theory before the 19th century, while other scholars view Sharia as a changing body, and include reform Islamic legal theory from the contemporary period.

We can extract the meaning that Sharia can be seen as “A body and legal precedent” or “A changing body of Islamic Legal Theory”.

In my opinion, the word theory contains the meaning of “General” and not practical, While the word Fiqih is more practical. Why don’t you start to do an internet search for the word Fiqih or Fikih or Fiqh.

Line 4 : Before the 19th century legal theory was considered the domain of the traditional legal schools of thought. Most Sunni Muslims follow Hanafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Shafii, while most Shia Muslims follow Jaafari (Hallaq 1997, Brown 1996, Aslan 2006).

Even in classical time there are some Islamic scholars with different interpretations.




searching
User
spacer line
 

AF,

Let's make this discussion to be one topic at the time.
First: SHARIA LAW
Here is my search of internet base about Sharia. I use wikipedia, because I don't want to make any bias by using www.faithfreedom.org.

Sharia (Arabic: شريعة‎ ​ translit: Sharī‘ah) refers to a body of Islamic law . In the Islamic state Sharia governs both public and private lives of those living within the state. Sharia governs many aspects of day-to-day life, including politics, economics, banking, business law, contract law, and social issues. Some accept Sharia as the body of precedent and legal theory before the 19th century, while other scholars view Sharia as a changing body, and include reform Islamic legal theory from the contemporary period.

The presence of sharia cannot separate itself from the Islamic Law, becauser it's the base for governing public and private life.

As you told me, the basis for Islamic Law are Qur'an, hadith, Ijma (Scholars agreement), and Qiyas (personal opinion).
I also believe that Quran is the highest authority, Islamic Law should never be against Quran.

Now what are the examples of Islamic Law? From Wikipedia we find several examples.

1) The penalty for theft

In accordance with the Qur'an and several hadith, theft is punished by imprisonment or amputation of hands or feet, depending on the number of times it was committed.[1][2]

2) Dietary laws

Sharia dictates that Muslims may only eat from meat that has been slaughtered in the name of God and meets stringent dietary requirements. Such meat is called halāl, or "lawful". Islamic law prohibits a Muslim from eating pork, and most juridical opinions also hold monkey, dog, cat, carnivores and several other types of animal as harām (prohibited). For the meat of an animal to be halāl it must be one of the declared halāl species, and the animal may not be killed by excessively cruel or painful means. The traditional means of slaughter is by slicing open the jugular veins at the neck, resulting in quick blood loss; a state of shock and unconsciousness is induced, and death soon follows through cardiac arrest.

According to the Qur'an, the animal does not have to be slaughtered by a Muslim, but may be slaughtered by a Jew or a Christian (People of the Book) as long as it meets their strict dietary laws (Al-Ma'ida 5: "The food of those who have received the Scripture is lawful for you." Emoticon: Wink Thus, most Muslims will accept kosher meat as halāl. (Qur'an 2:173, 6:121)

3. The role of women under Sharia

Islam does not prohibit women from working, but emphasizes the importance of housekeeping and caring for the families of both parents. In theory, Sunni Islamic law allows husbands to divorce their wives at will, by clearly saying talaq ("I divorce you" Emoticon: Wink three times in public. In Shi'a Islam, divorce is more involved than this and state proceedings vary. In 2003, for example, a Malaysian court ruled that, under Sharia law, a man may divorce his wife via text messaging as long as the message was clear and unequivocal. [6] Such a divorce, known as the "triple talaq" is not allowed in most Muslim states. The divorced wife always keeps her dowry from when she was married, and is given child support until the age of weaning, at which point the child may be returned to its father if it is deemed to be best.

In addition, women are generally not allowed to be clergy or religious scholars. Many interpretations of Islamic law hold that women may not have prominent jobs, and thus are forbidden from working in the government. This has been a mainstream view in many Muslim nations in the last century, despite the example of Muhammad's wife Aisha, who both took part in politics and was a major authority on hadith.

A Muslim may not marry or remain married to an unbeliever of either sex (2:221, 60:10). A Muslim man may marry a woman of the People of the Book (5:5); traditionally, however, Islamic law forbids a Muslim woman from marrying a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam.

