In any case, it is the thoughts that are important, not the identity of the person. Anyway, leaving all that aside ...
Yes it would have been important if what he said was somewhat accurate. I'm not sure if you actually went thought the link that I gave you but in one section there are screenshots there of "Ali Sina" saying on his forum that he wants to nuke the middle east and Iran and get rid of all the people there(which would obviously include his family and relatives if he was speaking the truth about his origin). I guess after leaving Islam he hast lost all humanity as well. But yes, lets leave that aside we are getting off topic here
Will you say that imposing Sharia Law is not part of Islam? How would you impose Sharia without an Islamic state?
If you say Sharia is not part of Islam, most Muslims would probably not agree with you.
Sharia is another misunderstood word. Sharia literally means the way or path. It basically referes to Islamic teachings that should be incorporated in a person's life. So for example praying, fasting in ramadan, giving in charity, not lying, not giving false witness or being involved in bribery, not having premarital sex e.t.c are all part of sharia. Infact, having sex with you wife results in reward and if you do that you are following sharia. Some of these which are pretty basic as those listed above are fixed by the Quran and Hadith. But there is another than need interpretations as well and thats where the role of Jursiprudence and different schools of thoughts come to play where you have decisions to take whcih were not present in the time of the Prophet. For example on using birth control (it is permitted), use of marijuana or smoking tobacco (not permitted) e.t.c require interpretation but only by a person who is qualified to do so. Any anyone can become qualified by studying for the required number of years.
BUT there is no requrement according to the Quran of grabbing political power and IMPOSING sharia top down and establishing an Islamic state. Thats what is being discussed here and what many traditional Islamic scholars say.
Unlike the catholic church or the vatican, Islam does not have an established clergy. Each muslim should got to the religious scholar that he/she considers the most sutiable if they need guidance on any matter that they do not know about but again this is not cumpolsory. This guidance is then given in the form of a
fatwa or religious opinion. Now the again, this is just a opinion of that scholar and a person can go to another scholar and get another fatwa as well. These are non-binding. Hence, the ulema should remain seperate from the politcal establishment and maintain their independance although they may have an important role to play in the individual lives. Just like the judiciary is independant from the politcal establishment but necessary to dispense justice.
More importantly any lay person can become an Islamic scholar justliek anyone can become a judge if he spends time to study and graduates from a reputed university.
The more established and renowned a scholar is and the more time he has spent stydying Islamic scriptures the more acceptable his opinion is. I have discussed this in another post that you may want to read in full
An analogy can be taken if we look at the medical feild. A nurse may have an opinion about what the patient is suffering from but the opinion of a doctor is more credible and of a medical expert like an ENT or Heart specialist even more so. Moreover, the more experienced teh doctor is and the more well known the institution he graduated from is, the more respected and acceptable is his opnion about a prognosis. Ofcourse a layman or even an expert is some other field like Computer science or Civil Engineering or a Bussinessman who has no relation to the medical field will have no standing if he/she gives their opinion on a medical condition even though they may be experts in their own field.
Similarly any hafiz (a person who memorised the quran), mulla(person who has basic learning in Islamic teachings) or imam (person who leads the prayer) can give a fatwa although this is discouraged as they may not have right information/knowledge to give the fatwa (religious opinion). The importance and credibility of a fatwa increases as and when the person giving the fatwa is well known in circles of Islamic jurisprudence and is himself a qualified mufti. If it is issued from a mufti of a well known institute then the importance of the fatwa increases as well over those issued by minor players in this regard.
Original Post
Yes, I agree with most of this.
I am sympathetic to your views, but I am not sure how true you are being to the roots of Islam, and about how popular such views can become amongst Muslims.
Regards ....
The majority of muslims are hardly followin Islamic teachings just like their Christian, Jewish or Hindu counterparts. Just ask how many muslims regularly pray five times a day or give their obligatory 2.5% in zakat charity?
Whatever, I have said are based on traditional Islamic scholars and their books and teachings. The speech and articles recently posted are all from Maulana Wahiddudin Khan's articles who has spent his entire life on studying Islamic scriptures and you consider Zaid Hamid an Engineering graduate more credible than him on Islam?
Going by the medical analogy, you mean to say that you would have you heart problems checked out by a programmer because the programmer has read many medical books and looks like he knows what he talks about. I doubt you would even think about that. Then why the duplicity about this? This is a general problem for muslims and non-muslims so you are in no means unique in you view.
Because the media does not highlight this fact and usually goes for a blanket "Islam is a religion of peace" line, people don't know why these terrorists are commitiing these acts in the name of religion. The recent program "The state of sharia" by DAWN was I guess a novel attempt in this regard. If you noticed there was a founding member of Hizb-ut-Tahrir (An "Islamist" organisation) who had left the organisation and was speaking out against this very concept. If the very FOUNDING members are leaving such organisations after studying traditional Islam, AND being vocally against such concepts, then how popular can this view be?
BUT this has been debunked and intellectually fought against traditional Islamic scholars for half s century since Syed Qutb and Maududi first came out with their concepts of politcal Islam. For people who don't folow religious scholarly magazines or books, they would'nt know about this.
I have highligted this same thing in another post of mine which you may want to read in full as well addressing this fact.
Unfortunately the western media and even our own media in the east does not highlight the people who are well versed experts in Islam and gives more airtime to these ignorant "mullahs" . The other problems is complacency shown to secretarian and militant groups shown in Pakistan. These were used for political purposes. If you look at the AQ personalities, OBL is a businessman, Zawahiri a medical doctor. In Pakistan Qazi Hussain has an MSc in Geography, TTP heads Baitullah and Hakimullah do not even have any education in Islamic law. Not much is known except that they spent a few years in regular schools and a few years in a madrassa(which was more a training camp than a school of Islamic learning). Hafiz Saeed again has no expertise in Islamic law and has no right to go around brandishing false reasons for Jihad. "Mullah" Omar again there is no definite information from which school he graduated. Why should their explanation of Islam be given importance over people who have spent much more time studying and doing research on the same?
Original Post
I appreciate that it is difficult for non-muslims to understand these things. Its a problem for many muslims also. That is why this thread is more intended at the muslim audience first.
..yet again you are trying to convert it in to anti Hindu bashing and trying to prove that all Hindus are anti muslims ..Ejaz is one of the most respected member here from Indian side...and whats wrong with guys asking him questions and debating about it??Is it the right way to clear all misconceptions??
