<![CDATA[
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFF0F0" link="#FF0000" vlink="#800080" alink="#0000FF" background="bg8.gif">
<table COLS=3 WIDTH="100%" >
<tr>
<td WIDTH="20%"><img SRC="manglow.gif" ALT="I bear witness that there is no god but God and Muhammad is His Messenger" height=138 width=90></td>
<td WIDTH="5%"></td>
<td WIDTH="75%">
<center><img SRC="apostasy.GIF" ALT="Apostasy in Islam" VSPACE=40 height=181 width=397></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>
<center><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font color="#990000"><font size=+1>A
Synthesis of the Islamic Law</font></font></font><a NAME="TOP"></a>
<br><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font color="#990000"><font size=+1>of
Blasphemy/Apostasy</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font color="#990000"><font size=+1>in
the Context of</font></font></font>
<br><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font color="#990000"><font size=+1>Canadian
Multiculturalism</font></font></font></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>
<center><i><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1>by <a href="http://www3.sympatico.ca/rmills/WORD.HTM">i</a><a href="word.htm">Syed
Mumtaz Ali</a></font></font></i></center>
</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td><b><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font color="#000000"><font size=-1>Contents:</font></font></font></b>
<br><a href="#I">I. Dictionary of Islam by T.P. Hughes</a>
<br><a href="#II">II. Abington Dictionary of Living Religions - Keith Crim</a>
<br><a href="#III">III. The Concise Law Dictionary -- Legal Definitions
- P.G. Osborne</a>
<br><a href="#IV">IV. The Muslim Conduct of State - Dr. M. Hamidullah</a>
<br><a href="#V">V. Introduction to Islam - Dr. M. Hamidullah</a>
<br><a href="#VI">VI. More Definitions and Differences</a>
<br><a href="#VII">VII. Kitab al-fiqh Ala' ad-Madahib al-Arba'ah - 'Abd
al-Rahman Jaziri</a>
<br><a href="#VIII">VIII. Some Pertinent Issues</a>
<br> <a href="#one">1.
Issues cannot be addressed in isolation or out of context</a>
<br> <a href="#two">2.
Unquestionable reverence and legislative authority of Prophet Muhammad
(p.b.u.h.)</a>
<br> <a href="#three">3.
Hadd or Tazeer?</a>
<br> <a href="#four">4.
Severity and Harshness of Islamic Punishment</a>
<br> <a href="#five">5.
Postmodernism and Islam</a>
<br> <a href="#six">6.
The Western Media and the 'Knowledge Vacuum'</a>
<br> <a href="#seven">7.
The Rushdie Affair</a>
<br><a href="#IX">IX. The basic concepts and special feature of Rights
and Duties.</a>
<br><a href="#X">X. Conclusion</a>
<br><a href="#APPENDIX">Appendix</a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td></td>
<td>
<center><b><font size=+2>Introduction </font></b></center>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
<br>
<table COLS=3 WIDTH="90%" >
<tr>
<td WIDTH="20%"></td>
<td WIDTH="5%"></td>
<td WIDTH="60%"><font face="Times New Roman"> An<b> </b>e-mail communication
by a visitor to our website made us aware, once again, of the need to make
available reliable information on those particular provisions of Muslim
Law which so often shock a casual, uninformed non-Muslim observer, who
is particularly accustomed to a 'Western'/secular way of thinking. Consequently
the derogatory epithets emanating from such people seem to acquire a life
and a currency of their own. Such reactions in their turn, seem to shock
and baffle the Muslims out of their wits too! Yet, in some vague fashion,
both parties seem also to realize that their relative sets of basic values,
fundamental principles and concepts and inherent philosophies are different
in so many ways. Both parties are also likely to realize more often than
not that their respective positions make sense in the context of their
own circumstances. No doubt both are appreciative of the realities of life
that the world has shrunk and changed so much that there is no practical
alternative but to live and let others live side by side. Tolerance and
co-existence is no longer a matter of choice in this nuclear age. Genuine,
real tolerance is not an option anymore. Instead it has now become an imperative
that cannot be ignored. Therefore, it is incumbent on both sides to make
sincere efforts to demolish the barriers of mutual discontent and mutual
ignorance. No doubt the knowledge vacuum has to be eliminated, but how
does one go about filling in this vacuum? Philosophical discourses, academic
presentations and high-brow elitist approaches do have their own roles
to play in their own limited spheres, but it is the need of the man on
the street which must be given top priority. This need can only be fulfilled
by providing reliable information and knowledge in a simple yet sophisticated
manner to satisfy the wide spectrum of the grasp of the average man. In
faithful pursuit of its mandate, the Canadian Society of Muslims is trying
to do just that despite our own limitations of resources.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Our modest effort in this respect is mainly
meant to assist the non-Muslim, Western, secular man on the street, in
an unbiased understanding of Islamic teachings. We felt that there was
no point in resorting to the archaic language or the detailed scholarly
discussions and the academic texts of the usual classical legal compendiums
such as <i>Fatawa Alamgiri, Hidaya, Kifaya, Dural Mukhtar, Radd al-Muhtar</i>,<i>
Quaduri</i>, etc.<b> </b>We have therefore tried to use simple dictionaries
and other not-so-difficult English books which are readily available in
Western countries and easy to understand without getting into too much
detail of an academic nature.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">We are obliged to our thoughtful correspondent
for pinpointing the need for information on the Islamic Law of Blasphemy
and Apostasy. We have tried to cover almost all the points of his letter
which in effect are used as our parameters for discussion of the subject
matter.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<center>
<p><a NAME="I"></a><font face="Times New Roman"><b>I. Dictionary of Islam
</b><sup><a href="#N_1_">(1)</a></sup></font>
<br><font face="Times New Roman"><i>by T.P. Hughes</i>:</font></center>
<p><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The following definitions are important
for our discussion:</font>
<br>
<p><u><font face="Times New Roman"><b>Blasphemy</b> </font></u><font face="Times New Roman">-
"(Kufr) 'to hide' (the truth).</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">It includes a denial of any of the essential
principles of Islam.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">A Muslim convicted of blasphemy is sentenced
to death in Muhammadan countries."</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">According to <i>Webster's Dictionary</i><sup><a href="#N_2_">(2)</a></sup>"contemptuous
and irreverent speech about God or kings regarded as sacred." </font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><b><u>Apostasy</u></b> - "According to
Muslim Law, a male apostate, or <i>murtadd</i>, is liable to be put to
death if he continue obstinate in his error; a female apostate is not subject
to capital punishment, but she may be kept in confinement until she recant.
If either the husband or the wife apostatize from the faith of Islam, a
divorce takes place <i>ipso facto; </i>the wife is entitled to her whole
dower, but no sentence of divorce is necessary. If the husband and wife
both apostatize together, their marriage is generally allowed to continue,
although Imam Zufar says if either husband or wife were singly to return
to Islam, then the marriage would be dissolved.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">According to Abu Hanifah, a male apostate
is disabled from selling or otherwise disposing of his property. But Abu
Yusuf and Imam Muhammad differ from their master on this point, and consider
a male apostate to be as competent to exercise every right as if he were
still in the faith.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">If a boy under age apostatize, he is not
to be put to death, but to be imprisoned until he come to full age, when,
if he continues in the state of unbelief, he must be put to death. Neither
lunatics nor drunkards are held to be responsible for their apostasy from
Islam. If a person <i>upon compulsion</i> became an apostate, his wife
is not divorced, nor are his lands forfeited. If a person become a Mussulman
[i.e. Muslim] upon compulsion, and afterwards apostatize, he is not to
be put to death.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The will of a male apostate is not valid,
but that of a female apostate is valid.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Ikrimah relates that some apostates were
brought to the Khalifa Ali, and he burnt them alive; but Ibn Abbas heard
of it and said that the Khalifa had not acted rightly, for the Prophet
had said "<i>Punish not with God's punishment</i> <i>(i.e., fire), but
whosoever changes his religion, kill him with the sword</i>."</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><b><u>Apostasy</u></b> - Returning to Webster's
dictionary this time for a definition of Apostasy and Treason: - "the public
abandoning of a religious faith, esp. Christianity, for another; a similar
abandonment of a doctrine or party." 'Treason is' defined: "not only as
an attempt to overthrow by illegal means, the government to which a person
owes allegiance, the act or attempted act of working for the enemies of
the State, and attempt to kill or injure the sovereign, but also betrayal
of trust, disloyalty (to a cause, friend, etc.)." </font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<center>
<p><a NAME="II"></a><font face="Times New Roman"><b>II. Abingdon Dictionary
of Living Religions</b> <sup><a href="#N_3_">(3)</a></sup></font></center>
<p><b><font face="Times New Roman">Apostasy in Islam is defined/described
as follows:</font></b>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><i>Irtidad</i> and<i> Ridda</i> [signifies
'turning back' from Islam to another religion or to unbelief] are the technical
Arabic terms and an apostate is a <i>murtadd</i>; (Lit. "one who turns
the back") [forsakes Islam for another religion or unbelief]. In the Qur'an,
God's punishment for <i>Irtidad</i> is only in the afterlife [life in the
next world] (Sura 16:106, ff.; 3:86 ff.; 2:217), although one who repents,
not having become confirmed in apostasy, will be saved. </font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">In the Prophetic Tradition, apostasy is
punishable by death, a view which is upheld and detailed in both the Sunnite
and Shi'ite law books.<sup><a href="#N_4_">(4)</a></sup> However, the offender
is usually granted an opportunity to recant. Only adult, sane, male apostates
who have acted freely are to be executed (traditionally by the sword).
