Live Dialogue on Islamonline.net
Session details | |
Guest Name | Dr. Tariq Ramadan, Prof. of Islamic Studies and Leading Speaker on Islam |
Subject | |
Date | Thursday, Mar 31,2005 |
Name | Host |
Profession | |
Question | |
Answer | Dear visitors, The session has just started. Please feel free to join us with your questions. After the session has ended, you can view the whole dialogue by clicking Recent Sessions, or later on Archive. For feedback and suggestions, please e-mail us at [email protected]. Yours, Islamonline Live Dialogue Editing Desk |
Name | Mustafa |
Profession | Student |
Question | Hiding behind the argument that application of the Hudud is merely formalism is simply unacceptable. As Muslims, why should we use the west as the standard for interpreting our laws? I do not say that the west is un-Islamic, but at the same time, I believe that Muslims need to make the distinction between the two vastly differing cultures. |
Answer | My dear Brother Mustafa, Read the entire text carefully please. Am I saying that? Not at all! My point is more precise: very often some governments are using a formalistic application of the Hudud to claim that they are implementing the Shari`ah. And the populations sometimes accept and support this very superficial understanding. The Shari’ah is about social justice, equality, rule of law: it is about a global vision within which the Hudud are only a small part, not the essential. We are confusing the two by thinking that the limits of Hudud are enough, when implemented, to build the path to a social project. This is the wrong understanding. The debate I want to launch has nothing to do with the west. It is a question to be tackled from within our references. Do not misunderstand the purpose of the call. If I wanted to please the west, I would have condemned the whole scriptural references. My intention, while trying to please Allah and to be faithful to His message, is to face the reality and our weaknesses from within. May Allah help us. |
Name | Ursula |
Profession | |
Question | As-salamu `alaykum Mr. Ramadan I think your call is a very important step on debating and reflecting on Islam. It is important that believers (not just Muslims) start to reflect on their faith and try to go back to the fundamentals of their belief instead of being too often concerned about rites, cults and laws. It is this kind of reflection which allows an open and honest discourse. |
Answer | Dear Ursula, Wa`alaykum As-salam. This is my hope, in sha’ ar-Rahman. I am asking my brothers and sisters to read the text carefully, to avoid an emotional reaction and to understand it deeply. I was not expecting support but my hope is to open a debate in the name of Islam and through the teachings of Islam. Let us face up to our responsibilities: I was told, it would be controversial… sometimes we have positive and constructive controversies if we take the time to listen, to respond and to respect. May Allah help us, love us and guide us. |
Name | Muslim – Jordan |
Profession | |
Question | If we ask for a moratorium on Hudud today, will it expected to ask for a moratorium on Friday Prayer…. any comment Dr. Tariq!! |
Answer | Dear Muslim, I heard about this kind of argument. Could we, because we are afraid of exaggerations, accept that our message be betrayed??? Is this the way the scholars were thinking through our history? No, we have to be clear and strict. The fundamentals are the fundamentals and we have to say no to any attempt to destroy Islam from within. I am asking Allah to be one of the first to react to such attempts, in sha’ Allah. What I am trying to say has nothing to do with that. We need more Islam, a better understood Islam, a better implemented Islam… This is why I am worried about us and our silence when, on the Day of Judgment, we will be before Allah and we are going to be asked about our poor brothers and sisters who were punished and killed in the name of Islam. What about us knowing what happened? What about our silence? Hope everyone of us can face up his or her responsibility: the `Ulama should talk and give advice, the intellectuals should be involved by offering proposals for a better social and political projects and the ordinary Muslims should also feel that they have something to say and to give. But please, forgive me, if with such a moratorium we can save one life, protect one needy woman or man, and relieve one body from wrong punishment or death… It may be enough to please Him and to be accepted in His Rahmah or Allah’s Mercy. Allahu a’la, wa a’lam wa ahkam Your brother in Islam. |
Name | Salima – Norway |
Profession | Student |
Question | I see that your message might not be as controversial as first presented but don’t you think that dropping such a fireball as calling for a moratorium on Hudud is more of a western-media-style/level of provoking a debate, that serious Muslim thinkers should raise above? Personally, I have to say that I cannot take you as seriously as before after this. I agree that Hudud is a very serious matter indeed, and the way in which the Shari’ah is being implemented around the Muslim world today does mock the very foundations of Islam. But should we not rather call for an improvement in this situation and build on what we have, rather than tearing down the fragment of Shari’ah which is a part of the laws of these countries laws? How do you plan ahead if now the Hudud should be frozen across the globe? What next? Do you think this would automatically bring forth justice for all? I think not. This is not the way to go. |
Answer | Salam dear Salima, Once again, we are so afraid to be influenced by the western culture and style that whatever action we promote should not appear as « westernized ». There is nothing « westernized » in this call and in this text. And to call for an intra-community dialogue among Muslim scholars is crucial and necessary. Now, how could we proceed? To ask for a moratorium could help us to achieve three things: 1. Ask the `Ulama, in their different councils, to open a debate and to tell us more about the priorities as to the respect and the implementation of Ash-Shari’ah understood in its global meaning. 2. To stop the unfair treatments in the name of Islam. 3. To get rid of this formalistic approach of the Islamic teachings and to educate people as to their responsibilities in promoting public education, social justice, and more open political system. You said to start with what we have… great, what do we have exactly? As for provoking a debate, I have been working at the grassroots level for the last 15 years and provoking debates and trying to share views. Let us learn to be less emotional… and this is not an influence of the west. |
Name | Zeiad – United Kingdom |
Profession | Student |
Question | Mr Ramadan… What would you say to people who think that you are just giving into western pressures and is another one of them « hypocrites » such as Dr. Amina and the « Muslims for Bush » bunch? |
Answer | I read that yesterday and I was sad… This has nothing to do with western pressure and how could some compare what I am doing with what some Muslims are promoting in the name of « being progressive » and « modern ». Look, I have never kept silent when some intellectuals and Muslim scholars were promoting what I called « an Islam without Islam ». I took clear stances and I am attacked on that front as well. I wrote, regarding the debate around Dr. Amina Wadud’s views on al-imamah, that I thought that she was wrong according to Islamic teachings, the rules within the ‘ibadat field, etc. My posture is totally different. I have been studying the Islamic sciences for the last 15 years with the `Ulama and on my own. I try to build my work from within the Islamic tradition and everything in my work is rooted in this legacy. This call for a moratorium regarding the application of the Hudud is done from within: I do not deny the texts but I am asking the scholars and the `Ulama: what about the maqasid, the objectives of the Shari’ah? If we want justice, how can we witness such injustices and say that they are « details »? |
Name | Syed – Pakistan |
Profession | |
Question | Salamu `alaikum Dr. Tariq. What do you mean by this call on suspending the Hudud? Please explain in detail as I am confused!! |
Answer | Salamu ‘alaykum dear brother Syed, I hope you will have the time to read the whole text. It is a call to suspend (ta’liq) the current application of the Hudud because what we witness today is three things: 1. Yes, there are clear-cut texts on the matter but the `Ulama disagree on the content of these texts (not all of them of course), the conditions (shurut) and the context within which we can think about applying them – al waqi’. 2. Meanwhile, in the name of this Hudud, we see repressive policies and unbelievable injustices condoned in the name of Islam. 3. It is clear that the Muslim world needs a debate on that sensitive subject as well as on other priorities so as to propose social and political reforms in the Muslim majority societies. Once again, I am not saying the Hudud law is not « Islamic », I am saying the current application in the social and political contexts we live in are a plain betrayal of our message. And I cannot accept the argument that it concerns only few people, or It is not a big issue. `Umar ibn al-Khattab, (may Allah be pleased with him) was scared about his own destiny because of the suffering of a sheep under his authority. What about us when we remain silent while people are treated in such a bad and wrong way in the name of Islam. Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi, who is a teacher for me, for whom I have the deepest respect, commented on the call by saying that I should have asked for a better implementation of the Shari’ah. This is exactly what I am saying… and asking that, in the meantime, we stop implementing the Hudud in such an unfair way and to come back to the essential message of justice carried by the Revelation. |
Name | Seema – Canada |
Profession | Teacher |
Question | What would you say in response to the `Ulama who have already spoken out already against your Call, for example: Muzammil H. Siddiqi who says: “When this call comes from a respectable scholar like Dr. Tariq Ramadan, it may encourage others also to disrespect the laws of Allah” or : Taha Jabir Al-`Alwani, President of the Fiqh Council of North America » agreed that Muslims had enough of problems and pressing issues. » It seems to me that people dying everyday from the application of unfair treatment would be a priority! And finally: The response we have thus seen: is this exactly what you described in your position piece when you say the Muslim world sees a Moratorium as betraying the scriptural sources? |
Answer | Dear Seema, Salamu `alaykum wa rahmatulLahi wa barakatuhu. Thank you for your question. First, I want to start by thanking Islamonline for giving us the opportunity to open the debate. The purpose of the call was exactly that one: we need to debate. Second, I also want to thank the scholars and the `Ulama who take from their time to read and to comment on this call. From the bottom of my heart, I value these comments and respect their content and their criticisms. As you have understood from the entire text, I was expecting such reactions even though I would have preferred a deeper debate on the content. I have been discussing the matter during the last five years. I spoke with the `Ulama and scholars around the world, from Morocco and Egypt to Indonesia. It is not a call « coming from nowhere »… and the text needs to be read carefully for I also have been working on