spending their time looking for legal loopholes in islamic law?

Submitted by the Grand Infidel of Kaffiristan (Australia), Oct 23, 2010 at 20:42

Mr Curmally writes providing an explanation of the intricate nature of various different interpretations of islamic law:

"...Why should I rave and rant about Jews? Aren't they Human? They have as much right to this Earth as any other Human Being and of that be sure."

Now, what would be the reaction of other muslims in Souther Lebanon say - if you were to go there and announce that on a street corner? Or in fact - in other sunni areas in many parts of the muslim world?

"....Try and understand, that there are 5 schools of law in Islam they are, Hanafi, Sha'afi, Maliki and Hambali. These are the 4 major Sunni schools of law, Then you have Ja'aferi school of law which is am Shi'a school..of law. We in Pakistan are Hanafi in the majority and tend to disregard the hadith as a source of law. All our laws are based on the Quran e Karim and the Sunnah or the actions of the prophet (may peace be upon him). The Council for Islamic Ideology, which is the Supreme body that goes through any bill prior to it being passed by the upper and lower houses of the Parliament. A hadith can be quoted to indicate a precedent because the Hadith are supposed to be the sayings of the Prophet ( may peace be upon him). So when you discuss a fatwa that was read out by the Saudi Arabian scholars, it need not be binding on us because the Saudis follow the Hambali schools of law and the Ibn Taymitta's updating of it in the 13th century and finally there law is based on the teachings of Abdul Wahab. The same would be he case in Egypt or Malaysia or Indonesia.who are not Hambalis or followers of Abdul Wahabs interpretation. In the 18th and 19th century, there arose a revivalist schools in the islamic world because Islam was on the retreat. Now all Muslims hold that Islam is not just a religion but a way of life. This revivalist movement threw up the Barelvis and the Deobandis and other schools. The Shi'as have a different way of looking at things. There is a strict heiarchy of scholars who graduated from Qum or Najaf. and on the top are the Marjah e Taqlid or those whom the Shi'a follow in their personal law. Now the Shi9'a books are very different from the Sunni books. So once again you have to be careful about whom you are quoting. The Shi'a books after the Quran e karim are the Najul Balagha (this has been legislated in Iran)and Kulayni's works. Most Shia's follow a marja e Taqlid be he from Iran or Iraq..So this is where you have to be careful. I may read Ibn Taymitta's works but I need not follow him.

And you left out sufis.

So complex, so many interpretations - each one sure that all the others are incorrect. And what the hell does any of this have to do with an individual's expansion of their own conscious awareness? Talk about going off on a tangent.

"In the same way we have the Ismailis who hold the Aga Khan to be Imam Hazir Moujood. or the present Imam whom they claim is the direct decedent of the Prophet ......"

and you think they are wrong don't you? Yes or no will do. And they think you are wrong too?

And then:

"...Keeping this in mind, quoting a hadith, could be a tricky business. and not necessarily binding on all the Muslims."

Truth is simple.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".