Political Opportunism
Under the banner of the “War On Terror” politicians have used the current political narrative to serve their interests. Right wing politicians such as Geert Wilders are calling for the ban of the Qur’an, and it was reported this week that the right wing Dutch Politician released a film on the divine book which he named Fitna, a Qur’anic term meaning strife.The film is an attempt to show how the Qur’an incites to violence, terror, death and destruction. In addition to this he has commented on the Qur’an many times, his opportunistic one liner’s include:
“Ban this wretched book just like Mein Kempf is banned”“Muslims living in the Netherlands should tear out half of the Koran”“…this fascist book called the Koran”However, can anyone take him seriously? Isn't this political opportunism at its best? The current situation in the Netherlands gives some damning answers,Netherlands under its current secular political framework suffers from:– 48% increase in robbery– 35% increase in violent crime– 24% increase in drug trafficking– 105% rise in prison population in the past 10 years (1991-2001)– 15% increase in homicideWhere are Geert Wilder’s detailed policies on these issues? Is he really interested in the Dutch people and the future of his country? If he is, then why does he and his political party just produce anti-Islamic rhetoric?
This exposes his political opportunism.Additionally, politicians who advance that secularism is the only political framework suitable for the world should be humbled by the statistics from a country seen to to be a shining example of secularism.ApproachMany politicians who attack the Qur’an claim that Europe is based upon the Judeo-Christian heritage and that secular values are the standard to follow, misquoting and twisting verses from the Qur’an. However if their thinking and approach were to be applied to their own heritage, then can not the following be taken as an excuse or justification for violence, oppression and hatred?“If you hear it said about one of the towns the Lord your God is giving you to live in, that wicked men have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, ‘Let us go and worship other gods’.
Then you must enquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. Destroy it completely both its people and its livestock
Gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a - whole burnt offering to the Lord your God.” Bible, Deuteronomy 13: 12-16Dutch Constitution Article 97,
(1) All Dutch nationals who are capable of doing so shall have a duty to cooperate in maintaining the independence of the State and defending its territory.
(2) This duty may also be imposed on residents of the Netherlands who are not Dutch nationals.If we use the line of thinking that the politicians who attack Islam and the Qur’an use, then anyone can conclude that the above statements have been, and are being used, as a justification to murder, subjugate, oppress and terrorise human beings.
Was it not under the secular political framework that the following occurred?- 700,000 innocent deaths due to the current Iraqi occupation?
- 500,000 Iraqi children dead in the 10 year sanctions?
- Over 60 million preventable deaths is Africa due to unjust trade laws and economic policies in the past decade?
- 70,000,000 murdered American Indians?
- World War 1 and 2?
- The occupation of Palestinian land?
- The genocide of Bosnians?
- The genocide of the Jews?
- Stalin? Hitler? Bush?
- The Vietnam War?
- The mass murder of new born baby girls in China?
- 250,000 dead Fillipinos?- Hiroshima?
- The ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and Chechnians?
- The oppression of Muslims via western backed dictators in the Muslim world?
However, the replies to this crude analysis of the Dutch constitution and the Bible would include ‘you are no law maker’, ‘do you have all the necessary tools to extract legislation?’, ‘you have ignored the context’. Muslims would agree, and this is how Islam and the Qur’an should be viewed too.In order to extract law from any secular text, knowledge of the language, relevant education in Law, knowledge of legislative changes and the rules of interpretation are required.
For example to interpret any UK book of law there are four basic rules of interpretation,
- Literal Rule: Literal Meaning of the Words
- Golden Rule: Take the whole of the statue rather than a few texts
- Purposive Rule: Ascertain what the craftsman intended
- Mischief Rule: Looks at what the circumstances and history when that law was created
This is similar with the Qur’an. Islamic scholarship has developed methods and rules of interpretation based upon the Islamic intellectual heritage. One requires all the necessary tools and techniques to extract legislation and law whether it is a secular text or the Qur’an, because they both deal with the individual and society. Therefore Geert Wilders who simply quotes and associates the Qur’anic verses with terror and oppression shows that his agenda is to destroy bridges and prevent dialogue.In a world of sound bytes and generalisations his politically motivated and agenda driven film does not facilitate any form of dialogue and understanding.
This indicates that he is a self-publicist and a political opportunist, using the current narrative on the War On Terror to achieve his right wing goals.This façade does not create an environment where people of the Netherlands, and Europe, can learn about the Qur’an without pre-judging the book and its followers. Dutch society is thirsty for information and its people are willing to initiate in a dialogue that transcends the anti-Islamic hysteria and hype.
Geert Wilders further exposed himself when he stated on Fox News “I am not a cultural relativist…I don’t believe cultures are equal I believe our culture is better than a retarded Islamic culture…” Without initiating a dialogue and a positive debate, how can he make these claims? It seems that he has already assumed the position of judge, jury and executioner.
The Qur’an can not be viewed just as a spiritual text but as a dynamic text that provides legislation for all of aspects of human life and behaviour. Politicians are in no position to understand the Qur’an with regards to Law, Foreign Policy and Economics as they do not have the tools in place to interpret the divine book.
If someone was willing to understand the Qur’an they would acquire all the tools necessary to do so or at least ask those who know. Can a butcher read a law book and claim he has knowledge of the law?
Monday, 31 March 2008
Sunday, 23 March 2008
Islam
Whenever western governments mention weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and Muslims in the same breath, the western media immediately breaks into wild frenzy warning its people that a catastrophic event of epic proportions is about to unfold.
Old European fables of Muslims spreading Islam by the sword are reinvented to convey the impression that Muslims are extremely dangerous, highly irresponsible and pay scant regard to human life. Hence the mantra of disarming Muslim countries of WMD has become the rallying cry of the West directed against the Muslim world.
In some cases the arguments are extended to justify the West’s ongoing policy of regime change in Syria, Iran and perhaps Pakistan. However, a close study of Islamic rule in the past contradicts the popular western myth that Muslims are bloodthirsty people anxious to wipe out the rest of mankind in the name of Islam.
The same however, cannot be said about the West. The West armed with its secular doctrine and materialistic world-view proceeded to exploit, plunder and colonise vast populations in order to control resources and maximise wealth.
In pursuit of these newfound riches the West succeeded in destroying civilisation such as the Incas, American Indians, Aztecs, and Aborigines. Those who survived colonisation were forcibly converted to Christianity, stripped of their heritage and sold into bondage to western companies. For the indigenous people of Africa, India, Asia, Middle East and others, the promises of freedom quickly evaporated and were replaced by colonial rule. Rather than show remorse towards such atrocities the West could only gloat at its achievements.