4) Dress code
The Qur'an also places a dress code upon its followers. The rule for men has been ordained before the women."say to the believing men to lower their gaze and preserve their modesty, it will make for greater purity for them and Allah is well aware of all that they do." For women, it emphasizes modesty. Allah says in the Qur'an, "And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof(interpreted as the face and hands), and let them wear their head-coverings over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments (interpreted as the body shape and possibly the hair) except to their husbands or their fathers, or their sons, . . ." (surat an-Nur verse 31). All those in whose presence a woman is not obliged to practice the dress code are known to be her mahrams. Men have a dress code which is more relaxed: the loins must be covered from knee to waist. The rationale given for these rules is that men and women are not to be viewed as sexual objects. It is a fail safe system. Men keep their guard up and women protect themselves. Should either one fail, the other prevents the society from falling into fitna

5) Domestic punishments

According to most interpretations, authorization for the husband to physically discipline disobedient wives is given in the Qur'an. First, admonishment is verbal, and secondly a period of refraining from intimate relations. Finally, if the husband deems the situation appropriate, he may hit her:

"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more [strength] than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them [first], [Next], refuse to share their beds, [And last] beat them [lightly]; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means [of annoyance]: For Allah is Most High, great [above you all]." [[[Qur'an]] 4:34 English translation: Yusuf Ali.

The medieval jurist ash-Shafi'i, founder of one of the main schools of fiqh, commented on this verse that "hitting is permitted, but not hitting is preferable."

The Arabic verse uses idribu¯hunna (from the root daraba ضرب Emoticon: Wink , whose commonest meaning in Arabic has been rendered as "beat", "hit", "scourge", or "strike". Besides this verse, other meanings for daraba used in the Qur'an (though not with a human direct object) include 'to travel', 'to make a simile', 'to cover', 'to separate', and 'to go abroad', among others. For this reason — particularly in recent years (e.g. Ahmed Ali, Edip Yuksel) — some consider "hit" to be a misinterpretation, and believe it should be translated as "admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and separate from them." Certain modern translations of the Qur'an in the English language accept the commoner translation of "beat" but tone down the wording with bracketed additions. Whatever idribu¯hunna is meant to convey in the Qur'an -- and multiple, complementary meanings are quite common in Islam's holy book -- the verb is directed, not at a single husband, but to the community as a whole.

Several Hadith urge strongly against beating one's wife, such as: "How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion camel and then embrace (sleep with) her? (Al-Bukhari, English Translation, vol. 8, Hadith 68, pp. 42-43), "I went to the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) and asked him: What do you say (command) about our wives? He replied: Give them food what you have for yourself, and clothe them by which you clothe yourself, and do not beat them, and do not revile them. (Sunan Abu-Dawud, Book 11, Marriage (Kitab Al-Nikah), Number 2139)". Others hadiths do indicate that husbands have a right to discipline their wives to a certain extent:

Fear Allah concerning women! Verily you have taken them on the security of Allah, and intercourse with them has been made lawful unto you by words of Allah. You too have right over them, and that they should not allow anyone to sit on your bed whom you do not like. But if they do that, you can chastise them but not severely. Their rights upon you are that you should provide them with food and clothing in a fitting manner. (Narrated in Sahih Muslim, on the authority of Jabir.) [7]

According to Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, head of the European Council for Fatwa and Research:

"If the husband senses that feelings of disobedience and rebelliousness are rising against him in his wife, he should try his best to rectify her attitude by kind words, gentle persuasion and reasoning with her. If this is not helpful, he should sleep apart from her, trying to awaken her agreeable feminine nature so that serenity may be restored, and she may respond to him in a harmonious fashion. If this approach fails, it is permissible for him to beat her lightly with his hands, avoiding her face and other sensitive parts. In no case should he resort to using a stick or any other instrument that might cause pain and injury. Rather, this 'beating' should be of the kind the Prophet (peace be on him) once mentioned to a disobedient maid-servant, when he said 'If it were not for the fear of retaliation on the Day of Resurrection, I would have beaten you with this miswak (tooth-cleaning twig)' [as reported by Ibn Majah, by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih, and by Ibn Sa`d in his Tabaqat].[8] [9]

However, punishments are authorized by other passages in the Quran and Hadiths for certain crimes (e.g., extra-marital sex, adultery), and are employed by some as rational for extra-legal punative action while others disagree (quotations provided by Syed Kamran Mirza):

