What's new

Changing times: Ijtihad and other questions Muslims must revisit

God or Islam doesnt need individuals to protect it. I have heard he is a Islamic scholar whom yu had quoted. He can maybe give answers
who is an Islamic scholar? Khala Jee?
bro he is a she, and she has quite a bit of knowledge but i dont think she is a scholar, but she has knowledge about our religion no doubt, she is doing PhD is some Plant, Human Bio something
 
.
but in today's world Ijtehaad has become very difficult, as even Ulemas cannot agree on everything nowadays
So why not even try? We cannot give a united ruling like ISIS, Al-Qaeda for being unislamic terror organisations. Today's Islamic world has become a joke! Concept of Ummah is a total failure.

What difference does it make to you as a practicing Muslim if Pakistan is a secular state or an Islamic one. Tell me in practical examples. You would still be able to go to prayers 5 times a day, you would still keep a fast during ramzan, your masjid will still use loudspeakers for azan.
In Pakistanis, if Qadianis call their house of worship mosque, or even say Azaan, they are put in prison. Pakistani law is full of hypocrisies.

The only thing that Secular country would do is ensure that no one can take non-Muslims for a ride. The State will not discriminate between its people on the basis of religion.
True. A concept alien to bigoted Muslim minds.

What was his religion?
Qadiani.

dude, according to our current law, there is no discrimination, against Muslim or Non Muslim today, not any that i know of.
LOL. What are you smoking? Pakistani law clearly violates civilian and religious rights of the Qadianis and other minorities:
Ordinance XX - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Blasphemy law in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

anyway , now tell me today muslims are fighting , do you really think that they sit together and talk and solve their matter from Quran or Sunnah ?
Of course not. Why would they?
 
.
dude, according to our current law, there is no discrimination, against Muslim or Non Muslim today, not any that i know of.
Where should I start?

Secularism quite simple means that the Government/State does not discriminate between its citizens on the basis of faith. That means it treats ALL its citizens as equal, it provides no favours or cause of fear to anyone.

Now I give examples of the laws in Pakistan:
1. No Non-Muslim can become the Prime Minister or the President of Pakistan.
2. Leaving Islam is a crime. That means that if any person wishes to become atheist or convert to another religion can be prosecuted and given a death penalty!
Yet everyone else is free to convert to Islam.
3. Insulting Mohammad or Islam carries a death penalty. Please note that insulting the religious feelings of others is also a crime in India, US, Europe, etc, etc. This blasphemy law however specifically targets non-Muslims.


These are just off the top of my head. If you want I can read and point out many many such laws.

Does any of this look like a State being equal to all its people?
 
Last edited:
.
it SHOULD have been solved.
and todays problem SHOULD be solved by us

but again by which sect ?? suppose a shia and sunni get a fight .. who will solve the issue ? and will a shia will accept a sunni imam judging or a sunni will accept a shia imam judging ?? forget about other 50+ sects .
 
.
So why not even try? We cannot give a united ruling like ISIS, Al-Qaeda for being unislamic terror organisations. Today's Islamic world has become a joke! Concept of Ummah is a total failure.


In Pakistanis, if Qadianis call their house of worship mosque, or even say Azaan, they are put in prison. Pakistani law is full of hypocrisies.


True. A concept alien to bigoted Muslim minds.


Qadiani.


LOL. What are you smoking? Pakistani law clearly violates civilian and religious rights of the Qadianis and other minorities:
Ordinance XX - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Blasphemy law in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Of course not. Why would they?

because some peoples here talking about a muslim leading a muslim state ...
 
.
but in today's world Ijtehaad has become very difficult, as even Ulemas cannot agree on everything nowadays

U don't need to worry abt ijtihad if u can't do that. Scholars are unanimously agreed on most issues regarding Islam's stand contemporary issues. Rulings on abortion for eg. is very clear . Now if someone wants to go against quran and sunnah to suite his/her own desires and ego in the name of ijtihad, that's a different matter. The problem with such people is that they don't take religion seriously and vent frustrations when they can't bent religion for suit their wordly agendas. Alcohol is haram, women can not lead men in prayer, there is no such thing femenist interpretation of islam. These things are very clear in Islam in light of Quran and sunnah. One having hard time accepting such basic islamic principles and going against them lack faith.
 