Women are either imprisoned until they recant (Hannafites and Shi'ites)
or are executed (Malikites, Shafi'ites, and Hanbalites).</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The death penalty is rarely carried out
today, but there remains a powerful sense of outrage among Muslims when
one of their number forsakes the community.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><i>Bibliography,</i> Muhammad Ali, <i>The
Religion of Islam </i>(nd), pg. 591-99; S.M. Zwemer, <i>The Law of Apostasy
in Islam</i> (1924); Burhan al-Din Ali, <i>The Hedaya,</i> etc., Hamilton,
(1791), II, 227. (F.M. Denny)."</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<center>
<p><a NAME="III"></a><b><font face="Times New Roman">III. The Concise Law
Dictionary<font size=+1> </font><sup><a href="#N_5_">(5)</a></sup></font></b>
<br><b><font face="Times New Roman">(Legal Definitions) </font></b></center>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Please note, the following definitions
deal with the British Common Law system and do not cover the French/Civil/Roman
law system, yet they could help for a sort of a comparison with the Muslim
Law provisions.</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><u>Blasphemy</u> "The public or ciminal
libel of speaking matter relating to God, Jesus Christ, the Bible, or the
Book of Common Prayer, intending to wound the feelings of mankind or to
excite contempt and hatred against the Church by law established, or to
promote immorality. It is a common law misdemeanour."</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><u>Apostasy</u> "The total renunciation
of Christianity by one who has been educated in or professed that faith
within this realm. It is punishable under 9 WILL, 3, c.35"</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><u>Nationality</u> "The character of or
quality arising from membership of some particular nation or state, which
determines the political status and allegiance of a person. It may be acquired
by birth, descent, naturalisation, conquest, or cessation of territory,
or (if a woman) by marriage."</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><u>Naturalization</u> "When a person becomes
the subject of a State to which he was before an alien."</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><u>State</u> "The organized community:
the central political authority. In international law, a State is a people
permanently occupying a fixed territory, bound together in one body politic
by common subjection to some definite authority exercising, through the
medium of an organized government, a control over all persons and things
within its territory, capable of maintaining relations of peace and ware,
and free from political external control."</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><u>Treason</u> "Breach of allegiance --
In all prosecution for treason some overt act must be alleged and proved:
there existed formerly both high treason and petty treason -- <i>The Treason
Act</i>, 1800, provided that in case of high treason, where the acts charged
were the killing of the king or any direct attempt against his life or
whereby his life might be endangered or his person suffer bodily harm,
the person charged should be indicted, arraigned and tried in the same
manner as if he stood charged with murder. <i>The Treason Act</i>, 1945
amended the Act of 1800 to make it of general application to all cases
of treason."</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><u>Capital punishment</u> "Punishment of
death, awarded for treason and the capital felonies . . ."</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><u>Law</u> "A law is an obligatory rule
of conduct. The command of him or them that have coercive power (Hobbs);
A law is a rule of conduct imposed and enforced by the Sovereign (Austin).
But <i>the</i> law is the body of principles reorganised and applied by
the State in the administration of justice (Salmond).</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Ihering found the end of law in the delimitation
of interests; and Vinogradoff saw law as "a set of rules imposed and enforced
by a society with regard to the attribution and exercise of power over
persons and things."</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><u>Right</u> "An interest recognised and
protected
by the law, respect for which is a duty and disregard of which is a wrong
(Salmond). A capacity residing in one man of controlling, with the assent
and assistance of the State, the actions of others (Holland.)"</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><u>Obligation</u> "A duty: the bond of
legal necessity which binds together two or more determinate individuals.
It is limited to legal duties arising out of a special personal relationship
existing, whether by reason of a contract or a tort, or otherwise between
two or more individual persons; e.g. debtor and creditor."</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<center>
<p><a NAME="IV"></a><b><font face="Times New Roman">IV. The Muslim Conduct
of State <sup><a href="#N_6_">(6)</a></sup></font></b></center>
<p><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">I would like to reproduce here below paragraphs
330 to 335 from Dr. Muhammad Hamidullah's "<i>The Muslim Conduct of State</i>"
in order to elaborate further on this subject. It should be borne in mind
that this book is a recognized authority on Muslim International Law and
that the law of Apostasy is discussed in the International context</font><font face="Arial">:</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">"To wage war against apostates is justified
on the same principle as that on which the punishment of a solitary apostate
is based. The basis of Muslim polity being religious and not ethnological
or linguistic, it is not difficult to appreciate the reason for penalising
the act of apostasy, for it constitutes a politico-religious rebellion.
The greater the harm of a given rebellion to a polity, the greater is the
severity of repression. Every civilisation, not the least the modern Western
one - both in the communistic and capitalistic manifestations - has provided
capital punishment against violating the integrity of what it considers
its very <i>raison d'etre</i>; and one cannot deny that right to Islam.
As an independent organic community, Islam will have the liberty to determine
what points should be dearer to it: colour of one's skin, language spoken
by its subjects or ideology which animates its existence. As a passing
remark, let us recall that the Byzantine law of the epoch of the Prophet
also punished with death the apostasy from the Byzantine sect of Christianity.
(paragraph 330)</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Apostasy in Muslim law means turning from
Islam after being a Muslim. Not only does it occur when a person declares
his conversion to some non-Islamic religion, but also when he refuses to
believe in any and every basic article of the Islamic faith. (paragraph
331)</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The sayings and doings of the Prophet,
the decision and practice of the Caliph Abu Bakr, the consensus of the
opinion of the Companions of the Prophet and all the later Muslim jurisconsults,
and even certain indirect verses of the Qur'an, all prescribe capital punishment
for an apostate. In the case of apostasy, no distinction is made between
a Muslim born of Muslim parents and a convert; and similarly there is no
difference between accepting Judaism or Christianity, atheism or idol-worship
or any other non-Islamic faith. Nevertheless, Muslim jurists emphasize
that before prosecuting and condemning an apostate, it is necessary officially
to discuss the matter with him and to remove his doubts regarding the soundness
and reasonableness of the Islamic point of view in the matter concerned.
Time is given him for reflection sometimes even for months before finally
proceeding with the prosecution. There is no difference between a free
man and a slave, as Sarakhsiy is explicit. <sup><a href="#N_7_">(7)</a></sup></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">In case an insane person, a delirious,
a melancholy and perplexed man, a minor, or intoxicated, one who had declared
his faith in Islam under coercion, and a person whose faith in Islam has
not been known or established were to become apostate, they would not suffer
the supreme penalty. So, too, an apostate woman, or a hermaphrodite, according
to the Hanafi school of law, would not be condemned to death, but imprisoned
and even physically tortured. An old man from whom no offspring is expected
is also excepted. (paragraph 333)</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">TREATMENT OF AN APOSTATE.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The apostate has to choose between Islam
and the sword; he cannot be given quarter, nor will he be allowed to become
a <i>dhimmi</i>, i.e. a resident non-Muslim subject of the Muslim State,
on payment of the yearly protection-tax. (paragraph 334)</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><i>De jure</i> he is dead. So if he does
not re-embrace Islam, and escapes to some non-Muslim territory, his property
in the Islamic territory will be distributed among his Muslim heirs as
if he were dead. In addition to this, the debts owed to him will be wiped
out if he has reached non-Muslim territory. This is what Mawardi says,
but I wonder why these debts should not be inherited by the heirs of the
renegade just like the rest of his property." (paragraph 335)</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<center>
<p><a NAME="V"></a><b><font face="Times New Roman"><font size=+1>V. Introduction
to Islam <sup><a href="#N_8_">(8)</a></sup></font></font></b>
<br><b><font face="Times New Roman">by Dr. M. Hamidullah</font></b></center>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">I will now refer to a very useful book
entitled "<i>Introduction to Islam</i>" by the same author. A thorough
reading of this book is highly recommended for good general background
information about Islam, particularly the chapter on "The Islamic Conception
of Life" (Par. 99 to 125). Paragraphs: 261-265; 118, 119, 440, 387, and
533 are particularly relevant. For ease of reference we are reproducing
these paragraphs separately in the Appendix.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<center>
<p><a NAME="VI"></a><b><font face="Times New Roman"><font size=+1>VI. More
Definitions and Differences</font></font></b></center>
<p><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">In order to properly grasp the significance
of why blasphemy/apostasy are treated as <i>Treason</i>, it is crucial
to note that Islamic concepts of "State, nation/nationality," "citizenship"
and "naturalization" are drastically different from these notions as we
understand and routinely use them in the Western secular countries where
they are defined as follows: a "nation" is defined as "a body of people
recognized as an entity by virtue of their historical, linguistic or ethnic
links; a body of people united under a particular political organization,
and usually occupying a defined territory." And a "state" is defined as,
