Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Th Ideal Society in Islam

427 replies

peacedove · 25/12/2005 07:30

This is in response to ruty, who wrote:

"Peacedove, I would be interested to know what kind of govt and society you view as the ideal. Do you believe in religious freedom, not just for muslims? Do you believe in a separation of State and religion? not a trick question, just asking."

The ideal society is what the prophet [saw] and the rightly-guided Caliphs demonstrated for us. I will detail it by examples later. I wonder if I will be allowed to do that. This is a "mumsy" site, you know

But peace, and tranquility, and a fair society are mumsy topics, too.

To answer your question, freedom of religion is for everyone, Muslim or non-Muslim, the only exception being the practice of Black Magic.

Muslims have found the West liveable because many of the laws here and much of the attitudes of people to their neighbours click with us as being based on Islam, while in many parts of the societies we came from have lost those principles.

For example, equality before law is a principle laid out by the prophet [saw] himself. A woman of the influential tribe of bani Makhzoom was found guilty of stealing, and the closest person to the prophet, the young son Usama of the prophet's employee Zaid was sent to intercede on her behalf. The prophet loved Zaid as a son, and Usama as his own grandson. He had nominated young Usama for an important assignment when on deathbed, passing over many more seasoned Companions. Yet, despite that love, he laid the principle that even if the prophet's own daughter had been involved, she would also have received the same punishment. Throughout Muslim history, you will see many fine examples of that.

Equality before law is so enshrined in our psyche as an ideal that we once had realised in practice, that we resent our societies for having lost it, we resent our leaders for not implementing it, and we love the West for embracing this principle.

When we see the US or other Western countries compromising on this principle, we are baffled and feel betrayed, because we do know our societies have degenerated, but had come to see the West as an embodiment of that principle.

Take the case of the welfare state. The first welfare state in history was that of the second Caliph, who said that even if a dog dies on the banks of the river Euphrates due to hunger, I will be asked about it.

The principle for this had been laid down by the prophet [saw]. Loans in Islam are to be discharged, but the prophet said: if anyone of you dies leaving an estate, it is for his heirs (after paying the loans), but if he dies destitute (or his loans are greater than his assets), then the loans are for us (to pay). The state assumes the payment of such loans.

As opposed to dictatorships or the Divine right of Kings, the prophet said, something like: "everyone of you is a shepherd, and on the day of Judgmnent he will have to answer for his flock."

He similarly said, something like: "The ruler of people is actually their servant."

That is the principle which was actualy put in practice, and when we see or read of the lawmakers or the Prime Ministers doing what ordinary people do, using public transport, living in houses no better than the ordinary man, the husband helping the wife in household chores, this rings a bell with us because this is what our societies were like, before degeneration. I would have liked to post some of those stories, which will show what our ideal is, and how close the West is to our ideal, and where the West is far from that.

There are many examples, and many laws in the West ring a bell with us, because these are what Islamic societies had and should have, but because these societies, like the other third world countries, have developed a feudal/ tribalistic structure, having lost the Islamic values, they are far from Islam in many ways.

Islamic laws are based on common sense, and for the most part the West's laws and practice are mostly based upon this. For example the fundamental rule of the road was enunciated by the prophet [saw] - that you should not be an obstacle in someone's path. In fact we are asked to remove even pebbles from the path. Thus the laws on traffic make sense. If we try to understand this a little more deeply, it becomes a rule that we should be helpful to others, rather than being obstacles in the lives of others, provided what they are doing is legal and moral. An eminent principle, that helps society, and I have found in practice within Western societies, but the third world countries had lost it, mostly where feudalism prevailed.

Again for example, the fact that when someone says something in the West, there is trust that he has spoken the truth, this is Islamic, is one because Islam teaches Muslims to speak only the truth. The rule that an accused is innocent unless proven guilty, that is Islamic too.

And again the fact that contracts are to be recorded in writing, is an Islamic injunction.

We are taught to be civil and helpful. If we are not being so, it is because we have forgotten that particular command.

Muslims thinkers have thought long that the renaissance of Islam will take place in the West. This will happen due to internalisation of most Islamic values, which has already taken place here, NOT as a result of conquest by Islam. Islamic principles are already recognised and applied in the West, the only obstacle in the way of accepting Islam is ignorance.

Islam teaches tolerance. It tells us that all mankind is from the same father and mother, Adam and Eve. It tells us life is so valuable that the taking of one innocent life is like murdering the whole of humanity. It tells us that wastage and over-consumption are sins, which will have to be answered for.

Islam teaches respect for other species, and for the environment.

Of course, there are some areas where the West is away from Islamic principles. Europe in having lost or relegating religion has gone in a direction away from God, and that may now be a hurdle in the embracing of Islam by Europe.

