11
   

6,000 Muslim clerics approve a fatwa against terrorism

 
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Nov, 2008 10:07 am
@rosborne979,
No -- it's an opinion, but it's based on the civil codes of Shari'ah.

Quote:
A fatwā (Arabic: فتوى‎; plural fatāwā Arabic: فتاوى‎), in the Islamic faith is a religious opinion on Islamic law issued by an Islamic scholar. In Sunni Islam any fatwa is non-binding, whereas in Shia Islam it could be, depending on the status of the scholar. wiki


Quote:
Sharia

During his lifetime, Muhammad held both spiritual and temporal leadership of the Muslim community. Religious and secular law merged, and all Muslims have traditionally been subject to sharia, or religious law. A comprehensive legal system, sharia developed gradually through the first four centuries of Islam, primarily through the accretion of precedent and interpretation by various judges and scholars. During the tenth century, legal opinion began to harden into authoritative rulings, and the figurative bab al ijtihad (gate of interpretation) closed. Thereafter, rather than encouraging flexibility, Islamic law emphasized maintenance of the status quo.

The word “Islam” means “submission.” A “Muslim,” therefore, is one who submits to the will of God. Shariah, frequently translated as “Islamic law,” is neither a document nor a code in the strict sense, but rather an amalgamation of scriptural (Quranic) injunctions, sayings of the Prophet Mohammed, juridical rulings, and legal commentaries dealing with all aspects of social, economic and political life, similar to Jewish Halakhic law.

Islam, like Judaism, is a religion of laws " it is the legal code, not a theology, which establishes the criteria of right and wrong, proper and improper behavior. Like Halakhah, Shari’a is believed to be ordained by God and its scope to be total, ranging from the loftiest ideals to the minutiae of daily life. Even the words Halakhah and Shariah, have similar meanings and may be translated as the “path” or “road” to righteousness.

In its ideal form, Shariah ensures the rights of all in an Islamic state. Fiqh is Islamic jurisprudence; it forms the basis of Shariah and is a process of ongoing interpretation. Thus it is neither static nor monolithic, and may take different forms in different countries or from one period of history to another. A classic text on Shariah, by the fourteenth-century scholar, Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, deals with a wide range of subjects, including purity of heart, fasting, divorce, backbiting, crimes, and rules of warfare. more
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Nov, 2008 10:25 am
@JPB,
Another point about Shari'ah and Halakhah is that they are ever changing with the times. The Koran and the Torah are static. Shari'ah and Halakhah are civil codes which interpret modern questions against the historic documents. In Judaism the Talmud expanded on the Torah and Halakhah is the civil component of the religious writings.

I'm oversimplifying both descriptions greatly and I'm not Jewish or Muslim so I welcome clarifications from others.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Nov, 2008 12:40 pm
Quote:
Report: Al-Qaida planning Britain strikes

LONDON, Nov. 9 (UPI) -- al-Qaida cells in London, Birmingham and Luton, England, are planning mass casualty attacks in Britain, a government intelligence report indicates.

The restricted document, authored by the Ministry of Defense, MI5 and the British Special Branch, maintains al-Qaida operatives based in Britain will attempt another "spectacular" event targeting major transport facilities, such as airports and train stations, the Sunday Telegraph said.


I honestly don't care what brings moderate muslims together to reclaim Islam and, no, I wasn't saying that Obama is the reason or motivation behind the fatwa. I was linking the sentiment of the other piece -- that the extremists have expressed concern that Obama would effect changing attitudes around the world to the point that moderate muslims will unit against the fanatics.

I agree with Deb. Good on 'em. Let it be only the beginning.
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Nov, 2008 06:31 am
@JPB,
Damn!

Clearly these al Qaida cells in London have not heard of the fatwa!! This is very confusing. Someone should get in touch with them to explain that putting bombs on London Transport is against the law.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 11 Nov, 2008 08:50 am
@Steve 41oo,
Steve 41oo wrote:

Someone should get in touch with them to explain that putting bombs on London Transport is against the law.


Yes. And then he should tell Christians, Jews and others that there religions forbid killing ...
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Nov, 2008 05:01 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:

Steve 41oo wrote:

Someone should get in touch with them to explain that putting bombs on London Transport is against the law.


Yes. And then he should tell Christians, Jews and others that there religions forbid killing ...
I've been re reading Richard Dawkins The God Delusion.

I'm sure he wont mind me quoting a few paragraphs

Quote:
Christianity, just as much as Islam, teaches children that unquestioned faith is a virtue. You dont have to make the case for what you believe. If somebody announces that it is part of his faith, the rest of society, whether of the same faith, or another, or of none, is obliged, by ingrained custom, to 'respect' it without question; respect it until the day it manifests itself in a horrible massacre like the destruction of the WTC or the London and Madrid train bombings. Ther is a great chorus of disownings, as clerics line up to explain that this extremism is a perversion fot eh 'true' faith. But how can there be a perversion of faith, if faith, lacking objective justification, doesnt have any demonstrable standard to pervert?

Ten years ago, Ibn Warraq, in his excellent book Why I am not a Muslim made a similar point from the standpoint of a deeply knowledgeable scholar of Islam. Indeed, a good alternative title for Warraq's book might have been The Myth of Moderate Islam, which is the actual title of a more recent article in the London Spectator (July 2005) by another scholar, Patrick Sookhdeo, director of the Institute for the study of Islam and Christianity. 'By far the majority of muslims today live their lives without recourse to violence, for the Koran is like a pick and mix selection. If you want peace you can find peaceable verses. If you want war, you can find bellicose verses.

