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:
CometheytoldmepapapaPapillon · 28/12/2005 16:39

Peacedove you should hang with us in the MN Yurt ...we specialise in revealing the obscure spiritual aspects of ourselves and the world around us. The veils of all life have great beauty in both the negative and positive aspect and lessons to be learnt.

ruty i feed him the paps... both barrels He is like a feeding gumless Tiger!!

I think my name should be supermammy atm

monkeytrousers · 28/12/2005 16:48

Mooney, the way the Koran is interpreted and Islam practiced in many countries is a cause of great concern to me, as is the practicing of christianity. But I think that religion is simply an expression of human nature and both misogyny and prejudice are part of that, or in other words religion isn't the cause.

Pd, it isn't that I'm a 'supporter' of homosexuality - as I'm not opposed to it either. I simply accept that it occurs within nature and don't think people should be discriminated against because of it. And your right, the genetic argument is contentious, not least within the gay community itself. And queer theory is an genre in academia.

ruty · 28/12/2005 16:57

yes paps, supermammy title well deserved.

peacedove · 28/12/2005 17:04

tamba Thanks for the interest, but it would be impossible for me to refute every accusation levelled at Islam or Muslims. I do appreciate that you realise that the motives from the writer may not be to find the truth.

About saving life, one's or someone elses', it is always preferable to tell the truth. Why I say context is important will become clear when I recount an event about this.

At Makkah the idol-worhippers used to torture the Muslims, particularly those who were slaves or otherwise weak. One of those slaves and his family were tortured severely, and the mother expired as a result of torture. He was asked to renounce Islam, and to say that Muhammad is a false prophet. He refused, but he was tortured again, and eventually he could not take it any more, and said what was required by his torturers. When he met the prophet, he was very unhappy as he had denounced the prophet. He related the entire story to the prophet, who asked whether he had renounced Islam in the heart as well. He said he hadn't, and then the prophet told him not to worry, as he hadn't renounced it in the heart.

It must have been quite a torture. Unlike prosletysers I do not have books from which to give you any more details.

2nd, to effect a peace or reconciliation;

I think it is true.

3rd, to persuade a woman;
4th, on the occasion of a journey or expedition.

3rd and 4th are utter rubbish, and the prophet (saw) never made any false promise, to anyone.

Female circumcission is not an Islamic practice, it is a cultural one, among the nations of Africa.

About the male-female difference in treatment, perhaps fuzzywuzzy can best answer that.

Enough prosletysing , may I now have a rest now please.

OP posts:
monkeytrousers · 28/12/2005 17:38

Tamba if you do a search on sharia law in the archives you'll be able to see all of Peacedove's previous posts and answers to numerous questions on the subject.

tamba · 28/12/2005 17:39

Thanks

stitch · 28/12/2005 18:02

ruty, thing about the quran is that it is the word of god, and mohammed was an illiterate man.

Blandmum · 28/12/2005 18:26

As far as I can see PD still hasn't told us what he thinks of the Sharia law pronouncments on what should happen to an 'out' gay man, and what he feels about this. What a surprise.

Doesn't like to muddy the waters?

Blandmum · 28/12/2005 18:27

And the fact that while a muslim man can marry any woman 'of the book' ie muslim, christian or jewess, but a muslim woman can only marry a muslim man.

Blandmum · 28/12/2005 18:30

Ah, it is probably because I am not 'worthy' of an answer.....lets forget he insulted me first and said that I considered all muslims were terrorists...Oh I forgot, that was a 'joke' wasn't it?

Blandmum · 28/12/2005 18:42

Oh and before I forget I'd be interested to know PDs views on Irshad Manji call for itjihad....reformation, for which she recieved numerous death threats. Her feeling is that Islam needs to be reformed and it is women who should be central to this process. But many muslims feel that tyhis is literaly blasphamy, since the word of the Koran cannot be questioned, this is why mosr muslims would consider themselved to be fundimentalist MT.....not in a perjorative sense, but simply meaning that they take the word of the Koran as an absolute truth given by od, which cannot be changed. there has never been a reformation of Islam for this reason, this is why it is , by its essence, different to Christianity which has been through several periods of reformation and change,

But I'm even boring myself now and so will bow out. Just let me know if he ever tells us the answer to a 'hard' question, will you?

stitch · 28/12/2005 20:20

mb, ive emailed my mom asking her if there is a prescribed punishment for homosexuality. hopefully she'll reply soon. though she doesnt check her email very often.