its content for the past years. Now, the central issue should be clear. I am saying that the texts (in the Qur’an and the Sunnah) exist and are known and some of them are definitive or qat’i ath-thubut wa ad-dalalah: to deny that « qad yu addi ilal-kufr » as say the `Ulama (could cause one to become a negator of the Truth). I am not denying the texts dealing with the Hudud: this is not the point. Neither am I saying that the Shari’ah should not be applied. All my books refer to the notion of Shari’ah understood as « the path towards faithfulness » to the message of Islam. Therefore, the Shari’ah cannot be reduced to the « Hudud » and the « penal code ». As Shaykh Shanqiti (hafidhahu Allah) is putting it: the Shari’ah is not rightly implemented today in any of the Muslim majority countries. My point is specific and clear: if we look at the reality as it exists, some of the Hudud (from corporal punishments to death penalties) are implemented today in the Islamic world in total betrayal with the Islamic message of justice. Can we, as Muslims, average Muslims or scholars, hide ourselves behind general statements: it is « almost never applicable », or this is not the « true implementation of the Shari’ah », etc. These statements are right but at one point they do not prevent innocent and poor people from being unjustly punished and killed. The meaning of a moratorium is exactly that: we recognize the authenticity of the texts, we know that there are conditions or shurut, we take into account our disagreement and we open a debate about what it exactly means to be faithful to the Shari’ah today. Meanwhile, we cannot be silent and accept that poor people to be unjustly treated in the name of « a wrong implementation »… If this is wrong so let us say it and ask to stop it immediately. The moratorium is not against the Islamic teachings and the Shari’ah but in their name. Wa Allahu a’lam wa ahkam. |
Name | Editor |
Profession | |
Question | |
Answer | Finally, we would like to thank Dr. Tariq Ramadan for taking the time to answer the questions of Islamonline viewers today, and we also thank all those who participated in this dialogue. We apologize for not being able to accommodate all the questions within the time allocated to this session. If you feel your question is very important, feel free to contact us at [email protected] and we will try our best to answer your question. We request our readers to join us in upcoming sessions. Yours, |
Islamonline.net, Live Dialogue, Thursday, Mar 31, 2005
Assalam-o-alekum wrwb,
Dear Brother Tariq, I welcome your call for a moratorium on hudud. It is high time that muslims stood upto the challenges they face. These laws have been misused enough. A case in study would be Pakistan where the tyrannical rule of the dictator in the 80’s saw countless floggings and stonings, and this continues on to this day.
I have gone through the call and want to thank you for your efforts.
Sohail Abbas
Charleston, WV
USA
salaam. The call for a moratorium on hudud now inevitably poses because sharia is not islamic law!Sharia is Quran + sunna and this is contrary to the Quran!Quran is the only source of islamic jurisprudence as proved by many verses. For example there is no dealth penalty or stoning as punishment for adultery. There is only 100 lashes. thus the main problem is that we have gradually abandoned the Quran which is the word of God in favour of other man-made books and sources. [4:25]proves that punishment for adultery cannot possibly be death!
Assalamu alaykum. Please tell me if what I have understood of your call is correct:
(1) As we know Shariah & Islam are supposed to be implemneted by government 100%
(2) When Shariah is implemneted 100% with it’s contexts, & shuroot, such a state can be called an Islamic State (al-Khilafah Islamiyyeh)
(3) It is then the duty for the elected Khalif & the Majlis as-Shura to implent all of the laws of Islam, including the Qati’ punishments for the adulterer, thief, etc so long as the Shuroot-al-Hudood are met.
(4) In the mean time all token gesture applications of Hudood & Islam are designed to appease the Muslims & lull them into a false sense of security about the Islamicness of their societies & rulers.
(5) These token gestures of application of Islam & it’s punishments are bringing Islam into disrepute, and are a ‘Zhulum’ opression, so you are calling for these to end until a true Islamic state with a freely elected Khaleef exists?
Why don’t you join the call, for the full application of Shariah, and for a truly Islamic State, the Khilafah system, and declare your abhoration for the regimes that are clearly all un-Islamic instead. As you mention Umar (ra), the system he implemenetd was the Khilafah system. It comes accross very soft in focus on our rulers, light on the crucial word: Khilafah, and appears to divert focus to hudood rather than the rulers & need for full implementation of Islam, although I don’t believe you intended it this way.
I agree with this valid point
Why do you not simply address the root of the matter, the non-application of the Islamic form of govt, namely the Khilafah, instead of skirting around the issue by addressing moritorium of the hudud?
Zafer, because the call is in fact to better the application of the islamic form of govt, namely the Kilafah.
If Tariq would have address the non-application of the islamic form of govt, it would have still be a betrayal in the message of islam. In fact, you would have not even bother respond to the debate as you did now…
it’s good you respond
it’s also good you think deeper into it.
The call is very intelligent.
Intelligent muslims, beautiful Islam…
Your Brother,
Mohammad,
London.
Intelligent muslims, beautiful islam:-) Totally agree. Islam is a sophisticated way of life, not everybody (muslims and non-muslims alike) sees that!