Sookhdeo goes on to explain how Islamic scholars, in order to cope withg the many contradictions that they found in the Koran, developed the principle of abrogation, whereby later texts trump earlier ones. Unfortunatley, the peaceable passages in the Koran are mostly early, dating from Muhammed's time in Mecca. The more belligerent verses tend to date from later, after his flight to Medina. The result is that

"the mantra 'Islam is peace' is almost 1400 years out of date. It was only for about 13 years that Islam was peace and nothing but peace...For today's radical Muslims - just as for the medieval jurists who developed classical Islam - it would be truer to say 'Islam is war'. One of the most radical Islamic groups in Britain, al-Ghurabaa, stated in the wake of the two London bombings, 'Any Muslim that denies that terror is a part of Islam is a kafir.'

Could it be that the young men who committed suicide were neither on the fringes of Muslim society in Britain, nor following an eccentric and extremist interpretation of their faith, but rather that they came from the very core of the Muslim community and were motivated by a mainstream interpretation of Islam?


Thank God for Richard Dawkins.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Nov, 2008 06:30 am
@Steve 41oo,
You really ought to be reading better literature than that at your age Steve.

The idea of " no faith" is all very well as a minority interest riding on the back of a deep residue of faith based institutions. Standing on its own it has not yet been shown to work except in fiction such as Brave New World and 1984.

Mr Dawkins is on his third wife who I presume is tax deductible.

What those bombings have to do with his argument is not immediately apparent to me.

An objective justification of faith may be discoverable in the outcome of doing without it. Dawkins is equating perversions of faith with faith itself. To get away with that he needs stupid readers.

One might as well suggest getting rid of the Police when some policemen behave badly.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Nov, 2008 08:56 am
@spendius,
Quote:

One might as well suggest getting rid of the Police
when some policemen behave badly.

R u coming up on the 200th Anniversary
of Robert Peel 's creating police for England ?

Before that, the English got along with no police.
How long is English history ?





David
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Nov, 2008 10:35 am
@spendius,
spendius wrote:
Mr Dawkins is on his third wife who I presume is tax deductible.
I dont think the good professor collects wives for tax reasons. Thats like collecting tax for matrimonial reasons.

Dawkins is not equating a perversion of faith with faith. He is saying faith is not a virtue but a vice. I believe it was Mark Twain who said every village has a torch, the teacher, and an extinguisher, the clergyman.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Nov, 2008 12:27 pm
@Steve 41oo,
I don't rate Mark Twain.

I suppose Dave that English history is as old as the title England. I don't know how old that is though. I would guess about 1,000 years.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Nov, 2008 01:24 pm
@spendius,
New York got its first police dept. around the same time: 1845.
It was the 2nd or 3rd police dept. in the USA.
Before then, we all got along with no police.
That was considered a pro-freedom thing.

I wish I coud travel thru time,
to visit and enjoy its freedom.


The Founders were very wary of police.
Thay called the concept " a standing army " to be avoided.





David
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Nov, 2008 01:29 pm
@spendius,
spendius wrote:

I don't rate Mark Twain.

I suppose Dave that English history is as old as the title England. I don't know how old that is though. I would guess about 1,000 years.
history teacher shouts Athlestan was the first king of England. Read a bloody book.

Well thats history teachers for you. it wasnt like that in my day.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Nov, 2008 01:38 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

New York got its first police dept. around the same time: 1845.
It was the 2nd or 3rd police dept. in the USA.
Before then, we all got along with no police.
That was considered a pro-freedom thing.

I wish I coud travel thru time,
to visit and enjoy its freedom.


The Founders were very wary of police.
Thay called the concept " a standing army " to be avoided.





David
well clearly as my glaswegian friend just said to me it was the pOlis that caused all the trouble.

note to David. Please tell what planet you inhabit.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Nov, 2008 02:00 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
]
R u coming up on the 200th Anniversary
of Robert Peel 's creating police for England ?

Before that, the English got along with no police.


I believe that the constables of the local lords and nobles (those were responsible to maintain order in their lands) were a kind of 'police' in today's meaning. (And before that, the tithings, since the Norman conquest, were led by a constable.)

London had the first paid law enforcement body in England: since 1285 according to Ackroyd in London. The Bography.
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Nov, 2008 02:13 pm
@Walter Hinteler,
I'm afraid every time I read the title '6000 Muslim clerics....' I start laughing. Sorry.

I think it was 4786.
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Nov, 2008 02:23 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
I wish I coud travel thru time,
to visit and enjoy its freedom.


Be a smallish vehicle I think Dave.

Where and when would you choose to disembark? I'll try to look up the place and let you know whether I would recommend it.
0 Replies
 
McTag
 
  1  
Reply Wed 12 Nov, 2008 02:27 pm
@Steve 41oo,

They must have had a guest list, or a signed attendance list. They certainly would if they were German muslims. Or American ones.

Verifiable paper trail.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Report: CIA foiled al-Qaida plot - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Happy New Year from Pakistan - Discussion by djjd62
ISIS or Daesh - Question by usmankhalid665
Nothing about Brussels? - Discussion by McGentrix
Flavors of terrorists - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 02/23/2020 at 11:47:39