You might have seen a government-required sign at a McDonald's restroom telling employees to wash their hands. Muslims do this as a part of living their faith, which is called sharia in Arabic. The Prophet Muhammad also encouraged Muslims to wash their hands before and after eating. Muslim parents raise their children on many such manners. The first chapter in almost all books on sharia is about morals and manners of cleanliness, which Prophet Muhammad said is half of the faith. God's peace and blessings be upon him.
When Muslims begin anything they say, "in the name of God." -- that is sharia. When they greet each other, they smile and say, "Assalamu Alaikum" (peace be with you) -- that is sharia.
Similarly, when Muslims take short breaks five times a day to pray, this is another example of practicing sharia. Prayer is normally the second chapter in almost all books about sharia.
sharia does not present a comprehensive list of pure foods and drinks, although it prohibits ten or twelve things and declares everything else to be Halal or lawful to consume. If Muslims cannot find Halal food, they often eat vegetarian or kosher food. This is all sharia.
When you see a Muslim woman wearing a headscarf and a loose dress, or a Muslim man with a head covering or beard, they are likely following sharia manners of dress.
When in a marriage sermon you hear the Quran recited about piety, loyalty to each other, and God's advice for clear communication between spouses, that is a sharia wedding.
Muslims often avoid taking out mortgages due to the sharia prohibition on Riba (usury/interest). This has led to the establishment of the worldwide Islamic financial industry and Dow Jones Islamic Market Indexes. The latter select companies that don't deal in weapons, pornography, gambling, tobacco, or alcohol, etc. These investments are similar to 30 other "faith-based" investment options, like the Catholic Values Index. These are examples of the practice of sharia in the realm of business.
All of the above are real-life examples of the totality of sharia as practiced by the observant among the close to six million Muslims in America and the 3,000 formal Muslim congregations in America. Muslim Americans include doctors, entrepreneurs, professors, cab drivers, and the geek fixing your computer. Their service to their communities is also an example of practicing sharia.
The sharia That Muslim Americans Don't Practice
There are parts of sharia that Muslim Americans don't implement in their daily lives.
Since Muslims ran a civilization for over a thousand years, they naturally developed a body of laws to deal with governing society. These laws deal with issues ranging from fighting neighborhood crime to international laws of war and peace.
Muslim Americans don't practice these laws since they deal with the realm of government and state. sharia emphasizes that the rule of law in a society must be implemented by the state. It considers vigilantism a major crime and a sin. Therefore, sharia prohibits Muslims from practicing this part of Islam on an individual basis.
The Quran, like the Old Testament, is not limited to only the Ten Commandments, all of which except for the commandment to keep the Sabbath are to be found in parallel statements in the Quran. Like the Torah (Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Leviticus and Deuteronomy), it ordains punishments for serious crimes. Unfortunately, it is this penal law that many people wrongly think is exclusively sharia. This is incorrect.
It is true that Islamic criminal law has been at times implemented harshly, and even wrongly, by some Muslims. Such an application of Islamic criminal law is void of God's mercy, which is considered His primary attribute in Islam. However, those nations or groups that do this do not speak for all Muslims, nor do they speak for the prophet of mercy, Prophet Muhammad, who would turn his face away when a person confessed his or her crimes. This was to give them room for repentance and forgiveness.
About five countries among the 56 Muslim nations worldwide implement Islamic criminal laws. Virtually none of them implement sharia in its totality in all spheres of life. Their laws are a combination of local custom and precedent in that particular country, as well as remnants of laws brought by European colonial powers that ruled those countries.
The primary purpose of sharia is to preserve life and order in society, not to incarcerate and punish. However, many in the Muslim world who are sick and tired of corruption and injustice demand that the criminal laws of Islam be implemented in their countries. However, this is not what Muslims in America are demanding. Their practice of sharia is limited to the personal sphere.
Sharia Is Neither One Nor Static
Sharia is not one monolithic body or a codified book of comprehensive law.
Sharia is based on the Quran and the teachings of Prophet Muhammad, but not all of sharia is God's word. A good part of sharia is made up of human contributions. There are literally hundreds and thousands of books written in the last 1,400 years, in multiple languages in places as diverse as Timbuktu in Africa to Bukhara in Central Asia, with millions of opinions, judicial reviews, etc. on various issues. Together, they form the body of sharia.