Quran-24:2 "The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication—flog each of them with hundred stripes: Let no compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by God, if ye believe in God and the last day."
Quran-17:32 "Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful (deed) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils)."
Sahi Muslim No. 4206: "A woman came to the prophet and asked for purification by seeking punishment. He told her to go away and seek God's forgiveness. She persisted four times and admitted she was pregnant. He told her to wait until she had given birth. Then he said that the Muslim community should wait until she had weaned her child. When the day arrived for the child to take solid food, Muhammad handed the child over to the community. And when he had given command over her and she was put in a hole up to her breast, he ordered the people to stone her. Khalid b. al-Walid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and when the blood spurted on her face he cursed her."
Sahih Al-Bukhari Vol 2. pg 1009; and Sahih Muslim Vol 2. pg 65: Hadhrat Abdullah ibne Abbaas (Radiallahu Anhu) narrates the lecture that Hadhrat Umar (Radiallaahu Anhu) delivered whilst sitting on the pulpit of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam). Hadhrat Umar (Radiallahu Anhu) said, "Verily, Allah sent Muhammad (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) with the truth, and revealed the Quran upon him. The verse regarding the stoning of the adulterer/ess was from amongst the verse revealed (in the Quraan). We read it, secured it and understood it. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) stoned and we stoned after him. I fear that with the passage of time a person might say, ‘We do not find mention of stoning in the Book of Allah and thereby go astray by leaving out an obligation revealed by Allah. Verily, the stoning of an adulterer/ress is found in the Quraan and is the truth, if the witnesses are met or there is a pregnancy or confession."

Some critics have pointed to "honor killing" as an illustration of the problems with Muslim culture and Shariah law. While the practice of honor killing is common in many Muslim countries, most Islamic leaders and scholars condemn the practice of honor killing, and argue the practice is not based on religious doctrine

6) Muslim apostates

Main article: Apostasy in Islam

In most interpretations of Shariah, conversion by Muslims to other religions is forbidden and is termed apostasy. Muslim theology equates apostasy to treason, and in most interpretations of shariah, the penalty for apostasy is death.

I only bring you six examples of regulation under Sharia. And I ask you now are you sure it is fit with modern justice?

Searching

P.S.
1) If you want to open sub thread, I am more than happy to join when you open one.
2) you said "how do I think that you are a moslem"? Well, I don't know, only you can tell us here if you are a moslem or not.




Find out the real face of Islam, read www. faithfreedom.org

AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 

Searching said : your own Quran stated that apostasy should be punished with death. So I don't know where you find your source.


4:88-89 Then what is the matter with you that you are divided into two parties about the hypocrites? Allah has cast them back (to disbelief) because of what they have earned. Do you want to guide him whom Allah has made go astray? And he whom Allah has made to go astray, you will never find for him any way (of guidance) 89 They wish that you reject (Faith), and thus that you all become equal (like one another). So, take not Auliya (protectors or friends) from them, till they emigrate in the way of Allah (to Muhammad). But if they turn back (from Islam), take (hold of) them and kill [q-t-l] them wherever you find them . . . .

See the bold.


I reply : There is no such phrase in bracket (from Islam) in the three most well known English transliterations of Yusuf Ali, Pickthal, and Shakir. I don’t know where the source of you get the idea to add the phrase in bracket. Hmmm…………….?????????
Have you heard the term asbabun nuzul ? Asbabun nuzul is the cause why certain passage/s in Qur’an was sent down. The asbabun nusul of these ayahs was when The Muslims in Medina were in war with the meccans. In the middle of war there were some people who betrayed the Muslims and went to ally with meccans so . The ayahs refers to that incidence in the middle of war. Beside that, if you may do a bit research, you may find that there is an ayah that say “There is no Compulsion in Religion”.
Here are Three ayahs with Three versions of English transliterations :

004.088
YUSUFALI: Why should ye be divided into two parties about the Hypocrites? Allah hath upset them for their (evil) deeds. Would ye guide those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way? For those whom Allah hath thrown out of the Way, never shalt thou find the Way.
PICKTHAL: What aileth you that ye are become two parties regarding the hypocrites, when Allah cast them back (to disbelief) because of what they earned? Seek ye to guide him whom Allah hath sent astray? He whom Allah sendeth astray, for him thou (O MUhammad) canst not find a road.
SHAKIR: What is the matter with you, then, that you have become two parties about the hypocrites, while Allah has made them return (to unbelief) for what they have earned? Do you wish to guide him whom Allah has caused to err? And whomsoever Allah causes to err, you shall by no means find a way for him.

004.089
YUSUFALI: They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks;-
PICKTHAL: They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them,
SHAKIR: They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.

004.090
YUSUFALI: Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. If Allah had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you: Therefore if they withdraw from you but fight you not, and (instead) send you (Guarantees of) peace, then Allah Hath opened no way for you (to war against them).
PICKTHAL: Except those who seek refuge with a people between whom and you there is a covenant, or (those who) come unto you because their hearts forbid them to make war on you or make war on their own folk. Had Allah willed He could have given them power over you so that assuredly they would have fought you. So, if they hold aloof from you and wage not war against you and offer you peace, Allah alloweth you no way against them.
SHAKIR: Except those who reach a people between whom and you there is an alliance, or who come to you, their hearts shrinking from fighting you or fighting their own people; and if Allah had pleased, He would have given them power over you, so that they should have certainly fought you; therefore if they withdraw from you and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah has not given you a way against them.

