Who is Fatimah Mernissi?

Fatima Mernissi was born in 1940 in Fez, Morocco. She grew up in a harem along with her mother, grandmothers and other sisters. It was a harem guarded strictly by a janitor so that the women could not escape from it. The harem was well-maintained and served by a maid servant. Her grandmother, Yasmina, is one of nine wives but the same fate did not fall upon her mother. Her father took only one wife and did not choose polygamy since the nationalists rejected polygamy. Even so, her mother was illiterate because she spent all of her time inside the harem.
When she was born, Moroccan nationalists successfully decolonized the country from French rule. As she related,”.... if I was born two years earlier, I would not have obtained an education. I was born at the right time.” The nationalists who fought against France promised to create a new Morocco with equality for everyone. Women and men had equal access to education. The nationalists also sought to abolish the practice of polygamy.
Fatima was lucky that despite of her life in a harem, she got the opportunity to acquire a higher education. In her book The Harem Within, Mernissi tells us about her childhood in a harem in Fez but it’s only part of the book as her childhood was not as wonderful as depicted in the book. For example, although she illustrates life in the harem appealingly, she does not ignore the oppression for those inside. She explained how women in the harems looked up to the sky and dreamt about simple things like walking freely on the street, or how they might peep at the outside world through key holes.
To Mernissi, westerners always visualize harems as castles. She distinguishes between the high class harem (imperial) and the ordinary harem (domestic). The westerners imagination is about the high class harems of rich and powerful men with hundreds of female slaves guarded strictly by a kasim. This sort of harem ceased to exist in World War I when the Ottoman Empire was destroyed and those practices were forbidden by the new Western rulers. Mernissi lived in an ordinary harem of the kind which still exists in the Gulf countries.
Since she was a little girl, Mernissi was involved in the national upheaval of thought and raised wild questions for instance on the limits imposed between boys and girls. The little Mernissi asked, if there is an approved boundary between boys and girls, why is it only girls who are covered and limited. She only posed such questions to her grandma Yasmina who could not reply since it was too dangerous for her.
At that time she also had an ambivalent relation with religion, due to the difference and tension between the perspective of Alqur’an she perceived in the school of Alqur’an and what was taught by her grandma. She was taught strictly in the school where she should memorize Alqur’an everyday. She was constantly berated, yelled at and beaten whenever she made a mistake. Thus she viewed religion as something to be afraid of.
On the other hand, the little Mernissi perceived the beauty of religion through her grandmother Yasmina, who lead her towards the poetic side of religion. Her grandma frequently told the story about her hajj and enthusiastically told Mernissi about Mecca and Medina. She constantly talked about Medina and ignored the other cities like Arafah and Mina. This influenced Mernissi so much that she became obsessed with Medina.
Mernissi nursed this attitude for many years. To her, Alqur’an depends on our perspective and on our perception toward it. These holy verses could be the gate to escape from or instead be an obstacle. To her Alqur’an can lead us towards dream or instead damage our fortitude.
Meanwhile, Mernissi’s mother always taught her how to behave and carry herself as a woman: “you should learn how to shout and protest just as you learnt how to walk and talk.” For example, she told her the story of how woman should behave wisely and prudently. She often told her the story of A Thousand and One Arabian Nights. It’s about a Sultan who was very fond of tales. Once, Sultan Nebuchadnezzar found his wife engaged having sex with his guard. He was furious and killed them both. He hated women afterward and it led him to the bad habit of marrying woman one night and then killing her the next day. It constantly happened and led to the death of many women. This habit was finally stopped by a girl named Scheherazade who magnetized him through her stories so that the Sultan always delayed his plan to kill her.
The mother regularly recounted such wisdom. Nevertheless, we should highlight how the little girl asked: “How can we learn how to tell stories that please the King?” The mother, as if she was talking to herself, said that it is the life long task of a woman. Mernissi admitted that it was her mother and grandma who supported her in getting a higher education so that she could be independent.
When Mernissi became a teenager, she started having religious lessons. She found it heart breaking:
“….. Some Hadits (prophetic tradition) originated from Kitab Bukhari which are told by the teachers hurt me. They state that the Prophet said: “Dog, donkey and woman would annul anyone’s prayer whenever they pass ahead them, break off between the praying man and kiblah.” I was shocked to hear that sort of Hadits and never repeat it with the hopes that silent would wipe away this Hadits out of my mind. I asked, “How come the Prophet said that sort of Hadits which hurt me so much... how could the beloved Muhammad hurt a little girl who is in her growth, attempt to make him as pillars of her romantic dreams.” (Woman in Islam, p. 82)
Mernissi experienced an upheaval in her thinking. Yet despite the merits of the nationalists who allowed women to get an education, Mernissi admitted that many ideas of Arabic nationalism are still to be accomplished. Polygamy is not yet forbidden, women cannot achieve equal status and democracy has not yet become established in the Arab world.
Currently, Mernissi has obtained her master in politics from Mohammed V University in Rabat, Morocco, and a PhD from Brandeis University in America in 1973. Her dissertation, Beyond the Veil, become a text book and a key reference in the west about women and Islam.
And at the moment, she works as a lecturer of Sociology at Mohammed V Rabat University where she graduated. She is well-known as a Muslim feminist in North Africa and is a prominent activist in the Islamic world.
Thought and works
I notice that Mernissi’s works stem from her individual experiences which triggered her to conduct historical research about things which have disturbed her religious comprehension. For example, in her work The Veil and Male Elite which she revised later as Women and Islam: A Historical and Theological Enquir, her investigation of the sacred texts of Alqur’an and Hadits is based on her individual experience, as for instance the case of the misogynist Hadits which equate a females position to that of dogs and donkeys.
Mernissi’s heartbreak deepened when she heard about Hadits regarding female leadership. Her motivation to investigate such Hadits seriously was instigated by the Hadits spoken by a trader in the market who negated female leadership. Surprised by her questions, the trader quoted the Hadit that “there is no salvation within society led by females.” To her, this indicates that the Hadits are embedded within the Muslim community and that therefore female leadership is still debatable despite the case of Benazir Buttho who became the prime minister of Pakistan and despite the fact that Alqur’an discusses the leadership of Queen Bilqis.
She is also concerned with another matter: hijab. The topic of hijab has dominated her intellectual career. The Hujab, which is a instrument of limitation, segregation and isolation which is used to keep women out of the public space. To her Hijab means segregation and is used as a medium of asserting heirarchy between the rulers and the people.
She communicates her understanding through interpretations of Alqur’an and Hadits and through historical research and sociological analyses. Her goal is to deliver an alternative interpretation through her books The Forgotten Queen in Islam and Islam and Democracy. In these works she attempts to show that the defects within Arab governments are not inherent in religious teachings, but that they are due to the manipulation of the religious teaching by rulers for their own interests. Nevertheless, Mernissi defends Arab countries when they are maligned by the western press (see Islam and democracy p. 26).
In most of her works, she attempts to illustrate that religious teachings can be easily manipulated and for that reason she believes that the oppression of woman is not part of the real teaching of Islam. That’s why she is careful not to oppose sacred tradition. Most of her articles regarding woman express these notions. We can see this, for example, in her book Rebellion's Women and Islamic Memory, (London & New Jersey: Zed Books, 1996).
In conclusion, her articles are rich in sociological analyses. In the works mentioned above and in her published dissertation, Beyond the Veil, she writes specifically about her research on Moroccan woman and about the sexual limits placed on woman. Nevertheless, her intellectual struggle and experience can be seen as representative of Muslim matters in general.

Hadist dalam Literatur Syi'ah

Diskursus hadits dalam wacana keilmuan Syi'ah telah mempunyai akar yang panjang dan dilakukan dengan cukup intens. Perhatian mereka terhadap hadist/sunnah, menurut sebagian orang, membuat mereka berhak pula untuk menyandang gelar Ahlu Sunnah wa Syi'ah --namun bukan wa al Jama'ah.
Dr. Muhammad At-Tîjâni as-Samâwie --seorang Sunni yang kemudian membelot ke Syi'ah, ketika melakukan kajian komparatif antara Sunnah dan Syi'ah, memberikan judul bukunya tersebut: Asy-Syî'ah Hum Ahlu Sunnah. Namun demikian, dalam beberapa hal, metodologi hadist Syi'ah amat berlainan dengan metodologi Ahlu Sunnah. Kajian tentang metodologi hadist dalam Syi'ah Imamiah telah menjadi objek sebuah risalah doktoral di fakultas Ushuluddin Universitas al Azhar. Pada penghujung tahun 1996, risalah tersebut telah diuji dan dinyatkan lulus.

a. Term Hadist

Hadist/Sunnah, secara terminologis, menurut ulama ilmu hadist Ahlu Sunnah Wa al Jama'ah adalah: Seluruh hal yang diriwayatkan dari Rasulullah Saw, baik perkataan, perbuatan, persetujuan, sifat fisik maupun akhlak dan sirah beliau. Sedangkan dalam wacana keilmuan Syi'ah, perkataan imam-imam Syi'ah (yang ma'shum, menurut kaum Syi'ah) juga bersatus seperti hadist dan diterima seperti Alquran.
Hal itu karena, menurut M.H. Al Kâsyif al Githa, imam atau imamah adalah kedudukan Ilahiah yang Allah pilihkan bagi hamba-Nya, sesuai dengan ilmu Allah, seperti Allah memilih para nabi. Menurut kaum Syi'ah pula, Allah telah memerintahkan Nabi Saw. untuk menunjukkan imam kepada umat dan memerintahkan mereka untuk mengikutinya.
Substansi khabar, hadist dan riwayat-riwayat tersebut, menurut kaum Syi'ah terbagi menjadi tiga macam:

Pertama: Khabar dan riwayat yang mengandung petunjuk pembersihan jiwa, akhlak, nasehat dan cara-cara pengobatan penyakit hati. Dengan muatan berisi pertakut, ancaman, dan dorongan. Atau yang berkaitan dengan tubuh, seperti kesehatan, penyakit, sakit dan pengobatan. Juga manfaat buah-buahan, tetumbuhan, pepohonan, air dan batu mulia. Atau yang mengandung do'a, zikir, jampai dan keutamaan ayat-ayat. Serta semua hal yang disunnahkan, baik dalam pembicaraan, perbuatan, maupun sikap. Itu semua, menurut kaum Syi'ah, bisa dijadikan landasan untuk beramal ibadah. Dan tidak perlu mencari tahu apakah sanad dan matannya shahih atau tidak. Kecuali jika ada tanda-tanda yang menunjukkan kepalsuannya.

Kedua: Yang mengandung hukum syara' parsial, taklifi atau wadl'i. Seperti thaharah, berwudlu, cara shalat, zakat, khumus, jihad dan semua bagian mu' amalat, transaksi yang diperbolehkan. Juga tentang nikah, thalaq, warisan, hudud dan diyat. Semua khabar dan riwayat tersebut tidak boleh langsung dijalankan. Namun diberikan kepada faqih yang mujtahid untuk menterjemahkannya . Sedangkan orang awam harus mengikuti mujtahid marji'.

Ketiga: Khabar dan riwayat yang mengandung pokok-pokok aqidah, seperti pengitsbatan al Khaliq Swt., juga tentang hasyr, barzakh, sirâth, mîzân, hisâb dan lain-lain. Khabar dan riwayat seperti ini, jika berkaitan dengan aqidah dan pokok agama -seperti tauhid, 'adl, nubuwwah, imâmah dan ma'ad, jika khabar tersebut sesuai dengan dalil-dalil 'aqli, urgensi, dan tanda-tanda yang qath'i, maka ia dapat dijalankan, dan tidak perlu menyelidiki sanad, keshahihan dan ketidak shahihannya.

b. Metoda Klasifikasi Hadist

Hadist, menurut Syi'ah terbagi menjadi dua bagian, mutawattir dan ahad. Hadist mutawattir adalah hadist yang diriwayatkan oleh sebuah jama'ah yang mencapai jumlah yang amat besar sehingga tidak mungkin mereka berbohong dan salah. Hadist seperti ini adalah hujjah dan harus dijadikan landasan dalam beramal. Sedangkan hadist ahad adalah hadist yang tidak mencapai derajat tawatur, rawie yang diriwayatkannya satu atau lebih. Kemudian, hadist ahad diklasifikasikan menjadi empat bagian.

1. Shahih

Yaitu hadist yang diriwayatkan oleh seorang penganut Syi'ah Imamiah yang telah diakui ke-adalah-annya dan dengan jalan yang shahih.

2. Hasan

Yaitu jika rawi yang meriwayatkannya adalah seorang Syi'ah Imamiah yang terpuji, tidak ada seorangpun yang jelas mengecamnya atau secara jelas mengakui ke-adalah-annya.

3. Muwats-tsaq

Yaitu jika rawie yang meriwayatkannya adalah bukan Syi'i, namun ia adalah orang yang tsiqat dan terpercaya dalam periwayatan.

4. Dla'if

Yaitu hadist yang tidak mempunyai kriteria-kriteria tiga kelompok hadist di atas, seperti misalnya sang rawie tidak menyebutkan seluruh rawie yang meriwayatkan hadist kepadanya. Hadist shahih adalah hujjah menurut kesepakatan seluruh ulama Syi'ah yang mengatakan bahwa khabar ahad adalah hujjah. Sedangkan hadist muwats-tsaq dan hasan, menurut pendapat yang masyhur keduanya adalah hujjah, sedangkan menurut pendapat kedua mengatakan bahwa keduanya tidak dapat dijadikan hujjah. Namun pendapat yang kuat adalah pendapat yang mengatakan bahwa keduanya dapat dijadikan hujjah. Adapun hadist dla'if, menurut kesepakatan seluruh ulama Syi'ah tidak dapat dijadikan hujjah.

c. Kitab-kitab Hadist

Dalam kalangan Syi'ah, kitab-kitab hadist yang dijadikan pedoman utama -dan berfungsi seperti kutub sittah dalam kalangan sunni- ada sebanyak 4 buah kitab.

1. Kitab al Kâfi. Disusun oleh Abu Ja'far Muhammad bin Ya'qub al Kulayni (w.328 H.). Kitab tersebut disusun dalam 20 tahun, menampung sebanyak 16.090 hadist. Di dalamnya sang penyusun menyebutkan sanadnya hingga al ma'shum. Dalam kitab hadist tersebut terdapat hadist shahih, hasan, muwats-tsaq dan dla'if.
2. Kitab Ma La Yahdluruhu al Faqih. Disusun oleh ash-Shadduq Abi Ja'far Muhammad bin 'Ali bin Babawaih al Qummi (w.381 H.). Kitab ini merangkum 9.044 hadist dalam masalah hukum.
3. Kitab at-Tahzib. Kitab ini disusun oleh Syaikh Muhammad bin al Hasan ath-Thusi (w.460 H.). Penyusun, dalam penulisan kitab ini mengikuti metode al Kulayni. Penyusun juga menyebutkan dalam setiap sanad sebuah hakikat atau suatu hukum. Kitab ini merangkum sebanyak 13.095 hadist.
4. Kitab al Istibshar. Kitab ini juga disusun oleh Muhammad bin Hasan al Thusi. Penysusun kitab at-Tahzib. Kitab ini merangkum sebanyak 5.511 hadist.

Di bawah derajat ke empat kitab ini, terdapat beberapa kitab Jami' yang besar. Antara lain:

1. Kitab Bihârul Anwâr. Disusun oleh Baqir al Majlisi. Terdiri dalam 26 jilid.
2. Kitab al Wafie fi 'Ilmi al Hadist. Disusun oleh Muhsin al Kasyani. Terdiri dalam 14 juz. Ia merupakan kumpulan dari empat kitab hadist.
3. Kitab Tafshil Wasail Syi'ah Ila Tahsil Ahadist Syari'ah. Disusun oleh al Hus asy-Syâmi' al 'Amili. Disusun berdasarkan urutan tertib kitab-kitab fiqh dan kitab Jami' Kabir yang dinamakan Asy-Syifa' fi Ahadist al Mushthafa. Susunan Muhammad Ridla at-Tabrizi.
4. Kitab Jami' al Ahkam. Disusun oleh Muhammad ar-Ridla ats-Tsairi al Kâdzimi (w.1242 H). Terdiri dalam 25 jilid. Dan terdapat pula kitab-kitab lainnya yang mempunyai derajat di bawah kitab-kitab yang disebutkan di atas. Kitab-kitab tersebut antara lain: Kitab at-Tauhid, kitab 'Uyun Akhbâr Ridla dan kitab al 'Amali.