"a self-governing political community occupying its own territory; a partly
autonomous member of a political federation; the political organism as
an abstract concept." Islam came to class these notions among the evil
traits of humanity and tried to bring about a cure.<sup><a href="#N_9_">(9)</a></sup></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">What is the Islamic cure? Or to put it
another way: How different then is the Islamic concept? To start with,
the basis of the Islamic nationality is <i>religious</i> not political,
ethnic, linguistic or regional.<sup><a href="#N_10_">(10)</a></sup></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">A common ideology is the basis of "nationality
among the Muslims, and Islam is this ideology <sup><a href="#N_11_">(11)</a></sup>
and this Islamic ideology is a synthesis of the requirements both of the
body and the soul.<sup><a href="#N_12_">(12)</a></sup> After all, life
in this world is but ephemeral, and there must be a difference between
the behaviour of a man and a beast. <sup><a href="#N_13_">(13)</a></sup>
"Naturalization" (to grant citizenship) or "nationality" in Islam is a
thing depending solely upon the will and the voluntary choice of the individual,
not on an essentially ineluctable accident of nature.<sup><a href="#N_14_">(14)</a></sup></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Islam rejects the narrow Western basis
of birth and common blood, language, etc. as the element of solidarity
called "nationality".<sup><a href="#N_15_">(15)</a></sup></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">A citizen, by definition, has rights and
owes allegiance to the State howsoever defined. Under the secular, non-Islamic,
Western way of life, based on <i>political</i> authority, a western citizen
owes his allegiance to the political entity. In Islam a Muslim citizen
owes his allegiance to a <i>politico-religious entity</i> which is based
upon his religious ideology.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Now, one is likely to wonder what the concepts
of state, religion, treason and apostasy have to do with blasphemy, and
why is it necessary and even relevant to mention laws of Apostasy in the
same breath. Without a proper background on the subject, it would be very
difficult for a non-Muslim to understand the reasoning. Let me explain.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">In Islam, contemptuous, irreverent speech
or sacriligious acts, not only about God , but also about the Prophet Muhammad
and all other prophets, and the members of these prophets' households,
as well as the holy scriptures, including the Qur'an, and other things
that are of a similar religious nature (i.e., which are regarded as sacred)
are all acts of blasphemy. Muslims regard blasphemy to be as heinous a
crime as apostasy. Since blasphemy is tantamount to apostasy, which in
Islam is an act of political treason, (i.e. a crime against the state which
is a capital offence) the punishment for blasphemy is the same as the punishment
for apostasy. In other words, by committing blasphemy, a Muslim takes himself
out of the pale of Islam and becomes an infidel, an apostate. As to the
question of the severity of punishment for treason, we need only mention
the fact that almost every country and every nation in the world regards
Political Treason as a capital offence which calls for capital punishment
involving forfeiture of life. In order to bring the differences and similarities
of the two systems into relief, the following illustration may be useful:
- </font>
<center>
<p><b><i><font face="Times New Roman">Tabulated 'Equation'</font></i></b></center>
<table BORDER WIDTH="451" >
<tr VALIGN=TOP>
<td ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH="377"><b><font face="Arial">WEST</font></b></td>
<td ALIGN=RIGHT WIDTH="29"></td>
<td ALIGN=CENTER WIDTH="356"><b><font face="Arial">ISLAM</font></b></td>
</tr>
<tr VALIGN=TOP>
<td ALIGN=RIGHT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>STATE (Political entity)</font></font></td>
<td ALIGN=CENTER><i><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>= </font></font></i></td>
<td ALIGN=LEFT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>IDEOLOGY (politico-religious
entity)</font></font></td>
</tr>
<tr VALIGN=TOP>
<td ALIGN=RIGHT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>ALLEGIANCE to state</font></font></td>
<td ALIGN=CENTER><i><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>= </font></font></i></td>
<td ALIGN=LEFT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>ALLEGIANCE to ideology/faith</font></font></td>
</tr>
<tr VALIGN=TOP>
<td ALIGN=RIGHT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>DISLOYALTY to state</font></font></td>
<td ALIGN=CENTER><i><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>= </font></font></i></td>
<td ALIGN=LEFT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>DISLOYALTY to religious
faith/ideology</font></font></td>
</tr>
<tr VALIGN=TOP>
<td ALIGN=RIGHT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>such disloyalty TREASON</font></font></td>
<td ALIGN=CENTER><i><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>= </font></font></i></td>
<td ALIGN=LEFT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>such disloyalty = APOSTASY</font></font></td>
</tr>
<tr VALIGN=TOP>
<td ALIGN=RIGHT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>TREASON: Capital Crime</font></font></td>
<td ALIGN=CENTER><i><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>= </font></font></i></td>
<td ALIGN=LEFT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>APOSTASY: Capital Crime</font></font></td>
</tr>
<tr VALIGN=TOP>
<td ALIGN=RIGHT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>BLASPHEMY = non-capital
offence</font></font></td>
<td ALIGN=CENTER><i><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>= </font></font></i></td>
<td ALIGN=LEFT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>BLASPHEMY = CAPITAL CRIME</font></font></td>
</tr>
<tr VALIGN=TOP>
<td ALIGN=RIGHT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>Blasphemy does NOT equate
to Apostasy</font></font></td>
<td ALIGN=CENTER><i><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>= </font></font></i></td>
<td ALIGN=LEFT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>Blasphemy = Apostasy</font></font></td>
</tr>
<tr VALIGN=TOP>
<td ALIGN=RIGHT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>PUNISHMENT different (for
both offenses)</font></font></td>
<td ALIGN=CENTER><i><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>= </font></font></i></td>
<td ALIGN=LEFT><font face="Arial"><font size=-2>PUNISHMENT identical (for
both crimes)</font></font></td>
</tr>
<tr VALIGN=TOP>
<td ALIGN=RIGHT></td>
<td ALIGN=RIGHT></td>
<td ALIGN=RIGHT></td>
</tr>
</table>
<center>
<p><a NAME="VII"></a><b><font face="Times New Roman"><font size=+1>VII.
Kitab al-fiqh Ala' al-Madahib al-Arba'ah</font></font></b><sup><font face="Arial"><a href="#N_16_">(16)</a></font></sup>
<br><b><font face="Times New Roman">by 'Abd al-Rahman Jaziri (Urdu translation)</font></b>
<br><b><font face="Times New Roman"><font size=-1>Excerpts and examples
to further illustrate what constitutes blasphemy in Islam</font></font></b></center>
<p><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">It is necessary to have evidence of two
reliable witnesses corroborating each other before a <i>Khazi</i> (judge)
shall be required to question the witnesses. Thereupon the witnesses will
have to make statements describing the words uttered or the acts done which
constitute apostasy.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Apostasy can be committed in two ways:
(1) by uttering expressly by tongue that he is (or has become) a <i>Mushrik
, </i>a polytheist (i.e. one who associates others with the One God and
considers them to be worthy of worship) or, by saying something which is
bound to connote in its meaning a denial of the existence of God, for instance
to say that God has corporeal (physical, material) existence just like
any other corporeal object, or (2) by the performance of an act in which
one cannot avoid the clear conclusion that it is tantamount to '<i>kufr'</i>
(infidelity, denial of Islam), for example, to throw away with contempt
the holy Qur'an or any part of it or even a single word of it; or to throw
it in the fire in an insulting, contemptuous manner; or to throw it in
such a place as a garbage dump where there are filthy, dirty and repulsive
things; or in a spittoon etc. These acts would be blasphemous and constitute
apostasy.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The same rules apply to the Most Beautiful
Names of Allah as well as to books of Ahadith (Prophetic Traditions - i.e.
records of the Prophet's sayings, doings and tacit approvals) and it would
be considered blasphemy amounting to apostasy.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The same rules apply to books of <i>Fiqh</i>
(Muslim jurisprudence) provided the acts are done with the intention of
defaming or belittling with contempt the Islamic injunctions or the Islamic
code of law. This would be regarded as blasphemy/apostasy.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Other examples of blasphemy/apostasy are:</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">• To believe in transmigration of souls
or reincarnation because this amounts to rejecting the belief in life-after-death
and the world of the Hereafter.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">• To deny or reject something of which
the whole Muslim Community <i>(Ummah)</i> is agreed upon, e.g. to hold
that the obligatory ritual prayers or fasting are not obligatory or to
deny legal permissibility <i>(halal)</i> of a thing on which the whole
Muslim Community is agreed upon and which is definitely proven to be so
on the basis of its proof from the holy Qur'an and Hadith <i>mutawatir.</i></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">• To call names and use swear-words in
respect of all such Messengers of God, Apostles, Prophets who are accepted
as such by the whole Muslim Community.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">• This same rule applies to angels.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">• This same rule applies to angels and
prophets with regard to fault-finding using taunting or derogatory or sarcastic
language against them even in respect of their physical/bodily defects.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">• To use sarcasm and belittling words in
respect of the moral character or the way of life (religion) of the Prophet
Muhammad or other prophets.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<center>
<p><a NAME="VIII"></a><b><font face="Times New Roman"><font size=+1>VIII.
Some Pertinent Issues</font></font></b></center>
<p><a NAME="one"></a><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1><b>1. </b>Issues
cannot be addressed in isolation or out of context. </font></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">In dealing with the application of the
Islamic penal system, first of all one has to try to understand its place
within the Islamic legal framework as a whole or rather within Islam itself.
