Quran's shariah and it's applicability
-
Salaam All
As we all know in Quran Allah legislated laws for His servants to deal with cruel and shameful crimes. But when we look at the punishments for these crimes we see that most of them are old-fashioned and can be applied in small and undeveloped societies. For instance we can now throw the thiefs and adulters in jail or enforce some other equal punishment. I'm not saying that Allah is not perfect law maker, I mean that the laws in the Quran are for the ancient nomadic muslims who had nothing but faith. They had to mark (?) the hands to make it known that the person was a thief. But now we do that by crime records.
242 The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.
How can we make sure that the watchers are mumin?
It cannot be denied that some ayats are for people who lived in those ages. We can't raise our voice to Mohammad now (492) and we cannot enter Prophets house (3353) and the list goes on (3330, 3332...)
So, can Quran's legal rulings be applied today and how? And which ayats can only be for those who lived with Muhammad, is there any method to guess this? Are we making a idol out of the Reading?
Please read brother Layths "The True State of the Quran" article here. It's interesting.
Peace...
-
Salaamun alaikum Born-again,
I'm sorry if this sounds accusative but to me, it all boils down to how much you trust the book itself. The book calls itself 'hudan linaas' (guidance for humankind) without any qualification (e.g. humans before the scientific age). To me, this shows that its not just for 'ancient nomadic Muslims who had nothing but faith'.
Why do I trust the book so much despite living in this era of scientific and tecnological achievement? Because the book has proven itself to me. Time and again it captures the human condition in such a way that it makes me question modernity rather than the book itself. And it is modernity which fails the test
However, i must say you raised interesting points which i will try to humbly respond to
They had to mark (?) the hands to make it known that the person was a thief. But now we do that by crime records.
I dont think its marking the hands to begin with. Assuming it is though, people don't carry criminal records with them and will hardly go to a potential victim and show thier records. Marking the hands is something more permanent and visible.
How can we make sure that the watchers are mumin?
Mumin people have specific characteristics in Al-Quraan. For example, they strive with goods and persons.
It cannot be denied that some ayats are for people who lived in those ages. We can't raise our voice to Mohammad now (492) and we cannot enter Prophets house (3353) and the list goes on (3330, 3332...)
If we believe nubuwat and risalaat has ended, sure. I for one don't believe so.
shukran wa salaam
-
peace b_a, mq, all,
I second brother mq's post.
To make such statements assumes you comprehensively understand the reasons/workings behind such laws/punishments etc. To investigate such a claim, why dont you come up with what you think is an ideal law/solution for a specific situation, then compare your solution to al quran's solution. Post it for analysis. See what happens.Wakas
-
A.S. Brother mquran
Don't think that I don't trust the Reading and I agree that it is a guidance. But a SPIRITUAL GUIDENCE.
I dont think its marking the hands to begin with. Assuming it is though, people don't carry criminal records with them and will hardly go to a potential victim and show thier records. Marking the hands is something more permanent and visible.
Criminal records are permanent too, you can't get into a job if you're a thief.
By the way, do you consider "aydiyahumma" as resources?
"Mumin people have specific characteristics in Al-Quraan. For example, they strive with goods and persons."
I live in a muslim country but it would be hard for me to find a mumin except mollas or imams (If they are really mumins). This only can be applied in a small geographic area where everyone knows everyone.
If we believe nubuwat and risalaat has ended, sure. I for one don't believe so.
I don't know what they are but certainly we don't need them. Just look at at-Tawba. The first ayats of the sura is about treaties with the mushriks (fighting when forbidden months are past...) Likewise if you take 929 out of context it sounds like we have to fight ahl-i kitab till they pay compensation but it's not. We can't fight anyone until they wage war on us that's the general message of the Quran.
Peace...
-
Salaamun alaikum Elena,
mquran, what do nubuwat and risalat mean, please?
If it has been explained before, I don't remmember.Nubuwwat is usually translated as prophethood and risalaat as messengership. My apologies if i've made things difficult for you, but Im trying to capture the whole Quranic meaning and this is why I used the original wording.
thanks and peace
-
Salaamun alaikum born_again,
Don't think that I don't trust the Reading and I agree that it is a guidance. But a SPIRITUAL GUIDENCE
Please tell me
-
what does 'spiritual' mean in this context?