Kaum Syi'ah, juga mengarang kitab-kitab tentang rijal periwayat hadist. Di antara kitab-kitab tersebut, yang telah dicetak antara lain: Kitab ar-Rijal, karya Ahmad bin 'Ali an-Najasyi (w.450 H.), Kitab Rijal karya Syaikh al Thusi, kita Ma'alim 'Ulama karya Muhammad bin 'Ali bin Syahr Asyub (w.588 H.), kitab Minhâj al Maqâl karya Mirza Muhammad al Astrabady (w.1.020 H.), kitab Itqan al Maqal karya Syaikh Muhammad Thaha Najaf (w.1.323 H.), kitab Rijal al Kabir karya Syaikh Abdullah al Mumaqmiqani, seorang ulama abad ini, dan kitab lainnya.

Satu yang perlu dicatat: Mayoritas hadist Syi'ah merupakan kumpulan periwayatan dari Abi Abdillah Ja'far ash-Shadiq. Diriwayatkan bahwa sebanyak 4.000 orang, baik orang biasa ataupun kalangan khawas, telah meriwayatkan hadist dari beliau. Oleh karena itu, Imamiah dinamakan pula sebagai Ja' fariyyah. Mereka berkata bahwa apa yang diriwayatkan dari masa 'Ali k.w. hingga masa Abi Muhammad al Hasan al 'Askari mencapai 6.000 kitab, 600 dari kitab-kitab tersebut adalah dalam hadist.

d. 'Adalah (Sifat adil) Shahabat

Shahabat Rasulullah Saw. adalah: Orang yang berjumpa dengan Rasulullah Saw. dengan cara biasa dalam masa hidup beliau dan saat itu orang tersebut telah masuk Islam dan beriman. Dalam wacana keilmuan Ahlu Sunnah, seluruh sahabat adalah 'udul. Oleh karena itu, ketika menjalankan proses jarh wa ta' dil dalam ilmu hadist untuk menentukan apakah riwayat seseorang diterima atau tidak, Ahlu Sunnah akan berhenti sampai pada tabi'in (perawie setelah sahabat). Dan mereka tidak memasuki kawasan sahabat, karena meyakini bahwa sahabat adalah 'udul dengan pengakuan dari Allah SWT Sehingga tidak perlu dilakukan analisa jarh wa ta'dil.

Sikap mereka tersebut berdasarkan pernyataan ayat Al Quran yang mendeklarasikan ke adalahan sahabat. Ayat-ayat itu antara lain terdapat pada QS. At-Taubah:117 .

"Sesungguhnya Allah telah menerima taubat Nabi, orang-orang Muhajirin dan orang-orang Anshar".

Juga QS. At-Taubah: 100

Orang-orang yang terdahulu lagi yang pertama-tama (masuk Islam) di antara orang-orang Muhajirin dan anshar dan orang-orang yang mengikuti mereka dengan baik, Allah ridla kepada mereka dan merekapun ridla kepada Allah". Dan Rasulullah Saw. dalam banyak kesempatan telah berwanti-wanti agar tidak mengusik kehormatan dan kedudukan sahabat, mengingat kedudukan mereka yang mulia di sisi Allah Swt. Rasulullah Saw bersabda: "Jangan kalian kecam sahabat-shabatku" (Hadist Muttafaq 'Alaih). Menurut riwayat yang sahih, imam-imam Syi'ah juga melarang untuk mengecam, sahabat Rasulullah Saw. . Karena Seperti dikatakan oleh An-Naubakhti dalam kitab Firaq Syi'ah, fenomena pengecaman terhadap sahabat justru dimulai oleh Abdullah bin Saba'; seorang Yahudi yang berpura-pura memeluk Islam dan kemudian menyebarkan perpecahan dalam Islam. Ia pula yang pertama menuhankan Ali k.w. Sedangkan dalam wacana keilmuan Syi'ah, tidak semua sahabat, menurut Syi'ah, bersipat 'udul. Karena di dalam Al Quran juga diterangkan tentang keberadaan orang-orang munafiq di Madinah, seperti dalam QS. At-Taubah:101, dsb. Maka jalan untuk mengetahui mu'min dan munafiknya seseorang, menurut Syi'ah, adalah dengan melihat apakah orang-orang tersebut cinta kepada 'Ali k.w atau nmembencinya. Jika ia mencintainya, maka ia adalah mu'min, dan jika membencinya berarti ia adalah munafiq.

Dari logika seperti itu, maka sahabat-sahabat yang mereka anggap telah merampas hak 'Ali k.w. atau tidak mendukungnya adalah munafik atau kafir. Dalam kitab-kitab kaum Syi'ah akan didapati banyak cercaan kepada sahabat yang mereka anggap telah munafik, sesat atau malah kafir.

Dalam buku Syubhat Haula Syi'ah, 'Abbas 'Ali al Musawie membagi sahabat menjadi dua kelompok. Pertama kelompok yang setia dan kedua kelompok yang mereka anggap telah sesat.

Yang pertama adalah sahabat-sahabat seperti 'Ammar bin Yasir, Miqdad dan Abu Dzar al Ghifari.

Sedangkan kelompok yang kedua, menurutnya lagi adalah seperti Mu'awiyyah bin Abi Sufyan, Abu Hurairah dan Al Walid bin 'Uqbah bin Abi Mu'ith.

Dalam buku-buku kaum Syi'ah akan banyak didapati cercaan terhadap sahabat. Dan cercaan tersebut tidak hanya terbatas pada shigar sahabat, namun juga menimpa dua Syaikhain: Abu Bakar dan 'Umar Ra. Yang dapat disebutkan di sini adalah, bahwa dengan sikap Syi'ah terhadap sahabat seperti itu, maka kaum Syi'ah dalam periwayatan hadist, hanya menerima periwayatan dari sahabat-sahabat yang loyal kepada mereka.

Namun, jika klaim mereka tersebut diterima, maka secara implisit hal itu akan mempunyai dampak yang luas. Misalnya: Bahwa Rasulullah Saw telah gagal dalam menyampaikan risalahnya, karena mayoritas sahabat yang beliau didik dan bina telah menyimpang, bahwa kekhalifahan dan dinast-dinasti Islam, serta capaian peradaban yang telah mereka wujudkan adalah bukan hasil peradaban Islam, karena dilakukan oleh orang-orang yang --menurut kaum Syi'ah-- telah menyimpang (munafik atau kafir). Dan konsekuens-konseksuensi logis lainnya

Perbedaan antara Sunni dan Syiah

Banyak orang yang menyangka bahwa perbedaan antara Ahlussunnah Waljamaah dengan Syiah Imamiyah Itsna Asyariyah (Ja’fariyah) dianggap sekedar dalam masalah khilafiyah Furu’iyah, seperti perbedaan antara NU dengan Muhammadiyah, antara Madzhab Safi’i dengan Madzhab Maliki.

Karenanya dengan adanya ribut-ribut masalah Sunni dengan Syiah, mereka berpendapat agar perbedaan pendapat tersebut tidak perlu dibesar-besarkan. Selanjutnya mereka berharap, apabila antara NU dengan Muhammadiyah sekarang bisa diadakan pendekatan-pendekatan demi Ukhuwah Islamiyah, lalu mengapa antara Syiah dan Sunni tidak dilakukan ?.

Oleh karena itu, disaat Muslimin bangun melawan serangan Syiah, mereka menjadi penonton dan tidak ikut berkiprah.

Apa yang mereka harapkan tersebut, tidak lain dikarenakan minimnya pengetahuan mereka mengenai aqidah Syiah Imamiyah Itsna Asyariyah (Ja’fariyah). Sehingga apa yang mereka sampaikan hanya terbatas pada apa yang mereka ketahui.

Semua itu dikarenakan kurangnya informasi pada mereka, akan hakikat ajaran Syiah Imamiyah Itsna Asyariyah (Ja’fariyah). Disamping kebiasaan berkomentar, sebelum memahami persoalan yang sebenarnya.

Sedangkan apa yang mereka kuasai, hanya bersumber dari tokoh-tokoh Syiah yang sering berkata bahwa perbedaan Sunni dengan Syiah seperti perbedaan antara Madzhab Maliki dengan Madzahab Syafi’i.

Padahal perbedaan antara Madzhab Maliki dengan Madzhab Syafi’i, hanya dalam masalah Furu’iyah saja. Sedang perbedaan antara Ahlussunnah Waljamaah dengan Syiah Imamiyah Itsna Asyariyah (Ja’fariyah), maka perbedaan-perbedaannya disamping dalam Furuu’ juga dalam Ushuul.

Rukun Iman mereka berbeda dengan rukun Iman kita, rukun Islamnya juga berbeda, begitu pula kitab-kitab hadistnya juga berbeda, bahkan sesuai pengakuan sebagian besar ulama-ulama Syiah, bahwa Al-Qur'an mereka juga berbeda dengan Al-Qur'an kita (Ahlussunnah).

Apabila ada dari ulama mereka yang pura-pura (taqiyah) mengatakan bahwa Al-Qur'annya sama, maka dalam menafsirkan ayat-ayatnya sangat berbeda dan berlainan.

Sehingga tepatlah apabila ulama-ulama Ahlussunnah Waljamaah mengatakan : Bahwa Syiah Imamiyah Itsna Asyariyah (Ja’fariyah) adalah satu agama tersendiri.

Melihat pentingnya persoalan tersebut, maka di bawah ini kami nukilkan sebagian dari perbedaan antara aqidah Ahlussunnah Waljamaah dengan aqidah Syiah Imamiyah Itsna Asyariyah (Ja’fariyah).

1. Ahlussunnah : Rukun Islam kita ada 5 (lima)

a) Syahadatain

b) As-Sholah

c) As-Shoum

d) Az-Zakah

e) Al-Haj

Syiah : Rukun Islam Syiah juga ada 5 (lima) tapi berbeda:

a) As-Sholah

b) As-Shoum

c) Az-Zakah

d) Al-Haj

e) Al wilayah

2. Ahlussunnah : Rukun Iman ada 6 (enam) :

a) Iman kepada Allah

b) Iman kepada Malaikat-malaikat Nya

c) Iman kepada Kitab-kitab Nya

d) Iman kepada Rasul Nya

e) Iman kepada Yaumil Akhir / hari kiamat

f) Iman kepada Qadar, baik-buruknya dari Allah.

Syiah : Rukun Iman Syiah ada 5 (lima)*

a) At-Tauhid

b) An Nubuwwah

c) Al Imamah

d) Al Adlu

e) Al Ma’ad

3. Ahlussunnah : Dua kalimat syahadat

Syiah : Tiga kalimat syahadat, disamping Asyhadu an Laailaha illallah, wa asyhadu anna Muhammadan Rasulullah, masih ditambah dengan menyebut dua belas imam-imam mereka.

4. Ahlussunnah : Percaya kepada imam-imam tidak termasuk rukun iman. Adapun jumlah imam-imam Ahlussunnah tidak terbatas. Selalu timbul imam-imam, sampai hari kiamat.

Karenanya membatasi imam-imam hanya dua belas (12) atau jumlah tertentu, tidak dibenarkan.

Syiah : Percaya kepada dua belas imam-imam mereka, termasuk rukun iman. Karenanya orang-orang yang tidak beriman kepada dua belas imam-imam mereka (seperti orang-orang Sunni), maka menurut ajaran Syiah dianggap kafir dan akan masuk neraka.

5. Ahlussunnah : Khulafaurrosyidin yang diakui (sah) adalah :

a) Abu Bakar

b) Umar

c) Utsman

d) Ali Radhiallahu anhum

Syiah : Ketiga Khalifah (Abu Bakar, Umar, Utsman) tidak diakui oleh Syiah. Karena dianggap telah merampas kekhalifahan Ali bin Abi Thalib (padahal Imam Ali sendiri membai'at dan mengakui kekhalifahan mereka).

6. Ahlussunnah : Khalifah (Imam) adalah manusia biasa, yang tidak mempunyai sifat Ma’shum.

Berarti mereka dapat berbuat salah/ dosa/ lupa. Karena sifat Ma’shum, hanya dimiliki oleh para Nabi.

Syiah : Para imam yang jumlahnya dua belas tersebut mempunyai sifat Ma'’hum, seperti para Nabi.

7. Ahlussunnah : Dilarang mencaci-maki para sahabat.

Syiah : Mencaci-maki para sahabat tidak apa-apa bahkan Syiah berkeyakinan, bahwa para sahabat setelah Rasulullah SAW wafat, mereka menjadi murtad dan tinggal beberapa orang saja. Alasannya karena para sahabat membai'at Sayyidina Abu Bakar sebagai Khalifah.

8. Ahlussunnah : Siti Aisyah istri Rasulullah sangat dihormati dan dicintai. Beliau adalah Ummul Mu’minin.

Syiah : Siti Aisyah dicaci-maki, difitnah, bahkan dikafirkan.

9. Ahlussunnah : Kitab-kitab hadits yang dipakai sandaran dan rujukan Ahlussunnah adalah Kutubussittah :

a) Bukhari

b) Muslim

c) Abu Daud

d) Turmudzi

e) Ibnu Majah

f) An Nasa’i

(kitab-kitab tersebut beredar dimana-mana dan dibaca oleh kaum Muslimin sedunia).

Syiah : Kitab-kitab Syiah ada empat :

a) Al Kaafi

b) Al Istibshor

c) Man Laa Yah Dhuruhu Al Faqih

d) Att Tahdziib

(Kitab-kitab tersebut tidak beredar, sebab kebohongannya takut diketahui oleh pengikut-pengikut Syiah).

10. Ahlussunnah : Al-Qur'an tetap orisinil

Syiah : Al-Qur'an yang ada sekarang ini menurut pengakuan ulama Syiah tidak orisinil. Sudah dirubah oleh para sahabat (dikurangi dan ditambah).

11. Ahlussunnah : Surga diperuntukkan bagi orang-orang yang taat kepada Allah dan Rasul Nya.

Neraka diperuntukkan bagi orang-orang yang tidak taat kepada Allah dan Rasul Nya.

Syiah : Surga diperuntukkan bagi orang-orang yang cinta kepada Imam Ali, walaupun orang tersebut tidak taat kepada Rasulullah.

Neraka diperuntukkan bagi orang-orang yang memusuhi Imam Ali, walaupun orang tersebut taat kepada Rasulullah.

12. Ahlussunnah : Aqidah Raj’Ah tidak ada dalam ajaran Ahlussunnah. Raj’ah adalah besok diakhir zaman sebelum kiamat, manusia akan hidup kembali. Dimana saat itu Ahlul Bait akan balas dendam kepada musuh-musuhnya.

Syiah : Raj’ah adalah salah satu aqidah Syiah. Dimana diceritakan : bahwa nanti diakhir zaman, Imam Mahdi akan keluar dari persembunyiannya. Kemudian dia pergi ke Madinah untuk membangunkan Rasulullah, Imam Ali, Siti Fatimah serta Ahlul Bait yang lain.

Setelah mereka semuanya bai'at kepadanya, diapun selanjutnya membangunkan Abu Bakar, Umar, Aisyah. Kemudian ketiga orang tersebut disiksa dan disalib, sampai mati seterusnya diulang-ulang sampai ribuan kali. Sebagai balasan atas perbuatan jahat mereka kepada Ahlul Bait.

Keterangan : Orang Syiah mempunyai Imam Mahdi sendiri. Berlainan dengan Imam Mahdinya Ahlussunnah, yang akan membawa keadilan dan kedamaian.

13. Ahlussunnah : Mut’ah (kawin kontrak), sama dengan perbuatan zina dan hukumnya haram.

Syiah : Mut’ah sangat dianjurkan dan hukumnya halal. Halalnya Mut’ah ini dipakai oleh golongan Syiah untuk mempengaruhi para pemuda agar masuk Syiah. Padahal haramnya Mut’ah juga berlaku di zaman Khalifah Ali bin Abi Thalib.

14. Ahlussunnah : Khamer/ arak tidak suci.

Syiah : Khamer/ arak suci.

15. Ahlussunnah : Air yang telah dipakai istinja’ (cebok) dianggap tidak suci.

Syiah : Air yang telah dipakai istinja’ (cebok) dianggap suci dan mensucikan.

16. Ahlussunnah : Diwaktu shalat meletakkan tangan kanan diatas tangan kiri hukumnya sunnah.

Syiah : Diwaktu shalat meletakkan tangan kanan diatas tangan kiri membatalkan shalat.

(jadi shalatnya bangsa Indonesia yang diajarkan Wali Songo oleh orang-orang Syiah dihukum tidak sah/ batal, sebab meletakkan tangan kanan diatas tangan kiri).

17. Ahlussunnah : Mengucapkan Amin diakhir surat Al-Fatihah dalam shalat adalah sunnah.

Syiah : Mengucapkan Amin diakhir surat Al-Fatihah dalam shalat dianggap tidak sah/ batal shalatnya.

(Jadi shalatnya Muslimin di seluruh dunia dianggap tidak sah, karena mengucapkan Amin dalam shalatnya).