For those who need to see the source her it is.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/004.qmt.html




Jantje
User
spacer line
 

Islam is a pandemic. A dangerous, sickening, barbaric religeon. Nothing “academic” about it!
AF and his brothers still have a lot of preaching, interpreting, writing and postings to do in trying to justify the atrocities this inhumane cult has committed upon mankind and still are about to do in this day and age and it’s not just a small group!
I luckily don’t have children but feel sorry for the future of those who still must grow up in this intoxicated society.
Muslims never strongly condemned attacks on innocent people over the years. I would be deeply ashamed to be associated with them.

For Mas Ed:
I’d rather choose the electric chair than the ordeal these poor women were subject to in www.faithfreedom.org/stoning to death.

I appreciate everybody’s input for now the readers, academic and non-academic, can see for themselves and learn compare and judge the difference between good and evil.

AF: keep up the “good” work! Emoticon: Angry



searching
User
spacer line
 

AF,

About the definition of Sharia:
Sharia is:
a body of Islamic law
---> Thus it is based itself on Islamic law.

In the Islamic state Sharia governs both public and private lives of those living within the state
----> First of all, Indonesia is NOT an Islamic state. The second, governing both public and private lives of NON moslem people in a NON Islamic State by Islamic law is absurd.

Sharia governs many aspects of day-to-day life, including politics, economics, banking, business law, contract law, and social issues.
----> See my second point.

Some accept Sharia as the body of precedent and legal theory before the 19th century, while other scholars view Sharia as a changing body, and include reform Islamic legal theory from the contemporary period.

About this, you said:

Please, focus to the phrase A body of Islamic law. This means that Sharia has wider meaning than LAW.

Emoticon: Nooo Sharia is A BODY of Islamic Law. Without Islamic Law, there will be no sharia. Of course, if you want to stick to the fact that we are talking about the application of A BODY OF ISLAMIC LAW to govern people including NON moslems. I don't understand why you stick on Sharia meaning than the fact that it governs BASED on Islamic law.

This means that Sharia has branches like public laws and private laws, and contains many aspects of day to day life…….not just LAW.

Emoticon: Nooo Public laws and private laws ARE LAWS. Day to day life, we have things that govern public activities (called public laws) and private activities (called private laws). This alone should show you that Islamic Law used by Sharia also rules private laws, while modern justice system separate what is public and what is private, and give personal freedom more. You can see the example in my previous post about apostasy.

In my opinion, the word theory contains the meaning of “General” and not practical, While the word Fiqih is more practical. Why don't you start to do an internet search for the word Fiqih or Fikih or Fiqh.

Emoticon: Nooo When you said something about applying Sharia which based itself on Islamic Law, then we are NOT talking about theory. We are talking about positive laws. So it's not useful to wider ourselves to things like "theory", because we are talking about something practical.

Even in classical time there are some Islamic scholars with different interpretations.

Emoticon: Nooo Ok, give me an example, what are the different interpretation of those mazhab in their opinion to Apostasy.

I have given my source, a non bias one. Where is your source?

Searching


Find out the real face of Islam, read www. faithfreedom.org

searching
User
spacer line
 

AF,

I reply : There is no such phrase in bracket (from Islam) in the three most well known English transliterations of Yusuf Ali, Pickthal, and Shakir. I don't know where the source of you get the idea to add the phrase in bracket. Hmmm…………….?????????
Have you heard the term asbabun nuzul ? Asbabun nuzul is the cause why certain passage/s in Qur'an was sent down. The asbabun nusul of these ayahs was when The Muslims in Medina were in war with the meccans. In the middle of war there were some people who betrayed the Muslims and went to ally with meccans so . The ayahs refers to that incidence in the middle of war. Beside that, if you may do a bit research, you may find that there is an ayah that say “There is no Compulsion in Religion”.


Are you sure you want to claim that Quran should be justified based on the time? It's not for all time then.

The compulsion in religion verse, it was sent down during Meccan time, isn't it? I also research and there's a concept Nasakh. The verse was nasakh by the other verse later. Do you want me to bring it as well?

