Only the first half-hour was enjoyable. "Pragmatic-optimism" or "pessimism" is not the license to further descend into what you already hold to be true during a dialogue.
The discussion is very helpful and hopeful at the same time, every segment of this discussion needs an opened intellectual discussion, for example; slavery in Islamic world was not abolished by Sharia but through secular law as professor Abdullahi an Na'im said and it can return back again, I think that it is not simple by this way, it is more complicated than this simple view which was mentioned to defend certain idea, when the Sharia don't give a clear cut order about certain issues such as slavery for example, it doesn't mean that it is not prohibited immediately or it will not be on long term, it is more powerful message than the one which had a clear cut command such as theft for example, because slavery was a social problem throughout human history, Islam couldn't come out of the blue to say that it was prohibited without taking different approach considering the people circumstances because it will not work at all even with drinking alcohol for example; it took many steps first but with slavery, it is more complicated, human has to reach full assessment and satisfaction with himself and to recognize at the end how slavery is insane because it is against justice, human rights and many others which are critical and important in Islam, Islam gave us beautiful notes throughout the revelation and the Serra of the prophet to understand that it is not good to practice it but it will take time so human can reach his own judgment and conclusion at the end and to say; it is enough and it has to be stopped, this is the genus of Islam, so we have to look at it from that angle. I think that all what was said in this discussion has to be discussed intellectually at a higher level in the circle of the academia so the fruit of any idea can come out right and productive for all inshallah. For professor Na'im; your idea is brilliant but it will take long time and it needs the Muslim scholars to involve in this discussion heavily so all can be aware of the different dimensions of this idea, it will benefit all inshallah. JAK both for this beautiful discussion.
+Mohamed Osman The proof is; even with a clear cut command as with theft, the result is not too much and the people still do it regardless the clear cut command but with slavery, it was abolished completely and slowly on long term because the approach that was taken by Islam to stop it on long term is so powerful than just clear cut command. Again, this is the genus of Islam, not the secular law, Islamic teaching has to be taken seriously at all levels because all answers and solutions are in it, because Islam is genus, it needs a genus mindset to continue researching it to the highest level.
Mohamed Osman yes u r right ... islam eliminated slavery by its teaching.. islam encourages people to free people from slavery... islam gives solutions to the problem of slavery .. for example, Islam eliminates slavery in the sense that it offers rewards to anyone frees a slave, also it offers forgiveness of sins to anyone frees a slave ... there is saying by the second Calipha (Omar bin Alkhtab) said : how u dare slave people while they were free when they given birth by their mothers ... and so on ..
Slavery and secularism these terminologies has got historical implications based on sociology and economics of that time , dominated mainly by economics Does anybody things in modern western liberalism does not support slavery ? In practice they support slavery in a very cunning fine line / one example is Garments slaves in Bangladesh / very user friendly , adaptive way but ethical dilemma there , like slavery 1400 years back / So is human rights That doesn’t mean I am a supporter of either What I am saying that one is not superior , more ethical than other , on deep palpation Thanks
Addendum / Corporate Capitalism is treating the human being of vulnerable sections of human beings as slave , only format has been changed / quality of life of poors are still supported by “ survival of the fittest “ philosophy , so why feeling of superiority by “ Deep states “ as more secular , ethical , or more humanistic “ ?? That difficult , I understand , but should be admitted openly rather than playing “ priest “