It is well known that Islam provides a complete system for regulating every
aspect of human life. The rules, obligations, injunctions and prohibitions
laid down by or derived from the Qur'an and the Sunnah produce a complete
picture of the Muslim community, from which no part can be removed without
the rest being damaged. Equally no isolated part of this scheme, especially
when taken out of context, can make any sense or be of any use. Mohammad
S. al-Awa in his "Punishment in Islamic Law"<sup><a href="#N_17_">(17)</a></sup>
points out: "Within any legal system, the philosophy of punishment is an
integral part of the system which cannot be understood or applied except
within its principles, in order to protect the values recognized by it.
If this is correct, and it is undoubtedly correct, then it must be completely
wrong to borrow the penal philosophy of one legal system and adapt it to
[or compare it with] another which is based on different principles and
values ..." </font>
<p><a NAME="two"></a><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1><b>2</b>.Unquestionable
Reverence and Legislative Authority of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) - The Essential
Tenet of Islam</font></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The unquestioned reverence and legislative
authority of the Prophet Muhammad has been acknowledged by the Muslims
as the Messenger of God, and whatever he gave them in his lifetime, (i.e.,
commands as well as injunctions, in the name of his Sender, God), is accepted
by the Muslims as indisputably <i>final</i> and <i>most reasonable</i>.
The belief in the Messengers of God is useful even from the point of view
of jurisprudence, in that the awe and respect and reverence towards them
lead to the acceptance of certain fundamentals without any dispute. It
is from this that other and further details may be elaborated. For this
reason, the Muslim savants are very thankful to the generosity of God,
for He gave men along with <i>reason</i> certain chosen <i>human guides</i>
to help them in the conduct of life. These chosen ones pointed out God's
commands (for He is the real Sovereign and Lawgiver) with regards to good
and evil and with regards to their rights and the corresponding obligations.<sup><a href="#N_18_">(18)</a></sup></font>
<p><a NAME="three"></a><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1><b>3.</b>
Hadd or Tazeer?</font></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">As to the technical terminology of '<i>hadd</i>'
(unalterable punishment) and "<i>tazeer</i>" (discretionary punishment)
classification of punishments, according to Hanafi, Shafii and Zahiri<sup><a href="#N_19_">(19)</a></sup>
schools of law, the death penalty is a "<i>hadd</i>" punishment. The Hanbali
and Malikki <sup><a href="#N_20_">(20)</a></sup> do not classify it as
"<i>hadd</i>" punishment. This difference of opinion arises mainly because
of the different ways the grammatical imperative mood of the word 'kill'
used in the <i>Hadith</i> may be interpreted. This punishment is based
on a <i>Hadith</i> narrated by Ibn 'Abbas (Sahih Bukhari) in which the
Prophet is reported to have said, "Whoever changes his religion, kill him."
It is primarily on the strength of this <i>Hadith</i> that jurists have
based their view that an apostate should be sentenced to death. Their work
on the subject leads them to interpret the words, "kill him" as a grammatical
imperative,<i> (sighat al-amr), </i>that is, an order which must be carried
out. The jurists have held that the imperative, <i>sighat al-amr</i>, may
be used in sixteen different ways. Some of them are: inimitability, recommendation,
threat, permission and the literal meaning of the imperative which signifies
a <i>command</i> or an <i>order</i>.<sup><a href="#N_21_">(21)</a></sup></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Briefly, in the '<i>hadd</i>' category
of crime, the judge has no discretion to alter or reduce the prescribed
punishment once the crime is proved. In the <i>'Tazeer'</i> category of
crime the judge has the <i>discretion</i> to impose the maximum (in the
case of Blasphemy/Apostasy) death penalty or commute the sentence to life
imprisonment or pronounce some other appropriate punishment, such as a
fine, etc.</font>
<p><a NAME="four"></a><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1><b>4.
</b>Severity
and Harshness of Islamic Punishment?</font></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><i>Hudud</i> punishments prescribed by
the command of the Qur'an or the Prophet are, of course, considered most
reasonable, fair and justified in the eyes of Muslims. We would like to
quote Paragraph 229 and 230 from the book <i>Introduction to Islam</i>,<sup><a href="#N_22_">(22)</a></sup>
in order to explain the nature of Islamic law and morality as follows:
"Islam is based on the belief of Divine revelation sent to men through
prophets as intermediaries. Its law and morality, even its faith, are therefore
based on Divine commandments. It is possible that in the majority of cases
human reason also should arrive at the same conclusion but essentially
it is the Divine aspect which has the decisive significance in Islam and
not the reasoning of a philosopher, a jurist or a moralist, the more so
because the reasoning of different individuals may differ and lead to completely
opposite conclusions. Sometimes the motive of discipline is found underlying
an obligation and practice which is apparently superfluous.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">One may divide human actions, first of
all, into good and evil, represented by orders and prohibitions. The acts
from which one must abstain are also divided into two big categories: Those
against which there is temporal sanction or material punishment in addition
to condemnation on the day of the Final Judgement and those which are condemned
by Islam without providing a sanction other than that of the Hereafter."</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">It must, therefore, be particularly noted
that except in cases of extraordinary gravity, the public authorities do
not take cognizance of them and it is at this juncture that the discretionary
system of punishment (<i>tazeer</i>) comes to play its role.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">It should also be noted that Islam attaches
particular importance to morality "in its ardent desire to attack the very
sources of evil and not merely certain of its manifestations. Islam has
imposed, recommended, or otherwise encouraged certain practices, which
astonish us sometimes if we do not take into consideration their profound
motives. All religions say that fornication and adultery are crimes, but
Islam goes further and prescribes means to diminish these temptations.
It is easy to hope that everyone would develop individual morality in order
to resist the temptations; but it is wiser to diminish the occasions in
which persons with weak characters - who constitute the majority of human
beings - need to engage in a battle where defeat is a foregone conclusion."<sup><a href="#N_23_">(23)</a></sup>
Perhaps the very aim of human society is none other than controlling temptations
and remedying the damage already done.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">This is the position of Islam and Muslims
with respect to law, morality, prevention of evil, and its system of punishment.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Now we shall look at what one knowledgeable
Christian scholar says of the severity of Islamic punishment.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">An Excerpt from <i>"Preliminary Discourse"</i>,
by Charles Hamilton, <sup><a href="#N_24_">(24)</a></sup></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">"This book treats only of the punishment
incurred by <i>crimes of a spiritual nature</i> [i.e. the <i>Hudud</i>
punishment], those instituted for offences against a person or property
being discussed under their respective heads. The punishment for adultery
is certainly severe, yet we will not, perhaps, be forward to condemn this
severity, if we compare it for a moment with what is recorded in the twentieth
chapter of Leviticus upon the same point - in fact, from the nature of
the evidence required, it was next to impossible that the offence should
ever be fully proved, even among the tents of the Arabs; so that the institution
of the prescribed punishment was in a great measure nugatory, except in
cases of confession by the parties. That those confessions were sometime
made in the early days of Islamism, is a fact; and made, as they were,
at the certain expense of life, they afford a wonderful instance of devoted
zeal among the first followers of Muhammad. Still, however, even in those
instances, every means that precaution could suggest is enjoined to avoid
the necessity of inflicting the sentence . . ."</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">"Chapter IV containing the penalties of
drunkenness, exhibits a degree of lenient indulgence with respect to that
vice which we should scarcely expect to meet in a Mussulman law-book, as
it hence appears that a man may offend in this way, even to a considerable
degree, without any danger of legal cognizance. [S<i>ee below: "Adhab"</i>]Slander
[accusing a person of unchastity.] As treated of in Chapter V, comprehends
all expressions which may either affect the reputation of a man or a woman
previously possessed of a fair character, of the legitimacy of their issue
and the punishment has added to it, an effect equally just and politic,
namely incapacitating the slanderer from appearing as an evidence. [witness]
on any future occasion."</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">"Discretionary correction <i>[Tazeer]</i>,
which forms the subject of Chapter VI extends to all petty descriptions
of personal insult, even to abusive language. In fact two-thirds of the
punishment in Turkey, Persia, or India, are inflicted under the name of
<i>Tazeer.</i>"</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">We must not pass this book without noticing
the extraordinary indulgence shown to slaves, in subjecting them, for all
spiritual offences, to only half the punishment of freemen. The reasons
alleged for this leniency manifest an uncommon degree of consideration
and feeling for the state of bondage."</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman"><b>Adhab</b> (= torment, suffering, punishment)</font>
<br><font face="Times New Roman">“The punishment is considered in Muslim
law either as the right of God (hakk Allah) or as the private right of
man (hakk adami). In the latter case, the punishment is applied only at
the desire of the injured party (or of the latter’s relatives or heirs).
The punishment, e.g. retaliation, is inflicted upon the culprit as the
personal right of the plaintiff. </font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">In the case of a transgression against
God, the punishment consequently being then a hakk Allah, a peculiar principle
in the law applies. God, it is supposed, is forbearing and, in fact, desires
not at all the punishment of the transgressor.</font>
<br><font face="Times New Roman">Punishment was considered in the beginning
of Islam, just as in Arabian paganism, as a purification from sin. So for
instance a certain Ma’iz b. Malik came to the Prophet and said to him:
tahhirni “purify me,” i.e. punish me! Cf. I. Goldziher, Muhamm. Stud.,
i. 27, note I; do., Das Strafrecht im Islam (Fragen zur Rechisvergleichung,
gestellt von Thm. Mommsen, beantworiet von H. Brunner, c.s.) P. 101, 104,
note 2. But the Prophet is stated to have said “God will forgive</font>
<br><font face="Times New Roman">the sins of every believer except when
the sinner himself makes them known. God loves those of his servant that
cover their sins.”</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">On the ground of this tradition, there
is a prescription in the Muslim law books that when the punishment is to
be considered as a hakk Allah the transgressor should hide his guilt as
much as possible and not confess it, and even when he</font>
<br><font face="Times New Roman">does confess it revoke this confession.