-
an example of something the Quran DOESN'T guide on?
-
proof that the quran itself limits its scope of guidance.
Criminal records are permanent too, you can't get into a job if you're a thief.
By the way, do you consider "aydiyahumma" as resources?
In the UK, the killer of Holly and Jessica (a famous case where two 10 yr old girls were brutally murdered) already had a file. Yet he got a job as a maintenance man in thier school.
Aydihuma are 'their resources, capabilities', yes.
I live in a muslim country but it would be hard for me to find a mumin except mollas or imams (If they are really mumins). This only can be applied in a small geographic area where everyone knows everyone.
I'm afraid that's not really an argument. If you can't find anyone, I don't think you have the power to punish either, right ?
I don't know what they are but certainly we don't need them. Just look at at-Tawba. The first ayats of the sura is about treaties with the mushriks (fighting when forbidden months are past...) Likewise if you take 929 out of context it sounds like we have to fight ahl-i kitab till they pay compensation but it's not. We can't fight anyone until they wage war on us that's the general message of the Quran.
I disagree. I think we do need a nabi and rasul. Many of the verses are conditional upon thier existence. Take 48/28 for example.
thanks and peace
-
-
Greetings with peace, mquran.
What is spirit to begin with?
Anwar Azim
Salaamun alaikum born_again,
Don't think that I don't trust the Reading and I agree that it is a guidance. But a SPIRITUAL GUIDENCE
Please tell me
- what does 'spiritual' mean in this context?
-
Alaikum Salaam mquran
Please tell me
-
what does 'spiritual' mean in this context?
-
an example of something the Quran DOESN'T guide on?
-
proof that the quran itself limits its scope of guidance.
How to save our spirit from hell-fire is what I meant by spiritual guidance. The only reason I restricted Quran's guidance is the Quran itself. Just look at adultery witness system. Now we have medical tests to prove whether there's been some kind of cheating. Let's say hypothetically a man is suspicious of his wife and he got some proofs that he is being cheated on. What would he do? Wait to catch his wife with four witnesses or get help from mainstream medicine or something? If you choose the latter then you're not living in accordance of the Quran.
The other example is inheritance system. Women now have their economic freedom. It would be unjust to apply Quran's law today.
In the UK, the killer of Holly and Jessica (a famous case where two 10 yr old girls were brutally murdered) already had a file. Yet he got a job as a maintenance man in thier school.
Aydihuma are 'their resources, capabilities', yes.
Killers should be killed unless he/she is forgiven by the victim's kins. See this is the general message. But had the Quran indicated how the killers must be killed e.g. with a sword, would you still be strict enough to chop off heads like some countries do?
I'm not sure what is theft punishment since everyone's interpretation of the verse is different.
I'm afraid that's not really an argument. If you can't find anyone, I don't think you have the power to punish either, right ?
I didn't say they should get away with what they did.
Peace brother...
-
-
Hello born again, all, i wish you peace and salvation...
Bornagain, although you maybe haven t choosen the happiest examples i think you might well be onto something ...
Led by my decade long experience in its application and study, misunderstanding, difficulties and mistakes therein, i often get impression that many if not all of the instructions and regulations are deeply culturaly or enviromentaly related and cant be sucessfuly understood or applied, or are not meant at all to be applied to cultures other than that of the original recipients...
of course i might be well wrong, however i would like to be proven that better from citing "O you people"...
after all the revelation have come in arabic...
there is a room for questioning the validity of its detail instructions to other than arabs... arent all the revelations previous to this sent in the language of its people? how it happened that this sunnah/pattern is now changed?
best wishes, Zlatan
-
Salaamun alaikum born-again,
How to save our spirit from hell-fire is what I meant by spiritual guidance. The only reason I restricted Quran's guidance is the Quran itself.
Well, as far as I can see from al-quraan, its guidance was meant to help people achieve salaam IN THIS LIFE itself. Of course, I respect your right to question but without evidence from al-quraan, i can hardly accept it.