i think, the main problem of common muslims and including most of their Quranic scholars, are too much "legalistic," (fiqh oriented), as if ayatollah (god guidance) is only one: al Quran (holy scripture). factually, God him self, in very first revelation to Muhammad, is not asking Muhammad to study (iqra) the holy Quran (cos the kitab doesn't exist at that day), instead He command Muhammad to study (iqra) other ayatullah, we called as ayat Kauniyah (universe and all of His Creations in it). That why in serious and encyclopedic Islamic traditional school, we always taught that beside al Quran, there is another god guidance (ayatullah) called ayat kauniyah (the universe and all god creation in it). and for qur'anic scholars, we also know --from al Quran it self, there are two others god guidance (ayatullah), that we as muslims should seek for God Guidances: called as ayat insaniyah (human being) and ayat tarikhiyyah (human history). if common muslims and it scholars, uses all 4 God Guidance in balanced ways, we will not always fall into legalistic point of view when we talking or examining Islam point of view about woman/feminism, politics, evolution, LGBTQ issues, democracy, secularism, separation between religion and state, on terrorism, etc. for me, if sociology, political science, statistics, history on the rise and fall of civilizations/countries (as interpreters of ayat kauniyah and ayat tarikhiyyah) comes to the conclusion that democracy with separation between religion and state, is the best political system in the world for advancement human civilizations, then all Muslims should choose democracy with separation between religion and state, as preferable political system to practice in all Muslims majority countries. also if expert on biology, doctors, psychiatry, etc (as interpreter of ayat kauniyah and ayat insaniyah) , said that beside man and woman (as gender), we also has intersex, hemaprodyte, woman with more testosterones, man with more X chromosome, etc, then all Muslims should choose to agree that god him self gave us guidance / ayat that beside man and woman as gender, there also another genders/pronouns that we should cherish, protect, and respect (cos if we don't respect others God Creations, are similarly with we don't respect our God as their Creator). if we stubborn, only picks, one ayatullah, we called al Quran (holy scripture/ayat Qauliyah), as the one and only god guidance to follow, then muslims and it scholars, will always fall upon into legalistic point of view (fiqh oriented) when we examining what is islamic point view on everything under the sky. wahabbiyah, isis, al Qaida, etc are trapped in this narrow point of view about Islam and its believe. of course, for responsible and encyclopedic islamic teaching, all those narrow point views on Islam are wrong (at least incomplete), misguided, and disrespecting God. umar bin khattab, as on of few sahabah (closed friend of Prophet), several times choose to disregarding some textual issues stated clearly in al Quran, and pick other decision after he choose as Muhammad successor, as leader (khalifah/amir), if there are more fairer and more justice way (socially) on making decision as Amir/Leader, rather than choose from what already state very clear in al Quran. he always choose more fairer and more justice decisions, even others sahabah question his decision. and as we know it, umar bin khattab is one of several sahabah (closed friend of Prophet) that guaranteed (informed) by the Prophet that he is going to heaven. his way of leadership decision, was a hard evidence that the closest friend to Muhammad, also not only consider holy scripture (ayat Qauliyah), but also social aspect, fairness, and justice (ayat kauniyah), when he making decision as a leader. nobody in umar bin khattab time, dare to called umar bin khattab as heretic/bid'ah, kuffar, or infidel. but in modern era, several of loud muslims, loud muslim scholars, and most of jihadist will immediately call us heretic/bid'ah, kuffar, or infidel if we also uses 3 other God Guidance's beside ayat Qauliyah, when we speak, analyze, examining islamic point of view on everything under the sun. how strange is it, if we following completes God Guidance's, then be called as infidel, kuffar, or bid'ah. legalistic approach (fiqh oriented) on Islam has bad impact on advancement of Islamic civilization, and has backward effect on development of its peoples: the Muslims. but yes, in Islamic jurisprudence (ushul fiqh), we also has similar concept with Umar way, but unfortunately has more narrowed approach and clearly far from sufficient to be implemented in modern era, we call them: maslahah mursalah (public good principle) and maqashid syariah (ratio legal over legal specific). if muslims also incorporate social science, biology, technology, history, political science, psychology, etc (as part of rightful interpreter all of God Guidancs/ayatullah), many problem we faced today in many part of Muslim countries, will be addressed in responsible way. Muhammad him self, in his own word (Hadits Bukhari Collection no 6015), said: muslims should follow person with specific expertise on handling matter, so let