Shariah - Terrorising or Modernising

Jamadi-ul-Awwal 12, 1431 A.H, Tuesday, April 27, 2010

‘The Saracens [i.e. The Muslims] show us great goodwill. They allow us to build our churches and to observe our own customs without hindrance.’1

These are the sentiments of Patriarch Theodosius of Jerusalem regarding Muslim tolerance, expressed in a letter written to the Patriarch of Constantinople in 869 CE. Theodosius was certainly the equivalent of Archbishop of Canterbury in Jerusalem at the time. We may wonder whether his acknowledgement was deemed controversial, or whether he was asked to resign for daring to speak well of Muslims. Such sentiments did not of course provoke the kind of outrage that is witnessed today; probably due to the factual accuracy of the patriarch’s statement. What Theodosius stated is also corroborated by other Christian figures such as Bernard the Wise (a French pilgrim who visited Jerusalem in the reign of Caliph al-Mu’tazz [866-9 CE]), who stated that if any property was left unattended for some time, it would be found unmolested upon return, ‘such is the peace there’2.

If modern critics of Shariah law were living in those times, we don’t quite know what they would have said about its effective tolerant nature. The dynamics of the Shariah and its application continues, on the one hand, to intrigue interest, and on the other to generate scepticism. The debate of course has global implications; how compatible is Shariah law with the modern age?

At the outset we must begin by highlighting media bias and selective focus on cases of ‘unethical’ and ‘uncivilized’ treatment of others in Muslim populated countries, which has sadly done much to tarnish a legal code founded upon ideals of justice, human rights and deterrence; resulting in a somewhat negative popular perception of Shariah law. The law code is applied extremely selectively, or not at all, in Muslim populated countries today.

What is Shariah law? Shariah law is the law that is directly derived from the Qur’an and authentic prophetic traditions (the Sunnah) and it is this law, which Muslims uphold as sacred as well as a source of modernity. The parameters for such a discussion are blurred due to the aforementioned current context, but it is hoped that objectivity will triumph above misconceived notions and political persuasions. A fusion of linguistic and technical terminology allows for recognition of modernity as anything newly accepted, and manifests itself through political, economic and scientific development.

Modernity of course is a very fluid and relative term, and the peripheries of the notion may change from time to time or place to place. Modernity may influence societies in a diverse range of ways, and under various socio-economic circumstances, the effects of modernity may transpire in a variety of forms. Today, however, it is fairly accurate to conclude that no one has a monopoly on modernity; one man’s modernity may be another’s barbarity.

Who defines modernity and its limits is the question still to be addressed by European scholarship. European modernity is in continuous evolution, not having any set consistency, standard or criteria. However, the Islamic definition of modernity is very different in both make-up and stature. Islamic Law seeks to ensure the protection of one’s life, honour, property, intellect, religion and the constructive development of humanity - whilst pursuing the ‘progressive’ attainment of modernity. This must be noted in light of contemporary markings of ‘modernity’; from the economic exploitation of poor nations to the corrosion of social values within contemporary and supposedly civil societies.

We may note that Muslims governed parts of Spain with Shariah law for more than seven centuries (711-1492 CE). This law produced such peace and tranquillity among the population that they were able to achieve high levels of academic excellence and scientific advancement, and it was this very same advancement, which was subsequently translated into Latin for European learning by scholars such as Gerard of Cremona, Michael Scot, Robert of Ketton and Adelard of Bath. Europeans were, at that time, so unacquainted with these sciences that Robert of Ketton, when writing the preface for his translation of the Arabic text, ‘Composition of Alchemy’, stated that ‘Since what Alchymia is, and what its composition is, your Latin world does not yet know, I will explain in the present book’3.

Works on all scientific fields were translated in the schools of Toledo and then subsequently passed on to European countries. Professor Thomas Arnold confirmed this by asserting that ‘Muslim Spain had written one of the brightest pages in the history of medieval Europe. Her influence had passed through Provence into the other countries of Europe, bringing into birth a new poetry and new culture, and it was from her that the Christian scholars received what of Greek Philosophy and science they had to stimulate their mental activity up to the time of the renaissance.’4

It would thus be of great benefit to British society if some of its politicians and journalists were to drop the attitude that is well spotted by Maria Rosa Menocal, a prominent scholar of medieval European literature, who stated that: ‘Westerners – Europeans - have great difficulty in considering the possibility that they are in some way seriously indebted to the Arab world...’5.

