Muslim Scholars Blast (Un)Islamic State’s Ideology

RNS-MUSLIM-SCHOLARS

MORE than 120 Muslim scholars from around the world joined an open letter to the “fighters and followers” of the Islamic State, denouncing them as un-Islamic by using the most Islamic of terms.

Relying heavily on the Quran, the 18-page letter picks apart the extremist ideology of the militants who have left a wake of brutal death and destruction in their bid to establish a transnational Islamic state in Iraq and Syria.

A translated 24-point summary of the letter includes the following: “It is forbidden in Islam to torture”; “It is forbidden in Islam to attribute evil acts to God”; and “It is forbidden in Islam to declare people non-Muslims until he (or she) openly declares disbelief.”

The Muslim leaders who endorsed the letter called it an unprecedented refutation of the Islamic State ideology from a collaboration of religious scholars. It is addressed to the group’s self-anointed leader, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, and “the fighters and followers of the self-declared ‘Islamic State.’”

Here is the executive summary of their letter:

1. It is forbidden in Islam to issue fatwas without all the necessary learning requirements. Even then fatwas must follow Islamic legal theory as defined in the Classical texts. It is also forbidden to cite a portion of a verse from the Qur’an—or part of a verse—to derive a ruling without looking at everything that the Qur’an and Hadith teach related to that matter. In other words, there are strict subjective and objective prerequisites for fatwas, and one cannot ‘cherry-pick’ Qur’anic verses for legal arguments without considering the entire Qur’an and Hadith.

2. It is forbidden in Islam to issue legal rulings about anything without mastery of the Arabic language.

3. It is forbidden in Islam to oversimplify Shari’ah matters and ignore established Islamic sciences.

4. It is permissible in Islam [for scholars] to differ on any matter, except those fundamentals of religion that all Muslims must know.

5. It is forbidden in Islam to ignore the reality of contemporary times when deriving legal rulings.

6. It is forbidden in Islam to kill the innocent.

7. It is forbidden in Islam to kill emissaries, ambassadors, and diplomats; hence it is forbidden to kill journalists and aid workers.

8. Jihad in Islam is defensive war. It is not permissible without the right cause, the right purpose and without the right rules of conduct.

9. It is forbidden in Islam to declare people non-Muslim unless he (or she) openly declares disbelief.

10. It is forbidden in Islam to harm or mistreat—in any way—Christians or any ‘People of the Scripture’.

11. It is obligatory to consider Yazidis as People of the Scripture.

12. The re-introduction of slavery is forbidden in Islam. It was abolished by universal consensus.

13. It is forbidden in Islam to force people to convert.

14. It is forbidden in Islam to deny women their rights.

15. It is forbidden in Islam to deny children their rights.

16. It is forbidden in Islam to enact legal punishments (hudud) without following the correct
procedures that ensure justice and mercy.

17. It is forbidden in Islam to torture people.

18. It is forbidden in Islam to disfigure the dead.

19. It is forbidden in Islam to attribute evil acts to God.

20. It is forbidden in Islam to destroy the graves and shrines of Prophets and Companions.

21. Armed insurrection is forbidden in Islam for any reason other than clear disbelief by the ruler and not allowing people to pray.

22. It is forbidden in Islam to declare a caliphate without consensus from all Muslims.

23. Loyalty to one’s nation is permissible in Islam.

24. After the death of the Prophet, Islam does not require anyone to emigrate anywhere.

Advertisements

11 thoughts on “Muslim Scholars Blast (Un)Islamic State’s Ideology

  1. I think the gesture is too little, too late. Why did they wait till now to speak up? To save their own skin perhaps? But still, better late than never. I just wish I trusted their motives though.

    Like

  2. I find it hard to understand how this is deemed just….

    “Sudan

    The legal system in Sudan is based on Islamic Sharia law. Islamic law is implemented in all of Sudan. The 2005 Naivasha Agreement, ending the civil war between north and south Sudan, established some protections for non-Muslims in Khartoum.

    Stoning remains a legal form of judicial punishment in Sudan. Between 2009 and 2012, several women were sentenced to death by stoning.[111][112][113] Flogging also remains a legal form of punishment. Between 2009 and 2014, many people were sentenced to 40-100 lashes.[114][115][116][117][118][119] Sudan’s public order law allows police officers to publicly whip women who are accused of public indecency.[120]” – Wikipedia

    It actually infuriates me.

    I also disagree with the death penalty that they have in the U.S. I believe that God gave us life and with that life, time to repent. By taking someones life prematurely you are robbing them of their chance to change and live in peace for eternity with God’s forgiveness.