Ok, we use your shakir:

SHAKIR: What is the matter with you, then, that you have become two parties about the hypocrites, while Allah has made them return (to unbelief) for what they have earned? Do you wish to guide him whom Allah has caused to err? And whomsoever Allah causes to err, you shall by no means find a way for him.

This is apostasy. this verse said that Allah had made them apostate.

SHAKIR: They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.

So the moslems forced the apostate to go back to Allah's way. But if they apostated, they should be killed. Don't befriend with them or make them moslem's aulia.

Which massage of my source which is not in accordance with it?

Searching


Find out the real face of Islam, read www. faithfreedom.org

AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 

Searching

Searching said : Let's make this discussion to be one topic at the time.
First: SHARIA LAW

I reply : Again, Sharia is not just LAW. It’s Legal System. You need to see the definition of Law from the dictionary.
This is what I found : Law = A set of rules or principles dealing with a specific area of a “legal system”: tax law; criminal law.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


Searching said : The presence of sharia cannot separate itself from the Islamic Law, becauser it's the base for governing public and private life.

I reply : Sharia is more general than fiqih so it has to be the other way around. The presence of Fiqih can not be separated from Sharia, but sharia as a whole body of LAWS and Regulations can be separated from Fiqih.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

As you told me, the basis for Islamic Law are Qur'an, hadith, Ijma (Scholars agreement), and Qiyas (personal opinion).
I also believe that Quran is the highest authority, Islamic Law should never be against Quran.

I reply : We have something in common. The difference is that you “Believe” that Qur’an is the highest authority, While I do “Have an understanding” why Qur’an should be the highest authority.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1) The penalty for theft

In accordance with the Qur'an and several hadith, theft is punished by imprisonment or amputation of hands or feet, depending on the number of times it was committed.[1][2]

I reply : This is a bit simplification. There are several kinds of punishment for theft. Amputation of extremity is the highest punishment. The moral of step by step punishment is to make the doer of theft re-think about their action. And don’t forget that there should be a hearing or legal process in front of Legal authority.
Again, we can not apply any kind of punishment, if the society ( By democratic process) is not informed and aware.
This kind of law is a penal code or criminal law (fiqih) not sharia.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

2) Dietary laws

Sharia dictates that Muslims may only eat from meat that has been slaughtered in the name of God and meets stringent dietary requirements. Such meat is called halāl, or "lawful". Islamic law prohibits a Muslim from eating pork, and most juridical opinions also hold monkey, dog, cat, carnivores and several other types of animal as harām (prohibited). For the meat of an animal to be halāl it must be one of the declared halāl species, and the animal may not be killed by excessively cruel or painful means. The traditional means of slaughter is by slicing open the jugular veins at the neck, resulting in quick blood loss; a state of shock and unconsciousness is induced, and death soon follows through cardiac arrest.

According to the Qur'an, the animal does not have to be slaughtered by a Muslim, but may be slaughtered by a Jew or a Christian (People of the Book) as long as it meets their strict dietary laws (Al-Ma'ida 5: "The food of those who have received the Scripture is lawful for you." Thus, most Muslims will accept kosher meat as halāl. (Qur'an 2:173, 6:121)

I reply : I agree with this one. I have to agree because I read some scientific facts that support this kind of practice. You may take a personal research on this.





AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 

3. The role of women under Sharia

Islam does not prohibit women from working, but emphasizes the importance of housekeeping and caring for the families of both parents.

I reply : emphasizing for housekeeping is a kind of cultural thing than religious. The accurate one is emphasizing for family management.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In theory, Sunni Islamic law allows husbands to divorce their wives at will, by clearly saying talaq ("I divorce you" three times in public. In Shi'a Islam, divorce is more involved than this and state proceedings vary.

I reply : In Indonesian family court (pengadilan agama), it should be after a decree from judge.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------


In 2003, for example, a Malaysian court ruled that, under Sharia law, a man may divorce his wife via text messaging as long as the message was clear and unequivocal. [6] Such a divorce, known as the "triple talaq" is not allowed in most Muslim states.

I reply : I have a strong reason why I still don’t agree with Malaysian on this.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

The divorced wife always keeps her dowry from when she was married, and is given child support until the age of weaning, at which point the child may be returned to its father if it is deemed to be best.

I reply : I don’t see any unfairness here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In addition, women are generally not allowed to be clergy or religious scholars.

I reply : Is there a concept of clergy in Islam ? I don’t think so.
Women are not allowed to be a scholar In Islam ? Well, are you sure you are not confusing Islam with Catholicism ?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Many interpretations of Islamic law hold that women may not have prominent jobs, and thus are forbidden from working in the government.