18. Ahlussunnah : Shalat jama’ diperbolehkan bagi orang yang bepergian dan bagi orang yang mempunyai udzur syar’i.

Syiah : Shalat jama’ diperbolehkan walaupun tanpa alasan apapun.

19. Ahlussunnah : Shalat Dhuha disunnahkan.

Syiah : Shalat Dhuha tidak dibenarkan.

(padahal semua Auliya’ dan salihin melakukan shalat Dhuha).

Demikian telah kami nukilkan perbedaan-perbedaan antara aqidah Ahlussunnah Waljamaah dan aqidah Syiah Imamiyah Itsna Asyariyah (Ja’fariyah). Sengaja kami nukil sedikit saja, sebab apabila kami nukil

seluruhnya, maka akan memenuhi halaman-halaman buku ini.

Harapan Penulis semoga pembaca dapat memahami benar-benar perbedaan-perbedaan tersebut. Guna menambah wawasan dan memperkaya wacana kita.

The Fundamentals of Understanding Islam

Introduction
The correct approach of understanding Islam entails an understanding of beliefs and practices of Islam, based fundamentally on the Qur'an and the Sunnah.
It encompasses an understanding and interpretation of the Qur'an, primarily from within the Qur'an, emanating from its theme, context, sequence and language. It involves an understanding of the Qur'an which also acknowledges interpretation of the verses in the light of the time of revelation and the phase of the Prophetic mission of religious propagation, both of which are determined from within the Qur'an. Sources that are external to the Qur'an are secondary to its interpretation.
This approach began as a movement for the renaissance of original thinking about the concepts and interpretations of religion and the study of its basic sources. Imam Hameed ud din Farahi (1862- 1930) was the founder of this thinking and he initiated the study of the Qur'an on these lines. He pioneered the discovery of coherence in the Qur'an and demonstrated that by taking coherence into consideration a single interpretation of the Qur'an was possible.
Amin Ahsan Islahi (1904-1997), his most distinguished pupil wrote a commentary of the Qur'an along the thinking of Imam Farahi called Tadabur-i-Qur'an. This commentary fully reflects the principles of his illustrious guide. It has ushered in a new era in the field of scriptural interpretation.
One of Amin Ahsan Islahi's students, Javed Ahmad Ghamidi has now established a research institute in Lahore, Pakistan called Al-Mawrid Institute of Islamic Sciences; (founded 1983) dedicated to the continuity of this tradition of original research and thinking. The objectives of the institute are to conduct and facilitate academic work on Islamic sciences and to educate people on its basis.
This booklet aims to introduce an approach to understanding Islam that is revived and promoted by the scholars of the above institute. The main content of the booklet consists of the following:
Religion
The Qur'an
The Sunnah
Hadith
Some of the important outcomes
Religion
The essence of religion is to worship God (Allah); it entails humility and obedience. The rites, rituals, norms and confines of this worship constitute religion. The righteous religion Islam is God's guidance in this world. This guidance has been bestowed upon mankind by way of His messengers and prophets. Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) is the final prophet of this sequence.
Purpose of Religion
According to religion, the purpose of our lives is to please God; which leads us to Paradise. To attain this we need to develop purification. This encompasses positive enhancement and moulding of the good in our soul, and purification and purging of the bad. The purpose of religion is to help us attain purification; both in our individual and collective lives. In the Qur'an, God states, successful is he, who has cleansed himself (87:14).
The Concept of Guidance
The Qur'an maintains that human beings have not been created blind and ignorant; have we not shown him the two ways [that he could understand the good and the evil]? (90:10). Religion does not provide guidance on all aspects of life but it maintains that human beings have generally been endowed with sufficient ability to solve their everyday problems (inborn guidance). Religion acts as a reminder (Revealed guidance) for men. A reminder about things and concepts which deep inside, he is already aware of, yet, due to the influence of the external world, his society and surroundings, he tends to forget. In light of the above it is incorrect to suggest that Islam provides complete guidance in all aspects of life. Islam is a direction finder and influences our way of thinking and steers us to the right Path.
Source of Religion
The Prophet or messenger of God is the solitary source of the religion; hence for Muslims Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) is the only source for their religion. From the Holy Prophet (pbuh) the entire religion was disseminated to the Muslims by way of the Qur'an and the Sunnah.
Islam, like other religions, consists of two components; beliefs and practices. The beliefs have been stated in the Qur'an while the practices are embodied in both the Qur'an and the Sunnah.
The Qur'an
Muslims believe the Qur'an is that Book of God that was sent to mankind through Prophet Mohammad (pbuh); providing guidance about religious beliefs and practices. The Prophet (Pbuh) taught the Qur'an to his Companions. This Book has been transferred from the Companions of the Prophet (pbuh), uninterrupted, through successive generations of Muslims with consensus (Ijma) and verbal perpetuation (tawaatur) to date.
Authority of the Qur'an
The Qur'an is the fountainhead of religious authority. It is the balance (mizan) in whose scales everything must be weighed in order to ascertain the extent of truth found within that entity, and it is the criterion (Furqan) which like a sieve sifts out good from evil.
It is God who has sent down the Book in truth that is the Mizan........ (42:17)
Blessed is He Who sent down the Furqan to His servant that it may be an admonition to the people of the world. (25:1)
The Qur'an is the Final Testament of the Almighty revealed to mankind. It is the Only Divine Book which is today found in its original language and form, preserved word for word. As such it has been invested with the status of the guardian over all previous Divine Books.
And to you (O Prophet pbuh), we have revealed a Book with the truth confirming what the previous scriptures (say about it) and it stands as Guardian over them......... (5:48)
Interpreting the Qur'an
Every Muslim and every reader of classical Arabic and all those who have access to an authentic translation of the Qur'an, can easily decipher from the Qur'an the articles of belief in Islam and the basic religious obligations bestowed upon a Muslim so that one can please one's Creator and attain salvation in the hereafter. As such, the Qur'an is a very straightforward book of guidance for all people.
However, to have a more scholarly understanding of the Qur'an and its message and to comprehend the accurate and in-depth meaning of its verses and their links together, in particular to be able to verify the authenticity of different understandings from the verses of the Qur'an, it is essential to have an in depth insight and means to appreciate and understand the Qur'an.
In this booklet, the essential means to appreciate and understand the Qur'an are called primary sources of interpretation of the Qur'an. These means and insights elucidate the Qur'an; others that are not essential but are helpful in the understanding and interpretation of the Qur'an are called secondary sources. The Primary and the secondary sources for interpreting the Qur'an are briefly introduced below.
Primary Sources for interpreting the Qur'an:
Language of the Qur'an: The language in which the Qur'an was revealed was the Arabic of the highest quality spoken by the Quraysh of Makkah. As such, it is impetrative that due consideration is given to an in-depth understanding of this particular language.
Context of the Qur'an: The Qur'an is a coherent Book in which its verses and Surahs are arranged in a specific order. While interpreting the Qur'an it is important to keep in view the context of its verses. No verse should be interpreted without regard to its context.
Parallels of the Qur'an: One of the main sources for understanding the Qur'an is the Qur'an itself. Many verses or words in the Qur'an are explained or further clarified in other verses of the Qur'an.
Theme of the Qur'an: The theme of the Qur'an is the "Indhar" of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) 1. Indhar is a term of the Qur'an and means admonition or warning. It is important to interpret verses of the Qur'an in the light of this theme (Indhar) and its different phases. In doing so, attention to the time of revelation and the addressees of verses (whether directives are general or are specific to certain group of people in the era of the Prophet (pbuh) are essential.
Secondary sources for interpreting the Qur'an:
Ahadith: Ahadith are potential sources to access the Prophet's (pbuh) and his companions' understanding, explanation and application of the verses of the Qur'an. A hadith that provides explanation for a verse or verses of the Qur'an helps in interpreting the Qur'an, provided that the chain of narrators of the hadith is not weak and that the context of Hadith itself is in line with the text of the Qur'an and its overall message. Hadith however cannot abrogate or add to a Qur'anic directive.
The previous scriptures: Previous divine scriptures are helpful in understanding the Qur'an. Though they are not present in their original form, however they are still an invaluable source of wisdom and divine directives. They also contain historical record about the previous prophets of Bani Israel (Children of Israel).
The major commentaries: Numerous translations and Tafasir (commentaries) have been written about the Qur'an by various Muslim scholars, these also provide a valuable source of scholarly insight and information about its interpretation.
History of Arabia: History of Arabia highlights the social, moral, intellectual and economic mood of the people at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The likes and dislikes of the people, rites, rituals and social norms of that time.
The Sunnah
Sunnah literally means well trodden path in Arabic. Sunnah are those Abrahamic practices and rituals that were adopted and revived by the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh), in some cases after modifications and additions, and instituted among his followers as integral part of God's religion.
Sunnan (plural of Sunnah) are practical activities and these have been transferred and established by the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh), as part of the practices of God's religion, through practical demonstration to his Companions. From the companions, these practices have been transmitted uninterrupted through successive generations of Muslims with consensus (Ijma) and practical perpetuation (tawaatur) to date. The Sunnah and the Qur'an are equally authentic. They are both delivered to us through the same source i.e. Prophet Mohammad (pbuh). They have reached us through the same mechanism of history (i.e. verbal and practical perpetuation and consensus of the Muslim Ummah). The Qur'an has reached us by verbal (documentary) transmission whilst the Sunnah by practical transmission. It is within these two that the entire basic corpus of Islam is preserved.
Essential features of the Sunnah include:
Consists of practices initiated by the Prophet (pbuh) and not by the Qur'an.
Initiated by the Prophet (pbuh) as integral part of religion.
Does not include religious beliefs and concepts.
Does not include Prophetic teachings, intended at interpreting and explaining human nature.
Cannot be established merely through individual reports, inclusion of an act as the Sunnah requires consensus of the Muslim Ummah.
Does not include supererogatory acts.
Does not include detailed religious practices that have not been established as Sunnah by the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh).
Significance of the Sunnah
The Sunnah provides concrete shape to Muslim faith and a practical semblance to very important tenets of Islam. It plays a crucial role towards the formation of Muslim Ummah and imparts a distinguished and unique character to all Muslims.
The Sunnan instituted by the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)
The Sunnah consists of three main categories of Mandatory rituals, Etiquettes pertaining to personal hygiene and Symbolic customs.
These are listed as follows:
To eat and drink by the name of God and with the right hand
Saying Al hamdu lillah (All praise be for God) when one sneezes and Replying to it by saying YarhamuKa Allah (May God bless you)
Calling Adhan in the right ear of a newborn baby and Iqamah in his left ear
Bathing the dead before burial
Shrouding the dead body in cloth (takfin) to bury it
Offering funeral prayer
Burial (tadfin) of the dead body
Celebrating Eid al Fitr, on the first day of the tenth month of the lunar calendar
Paying alms on Eid ul Fitr
Celebrating Eid al Adha on the tenth day of the twelfth month of lunar calendar
Takbirs (saying Allah u Akbar which means God is the greatest) after prayers during the days of Tashriq (Eid days And the three days after)
Offering the Eid Prayers
Trimming the moustaches
Greeting each other with Assalam u Alaykum (Peace be with you) and replying to it by Wa'alaykum Assalam (and Peace be with you)
Removing the undesired hair around the genitals
Removing hair from the armpits
Circumcision of all male children
Keeping finger and toe nails trimmed
Keeping the teeth, nose and mouth clean
Washing after defecation, and urination
Bathing after having sexual intimacy or orgasm
Avoiding sexual intimacy during menses and after birth
Bathing (of women) after menses and childbirth marking the end of the period
Organisation of five daily obligatory prayers
Friday congregation
Ablution for prayers
"Tayammum" (Using mud/dust to make ablution in the absence of water or when use of water can be detrimental to health)
Saying Adhan (call for prayers)
Saying Iqamah before the prayers
Constructing, establishing and maintaining a system for the management of mosques
Observing the sanctity of the Ka'bah
Fasting during the month of Ramadan
Ai'tikaf (seclusion and isolating oneself for a specific amount of time for worshiping God, in particular in the last Ten days of Ramadhan)
Paying Zakah (Islamic Tax)
Performing Hajj and Umrah (pilgrimage to Ka'abah)
Sacrificing animals on Eid ul Adha
Observing the sanctity of four months; the seventh lunar month of Rajab for Umrah and the eleventh, twelfth and The first lunar month for performance of Hajj. During these months all forms of armed conflicts and any attempt To obstruct the routes of pilgrims are strictly prohibited.
Tadhkiyah that is slaughtering animals with pronouncing the name of God, in the prescribed manner that is by cutting the main blood vessels to let all the blood flow out.
Tawaf (Circumambulation of the Ka'bah) as part of Hajj or Umrah
Offering Hadi (Sacrificial animals brought to the Ka'bah)
The procedure of Nikah (solemnisation of Marriage) and Talaaq (divorce)
Hadith
Hadith literally means a saying or something new. In Islamic terminology, it is defined as the individual-to-individual narratives ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) regarding his sayings, actions, expressed or tacit approvals, his life history and personal description.
These include:
Life history of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh), including his meetings with people, important events in his time e.g. Holy wars as narrated by his followers.
Record of the Prophet Mohammad's (pbuh) everyday life, rituals and routines, these are those things that he liked but did not authorise their initiation as essential part of religion. These records reveal the Prophet's (pbuh) excellent example (Uswa Al Hasana) in carrying out the directives of Islam.
Record of answers to questions and explanations given by the Prophet (pbuh) to his followers.
Record of any explanations about commandments in the Qur'an and the Sunnah by the Prophet (pbuh) to his followers.
Principles of Acceptance of Hadith
The scholars of the science of ahadith have devised the following criteria which need to be met for a hadith to be considered authentic.
Continuity in the chain of narrators.
Narrators must be practicing Muslims and must not have engaged in activities that are forbidden.
Narrators should have sound understanding, memory and expression.
Reports should not contradict similar substantiated Ahadith regarding the same topic.
Reports should be free of any hidden defects (which are called Illah in this science).
What can be understood and derived from a Hadith should not contradict The Qur'an, The Sunnah and Established facts.
Some important requisites for the understanding of Ahadith
Need to understand and interpret Ahadith in light of the Qur'an and the Sunnah, which are the ultimate and absolute sources of religious information.
Need to interpret ahadith in their proper and relevant context.
To understand Ahadith adequately, we need to study all the related Ahadith on the particular subject.
The Qur'an, the Sunnah and the Hadith
The Qur'an and the Sunnah hold a pivotal place as the source of understanding of religion. The Sunnah and the Qur'an do not abrogate each other. They cannot be overruled by Hadith. Both these sources contain the entire religion. Hadith can thus explain these sources or provide the best example set by the Holy Prophet (pbuh); it cannot abrogate or contradict the basic corpus of religion residing in the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Hadith literature does not add to the content of religion; it offers an explanation of the Holy Qur'an and the Sunnah, and dictates sense and reason.
Some of the main outcomes of adopting the correct approach to understanding Islam
Some of the outcomes of Understanding Islam approach are listed in two categories namely; ideological and behavioural outcomes.
Few of the ideological outcomes:
The following ideological outcomes are presented briefly. The objective is not to convince the reader about these outcomes or to fully explain them. More elaboration on these outcomes and the way they have been derived can be found in the sources that are listed in the bibliography at the end of this booklet.
Understanding the Qur'an as a robust, structured system
Identifying those directives of the Qur'an that were exclusively for the people or groups of people at the time of revelation.
Recognising that God does not punish any one unless one rejects the truth, after the truth is clearly shown to one and one is clearly and fully warned about it (Itmam Al-Hujjah). This means it is not correct to assume that any non-Muslim (of our time) will go to hell.
Learning that those who were among the direct addressees of the Messengers and rejected them will be punished in this world either directly by God or by the Messengers and/or his immediate followers.
Appreciating the role of both the Children of Israel (descendents of Prophet Isaac son of Prophet Abraham peace be upon them) and the Children of Ishmael (descendents of Prophet Ishmael son of Prophet Abraham pbut) as a collective group of people who were given the same position and authority as their respective messengers, in bringing the complete truth before people. (Itmam Al -Hujjah)
Understanding that Muslims, who live in this era, do not have the same authority that the Prophet (pbuh) and the collectivity of Bani Ishmael had in dealing with deniers of truth. Meaning that many of the directives of the Qur'an about Jihad and killing of rejecters do not apply to them.
Appreciating that the primary cause of the downfall of Muslims at present is not due to any external influence or circumstances but has endogenous basis. Therefore, the only way Muslims can restore prosperity for themselves in this world is to collectively become loyal to their religion. This does not mean that clear oppressions by some external forces are denied or ignored.
Identifying and distinguishing between the definitions of non Muslims, People of the Book, hypocrites, disbelievers, idolaters or polytheists.
Recognising the difference between Messenger (Rasool) and Prophet (Nabi) in terms of their role among their addressees.
Appreciating the underlined "concept" of the religious practices while identifying and protecting their obligatory "form".
Recognising that all practicing Islamic sects are agreed on the Sunnah.
Role of an Islamic state and duties of citizens.
Restoring and clarifying the rules of punishment in Shariah.
Separating the Islam-based knowledge from other types of knowledge (philosophy, mysticism, etc.)
Making understanding of Islam easier and more straight forward (but not simplistic)
Concept of Itmam Al-Hujjah (as described above) and its implications for the present day.
For explanation and elaboration on any of the above points, please refer to www.understanding-Islam.org or other items in the bibliography.
Some of the behavioural outcomes of the UI approach
The approach is a research based approach, no views are blindly followed
The approach is a Non-Sectarian one, and rejects to assume any sectarian title other than Muslim
Scholars who are studying and adopting this approach are continuously revising their understanding of Islam.
Being a research based approach to understanding Islam, we are not hesitant to use the phrase "we don't know" where applicable.
Utmost respect and learning attitude is held towards other approaches to understanding Islam and scholars who adopt these approaches
Why do we need this approach?
Every Muslim is aware that the Qur'an has a pivotal role in our religion.
And hold fast to the rope of God together and do not become disunited.... (3:103)
The Holy Prophet (pbuh) has explained that the Book of God is the rope of God that stretches from Heavens to Earth.
The natural outcome of this directive is that whenever Muslims encounter a difference of opinion, we resort to the Qur'an to find its solution. Unfortunately the irony is that we have gross difference of opinions concerning the interpretations of the Qur'an itself, in many instances providing contrasting explanations about its directives. This also occurred because Muslims based their Qur'anic interpretations on unsubstantiated Ahadith, different philosophies and mysticism. They also resorted to blind following of individual interpretations by religious scholars and were reluctant to question their understandings and interpretations. Furthermore the society did not encourage Intellectual inquisition towards the then accepted interpretations and beliefs about religion, to question them was looked upon as being un-Islamic. In addition to intellectual differences, the more serious issue raised by this multiplicity of interpretations of the Qur'an is that this forms the basis of the vast majority of sectarianism in Islam. Different religious groups have interpreted Qur'anic verses in different chosen ways to justify their beliefs and approaches. Each sect has adopted its own interpretation because isolating a verse from its context can associate multiple meanings to it.
Understanding Islam approach based on the thinking pioneered by Imam Farahi, aspires that when the Qur'an is interpreted in light of its theme, context and sequence, with a firm grasp of its language and taking into account the time of revelation and the phase of the prophetic mission, it reduces possibilities of different understandings from the Qur'an because it uses the Qur'an itself as the first scale for understanding the Qur'an.
According to Imam Farahi:
"There is no justification or place for more than one interpretation in the Qur'an".
Amin Ahsan Islahi in his Qur'anic commentary, Tadabur-i-Qur'an, writes:
"I have given the complete and required importance to the coherence of it's (i.e. The Qur'an's) text. Hence I have utilised the same diction and assertions in its entirety. In fact, I was forced to use the same diction and assertions, because after applying coherence, (The Qur'an) does not allow you to wonder in various valleys (i.e. different conclusions). The true fact becomes explicit right in front (of one's eyes in such a manner) that unless you are ignorant or blind you would not be able to deny it."
The text of the Qur'an will not accept multiplicity of explanations. This fulfils the obligatory and essential basis for the claim of the Qur'an that it is a balance in whose scales; everything must be weighed in order to ascertain the extent of truth; and criterion or distinguisher of good and evil which like a sieve sifts out good from evil.
Understanding Islam UK (UIUK)
UIUK is a UK based non-political organisation. It is the UK representative of the team of understanding Islam web site www.understanding-Islam.org founded and run by Moiz Amjad, one of the students of Javed Ahmad Ghamidi and an affiliate of Al Mawrid Institute of Islamic Sciences.
The UIUK's main goal is to seek, follow and clear the path of Truth. It aims to present and promote a true understanding of Islam (based on the approach that was described in this booklet).
UIUK is a humble effort to develop and promote a better understanding of Islam. The mission is to disseminate the message of Islam in truth and to the best of our abilities while passing on the knowledge as to how we have come to understand it. The message is for every person willing to seek the truth.