How Shariah law enabled the Spanish Muslims, Jews and Christian to produce this result was also appreciated by some of the most prominent European thinkers. Adam Smith, the 18th Century founder of modern economics whose picture is printed on the current £20 note, was exceedingly inspired by the Islamic method of governing. He proclaimed that ‘...the empire of the Caliphs seems to have been the first state under which the world enjoyed that degree of tranquility which the cultivation of the sciences requires. It was under the protection of those generous and magnificent princes, that the ancient philosophy and astronomy of the Greeks were restored and established in the East; that tranquility, which their mild, just and religious government diffused over their vast empire, revived the curiosity of mankind, to inquire into the connecting principles of nature.’6

How the Shariah Law provided this security and tolerance is clearly demonstrated in the texts of the treaties, which were agreed upon, by the Muslim rulers and their non-Muslim subjects. Consider, for instance, the Treaty of Jerusalem (638 CE): ‘This is the protection which the servant of Allah, Amir ul-Mumineen, grants to the people of Palestine. Thus, protection is for their lives, property, church, cross, for the healthy, and for all their co-religionists. In this way that their churches shall not be turned into dwelling houses, nor will they be pulled down, nor any injury will be done to them or to their enclosures, nor to their cross...and nor will anything be deducted from their wealth. No restrictions shall be made regarding their religious ceremonies…’7 This treaty concerning the Christians of Jerusalem was enacted by the 2nd Caliph Omar in the year 638 CE.

Whilst many politicians emphatically rule out any existence or partial accommodation of the Shariah law in UK, Times on-line (20th January 2008) ironically quoted Home Secretary Jacqui Smith remarking that she would not feel safe walking the streets of London at night even in well-to-do areas like Kensington and Chelsea. ‘It is thus astonishing’, as Chris Huhne notes, that ‘the Home Secretary admits that after 10 years of a Labour government, our capital is a no-go area for women at night.’8 Unfortunately, Jacqui Smith’s fears were confirmed by a Daily Mail report, only three days later, which stated that a teenage girl was raped next to the Diana memorial fountain in Kensington.

If the medieval monk Bernard the Wise (quoted above) was alive today, he probably would have advised the Home Secretary to give Shariah law a try. And perhaps too, the Nestorian John bar Penkaye (690 CE) who stated, regarding the reign of Mu’awiah (661-80 CE), that ‘the peace throughout the world was such that we have never heard, either from our fathers or from our grandparents, or seen that there had ever been any like it’9.

Much talk regarding the Shariah revolves around its attitude towards women. Women are protected, favoured and respected by the Shariah law, and this can be ascertained when one considers the rights and freedoms endowed upon women by Islam. For instance, women were considered an inherited object in pre-Islamic Arabia and sons would inherit their fathers’ wives as property. Islam, however, put an end to this injustice (O you who believe! you are forbidden to inherit women against their will. Nor should you treat them with harshness, that you may take away part of the dower you have given them-except where they have been guilty of open lewdness; on the contrary live with them on a footing of kindness and equity.)10; women were denied any part of inheritance, Islam gave them their share; women were not given a choice to choose a husband, Islam put an end to this inequality; men could divorce women at will and take them back at will, Islam diminished this practice and decreed that if a man was to divorce, he had to sustain the woman for four successive months; women were given complete rights of owning property by Islam and in addition to that they could spend their wealth when they liked while previously this was not the case; Islam declared that even if women were wealthy, it was still the responsibility of the husband to provide sustenance for them. Annie Besant, a feminist activist in the 1930s, had this to say about Islam’s position towards women:

‘I often think that a woman is more free in Islam than in Christianity. Woman is more protected by Islam...In the Qur’an the law about woman is more just and liberal. It is only in the last twenty years that Christian England has recognised the right of woman to property, while Islam has allowed this right from all times…it is a slander to say that Islam preaches that women have no souls.’ 11

Conclusion

It can therefore be noted that Muslims and their religious law played a decisive role in the modernisation of societies, and helped to establish a framework of justice and cohesive societal rule that has left a positive impression on the world. Much of what is now referred to as ‘western modernity’ – in its positive aspects - was largely borrowed from Islamic lands like Spain and Sicily, and such a contribution has received wide acclamation from historians and authors (Muslim and non-Muslim alike) of Islam’s unique ability to provide peace, harmony and advancement in society. Shariah law, therefore, is not terrorising; rather it is a divine religious code that works to foster human enlightenment.

References:

1) Christopher J. Walker, Islam and the West, (Gloucestershire, 2005), p. 17.
2) Christopher J. Walker, Islam and the West, (Gloucestershire, 2005), p 17.
3) E. J. Holmyard, Alchemy (Harmondsworth, 1957), p. 103.
4) Thomas Arnold, Preaching of Islam (London, 1913), p. 131.
5) Maria Rosa Menocal, The Arabic Role in Medieval Literary History, (Philadelphia, 2004), preface, p. xii.
6) Adam Smith, ‘History of Astronomy’, The Essays of Adam Smith (London, 1869), p. 353.
7) Thomas Arnold, Preaching of Islam (London, 1913), p. 56.
8) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3216678.ece
9) Hugh Kennedy, The Great Arab Conquests (London, 2008), p. 349.
10) The Holy Qur’an, Chapter 4, Verse 19.
11) Annie Besant, The Life and Teachings of Muhammad (Madras, 1932), p. 25-6.

The Hittin Institute is a research based initiative that focuses on historical, social and political analysis on issues affecting Muslims and the wider community. For further information please visit www.hittininstitute.com or email info@hittininstitute.com.