I reply : Then you may ask various opinion from Islamic scholars.
Women are forbidden from working in the government ???? Well, there is a probability that some minority would conclude that women are forbidden from working in the government. I’m sure that this is not from qur’an nor reliable hadith.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This has been a mainstream view in many Muslim nations in the last century, despite the example of Muhammad's wife Aisha, who both took part in politics and was a major authority on hadith.

I reply : remember Khadija who was well known as a businesswoman.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Muslim may not marry or remain married to an unbeliever of either sex (2:221, 60:10). A Muslim man may marry a woman of the People of the Book (5:5); traditionally, however, Islamic law forbids a Muslim woman from marrying a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam.

I reply : There is some scholars who have different opinion.




AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 




4) Dress code
The Qur'an also places a dress code upon its followers. The rule for men has been ordained before the women."say to the believing men to lower their gaze and preserve their modesty, it will make for greater purity for them and Allah is well aware of all that they do." For women, it emphasizes modesty. Allah says in the Qur'an, "And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof(interpreted as the face and hands), and let them wear their head-coverings over their bosoms, and not display their ornaments (interpreted as the body shape and possibly the hair) except to their husbands or their fathers, or their sons, . . ." (surat an-Nur verse 31). All those in whose presence a woman is not obliged to practice the dress code are known to be her mahrams. Men have a dress code which is more relaxed: the loins must be covered from knee to waist. The rationale given for these rules is that men and women are not to be viewed as sexual objects. It is a fail safe system. Men keep their guard up and women protect themselves. Should either one fail, the other prevents the society from falling into fitna

I reply : There are different opinion on how men and women should cover their bodies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5) Domestic punishments

According to most interpretations, authorization for the husband to physically discipline disobedient wives is given in the Qur'an. First, admonishment is verbal, and secondly a period of refraining from intimate relations. Finally, if the husband deems the situation appropriate, he may hit her:

"Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more [strength] than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in [the husband's] absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them [first], [Next], refuse to share their beds, [And last] beat them [lightly]; but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means [of annoyance]: For Allah is Most High, great [above you all]." [[[Qur'an]] 4:34 English translation: Yusuf Ali.

The medieval jurist ash-Shafi'i, founder of one of the main schools of fiqh, commented on this verse that "hitting is permitted, but not hitting is preferable."

I reply : this would be interesting if discussed in a special subforum.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

According to Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, head of the European Council for Fatwa and Research:

"If the husband senses that feelings of disobedience and rebelliousness are rising against him in his wife, he should try his best to rectify her attitude by kind words, gentle persuasion and reasoning with her. If this is not helpful, he should sleep apart from her, trying to awaken her agreeable feminine nature so that serenity may be restored, and she may respond to him in a harmonious fashion. If this approach fails, it is permissible for him to beat her lightly with his hands, avoiding her face and other sensitive parts. In no case should he resort to using a stick or any other instrument that might cause pain and injury. Rather, this 'beating' should be of the kind the Prophet (peace be on him) once mentioned to a disobedient maid-servant, when he said 'If it were not for the fear of retaliation on the Day of Resurrection, I would have beaten you with this miswak (tooth-cleaning twig)' [as reported by Ibn Majah, by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih, and by Ibn Sa`d in his Tabaqat].[8] [9]

I reply : I don’t see any unfairness from the above passages.




AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 


However, punishments are authorized by other passages in the Quran and Hadiths for certain crimes (e.g., extra-marital sex, adultery), and are employed by some as rational for extra-legal punative action while others disagree (quotations provided by Syed Kamran Mirza):

Quran-24:2 "The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication—flog each of them with hundred stripes: Let no compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by God, if ye believe in God and the last day."
Quran-17:32 "Nor come nigh to adultery: for it is a shameful (deed) and an evil, opening the road (to other evils)."
Sahi Muslim No. 4206: "A woman came to the prophet and asked for purification by seeking punishment. He told her to go away and seek God's forgiveness. She persisted four times and admitted she was pregnant. He told her to wait until she had given birth. Then he said that the Muslim community should wait until she had weaned her child. When the day arrived for the child to take solid food, Muhammad handed the child over to the community. And when he had given command over her and she was put in a hole up to her breast, he ordered the people to stone her. Khalid b. al-Walid came forward with a stone which he threw at her head, and when the blood spurted on her face he cursed her."
Sahih Al-Bukhari Vol 2. pg 1009; and Sahih Muslim Vol 2. pg 65: Hadhrat Abdullah ibne Abbaas (Radiallahu Anhu) narrates the lecture that Hadhrat Umar (Radiallaahu Anhu) delivered whilst sitting on the pulpit of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam). Hadhrat Umar (Radiallahu Anhu) said, "Verily, Allah sent Muhammad (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) with the truth, and revealed the Quran upon him. The verse regarding the stoning of the adulterer/ess was from amongst the verse revealed (in the Quraan). We read it, secured it and understood it. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) stoned and we stoned after him. I fear that with the passage of time a person might say, ‘We do not find mention of stoning in the Book of Allah and thereby go astray by leaving out an obligation revealed by Allah. Verily, the stoning of an adulterer/ress is found in the Quraan and is the truth, if the witnesses are met or there is a pregnancy or confession."