Sharia Continues To Evolve
A recent development, for example, is a sharia discipline called Islamic Economics and Finance. It now commands a trillion dollar market, thousands of scholarly works, graduate programs, and the establishment of sharia boards at hundreds of Muslim and non-Muslim owned banks. This exercise in sharia is essentially a human contribution of the last 50 years, aiming to offer Muslims guidance on how to invest and conduct their financial transactions in a modern economy in line with their principles as believers.
Throughout history, Islam has cherished debates. An important early Islamic debate that continues today was between traditionalists and rationalists over whether the universal principles of God's law were to be known by revelation or reason or both. These debates have resulted in dozens of schools of thought in Islam.
Is Sharia A Threat To America?
When some American pundits call sharia, "a growing threat to the United States," Muslim Americans wonder what in the world are they talking about. sharia is overwhelmingly concerned with personal religious observance, not with constitutions and laws. All observant Muslims practice sharia. Defining sharia as a threat, therefore, is the same thing as saying that all observant Muslims are a threat.
Unfortunately, three U.S. states have passed anti-sharia laws, and 18 others are actively considering bills against sharia. Some politicians are now looking to pass a federal law against sharia. Anti-sharia bills are a part of a well-funded campaign of fear-mongering and intolerance, not unlike previous campaigns in America against Catholics and Jews.
To understand sharia is to understand Islam. Criminalizing sharia will criminalize the practice of Islam in America.
Sharia mandates that Muslims respect the law of the land. It is also against sharia to impose sharia on anyone. Muslim Americans are subject to the same laws and constitution as any other American.
Sharia is in some ways similar to the Jewish halacha law or Catholic Canon Law, with similar historic roots but far less complex. Unlike Jewish Halacha law which is practiced in Jewish American courts called Beth Din, there is no Muslim court system in the United States, nor is the Muslim community demanding this.
Follow Abdul Malik Mujahid on Twitter: www.twitter.com/malikmujahid
Your religion along with the rest of organized ones have contributed nothing but perpetuate more poverty, ignorance, wars and disharmony. Specially lately.
Enlightenment comes from within. I don't need to wash my hands 100 times a day to be able have compassion for my fellow man. If you look at many indigenous populations, they lived in complete harmony until they were introduced to an organized religion concocted by some genius to control and stir the population in a certain direction.
Even those men who are called prophets, their teachings were hijacked and perverted along the way to the point that if they showed up today they would have only one phrase to utter: WTF.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/31/us/31shariah.html?_r=2&hp
People had confidence in America's democratic institutions and principles, they would not fall prey to the sort of Islamophobia prevalent on many of these boards.
That said, I am not denying the problem with certain Islamic extremists, but, as someone who has lived with Muslims for an extended period (including during the 9/11 attacks), I can tell you that there is just a huge gap between what the American/Israelite media propagandize about raving Muslims and the complex reality of Muslims throughout the world!
Religious teachings of any faith, at least the way they are interpreted by religious leaders, are based on guilt and perpetual fear among the unsuspecting population. That is the only way they can have political and economical power and ultimately control. Proven throughout history.
Religions are single-handedly responsible for most of the misery going on around the world. It just so happens to be a unifying force for any purpose.
I don't know how this country became so religious in recent years, to the point that God and religion have become an integral part of our politics and laws. The authors of the constitution were closet atheists who went out of their way to put religion where it belongs, in a citizens home and heart. No more.
I am completely against any type of religion practiced to the letter of scripture, interpreted by these perverted leaders. They need to be rooted out of our laws and politics. The law should be uniform no matter your religious affiliation. This is the root of this country's founding.
I am no fan of religion either, quite the contrary! But banning religion is not the answer either as I am sure you agree. The problem in America is that certain people want to stigmatize Muslims themselves as much as they stigmatize the religion. But the Muslims in America came there for the same reasons others came: for the freedom to pursue happiness.
Having said that, I oppose any religion that forces its adherents to follow lockstep their preachings. It is jsut that, so far, the threat comes from the Christian and Jewish right, not the Muslims in America. Saudi Arabia and Pakistan are an entirely different story!