He should rather turn himself to God in stillness, for God accepts his
conversion when his intention is pure.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The witnesses too are recommended not to
testify to the detriment of the accused person, and it is meet that the
judge should show the latter all the circumstances extenuating his guilt
and the validity of revoking his confession. The judge</font>
<br><font face="Times New Roman">may even entirely remit the punishment
except when the right of a man is also injured at the same time and the
latter demands the punishment of the guilty one.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Only in the case of a punishment established
by the law (hadd) the judge has no choice and must execute the punishment.
With regard to the latter punishments even an intercession on behalf of
the culprit is not allowed, while otherwise it is</font>
<br><font face="Times New Roman">recommended. But in order to establish
the guilt of the culprit in these cases, a very difficult legal proof is
always required. In fact the rules of the Muslim canon-law offer everybody
the opportunity for escaping such punishments. Practically there is only
one ground on which the legal evidence and the execution of “determined
punishments” may be based, namely the confession of the culprit himself;
so that in this respect, the “determined punishments” have the character
of penitence.” </font><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1><a href="#31">31</a></font></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The following additional differences and
distinctions between the Islamic and western ideologies, philosophies of
life and legal systems (including systems of punishment) deserve particular
attention: –</font>
<ul>
<li>
<font face="Times New Roman">Islam does not believe in the principle of
separation of the spiritual and the temporal, the sacred and the
profane nor the church and the state.</font></li>
<li>
<font face="Times New Roman">Similarly unlike in the western system, Islam
does not separate the treatment of the moral and the legal. Islamic law
is essentially a code of moral standards which are to be observed in a
Muslim Society and the function of the law is to enforce these moral standards
even by punishments. Islamic Society’s standard of morality is indeed very
much higher and strict than those of other societies.</font></li>
<li>
<font face="Times New Roman">Sexual immorality is considered particularly
reprehensible in Islam for two of the five Hadd punishments are related
to the sexual offenses of fornication, adultery and false accusation of
chastity.</font></li>
<li>
<font face="Times New Roman">Islam makes no distinction between private
and public morality. The Islamic concept of PERSONAL FREEDOM is the complete
opposite of contemporary western thought. According to Islam, personal
freedom is available and permissible only in respect to matters which are
NOT REGULATED by the injunctions and prohibitions laid down by the Qur’an
and the Sunnah, for these are expressions of the inherent Divine Wisdom
manifested through the Divine Will.</font></li>
<li>
<font face="Times New Roman">Finally, the most important point of all is
the concept of Sovereignty and legislative authority. A proper understanding
of the Islamic concept of Sovereignty and its paramount significance (which
permeates every aspect of human life), will help explain many differences
between the Islamic legal systems and western legal systems: <i>In Islam
all (political, legal and popular) sovereignty belongs to God alone. Every
Muslim is bound by his faith to acknowledge God as the sovereign in all
spheres of life – moral, social, cultural, economic and political. Islam
repudiates entirely the latest version of the philosophy of western democracy
in which the west accepts the absolute sovereignty of the people, the absolute
powers of legislation rest in the hands of the people, lawmaking is their
prerogative and legislation must correspond to the mood and temper of their
opinion.</i></font></li>
</ul>
<font face="Times New Roman">Since belief in the unity and sovereignty
of God is the foundation of the social and moral system of Islam, it is
also the very starting point of the Islamic political and legal philosophy.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">All civilized legal systems aim at combining
the rigidity of their principles through the legislation of a set of rigid
constitutional laws with the relative flexibility of the regular civil
and criminal laws of the country. As to the ability of the Islamic system
of law to adapt itself to the changing needs of society, Muslims are very
particular in pointing to this unique aspect of their system which accommodates
the changing needs of society. Muslims maintain that the Islamic system
combines these two opposite aspects more successfully than those systems
which are not based on Divine Law. The uniqueness of Islam lies in the
fact that the Divine Law which includes a strict and severe regimen of
punishment (i.e., <i>Hadd</i> punishments) is absolutely inflexible and
unalterable, whereas the system of punishments falling under the category
of <i>Tazeer</i> are very adaptive and very flexible because they accommodate
changing needs in the continuous evolution of human society. Simply put,
western constitutions are amendable, although with very rigid rules for
very special circumstances. In Islam, however, the
<i>Shariah</i> (i.e.
the Qur’an and the <i>Sunnah</i>), which may be regarded as a parallel
to the western style of constitutional law, is not amendable – period.
The rationale for the extreme rigidity of the Islamic Shariah Law (i.e.,
the Qur’an and the <i>Sunnah
</i>of the Prophet) which is distinct from
the rest of the Muslim jurisprudence (<i>Fiqh</i>), is that the provisions
of the <i>Shariah</i> deal with such matters that are of a universal and
perpetual nature. These principles relate to the three basic unchanging
human needs from the beginning to the end of time which relate to man’s
physical, moral and spiritual aspects of life. Obviously these needs never
require changing. Just as wholesome foods are necessary for physical nourishment
so are good and virtuous deeds necessary for moral nourishment and
a constant awareness of man’s position in the universe vis a vis
his Creator is necessary for his spiritual nourishment.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Now to take a quantum leap from the 18<sup>th</sup>
century to the present we will discuss current issues. To wit:</font>
<p><a NAME="five"></a><b><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1>5</font></font></b><font face="Times New Roman">.
</font><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1>Postmodernism
and Islam</font></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The predicament and promise of postmodernism
is the subject of an interesting book, <i>Postmodernism</i> <i>and Islam</i>,
by Akbar S. Ahmed, Professor of Anthropology at Cambridge University, England.
Professor Ahmed also has written and produced "<i>Living Islam</i>," a
six-part television series for the BBC England.<sup><a href="#N_25_">(25)</a></sup></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">In his book, Professor Ahmed says, "As
Muslims, we will live in the postmodern world which is just beginning to
shape our lives; therein lies the Muslim predicament: that of living by
Islam in an age which is increasingly secular, cynical, irreverent, fragmented,
materialistic and, therefore, for a Muslim, often hostile. However, postmodernism
also promises hope, understanding and toleration - and this is where it
connects with Islam. In an age of cynicism and disintegration, Islam has
much to offer."</font>
<p><a NAME="six"></a><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1><b>6.</b>The
Western Media and the 'Knowledge Vacuum'</font></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Professor Ahmed further asserts that the
present encounter with its universal Western culture and pervasive technology,
is perhaps the most forceful of onslaughts on Muslim civilization yet.
Islam appears so threatened and vulnerable because it is so amorphous and
because it appears in the most unexpected places. The TV and VCR in its
character and origin, has become part and parcel of Western civilization.
It needs no passport or visa for it can invade even the most isolated home
and challenge the most traditional values.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">According to Professor Ahmed, even a Muslim
like His Highness the Agha Khan who is known to be sympathetic to the West
and who scrupulously avoids political controversy, is concerned about the
relationship between Islam and the West. He feels that the perception of
Islam as a dark threat to order, is never far from the Western mind. The
Agha Khan further says, "With Islam encompassing a large area of the world
with significant populations, Western society can no longer survive in
its own interest by being ill informed or misinformed about the Islamic
world. They have to get away from the concept that every time that there
is a bush fire, or worse than that, it is representative of the Islamic
world. So long as they make it representative of the Islamic world itself,
they are sending erroneous messages back. This is what I call a 'knowledge
vacuum'. It is hurting everyone."</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Professor Ahmed then states that "we cannot,
therefore, even in our modern or postmodern age, ignore or disregard what
traditionalists have believed to be necessary. More specifically, for the
traditionalists, the larger message of Islam, rather than the narrower
sectarian or personal quibbles, is of paramount importance. As a result
they believe both in the universal message of God as well as in inter-faith
dialogue. </font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Seyyed Hossein Nasr has pointedly underlined
this same need in the following way: "There is also the very important
task which lies ahead for Muslims to try to make peace on a theological
level, not only on a political level, with other religions in the West,
to extend a hand, which Islam has always done [in the past], to Judaism
and Christianity and to other religions."</font>
<p><a NAME="seven"></a><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1><b>7</b>.