Some critics have pointed to "honor killing" as an illustration of the problems with Muslim culture and Shariah law. While the practice of honor killing is common in many Muslim countries, most Islamic leaders and scholars condemn the practice of honor killing, and argue the practice is not based on religious doctrine

I reply : I don’t see any inappropriate things from the passages above.
--------------------------------------------------------

6) Muslim apostates

Main article: Apostasy in Islam

In most interpretations of Shariah, conversion by Muslims to other religions is forbidden and is termed apostasy. Muslim theology equates apostasy to treason, and in most interpretations of shariah, the penalty for apostasy is death.

I reply : You may ask for various opinions. How can we kill someone for converting from Islam if there is a passage in Qur’an that says “There is no compulsion in religion.” ? You said that Qur’an is the highest authority in Islam.
------------------------------------------------------------

I only bring you six examples of regulation under Sharia. And I ask you now are you sure it is fit with modern justice?

I reply : Some of your versions are not fit with Islamic teaching. You may confused the real Islamic teaching and The Islamic teaching you want to believe.
If you want to be more specific you can bring up modern justice version of those issues. Shal we do a comparative study ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Searching said :
If you want to open sub thread, I am more than happy to join when you open one.

I reply : You are more than welcome to be the initiator. Emoticon: Smile


I said : "how do you think that I a muslim"?
You reply : Well, I don't know, only you can tell us here if you are a moslem or not.

I reply : Well, you stated in your previous post like this…”You,….muslims.”. Is it only a Guess ? or are you a fortuneteller ?




AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 

jantje

Jantje said : Islam is a pandemic. A dangerous, sickening, barbaric religeon. Nothing “academic” about it!

I reply : As I said before you may have any opinion regarding Islam. But you are confusing the term ‘”academic” with something else. Have you heard something like this “ An academic overview on Shakespeare’s plays.” The term academic is a kind of manner in studying something, even something that you feel UGLY.
-------------------------------------------------------------

Jantje said : AF and his brothers still have a lot of preaching, interpreting, writing and postings to do in trying to justify the atrocities this inhumane cult has committed upon mankind and still are about to do in this day and age and it's not just a small group!

I reply : LOL…………..Do you feel being preached by me ? If you don’t agree with what I said, All you have to do is to refute everything I wrote ACADEMICALLY, rather than throwing up un-academic posts.

Of course I have a choice to say something un-academic like attacking on personal or throwing up judgmental or stereotyped statements rather than refuting the ideas, but my academic background direct me to choose a more appropriate discussion method. Emoticon: Smile
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I luckily don't have children but feel sorry for the future of those who still must grow up in this intoxicated society.

I reply : Well, I’m not blaming you for the misunderstanding.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Muslims never strongly condemned attacks on innocent people over the years. I would be deeply ashamed to be associated with them.

I reply : Attacking innocent people is considered as a Big SIN according to Islamic teaching. And has been condemned by Muslims all over the world. Did you hear my condemnation on attacking innocent people like those who were attacked by American Bombs in Iraq, or those who were attacked by Israeli troops in Palestina ? Did you hear my condemnation on attacking innocent people all over the world ?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jantje said :
I'd rather choose the electric chair than the ordeal these poor women were subject to in www.faithfreedom.org/stoning to death.

I reply : Can you accept the probability that electric chairs have killed more people than the practice of stoning ?
No matter the method of death penalty is, it should be avoided as can as possible according to Islamic teaching. If you don’t agree with what I wrote you may bring up your proof that death penalty is easily apllied by Muslims judge.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

jantje said : I appreciate everybody's input for now the readers, academic and non-academic, can see for themselves and learn compare and judge the difference between good and evil.

I reply : The time will tell. Who knows ? As an open minded person, I always save the probability, in my thought, that I could be found WRONG someday. Do you accept that there is a probability that you are WRONG ?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jantje said :
AF: keep up the “good” work!

I reply : What a nice emoticons ! What do you think ? Is it “academic” to involve emotions in a discussion ? I have a firm belief that we should use brain than emotions in a discussion.