Technologies such as cannons, pistols, steam engines, machine guns, aeroplanes, mustard gas etc only hastened the acquisition of colonies and the exploitation of its people. Resistance offered by the natives towards their colonial masters was met by brute force – often resulting in the destruction of entire communities. When the West was not destroying the natives they were too busy annihilating each other in a desperate bid to cling on to their precious colonies. World Wars I and II are prime examples of the destructive nature of western values.
This is a description of the Old World where countries like England, France, and Germany built empires and accumulated immense wealth on the death and destruction of millions of innocent people. Is the New World (America leading the West) any different today?
Take the example of the New World and its relationship with Afghanistan and Iraq. Liberation has become occupation; democracy has given way to colonial rule, devastation is termed as precision bombing and the slaughter of innocent Muslims is described as collateral damage. Meanwhile, American and British oil companies are queuing up to exploit the oil wells of Iraq and transport the energy reserves of the Caspian Sea to Europe via Afghanistan.
The Islamic Khilafah in the past never treated mankind in such a barbaric fashion. Neither did the Khilafah spread Islam by force nor destroy civilisations. When Islam spread to Egypt, many Coptic Christians did not embrace Islam and today they still number approximately 7 million. Likewise, when India was opened up to Islam the inhabitants were not coerced into accepting Islam. India today has a population of more than 750 million Hindus.
Compare this to extermination of Muslim and Jews in the courts of the Spanish Inquisitors during the much-coveted European renaissance. Those Jews that survived this Spanish holocaust, were warmly welcomed by the Ottoman Caliphate. In Islamic Spain they flourished and became important members of the Islamic society.
Today the world has more to fear from the destructive nature of western values than WMD. In the past these values were enforced upon nations either through direct colonial rule or through tyrannical regimes loyal to the West. Presently, the greatest danger-facing mankind is the constant threat of the West imposing its values on the rest of the world through WMD.
Old European fables of Muslims spreading Islam by the sword are reinvented to convey the impression that Muslims are extremely dangerous, highly irresponsible and pay scant regard to human life. Hence the mantra of disarming Muslim countries of WMD has become the rallying cry of the West directed against the Muslim world.
In some cases the arguments are extended to justify the West’s ongoing policy of regime change in Syria, Iran and perhaps Pakistan. However, a close study of Islamic rule in the past contradicts the popular western myth that Muslims are bloodthirsty people anxious to wipe out the rest of mankind in the name of Islam.
The same however, cannot be said about the West. The West armed with its secular doctrine and materialistic world-view proceeded to exploit, plunder and colonise vast populations in order to control resources and maximise wealth.
In pursuit of these newfound riches the West succeeded in destroying civilisation such as the Incas, American Indians, Aztecs, and Aborigines. Those who survived colonisation were forcibly converted to Christianity, stripped of their heritage and sold into bondage to western companies. For the indigenous people of Africa, India, Asia, Middle East and others, the promises of freedom quickly evaporated and were replaced by colonial rule. Rather than show remorse towards such atrocities the West could only gloat at its achievements.
Technologies such as cannons, pistols, steam engines, machine guns, aeroplanes, mustard gas etc only hastened the acquisition of colonies and the exploitation of its people. Resistance offered by the natives towards their colonial masters was met by brute force – often resulting in the destruction of entire communities. When the West was not destroying the natives they were too busy annihilating each other in a desperate bid to cling on to their precious colonies. World Wars I and II are prime examples of the destructive nature of western values.
This is a description of the Old World where countries like England, France, and Germany built empires and accumulated immense wealth on the death and destruction of millions of innocent people. Is the New World (America leading the West) any different today?
Take the example of the New World and its relationship with Afghanistan and Iraq. Liberation has become occupation; democracy has given way to colonial rule, devastation is termed as precision bombing and the slaughter of innocent Muslims is described as collateral damage. Meanwhile, American and British oil companies are queuing up to exploit the oil wells of Iraq and transport the energy reserves of the Caspian Sea to Europe via Afghanistan.
The Islamic Khilafah in the past never treated mankind in such a barbaric fashion. Neither did the Khilafah spread Islam by force nor destroy civilisations. When Islam spread to Egypt, many Coptic Christians did not embrace Islam and today they still number approximately 7 million. Likewise, when India was opened up to Islam the inhabitants were not coerced into accepting Islam. India today has a population of more than 750 million Hindus.
Compare this to extermination of Muslim and Jews in the courts of the Spanish Inquisitors during the much-coveted European renaissance. Those Jews that survived this Spanish holocaust, were warmly welcomed by the Ottoman Caliphate. In Islamic Spain they flourished and became important members of the Islamic society.
Today the world has more to fear from the destructive nature of western values than WMD. In the past these values were enforced upon nations either through direct colonial rule or through tyrannical regimes loyal to the West. Presently, the greatest danger-facing mankind is the constant threat of the West imposing its values on the rest of the world through WMD.
Monday, 25 February 2008
Britain and Shariah Bond
Despite Britain ‘s animosity to Islam it plans to enter the Shariah bond market
On 17/2/08 it was revealed by the British media that the Chancellor Alistair Darling is expected to announce in his March 12 Budget if the Treasury will go ahead with plans for so-called "Sharia bonds (Sukuk)". The Treasury spokesman added: "We want the City of London to be one of the gateways globally for Islamic financial products and we want it to be competitive on all products you can imagine, so we should be competitive on Islamic finance as well as any other. Just because of your faith, there shouldn't be any issue about your access to financial services in the UK ." Sukuk is now estimated to be worth £ 5.5billion in a £125 billion global Islamic financial market. The announcement highlights a contradiction in Britain‘s commitment to its ideological values. On the one-hand, the British establishment regularly brow beats the Muslim community to compromise its Islamic values in exchange for the adoption of British values. Whilst on the other hand, the same establishment is prepared to sacrifice its ideology in a desperate bid to enter the booming Sukuk market and secure its commercial interests.
This contradiction should provide ample reassurance to those skeptical about the longevity of the coming Khilafah state. Simply put, Western capitalist states will willingly sacrifice their ideology to co-exist with the future Islamic state, as long as their interests are secured. The history of the 20th century also bears testimony to this fact. Britain on many occasions supported the Soviet Union against the US, even though she was ideologically opposed to it. Likewise, the US supported China against the Soviet Union .
Only an aware Islamic leadership that is political astute can exploit such situations and successfully navigate the Khilafah state to dominate the international situation.
On 17/2/08 it was revealed by the British media that the Chancellor Alistair Darling is expected to announce in his March 12 Budget if the Treasury will go ahead with plans for so-called "Sharia bonds (Sukuk)". The Treasury spokesman added: "We want the City of London to be one of the gateways globally for Islamic financial products and we want it to be competitive on all products you can imagine, so we should be competitive on Islamic finance as well as any other. Just because of your faith, there shouldn't be any issue about your access to financial services in the UK ." Sukuk is now estimated to be worth £ 5.5billion in a £125 billion global Islamic financial market. The announcement highlights a contradiction in Britain‘s commitment to its ideological values. On the one-hand, the British establishment regularly brow beats the Muslim community to compromise its Islamic values in exchange for the adoption of British values. Whilst on the other hand, the same establishment is prepared to sacrifice its ideology in a desperate bid to enter the booming Sukuk market and secure its commercial interests.
