Sharia law

[Netcurtains]

LAST EDITED ON 06-02-02 AT 11:09 AM (GMT)[p]not wanted on this board so I have removed it.

[sahi_muslim]

Assalaamoalaikum

There is no dispute among Muslims that the Qur'an is the basis of the Sharia and that its specific provisions are to be scrupulously observed. The Hadith and Sunna are complementary sources to the Qur'an and consist of the sayings of the Prophet and accounts of his deeds. The Sunna helps to explain the Qur'an, but it may not be interpreted or applied in any way which is inconsistent with the Qur'an. Though there are other sources of law—i.e., ijma', (consensus), qiyas, (analogy), ijtihad, (progressive reasoning by analogy)—the Qur'an is the first and foremost source, followed by the Hadith and Sunna. Other sources of law and rules of interpretation of the Qur'an and the Hadith and Sunna follow in accordance with a generally accepted jurisprudential scheme.

"Avoid condemning the Muslim to Hudud whenever you can, and when you can find a way out for the Muslim then release him for it. If the Imam errs it is better that he errs in favor of innocence (pardon) than in favor of guilt (punishment)."

The Prophet's Hadith

"Were people to be given in accordance with their claim, men would claim the fortunes and lives of (other) people, but the onus of proof is on the claimant and the taking of an oath is incumbent upon him who denies."

The Prophet's Hadith



Lo! Allah commandeth you that ye restore deposits to their owners, and , if ye judge between mankind, that ye judge justly. Lo! comely is this which Allah admonisheth you. Lo! Allah is ever Hearer, Seer.

Qur'an 4:58



How can rich muslims get away with a crime??
If a rich man kills a poor man the poor man's wali(successor) will decide that if the murderer should be killed (qisas) or be forgiven if one of the successor says to kill him he is to be killed.
As for bribery there is a hadeeth that the man who takes the bribe and the man who gives it both are the dwellers of hell.
The same for usury and interest.
w'salaam

[Asif]

Dear Netcurtains !

This is a reminder to you and other users that if you have questions about Islam, then you have permission to ask them, and await answers to those questions.

However, if you have your personal opinions about Islam that are negative in nature, then kindly keep them to yourself, and you do not have permission to express them here.

Thank you,
Asif.

[Netcurtains]

LAST EDITED ON 06-02-02 AT 11:11 AM (GMT)[p]not wanted here so I have removed it

[Netcurtains]

Ok.
I think I've learn't all I want too.
thanks for letting me write.

Bon chance - Netty!

[Lulua]

Net...you certainly have a wierd and narrow understanding (rather, misunderstanding) of Islam and Islamic Law (the shariah).

Firstly, about the punishment for killing...again...it may depend upon the circumstances of the killing itself. For 1st degree murder...that is...murder which is a devilishly pre-planned event...something which is no accident, then there is only one punishment for that...and that is capital punishment of death to the perpetrator. Period. There is no chance for payment of the 'diya' or 'blood money' to the remaining relatives of the victim. For what is termed in the west as perhaps 'second degree murder' or even 'manslaughter' in which there is no evidence of pre-planning of the tragedy...then there is the chance...only if the remaining relatives of the victim should be in agreement...of the payment of the required amount in place of taking another life. And...this remains...that the final word is up to the relatives of the victim...so regardless if the criminal is rich or poor...if the relatives of the victim do not wish to receive the money...but would rather have their revenge by knowing that the criminal is put to death..then their wish is to be upheld.

Now...in your reference to your supposed reason for the requirement of the witness...that one man's witness is equal to that of two women. This is something that is told to us in the Quran...without reason given. How is it that you...as a non-muslim...are assuming that you know what the reason is that Allah has prescribed this on mankind? You have more insight into Islam than even muslims themselves have? Such preposterous assumption indeed!!!

There may very well be many reasons promoting this very restriction...one of them being the state of women...and the legality of women in the presence of men. It is not fitting, according to Islamic teachings and rulings, that a woman be in an atmosphere of all men (a courtroom or judge's chamber, for example)...where there would be no other women. So...there you have another explanation and excellent reason why two women witnesses rather than merely one...so that the woman witnessing will not be alone in the presence of a gathering of men not her relatives (mahram...or legal male companion)...but rather in the comfortable company of another woman...to prevent any unwanted and uncalled for circumstances to arise or to have cause to arise.

And there are more explanations...but one should not come in with an accusing atmosphere of sneering at Islam, and supposing things which are not a part of Islam, but rather come in with a simple attitude of seeking knowledge and widening their atmosphere of understanding.

Surely, net...you could have presented your argument in a better way...rather than the sneering that you are presenting with. Oh...it is sure a fact that many women have MUCH better memories than men...and that is not the question here...but the question is...your approach in your presentation of your questions and your arguments. Please do try to be more civil.

Thankyou.

Lulua.

[Netcurtains]

LAST EDITED ON 06-02-02 AT 11:12 AM (GMT)[p]not wanted here so I have removed it

[Netcurtains]

LAST EDITED ON 04-02-02 AT 11:48 AM (GMT)[p]Why are Muslims living in the UK
nearly 200% more likely to commit a crime
then the "native" population?

this report comes from the left wing
national newspaper "The Guardian" - so you
can't blame the "Tory Press":

http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,2763,200493,00.html

[seekeroftruth]

Salam to all! a interesting topic. I just wanted to comment on this;

"....b)seekoftruth - posted on the "Current Afairs Board"
a message entitled: "AZZAM: US 'Chinook' Downed in Khost"
In it he put these words: "Pope John Paul said at the beginning..."

Now, again, this is not my words, azzam is a news service that i and many other people use, similar to BBC, which i and many other people use. Plz do tell me, if BBC dont make a mistake?

I hope the person who wrote the article, corrects the info, if the comment was incorrect. It is just news, you can read it and agree with it, or you can disagree with it, no one is forcing you to do anything, its your choice!

That is why this site is a good place on the net, you can post anything, overall observing the rules, members might agree, some might not agree, but thats how life works. No one is forcing you to DO anything..


take care, sadiQ!!

Look to this day! Yesterday is but a dream, and tomorrow is only a vision. But today, well-lived, makes every yesterday a dream of happiness, and every tomorrow a vision of hope. - Brother SadiQ

[Netcurtains]

LAST EDITED ON 05-02-02 AT 11:26 AM (GMT)[p]seekeroftruth:

Some points:
George Bush is a protestant, the Pope is a catholic.
They are similiar but not the same. The Pope is
from Poland and is against much of the American get
rich values.

There is no connection between the war against
people who blew-up 3,000 New Yorkers and
the legitimate RIGHT of religions to
preach FREELY in ALL COUNTRIES the message of GOD IS
LOVE.

I don't know if you are aware but Christianity came
to the Arab lands and India and Pakistan probably
BEFORE it came to the UK. Christianity is an EASTERN
religion. Christianity STARTED in ASIA. Indeed, at the
time of Christ the King of Palastine was an Arab.
Thus christianity IS A LEGITIMATE ARABIC RELIGION!

Perhaps read this link:
http://www.spiritualjourneys.net/christianity.htm
and this:
"
Tuesday October 30, 2001
The Guardian
Just 10 miles north of Islamabad, not far from the Pakistani nuclear facilities at Wah, lie the ruins of the ancient classical city of Taxila. Not many people come here today, but this was once the capital of a dynasty of Bactrian Greeks, descendants of Alexander the Great's stranded legions, who were ruled by a succession of kings with wonderfully unlikely names: Pantaleon, King of North India; Diomedes of the Punjab; Heliochles, King of Balkh and Menander of Kabul. The city was a Hellenic colony, carefully laid out in a grid of straight lines, like a chess board. According to tradition, it was at this spot that Christianity was first preached in India.
The Christians here will tell you that St Thomas - the doubting apostle of Jesus who famously refused to believe in the resurrection "until I have placed my hands in the holes left by the nails and the wound left by the spear" - came to India from Palestine after the Resurrection, and that he baptised their ancestors.

Recently, archaeologists have also found a second-century cross at Taxila. The cross is now in the Anglican cathedral at Lahore. Elsewhere in Pakistan there are other intriguing echoes of the old legends: at Thatta in Sind, for example, there is a Sufi Muslim community which claims to be descended from St Thomas's first converts, and to have relics and books to prove it. Unfortunately, no outsiders have ever been allowed to see this "proof".

For all the antiquity of Christianity in these parts, there is now a serious question mark over its future. The cold-blooded murder of 16 Christians, mainly women and children, at Bawalpur on Sunday, is just the latest in a long series of atrocities against Pakistan's small Christian minority - just 4m people in a country of 140m. Although Pakistan's constitution guarantees religious freedom, the country's notorious blasphemy laws - sections 295 B and C of the penal code - prescribe life imprisonment for anyone who defiles a copy of the Koran and death for insulting or criticising the prophet Mohammed. Because virtually no evidence above the word of the accuser is needed to bring a guilty verdict against a defendant, the laws have often been exploited by individuals with a personal grudge against an innocent non-Muslim by making false accusations.
"

Netty

[Tita]

The King of Palestine at the time of Christ was an Arab? Do you mean Herod?

[Netcurtains]

LAST EDITED ON 05-02-02 AT 07:24 PM (GMT)[p]yes - King Herod was of Jewish religion
but he was "arabic". Its on many sites.
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/p_greetham/wisemen/wmsoc9.html
(correct me if I'm wrong, but modern day jews take your ancestry from the mother not the father).

[Netcurtains]

I have removed my comments.