Bibliography
www.Understanding-Islam.org (Our mother web site)
www.studying-islam.org (One line course for studying Islam covering all the major aspects of religion)
www.aminahsanislahi.org (Web site detailing life history and achievements of both Amin Ahsan Islahi and Imam Farahi)
Mizan by Javed Ahmad Ghamidi (2002)
www.al-mawrid.org (official web site of Al-Mawrid institute of Islamic sciences)
www.monthly-Renaissance.com (journal about Islamic teachings and highlights current problems and issues facing the Muslims and suggests possible solutions)
www.Ghamidi.org (tells about the life, personality, achievements and religious works of Javed Ahmad Ghamidi)

Directives of the Shari`ah Regarding Edibles

The Basic Principle

The basic underlying purpose and direction of all the directives of the Islamic Shari`ah<sup>[1]</sup> is the purification and cleansing of the human mind, body and soul. It is with this basic stress in its general directives that the Shari`ah also requires man to keep in perspective the criterion of the 'good' and the 'bad'; the 'fit' and the 'unfit'; the 'clean' and the 'unclean' in his selection of what may and may not to be eaten. The Qur'an (Al-Maaidah 5: 4) says:

All things suitable [for eating] have been permitted to you.

Thus, the stipulation of the criterion of the 'suitable' and the 'unsuitable' is the basic guidance of the Shari`ah regarding the lawful and the prohibited in edibles<sup>[2]</sup>. The Shari`ah has generally considered this basic guidance to be sufficient for man. In fact, this is the reason why the Shari`ah has not felt the need to give an exhaustive list of what is suitable for eating and what is not, as man's natural inclinations and instincts generally have correctly guided him in making the decision. History bears witness to the fact that man has generally not felt attracted toward serving the flesh of wild and carnivorous animals, birds of prey and certain insects<sup>[3]</sup> on his table. He has generally considered his horses, mules and dogs to be of domestic utility for him, rather than to serve his hunger. He has also remained absolutely clear about the 'unsuitability' of his own defecations and those of other living things. The same has also generally been the case of all such things that intoxicate him and affect his consciousness and his faculty of reasoning and understanding. As stated earlier, it is for this reason that the Shari`ah, after giving this basic guidance regarding the lawful and the prohibited in edibles, has not felt the need to give an exhaustive list of what man should and should not eat. The prohibition of canines, birds of prey^[4], such animals that due to their habit of eating filth develop a kind of stench in them^[5] and mules^[6] etc. that has been reported in some narratives ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) are, in fact, an explanation of this natural inclination and instinct of man. The prohibition of liquor and intoxicants also falls in the same category. At the time of the revelation of the Qur'an, when people repeatedly inquired about liquor, pointing out to some of its advantages, the Qur'an adamantly declared that the sin involved in drinking liquor far exceeds any of its advantages^[7]. Then, later on, in Surah Al-Maaidah, the Qur'an emphatically declared that drinking liquor, due to its potentially negative consequences is an ungodly and a satanic deed, which, under all circumstances, therefore, must be avoided. The Qur'an (Al-Maaidah 5: 90) says:

O you, who believe, liquor, gambling, animals slaughtered at shrines and food distributed by gambling through arrows are all unclean, satanic deeds, therefore refrain from them, so that you may be successful [in the test of this life].

All these directives of the Qur'an and those mentioned in narratives ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) are, basically, a reference to and a reminder of these natural instincts and inclinations of man. There, indeed, have been scattered instances where a particular society has ignored these natural instincts and inclinations and has deviated from them. Nevertheless, on the whole man has, generally, quite strictly conformed to these instincts and inclinations, in choosing between what should and should not be eaten. It is for this reason that the Shari`ah has not gone into the, already conformed with, details of what a man may and may not eat, and has, therefore, restricted its guidance to the few instances in which man could have confused right from wrong, had he taken a decision in the light, merely, of his natural instincts and inclinations. For example, being an omnivorous animal, should pig be grouped with the eatable grazing animals or the uneatable carnivorous animals? All animals are killed before being eaten. What if an animal dies a natural death? Should it now be grouped with the 'edibles' or the 'inedibles'? Should blood - being a part of an animal's body - be grouped with the edible parts of its body - like meat, fat, bones etc. - or inedible parts - like the residual defecation in its stomach? Does it make any difference that the animal is slaughtered without pronouncing God's name upon it or even if it is slaughtered for any other deity besides God? Man, it is obvious, could not have answered these questions, with any degree of certainty, without God's guidance, in this regard. Thus, for the guidance of man, God has given clear answers regarding these four items (i.e. flesh of swine, flesh of dead animals, flowing blood and animals slaughtered for other deities) and has grouped each of them with the inedible group of things. In fact, a close look at the directives of the Shari`ah shows that it has restricted its directives to these four items, about which man was not in a position to take a decision on his own, regarding whether these items should be grouped with the eatable things or the uneatable things. The Qur'an, in Al-An`aam 6: 145, says:

Say [O prophet]: 'In what has been revealed to me, I find nothing prohibited from the things that a person eats, except carrion, flowing blood, the flesh of swine - because these are all unclean things - or any flesh that has been sacrilegiously consecrated for anything other than God'. Nevertheless, whoever is driven by necessity, intending neither to sin nor to transgress, will find your Lord very Forgiving, Eternal in mercy.

At another instance (Al-Baqarah 2: 173), the Qur'an says:

Only carrion, blood, flesh of swine and that which is consecrated for anything other than God is prohibited for you. Even, in these things, whoever is driven by necessity, intending neither sin nor transgression, there shall be no sin upon him. Indeed God is extremely Forgiving, Eternal in mercy.

Exactly the same directive has once again been repeated in Al-Nahl 16: 115, with hardly any alteration in words. Notice the limiting style in all these instances. In the first case, the words "In what has been revealed to me, I find nothing prohibited from the things that a person eats, except..."^[8], while in the second verse, the opening word "only..."^[9] has clearly restricted the prohibitions prescribed by God, in the case of edibles, to the mentioned four items only.

The above explanation completely sums up the basic directives of the Shari`ah with regard to edibles. To avoid any confusion, there are, however, some explanations, clarifications and extensions of these basic directives, also given in the Qur'an. These clarifications and extensions are explained in the following paragraphs:

Extensions/Limitations of the Prohibition of Carrion

a) Animals that Die in an Accident or due to an Injury

As is clear from the above explanation, carrion - flesh of dead animals - was clearly prohibited by the Qur'an. Nevertheless, there could still have remained some doubt regarding whether this prohibition applies only to animals that die a natural death or would it also extend to animals that die because of an accident or an injury caused by other animals or by a fall etc. The Qur'an, in Al-Maaidah 5: 3 completely clarified the situation and removed all doubts that could have existed in this regard. It declared:

Carrion, blood, flesh of swine and that which is consecrated for anything other than God has been made unlawful for you. And [this includes animals] which die due to strangulation, due to an injury, due to a fall and due to being gored by [the horn of] another animal and those, which have been [partly] eaten by a wild animal - [all these are included in carrion,] except those [which are found alive and which] you properly slaughter.

Thus, according to the Qur'an, a dead animal, whatever may have been the cause of its death, must not be eaten.

b) Parts Cut-off from Living Animals

The prohibition regarding carrion will also apply to any part cut-off from a living animal, and, therefore, the cut-off part shall not be considered as eatable. At the time of Hijrah^[10], the people of Medinah used to cut off the humps of their camels and the fat in the tails of their rams for eating. When this practice was brought to the notice of the Prophet (pbuh), he did not approve of the practice. The Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said:

Whatever is cut-off from a living animal is [to be considered as] carrion. (Abu Dawood, Kitaab al-Sayd)

c) Regarding Dead Fish and Locusts

The word used in the Arabic language for carrion or the flesh of dead animals is(Maetah). In the Arabic language, the usage of this word is, traditionally, restricted. The word, for instance, is not used for dead fish or dead locusts.

Thus, Al-Zamakhshariy, the acknowledged linguist of the Arabic language, writes:

The word [for carrion] has been used [in the Qur'an] in its generally held connotation [rather than a literal connotation]. Notice, when someone says: "He ate 'Maetah' [i.e. carrion]", this does not bring to mind someone eating a dead fish or a dead locust, just as when one says: 'He drank blood', this would not bring to mind someone eating liver or the spleen. Thus, it is precisely on the basis of the generally held connotations of words that Muslim jurists have said that if a person has vowed to avoid meat, but later on eats fish, his vow shall not be rendered broken, even though [in a literal sense] he has, in fact, eaten meat. (Al-Kashaaf, Vol. 1, Pg. 215)

It is precisely on this basis that the Prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said:

Two animals even when dead and two kinds of blood are allowed for you to eat. As for the two animals that you can eat if they are dead, they are fish and locusts. As for the two bloods, they are liver and the spleen. (Ibn Maajah, Kitaab al-At`imah)

This is precisely what the words: "Its [i.e. the sea's] dead are allowable for eating" ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) imply. The "dead of the sea" in this narrative ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) is used for such fish of the sea, which were generally not construed by the word "Maetah" in the Arabic language, even though from a purely literal or a legal perspective, the word would apply to all dead animals.

d) "Tazkiyyah" - An Essential Condition

The words: "except those [among these animals, which] you properly slaughter", at the end of the referred part of the cited verse of Al-Maaidah 5: 3 clearly evidence the fact that it is only the method of 'proper slaughtering' of all such animals which need to be slaughtered for eating that renders such animals fit for eating. This proper slaughtering of an animal in the Arabic language is called "Tazkiyyah".

In the Arabic language, the term Tazkiyyah of an animal connotes draining of the blood from the animal through the infliction of an injury with a sharp-edged instrument, in such a way that the animal dies primarily due to loss of blood. In this manner, the body of the animal and its meat is completely relieved of the "uncleanness" of the blood. The two methods generally followed for attaining Tazkiyyah of an animal are known as "Zibh" or "Nah'r". The former is generally used for the "Tazkiyyah" of animals like goats, sheep, cows, hens etc., while the latter is generally used in the case of animals like camels. In "Zibh", an incision is made across the throat of the animal in such a way that its trachea (windpipe) and esophagus or the trachea and the jugular veins are severed. In "Nah'r", on the other hand, the trachea of the animal is pierced with a sharp-pointed spear-like instrument in such a way that it results in a gushing discharge of the blood and, in some time, renders the animal lifeless.

However, if due to any reason, it is not possible to adopt any of these two methods of attaining "Tazkiyyah", then it would suffice to use any other method of inflicting such an injury to the animal, which drains it of its blood. Once, when one of the companions of the Prophet (pbuh) asked him regarding what method of "Tazkiyyah" should one employ in a situation where he does not have a knife, the Prophet (pbuh) said:

Inflict an injury, which drains it of its blood, by whatever instrument you may and pronounce God's name upon it. (Abu Dawood, Kitaab al-Dhuhaayaa)

Animals killed by arrows, gunshots or any other method should also be considered in the light of the above explanation. Moreover, if a trained hunting animal - like trained hounds or hunting birds - while retrieving the prey, injures and kills it, it would still be considered allowed for eating and shall not be considered carrion^[11]. The Qur'an has clarified the issue in Al-Maaidah 5: 4. The Qur'an says:

They ask you regarding what they are allowed to eat. Say: 'All suitable things are allowed for you and also that which your hunting animals, whom you have taught of the knowledge that God gave you, [hunt for you]. Thus, eat of that which they have held back for you [without eating from it] and pronounce God's name on this. Fear God [and obey His commandments, for] indeed God is swift in reckoning.

As is clear from the style and the context of the verse - especially the preceding verse in which the Qur'an had already prohibited all animals that die due to being attacked and [partly] eaten by a wild animal (except if they are found alive and slaughtered in the proper way) - that this verse is a response to the questions asked regarding the position of such a hunted animal, which is killed or which dies due to an injury or a wound that it may have suffered while being retrieved by a properly trained hunting animal. The Qur'an, in response to this question, has declared that when the prey is killed or fatally injured by a properly trained hunting animal, it may be eaten. This actually implies that, according to the Qur'an, such a killing or injuring by a properly trained hunting animal is a substitute for other methods of attaining "Tazkiyyah" of the prey. However, in such a case, the Qur'an has qualified the permission with the condition that the trained hunting animal must not have eaten from the prey and should have held it back for its master. The words: "which they have held back for you" clearly point toward the stated condition. The Prophet (pbuh) has clarified this condition, which was inherent in the referred verse as follows:

When you let your dog loose on a prey, pronounce God's name at that time. If you find that the prey is still alive, then pronounce God's name upon it, while slaughtering it, while if you find that the dog has killed it, but has not eaten any part of it, then you can eat it, because this is what it has held back for you. However, if you find that the dog has partly eaten it, then you should not eat it, for this is what it has held back for itself. And if you find other dogs with your dog, and you find that the dogs have killed the prey, even though they have not eaten from it, you should not eat it, for you cannot be sure which of the dogs may have killed it.