    Like

    • You know our indigenous Aussies want their own law too. Where do we draw the line? My parents were told to “shut up, you’re an Australian now” if they spoke their native language in public all those years ago. They were so terrified of not fitting in and upsetting the locals that they stopped speaking it even at home to us, such was the bullying we were all subjected to in the bad old days….or were they really the bad old days? My point is that we had to fit in or else.

      SHARIA: WHY A DUAL LEGAL SYSTEM WILL NOT WORK IN AUSTRALIA

      http://theconversation.com/sharia-why-a-dual-legal-system-will-not-work-in-australia-5281

      Like

      • It doesn’t work.

        Ultimately countries are going to have to make a decision on what system they want just as many Arab countries are doing by moving towards Sharia, I think it would be a huge mistake if Australia and many western nations moved away from a Judeo-Christian base and actually stating that that’s what the majority of the population are in these countries.

        It’s one thing to allow people to freely practice their faith (or not), but when it comes to the structure etc. a decision and declaration needs to be made.

        Like

    • “only America has called itself Judeo-Christian. America is also unique in that it has always combined secular government with a society based on religious values. Along with the belief in liberty—as opposed to, for example, the European belief in equality, the Muslim belief in theocracy, and the Eastern belief in social conformity—Judeo-Christian values are what distinguish America from all other countries.”Wikipedia

      Like

      • “Celebrating diversity and difference is only feasible when there is a willingness to commit to and protect the values and beliefs that underpin and sustain tolerance and accepting others.

        And such beliefs, values and institutions have not developed by accident or in a vacuum.

        They are associated with a unique form of government that has evolved from Westminster, a legal system based on common law and a moral code of behaviour drawing on Judeo-Christian beliefs and significant historical events like the Reformation and the Enlightenment.”

        Kevin Donnelly is a Senior Research Fellow at the Australian Catholic University and he recently co-chaired the review of the Australian national curriculum

        Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/comment/how-to-teach-what-it-means-to-be-australian-20140924-10labb.html#ixzz3EXtaVKxr

        Like

  3. “Women’s right to property

    Islam allows both single and married women to own property in their own right.[252] Islam grants women the right to inherit property from other family members, and these rights are detailed in the Quran. A woman’s inheritance is unequal and less than a man’s, and dependent on many factors.[Quran 4:12][253] For instance, a daughter’s inheritance is usually half that of her brother’s”

    Why? Why is a daughter not afforded the same as a son? Is this the case in Christianity?

    I think in the Western world men are actually often mistreated in courts when it comes to divorce, family and the divvying up of goods. They are often bled dry.

    Like

  4. 13. It is forbidden in Islam to force people to convert.

    Are people of differing faiths permitted to practice their own faith and build churches or synagogues to worship in Islamic fully Sharia compliant countries? Is there religious freedom?

    14. It is forbidden in Islam to deny women their rights.

    15. It is forbidden in Islam to deny children their rights.

    What are their rights? Are the rights of the child of a 2nd or 3rd wife equal to those of a first wife?

    16. It is forbidden in Islam to enact legal punishments (hudud) without following the correct
    procedures that ensure justice and mercy.

    I don’t believe physical punishments such as whipping, flogging, stoning or dismemberment are just. I believe they are barbaric.

    23. Loyalty to one’s nation is permissible in Islam.

    What does that mean?

    9. It is forbidden in Islam to declare people non-Muslim unless he (or she) openly declares disbelief.

    Why would that matter?

    10. It is forbidden in Islam to harm or mistreat—in any way—Christians or any ‘People of the Scripture’.

    But ok to harm anyone else?

    13. It is forbidden in Islam to force people to convert.

    “If a person has never been a Muslim, and is not a kafir (infidel, unbeliever), he or she can live in an Islamic state by accepting to be a dhimmi, or under a special permission called aman. As a dhimmi or under aman, he or she will suffer certain limitations of rights as a subject of an Islamic state, and will not enjoy complete legal equality with Muslims.
    If a person has never been a Muslim, and is a kafir (infidel, unbeliever), Sharia demands that he or she should be offered the choice to convert to Islam and become a Muslim; if they reject the offer, he or she may either be killed, enslaved, or ransomed if captured.[205]”

    Like

  5. Canon Law operates here in Australia in, for instance, the Anglican and Catholic churches.
    Not only does it apply only to members, but can’t over-rule the law of the land.

    Laws, religious or secular, are developing and changing all the time. Sharia law is used in various degrees, or not at all, in various countries. Turkey for instance is a member of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation where sharia plays no role in the judicial system. The same applies to each country coloured green in the map published here – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_of_sharia_law_by_country.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s