This contradiction should provide ample reassurance to those skeptical about the longevity of the coming Khilafah state. Simply put, Western capitalist states will willingly sacrifice their ideology to co-exist with the future Islamic state, as long as their interests are secured. The history of the 20th century also bears testimony to this fact. Britain on many occasions supported the Soviet Union against the US, even though she was ideologically opposed to it. Likewise, the US supported China against the Soviet Union .
Only an aware Islamic leadership that is political astute can exploit such situations and successfully navigate the Khilafah state to dominate the international situation.
Monday, 18 February 2008
World Aids day[2006] - an Islamic perspective
• December 1st was World Aids Day, we have seen in the newspapers and on TV screens a lot of discussion about HIV & Aids• Let us look at this subject to understand its reality and look at the Islamic solution to the problem of HIV & Aids.
• HIV stands out in respect of its prevention. It is one of the most notorious infectious diseases around today, with good reason, as it is currently incurable. Although, it’s disease progression in an individual can be significantly slowed down.
• The uniqueness of HIV is in its transmission. It is a virus that must pass from person to person through the exchange of significant quantities of bodily fluids, primarily sexual fluid or blood.
• These fluids do not ordinarily transfer from person to person except through the undertaking of specific activities over which an individual normally has control. The main methods of transmission amongst adults are via sexual intercourse or the sharing of needles that enter the blood stream of sequential individuals. The sharing of needles primarily occurs during the use of recreational drugs such as heroine.
• A safe assertion may be made that if a healthy adult avoids certain high risk activities, the probability of contracting HIV are miniscule. If two people of the opposite gender marry, and are faithful to each other for the rest of their lives, their risk of contracting HIV through sexual activity is negligible. HIV in children is usually transmitted during childbirth from an infected mother. There are various techniques that can be used to prevent this vertical spread. However, it is simple reality that if adults do not have HIV, children could not get it either.
• The UN has reported that rates of HIV throughout the world are reaching previously unprecedented levels, estimated to be 40 million people infected worldwide. There were over 4 million new cases in the last year, 700 000 of which were in children. Current boom areas are Pakistan and Indonesia, where the report said that transmission was out of control, although the problem is most critical in sub-Saharan Africa.
The Secular response
“Freedom” is one of the core principles in the capitalist ideology. They therefore shy away from advising people to avoid those behaviours likely to lead to HIV infection. They prefer to try to find ways to perform the various risky behaviours that they want to practice, but with a modicum of protection.
Practically speaking this means the promotion of condom use, and the provision of clean needles and syringes to drug addicts so that they do not need to share. These principles have been the lynch pins of strategies aimed at preventing the spread of HIV in the Western world. These approaches are increasingly being peddled to the developing world as the solution.This has not worked at all so far. While condoms are believed to be protective and the provision of clean needles may well limit the risk of transmission, it is naïve to expect uneducated drug addicts to be responsible, and condoms do not provide full proof protection. If these are really the only preventative measures that can be offered, failure is assured and the virus will continue to spread. This is an issue that many in the west are starting to acknowledge.
Jim Yong Kim, head of the WHO’s HIV/Aids program, said in reference to the G8’s pledge to pump more money into getting wide spread access to anti-retroviral drugs that this is more to do with social change rather than administering better pharmaceuticals. “Treatment is not rocket science,” he said “prevention is rocket science”.
Cause
The cause behind the increase of promiscuity & drug taking in society here and everywhere in the world is concepts of Freedom & Benefit.Destroys any type of morality people haveIndecency & fornication are norms in West e.g. office environment. Places like Indian subcontinent are catching up, traditional values eroding.This is occurring due to concepts of personal freedom, freedom of ownership and benefit as the criterion for actions.Let us look at the cause behind this – idea of Freedom.
They believe in 4 Freedoms – Freedom of belief, expression, ownership and personal freedom
Personal Freedom
The fourth type of freedom which the Capitalist system calls for and works to achieve and protect is the personal freedom. According to this system, every human being has the right to live his private life as he wishes unless he transgresses against the private lives of other people. He has the right to marry or to have an extra-marital relationship with any woman as long as it is done with her consent.He has the right to practice sexual perversion as long as this practice does not involve a minor. Also, he has the right to eat, drink and wear whatever he wants within the public laws. For these Capitalists, the concept of halal and haram does not exist when it comes to personal conduct, as long as the person behaves lawfully, and "lawful behaviour" in the Capitalist societies is subject to disparity from one society to another and from one time to another.
Religion has no influence upon this freedom. The system is detached from religion according to the Capitalist ideology. As a result of applying this type of freedom in the Capitalist societies, immorality has spread. Men and women live together without any legal relationship, and even men and women have partners of the same sex and establish abnormal relationships amongst themselves under the protection of the law.The personal and sexual perversions that prevail in the Capitalist societies result from personal freedom which has also led to unbelievable conflicts. Pornographic magazines and movies, sex phone lines, and nude bars are just a few examples of the abnormalities and perversions which the Capitalist societies have degenerated to as a result of personal freedom. The evident disparity between one Capitalist society and another in the practice of this freedom results from the origin of the Capitalist societies and their gradual application of the Capitalist ideology.
The Capitalist societies were established on the ruins of the Feudal system and the traditions and culture upheld by the Church. Because it was impossible to change these traditions overnight, the Capitalists were divided among themselves. One group pushed to immediately abandon these traditions, whilst another group called for removing the old traditions and culture gradually by taking into consideration the reality of the societies and the prevalent culture and traditions at the time. Those who called for the immediate practice of freedom were called Liberals, and those who called for the gradual application of freedom were called Conservatives. Another intermediate group has surfaced between these two groups who were called Moderates. This "Middle Group" was also divided; some of them were more inclined to the Conservatives and were called Rightists, and some of them were more inclined to the Liberals and were called Leftist. The Capitalist societies still have these classifications of groups today.
A Muslim is not allowed to accept personal freedom because it allows what Allah has forbidden, even aside from it being a source of various social diseases. Personal freedom is the freedom of fornication, sexual perversion, immorality, drinking alcohol, and other diseases.
Allah swt says;
“And those who disbelieve, their actions are like a mirage in a desert. The thirsty one thinks it to be water, until he comes up to it, he finds it to be nothing, but he finds Allah with him, Who will pay him his full due (hell). And Allah is swift in taking account.”