The Rushdie Affair</font></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">This need to create a better understanding
in order to eliminate this 'knowledge vacuum,' assumes an even greater
urgency in light of many recent developments. For example, consider the
atmosphere which has surrounded the Rushdie affair and the enmity which
it has created. An even more tragic example is the Balkan onslaught with
its policy of 'ethnic cleansing.' These examples show how desperate is
the need for communication and tolerance. Professor Ahmed says in relation
to this need that, "even the hope and promise of the modern and postmodern
era seem to be losing their appeal and any claim to tolerance, liberal-mindedness
and <i>laissez-faire</i>, seems a hollow and spent force. 'To each his
own thing' type of thinking, which was supposed to be changing the world,
is not so in practice and reality."</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">"In their shrill intolerance of opposing
voices, some of these labelled 'post-modernist' authors sound suspiciously
like other more conventional authors of earlier times. We saw how lines
were drawn in the Rushdie affair at many points, stereotypes negated and
paradoxes created. Many staunch Christian priests were totally supportive
of Muslims, while many liberal intellectuals sounded like Inquisition Priests
in their shrill and blanket condemnations. In the one case, a millennium
of hostility to Muslims was set aside; in the other, a century of liberal
philosophy . . . In their emphasis on ethnicity, many postmodernist political
movements generate racial violence which is as barbaric as any we know
of from primeval tribal warfare. Ethnicity is the unprimed and potentially
most explosive reality of human society, as we see in the disintegrating
communist states. Its links with postmodernism are still to be discovered
clearly. Muslims and Marxists slit the throats of fellow Muslims and fellow
Marxists; ethnicity in these cases overrides larger ideological loyalties.
Our age is littered with notorious examples."</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Ayatullah Khomeni had condemned Salman
Rushdie because his book was considered blasphemous; the Pope condemned
Madonna for her provocative songs. As head of his respective religious
structure, each did what was expected of him by his followers. Any Muslim
cleric would have reacted to this book in the same manner as the Ayatullah;
any Catholic priest would have found Madonna's songs distasteful. </font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<center>
<p><b><font face="Times New Roman"><font size=+1>IX. The basic concepts
and special features</font></font></b>
<br><b><font face="Times New Roman"><font size=+1>of Rights and Duties, </font></font></b>
<br><b><font face="Times New Roman">Fundamental Freedoms and Reasonable
Constraints.</font></b></center>
<p><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1><b>1.</b> In the Context
of the Islamic Law</font></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">[Law is defined as] "the science of the
rights and obligations of man" - a definition attributed to Abu Hanifah.
Muhibbullah al-Bihary (1109 A.H.) defines 'law' as : "the science of ascertaining
religious commands (which embrace practically all the affairs of human
life, material as well as spiritual) by means of their detailed guides.
(By 'guides' he means authority or source of information). </font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">For a definition of Law, Right and Obligation,
and other terminology under the British Common Law system, see <i>III.
The Concise Law Dictionary.</i></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">One of the important features of Islamic
law seems to be the emphasis on the correlation between rights and obligation.
Not only the mutual relations of men amongst themselves, but even those
of men with their Creator, are based on this same principle. One also has
obligations as a member of the larger family <i>viz</i> the society and
the State in which one lives. To speak only of the "rights of man," without
simultaneously realizing his duties, would be transforming him into a nefarious
beast, wolf or devil. Out of sheer necessity in civilized societies, legitimate
constraints must be imposed upon man's rights. The nature and extent of
various constraints and the shapes and forms which these limits assume
in any given socio-political <i>cum</i> religious context, must always
be a function of the dialectic between the rights and duties of the participants
in this context. Consequently, the rights of individuals with regards to
freedom of speech or expression, has to be balanced against the rights
of other individuals to be protected from defamation, insults, slander
and libel, etc. The same holds true with respect to the rights of all members
of society <i>vis a vis</i> States, Sovereign rulers and the Real Sovereign,
God - they all have to be harmonized in their own context. Obviously, then,
when dealing with Islam or Muslims, one has to take into consideration
the sensibilities of the whole Muslim 'Community'/ 'nation'/ 'Ummat' and
<i>their</i>
need for protection against harm, say for instance, through
<i>their</i>
rules of Blasphemy , which are framed on the basis of <i>theirown
</i>philosophy
of life depicted through <i>their own</i> perception and sensibilities
with regard to sacrilege, desecration, defamation, slander, libel and so
on. Therefore, in the case of Blasphemy, it goes without saying that the
Islamic rules are obviously determined by Muslims on the basis of their
own religious principles. As I have stated earlier, it is a universally
accepted fact that although many different ethnic groups and races with
a variety of colour, language and geographical origins are represented
within Islam, as 'Muslims' (as those who follow the Islamic religious tradition)
all these various ethnic groups and races are one people, one community,
one nation, one Ummah <i>vis a vis</i> the rest of the world.<sup><a href="#N_26_">(26)</a></sup>
This principle is extended to all other religions and cultural groups. </font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">According to Islam, as a consequence of
this philosophy, despite the various ethnic racial and other differences,
non-Muslims too are treated collectively as one people, one community,
one nation, one Ummah <i>vis a vis</i> the Muslim community, technically
known as <i>Dar al-Harb</i>.<sup><a href="#N_27_">(27)</a></sup></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The fairness of this equal treatment results
in what is commonly referred to as <i>tolerance - </i>in the real sense.
And at the heart of this tolerance lies the basic principle of Muslim International
law that:<i> "In the affairs of this world, Muslims and non-Muslims are
equal and alike."</i> This principle of equality serves the function of
a pivot. It is this point which balances all the detailed rules regulating
the protection of the spectrum of legitimate interests of non-Muslim minorities
- the 'protected' communities. As a result, it is not surprising to see
that one of the characteristic features of Islam is the award of judicial,
social and cultural autonomy to these communities. Islam permits and even
encourages every group (Jewish, Christian, Magian or other) to establish
their own tribunals presided over by their own judges who apply their own
laws - without any interference from Muslim authorities. Such judicial
autonomy is intended to encompass not only individual private matters (involving
personal status) but for all the affairs of life: civil, penal, religious,
cultural, etc. As far as issues of social and cultural autonomy are concerned,
the safeguards of the rights of non-Muslims in Islamic territories so far
as giving them liberty to practise customs that are entirely opposed to
those of Islam. For instance, manufacture, importation, sale and consumption
of alcohol, games of chance, marriage with close relatives, contracts that
entail interest etc., are all permitted. After all, to establish liberty
of conscience in the world was one of the aims and objectives of the Prophet
Muhammad. However, to be more realistic, it is always useful to remind
ourselves to distinguish between the 'Muslim Law' and the 'laws of the
Muslims.'<sup><a href="#N_28_">(28)</a></sup></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Closer to home, in Canada these are the
principles of the Islamic Law which correspond to similar principles in
the<i> Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms</i> which relate to: (1)
The Supremacy of God and the Rule of Law (Preamble); (2) Guarantee of Rights
and Freedoms (3) Fundamental Freedoms (4) Equality Rights; (5) Multicultural
heritage.</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1><b>2.</b> In the Context
of Canadian law: The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms</font></font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">(1) The preamble in the Canadian Charter
of Rights and Freedoms clearly states that "Canada is founded upon principles
that recognize the Supremacy of God and the Rule of Law.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">(2) It <i>"guarantees" the rights and freedoms</i>
set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law
as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">(3) Section 2 sets out the Fundamental
Freedoms; "everyone has the following freedoms: a) freedom of conscience
and religion b) freedom of thought, belief, opinions and expression, including
freedom of the press and other media of communication; c) freedom of peaceful
assembly; and d) freedom of association.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">(4) Section 15(1) sets out Equality Rights:
"Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to
the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination
and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic
origin, colour, religion, sex, age, or mental or physical disability." </font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">(5) Section 27 on Multicultural heritage
states: "this Charter shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with
the preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of CANADIANS"</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">(1) According to the Preamble of the Charter,
"Canada is 'founded upon the principles that recognize the <i>Supremacy
of God </i>and the Rule of Law." This "preamble" too must be interpreted
in the light of Section 27 which makes it mandatory that "this Charter
shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the <i>preservation </i>and
<i>enhancement</i>
of the <i>multicultural heritage</i> of Canadians."</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Islam is and has been (even going back
to the time of Confederation) a part and parcel of multicultural heritage
and Muslim adherents have had the privilege of enjoying the status of 'Canadians'.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Because of the recognition of "Supremacy
of God," Islamic law, which originates from the Divine Source of the Supreme
Legislator, God, deserves to be recognized as a legitimate code under the
Rule of which Law Muslims are constitutionally entitled to live and be
recognized under Section 2(a): as to freedom of conscience and religion
-- in the same way as Islam recognizes the right of non-Muslims to live
by their own laws when living as minorities in a Muslim State (as mentioned
under "Islamic Law").</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">As to the recognition of the "Supremacy
of God" under the Preamble of the Charter, when interpreted in the context
of the "multicultural heritage" provision of Section 27, let us pause here
for a moment and ponder on this point: are we in a position to go to the
ridiculous extent and say that, yes, we do recognise the Supremacy of the
Christian God, or the Jewish God, but not the Muslim God?! Then, what about
the <i>de facto</i> context of Canadian secularism. By definition secularism
is <i>supposed</i> to be neutral (neither in favour of nor against religion),
where does the God of the Preamble fit into this scheme of things? </font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">(2) The Canadian Charter of Rights (Section
1) also requires that any reasonable limits on the guarantees of the Charter
have to be demonstrably justified. It is our position that in view of the
above arguments that the limits prescribed by Islamic law, with regards
to blasphemy/apostasy, <i>do</i> <i>satisfy</i> both the Charter requirements.