Limitations on the Prohibition of Blood

Blood, as is clear from all the cited verses of the Qur'an is also included in the list of prohibitions of the Shari`ah. The Qur'an, in one of the verses cited above (Al-An`aam 6: 45), has also clarified that it is only the flowing blood, which has been prohibited. The words(i.e. flowing or flown blood) clearly point to this fact. The phrase 'flowing/flown blood' is used in its generally implied and construed connotation. According to this connotation, liver and spleen are not included in blood, even though they may, in fact, be composed mainly of blood. Furthermore, any static blood that may remain in the veins of the animal would also not be included in the stated prohibition.

Extensions of 'Consecrations for Other Deities'

The last among the four prohibitions mentioned in the Qur'an are those animals, which have been consecrated for anything besides God. It is quite clear from the cited verse of Al-An`aam<sup>[12]</sup> that the first three prohibitions of the Shari`ah - i.e. flesh of dead animals or carrion, flesh of swine and blood - are prohibited for their inherent physical uncleanness. However, in contrast to the first three prohibitions, the fourth prohibition is not because of any inherent uncleanness in the animal, but because of the disobedience and the sinfulness of the person sacrificing the animal. The Qur'an has referred to such consecrations of animals for other deities as being a 'clear disobedience' or 'sacrilegious act' because of the obvious polytheistic spirit involved in such wrongful consecrations. Such an action is, obviously, an evidence of the uncleanness of the beliefs of the person sacrificing the animal. Thus, in other words, this prohibition, in contrast to the first three prohibitions of the Qur'an, entails a spiritual rather than a physical uncleanness, which is, in fact, the case of the former three prohibitions. It is also quite predictable that any other spiritual uncleanness of a related kind in an animal or its meat should also render the animal equally prohibited as does its consecration for other, imaginary, deities. Thus, as an extension of the prohibition of an animal that has been consecrated for other deities, the Qur'an has mentioned a few things, which entail the same kind of spiritual uncleanness.

a) Slaughtering at Shrines & Food Won through Games of Wager

The Qur'an (Al-Maaidah 5: 3) says:

And also [prohibited are] those animals slaughtered at shrines and also that [food,] which is distributed by [gambling through] arrows, for these entail extreme disobedience.

As a predictable custom of polytheistic cultures, the Arabs had a number of shrines and altars for their deities where they used to slaughter animals, which according to their beliefs, won them the pleasures and the goodwill of these false deities. Due to the same spiritual uncleanness in such sacrifices as is found in animals consecrated for deities other than the One God, the Qur'an has grouped the two together and has placed them both in the list of prohibitions. The reference to the prohibition of animals slaughtered at shrines, after already having mentioned the prohibition of those which are slaughtered in the names of deities other than the One God is a clear evidence of the fact that the mere placement of the slaughter ritual at a shrine or an altar, renders such animals unfit for eating^[13].

The latter part of the verse^[14] refers to a common cultural tradition of the Arabs in which they would gamble on a slaughtered camel and distribute its meat through raffle using arrows. The Qur'an had already condemned and prohibited all gains from gambling and wager, and because the meat distributed through raffling was clearly a gain from wager, it was rendered unfit for eating. Furthermore, because of the spiritual, rather than the physical nature of uncleanness in such meat, it is placed with the meat of animals consecrated for deities other than God and those slaughtered at shrines and altars.

b) Slaughtering Without the Pronouncement of God's Name

If an animal is not slaughtered in God's name, even though it is not consecrated for other deities, it would still be grouped with the meat of animals consecrated for other deities and those slaughtered at shrines and altars. The Qur'an has termed refusal to take God's name on animals as "a grave disobedience" and "a sacrilegious act"^[15] and has thus grouped it with consecrating animals for deities other than God and with sacrificing animals at shrines and altars.

The Qur'an, in Al-An`aam 6: 121, declares:

And do not eat of that upon [the slaughter of] which God's name has not been pronounced, for that, indeed, is a grave disobedience. And these devils inspire their partners to debate with you, and if you [O people,] were to follow them, you would then, indeed, be polytheists.

Pronouncing God's name, while sacrificing animals, implies the acknowledgement of God's blessings, submission to His directives and being grateful and thankful toward Him. Obviously, no one other than God deserves to be included in this declaration; and a refusal to pronounce His name is clearly ingratitude and thanklessness toward Him. This pronouncement further implies the fact that life - even that of an animal - is sacred and sanctified. Our pronouncement of God's name at the time of slaughter implies that it is only with God's permission and His approval that we are depriving a living thing of its life. Seen from this perspective, refusal to take God's name at the time of slaughter or adding names of false deities with that of God at this time is not only a sign of disrespect toward the life that is being taken but also toward the sole source of all life - the One God. Finally, this pronouncement is also a sign of consecration of all life for the Sole Being that deserves this consecration. Slaughter, as is well known, has always been a part of worship rituals and a show of extreme reverence and salutations. Thus, the pronouncement of God's name - and only His name - is a declaration to the effect that all salutations, all reverence and all worship is owed only to Him, Who is the sole source of all the blessings that we have been bestowed with.

If the pronouncement of God's name is such an essential element in the slaughter ritual that its absence renders the animal prohibited in the Shari`ah, then, one might ask, what would be the position of an animal on the slaughter of which the pronouncement of God's name has unintentionally been missed. The referred verse of Al-An`aam, if closely examined, provides a clear answer to this question, as well. Those who know the Arabic language can easily appreciate that due to the word "Lum" the phrase (mimma Lum yuzkarismallah `alaiyhe)<sup>[16]</sup> is no longer merely a simple negative clause. On the contrary, the word "Lum" has added a certain kind of stress in the negative aspect of this clause. Thus, now the phrase: (mimma Lum yuzkarismallah `alaiyhe) would apply only to those animals upon the slaughter of which God's name has intentionally not been pronounced or such pronouncement has been refused. In other words, the stated prohibition would not apply to a case where the pronouncement of God's name has, unintentionally, been missed.

Moreover, another question that may arise in one's mind relates to a situation of doubt. What should one do, if one is not certain whether God's name has been pronounced on an animal or not? In such a situation, if the slaughterer is a Muslim or ascribes to any such other creed which considers the pronouncement of God's name at the time of slaughter to be essential - as was the case of the Ahl e Kitaab (the Jews and the Christians) in the Arabian Peninsula, at the time of the revelation of the Qur'an and is still, generally, the case with the Jews and some Christians - then the meat would be eaten on the confidence that such a person would have pronounced God's name on his slaughter. Muslim, in his compilation of narratives ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh), reports:

According to Ayesha (ra) people from amongst the Bedouins would bring us meat. We used to be unsure whether they had pronounced God's name on such meat or not. The Prophet (pbuh), [when asked about such meat] said: 'Pronounce God's name upon the meat [as a Muslim should on every food] and eat it'.

On the contrary, if the slaughterer ascribes to a creed, which does not consider the pronouncement of God's name at the time of slaughtering an animal to be essential, then, obviously, it would no longer be a matter of doubt regarding whether or not God's name was pronounced on the animal. In such a case, a Muslim, because of the clear directives of the Shari`ah, should consider the meat prohibited for eating^[17].

c) Slaughter of the Polytheists and non-adherents to Creeds Based on the Teachings of a Prophet

To be grouped with the allowable animals, the animal should be slaughtered by a person, who believes in One God, does not ascribe false partners to Him and is an adherent and follower of any one of the known creeds that are based on the teachings of a true prophet of God. Thus, besides the animals slaughtered by the Muslims, the Qur'an has restricted the permission of edible meat to that of the animals slaughtered by the Ahl e Kitaab (i.e. the people of the Book - the Jews and the Christians). The Qur'an, in Al-Maaidah 5: 5, declares:

Now, all suitable things have been rendered fit for you to eat and also the food of the people of the book is fit for you to eat and your food is fit for them.

It is quite clear that the factors, which make the Ahl e Kitaab distinct from other creeds and similar to the Muslims - due to which only their food, contrary to the other's, has been rendered fit for the Muslims - are: 1) belief in God; 2) strict restraint from knowingly ascribing partners to God; and 3) ascribing to a creed that is based on the teachings of an established prophet of God^[18]. Thus, it logically follows that the absence of any of those factors, the presence of which in the Ahl e Kitaab qualifies their food as allowable for Muslims, shall render the food prohibited for Muslims. In other words, an animal slaughtered by a person, who:

• does not believe in God; or
• ascribes partners to the One God; or
• is not an adherent to a creed that is based on the teachings of an established prophet of God

shall be grouped with those animals that entail a grave spiritual uncleanness and is, thus, prohibited for eating.

An Exception Regarding the Prohibitions

The aforementioned list of prohibitions is to be strictly followed under all circumstances. The only exception is where a person is forced by necessity into benefiting from any of the stated prohibitions. The Qur'an has, generally, referred to this exception in the following words (Al-Baqarah 2: 173):

Nevertheless, whoever [eats of these things], due to being driven by necessity, intending neither sin nor transgression, there shall be no sin upon him. Indeed God is extremely Forgiving, Eternal in mercy.

The same words have been repeated in Al-Nahl 16: 115. However, in Al-Maaidah 5: 3, the Qur'an has altered the words by adding a slight clarification of the phrase 'driven by necessity'. The related part of Al-Maaidah 5: 3 reads as:

Then, whoever, being forced by hunger [eats of these things], without the inclination toward sin, then indeed God is very forgiving, eternal in mercy.

As is clear from the style and the words of this exception to the rules regarding the prohibitions, it refers to a situation where a person is forced to save his life by eating something which is clearly prohibited by the Shari`ah. However, even under such circumstances where a person is forced to take advantage of any of the express prohibitions of the Shari`ah, he should do so with dislike and abhorrence, rather than with the inclination of his heart. This is what the words 'intending neither sin nor transgression' and 'without the inclination toward sin' imply in the two cited verses, respectively. The permission to take advantage of the express prohibitions of the Shari`ah, in the presence of these words, should be purely with the spirit to save one's life, which obviously implies that it should be restricted to the quantity necessary to save one's life and it should, under no circumstances, exceed this limit.

The Prohibition Applies only to Eating

As the related verses of the Qur'an clearly imply, the prohibition of all the stated items is only with reference to their consumption as edibles. All these things can be used for purposes other than consumption as edibles. This is also reported in one of the sayings ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh). The narrative has been reported as:

The slave-girl of Maimoonah (ra) was given a goat in charity. The goat died. The Prophet (pbuh) passed by the goat and said: 'Why did you not skin it, so that you may have tanned its skin and benefited from it?' They replied: 'It is carrion'. The Prophet (pbuh) said: 'It is only prohibited for eating.'

The Law at a Glance

The following section summarizes the directives of the Shari`ah relating to the lawful and the prohibited in edibles:

• The basic guiding principle in considering an item prohibited/lawful for eating is that all things suitable for eating are permitted, while those, which are not suitable for eating should be refrained from. Man, through his natural instincts and inclinations, has generally taken the correct decision and is therefore not in need for an exhaustive list of items that he may or may not use as edible. Canines, birds of prey, such animals that due to their habit of eating filth develop a kind of stench in them, mules, horses, liquor and other intoxicants etc. belong to the category of things that man has generally not considered suitable for eating;
• As a guidance regarding the things, which man may have mistaken as eatable, the Shari`ah has prohibited:

1. Carrion or the flesh of dead animals;
2. Blood;
3. Flesh of swine; and
4. Anything consecrated for other deities.

• Some explanations given by the Shari`ah regarding the prohibition of carrion include:

1. All animals that die in an accident or due to an injury shall be grouped with carrion;
2. Parts cut off from a living animal shall be grouped with carrion;
3. Dead fish and locusts shall not be grouped with carrion and can, therefore, be eaten;
4. 'Tazkiyyah' or the proper bleeding of an animal is an essential requirement for it to be considered allowable. Any animal that is killed without the fulfillment of the condition of 'Tazkiyyah' shall be grouped with carrion.
5. The animals that are retrieved by trained hounds, hunting birds or any other species trained for the purpose are allowed for eating, even if the animal is injured or killed by the retrieving hound or bird etc.

• The prohibition of blood does not apply to:

1. Any static residual blood in the veins of a slaughtered animal; and
2. The liver and the spleen.

• Some details given by the Shari`ah, regarding the prohibition of animals consecrated for other deities, include:

1. Animals slaughtered at shrines and altars are also prohibited;
2. Animals, on the slaughter of which God's name is intentionally not pronounced are also prohibited; and
3. Animals slaughtered by polytheists and non-adherents to any creed, which is based on the teachings of an established prophet of God are also prohibited;

• Any food earned through prohibited means (like stealing, gambling etc.) is prohibited;
• If a person is driven by hunger, he may eat of any of these prohibited items to save his life. However, in so doing, the person should neither be inclined toward crossing the limits set by God, nor toward taking more than what is necessary to save his life;
• All the listed items are prohibited only for use as edibles. Their parts may be brought under any other use, except as edibles.

Outline of the Mosaic Law

An outline of the Mosaic Law relating to edibles follows:

1- The basic Criterion

Deuteronomy 14: 3 prohibits all abhorrent and unclean things for eating. The Bible says:

You shall not eat any abhorrent thing (Deuteronomy 14: 3)

The Encyclopedia Judaica has explained this aspect of the Mosaic Dietary Laws in the following words:

The Bible classifies those animals permitted for consumption as tahor ("clean"), and those prohibited as tame ("unclean"). The distinction is traced to the wording of Noah's instructions. "Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee seven and seven, each with his mate; and of the beasts that are not clean, two (and two), each with his mate" (Gen. 7:2). The criterion seems to have been the animal's sacrificial suitability, rather than pagan taboos. (Judaism Practice, Dietary Laws, Animals, Encyclopedia Judaica CD, version 1, Judaica Multimedia (Israel) Ltd.)

Then, further elaborating the application of the same criterion on birds, the Encyclopedia writes:

Leviticus 11:13-19 lists 20 "unclean" birds, and Deuteronomy 14:12-18 enumerates 21. From these two lists, the rabbis compiled a total of 24 "unclean" birds (Hul. 63a-b). All birds of prey are forbidden, such as the vulture, the osprey, the kite, the falcon, the raven, and the hawk. The Bible does not list "clean" birds. (Judaism Practice, Dietary Laws, Birds, Encyclopedia Judaica CD, version 1, Judaica Multimedia (Israel) Ltd.)

Adam Clarke, while explaining Genesis 7: 2 writes:

So we find the distinction between clean and unclean animals existed long before the Mosaic law. This distinction seems to have been originally designed to mark those animals which were proper for sacrifice and food, from those that were not. See Leviticus 11. (Clarke's Commentary on the Bible, CD, Complete Christian Collection, Packard Technologies, 1999)

2- Carrion

The Bible says:

You shall not eat anything which dies of itself. (Deuteronomy 14: 21)

Then again, in Leviticus, the Bible says:

He shall not eat an animal which dies or is torn by beasts, becoming unclean by it; I am the LORD. (Leviticus 22: 8)

The 'Jamieson, Faussett & Brown commentary on the Old Testament', while explaining Leviticus 22: 8, says:

The feelings of nature revolt against such food. It might have been left to the discretion of the Hebrews, who it may be supposed (like the people of all civilized nations) would have abstained from the use of it without any positive interdict. But an express precept was necessary to show them that whatever died naturally or from disease, was prohibited to them by the operation of that law which forbade them the use of any meat with its blood. (Jamieson, Faussett & Brown's commentary on the Old Testament, CD version, Master Christian Library - Version 8, Ages Corporation)

"Nevelah^[19]" or "Nebelah", in the Jewish law implies animals that have died for reasons other than the ritual slaughter. The Encyclopedia Judaica writes:

NEVELAH descriptive noun for any animal, bird, or creature which has died as a result of any process other than valid ritual slaughter (shehitah).

The Pentateuch forbids the consumption of such meat... (Judaism Practice, Nevelah, Encyclopedia Judaica CD, version 1, Judaica Multimedia (Israel) Ltd.)

It is clear from the cited part of the Encyclopedia that according to the Jewish law, all animals that die without the process of 'valid ritual slaughtering' are 'nevelah' and therefore prohibited for eating. However, fish and locusts can be eaten even without the 'valid ritual slaughter'. The Talmud says:

Cattle are [in a forbidden state until] rendered permitted by slaughtering... Fish, on the other hand, are [always in a permitted state, for they are] permitted by the mere taking up... (Talmud, Mas. Chullin 67b, Soncino Talmud, version II, CD version, Davka Corporation and Judaica Press Inc.)