Just look at adultery witness system. Now we have medical tests to prove whether there's been some kind of cheating. Let's say hypothetically a man is suspicious of his wife and he got some proofs that he is being cheated on. What would he do? Wait to catch his wife with four witnesses or get help from mainstream medicine or something? If you choose the latter then you're not living in accordance of the Quran.
That's right, you're not. However, what makes you think evidence cannot be falsified by the medical people? What makes you think the 'medical tests' itself isn't false ? I'd rather trust the book because i believe it was written by one who knows the hidden and the witnessable.
This is why I keep saying it all boils down to how much you trust the book. I will not fault you not saying its relative to the time, but the book itself doesn't say that.
The other example is inheritance system. Women now have their economic freedom. It would be unjust to apply Quran's law today
Unjust ? Well, if you say something is 'unjust', then we need to question you just as we question the Quran. So we need another criteria instead of the quran. What assures us that you as a criteria is sound ?
Killers should be killed unless he/she is forgiven by the victim's kins. See this is the general message. But had the Quran indicated how the killers must be killed e.g. with a sword, would you still be strict enough to chop off heads like some countries do?
The Quran does leave some choices to us (5/101-102). For Holly and Jessica's killer, I'd personally choose the most painful execution but that's just me.
I'm not sure what is theft punishment since everyone's interpretation of the verse is different.
That's because we're dealing with this in cyberspace. You believe it to mean that aliens will come and abduct the thief and it wouldnt matter. It would matter if you're in power though.
thanks and peace
-
Salaamun alaikum Zlatan,
Led by my decade long experience in its application and study, misunderstanding, difficulties and mistakes therein, i often get impression that many if not all of the instructions and regulations are deeply culturaly or enviromentaly related and cant be sucessfuly understood or applied, or are not meant at all to be applied to cultures other than that of the original recipients
2 questions, if you don't mind.
-
You mentioned that you've experienced 'misunderstanding'. How would you know that your current 'impression' (mentioned above) isn't also a misunderstanding ?
-
How do you know something is 'culturally and environmentally related' unless you consulted sources outside al-quraan? And if you did consult outside sources, you would be contravening al-quraan's principle that it is in detail. How then can your analysis be objective if you're reading something according to your own principle rather than its own?
of course i might be well wrong, however i would like to be proven that better from citing "O you people"...
Better ? Al-Quraan has a very clear word for 'arabs' (please see 41/44, 16/103) yet it never has the phrase 'o ye arabs' or 'o ye embedded in arab culture' or 'o ye who understand the curent arabic of the time'.
It very clearly says 'o humankind'. So why does this address need to be 'bettered', please ?
after all the revelation have come in arabic
...Yes, because if revelation were to come at all, it must come in a human language. How on earth could we communicate if not through a language ?
Secondly, Allah says that Arabic is the detailling factor of al-quraan (41/44 and 41/3). Quranic Arabic is the tool which carries forth its concepts in the most profound manner possible.
there is a room for questioning the validity of its detail instructions to other than arabs... arent all the revelations previous to this sent in the language of its people? how it happened that this sunnah/pattern is now changed?
Rather than assume that revelations 'previous to this' were only sent to a particular racial group or ethnic group or linguistic group, wouldn't it be better if you actually showed that this was the case from al-quraan itself ?
thanks for a most stimulating discussion, salaam.
-
-
salaam to you mujahid as well!
Rather than assume that revelations 'previous to this' were only sent to a particular racial group or ethnic group or linguistic group, wouldn't it be better if you actually showed that this was the case from al-quraan itself ?
i was actualy pointing to 144 where it is said in a most clear manner....
It very clearly says 'o humankind'. So why does this address need to be 'bettered', please ?
heres why ...it could be imo misleading to translate an-nass as humankind(though linguisticaly speakin it could be correct) ...but another possible translation is the people....and the in the people or al(n) in an-nas could be reffering to a specific group of people or humankind....specified elswhere in the book....this specific group of people could be inhabitants of mother of the cities and those around it...(see beggining of the)chapter 42
again i am not claiming all this 100% sure ... i was just talking about an impression....
this discusison is aggraviated because of our incoplete knowledge of the language-which is again an argument, it seems, in favor of my hypothesis...
best wishes and thanks for the stimulating discussion
Zlatan
-
Salaamun alaikum again Zlatan,
i was actualy pointing to 144 where it is said in a most clear manner....