Have a good Sunday evening. -:)
These Truths are from The Great Mystery and to suggest that religious practices that go against these Truths are real is just a figment of the Mind of Man.
The mind of a man created the sharia 'laws' and those religious practices have prevented millions of human beings the Gift of Choice that is also given to us by The Great Mystery.
You can disguise it with fear and a belief that 2000 years make it any more real then the other 'religions' that have separated our innate Truths from one another.
Islam, Christianity and Judaism ... are 'religions' yet they lack the spiritual honesty that brings us to know ourselves and the supreme equality with which we share this precious Earth.
The one Gift I would give to those practicing these three 'religions' is to awaken and free yourselves from the imposition that has so removed you from honoring the Truths ...
Any type of "moral" law removes the aspect of choice. People do not choose to be good. They simply follow a command. That makes the action kind of meaningless, no?
Therein lies the problem. As this "sharia" is not codified by "god" it becomes a matter of individual interpretation. Only most people are not interpreting anything. They are allowing someone to make the decisions for them.
Instead of defending these backward practices maybe it is time to start looking at the world through social and hard sciences. That would be a much more effective way of dealing with the species within a religion. And it could allow people to gain some power in this situation.
I agree and it is well documented at this forum. Now, what we can do about it before start looking at the world through "social and hard sciences"?
Don't you think that it will be same for "social and hard sciences" that people wouldn't interpret anything and then will allow someone to make the decisions for them? Just look at the "Evolution" and see what's going in this science or ask Bill O'Reilly who became an authority on "Evolution".
Yes, firstly, someone has to figure out how to teach the people in the world how they can interpret other people's religions, before going to teach them how to interpret "social and hard science".
Sure, this teachings wouldn't make 100% peaceful world, but definitely will make other people's life little comfortable to live, peacefully.
That is not the case with religion.
I guess my problem is the attempt in the above article to minimize significance of the aspects of "sharia" (its just praying and clothes and halal foods) while ignoring that it is system of control. In fact, I think it is possibly more dangerous to control these small aspects of one's life in a way that is not questionable or open to examination. It makes it easier to move to bigger and better things (slippery sloping it a bit here, I know). But that really is how it works. Look at any cult. J. Jones did not start off with the "white nights" and Scientology does not being with Xenu and the exploding volcano.
I think it is a bit wrong to assume that this is okay because people appear to be making the choice. There are inherent problems with the control and even more when it comes to social roles (especially with regard to "gender").
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fdy31Dyqb3Y&NR=1
People of Islamic, Christian, Wiccan, Hindi, etc faiths practice their beliefs on a daily basis with no worry to the rest of us. But the extremists of any faith will always be the most seen and heard.
What if a Muslim woman (married to a Muslim man) convert to another religion or leaves Islam, and then decides she wants a divorce. Who has jurisdiction?
There is a voluntary contract she signed as a Muslim. (Her marriage contract)
If she's no longer a Muslim, is she still bound by that contract?
If she's not bound by it, in event of divorce, does custody of the children still automatically go to the husband?
If not, what of the prohibition against granting custody to a woman or man who is an apostate?
(I'm assuming that she'll not otherwise be punished for her apostasy.)
the moment she leaves islam she is divorced; no need to go to a court for that
the children go to the husband of course
Have you seen or read about any prototype Sharia Court for the USA?
If not where did you get ideas?
Anyway, do you know anyone or talk to anyone who knows Sharia, or at least Sharia 101?
I'm not Muslim, but I've got a reasonably decent basic understanding.
And no, Muslims are not actually trying to promote Sharia law here; that's something anti-Muslims made up.
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2011/summer/jihad-against-islam
In 2009, the National Football League agreed to change its schedule after the New York Jets complained about games that conflicted with consecutive Jewish holidays.
Why we are discriminating the Muslims, their religion Islam and now the Sharia that most American Muslims don't practice, besides this, most Americans don’t have a clue about Sharia, including politicians and especially the GOP people and the Tea Party of the GOP extremists.