[Nur: 39]
He (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) also said:
“Two categories of people I have not seen them (yet): some people who hold whips like the tails of the cows by which they lash the people. And women who wear (clothes) but (are) half-naked, bending (their bodies) and bending the sight of the men to them. Their heads are like the tilted humps of the camels. These women will not enter the paradise nor will they experience its smell (odour), though its odour is felt at a distance of so and so (days)”
[Muslim].
Islamic alternative
The Islamic social system properly applied, holds the long-term solution to the problem of HIV. It constructs a society that heavily emphasises the importance of marriage prior to sexual relations, even prescribing penalties on those who transgress such boundaries. The resulting society would therefore have a particular complexion. The society would be founded on a number of principles.Firstly, an Islamic State would create an atmosphere conducive for taqwa (consciousness of Allah [swt]) to thrive. Islamic codes contain certain etiquettes, which guard against inappropriate social relationships. These include dress regulations and arrangement of private buildings.
Allah swt says;
“Tell the believing men to lower their gaze, and protect their private parts. That is purer for them. Verily, Allah is All Aware of what they do. And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and protect their private parts."
[TMQ An-Nur : 30-31].
Abu Hurairah reported that the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, “When a person commits fornication there goes out of him the Iman (belief) and it hovers like a canopy over his head and when he quits this act the Iman reverts to him again”
[Tirmidhi & Abu Dawud]
It has been narrated by Abu Musa al-Ashari that the Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said, “Any women that uses perfume and walks past men in order for them to smell her fragrance; she is a fornicator”
[Tirmidhi & Abu Dawud].
The Shari’ah prevents khulwa (seclusion) between men and women. The reality of khulwa is that it makes the man and woman more sexually agitated. By prohibiting this solitary privacy a cause of corruption is eliminated, because the khulwa is one of the direct means to corruption.
Jabir ibn Abdullah narrated that the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said,
“Whosoever believes in Allah and the Last Day (Al-Yawm al-Akhir) let him not be alone with a woman who has not a Mahram (male relative who she cannot marry) with her. Indeed, the third (person) is al-Shaytan!”
[Ahmad]
Taqwa & public opinion – quote of Umar – Those who are not corrected by the Taqwa are corrected by the Sultan (authority).
The Islamic punishment system enforces these rules;
“The woman and man guilty of illegal sexual intercourse, flog each of them with a hundred stripes."
[TMQ An Nur: 2]
Narrated by Jabir bin Abdullah Al-Ansari: a man from the tribe of Bani Aslam came to Allah's Messenger (salAllahu alaihi wasallam) and informed him that he had committed illegal sexual intercourse and he bore witness four times against himself. Allah's Messenger (salAllahu alaihi wasallam) ordered him to be stoned to death, as he was a married person.
(Sahih Al-Bukhari, vol 8, Hadith no 805).
Homosexuality
From Ikrimah from ibn Abbas who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Lut, kill the doer and the one to whom it is done” [it is narrated by the five excep An-Nisai]As for Ijma as-Sahabah, the Sahabah differed in the style of killing the homosexual; however, they had a consensus (ijma) on killing him.
Al-Bayhaqi extracted from Ali (ra) that he stoned a homosexual, and Al-Bayhaqi extracted from Abu Bakr that he gathered the people in the concerning a man who was married just as women are married and he asked the companions of the Messenger of Allah (saw) about that. The most severe among them on that day was Ali (ra). He said: ‘No nation among the nations has disobeyed with this sin except one nation with whom Allah did what you know. We view that we should burn them with fire.’
And Ja’far bin Muhammad narrated from his father from Ali in other than this incident who said: ‘He is stoned then burnt with fire.’Al-Bayhaqi extracted from ibn Abbas that he was asked about the hadd of the homosexual and said: ‘The highest building in the town is looked for then he is thrown from it upside down, then he is followed by stones.’ And it narrated from Ali: ‘He is killed by the sword then burnt due to the enormity of the sin.’ Umar and Uthman adopted ‘that a wall is thrown upon him.’ All these opinions collectively indicate killing even if they differ on the style of killing.
Marriage
Finally, Islam encourages marriage at a young age if possible, and seeks to remove the obstacles to this.“Oh you who are young. Whoever amongst you can afford to marry should marry, because it will help him refrain from looking at other women, and guard his modesty (i.e. private parts from unlawful sex). And whoever is not able to marry he should fast because it will protect him”
[Muslim].
Abu Hurairah (ra) narrates that the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said: "Three (persons) have a right from Allah to be helped: the Mujahid in the way of Allah, the seeker for marriage who wishes to guard his chastity and the slave who seeks funds to free oneself."The upshot of the Islamic social system regarding marriage is that young people would not have casual affairs but make strong commitments before engaging in sexual relationships. This is likely to go a long way in preventing the spread of HIV. In contrast with some major religions, it does not prohibit barrier contraception, which could be seen as the last protection against the spread of HIV rather than the only protection.
As for the injecting of drugs, intoxicants are absolutely prohibited in Islam and an Islamic social system would seek to eradicate drug use among its people. This would start with the cultivating of the individuals taqwa and creation of an Islamic atmosphere in society, but would proceed to an uncompromising crack down on the producers and dealers of drugs. It should be remembered that the medical name for heroine is diamorphine, which is used in many medical conditions and is currently in short supply (Britain’s National Health Service recently went through a national shortage, some hospitals running out altogether). Therefore such produce does not have to be traded illegally though the illegal version ismore profitable.
The Problem of Stigma – the Islamic view
Muslim countries with HIV problems such as Pakistan or Indonesia should cultivate an Islamic environment within their societies and this is the best way to eradicate the spread of HIV in the short and long term. HIV is not a disease exclusively transmitted between homosexuals. It is now possible to contract HIV without performing any action prohibited in Islam, although very unlikely. HIV must not carry a stigma in Islamic societies. If a person has performed a prohibited action it must be proven, otherwise speculation and suspicion is not permitted. If a person has performed a prohibited action and it has been proven, then he should be penalised as proscribed in Islam, but the presence or absence of this infection does not make him or her guilty of any further crime.
In Islam having HIV is not a sin in itself. It is mostly, but not exclusively, transmitted through prohibited actions and it is those actions that should be frowned upon if it is proven that they have been performed, regardless of the transmission of this virus.Seeking a cure – Prophet (saw) said “For every disease there is a cure, so seek the cure”
Conclusion
Eliminating the stigma and cultivating an Islamic society may contribute to controlling the spread of HIV in Islamic lands. Those who have already contracted the virus should be treated with the appropriate medications with compassion.As for the non-Muslim lands, they are likely to continue to suffer hugely until a satisfactory model of an Islamic society can be displayed to them proving its capability to prevent HIV. Strong political leadership in these countries is required to modify behaviours but these political leaders need something to lead with which they do not currently have.