Lets first recapitulate what we're discussing, ok ?
We're discussing the temporality of Quranic law. You are somewhat of the opinion that it is limited to original recipients. You then quote 14/4 to justify the claim that al-quraan in totality is only for Arabs of the time. Correct me if this paragraph is inaccurate, ok ?
Lets look at the verse again
We sent not a messenger except (to teach) in the language of his (own) people (illa bilisaani qawmihi), in order to make (things) clear to them. Now Allah leaves straying those whom He pleases and guides whom He pleases and He is Exalted in power, full of Wisdom (14/4)
A 'rasool' has to demostrate the book , give information about alkitaab walhikmah and bring about growth or tazkiya (please see 3/164). He doesn't have to bring about a new book. In fact, he doesn't need to bring a written text at all. 14/4 mentions no such thing.
heres why ...it could be imo misleading to translate an-nass as humankind(though linguisticaly speakin it could be correct) ...but another possible translation is the people....and the in the people or al(n) in an-nas could be reffering to a specific group of people or humankind....specified elswhere in the book....this specific group of people could be inhabitants of mother of the cities and those around it...(see beggining of the)chapter 42
How is it, if its linguistically correct its misleading ?
Al-quraan specifically mentions about sectionanlisation. It mentions about 15 terms for specific sectioning modes. Here are some
- firqa
- hizb
- ashaab
- aali
- ahl
- qaum
- umma
- shiaa
- shuub
- qabail
- ikhwaan
hope thats enough as i forgot the other 4... oops
so i think when Allah wants to section humankind, He would have said so
again i am not claiming all this 100% sure ... i was just talking about an impression....
Well, the only course to take is the operationalisation of the book and the actualisation of results. So i'm in the same boat as you.
this discusison is aggraviated because of our incoplete knowledge of the language-which is again an argument, it seems, in favor of my hypothesis...
Try asking 10 Arabs what is 'ad-deen'. See how many of them give you a complete Quranic semantic map of the concept. In my experience, being Arab can have an adverse effect which nullifies any advantage when you want to absorb Quranic concepts. At least, when you're a non-arab, the word is free from preconceptions in your mind.
thanks and peace.
-
Don't think that I don't trust the Reading and I agree that it is a guidance. But a SPIRITUAL GUIDENCE.
Absolutely! There can be no "doubt" in that -)
In my view the language of the scripture is that of the 6th Arabia, the Morality of the scripture is the morality of the 6th century Arabia. That is why you get "spoils of war" being distributed amongst the victors. That is why the victims of war becomes your "Right Hand" possesion that can be made into slaves and concubines. This kind of Morality is unacceptable in this century. But the universal spiritual message of the scripture remains the sameBe God-conscious, Be compassionate...
Regards,
-
Salaamun alaikum,
In my view the language of the scripture is that of the 6th Arabia, the Morality of the scripture is the morality of the 6th century Arabia. That is why you get "spoils of war" being distributed amongst the victors. That is why the victims of war becomes your "Right Hand" possesion that can be made into slaves and concubines. This kind of Morality is unacceptable in this century. But the universal spiritual message of the scripture remains the sameBe God-conscious, Be compassionate...
Some questions for you, if you don't mind
-
Can you please point to me where the words 'spoils of war' are mentioned in al-qur'aan ?
-
Can you please tell me if you indeed believe so, what is your criteria for moral relativism ? In other words, if Quranic morality doesn't apply, whose criteria will you choose ?
thanks and peace.
-
-
Hello mquran,
Some questions for you, if you don't mind
- Can you please point to me where the words 'spoils of war' are mentioned in al-qur'aan ?
Y.Ali They ask thee concerning (things taken as) spoils of war. Say '(such) spoils are at the disposal of Allah and the Messenger So fear Allah, and keep straight the relations between yourselves Obey Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe.'
R.Khalifa They consult you about the spoils of war. Say, 'The spoils of war belong to GOD and the messenger.' You shall observe GOD, exhort one another to be righteous, and obey GOD and His messenger, if you are believers.