political scientist handle political matter, health matter should handle by doctors, etc. do not let everything under authority of quranic expert. in general, muslim should treat expert on other ayatullah (scientist as rightful interpreter whole universe and all of His Creations in it, as rightful interpreter human being behavior and it history) equal to expert on holy scripture (al quran). Furthermore, on all wide range of social issues, every new founding/understanding as result from responsible research by scientist, should supersede (abrogate) any old interpretation from holy scripture, cos all of new founding/understanding as result from responsible research by scientist, are also rightful interpreter of God Guidance (ayatullah). falling to do so, should be interpreted as a disqualified argument/opinion. Many argument/opinion base on fiqh (islamic legal specific), kalam (theology) and falsafah (philosophy), factually in most areas are quite obsolete for addressing social, economic, and political problem in modern era, cos most of them are derived only from ayat Qauliyah (Quranic centric), which is an incomplete way to sorting our problem in modern era. Most of old argument/opinion already supersede/abrogated by new founding/understanding as result from responsible research by scientist. Muslims should back to the complete of God Guidance in balance way on solving problem in Muslims world, not only using holy scripture as final say. and stop kuffar/infidel calling game, cos that game from a complete, genuine, and responsible interpretation of 4 God Guidances, is simply un islamic. and, as an open end conclusion, there is a deeper question: why common muslims and its scholars dare to disregarding 3 other God Guidance's? why muslims and its scholars become legalistic (only focus on 1 ayatullah / 1 God Gudance (ayat Qauliyah) called alquran, as if salvation of a civilization fate can be and must be depend on 1 cause only? as brief answer is: corruption and abuse of power by people in high power, it cronies, and big business that closed to muslim countries rulers at that time. all of them, almost single handedly creates and propagate common muslims and its scholars into disregarding 3 other God Guidance's. peoples in power, it cronies, and big business that closed to muslim countries rulers push and push relentlessly to narrow interpretation on morals and public interest thru perverted interpretation on the holy scripture. even, they dare to appoint unqualified islamic scholar as qadi for them to uses as fatwa producers in favors to their vested interest. since then, islamic civilization goes down spiral into inevitable decline from it's greatness. many fatwa produced in their regime will makes serious, genuine, and responsible islamic scholar scratching their head and shocked. fatwa on mihnah policy, on banning printing technology, banning radio, tv, google, youtube, etc, are among of perverted interpretation on holy scripture. it lead to tradition/repetition/reinforcement on using narrow interpretation islamic law for beating and punishing dissent and discontent on social injustice in islamic society. furthermore, it lead islamic society to become close minded, anti science, and trapped in textual approach tradition on just 1 god guidance called al quran (ayat Qauliyah) only, with narrow and more narrow interpretation. common muslim today and it scholar today are the real victims of bad fatwa born from dark alliance between high power, it cronies, big business that closed to muslim rulers before them. lets wake them up, by spreading the real genuine of God Guidance's and it's rightful interpreters that we called: sciences. amen.
Mr. Asad is talking about human rights in terms of politics instead of deriving them from the natural rights of humans. Mr. An-Naim is right that human rights should be defended by humans themselves as citizens of a country. If shara is not a proper set of laws to abolish slavery, then secular laws should take precedence.
Mr Abdullahi An-Naim said Sharia is not Divine. That is not true. Sharia is Divine. To cut the hands of the thieves is Divine. Allah ordered us to cut the hands of the thieves in his holy book, the Quran. I'm not saying all, but most Muslim scholars in the West do not tell the truth about their religion. He said Sharia is not Divine. That is a joke. Hi is saying Sharia is the Human understanding of the Divine!. It is just like saying the American Constitution is not the American Constitution. The Human understanding of the American constitution is the Constitution. I call that playing with the words.
Only the first half-hour was enjoyable. "Pragmatic-optimism" or "pessimism" is not the license to further descend into what you already hold to be true during a dialogue.