Namely (i) the Islamic limits are <i>reasonable limits</i>, and are (ii)
<i>demonstrably
justified</i> within the meaning of Section 1 of the Charter on these grounds:
a) The provision of the Preamble regarding the Supremacy of God, b) the
constitutional obligation to interpreted in a manner consistent with the
preservation and enhancement of the multicultural heritage of Canadians,
c) that over one billion people (Muslims) worldwide consider those limits
to the freedom of speech/expression to be <i>reasonable, </i>d)(i)what
such a large segment of the Canadian minority believes as a precept of
their faith/religion ought to be fully recognized if the Charter's provision
respecting <i>freedom of religion</i> are to have any real meaning. (ii)
Adherence to Islamic principles in this context, ought to be accepted as
sufficient enough to satisfy the Charter Requirement of <i>demonstrable
justification</i>. Recognition of Islamic standards of reasonable limits
on the freedom of speech by the Canadian courts does not necessarily entail
any obligation to enforce the Islamic punishment for blasphemy/apostasy
within the Canadian jurisdiction. The Muslims themselves (with the exception
of the small Shi'ite minority) do not generally believe or insist on any
extraterritorial rights to enforce Islamic <i>Hadd </i>punishment in non-Islamic
countries. (See footnote 1, under II, Abingdon Dictionary of Living Religions).</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Therefore, it seems logical and reasonable
that when dealing with situations which involve Islamic Blasphemy, the
Canadian courts, in all fairness, must also determine the issue of the
reasonableness of the limits on the freedom of speech and the issue of
demonstrable justification in accordance with the sensibilities of the
whole Muslim Community/<i>Ummah</i>. Muslims adhere to the Islamic religious
principles underlying their laws, which according to them, are legislated
under the very authority of the Real Sovereign, the 'God', Who is also
recognized by the Charter Preamble.</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">(3) Failing to do so will be a flagrant
breach of equality rights under Section 15(1) of the Charter. Because of
this failure, Muslims will not be given the equal protection and equal
benefit of the law and they will not be treated as equal before and under
the law. Indeed, Muslims will thus be discriminated against on the basis
of race, national or ethnic origin, colour and especially religion. All
such diverse people as those who follow the Islamic religious tradition,
despite their various race and ethnic origin are <i>one people.</i></font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">(4) Failing to interpret the guaranteed
rights and freedoms of Muslims, in accordance with the true spirit of multiculturalism
results in the effective denial of this fundamental philosophy of the Canadian
constitution. This is a tragic departure from that cherished 'tolerance'
(the real tolerance) which is the distinguishing quality of a cultured
people. The more tolerant a nation, the more cultured its people will be.
With this measure of cultural excellence, Canada does hold a place of honour
in the nations of the world and indeed we proudly stand head and shoulders
above so many other nations. What a sad thing it would be to not appreciate
the necessity of inculcating this multicultural philosophy into our daily
lives. How else can human beings become civilized enough to be able to
claim that they do actually respect other cultures and wish to co-exist
with them.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<center>
<p><b><font face="Times New Roman"><font size=+1>X. Conclusion</font></font></b></center>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">In view of this supreme law of the land,
it would seem that when dealing with the issues of freedom of expression,
the laws dealing with defamation, slander, libel, sacrilege, desecration,
blasphemy and apostasy (in the context of the rights of the Muslim minority
population living as lawful citizens of this country), not only our courts
but also all our citizens are under a legal constitutional obligation to
look into the matter in the light of the above essential considerations.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The Islamic Blasphemy/Apostasy issue cannot
be looked at or discussed in isolation or out of multicultural context
in that the religious beliefs of the Muslim population of Canada and their
way of life is an integral part of the multicultural heritage of Canadians.</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<center>
<p><b><font face="Times New Roman"><font size=+1>The Maturing of Canada </font></font></b></center>
<p><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p><b><font face="Times New Roman">(a) </font></b><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1>Phase
One: from an ethnocentric, monolithic, unilingual society towards a bilinguistic,
bicultural and multicultural society.</font></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">In Canada, a country with its longstanding
bilingual and bicultural history, as well with its constitutional commitment
to ethnic equality and multiculturalism, things seem to have come to a
dead stop. When efforts are made to persuade the powers that be to implement
the theory of multiculturalism, to put it into practice, one finds little
evidence of any sincere measures. A great deal of heated debate and hot
air is created in sheer rhetorical terms. This is all that one finds in
plentiful measure.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">In practice, the alleged liberal-mindedness
of Canadians and their claim to world leadership as international brokers
of peace and peace-keeping or as champions of fairness and equality, etc.,
etc., amounts to mere platitudes meant only for foreign consumption and
packaged to please the ears of the international community.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">To illustrate this point of view, let us
take a closer look at the latest development in the Canadian constitutional
arena. The Calgary Declaration recognizes the unique character or unique
identity of Quebec society, and in the same breath, stresses that all Canadians
and all provinces are equal. What is the basis of this wonderful arrangement/agreement?
What do we find? We find that none of the participating leaders at the
Calgary conference (or even during debates in the provincial legislatures
for support of the declaration) deemed it necessary to give any serious
thought to multiculturalism or attempt to create a supra-racial, supra-regional
or supra-linguistic society. None of these leaders seemed to acknowledge
the reality that the Canadian mosaic consists of a <i>multiplicity of special
and distinctive societies</i> within Canada - not just Anglo Saxon and
the French cultural societies. We do not seem to have fully overcome the
unfortunate national trait, described by Keith Spicer in his fact-finding
report on Canadian constitutional problems, as "the coast-to-coast <i>terminal
meanness matched by terminal bitterness</i> in Quebec." But we have made
some progress in expressing our generosity in acknowledging and accommodating
the obvious distinctness of Quebec and its special needs. Is it not incumbent
upon all Canadians to extend a similar generosity to that multiplicity
of special and distinctive societies (other than Quebec) within Canada
who have constitutional rights under the multicultural heritage provision
to be treated equally along with the Quebec society. When it comes to granting
that necessary extra, we cannot seem to overcome our 'traditional meanness'
identified by Keith Spicer as one of the major causes of our constitutional
problems. We act as though granting the same necessary extra to other cultural
entities <i>somehow diminishes the rest of us</i>.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">When it comes to identities, a person can
and does possess overlapping identities. In our modern age, this allows
the possibility of enrichment and pleasure. A person can be a devout Muslim,
Christian, Jew or of secular persuasion and still be a loyal citizen of
Canada. Multiple identities mean electicism which require tolerance of
others. Without some conscious attempt to comprehend the logic of this
formula, we reduce Multiculturalism to a meaningless <i>shibboleth</i>.</font>
<br>
<p><b><font face="Times New Roman">(b) </font></b><font face="Arial,Helvetica"><font size=-1>Phase
Two: from a multi-culture to a universal Culture - a natural evolution
of human society</font></font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">To quote Marmaduke Pickthall, "the aim
of culture is not the cultivation of the individual or a group of individuals,
but of the entire human race. It aims at nothing less than universal human
brotherhoods -- literary, artistic, linguistic and scientific achievements
are regarded as the <i>incidental</i> phenomena of culture [and serve to
act] as either aids to the end, or refreshment for the wayfarer."<sup><a href="#N_29_">(29)</a></sup>
In other words, as he further asserts, culture "aims <i>not</i> at beautifying
and refining the resources of human life: it <i>aims at beautifying and
exalting human life itself.</i></font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Inherent in such a conception of culture
it is the active principle of unity which is rooted in a shared framework
concerning a progressive belief in the ideals of universal brotherhoods
without distinction of race, religion, ethnic background, language or place
of abode.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">To paraphrase a passage from our publication,<i>
'Oh! Canada: Whose Land? Whose Dream?' </i>:<font size=-2> <a href="#30new">30</a></font><i>
,</i>"The practise of universal brotherhood requires <i>tolerance of differences.</i>
Tolerance can be helped to become established and to flourish by ensuring
that there are an array of social, judicial, political, educational, and
constitutional means of protecting, preserving and enhancing the autonomy
of individuals and communities. This is especially true in relation to
minorities who, because of their relative disadvantage of not belonging
to the ethnic/racial/religious/secular majority, need to be treated as
a "protected community" <i>within</i> the larger community. Indeed, governments
have a duty<b> </b>of care to protect the legitimate interests of these
"strangers," rather than forcing on them a culture of assimilation which
is not conducive to the preservation of the identity and integrity of such
minority groups.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">In the context of the special cultural/religious
needs of the Muslim community in respect of their beliefs about blasphemy,
it indeed behoves a broad-minded people like Canadians to accommodate their
(Muslim community's) needs by simply taking that extra step discussed earlier
- this will<i> not diminish</i> the rest of us. Mutual respect, compassion
and diversity will only help us grow together rather than apart. Surely
it will be worthwhile to rise above the pettiness and the 'terminal meanness'
of linguistic, regional, racial and narrowly defined cultural considerations.
