Point de Bascule n’endosse pas le contenu de cet article. Il est archivé sur ce site uniquement à des fins de référence.
WARNING
Point de Bascule does not endorse the content of this article. It is archived on this website strictly for reference purposes.
The author is an assistant professor at the Department of General Studies at the International Islamic University in Malaysia (IIUM).
http://aibim.com/shariah/SChart.Hikmatullaj.pdf
In February 2009, the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) signed an agreement with the International Islamic University in Malaysia (IIUM) to provide seventy scholarships for IIIUM students. At the time, the IIIT delegation met with Dr. Hazizan bin Md Noon, the Dean of Kulliya of Islamic Revealed Knowledge and Human Sciences.
IIIT was founded in the U.S. in 1980 by important members of the Muslim Brotherhood network as a research centre promoting the “Islamization of Knowledge.”
IIIT (March 4, 2009): IIIT Vice President Visits IIUM and Attends World Conference
GMBDR (March 5, 2009): IIIT Announces Scholarships for the IIUM
The following excerpts of the article mention that sharia justifies forcing Muslims to recite prayers, to pay zakat and to cover the hair for women:
To propose that the verse (2:256 – No compulsion in religion) implies that Muslims cannot be forced to perform certain religious obligations is to indulge in a liberal personal interpretation unsupported by history and authoritative exegetic principles. A free-for-all interpretation of sacred texts is intellectually indefensible and, if not checked, can lead to serious confusion within the Muslim community.
(…) Next is the question of whether or not the religious authorities in Islam have a right to determine certain behavioural limits and mores of Muslims in relation to personal matters like attire and such. Yes, they have certain rights to do so.
(…) This is clear from the history of Caliph Abu Bakr with his stern measures on those who neglected prayers and did not pay the zakat (financial contributions). Abu Bakr decided to go to war against those Muslims who refused to pay zakat.
(…) As for the covering of the hair for Muslim women, apart from being one of the conditions for the validity of prayer (that of covering the aurah), this has been clearly spelt out in the sacred law for more than 1,400 years.
(…)It is the responsibility of the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) religious scholars to clarify the true meaning of there being “no compulsion in religion”, lest the Muslim and non-Muslim public be misled into believing that Islam allows every one to do whatever he or she likes regarding Islamic religious obligations.
Original Title: Religious rules not subject to random interpretations
Hikmatullah Babu Sahib
New Straits Times (Malaysia)
17 December 2005
CONCERNING the meaning of the Quranic verse, “there is no compulsion in religion” (al-Baqarah, verse 256), it is intellectually objective and correct as well as culturally authentic to refer to the authoritative explanations found in the mainstream intellectual history of the Muslim community before embarking on one’s own “interpretations”.
The interpretation of classical scholars is, as stated in the commentary of Ibn Kathir: “Allah says, ‘There is no compulsion in religion’, that is, do not force anyone to enter the religion of Islam; it is clear and evident in terms of the reasons and arguments (showing its truth) and does not need anyone to be forced to enter it; in fact, whoever is given guidance to it by God and expanded his breast is expanded by Him and his eye of the heart is illuminated (to accept it) he enters it on evidence (clearly understood by him), and whoever is led by God to be in darkness in his heart and (thereby) sealed his hearing and vision (from listening to the truth and seeing its clear evidences) then there is no benefit for him to enter the religion by force.” The verse was revealed in connection with a man from among the Ansar of the tribe of Salim ibn Auf. He was called al-Husaini and had two children who were Christians while he was a Muslim. He said to the Prophet, “Shall I force them (to enter Islam) whereas they do not want except Christianity. (The Prophet did not allow him to force the two children.) So the verse was revealed.” Another scholar who can be cited is al-Baidawi who explains that the verse was revealed to mean that there shall be no compulsion upon anyone to enter Islam, or to be forced to change his/her religion to become a Muslim. Therefore, to propose that the verse implies that Muslims cannot be forced to perform certain religious obligations is to indulge in a liberal personal interpretation unsupported by history and authoritative exegetic principles. A free-for-all interpretation of sacred texts is intellectually indefensible and, if not checked, can lead to serious confusion within the Muslim community.
Next is the question of whether or not the religious authorities in Islam have a right to determine certain behavioural limits and mores of Muslims in relation to personal matters like attire and such. Yes, they have certain rights to do so. This is clear from the verses requiring Muslims “to obey Allah, to obey the Prophet, and the people of authority from among you” and from the hadith about obligatory prayers and on parents having to teach children to pray when they are seven years old.
When they are 10 years old, they must be made to pray, whether they like it or not. The Islamic Government is also allowed to enforce the ruling on the fundamental religious obligations. This is clear from the history of Caliph Abu Bakr with his stern measures on those who neglected prayers and did not pay the zakat.
Abu Bakr decided to go to war against those Muslims who refused to pay zakat. In the political treatise of al-Mawardi, there is a chapter about al-hisbah explaining the obligation of the Islamic Government to enforce the Syariah upon the Muslim people. This is the view of well-known Islamic religious scholars for the last 1,500 years.
As for the covering of the hair for Muslim women, apart from being one of the conditions for the validity of prayer (that of covering the aurah), this has been clearly spelt out in the sacred law for more than 1,400 years. It is reflected in the book al-Fiqh ‘alal-Madhahib al-Arba’ah, recognised by the Azhar professors as the authentic position of the sacred law.
The following traditions of the Prophet give us further guidance in the matter: “It is not lawful for any woman who believes in Allah and the Last Day that she should uncover her hand more than this and then he placed his hand on his wrist joint.” When a woman reaches puberty, no part of her body should remain uncovered except her face and the hand up to the wrist joint, which means that her hair must be covered.
Aisha, wife of the Prophet, reported that once she appeared got up in finery before her nephew, Abdullah ibn al-Tufail. The Prophet did not approve of it.
It is the responsibility of the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) religious scholars to clarify the true meaning of there being “no compulsion in religion”, lest the Muslim and non-Muslim public be misled into believing that Islam allows every one to do whatever he or she likes regarding Islamic religious obligations.
* The writer is an assistant professor at the Department of General Studies, IIUM.