The discussion is very helpful and hopeful at the same time, every segment of this discussion needs an opened intellectual discussion, for example; slavery in Islamic world was not abolished by Sharia but through secular law as professor Abdullahi an Na'im said and it can return back again, I think that it is not simple by this way, it is more complicated than this simple view which was mentioned to defend certain idea, when the Sharia don't give a clear cut order about certain issues such as slavery for example, it doesn't mean that it is not prohibited immediately or it will not be on long term, it is more powerful message than the one which had a clear cut command such as theft for example, because slavery was a social problem throughout human history, Islam couldn't come out of the blue to say that it was prohibited without taking different approach considering the people circumstances because it will not work at all even with drinking alcohol for example; it took many steps first but with slavery, it is more complicated, human has to reach full assessment and satisfaction with himself and to recognize at the end how slavery is insane because it is against justice, human rights and many others which are critical and important in Islam, Islam gave us beautiful notes throughout the revelation and the Serra of the prophet to understand that it is not good to practice it but it will take time so human can reach his own judgment and conclusion at the end and to say; it is enough and it has to be stopped, this is the genus of Islam, so we have to look at it from that angle.
I think that all what was said in this discussion has to be discussed intellectually at a higher level in the circle of the academia so the fruit of any idea can come out right and productive for all inshallah.
For professor Na'im; your idea is brilliant but it will take long time and it needs the Muslim scholars to involve in this discussion heavily so all can be aware of the different dimensions of this idea, it will benefit all inshallah.
JAK both for this beautiful discussion.
+Mohamed Osman
The proof is; even with a clear cut command as with theft, the result is not too much and the people still do it regardless the clear cut command but with slavery, it was abolished completely and slowly on long term because the approach that was taken by Islam to stop it on long term is so powerful than just clear cut command.
Again, this is the genus of Islam, not the secular law, Islamic teaching has to be taken seriously at all levels because all answers and solutions are in it, because Islam is genus, it needs a genus mindset to continue researching it to the highest level.
Mohamed Osman yes u r right ... islam eliminated slavery by its teaching.. islam encourages people to free people from slavery... islam gives solutions to the problem of slavery .. for example, Islam eliminates slavery in the sense that it offers rewards to anyone frees a slave, also it offers forgiveness of sins to anyone frees a slave ... there is saying by the second Calipha (Omar bin Alkhtab) said : how u dare slave people while they were free when they given birth by their mothers ... and so on ..
The last country to abolish slavery was Mauritania. Congratulations, Muslim apologists.
Slavery and secularism these terminologies has got historical implications based on sociology and economics of that time , dominated mainly by economics
Does anybody things in modern western liberalism does not support slavery ? In practice they support slavery in a very cunning fine line / one example is Garments slaves in Bangladesh / very user friendly , adaptive way but ethical dilemma there , like slavery 1400 years back / So is human rights
That doesn’t mean I am a supporter of either
What I am saying that one is not superior , more ethical than other , on deep palpation
Thanks
Addendum / Corporate Capitalism is treating the human being of vulnerable sections of human beings as slave , only format has been changed / quality of life of poors are still supported by “ survival of the fittest “ philosophy , so why feeling of superiority by “ Deep states “ as more secular , ethical , or more humanistic “ ?? That difficult , I understand , but should be admitted openly rather than playing “ priest “
shariah is Devine , but Fiqh is the understanding of Shariah.
I think the 2nd professor put it wrongly
Thank you Sir.
i think, the main problem of common muslims and including most of their Quranic scholars, are too much "legalistic," (fiqh oriented), as if ayatollah (god guidance) is only one: al Quran (holy scripture). factually, God him self, in very first revelation to Muhammad, is not asking Muhammad to study (iqra) the holy Quran (cos the kitab doesn't exist at that day), instead He command Muhammad to study (iqra) other ayatullah, we called as ayat Kauniyah (universe and all of His Creations in it). That why in serious and encyclopedic Islamic traditional school, we always taught that beside al Quran, there is another god guidance (ayatullah) called ayat kauniyah (the universe and all god creation in it). and for qur'anic scholars, we also know --from al Quran it self, there are two others god guidance (ayatullah), that we as muslims should seek for God Guidances: called as ayat insaniyah (human being) and ayat tarikhiyyah (human history).