The importance of retroviral drugs and future vaccines should not be over-emphasised. They are needed for those people who currently suffer from the virus, but are not the solution. Even if a vaccine or cure is found, it will inevitably be expensive and there are many terrible eminently treatable infections that plague the developing world and are not treated due to expense or practicality leading to millions of deaths each year. Pharmaceutical companies will not solve this problem.
The Euro/American plan of action involving condoms, clean needles and medication has not worked so far and is unlikely to work in the long run. Total social change is required world wide to help stem the spread of this disease but that must be based on ideas and only the Islamic ideology has a social structure likely to tackle this disease. This is particularly relevant in affected Muslim countries, which should act as leaders by example.These changes are needed immediately because sub-Saharan Africa, standing now as 28 million infected and 2.4 million dead, cannot continue like this for much longer.
Saturday, 9 February 2008
Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams
Let Muslims establish the Shariah in their own lands!
The Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams gave an interview to the BBC on 7th February 2008 in which he proposed that some aspects of Shariah law could be incorporated into English law. The responses to his comments have been vitriolic. The media provocatively reported his words that it was ‘unavoidable' that Muslims would have Shariah law in the UK, opening a familiar attack on Islam. Prime Minister Gordon Brown entered the debate saying that laws in Britain should only be based on British values - although where lucrative profits for the City of London are concerned, he is happy to promote Britain as a centre for Shariah compliant finance. A typical response to the William's interview on websites was: "Muslims are running away from this barbaric law which is practiced in their own countries, once here they want to bring this barbaric law with them. If they want this law they could go and live in a country that practices this law."
The perverse irony is that the politicians who make policies that encourage such a hostile climate also make policies to prevent Muslims from establishing the Shariah in the Muslim world. The ‘war on terror' was, in the words of Bush and Blair, to prevent the rise of a Khilafah and Shariah. The support for tyrants who crush all Islamic political opposition has continued for decades for the same purpose. Although Brown said that laws in Britain should only be based on British values, successive western governments have worked to force laws everywhere in the world to be based on secular liberal values.
It is the height of conceit that these politicians, who approved the bloodshed in Iraq and Afghanistan to export this secular system, cry about protecting Britain's traditions and heritage, whilst obstructing the desire in the Muslim world to have laws that reflect their Islamic beliefs, heritage and system. It is this supremacist desire of western governments to enforce western secular values on the Muslim world that is the real problem in the world, and not a fabricated campaign of Muslims to enforce Shariah laws on the people of Britain. In fact, this fabrication of a campaign to establish Shariah in Britain is nothing more than part of a propaganda campaign to justify and fuel Britain's global agenda to prevent the rise of the Caliphate, so as to secure its colonial interests.
To seek to organise marriages and divorce, inheritance, food regulations and personal financial arrangements within our community is not a campaign for the establishment of Shariah. It is to live our lives according to Islam, in a personal space. Yet, some amongst politicians and the media have sought to use this as another Muslim bashing exercise, encouraging an out pouring of abuse against Shariah, and comments that if Muslims want it, they should leave. These events only go to show the inherent intolerance of western liberal values. The irony is that the Islamic Khilafah state protected the rights of minorities and allowed minorities to live according to their laws within their personal lives and religious codes.
Moreover, whilst people will say they do not want to see Shariah punishments in Britain, it is rich of the critics in this society - with its high levels of theft, murder, rape and other crimes - that they lecture Muslims on their choice of law in the Muslim world.
Prejudice is not a new thing for many Muslims in Britain. Xenophobia and the inherent assumption of superiority is part of Europe's tradition. Germany in 1930's and Bosnia in 1990's illustrate the worst of Europe's treatment of minorities. The experience of Blacks and Asians, Jews, Catholics, the Irish and other minority communities' show just how common bad treatment of minorities has been in the UK
So how should Muslim's respond?
We should realise that this media propaganda is a deliberate provocation. This is a means to set people against each other and create fitna (division). We should show the beauty of Islam and the Shariah in our lives and show how Allah has given us a sublime deen, which brings tranquillity to the heart and mind. Such an example, where the Shariah commands us to be good to our neighbours (regardless of race or religion), good to our elders, parents and teachers, to refrain from insulting people's beliefs, is sorely needed. It stands in stark contrast with increasing individualism and selfishness, antisocial behaviour and disrespect, and the freedom to insult and persecute that so characterises western countries today.
In this climate of attacking and smearing Islam we must stand up as a united community and enter into a vigorous debate with the way of life in the west i.e. secularism. For it is not merely that they attack Islam, it is also that they are blind to the flaws that exist in this secular system that they export across the world. While they resort to abuse and insults we should follow the example of our Prophet (SAW) and show the flaws and wrongs of western secularism that has brought so much misery to the people of the world. Rampant materialism, a widening wealth gap, individualism, rape, child abuse, racism, occupation and oppression are the fruits of a world ruled by man's freedom to do whatever he pleases. The secular age of man has been arguably the most bloody in human history.
Secondly, we should continue to join the work to establish the Shariah in the Muslim world. Britain is where so much anti-Shariah and anti-Islam propaganda is created and exported. We need to counter this propaganda by illustrating the great weaknesses in the secular model that is so often immorally exported at the barrel of a gun, or as a condition to humanitarian aid.
The Messenger of Allah (saw) and his companions, may Allah be pleased with them all, faced such propaganda and worse during 13 years in Makkah. They restricted their response to words, arguments and a battle of ideas without raising a finger in action. This is the battle that the enemies of Islam fear, and why they attack with smear, exaggeration, insults and hate speech.
Our goal, dear brothers and sisters, is to voice the message of Islam strongly to those around us, and to stay close to Allah (swt) seeking His Help at all times.
وَإِن تَوَلَّوْاْ فَاعْلَمُواْ أَنَّ اللّهَ مَوْلاَكُمْ نِعْمَ الْمَوْلَى وَنِعْمَ النَّصِيرُ
And if they turn away [from righteousness], know that Allah is your Protector - [and] how excellent a Protector and how excellent a Helper!
(TMQ al - Anfal 8:40)
Thursday, 31 January 2008
Kenya
What is happening in Kenya?
The results were delayed for more than a day, at a time when ODM candidate Raila Odinga was leading
Many thousands of people seem to have only voted in the presidential election but not the parliamentary or local polls held at the same time
Some of these results came from areas known to be pro-Kibaki
In the parliamentary race, Mr Odinga's ODM won twice as many seats as Mr Kibaki's Party of National Unity (PNU)
Results in some constituencies were different when announced nationally, to when they had previously been announced locally
The head of the election commission has admitted that turnout in one constituency was 115%.
