Are you a Muslim? Do you consider yourself moderate and representative of mainstream Muslim views and Islamic scholarship?
Here’s a short quiz regarding religious opinions to think about the answer to that question (Note: this is not an interrogation, just try to answer to the best of your ability and we will discuss results afterwards):
- Do you believe musical instruments (with maybe the exception of a few) are impermissible to play?
- Do you believe that a father has the right to force his daughter into wearing the hijab?
- Do you believe that a husband has the right to force his wife into wearing the hijab?
- Do you believe that a husband has the right to hit his wife (under the conditions that the hitting takes place as a last resort, not on the face, and not serious enough to leave a mark)?
- Do you believe a man has the right to marry a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th wife irrespective of the protests of the 1st wife?
- Do you believe slavery (with the only sources of slaves being trade or war captives) is permissible?
- Do you believe a man has the right to have intercourse with his female slave?
- Do you believe that Muslims who no longer believe in Islam deserve to be put to death (after due judicial process)?
- Do you believe that offensive jihad (attacking and conquering peaceful countries to spread Islam) is a mandatory policy for an established Islamic Caliphate?
- Do you believe that the scientific view of human evolution (humans and primates have a common ancestor) is not compatible with Islam?
- Do you believe polytheism and disbelief are worse than murder and rape?
- Do you believe that religious belief is more important than living a moral life? To put the same point differently, do you believe otherwise moral people who have received a proper invitation to Islam but did not believe in the message are generally Hell-bound (without making judgements on specific people)?
- Do you believe anyone can be deserving of punishment in Hell for eternity?
Count up how many questions you answered yes to and how many questions you answered no to. Now, analyze your answers with the following facts (feel free to corroborate these with your own investigation):
a) According to the overwhelming majority of Islamic scholarship, the answer to every single one of these questions is a definitive yes.
b) There are however, fringe and small minority views within Islamic scholarship to justify the answer no to all of these questions.
I hypothesize that it would be rare to find a Muslim who confidently answers yes to every single one of the above questions. Such a person would no doubt be labelled an extremist by other Muslims.
This brings up a serious issue: how mainstream are mainstream Muslims?
Muslims oftentimes label those who propagate the above views as not representative of “true” Islam. In reality however, we know that no one group has a monopoly on defining the Islamic religion, instead we have historically found a multitude of very different views (Chapter 1.1).
Now if most Muslims do not agree with all of these views, then where do they stand in terms of mainstream and traditional understandings of Islam? How deep of a disparity is there between the views of the average Muslim and the average Muslim scholar – and where does the average Muslim lie on the spectrum of Islamic discourse?
Something to think about.
Do you believe musical instruments are impermissible to play?
While Islamic scholarship agrees overwhelmingly that the answer is no (which is also what I go by) there are legitimate differences of opinions amongst mainstream scholars about this question with regards to the duff, music at weddings and eid, music only for women, etc.
Questions 2,3,4,5
All depends on how you define the terms right and force (the definition which you intend is unclear to myself) and a host of other conditions that go along with each, such as issues of urf, whether or not one is in an islamic state, whether or not one has the financial means to support all wives, etc. All these issues and considerations are taken into account by mainstream sunni scholars, and some differences are indeed found, though the core ideas are, broadly speaking, agreed upon, and I too subscribe to them.
Do you believe slavery (with the only sources of slaves being trade or war captives) is permissible?
Again, its not a simple yes or no question. While no doubt slavery from the two sources you mentioned are permissible and I too hold that position, the Islamic fiqhi rules of slavery are quite different from how slavery is understood in the west.
Do you believe a man has the right to have intercourse with his female slave?
Again, the simplistic answer is yes. However, the concept of malakat aymanukum in Islam is markedly different from how concubinage has been understood in the west. Refer to this article for a deeper look at some more complicated issues.
http://www.letmeturnthetables.com/2012/09/no-rape-slave-women-islam.html
As an aside, I wouldnt really mind getting a slave women, as it is from an evolutionary biological perspective (which despite not believing in human evolution I am a huge proponent of when it comes to sex and gender roles as it makes sense to me) in the nature of men to possess multiple women, and to dominate over them.
Do you believe that Muslims who no longer believe in Islam deserve to be put to death (after due judicial process)?
Simple answer: Yes. However, define due judicial process. If someone apostates privately the islamic state is not going to carry out an inquisition into people’s homes. However, if someone apostates publicly and calls to his kufr, then yes, after a chance to repent. Even here, a minority view of the Hanafis calls for a tazir punishment (though i dont agree with it). While this may be shocking to non muslims, its simply because they dont understand that the Islamic religion and state both function on totally different paradigms then that of the western notion of state and religion. Islam is not a religion in the common meaning of the term in that it does not simply consist of a personal dogma and individual guide to morality. It is a comprehensive and complete ideology, which governs every domain of human life, from politics, economics, to social structure. Hence an apostasy is akin to treason against a state. Further, the Islamic state finds its origins in the Islamic law, while other states derive their law from their state. Dr. Mahmoud Ghazi put it effectively when he wrote: “Law, in other traditions, is generally recognized as such only when it is promulgated by the political authority, that is to say, law is always the creation of the political authority, of the state apparatus. On the other hand, in the Islamic tradition, it is other way round: the state and the political authority are the creations of the law.” (Kitab Al-Siyar Al-Saghir- The Shorter Book on Muslim International Law, Islamic Research Institute, Islamabad, 1998 p.18). Again, the above website has a decent article on this, which is where I got the quote from.