Pickthal They ask thee (O Muhammad) of the spoils of war. Say The spoils of war belong to Allah and the messenger, so keep your duty to Allah, and adjust the matter of your difference, and obey Allah and His messenger, if ye are (true) believers.
Shakir They ask you about the windfalls. Say The windfalls are for Allah and the Messenger. So be careful of (your duty to) Allah and set aright matters of your difference, and obey Allah and His Messenger if you are believers.
Literal They ask/question you about the spoils/gifts . Say "The spoils/gifts (are) to God and the messenger, so fear and obey God and correct/repair that what is between you, and obey God and His messenger, if you were believing."
Surah 81- Can you please tell me if you indeed believe so, what is your criteria for moral relativism ? In other words, if Quranic morality doesn't apply, whose criteria will you choose ?
thanks and peace.
"Morality" evolves. For example in the past "MIGHT IS RIGHT" was a form of morality. That is if you are strong enough then you can steal your brothers land. And that was OK. And thats what the Kings and Emperors did in the past, and all the countless conquerors and dictators that have come and gone. But we now have universal declarations of Human Rights, The Geneva Conventions and of course Rules of Democracy. All these forms of morality have been invented by human beings to govern their affairs. But Scriptures have been used in many cases as GUIDE to evolving our human MORALITY. For example Quranic laws of inheritance have been used and evolved by all the European Countries. So has the concept of "Just War" in Quran have been evolved into the Geneva Conventions. Therefore I would use our God-given Reason together with Scritpure as Guidance to make and evolve morality and rules that best serves as a society...
Regards,
-
Salaamun alaikum LoteTree,
The word 'al-anfaal' is rooted in NFL which appears in 17/78 as 'profit' (there's no way 17/78 can mean war spoils).
A further proof of this can been in 8/41 And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah,- and to the Messenger, and to near relatives, orphans, the needy, and the wayfarer,- if ye do believe in Allah and in the revelation We sent down to Our servant on the Day of Testing,- the Day of the meeting of the two forces. For Allah hath power over all things.
If you note, the phrase 'in war' is in brackets. The reason for this is, this was never part of the verse. The actual wording is 'from ANYTHING' (min shai'). So whatever profits you attain, you need to give it to the appropriate parties.
"Morality" evolves.
Does it ? What authority tells us so ?
For example in the past "MIGHT IS RIGHT" was a form of morality. That is if you are strong enough then you can steal your brothers land. And that was OK.
Was it ? Who is saying so, please ? If you were one of the oppressed back then, would you say it was ok ?
And thats what the Kings and Emperors did in the past, and all the countless conquerors and dictators that have come and gone. But we now have universal declarations of Human Rights, The Geneva Conventions and of course Rules of Democracy
.Hahahaha. Seriously, you believe in all this ? The bosnians were massacred for 7 years before any one came to help. The new guineans were oppressed by the indonesian army when Suharto was a friend of the USA.
These words have no meaning in the real world. A firaunic dictatorship still exists.
All these forms of morality have been invented by human beings to govern their affairs. But Scriptures have been used in many cases as GUIDE to evolving our human MORALITY. For example Quranic laws of inheritance have been used and evolved by all the European Countries. So has the concept of "Just War" in Quran have been evolved into the Geneva Conventions. Therefore I would use our God-given Reason together with Scritpure as Guidance to make and evolve morality and rules that best serves as a society...
Best serves society ? Right, please go and tell that to the Vietnamese who were napalmed by the US army. I'm sure they were well-served when they were being burnt to a crisp.
The Quran incises the human condition and tells us what we must do to attain salaam or peace. Nothing else matters with respect to that.
-
Peace mquran,
A further proof of this can been in 8/41 And know that out of all the booty that ye may acquire (in war), a fifth share is assigned to Allah,- and to the Messenger, and to near relatives, orphans, the needy, and the wayfarer,- if ye do believe in Allah and in the revelation We sent down to Our servant on the Day of Testing,- the Day of the meeting of the two forces. For Allah hath power over all things.
The verses before and after including 841 (from 839 - 845) talk about war/fighting, hence the booty or "spoils of war" or loosely "profits". My question is how does one share/assign 20% (1/5th) with/to Allah and HIS messenger??? roll