Kenya's opposition Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) claims that last month's election was rigged in favour of President Mwai Kibaki. Protests have led to over 900 deaths nationwide and more than 250,000 people have fled their homes.
According to the official results, Mr Kibaki won with a tiny margin of 230,000 votes out of a total cast of some 10 million. There were various discrepencies in the elections, such as:
The results were delayed for more than a day, at a time when ODM candidate Raila Odinga was leading
Many thousands of people seem to have only voted in the presidential election but not the parliamentary or local polls held at the same time
Some of these results came from areas known to be pro-Kibaki
In the parliamentary race, Mr Odinga's ODM won twice as many seats as Mr Kibaki's Party of National Unity (PNU)
Results in some constituencies were different when announced nationally, to when they had previously been announced locally
The head of the election commission has admitted that turnout in one constituency was 115%.
Opinion polls conducted by Steadman prior to the election indicated that Raila was ahead and his ODM was more popular than the PNU. It is likely that President Mwai Kibaki manipulated the results in order to remain in power.
It is important to understand the background of both parties and their allegiences.
I) The Party of National Unity (PNU) headed by the incumbent president Mwai Kibaki. This group actually is an alliance for the following groups:
1. National Rainbow Coalition-Kenya: This is Kibaki’s original party.
2. The Democratic Party (DP)
3. Kenya African National Union (KANU)
4. Forum for the Restoration of Democracy-Kenya.
5. Forum for the Restoration of Democracy-People.
6. Shirikisho Party of Kenya.
7. TIP
8. Safina
9. Sisi Kwa Sisi
10. Agano
Most of these ten parties are led by the regional tribal leaders. This alliance was hastily cobbled up just before the general elections because Kibaki feared that chances of his NARC party winning the polls alone were slim. He therefore forged this alliance under a single umbrella to face the opposition as a unified front.
II) The Opposition Alliance: The Orange Democratic Movement (ODM) which split into three outfits:
1. The Orange Democratic Movement is the main group and the strongest of the alliance. This is led by Raila Odinga who is the Opposition Leader who is form Lou, the second largest tribe in Kenya. He was chosen to head the party in its conclave held recently and nominated to be the opposition candidate for the Kenyan presidency in the ensuing elections. Immedeately on being elected leader, Odinga took the initiative to foster cordial relations with all his 5 rivals whom he had defeated at the party conference. This was designed to put forward a unified opposition front as these rival leaders represented various tribes as follows:
A. Musalia Mudavadi, the former Vice President represented the Luhya tribe which is the 3rd largest tribe on Kenya.
B. William Ruto, was the right hand man of the former president Moi. He represents the Kanenjin tribe.
C. Najeeb Bala’la’, a Muslim of the Yemeni (Hadhrami) origin. He is a strong supporter of Raila Odinga within the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM).
C. Najeeb Bala’la’, a Muslim of the Yemeni (Hadhrami) origin. He is a strong supporter of Raila Odinga within the Orange Democratic Movement (ODM).
D. Joseph Niagah, who although belongs to the Kikuyu tribe of the current president, yet is in the opposition.
E. Charity Ngilu, is from the Kamba tribe who heads the NARC alliance which actually brought Kibaki to the presidency. She then joined the opposition.
Raila won the nomination to head the oppostion alliance thanks to the American support which is evident from the statements of the US Ambassador who called upon the voters to back the “youth” , indicating Raila who is many years junior to Kibaki. It is known that Kibaki who inspite of his previous British loyalties, was closer to the US in his tenure as president during 2002-2005 and the US had hoped to lure him to its ways especially after his US visit in 2003.
Britain on its part had foisted its own men around the president by using the ‘carrot and stick’ tactics. This campaign for Britain was carried out by the former president Moi who is a bastion of the British politics in Kenya: Moi thretened to start an intensive campaign to expose Kibaki’s corrupt practices, at the same time he offered to support him in the next prsendential elections. Moi convinced him that the current public opinion was against the US and cited the results of the 2005 referendum on the draft constitution prepared by Kibaki which went against him. Kibaki was convinced that the people and their votes were with Moi and thereby the British loyalists and if he went wioth them, he can be assured of a second presidential term.
Thus by using the threat of exposure and incentive for a second term, Britain ensured that since 2005, Kibaki reverted back to his original loyalty.This prompted the US to back Raila as Kibaki’s rival. Consequently, the alliance in power started a massive campaign against Raila and the US as follows:
A. The government charged Raila that he promised the Americans to establish their military base in Kenya.
B. The government refused to allow American observers for elections from the Carter Center while permitting only EU deputed observers.
B. The government refused to allow American observers for elections from the Carter Center while permitting only EU deputed observers.
C. Newton Kulundu, the Labour Minister in the government charged the US of ignoring the Human rights and liberties aspirations of the Third World and cited the Guantanamo and Abu Ghuraib incidents. This infuriated the US Ambassador so much so that he refused to shake hands with Kulundu.
D. The government supporters organised a protest at the site of the 1998 US embassy blasts and raised anti-American slogans.
2. The Orange Democratic Movement-Kenya (ODM-K) is led by Kalonzo Musyoko, a conservative christian with links to the former president Moi and belongs to the 5th largest Kenyan tribe of Kamba. It may be recalled that Kalonzo had split from the original ODM before its conference where Raila was elected its leader. He his regarded by most local observers as a government agent sent to the opposition in order to cause disruption in its ranks and confuse the voters due to the similarity in the names and their election symbols. Kalonzo has so far only succeeded in getting a few leaders to his party from his own tribe. His party is therefore regarded as a mere tribal entity.
3. Kenya African National Union (KANU) has further split into two factions:
1. Faction led by Uhuru Kenyatta the younger son of the first Kenyan president Jomo Kenyatta. He has little political expertise but belongs to the largest Kenyan tribe of Kikuyu. He is widely regarded as a pawn in the hands of the former president Moi. Until recently, Uhuru was in the opposition ODM even during the referendum on the new draft constitution in November 2005, but switched his loyalties to the current president Kibaki under pressure from former president Moi. As a result, the ODM movement was reduced to being a single party rather than an alliance.
2. The new Kenya African National Union (KANU) led by Nicholas Biwott, who is a right-hand man of Moi. There wer persistent rivalries between Biwott and Uhuru, but were sorted out by Moi to unify the KANU.
Raila is the strongest opponent of Kibaki who was nominated by the ODM as the presidential candidate. This is why Kibaki spared no effort to engineer a split in the ranks of the ODM with the help of former president Moi. Hence the opposition charged Kibaki of allying with a dictator.
Both Kibaki and Moi are from the British Imperialist background are working to keep Kenya under the British influence and to isolate Raila who appears to harbour American loyalty. They regard him as dangerous for the British influence as he is an impressive orator who can sway the people with his eloquent speaking skills.