Why we don't see much of this in practice in Muslim countries, is something that has occupied Muslim thinkers for a long time, and there have been many movements for rectification. Not all of them have been comprehensive, not all of them have blamed the West. Unfortunately again, instead of trying to understand these movements, the politicians and leaders with agendas, people with vested interests, from within and without, have sabotaged that process.

Why I say based on Islam? because Europe learnt from Islam and Muslims. Muslim societies fell into corruption and disarray, but Islam does not.

The Tatars are a classic example. They destroyed Muslim lands, and dispersed Muslim peoples, conquering their lands, committing atrocities even worse than the Nazis, but they eventually reverted to Islam, NOT as a result of conquest, but because the principles of Islam appealed to them.

There is one major difference from today's West, and that is to us all these good laws come from Allah and His prophet, so we want to establish these in the name of Allah.

OP posts:
monkeynutsroastingonanopenfire · 25/12/2005 08:37

Hi Peacedove. I don't have anything to add about your post, as always your patience is commendable. I just wanted to add an idea that it is capitalism that necessarily secularises a society. As capitalism (read 'democracy' in political rhetoric) spreads eastwards across the world so all religions will become secularised, as the 'product' becomes the new god. There will always be pockets of fundamentalism as people try to fight this tendency, and use their own distorted rhetoric to justify their actions.

I think however, it's a mistake to think of Islam as in any way different to Christianity, or any religion for that matter. The 'orientalism' (Said) that distorts the western view of 'others' is almost impenetrable, in that you have to at first accept your view is distorted to begin to see clearly. I think that is bared out again and again in the way you are constantly challenged to justify your religion on this website by otherwise intelligent and articulate people. Not that that is a blanket criticism; it all stems from a need to understand which is commendable in itself, just that a category error (of 'them' and ?us?) is made in the first instance which irreparable distorts the tone of the debate.

Normsnockers · 25/12/2005 09:21

Message withdrawn

christmaslovingbluealien · 25/12/2005 09:37

peacedove, go away

this is a forum for moms to chat on. not for you to preach on.

Blandmum · 25/12/2005 10:09

and a great choice of day imho.

monkeytrousers · 25/12/2005 10:21

If you don't want to engage with Peace dove on these issues then don't but I'm sorry no one has the right to tell him to go away! That's just bloody facistic. We and our kids live in a multicultural society. I've learnt a lot from Peacedove - even when I've disagreed with him. He is always gracious and answers all of the (sometimes outrageous) questions put to him with patience the person asking sometimes doesn't deserve. Like I say, we've had our disagreements but I will defend his right to post on this website or any other.

christmaslovingbluealien · 25/12/2005 11:01

thats me told off.

Pinotmum · 25/12/2005 11:09

Merry Christmas to you!

Blandmum · 25/12/2005 11:32

THis is an open forum, and poeple can post what the wish (within the MN rules). However this is probably better posted in the religion, beliefs section than 'In the News'

I also think it is a rather odd day to choose. Imagine If I had posted to a website which I knew contained a large number of Muslims at Eid saying, 'Jesus Christ is the risen son of God'. Would anyone think that rather odd, if not provocative?

I would also be interested to read Peacdove's views on children, since he does tend to restrict his posting to Islam and conflict in the middle east.

peacedove · 25/12/2005 11:44

Thanks MT I will think about the points you have made. The first difference between religions that comes to mind is that Christianity tells its adherents to "Render unto
Caesar what is Caesar's and unto God what is God's", while Islam lays down rules for governance, and has demonstrated them in practice.

Norms Your observations are:

  1. "This thread should have been in the religious/ Faith section".

I agree! it so happens that I came on this site and in this section because a certain lady was bashing Islam and the last prophet. No one told her then, and no one has told others who have attacked Islam that this was not the appropriate place to do so. While your point is valid, it should be applied universally.

  1. "I, for one, am not asking peacedove to justify his beliefs."

No one is, but if you had cared to read the initial sentence in this thread, it would have told you that ruty wanted answers to some questions. Surely ruty and I have a right to converse on topics of mutual interest to us. As MT said, those who do not like this topic are free to keep away from this thread.

  1. "I'm asking myself a few more searching questions about his use of this site."

Please share those questions with us. I am sure your thought on this would be of interest.

christmaslovingbluealien Please do not be put off. I too had wondered if I was going to the right place. When I joined, I asked if it was appropriate for me to be here as the name implied "mothers only", but I had seen some men posting here. I was told I was welcome.

MB et tu, Brute!

would you care to read my original post, and show me where it departs from the Christmas spirit? maybe after the Christmas hangover.

Why do I limit myself to Islam and the ME? You can guess from the reason I came on this site.