Last edited:
.
yes for Muslims it will be dangerous, because for us keeping the state Islamic is the first thing, and as for some non Muslims having power or not, i am not sure, i have not read anything with or against it, maybe Khala jee can help
@Akheilos
question?
 
.
So why not even try? We cannot give a united ruling like ISIS, Al-Qaeda for being unislamic terror organisations. Today's Islamic world has become a joke! Concept of Ummah is a total failure.
we HAVE to revive it

LOL. What are you smoking? Pakistani law clearly violates civilian and religious rights of the Qadianis and other minorities:
Ordinance XX - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Blasphemy law in Pakistan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Blasphemy law is completely legal PROVIDED it is used properly, would you not mind if our Prophet was made fun of (Naaoozubillah)(May Alah Protect me from such Blasphemy)
it should include the law for all other Prophets too
the other one is also ok
 
. .
U don't need to worry abt ijtihad if u can't do that. Scholars are unanimously agreed on most issues regarding Islam's stand contemporary issues. Rulings on abortion for eg. is very clear . Now if someone wants to go against quran and sunnah to suite his/her own desires and ego in the name of ijtihad, that's a different matter. The problem with such people is that they don't take religion seriously and vent frustrations when they can't bent religion for suit their wordly agendas. Alcohol is haram, women can not lead men in prayer, there is no such thing femenist interpretation of islam. These things are very clear in Islam in light of Quran and sunnah. One having hard time accepting such basic islamic principles have a problem with their faith.
but but, i think women can lead prayers, and why cant one advocate rights for women in light of Islam?
 
.
whether Non Muslims can be heads of a state like Pakistan
lolz....


State like Pakistan

1) This isnt even an Islamic issue since Pakistan is only semi Islamic and follows a twisted version of the Shariah so why worry about what Shariah has to say about ruling?

2) What does the constitution say? :pop:
 
.
Where should I start?

Secularism quite simple means that the Government/State does not discriminate between its citizens on the basis of faith. That means it treats ALL its citizens as equal, it provides no favours or cause of fear to anyone.

Now I give examples of the laws in Pakistan:
1. No Non-Muslim can become the Prime Minister or the President of Pakistan.
2. Leaving Islam is a crime. That means that if any person wishes to become atheist or convert to another religion can be prosecuted and given a death penalty!
Yet everyone else is free to convert to Islam.
3. Insulting Mohammad or Islam carries a death penalty. Please note that insulting the religious feelings of others is also a crime in India, US, Europe, etc, etc. This blasphemy law however specifically targets non-Muslims.


These are just off the top of my head. If you want I can read and point out many many such laws.
Does any of this look like a State being equal to all its people?
all of them seen fair enough, should we not protect our Religion from Insults? it is applicable to Muslims too yup know? leaving Islam is a crime yes, its punishment is prescribed by the Islamic law
 
.
but again by which sect ?? suppose a shia and sunni get a fight .. who will solve the issue ? and will a shia will accept a sunni imam judging or a sunni will accept a shia imam judging ?? forget about other 50+ sects .
the council should include a person of the sect involved
 
.
Is suicide bombing justified? Can women lead prayers? Is there a feminist interpretation of Islam?

These are some of the questions Muslims living in the West often face. They attempt to answer these questions as best as they can. And in the process, they are often forced to reinterpret their faith, a process called 'ijtihad', although they are no 'mujtahids'.

The concept of ijtihad allows Muslims to interpret their beliefs according to the time and place they live in. This concept, however, has not been used for centuries.

'Ijtihad' is an Islamic legal term that means "independent reasoning", which is used for defining an issue in a way that does not contradict the teachings of the Holy Quran and the Sunnah.



Explore: Why are matters of faith beyond discussion?



In Sunni Islam, ijtihad is recognised as a process of legal decision-making through personal effort. It is also accepted as one of the four main sources of law.

The person making such a decision is required to have a thorough knowledge of theology, revealed texts, legal principles and the Arabic language. Other qualifications include sincerity, goodness and intellect.

A person qualified to do so is recognised as a mujtahid, one who can make ijtihad.

Both words are derived from a three-letter Arabic root, J-H-D, i.e. struggle. Thus ijtihad is a process of “struggling with oneself” to interpret an issue through independent reasoning in the light of the revealed text and the instructions of the Sunnah.