This is another example of the turmoil created by the meddling of the Western powers in Africa, a rich continent destroyed by the greed of the colonialists.
Thursday, 24 January 2008
World Aids day
World Aids day - an Islamic perspective
• December 1st was World Aids Day, we have seen in the newspapers and on TV screens a lot of discussion about HIV & Aids
• Let us look at this subject to understand its reality and look at the Islamic solution to the problem of HIV & Aids.
• HIV stands out in respect of its prevention. It is one of the most notorious infectious diseases around today, with good reason, as it is currently incurable. Although, it’s disease progression in an individual can be significantly slowed down.
• The uniqueness of HIV is in its transmission. It is a virus that must pass from person to person through the exchange of significant quantities of bodily fluids, primarily sexual fluid or blood.
• These fluids do not ordinarily transfer from person to person except through the undertaking of specific activities over which an individual normally has control. The main methods of transmission amongst adults are via sexual intercourse or the sharing of needles that enter the blood stream of sequential individuals. The sharing of needles primarily occurs during the use of recreational drugs such as heroine.
• A safe assertion may be made that if a healthy adult avoids certain high risk activities, the probability of contracting HIV are miniscule. If two people of the opposite gender marry, and are faithful to each other for the rest of their lives, their risk of contracting HIV through sexual activity is negligible. HIV in children is usually transmitted during childbirth from an infected mother. There are various techniques that can be used to prevent this vertical spread. However, it is simple reality that if adults do not have HIV, children could not get it either.
• The UN has reported that rates of HIV throughout the world are reaching previously unprecedented levels, estimated to be 40 million people infected worldwide. There were over 4 million new cases in the last year, 700 000 of which were in children. Current boom areas are Pakistan and Indonesia, where the report said that transmission was out of control, although the problem is most critical in sub-Saharan Africa.
The Secular response
“Freedom” is one of the core principles in the capitalist ideology. They therefore shy away from advising people to avoid those behaviours likely to lead to HIV infection. They prefer to try to find ways to perform the various risky behaviours that they want to practice, but with a modicum of protection.Practically speaking this means the promotion of condom use, and the provision of clean needles and syringes to drug addicts so that they do not need to share. These principles have been the lynch pins of strategies aimed at preventing the spread of HIV in the Western world. These approaches are increasingly being peddled to the developing world as the solution.
This has not worked at all so far. While condoms are believed to be protective and the provision of clean needles may well limit the risk of transmission, it is naïve to expect uneducated drug addicts to be responsible, and condoms do not provide full proof protection. If these are really the only preventative measures that can be offered, failure is assured and the virus will continue to spread. This is an issue that many in the west are starting to acknowledge.Jim Yong Kim, head of the WHO’s HIV/Aids program, said in reference to the G8’s pledge to pump more money into getting wide spread access to anti-retroviral drugs that this is more to do with social change rather than administering better pharmaceuticals. “Treatment is not rocket science,” he said “prevention is rocket science”.
Cause
The cause behind the increase of promiscuity & drug taking in society here and everywhere in the world is concepts of Freedom & Benefit.Destroys any type of morality people haveIndecency & fornication are norms in West e.g. office environment. Places like Indian subcontinent are catching up, traditional values eroding.This is occurring due to concepts of personal freedom, freedom of ownership and benefit as the criterion for actions.Let us look at the cause behind this – idea of Freedom. They believe in 4 Freedoms – Freedom of belief, expression, ownership and personal freedom
Personal Freedom
The fourth type of freedom which the Capitalist system calls for and works to achieve and protect is the personal freedom. According to this system, every human being has the right to live his private life as he wishes unless he transgresses against the private lives of other people. He has the right to marry or to have an extra-marital relationship with any woman as long as it is done with her consent.He has the right to practice sexual perversion as long as this practice does not involve a minor. Also, he has the right to eat, drink and wear whatever he wants within the public laws. For these Capitalists, the concept of halal and haram does not exist when it comes to personal conduct, as long as the person behaves lawfully, and "lawful behaviour" in the Capitalist societies is subject to disparity from one society to another and from one time to another.
Religion has no influence upon this freedom. The system is detached from religion according to the Capitalist ideology. As a result of applying this type of freedom in the Capitalist societies, immorality has spread. Men and women live together without any legal relationship, and even men and women have partners of the same sex and establish abnormal relationships amongst themselves under the protection of the law.The personal and sexual perversions that prevail in the Capitalist societies result from personal freedom which has also led to unbelievable conflicts. Pornographic magazines and movies, sex phone lines, and nude bars are just a few examples of the abnormalities and perversions which the Capitalist societies have degenerated to as a result of personal freedom. The evident disparity between one Capitalist society and another in the practice of this freedom results from the origin of the Capitalist societies and their gradual application of the Capitalist ideology.
The Capitalist societies were established on the ruins of the Feudal system and the traditions and culture upheld by the Church. Because it was impossible to change these traditions overnight, the Capitalists were divided among themselves. One group pushed to immediately abandon these traditions, whilst another group called for removing the old traditions and culture gradually by taking into consideration the reality of the societies and the prevalent culture and traditions at the time. Those who called for the immediate practice of freedom were called Liberals, and those who called for the gradual application of freedom were called Conservatives. Another intermediate group has surfaced between these two groups who were called Moderates. This "Middle Group" was also divided; some of them were more inclined to the Conservatives and were called Rightists, and some of them were more inclined to the Liberals and were called Leftist. The Capitalist societies still have these classifications of groups today.
A Muslim is not allowed to accept personal freedom because it allows what Allah has forbidden, even aside from it being a source of various social diseases. Personal freedom is the freedom of fornication, sexual perversion, immorality, drinking alcohol, and other diseases.
“And those who disbelieve, their actions are like a mirage in a desert. The thirsty one thinks it to be water, until he comes up to it, he finds it to be nothing, but he finds Allah with him, Who will pay him his full due (hell). And Allah is swift in taking account.”
[Nur: 39]
He (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) also said:
“Two categories of people I have not seen them (yet): some people who hold whips like the tails of the cows by which they lash the people. And women who wear (clothes) but (are) half-naked, bending (their bodies) and bending the sight of the men to them. Their heads are like the tilted humps of the camels. These women will not enter the paradise nor will they experience its smell (odour), though its odour is felt at a distance of so and so (days)”
[Muslim].
Islamic alternative
The Islamic social system properly applied, holds the long-term solution to the problem of HIV. It constructs a society that heavily emphasises the importance of marriage prior to sexual relations, even prescribing penalties on those who transgress such boundaries. The resulting society would therefore have a particular complexion. The society would be founded on a number of principles.
Firstly, an Islamic State would create an atmosphere conducive for taqwa (consciousness of Allah [swt]) to thrive. Islamic codes contain certain etiquettes, which guard against inappropriate social relationships. These include dress regulations and arrangement of private buildings.