The Talmud further elaborates:

The blood of fish and locust may deliberately be eaten! (Talmud, Mas. K'rithoth 21b, Soncino Talmud, version II, CD version, Davka Corporation and Judaica Press Inc.)

It is further clarified in a footnote to a Mishna^[20]:

For the purpose of elucidation, this Rabbinic ruling must be cited: carrion, whether of wild animals, clean or unclean cattle, imparts uncleanness by contact and carrying. The carrion of a clean bird has but the one uncleanness ? that when there is an olive's bulk thereof in the eater's gullet (v. Toh. I, 1). The carrion of an unclean bird, of fish, clean and unclean, and of locusts, have no uncleanness at all. (Footnote on Mishna - Mas. Uktzin Chapter 3, Mishna 3, Soncino Talmud, version II, CD version, Davka Corporation and Judaica Press Inc.)

Regarding fish, the Encyclopedia Judaica writes:

In Jewish tradition only fish that have scales and fins are permitted for consumption. They need not be slaughtered ritually (shehitah) and their blood is not prohibited. (Fish and Fishing, Fish in the Halakhah, Encyclopedia Judaica CD, version 1, Judaica Multimedia (Israel) Ltd.)

Parts cut off from living animals are also considered prohibited in the Jewish law. The Talmud reads:

"Our Rabbis taught: 'But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat' (Genesis IX, 4), this prohibits flesh cut from the living animal. R. Hanina b. Gamaliel said: It also prohibits blood drawn from a living animal." (Talmud, Mas. Sanhedrin 59a, Soncino Talmud, version II, CD version, Davka Corporation and Judaica Press Inc.)

Furthermore, like "Tazkiyyah" in the Islamic Shari`ah, "Koshering" - i.e. removing all possible blood from the slaughtered animal - is an essential element for considering the animal allowable for eating. The Judaica writes:

The prohibition against the consumption of blood (Lev. 7:26-27; 17:10-14) is the basis for the process of koshering meat. The purpose of the process is to draw out and drain the meat of non-veinal blood, before it is cooked. The blood can be removed either by salting the meat, or by roasting it over an open flame. (Judaism Practice, Dietary Laws, Koshering, Encyclopedia Judaica CD, version 1, Judaica Multimedia (Israel) Ltd.)

3- Blood

The Bible says:

... you shall eat no kind of blood, whether it is of bird or of beast, in any of your dwellings. (Leviticus 7: 26)

Then again:

However you may slaughter animals and eat their meat in all your gates, to your heart's desire, according to the blessing of the Lord, your God which he has given you; the unclean and the clean may eat of it, as they do of the gazelle and the deer. Only you shall not eat the blood; you shall pour it upon the earth like water. (Deuteronomy 12: 15 - 16)

According to the Encyclopedia Judaica:

In the Bible there is an absolute prohibition on the consumption of blood. The blood of an animal must be drained before the flesh may be eaten (Lev. 3:17; 7:26; 17:10-14; Deut. 12:15-16, 20-24). (Judaism Practice, Blood, Encyclopedia Judaica CD, version 1, Judaica Multimedia (Israel) Ltd.)

Consumption of blood, as is clear from the Encyclopedia, is considered a punishable crime, in Judaism. The Encyclopedia writes:

The prohibition of blood enjoined in the Bible is defined by the Talmud as referring to the blood of cattle, beasts, and fowl, and prescribes the punishment of karet^[21] for the consumption of the minimum amount of the volume of an olive (Ker. 5:1). The blood for which one is so liable is "the blood with which the soul emerges," i.e., the lifeblood, but not the blood which oozes out subsequently, or blood in the meat. Blood of all other creatures, fish, locusts, and human blood, is permitted according to the rabbinical interpretations of biblical law, although according to one source (Tanna de-Vei Eliyahu Rabbah, 15) human blood is equally forbidden by the Bible. (Judaism Practice, Blood, Blood in Halakhah, Encyclopedia Judaica CD, version 1, Judaica Multimedia (Israel) Ltd.)

It is, in fact, the severity of the crime involved in eating blood that a complex process of completely draining the blood from an animal is adopted to ensure that no sin is involved in eating of the slaughtered animal. Explaining this process of Koshering (i.e. draining the blood from the animal), the Encyclopedia Judaica writes:

The prohibition against the consumption of blood (Lev. 7:26-27; 17:10-14) is the basis for the process of koshering meat. The purpose of the process is to draw out and drain the meat of non-veinal blood, before it is cooked. The blood can be removed either by salting the meat, or by roasting it over an open flame.

The salting process is begun by fully immersing the meat and bones in clean, cold water (in a vessel used exclusively for this purpose), for 30 minutes. The purpose of this operation is to open the pores, and remove any blood on the surface, thus enabling the salt to draw the blood out of the softened fibers of the meat. The meat is then laid out on a special grooved or perforated board, which is slanted, in order to allow the blood to flow down. It is then sprinkled with salt. The salt should be of medium texture; neither fine (which melts away), nor coarse (which falls off). Poultry should be opened and must be salted inside and out. The meat is then left to stand, for one hour, after which it is washed two or three times in cold water. In an emergency, i.e., when the meat is intended for a sick person or when time is short on the eve of Sabbath, the periods of immersion and salting may be reduced to 15 and 30 minutes respectively.

The salting process cannot be used if more than 72 hours have elapsed since the time of the shehitah. Such meat can only be koshered by roasting over an open flame, a process which is considered to be more effective in removing the blood than salting. It is, however, customary to salt the meat a little, even if it is to be roasted over an open flame.

Before koshering, the vein which runs along the front groove of the neck must be removed or cut in several places. The heart, too, is cut in several places and the tip is cut off so that the blood may drain. The gizzard is cut open and cleaned before koshering. Salting is not considered effective enough to kosher the liver, which is full of blood. It is therefore, sprinkled with salt, cut across or pierced several times, and placed on or under an open flame, until it changes color, or a crust forms. (Judaism Practice, Dietary Laws, Koshering, Encyclopedia Judaica CD, version 1, Judaica Multimedia (Israel) Ltd.)

4- Flesh of Swine

The Bible says:

... and the pig, for though it divides the hoof, thus making a split hoof, it does not chew cud, it is unclean to you. (Leviticus 11: 7)

Adam Clarke, while explaining Leviticus 11: 7 writes:

And the swine [chazir], one of the most gluttonous, libidinous, and filthy quadrupeds in the universe; and, because of these qualities, sacred to the Venus of the Greeks and Romans, and the Friga of our Saxon ancestors; and perhaps on these accounts forbidden, as well as on account of its flesh being strong and difficult to digest, affording a very gross kind of aliment, apt to produce cutaneous, scorbutic, and scrofulous disorders, especially in hot climates. (Notes on Leviticus 11: 7, Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible, Power BibleCD, Ver. 2.5, Online Bible Inc.)

According to John Wesley's Notes on the Old and the New Testaments:

the swine - It is a filthy, foul-feeding animal, and it lacks one of the natural provisions for purifying the system, "it cheweth not the cud"; in hot climates indulgence in swine's flesh is particularly liable to produce leprosy, scurvy, and various cutaneous eruptions. It was therefore strictly avoided by the Israelites. Its prohibition was further necessary to prevent their adopting many of the grossest idolatries practised by neighboring nations. (Notes on Leviticus 11: 7, John Wesley's notes on the Old and the New Testaments, Power BibleCD, Ver. 2.5, Online Bible Inc.)

5- Consecrations for Other Deities

The Bible says:

Whoever sacrifices to any god, other than the LORD alone, shall be devoted to destruction. (Exodus 22: 20)

It says in the Talmud:

Mishnah. That which is slaughtered by a gentile^[22] is Nebelah and defiles by carrying. (Talmud Mas. Chullin 13a, Soncino Talmud, version II, CD version, Davka Corporation and Judaica Press Inc.)

While explaining the cited part of the Mishnah, the Talmud says:

"And defiles by carrying". Is not this obvious? Since it is nebelah [it follows that] it defiles by carrying! Raba answered: This is the interpretation. This animal defiles by carrying, but there is another [similar] case where the animal even defiles [men and utensils that are] in the same tent. Which is that? It is the case of an animal slaughtered as a sacrifice to idols. This then is in accordance with the view held by R. Judah b. Bathyra. (Talmud Mas. Chullin 13b, Soncino Talmud, version II, CD version, Davka Corporation and Judaica Press Inc.)

It might be of interest to note that the prohibition of blood, carrion and animals consecrated to idols is also mentioned in the New Testament. Acts 15: 20 says:

but that we write to them that they abstain from things contaminated by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood.

1Corinthians 10: 28 reads as:

But if anyone says to you, "This is meat sacrificed to idols," do not eat it, for the sake of the one who informed you, and for conscience' sake.

Thus, the prohibition of blood, carrion and animals consecrated for idols was also maintained and honored by all the Christian creeds until the 8^th Century. According to John Wesley's Notes on the Old and the New Testaments:

Blood - The eating of which was never permitted the children of God from the beginning of the world. Nothing can be clearer than this. For, 1. From Adam to Noah no man ate flesh at all; consequently no man then ate blood. 2. When God allowed Noah and his posterity to eat flesh, he absolutely forbade them to eat blood; and accordingly this, with the other six precepts of Noah, was delivered down from Noah to Moses. 3. God renewed this prohibition by Moses, which was not repealed from the time of Moses till Christ came. 4. Neither after his coming did any presume to repeal this decree of the Holy Ghost, till it seemed good to the bishop of Rome so to do, about the middle of the eighth century. 5. From that time those Churches which acknowledged his authority held the eating of blood to be an indifferent thing. But, 6. In all those Churches which never did acknowledge the bishop of Rome's authority, it never was allowed to eat blood; nor is it allowed at this day. This is the plain fact; let men reason as plausibly as they please on one side or the other. (Notes on Acts 15: 29, John Wesley's notes on the Old and the New Testaments, Power BibleCD, Ver. 2.5, Online Bible Inc.)

According to the People's New Testament Commentary:

That they abstain from the pollutions of idols. Four items are mentioned, which are all embraced in the apostolic letter as things forbidden. They were four common customs of the Gentile world, and matters on which there should be a clear understanding. The first does not mean only to refrain from worshiping idols, or eating meat offered in idol sacrifice, but from all the pollutions of the system of idolatry. Licentiousness and drunkenness received a sanction from religion. See Lecky's European Morals, chapter V., and Conybeare and Howson's Paul, chapter IV.

From fornication. Chastity was the exception instead of the rule among Gentiles at this period.

From things strangled. Because in strangling the blood was retained in the flesh.

From blood. The use of blood was prohibited by the Mosaic law (Le 17:14; De 12:16,23), and for wise reasons this prohibition was extended to Gentiles. The Roman epicures were wont to drown fowls in wine and then use the flesh. It was a common thing to drink wine mingled with blood. The only way to strike at these savage practices was to prohibit its use.

(Notes on Acts 15: 20, People's New Testament Commentary, Power BibleCD, Ver. 2.5, Online Bible Inc.)

As far as the pronouncement of God's name before slaughtering the animal is concerned, there is sufficient evidence to believe that it is a regular practice of the Jewish community, even though the exact words of the particular benediction offered at the time of slaughter could not be found. As a principle, benefiting from all good things in life must be preceded by a blessing. The Encyclopedia of Judaism says:

Pronouncing this benediction [reference is to Grace Before Meals] accords with the rabbinic view that "it is forbidden and sacrilegious for anyone to enjoy [the good things] of this world without a blessing (Ber. 35a), and that failure to recite a benediction over food is tantamount to "defrauding the Almighty" (Tosef. Ber. 4.1) (The Encyclopedia of Judaism, Grace Before Meals, Davka Corporation)

The Encyclopedia Judaica says:

The act of shehitah [i.e. ritual slaughter] is preceded by a benediction. (Judaism Practice, Shehitah, Encyclopedia Judaica CD, version 1, Judaica Multimedia (Israel) Ltd.)

The same information is also given in the Encyclopedia of Judaism:

The shohet [i.e. the person performing the shehitah] pronounces a special blessing before slaughtering, and one blessing suffices for the slaughter of many animals at one time. (The Encyclopedia of Judaism, Shehitah, Davka Corporation)

The above information, combined with the fact that all Jewish blessings and benedictions, as a rule, must entail God's name^[23], should suffice as evidence to the fact that one of the elements in the ritual slaughter to be valid, according to the Jewish Law, is the pronouncement of God's name before the actual act of slaughtering.

6- The Stated Prohibitions may be Used for Purposes Other than Eating

There seems to be some difference of opinion among the Talmudic scholars regarding deriving benefits, other than eating, from nevelah^[24] and other prohibited items. The Talmud says:

On the view of R. Meir who maintained,[to] a ger^[25] and a heathen alike, both selling and giving are permitted, it is well: since a verse is required to permit benefit from a nebelah, it follows that all other things forbidden in the Torah are forbidden in respect of both eating and [general] benefit. But according to R. Judah, who maintained, it comes from [the purpose of teaching that] the words are as they are written, whence does he know that all [other] things forbidden in the Torah are forbidden in respect of benefit? He deduces it from, [ye shall not eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field;] ye shall cast it to the dogs: 'it' you may cast to dogs, but you may not cast to dogs all [other] things forbidden in the Torah. And R. Meir? ? [He interprets:] 'it' you may cast to dogs, but you may not cast to dogs hullin killed in the Temple Court. And the other? ? [Benefit from] hullin killed in the Temple Court is not [forbidden] by Scriptural law. (Talmud Mas. Pesachim 21b - 22a, Soncino Talmud, version II, CD version, Davka Corporation and Judaica Press Inc.)

This difference of opinion is further elaborated in the following part of the Talmud:

Shall we say that it is dependent on Tannaim^[26]? [And the fat of that which dieth of itself, and the fat of that which is torn of beasts.] may be used for all service [: but ye shall in no wise eat of it]. Why is 'for all service' stated? For I might think, for the service of the Most High let it be permitted, but for secular service let it be forbidden; therefore it is stated, 'for all service': this is the view of R. Jose the Galilean. R. Akiba said: For I might think, for secular service let it be clean, [but] for service of the Most High let it be unclean; therefore it is stated, 'for all service'. Now R. Jose the Galilean [holds] that in respect of uncleanness and cleanness a verse is not required, a verse being required only in respect of what is forbidden and what is permitted. While R. Akiba [maintains]: [in respect of] what is forbidden and what is permitted no verse is required, a verse being required only in respect of uncleanness and cleanness. Surely then they differ in this, [viz..]: R. Jose the Galilean holds, ye shall not eat' connotes both a prohibition of eating and a prohibition of benefit, and when the verse comes to permit nebelah, it comes in respect of benefit. While R. Akiba holds: it connotes a prohibition of eating, [but] does not connote a prohibition of benefit, and for what [purpose] does the verse come? In respect of uncleanness and cleanness! No: all hold that 'ye shall not eat' connotes both a prohibition of eating and a prohibition of benefit, but here they differ in this: R. Jose the Galilean holds, when nebelah was permitted, it [alone] was permitted, [whereas] its fat [heleb] and its sinew were not permitted, and [therefore] for what purpose is the verse required? It is in respect of permission for use. But R. Akiba holds: when nebelah was permitted, its fat [heleb] and its sinew too were permitted; hence for what purpose is the verse necessary? It is in respect of uncleanness and cleanness. (Talmud Mas. Pesachim 22a - 23b, Soncino Talmud, version II, CD version, Davka Corporation and Judaica Press Inc.)

However, the following verse of the Bible seems to clearly permit such usage:

Also the fat of an animal which dies and the fat of an animal torn by beasts may be put to any other use, but you must certainly not eat it. (Leviticus 7: 24)

The Christian Creed

The position of the Christian creed, with reference to the Mosaic Law was no different from the Jews themselves. Jesus (pbuh) in his legendary 'Sermon on the Mount' declares:

Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5: 17 - 19)

This express confirmation of the Mosaic Law and the commandments entailed in the Books of the Prophets, combined with the fact that Jesus (pbuh) did not, at any time during his ministry, expressly direct his disciples to disregard any of the teachings entailed in these books, is a sufficient evidence for us to believe that by default the Christians were, in fact, supposed to adhere to all the prohibitions mentioned in the Mosaic Law. It is precisely for this reason that Jesus (pbuh) did not bring a new Shari`ah regarding edibles.

Thus, whatever has been explained in the foregoing section regarding the Jewish Dietary Laws, applies to the Christian as well^[27].