Blandmum · 28/12/2005 20:23

What i quoted was from a sharia law website. The punishment for a man is death, but if he confesses they might be lenient.

For a woman, because penetration doesn't take place it is 100 lashes.

I think this is why PD doesn't answer me

And I said I was done on this thread

Forgive me

monkeytrousers · 28/12/2005 20:27

But hasn't someone already answered that question on the thread MB?

Blandmum · 28/12/2005 20:27

Wjat question, i'm lost now

moondog · 28/12/2005 20:30

Good on you mb! Well said-all of it!
And with such good humour and grace!
I shall lurk,but know full well how PD will (or rather won't) respond.
I understand his modus operandi you see.

monkeytrousers · 28/12/2005 20:38

The one's you've just given the answers to..sorry, i don't have time to go thry the thread now but they ring a bell that's all..

Blandmum · 28/12/2005 20:42

I was answering Stitch's posting, re the punishments....the thread is long and I didn't expect her to trawl through it

Re the fundimentalist bit, i was posting in responce to your thread when you said

'But MB, fundamentalists preach a fundamentalist doctrine, and quite patently Peacedove is not a fundamentalist of any sort. If he was, what would be the logic of him pretending otherwise? And surely even that would only matter if we were all idiots anyway. '

I'm quite sut=re that PD is a fundimentalist in the sense that he takes the word of the Koran (in arabic) as the divine word of God....and this is not pejorative. My understanding is that the Koran as the word of God given to the Prophet is the onlt miracle that all muslims have to belive in.

monkeytrousers · 28/12/2005 20:43

Soz MB, it was you! (martianbishop on Tuesday, 27 December, 2005 2:08:51)

monkeytrousers · 28/12/2005 20:45

But what is it you're trying to argue?

monkeytrousers · 28/12/2005 20:45

..overall, I mean?

Blandmum · 28/12/2005 20:49

That you have said PD isn't any sort of fundimantalist. I disagee, I'm sure he is and wousl say so himself

My point is that all muslims belive that the Koran is the word of God, thus they believe in a fundimantal acceptance of it as the word of God, and as such it is not subject to debate or argument. Fundimantalist in this sense is not rude or derogatory, but accurate. I'm sure that PD would agree with me.

And becauise of this Islam is not like christianity, which has been subject to reaprasal by most christiam sects , expet those who take it as the absolute word of god, as Mulsims do the Koran.

I'm disagreeing with your statement that he is not a fundimantalist.

Note I am not saying he is a nutter, a terrorist or a bomber

Blandmum · 28/12/2005 20:51

I'm also saying that PD is very careful only to put forward his more palitable feelings about religion. I'm not sure hw happy MN would be if, say , he said that the Sharia law treatment of gay men was correct

Happy to be wrong as ever

monkeytrousers · 28/12/2005 21:04

I should qualify a bit. I'm asking because there are many points in the practice of Islam around the world that I find problematic, as I do many other doctrines, religious and secular. I also know however, that my opinion on it is of no importance at all, as I'm almost completely ignorant or my view of it is distorted by 'orientalism'. In light of this I know that if I was to start quoting the Koran out of context (and as none of us are scholars I'd hope we could all agree we were fallible there) and trying to interpret Sharia law (without being versed in it) I'd be part of the problem , jumping to conclusions I had no real grounds to make. If all I wanted to do however was prove Islam was bad , well there's alot of stuff around to back this up - but how can I be sure what is accurate and what is propaganda ? why not ask what makes Islam good? Why is it always couched in negativity? I want to question the prejudices I've grown up with in the west about this, that we're still constantly bombarded with - to hopefully better understand it (as far as I can anyway).

monkeytrousers · 28/12/2005 21:06

Okay MB - PD can answer for himself I'm sure.

Swipe left for the next trending thread