The good news was that Los Angeles Dodgers won the 1965 World Series 4-3 against Minnesota Twins, but it had nothing to do with the religion or the religion practices of their players, management or fans............ :)
The bad news is that today, 46 years later, Los Angeles Dodgers has filed a bankruptcy. Can anyone try to find out whether bankruptcy has to do with the religion or the religion practices of their players, management or fans? ............ :)
I'm sure they'd do the same thing for any other important fan base,
Given the almost mystical attachment of many Buddhists and Hindus to boring English sports,
it's not likely to happen any time soon.
Pew Foundation numbers say 1.7% of the populations is Jewish.
-- next largest: Buddhism at 0.7%
-- then Hindu 0.4%.
-- then Sunni 0.3%
-- then Shiite < 0.3%
[If KSA and Iran can mangage to avoid a shooting war, the Yemen thing settles down, the dying stops in Bahrain, Iraq doesn't go all Zarqawi on US withdrawal, Lebanon doesn't explode into lots of little pieces, Syria doesn't turn to throat-slitting sectarian violence, Pakistan and Iran don't go to war over their little Balochistan problem, and the Hazara manage to escape another Sunni cleansing, I'd be willing to slide the united Muslim umma back into fourth place. Until then, they're looking less and less like brothers and more like cold-war Russkies and Yankees.]
Nobody much cares anymore but the Sharia is not derived from the Quran and the Sunna. It apparently derives from what you might call Arabic Common Law and flatly contradicts the Quran on at least one point (stoning adulterers). The Sunna was apparently developed to explain and justify the Sharia rather than being its source.
The first kind of Sharia is benign. The second kind is an obsolete monstrosity. But there are matters - like divorce and inheritance - that fall in between. The argument being whether they are Sharia of the first sort or the second sort. Personally I think they belong in the second category but I would yield to public opinion on the matter.
Perhaps an ecumenical council (to include agnostics and non-believers) drawing the most considerate and progressive facets of each religion could be put in a volume of recommended human treatment--a humanitarian code of conduct.
What concerns me most about “established” religions in the U.S. are the tax codes—their non-profit status and tax-free income and that money being used to promote their own agendas, here and abroad. I don’t like subsidizing them.
Many people find God and primary religion in a vegetables garden--whether in working with nature to raise food or teaching others to respect the soil and land and how to raise their own food. We spend more time practicing our religion than people who attend a religious building for services once or twice a week. And, gardeners don't take on the tribal mantra of being God's "chosen people" or the "master race". Yet, we do not receive any tax-free, non-profit benefits when we practice and invest in our religion. This is where I'd like to see some justice.
Humanitarian code of conduct? Try the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), as opposed to the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam ( CDHRI).
" systematic effort has been made at UN by certain member states to replace some of the dominant paradigms of international relations. eg., Iran continue[s] to press their objections to the universal character and indivisibility of human rights, as interpreted in the UDHR, is a Western secular concept of Judeo-Christian origin, incompatible with the sacred Islamic shari'a. ...
"The dangers of the CDHRI were enumerated in the press release and again spelled out in a joint statement to the UN Commission on Human Rights by Adama Dieng, its Muslim secretary-general, a prominent Senegalese jurist, who alerted the international community to the grave negative implications that would result. Speaking for the ICJ and the Paris-based International Federation of Human Rights he declared that:
1. It gravely threatens the inter-cultural consensus on which the international human rights instruments are based;
2. It introduces an intolerable discrimination against both non-Muslims and women;
3. It reveals a deliberately restrictive character in regard to certain fundamental rights and freedoms,[with] certain essential provisions are below legal standards in effect in [some] Muslim countries;
4. It confirms, under cover of the "Islamic Shari'a", the legitimacy of practices, such as corporal punishment, which attack the integrity and dignity of the human being.
http://www.dhimmi.org/Islam.html
How does any of what you posted related to American Muslims?
To non-believers the issue is between good law and bad law. And bad law should be challenged and revised, hopefully without too much violence.
The human right of the individual to believe or not to believe must be safeguarded in modernity. Secular society must treat everyone equally. One set of law applies to all citizens for the benefit of the whole. This is in step with the separation of church and state. There is absolutely no need for another set of law to run the state's business.
It is up to the law makers representing the people to write rational and practical laws based on reason and compassion to correct and deter bad behavior.