Regarding the Additional Restrictions of the Judaic Law

Besides the aforementioned similarities in the Islamic Shari`ah and the Mosaic Law regarding what may or may not be used for eating, there were certain additional restrictions imposed by the earlier Law. It is beyond the scope of this article to enumerate all these additional restrictions regarding edibles, yet to get an idea about these restrictions, one may only look at the law relating to the act of slaughter (Shehitah).

The Judaica writes:

Specific regulations govern the method by which an animal must be slaughtered before it is permitted. So complex and minute are the regulations, that the slaughter must be carried out by a carefully trained and licensed shohet. It is his duty both to slaughter the animal, and to carry out an examination (bedikah). Should a defect be found in some of the organs, such as the brain, the windpipe, the esophagus, the heart, the lungs, or the intestines, the animal is terefah, and forbidden for consumption. Defects are normally classified under eight categories (Hul. 43a): nekuvah, perforated organ walls; pesukah, split pipes; netulah, missing limbs; haserah, missing or defective organs; keru'ah, torn walls or membrane covers or organs; derusah, a poisonous substance introduced into the body, when mauled by a wild animal; nefulah, shattering by a fall; shevurah, broken or fractured bones. It is assumed in the Talmud that any of these defects would lead to the death of the animal within one year (Hul. 3:1; see below). Only if the animal has none of these injuries, is it pronounced kasher.^[28]

Then again, with the prohibition of nevelah - flesh of a dead animal - animals that have suffered an injury which can cause death - within a specific time (generally, one year) - even though the animal has not yet died, renders the animal unfit for eating. The Judaica writes:

It is forbidden to eat either a nevelah (an animal that dies a natural death, or that has been killed by any method other than shehitah; Deut. 14:21), and a terefah (an animal that has been torn by a wild beast; Ex. 22:30). The term terefah is also applied to an animal suffering from an injury which may lead within a specific time to its death (see above). Such an animal is absolutely prohibited for consumption. The Talmud (Hul. Chap. 3) describes over 70 such injuries and lesions (see also Sh. Ar., YD 29-60; Maim. Yad, Shehitah, 10:9), which Maimonides describes as "the limit" and which, he says "must not be increased even though it should be found by scientific investigation that other injuries are dangerous to the life of the animal" (Maim. Yad, ibid., 10:12), or diminished "even if it should appear by scientific investigation that some are not fatal; one must go only by what the sages have enumerated" (Maim. Yad, ibid., 10:13).

All these restrictions were removed in the final Shari`ah. It was, in fact, the removal of such restrictions, which the Qur'an (Al-Aa`raaf 7: 157) has referred to in the following words:

[The true believers are they] who are following the messenger - the Unlettered Prophet - whom they find mentioned in the Torah and the Gospel. He enjoins righteousness upon them and forbids them from evil. He makes suitable things lawful to them and prohibits all that is unsuitable. He relieves them of their burdens and of the shackles that had weighed upon them. Thus, those who have believed in him and have honored him and have aided him and have followed the light sent down with him, are the ones that shall indeed triumph.

© Copyright October 2000. All Rights Reserved with the Author

---

^[1] The divine law entailed in the Qur'an and the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh).

^[2] At another instance while reminding His favor on the Ahl e Kitaab, which was inherent in the advent of the last Prophet (pbuh), God declares:

He [i.e. the Prophet (pbuh)] allows them the suitable and prohibits for them the unsuitable and removes the burdens and the shackles that have remained upon them [in the past]. (Al-Aa`raaf: 7: 157)

^[3] Like lions, tigers, elephants, eagles, vultures, crows, snakes, scorpions etc.

^[4] As reported in Muslim, Kitaab al-Sayed.

^[5] Al-Nasaaiy, Kitaab al-Dhuhaaya. Such animals are termed as "Jallaalah" in the Arabic language.

^[6] Bukhari, Kitaab al-Zabaaih.

^[7] Al-Baqarah 2: 219.

^[8] This is an exact translation of the Arabic words used in the referred verse:

^[9] The Arabic word used in this verse is . The same word is also used in the begining of Al-Nahl 16: 115.

^[10] i.e. the migration of the Prophet (pbuh) from Mekkah to Medinah.

^[11] However, if the prey dies not because of any injury inflicted by the hound, but due merely to fear or due to any other reason, it would then be considered carrion and should, therefore, not be eaten. Likewise, if the prey is still alive when retrieved, it would then, obviously, have to be slaughtered in the prescribed manner.

^[12] 6: 145, Say [O prophet]: 'In what has been revealed to me, I find nothing prohibited from the things that a person eats, except carrion, flowing blood, the flesh of swine - because these are all unclean things - or any flesh that has been sacrilegiously consecrated for anything other than God. Nevertheless, whoever is driven by necessity, intending neither to sin nor to transgress, will find your Lord very Forgiving, Eternal in mercy'.

^[13] Had the prohibition in such cases also been restricted to those animals, which are slaughtered in the name of deities other than God, there was, obviously, no need to mention these separately, after mentioning the prohibition of animals sacrificed in the name of other deities.

^[14] that [food,] which is distributed by [gambling through] arrows.

^[15] In the same way, as it had previously termed the act of consecrating animals for other deities, performing the slaughter ritual at shrines and altars and of gambling on an animal's meat.

^[16] "... [any part] of that upon [the slaughter of] which God's name has not been pronounced".

^[17] Some people are of the view that even if it is known, with certainty, that God's name has not been pronounced on the animal, a Muslim may eat of it after pronouncing God's name upon its meat. The cited verse of Al-An`aam does not support this view. The verse clearly directs the Muslims to refrain from eating any part of an animal upon which God's name has not been mentioned. The words of the verse clearly imply that God's name should be pronounced at the time of the slaughter of the animal. If such is not the case and if God's name has, intentionally, not been pronounced at the time of the slaughter, then the verse strictly prohibits a Muslim from eating any part of such an animal. No one, who knows the Arabic language can take the verse as directing the Muslims that if God's name has not been pronounced at the time of slaughter, they should, then, pronounce it, before eating its meat.

^[18] As shall be shown later in this article, this particular quality of the Ahl e Kitaab - i.e. their ascription to a creed, which is based on the teachings of an established prophet of God - also creates remarkable similarities in the directives regarding what should and should not be considered fit for eating. This seems to be one of the basic reasons in allowing the food of the Ahl e Kitaab.

^[19] Hebrew, lit: "Carcass".

^[20] The oldest authoritative postbiblical collection and codification of Jewish oral laws, systematically compiled by numerous scholars over a period of about two centuries. (Encyclopedia Britannica, Mishna)

^[21] The halakhah explains karet as premature death (Sifra, Emor, 14:4), and a baraita (MK 28a; TJ, Bik. 2:1, 64b) more explicitly as: "death at the age of 50," but some amoraim hold that it refers to "death between the ages of 50 and 60." (Judaism Practice, Karet, Encyclopedia Judaica CD, version 1, Judaica Multimedia (Israel) Ltd.)

^[22] This, obviously, implies that animals slaughtered by idolators are considered prohibited for eating as well.

^[23] The Encyclopedia of Judaism writes:

Of the different blessing patterns that have survived, one short form opens with the "Blessed are You, O Lord" wording, another short form incorporates it is its conclusion, while a third and longer form uses it at both the beginning and the end. In accordance with a rule laid down by the sages (Ber. 12a, 40b), no statutory benediction may exclude the mention of God's name (the Tetragrammaton YHVH pronounced "Adonai") and of His kingship. (The Encyclopedia of Judaism, Benedictions, Davka Corporation)

^[24] Carcass.

^[25] i.e. a stranger, a non-Jew.

^[26] i.e. 'teachers'.

^[27] However, one may ask that even if the Christians were supposed to follow the Mosaic Laws, the fact remains that they had actually given up adherence to these laws from a very early period; under these circumstances, why has the Qur'an not criticized the Christians for their lack of adherence to the Mosaic Laws, if it was wrong to do so.

The 'Nasaara' (i.e. the Nazarenes), the Christian sect in the Arabian Peninsula had not given up adherence to the Mosaic Laws. Had that been the case, the Qur'an most certainly would have criticized them for it. The Nazarenes were a Syrian Judeo-Christian sect. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica:

"Although they [the Nazarenes] accepted the divinity of Christ and his supernatural birth, the Nazarenes also maintained strict observance of Jewish laws and customs, a practice that had been dropped by the majority of Jewish Christians. They used a version of the Gospel in Aramaic called the Gospel According to the Hebrews, or the Gospel of the Nazarenes."

There is also some evidence to suggest that the Nazarene creed also ascribed to the belief of the divinity of Mary (Hadhrat Maryam) - a belief criticized by the Qur'an, not ascribed to by the Pauline Christians. The following is a note on the Gospel of the Hebrews posted on one of the internet sites giving information about the canonical and apocryphal books in the Christian theology (http://www.comdac.com/~trowbridge/gosheb.htm):

c. 70-150 C.E.

It is both odd and unfortunate that no copies of any of the so-called "Judeo-Christian" gospels have survived antiquity, though the texts, kept by early Christians who maintained deep-seated Jewish beliefs, were often quoted by Christian writers throughout the first five centuries. These short citations are our only windows through which we might study the traditions of the communities that used them.

The Gospel of the Hebrews is the most often quoted of the Judeo-Christian gospels, though it must be noted that at least two other texts (Ebionites and Nazoreans) were referred to by the same title, and we can only make educated guesses as to which gospel each fragment was derived from. At least eight early writers had either referenced or cited from Hebrews, each offering their own interpretations and assessment of validity. From these we know the date of composition is no later than mid-second century, possibly much earlier. It was said to have been written in Hebrew, though much of its theology parallels Egyptian tradition.

The gospel shows no direct dependence upon the canonical gospels, though it shares a verse with the Gospel of Thomas (GosThom 2). Among the most unique traditions is the depiction of Mary, like the Johannine logos, as divine - in fact, that she was the incarnation of Michael, who was the personification of the Holy Spirit. Also, Jesus first appears to his brother James following the resurrection. Since James the Just was traditionally held to have founded the church at Jerusalem, it is no surprise that the Hebrew gospel elevates his authority by making him the first to witness the risen Christ.

Reference to the Nazarene Judeo-Christian sect in the writings of the earlier Christians is generally in a tone of great disgust and hatred. As a representative of these writings, we present below an excerpt of one of St. Augustine's letters. He writes:

In our own day there exists a sect among the Jews throughout all the synagogues of the East, which is called the sect of the Minei, and is even now condemned by the Pharisees. The adherents to this sect are known commonly as Nazarenes; they believe in Christ the Son of God, 'born of, the Virgin Mary; and they say that He who suffered under Pontius Pilate and rose again, is the same as the one in whom we believe. But while they desire to be both Jews and Christians, they are neither the one nor the other. (Early Church Fathers, The Nicene and Post Nicene Fathers - Series One, Volume 1 - The Confessions and Letters of Augustine, Letter 75, (AD 404), Complete Christian Collection, Packard Technologies, 1999)

^[28] Any defect found even in the knife with which the animal has been slaughtered, renders the animal unfit for eating.

Trade & Commerce in Islam

One of the earliest caravan routes led along the Red Sea coast of Arabia. It was at the intersection of this "incense route", and another important route - leading from Iraq to Yemen - that the pre-Islamic Mecca arose to prominence. Scholars agree that its prominence was not solely due to its position as the cultic center of pre-Islamic paganism, but also to its thriving trade. The bulk of its population consisted of merchants, brokers and bankers.

Outside of Mecca and Medina, trade was the foremost concern in Hijaz. Dhu'l Majaz and `Ukaz are especially referred to as early pre-Islamic trading places. [Bukhari, Hajj, 150].

The Prophet himself was a trader before receiving his divine call to be a prophet. Abu Bakar and Uthman were drapers. Umar is reported to have been a corn-dealer.

Islamic attitude to trade and economic development was very favorable since the earliest times. The Qur'anic teachings are also welcoming of the trade which is free from fraud.

The Qur'an teaches that;

• The day is appointed for a profit-making occupation [Qur'an 78:11];

• shipping is a bounty of God to mankind [17:70]

• winter and summer caravans, (the two most important business transactions of the Meccans), were set up for "civilizing" the Quraysh [106:1, Pickthal uses: "taming", footnote: "civilising"].

• Several passages regard frauds in trade, like short measures, to be among the despicable acts [e.g., 83:1; 6:153; 7:83].

• Believers are enjoined to "spread over the land and seek the abundance of God." [62:10]

However (as mentioned above), TWO restrictions are made:

1. A difference is established between decent trade -- which is lawful -- and usury, which is unlawful. [2:275; 3:130; 4:161]. The FORMER falling into the category of search for lawful earnings.

2. The warning of materialism, including the possession of merchandise, implies the obligation of preference of God and His Prophet over interests of family and clan as well as of goods and chattel [9:24].

There is only one restriction that follows from this general injunction, and that is the cessation of trading during the congregational prayer on Friday, before and after which it is PERMITTED. [62:9-11], just as it is explicitly permitted during the pilgrimage to Mecca [2:198].

The regulations of contracts of debts for fixed terms [2:282ff.] also demonstrates the complete freedom of trade in the Qur'an, with its minimal restrictions in the interest of the unhindered fulfillment of cultic obligations and in conformity with the moral requirement of fair dealing.

The same spirit of economic liberalism permeates prophetic traditions (Ahadith) as well. This is evident from a collation with each other of all the recognized canonical collections of traditions.

As in earliest times, doubts were frequently expressed as to which classes of merchandise could be excluded from trade, the Prophet instructed to exclude only three classes of merchandise:

1. In conformity with ethical principles, anything which is NOT one's OWN property CANNOT be sold. [Musnad Ahmad b. Hanbal, ii, 189-90].

2. Things, that are considered to be ritually unclean (which specifically include wine & swine etc.), are, of course, unmarketable. [loc. cit.]

3. Water -- the sale of water is forbidden. [Ibn Maja, Ruhun 16, because it is, together with air, an article of common use. Both are "Res Communes" in Roman Law as well.]

Trade is to be carried on by mutual agreement, which may be cancelled by only by a tacit agreement of both the partners. [Musnad Ahmad, ii, 536].

Decency is an explicit prerequisite of every merchant [inferred from Qur'an 16:90]. Traditions enjoin certain restrictions, in the spirit of decency, on the honest dealers:

1. In matters of QUALITY and QUANTITY of goods, fraud and deceit are inadmissible. [Ibn Maja, Tijarat, 45].

2. Delay in payment may be granted to customers unable to pay in cash, and even remissions should be made for total inability to pay. [Bukhari, xliii, 3-9]

3. Swearing in closing a sale is discouraged, because: "swearing furthers the disposal of goods but diminishes its blessing." [Bukhari, Buy`u, 26].

4. The use of full weights and measures is a positive injunction in the Qur'an [6:151; 17:35; 26:181].

Regarding Barter trade, while the exchange of one kind of commodity for the same kind (like gold for gold, grain for grain etc.) is encouraged [Bukhari, Buy`u, 74-9], methods in which the elements of uncertainty in evident were forbidden. The most typical cases are as follows:

1. Joint transactions in one contract whereby one portion of a commodity is contracted for cash and another for credit [Ibn Hanbal, i, 398]

2. The storing up of food stuffs with the object of selling them at higher prices in times of need and scarcity -- a practice, which is considered a sin [Ibn Hanbal ii, 351].

3. The resale of food can be allowed only if the seller already possesses it (Qabz al-istifa); by way of extension, this rule may refer to all kinds of goods [Ibn Hanbal, iii, 402].

4. Before the close of the bargain, both parties have the right of option (khiyar), i.e., they may withdraw from the transaction if they have not seen the commodity negotiated until they separate or stipulate a term for the sale [Bukhari, Buy`u, 42-6].

5. In concluding a sale, bargaining, raising the price (najsh) and outbidding one's fellows are condemned [Ibn Hanbal, ii, 351].

Speculation in trade is explicitly prohibited. Even at the primitive stage of Arabian economic life, the period of transaction from the system of Barter into money economy, the following types of forward transactions were usual and PROHIBITED in Tradition:

1. Bay` al-Muzababa; when goods -- the weight, size and number of which are NOT known -- are sold in bulk for a definite weight, measure or number of some OTHER goods, for example, still-green-dates for a definite measure of RIPE dates. [Bukhari, Buy`u, 82-94]

2. Bay` al-Munabadha: when the handling over of goods is contracted WITHOUT both parties having seen them or when, as a sign of conclusion, a small pebble is handed over in place of the goods. [Bukhari, Buy`u, 62-3].

3. Bay` al-Gharar; (meaning: "dangerous" or "hazardous" trading); when the quality and the quantity of goods are NOT previously fixed. For Example; milk in the udder, fish in the water, etc. [Ibn Hanbal, i, 302, 388 etc.]