Do you believe that offensive jihad (attacking and conquering peaceful countries to spread Islam) is a mandatory policy for an established Islamic Caliphate?
Offensive jihad is carried out against states that hinder and stop the dawah. As such, they arent peaceful countries to begin with. Further, I think it was only the Shafi madhab that said that offensive jihad is fardh at least once a year.
Do you believe that the scientific view of human evolution (humans and primates have a common ancestor) is not compatible with Islam?
Yes.
Do you believe polytheism and disbelief are worse than murder and rape?
Yes. Though the disbelief and polytheism being deliberate (in that the dawah reached them and they consciously chose to reject it) or not could potentially make a difference here.
Do you believe that religious belief is more important than living a moral life? To put the same point differently, do you believe otherwise moral people who have received a proper invitation to Islam but did not believe in the message are generally Hell-bound (without making judgements on specific people)?
In Islam actions are part of iman. As such, I dont see how you seperate religious belief from a moral life. Now, when you rephrase the question, then yes, I do believe they are hell bound
Do you believe anyone can be deserving of punishment in Hell for eternity?
Yes.
So, how mainstream am I? My point being, for a lot of these points, its not as simple as you tried to make it. Legal codes, by their very nature, are complex and not black and white, and its not possible to state that “According to the overwhelming majority of Islamic scholarship, the answer to every single one of these questions is a definitive yes”, as the Islamic understanding of each point and its various facets is different from how a westerner would understand each point.
Hello hello, nice to have you on this one.
I think we have to understand the difference between “apologetics” and the issues “not being simple”. These are the straightforward, bottom-line results. People don’t generally point ‘em out this bluntly (and that should hint at discomfort with them), but if you clear through apologetics, explanations and sugar-coating these are still the results you get. Let’s have a looky at your results.
It sounds like you meant to say “yes they are impermissible” rather than “no they are permissible”. You make a good point about the duff though and disagreements on some specific instruments, I’m going to clarify the question to add “with maybe the exception of a few”.
Rights (from wiki):
Force (from wiki):
I tried to use the words carefully on these ones. Having “the right” to do something doesn’t necessarily mean it is the recommended course of action. Think about the signing of the treaty of Hudaybiyyah for example, because of the contentions of the Makkans the Prophet personally took out the reference to him as the “Messenger of God”. Just because it was wiser without doesn’t take away the God-given right to the title.
Similarly, just because one is a non-Muslim country or because there are times when it is better not to exercise these rights doesn’t change that these are still God-given entitlements. ‘Urf (appealing to social customs) is low on the priority scale of deducing law and meant for issues of ambiguous nusoos (texts), but all of these issues are seen as having clear verses/hadith in mainstream scholarship.
The fact remains that according to mainstream scholarship: a) men are authority figures in these relationships, b) men are given the right to polygamy, c) men are given the right to use of force on their wives as a last resort, d) not wearing hijab is a sinful act, e) men have a responsibility to intervene and f) that intervention includes an entitlement to the use of coercion (although gentleness is the preferred method).
The details of due judicial process are moot, whatever the ‘ulema deem appropriate. Also if I’m not mistaken, the Hanafi view of not applying the hadd (capital punishment) is specific to women because of the principle of not harming women in combat, however they still are imprisoned. But I do agree that if you look deep enough around (both classically and modern) you can find minority views that don’t subscribe to capital punishment for apostasy at all.
HAH, looks like we squeezed a minority view out of you after all. Although attacking countries that prevent freedom of presenting Islam is “proactive”, it would still more or less be in the “defensive” category than “offensive” because you’re intervening to stop what would be seen as the aggressive behavior of others.
When I say offensive jihad, I’m referring specifically to the use of military force to expand Islam politically and establish dominance for people to either convert, pay the jizya/live under Islamic authority. This majority view is that this is fardh kifaya (a communal obligation) when there is proper leadership, and if it is not done so regularly to some degree (the details of what is appropriate is disputed) the community as a whole is considered sinful. Here’s an excerpt from ibn Nuhaas’s (d.1411) book on jihad:
Again to summarize, I have tried to present the issues as accurately as possible. You are of course free to offer explanations, justifications and apologetics, but at the end of the day these are still the results you get.
And the results remain that positions 2-5 and 7 are patriarchal, 8 is a human rights violation, 9 is imperialistic and 10 is incompatibility with science. It goes without saying that to a lot of people, including Muslims, these are simply not consistent with their views on what Divinely-inspired truth sounds like.