It’s nice to know about you ! Emoticon: Smile




AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 

Searching,


Searching said : Are you sure you want to claim that Quran should be justified based on the time? It's not for all time then.

I reply : I never said that ! Emoticon: Smile How can you conclude that way ? I said that we need to recognize the occasion background of the ayah.
The most important point is how could your source add the phrase in brackets ?
------------------------------------------------

Searching said : The compulsion in religion verse, it was sent down during Meccan time, isn't it? I also research and there's a concept Nasakh.

I reply : There is no such concept (nasakh) according to mainstream teaching of Islam. Emoticon: Smile
------------------------------------------------------
Searching said :

The verse was nasakh by the other verse later. Do you want me to bring it as well?
Ok, we use your shakir:

SHAKIR: What is the matter with you, then, that you have become two parties about the hypocrites, while Allah has made them return (to unbelief) for what they have earned? Do you wish to guide him whom Allah has caused to err? And whomsoever Allah causes to err, you shall by no means find a way for him.

This is apostasy. this verse said that Allah had made them apostate.

SHAKIR: They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.

I reply : would you like to provide the name and the number of those two ayahs ?
I am just curious, why did you provide the name and the number of verses on your previous post, but do not mention the name and the number of verses in your last post ?


Searching said :
So the moslems forced the apostate to go back to Allah's way. But if they apostated, they should be killed. Don't befriend with them or make them moslem's aulia.

Which massage of my source which is not in accordance with it?

I reply : Don’t be so hurry ! until you can provide us with the name and number of those ayahs.




AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 

If you do not provide the name and the number of the ayahs I would assume that those ayahs are from Qur'an 4 : 88, 89.

And I'm curious why don't you mention the ayah 4: 90 ?





Agung
User
User icon of Agung
spacer line
 

Hello AbahFairus,
what do you think if western countries would apply a new kind of law. In this law all kinds of accepted traditional western behaviour are allowed, but typical non-western behaviour would be forbidden. Of course this law would be forced upon all parts of the country. I guess you can imagine what this would mean for immigrants in western countries. To start with a "dress code" when the temperatures hit 30 deg C...... (Obligatory to wear miniskirts) Emoticon: Nice

Sharia is of course doing exactly the same, but then from an Islamic point of view. (Obligatory for women to wear a scarf or a tent )




AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 

As I said before those ayah has an asbabun nuzul. You may do some internet research if you wish. or you can go to a debating board if you want to know more.
The ayahs are for them who commit a betrayal against Muslims in a war, not in daily life.



AbahFairus
User
spacer line
 

Hello Agung,

Hello AbahFairus,

agung said : what do you think if western countries would apply a new kind of law.

I reply : Personally, why should I care ? It’s their own business…………..LOL
----------------------------------------------------------------

Agung said : In this law all kinds of accepted traditional western behaviour are allowed, but typical non-western behaviour would be forbidden.

I reply : What do you mean by western behaviour and non-western behaviour ? You need to clarify this first….don’t you think ?
----------------------------------------------------------------

Agung said : Of course this law would be forced upon all parts of the country. I guess you can imagine what this would mean for immigrants in western countries. To start with a "dress code" when the temperatures hit 30 deg C...... (Obligatory to wear miniskirts)

I reply : Regarding the dress code, it would be debatable.
I have a suggestion for them, If they really wanted to apply such new law, the first thing to do is to inform the whole societies about the new law. The next step is to convince the whole society that the new law would give more benefit than the old one. Then, they can get the feedback from the society. Next, they can do a preliminary application. If the society has been convinced that the new law is better for them and the impact for the society has found better, They can apply the new law.

That step by step method is from Islamic teaching.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agung said : Sharia is of course doing exactly the same, but then from an Islamic point of view. (Obligatory for women to wear a scarf or a tent )

The same step by step method should be apply in applying any kind of Law. Including Fiqih or Sharia based Law. Note that I use the phrase Sharia based law than just sharia law.

Sharia based law means tha law that is believed having some basic principles from sharia.





You have to be logged in to post a message. You can login by clicking here.
If you do not have an account yet, you can register yourself here.



76,847,173 topic views - 234,929 posts - 13,697 topics - 25,672 members - last post @ 14-11-2019 19:32 CET

Created by indahnesia.com · feedback & contact · © 2000-2019
Other websites by indahnesia.com: ticketindonesia.info · kamus-online.com · indonesiepagina.nl · suvono.nl

125,699,009 pageviews Discover Indonesia Online at indahnesia.com