Shariah law: Barbaric or Misunderstood? 14th November 2012

Here is the video of the lecture I gave at the University of Sussex on the 14th November 2012, entitled, ‘Shariah law: Barbaric or Misunderstood?’.

The discussion in the question & answer session with the students, was very interesting, with many challenging questions being posed. Please watch to see the vibrant discourse that emerged.

Categories: Islam, Lectures, MDI UK, Videos

4 replies »

    • Islam/Quran and Western Feminism—Surah 4 verse 1 of the Quran says that humanity (soul/self/nafs) was created from a singularity—this concept works as a guarantee of the inherent equality of men and women. Therefore, in Islam, the starting point of any conversation about male/female begins with the idea of inherent equality (from God). This is not the case for Western Feminism which was a movement that was created to address the INEQUALITY between male/female in the West. However, in their quest to make the “female” equal to the “male” (in terms of rights) they forgot to consider the apparent physical inequality of male and female. The Quran balances this dichotomy between inherent equality vs apparent “inequality”/difference. There are two areas of “inequality”—Men are physically stronger and women have been given the biological responsibility of pregnancy/birth. The Quran balances this difference by giving the male the responsibility of physical and financial protection of women/family, thereby efficiently using the male biological characteristic to balance out the responsibilities. This creates equality between male and female biological difference.

      Quran and the Male—-The Quranic “system” is based on the concept of what in the west may have been called chivalry. —or the idea that the strong must protect the weak. Protection comes in two forms—the use of AND the restraint of ones strength to protect.
      This means that Men should restrain from using their strength to harm. (abuse of women. elderly, handicapped, children, the ill……etc). —-however, the duty of chivalry also extends to healthy women—who are also required to protect those that are weaker, such as children, the elderly, the ill, the handicapped…etc. though the primary duty rests with Men.

      The Quranic concept of equality is much more wholistic and comprehensive and also fits human nature.

  1. Stoning for adultery—while this may be understood as sharia by Muslims—this is NOT Quranic Law but Jewish law. The Quran prescribes lashing NOT stoning. (Surah 24 verses1-5) and though there is nothing wrong with applying Jewish law as it is from the same God, the Quran does specify in Surah 2 that (harsher) laws have been abrogated by better ones.
    Other Jewish laws that have been changed for the better in the Quran are laws of treason–the penalty is death in Judaism…but the Quran also offers the option of exile—the law about “an eye for an eye”, the Quran offers the option of forgiveness/mercy (Surah 5)……….

    Cutting off hands–Is a Christian idea /law from the New Testament Mark 9:43-45….
    Mark 9:43-45
    “43 And if your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than with two hands to go to hell,[h] to the unquenchable fire.[i] 45 And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame than with two feet to be thrown into hell. 47 And if your eye causes you to sin, tear it out.”

    • this is NOT Quranic Law but Jewish law.

      Jewish laws punishes Fornication – should we also speculate that Islamic law should not also contain the same? I know why you have engaged in such speculation to deny the Islamic punishment for public adultery, however, this is narrated in multiple hadiths and practice WITHOUT exception. There is not a case where the Prophet Muhammed (saaw) punishment post-married people for confessed intercourse without using stoning.

      As for your comment:

      Cutting off hands–Is a Christian idea /law from the New Testament Mark

      That is hillarious, considering Christians never considered that a law (Christians used the Old Testament for political laws).

      By claiming to know which laws from previous civilisations have been abrogated (without having a firm textual/historic) basis, you are making yourself as a self-proclaimed Prophet, privy to ‘inspiration’ the rest of us mere mortals don’t have. I suggest you go back to the drawing board, and start again (minus the Western concepts of Liberalism that make you want to negate the Islamic laws that don’t conform).

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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