I chose this day because I thought Christian mums wouldn't have much time today to be on the net, and ruty will be able to see the answers to her questions.

What views do I have on children? Can there be more than one view, that they are gifts to us from God.

OP posts:
monkeytrousers · 25/12/2005 11:46

Sorry, I don't want to spoil anyones day. Merry xmas! I do like a good debate but don't want to upset anyone.

I don't think the day is relevent to be honest MB. If it were a christian site then maybe, but it isn't and I'd imagine the vast majority of mumsnetters are either agnostic or athiest. In that context, and as a muslim, why should Peacedove not post today as he would any other day - it is in response to a question from Rudy - I cant imagine he suddenly woke up this morning and thought 'Oh, I'll post a thread about the ideal islamic society, just to get all them christian mumsnetter's backs up'

And these days Xmas is a celebration of capitalism more than it is christianity. I'm sure there won't be many practicing christians on here today..but maybe we should pick it up another day before we all start of the sherry

Pinotmum · 25/12/2005 12:18

I am Christian and agree with MB that this is provocative.

Blandmum · 25/12/2005 12:22

and incidentaly I am not a practicing Christian, but I do think that this is provocative.

Only one view on children? LOLOLOL!

monkeytrousers · 25/12/2005 12:26

I respectfully disagree..

peacedove · 25/12/2005 12:40

"provocative?"

OK, please read my post carefully, and show me the provocation. Show me where it departs from the Christmas spirit.

"Only one view on children? LOLOLOL!"

I unerstand how much frustrated teachers must get with some cchildren they have to teach, and who are ill-behaved, or who are not able to benefit much from the sort of schooling they and the teachers are forced into.

But when they come into this world, they are innocent. It is the parents, and their environment that makes them ill0behaved. It is the lack of resources or experimentation that makes them underachievers.

OP posts:
peacedove · 25/12/2005 12:40

"provocative?"

OK, please read my post carefully, and show me the provocation. Show me where it departs from the Christmas spirit.

"Only one view on children? LOLOLOL!"

I unerstand how much frustrated teachers must get with some cchildren they have to teach, and who are ill-behaved, or who are not able to benefit much from the sort of schooling they and the teachers are forced into.

But when they come into this world, they are innocent. It is the parents, and their environment that makes them ill0behaved. It is the lack of resources or experimentation that makes them underachievers.

OP posts:
vitomum · 25/12/2005 12:41

i've seen the old 'freedom of speach' argument used a lot on MN and nobody ever wins against it. it is too morally unasailable (and rightly so). however, from a less sophisticated perspective i do wonder what brought some people to this site in the first place and why they choose to stay. It is primarily a site for parenting and it does seem as though some people's needs would be best met elsewhere - yet they chose to engage with their interests through MN. There is nothing 'wrong' with that and it is impossible to argue that there is. To be brutally honest though i find a rather odd, and being the synic that i am i question their motives.

sevensuzyswongsaswimming · 25/12/2005 12:45

well you know what I have to say, ask rather

monkeytrousers · 25/12/2005 12:48

Fair enough Vitomum, but I personally find the 'motives' irrelevent. We all have motives, don't we?

monkeytrousers · 25/12/2005 12:49

I don't SW!

PranSerahndDancer · 25/12/2005 12:50

it's all gone a bit Suzy Wong???

What am I doing on here - I was looking for an overseas email. Drat Mumsnet

monkeytrousers · 25/12/2005 12:53

pmsl Serah! Merry crimbo {{}}

Blandmum · 25/12/2005 12:57

Suzy....lol at the crimbo, has this kicked off yet! Happy chjristmas, hen!

Blandmum · 25/12/2005 13:20

Peacedove, this website is predicated on the idea that we are here to discuss different ideas about raising children, hence my amusment at your comment that there is on;y one attitude to raising children. If you used this site as most 'members' do, ie discussing more than a few isolated issues and interest, you would be aware that there as as many attitues to children as there are posters.

peacedove · 25/12/2005 13:38

thanks MB for clearing that up. I have read some posts on

children's education, and summed up my views on that here. If you want opinions on specific topic, ask me.

I have explained what my motives were in coming here. If your fellow Welshwoman hadn't started bashing Islam and the prophet (saw) with ferocity, I wouldn't have registered here at all. That being the motive, I wanted to limit myself.

I have asked you to read my post, and show me the provocativeness. I didn't expect that from you. I did consider if this would be provocative, and I concluded it wasn't, but if I am mistaken, I want to be shown where it departs from the Christmas spirit.

I have praised the West in this post. I try to be fair, and to be considerate. If I have deviated from this, I apologise, but please show me where.

Do read the post before accusing me.

OP posts:
tamba · 25/12/2005 15:05

Why do you write (saw) ?