In the early periods of Islam, Muslims saw ijtihad as an acceptable form of interpreting legal and social issues that an individual or a group faced.

Among the Sunnis, ijtihad was often interpreted as a scholar’s personal judgment of an Islamic law.

Among the Shias, ijtihad evolved into a practice of applying careful reasoning to uncover the knowledge of what Imams would have done in particular legal situations.

Besides sharing some requirements with the Sunnis, the Shias also required a mujtahid to receive further training at a 'hawza' or a religious centre.

Since Shias do have religious schools entitled to produce mujtahids, this tradition has continued unabated among them.

But among the Sunnis, there has been no undisputed mujtahid since the mid-tenth century. Yet, calls for a revitalisation of ijtihad have always been made, particularly in the 19th and 20th centuries, when the Islamic world confronted Western thoughts. This confrontation made many Muslim scholars realise the need to reinterpret religious laws to cope with modern concepts entering their thoughts.



Also read: Alcohol consumption in Pakistan: Don't mix sin with crime



The scholarly debate over ijtihad has been going on for well over 200 years and has produced some prominent revivalist thinkers such as Jamaluddin Afghani, a 19th century Iranian scholar, Mohammed Abduh, his Egyptian friend and reformer, and Mohammed Iqbal, a poet philosopher from the Indian subcontinent. These scholars also included Hasan al-Banna, Syed Qutb and Maulana Maududi, founders of Islamist movements such as the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt and the Jamaat-i-Islami in the subcontinent.

Their works deal mainly with issues such as state and religion, individual and society, secularism and Islam. They had a major influence on Muslim thinkers, writers and political activists in the 20th century. Yet, they were generally accepted as scholars, not mujtahids.

But the need for a process to understand and interpret legal, social, economic and political issues of the modern world is felt at all levels.

This need is even greater in the West where Muslims live in a social setup very different from their own. Since 9/11, there has also been a steady increase in Islamophobia in the West.

This fear of Islam or Muslims, however, has not led to physical attacks on the lives and properties of the Muslims living in the West. But their beliefs and ideas are openly challenged in the media and are sometimes also questioned by their colleagues and neighbours.

The pressure is even greater in the social media where Muslims are often asked to explain:

Is using violence as a tool to defend a religious or political cause justified in Islam?

Were those who attacked America on Sept 11, 2001 right or wrong? Does Islam allow attacking civilians to avenge foreign occupation and political victimisation? Is suicide bombing allowed, particularly when Islam outlaws suicide?

What is the place of a woman in Islam? Can a woman lead prayers, be a priest or a mujtahid?

Can there be a feminist interpretation of Islamic religious texts? Can women interpret those texts?



Read through: Islam in America: When two women decided to pray with men



Muslims in the West, particularly women, are not waiting for answers to come from the Islamic world. There is a realisation here that they have to answer the questions they face, as those living in the Islamic world cannot appreciate the intensity of this issue.

So Muslims in the West have started answering these questions. Since Sept. 11, 2001, the West has seen a visible increase in the number of Muslim religious scholars, jurists, interpreters of the Holy Quran and the Hadith, social activists and educationists.

Attempts have also been made to present a feminist interpretation of Islam and its teachings. And some women have also challenged traditional interpreters, claiming that their interpretations show a clear male prejudice.

Muslim women led prayers, arranged rallies and held meetings to define their faith as they wanted to.

Not many among them qualify as jurists, interpreters of the Holy Quran or mujtahids but they are having an impact.

They are read and appreciated by the Muslims living in the West and their thoughts are also reaching the Islamic world.

It is still too early to say how successful they would be in reshaping the thoughts of Muslims, but they have started a debate.



Take a look: 'We are good Muslims, but Americans too'



The Muslim community, both in the West and in the Islamic world, has started discussing the issues raised by these scholars and activists.

Some of these issues — such as the justification for suicide bombing — stir heated debates. While some say that suicide bombing is 'haram' (forbidden) in Islam, others argue that it is permissible as a means of national resistance.

"Killing non-combatants and civilians is haram in Islam, no matter what means you use for this purpose," says Hamza Yusuf, the Californian Muslim scholar and a popular speaker at Islamic conventions.

But ordinary Muslims do not always view this violence as a religious issue. They do no consult their religious texts for arguments against or for an act like suicide bombing when discussing it. Instead, they almost always describe it as a political issue linked to disputes like the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, Chechnya or Kashmir.