“Tell the believing men to lower their gaze, and protect their private parts. That is purer for them. Verily, Allah is All Aware of what they do. And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and protect their private parts."
[TMQ An-Nur : 30-31].
Abu Hurairah reported that the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said,
“When a person commits fornication there goes out of him the Iman (belief) and it hovers like a canopy over his head and when he quits this act the Iman reverts to him again”
[Tirmidhi & Abu Dawud]
It has been narrated by Abu Musa al-Ashari that the Messenger of Allah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said,
“Any women that uses perfume and walks past men in order for them to smell her fragrance; she is a fornicator”
[Tirmidhi & Abu Dawud].
The Shari’ah prevents khulwa (seclusion) between men and women. The reality of khulwa is that it makes the man and woman more sexually agitated. By prohibiting this solitary privacy a cause of corruption is eliminated, because the khulwa is one of the direct means to corruption.
Jabir ibn Abdullah narrated that the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said,
“Whosoever believes in Allah and the Last Day (Al-Yawm al-Akhir) let him not be alone with a woman who has not a Mahram (male relative who she cannot marry) with her. Indeed, the third (person) is al-Shaytan!”
[Ahmad]
Taqwa & public opinion – quote of Umar – Those who are not corrected by the Taqwa are corrected by the Sultan (authority).
The Islamic punishment system enforces these rules
“The woman and man guilty of illegal sexual intercourse, flog each of them with a hundred stripes."
[TMQ An Nur: 2]
Narrated by Jabir bin Abdullah Al-Ansari: a man from the tribe of Bani Aslam came to Allah's Messenger (salAllahu alaihi wasallam) and informed him that he had committed illegal sexual intercourse and he bore witness four times against himself. Allah's Messenger (salAllahu alaihi wasallam) ordered him to be stoned to death, as he was a married person.
(Sahih Al-Bukhari, vol 8, Hadith no 805).
Homosexuality
From Ikrimah from ibn Abbas who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
“Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Lut, kill the doer and the one to whom it is done”
[it is narrated by the five excep An-Nisai]
As for Ijma as-Sahabah, the Sahabah differed in the style of killing the homosexual; however, they had a consensus (ijma) on killing him. Al-Bayhaqi extracted from Ali (ra) that he stoned a homosexual, and Al-Bayhaqi extracted from Abu Bakr that he gathered the people in the concerning a man who was married just as women are married and he asked the companions of the Messenger of Allah (saw) about that. The most severe among them on that day was Ali (ra). He said: ‘No nation among the nations has disobeyed with this sin except one nation with whom Allah did what you know. We view that we should burn them with fire.’
And Ja’far bin Muhammad narrated from his father from Ali in other than this incident who said: ‘He is stoned then burnt with fire.’Al-Bayhaqi extracted from ibn Abbas that he was asked about the hadd of the homosexual and said: ‘The highest building in the town is looked for then he is thrown from it upside down, then he is followed by stones.’ And it narrated from Ali: ‘He is killed by the sword then burnt due to the enormity of the sin.’ Umar and Uthman adopted ‘that a wall is thrown upon him.’ All these opinions collectively indicate killing even if they differ on the style of killing.
Marriage
Finally, Islam encourages marriage at a young age if possible, and seeks to remove the obstacles to this.
“Oh you who are young. Whoever amongst you can afford to marry should marry, because it will help him refrain from looking at other women, and guard his modesty (i.e. private parts from unlawful sex). And whoever is not able to marry he should fast because it will protect him”
[Muslim].
Abu Hurairah (ra) narrates that the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:
"Three (persons) have a right from Allah to be helped: the Mujahid in the way of Allah, the seeker for marriage who wishes to guard his chastity and the slave who seeks funds to free oneself."
The upshot of the Islamic social system regarding marriage is that young people would not have casual affairs but make strong commitments before engaging in sexual relationships. This is likely to go a long way in preventing the spread of HIV. In contrast with some major religions, it does not prohibit barrier contraception, which could be seen as the last protection against the spread of HIV rather than the only protection.As for the injecting of drugs, intoxicants are absolutely prohibited in Islam and an Islamic social system would seek to eradicate drug use among its people. This would start with the cultivating of the individuals taqwa and creation of an Islamic atmosphere in society, but would proceed to an uncompromising crack down on the producers and dealers of drugs. It should be remembered that the medical name for heroine is diamorphine, which is used in many medical conditions and is currently in short supply (Britain’s National Health Service recently went through a national shortage, some hospitals running out altogether). Therefore such produce does not have to be traded illegally though the illegal version ismore profitable.
The Problem of Stigma – the Islamic view
Muslim countries with HIV problems such as Pakistan or Indonesia should cultivate an Islamic environment within their societies and this is the best way to eradicate the spread of HIV in the short and long term. HIV is not a disease exclusively transmitted between homosexuals. It is now possible to contract HIV without performing any action prohibited in Islam, although very unlikely. HIV must not carry a stigma in Islamic societies. If a person has performed a prohibited action it must be proven, otherwise speculation and suspicion is not permitted. If a person has performed a prohibited action and it has been proven, then he should be penalised as proscribed in Islam, but the presence or absence of this infection does not make him or her guilty of any further crime.
In Islam having HIV is not a sin in itself. It is mostly, but not exclusively, transmitted through prohibited actions and it is those actions that should be frowned upon if it is proven that they have been performed, regardless of the transmission of this virus.Seeking a cure – Prophet (saw) said “For every disease there is a cure, so seek the cure”
Conclusion
Eliminating the stigma and cultivating an Islamic society may contribute to controlling the spread of HIV in Islamic lands. Those who have already contracted the virus should be treated with the appropriate medications with compassion.As for the non-Muslim lands, they are likely to continue to suffer hugely until a satisfactory model of an Islamic society can be displayed to them proving its capability to prevent HIV. Strong political leadership in these countries is required to modify behaviours but these political leaders need something to lead with which they do not currently have.
The importance of retroviral drugs and future vaccines should not be over-emphasised. They are needed for those people who currently suffer from the virus, but are not the solution. Even if a vaccine or cure is found, it will inevitably be expensive and there are many terrible eminently treatable infections that plague the developing world and are not treated due to expense or practicality leading to millions of deaths each year. Pharmaceutical companies will not solve this problem.
The Euro/American plan of action involving condoms, clean needles and medication has not worked so far and is unlikely to work in the long run. Total social change is required world wide to help stem the spread of this disease but that must be based on ideas and only the Islamic ideology has a social structure likely to tackle this disease. This is particularly relevant in affected Muslim countries, which should act as leaders by example.These changes are needed immediately because sub-Saharan Africa, standing now as 28 million infected and 2.4 million dead, cannot continue like this for much longer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