if common muslims and it scholars, uses all 4 God Guidance in balanced ways, we will not always fall into legalistic point of view when we talking or examining Islam point of view about woman/feminism, politics, evolution, LGBTQ issues, democracy, secularism, separation between religion and state, on terrorism, etc. for me, if sociology, political science, statistics, history on the rise and fall of civilizations/countries (as interpreters of ayat kauniyah and ayat tarikhiyyah) comes to the conclusion that democracy with separation between religion and state, is the best political system in the world for advancement human civilizations, then all Muslims should choose democracy with separation between religion and state, as preferable political system to practice in all Muslims majority countries.
also if expert on biology, doctors, psychiatry, etc (as interpreter of ayat kauniyah and ayat insaniyah) , said that beside man and woman (as gender), we also has intersex, hemaprodyte, woman with more testosterones, man with more X chromosome, etc, then all Muslims should choose to agree that god him self gave us guidance / ayat that beside man and woman as gender, there also another genders/pronouns that we should cherish, protect, and respect (cos if we don't respect others God Creations, are similarly with we don't respect our God as their Creator).
if we stubborn, only picks, one ayatullah, we called al Quran (holy scripture/ayat Qauliyah), as the one and only god guidance to follow, then muslims and it scholars, will always fall upon into legalistic point of view (fiqh oriented) when we examining what is islamic point view on everything under the sky. wahabbiyah, isis, al Qaida, etc are trapped in this narrow point of view about Islam and its believe. of course, for responsible and encyclopedic islamic teaching, all those narrow point views on Islam are wrong (at least incomplete), misguided, and disrespecting God.
umar bin khattab, as on of few sahabah (closed friend of Prophet), several times choose to disregarding some textual issues stated clearly in al Quran, and pick other decision after he choose as Muhammad successor, as leader (khalifah/amir), if there are more fairer and more justice way (socially) on making decision as Amir/Leader, rather than choose from what already state very clear in al Quran. he always choose more fairer and more justice decisions, even others sahabah question his decision. and as we know it, umar bin khattab is one of several sahabah (closed friend of Prophet) that guaranteed (informed) by the Prophet that he is going to heaven. his way of leadership decision, was a hard evidence that the closest friend to Muhammad, also not only consider holy scripture (ayat Qauliyah), but also social aspect, fairness, and justice (ayat kauniyah), when he making decision as a leader.
nobody in umar bin khattab time, dare to called umar bin khattab as heretic/bid'ah, kuffar, or infidel. but in modern era, several of loud muslims, loud muslim scholars, and most of jihadist will immediately call us heretic/bid'ah, kuffar, or infidel if we also uses 3 other God Guidance's beside ayat Qauliyah, when we speak, analyze, examining islamic point of view on everything under the sun. how strange is it, if we following completes God Guidance's, then be called as infidel, kuffar, or bid'ah. legalistic approach (fiqh oriented) on Islam has bad impact on advancement of Islamic civilization, and has backward effect on development of its peoples: the Muslims. but yes, in Islamic jurisprudence (ushul fiqh), we also has similar concept with Umar way, but unfortunately has more narrowed approach and clearly far from sufficient to be implemented in modern era, we call them: maslahah mursalah (public good principle) and maqashid syariah (ratio legal over legal specific).
if muslims also incorporate social science, biology, technology, history, political science, psychology, etc (as part of rightful interpreter all of God Guidancs/ayatullah), many problem we faced today in many part of Muslim countries, will be addressed in responsible way. Muhammad him self, in his own word (Hadits Bukhari Collection no 6015), said: muslims should follow person with specific expertise on handling matter, so let political scientist handle political matter, health matter should handle by doctors, etc. do not let everything under authority of quranic expert. in general, muslim should treat expert on other ayatullah (scientist as rightful interpreter whole universe and all of His Creations in it, as rightful interpreter human being behavior and it history) equal to expert on holy scripture (al quran). Furthermore, on all wide range of social issues, every new founding/understanding as result from responsible research by scientist, should supersede (abrogate) any old interpretation from holy scripture, cos all of new founding/understanding as result from responsible research by scientist, are also rightful interpreter of God Guidance (ayatullah). falling to do so, should be interpreted as a disqualified argument/opinion.