Yusuf also describes it as a "modern political phenomenon" and insists that it's imperative to resolve the Palestinian dispute in order to fight extremism and violence in Muslim societies.

"Palestine is the issue, and until this issue is resolved, there can be no peace," he argues.

Yusuf also calls upon the Jewish people in the United States to "rise against the suppression they witness with their eyes", urging them to "reject this gross injustice as we reject the killing of innocent children".

Attempts to make peace with the Jewish community are not confined to the Palestinian issue alone. After the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, Muslims across the world have been forced to reconsider their attitudes towards Jews.



Know more: Political Islam: Why militants now symbolise Muslims



Muslim leaders often acknowledge that the dispute with the Israel is encouraging violent tendencies within their community. In public meetings and private conversations, some Muslim leaders now also speak of the positive contribution the Jewish people have made to international civilisation.

Speakers at various Islamic conventions in North America often urge Muslims to learn from the Jews how to co-exist with other faiths.

At one of these conventions, the organisers screened a documentary showing the discrimination the Jews had to face when they first migrated to America. Some speakers also spoke of the Holocaust and the concentration camps in Germany and advised Muslims to integrate themselves with the followers of the two older Abrahamic faiths, Judaism and Christianity.

"We must assert to the Abrahamic people that we are the last extension of the Abrahamic religion... There is no such thing as an Islamic tribe," said Yusuf.

"Knowledge, and not just religion, enables a nation to progress. And now the Jews are holding the torch of knowledge, we must learn from them," said another speaker.

Can these attempts lead to a lasting peace between Muslims and Jews? Only time will tell.
Changing times: Ijtihad and other questions Muslims must revisit - Blogs - DAWN.COM

@Archdemon
@Natan
@500
@MarkovChain
you didnt tag me :cray:
 
.
no one would give him/her a vote, if the country is Muslim Majority
So Benazir Bhutto was not a Muslim? In view of ulemas, not woman should be allowed to govern an Islamic nation!

dude, they are Qadiyanis and not Muslims, you can say whatever you want, they go against the basic principles of Islam, however he didnt call Ghulam Ahmed a Prophet but a Wali.
Says who? Ulemas?

Read here:
Objectives Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

wait treachery is a good deed?
No. I said only Muslim sources say Jews of Medina did treachery. No other sources.

does this matter ???? Quran is 14000 year old and still valid .. Hadith are 1400 years old and still valid ??
so what is your point ?
My point being is that these should be interpreted in light of modern times not as they were interpreted 1000 years ago.

and todays problem SHOULD be solved by us
Good luck with that :D

Secularism quite simple means that the Government/State does not discriminate between its citizens on the basis of faith. That means it treats ALL its citizens as equal, it provides no favours or cause of fear to anyone.
True. A concept alien to tradional Islamic minds.

Now I give examples of the laws in Pakistan:
1. No Non-Muslim can become the Prime Minister or the President of Pakistan.
2. Leaving Islam is a crime. That means that if any person wishes to become atheist or convert to another religion can be prosecuted and given a death penalty!
Yet everyone else is free to convert to Islam.
3. Insulting Mohammad or Islam carries a death penalty. Please note that insulting the religious feelings of others is also a crime in India, US, Europe, etc, etc. This blasphemy law however specifically targets non-Muslims.
Hypocrisy at its best! :D

Blasphemy law is completely legal PROVIDED it is used properly, would you not mind if our Prophet was made fun of (Naaoozubillah)(May Alah Protect me from such Blasphemy)
it should include the law for all other Prophets too
the other one is also ok
Blasphemy was a crime here in the West too until they reformed and now they truly have free speech. You cannot have provisions like free speech in the constitution and then make Blasphemy laws. Hypocrites!
 
.
This secular concept of nationalism and faith is alien to bigoted Islamic minds who follow traditional tribal mindset of loyalty and faith. Clearly these bigots do not understand that real traitors in India were Muslim leaders themselves like Mir Jafar and Mir Sadiq who gladly sold out their "Islamic nation" to British interests for small chunks of land. LOL :D


What limitation are you talking about? Secularism means separation of state and religious affairs. That's it.


LOL. Ijtehad is the duty of every Muslim, not only dumb ulemas.
And that is clear kufr only students and followers off Abu Juhal think Islam is seperate from state
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom