Wednesday, May 23, 2012

08/29/08, Opinion-Editorial, printed in the Finger Lakes Times (NY)

flt_logo.gif 



Islamic Law Best for Faithful
By Sardar Anees Ahmad
Waterloo, New York

Muslims believe that God has revealed a complete legal code, called Shariah, upon which a society is to be built. It’s similar to the Halakha in Judaism and the Hindus’ Manu Smriti. Earlier this year the Arch Bishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, called for a limited application of Shariah in the United Kingdom . He reasoned that Shariah rulings would resolve disputes between Muslims on non-criminal issues such as business or divorce, and also lighten the British courts’ workload. As precedent, the archbishop cited the London Beth Din’s application of Rabbinical Law, a Jewish court in England that issues rulings on civil issues within the Jewish community. Given the similarities in values and legal philosophy, one could argue for a similar limited application of Shariah in America as well.

At their core Shariah and Western Law are very compatible – even identical at times. With the exception of the 3rd Amendment, one would be hard pressed to find a contradiction between the Bill of Rights and the principles of Shariah. Western ideals may strike a chord with today’s “Islamic” countries, but such countries are no more a representative of Islam than Benedict Arnold is of patriotism.

It must be understood that the Arch Bishop, while proposing the streamlining of Shariah into the legal system, did not advocate its blanket application to the entire British populace. Many Muslim scholars, however, argue that if Shariah is a complete law, it is universally applicable – to any people, in any time. That belief highlights an utter ignorance of Shariah, and of the unique economic and social sensitivities of every society.

Firstly, the implementation of a Muslim way of life mandates that its proponents themselves live as Muslims. With more than 70 Islamic sects today, which interpretation of Islam are we to impose on the West? If one argues that Shariah should at least be implemented in a country with a majority Muslim population, would not America then have the right to impose Canon Law?  Anarchy would be the end result, and in the name of “Godly” principles, a society would become godless.

Proponents of a blanket implementation of Shariah totally fail to understand the example of the one who introduced Shariah – Prophet Muhammad. As the de facto ruler of Medina, and later of the whole of Arabia , did Muhammad impose Shariah on any Christian, Jew, or fire worshipper? No. And what of the Muslims? Never imposing, rather Muhammad invited Muslims to inculcate Godly qualities so that a Godly Law may shape their society, not vice versa. If Muhammad implemented a voluntary, gradual process towards the realization of Shariah, what Muslim can reverse the order?

A cursory study of today’s global economy demonstrates why a universal application of Shariah is impossible. An interest-based economy, as it exists today, violates a fundamental tenet of Shariah – usury is illegal. While it requires more attention than can be provided here, interest is as alive in “Islamic” banking systems claiming to run within an interest-free framework as it is in the West.

From a social perspective, note that the prevalence of infidelity in America , not to mention around the world, is undeniable. From the average American to instances involving Bill Clinton, Eliot Spitzer, and most recently John Edwards, adultery’s prevalence underscores an undeniable truth many Muslim scholars insist on ignoring – Shariah cannot be applied in an environment unable to support it. Shariah dictates that the guilty party be flogged. Now if both the public and many of our politicians are guilty of such a crime, who will administer such a punishment? On a side note, contrary to the practice of today’s “Islamic” States, flogging during Muhammad’s time was not meant to mutilate the guilty party. Much like the Scarlet Letter Hester Prynne was forced to wear, during Muhammad’s time flogging was administered so the person would bear much shame, while enduring little pain.

With such a dynamic set of factors to consider, the point is that Shariah may well be a complete legal code, but as an Islamic law its application must be restricted to those who believe in Islam.

Comments (0)

Write comment

feedShow/hide comment form

busy