Many argument/opinion base on fiqh (islamic legal specific), kalam (theology) and falsafah (philosophy), factually in most areas are quite obsolete for addressing social, economic, and political problem in modern era, cos most of them are derived only from ayat Qauliyah (Quranic centric), which is an incomplete way to sorting our problem in modern era. Most of old argument/opinion already supersede/abrogated by new founding/understanding as result from responsible research by scientist. Muslims should back to the complete of God Guidance in balance way on solving problem in Muslims world, not only using holy scripture as final say. and stop kuffar/infidel calling game, cos that game from a complete, genuine, and responsible interpretation of 4 God Guidances, is simply un islamic.
and, as an open end conclusion, there is a deeper question: why common muslims and its scholars dare to disregarding 3 other God Guidance's? why muslims and its scholars become legalistic (only focus on 1 ayatullah / 1 God Gudance (ayat Qauliyah) called alquran, as if salvation of a civilization fate can be and must be depend on 1 cause only? as brief answer is: corruption and abuse of power by people in high power, it cronies, and big business that closed to muslim countries rulers at that time. all of them, almost single handedly creates and propagate common muslims and its scholars into disregarding 3 other God Guidance's.
peoples in power, it cronies, and big business that closed to muslim countries rulers push and push relentlessly to narrow interpretation on morals and public interest thru perverted interpretation on the holy scripture. even, they dare to appoint unqualified islamic scholar as qadi for them to uses as fatwa producers in favors to their vested interest. since then, islamic civilization goes down spiral into inevitable decline from it's greatness. many fatwa produced in their regime will makes serious, genuine, and responsible islamic scholar scratching their head and shocked. fatwa on mihnah policy, on banning printing technology, banning radio, tv, google, youtube, etc, are among of perverted interpretation on holy scripture. it lead to tradition/repetition/reinforcement on using narrow interpretation islamic law for beating and punishing dissent and discontent on social injustice in islamic society.
furthermore, it lead islamic society to become close minded, anti science, and trapped in textual approach tradition on just 1 god guidance called al quran (ayat Qauliyah) only, with narrow and more narrow interpretation. common muslim today and it scholar today are the real victims of bad fatwa born from dark alliance between high power, it cronies, big business that closed to muslim rulers before them. lets wake them up, by spreading the real genuine of God Guidance's and it's rightful interpreters that we called: sciences. amen.
As an atheist law student, I thought your exposé was very illuminating and interesting! Thank you for sharing :)
Mr. Asad is talking about human rights in terms of politics instead of deriving them from the natural rights of humans. Mr. An-Naim is right that human rights should be defended by humans themselves as citizens of a country. If shara is not a proper set of laws to abolish slavery, then secular laws should take precedence.
سبحان الله وبحمده
سبحان الله العظيم
Get rid of isms, which is a secular paradigm
He is secular in fact?
Mr Abdullahi An-Naim said Sharia is not Divine. That is not true. Sharia is Divine. To cut the hands of the thieves is Divine. Allah ordered us to cut the hands of the thieves in his holy book, the Quran. I'm not saying all, but most Muslim scholars in the West do not tell the truth about their religion. He said Sharia is not Divine. That is a joke. Hi is saying Sharia is the Human understanding of the Divine!. It is just like saying the American Constitution is not the American Constitution. The Human understanding of the American constitution is the Constitution. I call that playing with the words.