With regard to payment; advance payment (silm) contracted for:

• Goods to be delivered at a latter date; is LAWFUL when the measurements (length and breadth) are known;

• Animals; it is LAWFUL according to ash-Shafi`i but UNLAWFUL according to Abu Hanifa.

All these injunctions and prohibitions unmistakably imply the guarantee of the buyer against the possible abuses of the seller, and is a characteristic feature of Islam's economic reforms.

It is entirely at variance with the English common law, the rule of which is: "caveat emptor" (i.e., Let the Buyer Beware", or as they say in Farsi: "Mushtari Hushyar Baash").

This liberal attitude towards trade in Islam is thus one of its characteristic features since its earliest days.

Principles of Islamic Ethics - An Introduction

What is Ethics?

Ethics has been defined as:

"The normative science of the conduct of human beings living in societies - a science which judges this conduct to be right or wrong, to be good or bad or in some similar way." (William Lillie, An Introduction to Ethics, 3^rd edition, Methuen & Co. LTD., 1971, pg. 1 - 2)

Some key terms used in this definition are briefly explained for a better understanding of the concept.

'Normative Science' (as opposed to 'descriptive' or 'positive' sciences) in simple words, is a discipline, which describes or sets standards or rules for the field under consideration. For example, a 'normative grammar' of a language describes how its authors think that the language should be spoken or written. In other words, a normative science deals with 'how things ought to be' rather than 'how things really are'. 'Normative Sciences', primarily comprise of three fields:

• 'Aesthetics' deals systematically with the standards by which we judge the beauty or the ugliness of objects of sense perception, commonly sights and sounds. Thus, setting the standards of beauty or ugliness is related to the field of 'aesthetics'.

• 'Logic' deals systematically with the standards by which we judge the truthfulness or the falsehood of statements. Thus, setting any standards for 'true' and 'false' is related to the field of 'logic'.

• 'Ethics' deals systematically with the standards by which we judge the right or wrong in human action. Thus, setting any standards of 'right' or 'wrong' behavior in a society is related to the field of 'ethics'.

'Conduct' is a collective name for voluntary actions. A voluntary action is an action that a man could have done differently if he had so chosen.

Our definition has limited the conduct with which we deal in ethics in two ways:

• We deal with human actions and not with the actions of the lower animals;

• We confine ourselves to the study of the conduct of human beings living in societies. Moralists sometimes go further and hold that the standards of ethics only apply to the relations of men with one another; the conduct studied in ethics is not only conduct done in a society, but conduct that affects some other member or members of that society. Although, it may be considered convenient to include, in a single normative science, all human activities, including those that appear to have no effects on other people or relations with them, yet common usage would certainly make a social activity like speaking the truth more directly the concern of ethics that a purely private activity with no marked effects like playing a guitar in one's private room or a religious activity like fasting. Of course, even such activities may have indirect social effects, however, as soon as such activities start having a social effect, they shall be included in the study of ethics. For instance, a man playing his guitar may start disturbing his neighbors. At this juncture, his apparently private activity would now be included in the scope of 'ethics'.

The subject of ethics essentially comprises issues fundamental to practical decision-making in case of all such actions, which bring one in an active or a passive interaction with other human beings. For this reason, the discipline, though long considered a branch of philosophy, is closely linked with many other fields of inquiry, including anthropology, economics, politics, and sociology. Ethics, however, remains distinct from such areas of study, as it deals with human conduct, as it ought to be, rather than as it actually is.

Ethics is generally divided into three major sub-disciplines. These are (1) meta-ethics, (2) normative ethics, and (3) applied ethics.

'Meta-ethics' centers on questions relating to the nature and origin of moral concepts and judgments. Philosophers in meta-ethics have taken markedly different positions on this matter. There also has been much disagreement over whether moral judgments are objective or subjective, absolute or relative.

'Normative ethics' is primarily concerned with establishing standards or norms for conduct and is commonly associated with general theories about how one ought to live. One of the central questions of modern normative ethics has to do with whether human actions are to be judged right or wrong solely according to their consequences. Traditionally, theories that judge actions by their consequences have been known as 'teleological', though the term 'consequentialist' has in large part supplanted it. Another class of theories in normative ethics, designated as 'deontological', judges actions by their conformance to some formal rule or principle (for example, the ethical system of the philosopher Immanuel Kant).

'Applied ethics' is the application of moral theories to practical moral problems. Such moral issues as racial and sexual equality, human rights, and justice have become prominent, as have questions about the value of human life raised by controversies over abortion and euthanasia[1]. Related to the latter are the ethical implications of various developments in regard to reproduction as, for example, in vitro fertilization[2], sperm banks, gene manipulation, and cloning[3]. Perhaps the most striking development in the study of ethics during the second half of the 20th century has been the growing interest among philosophers in applied ethics.

The Standards of Determining 'Ethical' and 'Unethical'

Philosophers are not in agreement regarding the standards of judgment of 'right' and 'wrong' behavior. There have been a number of theories proposed by moral philosophers regarding the determination of standards of judging 'right' from 'wrong'. Some of the major theories are:

• No Standards or Relative Ethics: Relative ethics maintains that there are no moral rules that apply to all men as such. There are forms of ethical relativity, which would admit of standards for all the members of a limited group, but would not hold these standards true for those not belonging to that group. However, there are other more extreme forms of ethical relativity in which what is right for any man is a purely individual matter. Thus, according to this point of view, there is no question of any standard at all.

• The Standard as Intuition[4]: Intuitive ethics maintains that 'good' actions are those, which are believed to be 'good' through the intuition of the individual passing the judgment.

• The Standard as Law: Legal ethics maintains that 'good' actions are those, which are stated to be 'good' by the law. The word 'law' according to this school includes all such laws that are passed by a higher authority, including God - as in the Law of God, or Law of Moses (pbuh). Thus, Christian or Judaic ethics, which maintains that all that has been prescribed in the divine law is 'good' and all that has been prohibited is 'bad', can be considered as a part of this school.

• The Standard as Pleasure: This theory holds that pleasantness is the only quality because of which an experience is 'good' or valuable. A good action I san action, which leads to a pleasant experience as its consequence, and the right action at any moment is the one which will lead to more pleasant experiences or to greater pleasure than any other action. It should be remembered that this school does not merely hold that one of the consequences of 'good' is pleasure. It, on the contrary, holds that the only thing, which makes an action 'good' is the consequent pleasure that may result from it.

• The Standard as Determined by Evolution: According to this school, the conduct to which we apply the name 'good' is relatively more evolved conduct, and the conduct to which we apply the name 'bad' is relatively less evolved. The particular moral code accepted by any community at any period of history depends on the natural selection of that community, in accordance with its circumstances.

• The Standard as Perfection: According to this theory, 'good' action is one, which contributes in making the self 'perfect' and helps in removing all human shortcomings from it.

• The Standard as Value: According to this school, 'good' actions are those, which produce 'good' or valuable consequences.

Why Be Ethical?

It can be easily derived from the above varying points of views regarding the standards of ethical and unethical behavior that the motivating force for opting for good behavior and for avoiding bad behavior would naturally be quite different in these schools. For instance, according to the proponents of relative ethics, the motivating force is generally the inclination and the innumerable internal as well as external factors leading to the decision of the individual under consideration. While in the case of intuitive ethics, it is the psychological condition of the individual, which in turn depends on his financial, social and educational background. In the case of the standard as law, the motivating factor for ethical behavior is generally the avoidance of punishment attached with 'bad' behavior or reaping the rewards attached with doing 'good'. In the case of the standard as pleasure, the reason for being ethical is the pleasure that is expected from being ethical. In case of the evolution school of ethics, the prime motivator is to conform to and to contribute in the evolution process of the individual as well as the group with which the individual is attached. In case of the standard as perfection, the prime motivator is the consequent spiritual and moral perfection that is expected from the conformity with 'good' action. Finally, in the standard as value school, the motivating factor for doing 'good' is the expectation of the good or the valuable consequences.

The Ethical Philosophy of Islam

Having understood the concept of ethics and seen the different schools of moral philosophy, it is now time to focus on the ethical philosophy of Islam. We shall begin with an introduction to the standard of judgment regarding ethical and unethical behavior as given by Islam and the motivating force that, according to the tenets of Islam, should play the major role in opting for 'good' and avoiding 'bad'. Finally, we shall see the distinction between ethical philosophy of Islam and other ethical philosophies.

Standard of Judgment of 'Good' and 'Bad'

According to Islam, man has not come into existence on his own and neither is he a product of natural forces that had somehow, by pure chance, combined to produce life. On the contrary, man is a creation of an All Wise, and a Most Merciful Creator. God gave man life and with that also gave man the freedom and the authority to do good or to indulge into evil. This authority and this freedom was given to man for the basic purpose of testing him, as to how he uses his authority and freedom. As a part of this test, God also gave man the basic knowledge of 'good' and 'bad' at the time of his inception. Thus, according to Islam, every individual has been bestowed a clear standard of judgment of 'good' and 'evil' by God. The Qur'an, in Surah Al-Shams (91: 7 - 10) has presented this knowledge of the human soul as an evidence of the fact that soon, man shall indeed face separate consequences of his 'good' and 'bad' deeds. The Qur'an says:

The human soul - the way He molded it and inspired it with knowledge of its evil and its good - bears witness to the fact that indeed he, who cleanses it [of all impiety] shall be successful while he, who corrupts it shall face doom.

Thus, according to the Ethical philosophy of Islam, the knowledge of good and evil or in other words the standard of distinguishing good from evil is a part of the sapiential sense[5] of man. This sapiential sense includes, besides many other concepts, moral concepts like justice, truthfulness, honesty, helping the weak, freedom in one's personal matters etc. It is quite possible though, that there is a difference in the application of these concepts in practical life situations, yet the concepts themselves have never been questioned and are, and have mostly remained, universally accepted. It is for this reason that ethical values like justice, honesty, trustworthiness and truthfulness etc. have never even been questioned philosophically, even if there is a considerable practical deviation from these values or a huge difference in the practical application of these values.

It is precisely for the stated reason that man, on the Day of Judgment, shall have no excuse for any voluntary and conscious deviation from these values in his life, even if he has remained ignorant of the teachings of any prophet. Every person, irrespective of whether he is a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, a Buddhist, a Hindu, an atheist or an agnostic, knows that defrauding others is wrong. He defrauds others not due to any misconception about the 'goodness' or the 'badness' of defrauding others, but to gain some immediate and quick material gains from such an act. The same is the case of all other basic moral values. The excuse of ignorance, in the case of these basic moral and ethical values, shall therefore not save an individual from punishment on the Day of Judgment, as, in reality, there has never been ignorance in this sphere.

The Nature and Scope of the Islamic Shari`ah vis a vis Ethical Issues

The Qur'an has indeed reminded - not introduced - man of a number of basic moral and ethical values. The Qur'an has, for instance, mentioned wrongfully depriving others of their rights and bribing authorities for this purpose to be a great sin, as a direct corollary of the basic values of justice, honesty and refraining from defrauding others. However, this reference of the Qur'an is not to introduce man to the fact that such an act is sinful, but to remind him that he himself is fully aware of it being a sinful act. In Al-Baqarah 2: 188, the Qur'an says:

Do not devour one another's wealth through unjust means, nor bribe the authorities in order that you may wrongfully usurp the possession of others - while you are well aware [of its being a sinful act].

Most of the references to ethical principles or their applications to practical life situations, in the Qur'an are of the same nature. They are not mentioned as a first-time introduction for man, but as an obvious reality of which man is already aware.

However, there is another category of directives in the Qur'an, which relates primarily to the application of universal ethical principles. For instance, the Qur'an has mentioned the etiquette of interaction between unrelated men and women in a mutually interactive environment. This directive of the Qur'an is based primarily on the value of Hayaa[6]. However, in this particular case, the Qur'an has not stopped merely at reminding man of keeping the value of Hayaa in mind while interacting with the opposite sex, but has also prescribed a code that should be observed while such an interaction takes place. The same is the case, for instance, in the prohibition of Riba. The prohibition of Riba, according to the Qur'an is based on the universal principle of justice. Nevertheless, the Qur'an has not stopped merely at reminding man of keeping the value of justice in perspective, while economically transacting with others, but has gone further to prohibit a transaction that, in its view, was based on such an injustice.

These and other similar cases are examples where the Qur'an has not merely mentioned an ethical principle but has actually applied an ethical principle to a practical life situation and has prescribed or prohibited a certain act. However, a close analysis of all such situations shows that the Qur'an has done this only in cases where:

• In the absence of such divine prescription or prohibition, there could have been a significant difference of opinion and, subsequently, a significant deviation in human application of these ethical values to practical life situations. People could have gone to extremes in such applications; and

• Deviations in such applications affect the moral and spiritual cleansing of individuals, which, in turn, affects the success or failure in the hereafter.

The Qur'an has only made applications of universal ethical principles in cases where both the conditions mentioned above are satisfied.

Thus, to summarize, the ethical teachings of Islam may be classified into two categories:

1. Where the Qur'an has reminded man of the basic ethical values with the implication that if man consciously deviates from such values, he shall then have no excuse to defend himself from facing the consequences of such deviation.

2. Where the Qur'an has applied the basic ethical principles on practical life situations and has prescribed or prohibited a particular code of conduct.

An exhaustive explanation and enumeration of issues in Islamic ethics should consist of both these categories.

The Answer to the Question 'Why Be Ethical?' in the Islamic Perspective

In one of the preceding sections, we had seen that the various schools of moral philosophers have given their own answers to the question that why should a person choose to behave in a manner that is considered to be in keeping with the ethical norms and standards of his society. In this section, we shall see what is the answer to this question from the Islamic perspective.

Before we consider the answer to the said question in the Islamic perspective, it seems necessary to clarify that in a number of situations, the question of deviating from an ethical principle does not even arise. Let us take 'honesty', as a case in point. There are a number of situations in one's life where there is absolutely no reason to deviate from honesty. For instance, if someone, under normal circumstances, asks me my name, I am not likely to deviate from the principle of 'honesty'. I would, in most of the cases, tell him my name very 'honestly'. It is only under circumstances where a high - material, physical or emotional - price is likely to be paid or a great benefit likely to be sacrificed that one needs a good reason to adhere to 'honesty'. The same would hold true for all ethical principles. It is only under circumstances where adherence to ethical or moral values is likely to be followed by a loss that this adherence needs a reason.

The reason for such adherence, from the Islamic perspective is simply that it is a direct requirement of the articles of faith of Islam to adhere to such ethical or moral principles, irrespective of the volume of cost that has to be borne or that of the benefit that may be lost. The declaration of Imaan (faith) not followed by good deeds, in the eyes of Islam, is either hypocrisy or ignorance[7].

A person who truly believes in the Islamic articles of faith (Tawheed[8], Risalah[9] and Aakhirah[10]) cannot be unmindful of the practical requirements of these articles of faith. Ignorance of the practical requirements of these articles of faith, translates into ignorance of the articles of faith themselves. Furthermore, being unmindful of fulfilling these requirements practically refutes the very existence of true Imaan in one's heart.

The Difference Between Islamic and Other Ethical Philosophies

It should be obvious from the preceding discussion that the Islamic Ethical philosophy differs from the other philosophies on two basic accounts:

1. The origin or the motivating factor in adherence to ethical principles under the Islamic ethical philosophy is primarily the articles of faith of Islam. In other words, ethical behavior, under the Islamic ethical philosophy is a requisite of the articles of Islamic faith. An attitude of deviation from ethical principles is a practical negation of ascription to the very elements of Islamic faith.

2. The practical application of ethical principles of the Shari`ah, with the basic universal ethical principles themselves, are a part of the basic code of ethical conduct in Islam. Thus, refraining from Riba is as much a part of the Islamic code of ethics as dealing with others in a just manner.

© Copyright May 2000. All Rights Reserved with the Author

---

[1] Mercy killing.

[2] Like producing test tube babies

[3] All these concepts are related to the field of bio ethics.

[4] 'Intuition' is the immediate apprehension of an object by the mind without the intervention of any reasoning process.

[5] Sapiential sense refers to the necessary sense that every normal human being possesses. Derived from homo sapiens, the term was first coined by Roy Abraham Varghese in his book "Great Thinkers on Great Questions".

[6] Hayaa is one of the basic values that Islam wants to inculcate among its adherents. Due to the lack of an accurate synonymous in the English language, I have used the Arabic word, which, over here, implies 'the suppression of sexual interaction within certain prescribed limits and the avoidance of instigating sexual attraction or being instigated by a sexual attraction beyond those limits".

[7] That is the person is either lying about his imaan or is ignorant of what imaan really means.

[8] Belief in one God.

[9] Prophethood.

[10] Day of Judgment.