It is our belief that this sentiment is a living force among Canadians
who are fast becoming aware of the futility of working with the handicap
of tunnel-vision which tends to create blind spots at the expense of the
broad supra-racial, supra-linguistic and supra-territorial peripheral vision
which encompasses universal brotherhood.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">For Muslims, Faith means Faith in the Unity
of Reality which includes physical and supra-physical Nature. Consequently,
it is a Faith in the unity and solidarity of Humanity which the Qur'an
enunciates by saying that all human beings are the multiplication of one
soul. It follows from this that all humanity is one social organism, and
<i>"Whoever
slays a soul unless it be for man-slaughter </i>[as a legalpunishment]<i>
or mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men and whoever keeps
it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men."</i> [Qur'an 5:32] As
a corollary of this belief an individual as a human being exists only as
an integral part of a social organism; the injury to one part is an injury
to the whole. Sa'di, the philosopher poet has interpreted the Qur'anic
teaching in these words, "Human beings form one body and individuals are
limbs and organs of it: when one part suffers, its painful effects must
necessarily be felt by all other parts."</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">The efficacy of this universally accepted
principle is in fact demonstrated ever so often in our daily lives. For
instance, whenever a major natural calamity (eg. earthquake, flood, fire,
or famine, etc.) occurs in some part of the world, people from all over
the world rush in to help alleviate the sufferings of the unfortunate victims.
This principle, which is applied in this example to suffering of a physical,
material nature, must be extended in its application to similar devastating
dimensions of the emotional injuries which are inflicted upon the victims
of blasphemy. For nothing can cause more destruction or havoc to the universal
tolerance of people especially with respect to religious matters than this
despicable capital crime. In this respect, the realization of the oneness
of humanity, is the highest point of morality and culture - a necessary
condition of the well-being of man. Lack of information ('the knowledge
vacuum') about the religious needs of Muslims results in the intolerance
which prevails in the non-Muslim sectors of the Canadian population.</font>
<p>In this context and in this sense, a two-fold challenge for such non-Muslim
sectors of Canada is how to expand the Western idealistic notions of justice,
equality, freedom and liberty beyond their bounds to include all humanity,
and secondly to reach out to those not of their civilization and openly
extend the collective hand of genuine friendship. It goes without saying
that in both cases a mutual understanding as well as a working relationship
are essential. Obviously, this will only be possible if there is a universal
tolerance of others among Muslims and non-Muslims alike, an appreciation
of their <i>uniqueness </i>and a willingness to understand them. Muslims
need not be seen as sulking strangers to complete the second phase
of the maturing of Canada. In the next millenium, it is imperative that
these sentiments become both personal philosophy and national policy.
<p><font face="Times New Roman">It is our earnest hope that our efforts
to fill in the 'knowledge vacuum' (which causes intolerance of other cultures)
will enable Canadians at large to develop a heightened sensitivity to the
needs of the Muslim community that resides <i>within </i>the larger multicultural
Canadian community.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">Similar sentiments seem to be expressed,
perhaps in a somewhat different context, by Michel Montaigne. He says,
"the souls of emperors and cobblers are cast in the same mould - the same
reason that makes us wrangle with a neighbour causes a war twixt princes."</font>
<center>
<p><a NAME="APPENDIX"></a><font face="Times New Roman"><font size=+2>Appendix</font></font></center>
<p><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">From <i>Introduction to Islam</i>, by Dr.
Muhammad Hamidullah</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">440: Conversion "The Islamic law expressly
recognizes for non-Muslims the liberty to preserve their beliefs; and if
it forbids categorically all recourse to compulsion for converting others
to Islam, it maintains a rigorous discipline among its own adherents. The
basis of the Islamic "nationality" is religious and not ethnic, linguistic
or regional. Hence apostasy has naturally been considered political treason.
It is true that this crime is punished by penalties, but the necessity
scarcely arose as history has proved. Not only at the time when the Muslims
reigned supreme from the Pacific to the Atlantic Oceans, but even in our
own age of political as well as material and intellectual weakness among
Muslims, apostasy of Muslims is surprisingly non-existent. This is true
not only of regions where there is the semblance of a Muslim State, but
even elsewhere, under the colonial powers who have made all humanly possible
efforts to convert Muslims to other religions. Islam is gaining ground
today, even among Western peoples, from Finland and Norway to Italy, from
Canada to Argentina. And all this in spite of the absence of any organised
missionary activity.</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">118: For reasons best known to Him, God
has endowed different individuals with different talents. Two children
of the same couple, two pupils of the same class do not always have the
same qualities or capacities. All lands are not equally fertile, climates
differ; two trees of the same species do not produce the same quantity
or quality. Every being, every part of a being has its own peculiarities.
On the basis of this natural phenomenon, Islam affirms, on the one hand,
the original equality of all, and on the other, the superiority of individuals
one over the other: All are creatures of the same Lord, and it is not material
superiority which counts for obtaining the greater appreciation of God.
Piety alone is the criterion of the greatness of the individual. After
all, life in this world is but ephemeral, and there must be a difference
between the behaviour of a man and a beast.</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">119: Nationality " It is in this sense,
that Islam rejects the narrow basis of birth and common blood as the element
of solidarity. The attachment to parentage or to the soil on which one
is born, is no doubt natural; yet the very interest of the human race demands
a certain tolerance towards other similar groups. The distribution of the
natural wealth in different parts of the world in varying quantities renders
the world interdependent. Inevitably one is forced to "live and let live";
otherwise an interminable succession of vendettas will destroy all. Nationality
on the basis of language, race, colour or birthplace is too primitive;
therein is a fatality, an impasse - something in which man has no choice.
The Islamic notion is progressive, and is based solely on the choice of
the individual. For it proposes the unity of all those who believe in the
same ideology, without distinction of race, tongue, or place of abode.
Since extermination or subjugation of others is excluded, the only valid
possibility is assimilation. And which means can serve better such assimilation,
if not belief in the same ideology? It may be repeated that Islamic ideology
is a synthesis of the requirements both of the body and the soul; moreover
it inculcates a tolerance. Islam has proclaimed that God has always sent
His messengers, at different epochs among different peoples. Islam itself
claims nothing more than the function of renewing and reviving the eternal
message of God, so often repeated at the hands of prophets. It prohibits
all compulsion in the matter of religious beliefs; and however unbelievable
it may sound, Islam is under the self-imposed religious dogmatic duty of
giving autonomy to non-Muslims residing on the soil of the Islamic State.
The Qur'an, the Hadith and the practice of all time demand that non-Muslims
should have their own laws, administrated in their own tribunals by their
own judges, without any interference on the part of the Muslim authorities,
whether it be in religious matters or social.</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">259: Nationality "One finds in human society,
turn by turn, two contradictory tendencies: centripetal and centrifugal.
On the one hand, separate individuals group themselves in wedlock, families,
tribes, city-states, states and empires, sometime willingly and at other
times under compulsion. On the other hand, descending from the same couple
and ancestors, groups detach themselves from bigger units in order to lead
separate and independent lives, away from their relatives; and this separation
is occasioned sometimes amicably, for the purpose of finding the means
of livelihood elsewhere and lightening the charge on locality too restricted
to furnish food for all; while at other times it is dictated by passions,
quarrels and other motives.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">261: "At the dawn of Islam, in the 7th
century of the Christian era, differences and prejudices arising from race,
language, place of birth and other things had become the rule rather than
the exception; they developed deep-rooted notions, which grew to be almost
natural instincts. It was so everywhere in the world, in Arabia, in Europe,
in Africa, in Asia, in America and elsewhere. Islam cam to class these
notions among the evil traits of humanity, and tried to bring about a cure.</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">262: "The unifying ties of family, of clan,
and even of tribe proved too weak to serve the needs of defence and security
in a world where egoism and cupidity had rendered inevitable wars of everybody
against everybody else. But groups bigger than tribes were created sometimes
by the use of force by warriors and emperors. Failing however to create
an identity of interests among the totality of the subjects, these artificial
unions were constantly menaced by disintegration</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">263: "Without entering into the history
of the several thousand years of the development of this aspect of human
society, it would suffice to consider the idea of nationality prevalent
in our own time in order to illustrate the point. If nationality is based
on the identity of language, race, or place of birth, it goes without saying
that it will make the problem of aliens or strangers exist perpetually,
and such a nationality will be too narrow, ever to be able to embrace the
inhabitants of the entire world; and if the aliens are not assimilated,
there will always be the rise of conflicts and wars. In fact, the tie of
nationality is not a very sure bond at all. For two brothers may be enemies,
and two strangers, having a common ideology, may be friends.</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">264: "The Qur'an (30:22, 49:13) has rejected
all superiority on account of language, colour of skin or other ineluctable
incidences of nature, and recognizes the only superiority of individuals
as that based on piety. A common ideology is the basis of "nationality"
among the Muslims, and Islam is this ideology. We shall not speak of religions
which do not admit conversion. Among the religions of universal applications,
Islam distinguishes itself by the feature that it does not exact the refunction
of the world, but insists on the body and soul growing and operating simultaneously.
The past has shown that Muslims have assimilated this supra-racial and
supra-regional idea of brotherhood; and this sentiment is a living force
among them to this day.</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">265: "Naturalization is a feature now admitted
among all "nations" but to be naturalized in a new language, in a new colour
of skin, and in a new land is not as easy to adhere to as new ideology.
For others, nationality is essentially an ineluctable accident of nature;
in Islam it is a thing depending solely upon the will and choice of the
individual.</font>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">432: "There is a tendency among a large
number of people to imitate and ape their governors and chiefs, in the
outer conduct of life, such as dress, coiffure, etiquette, etc. The result
is a superficial assimilation, which brings no advantage to the ruling
community, but which causes a moral damage to the classes which imitate
in a servile manner. In an Islamic State, non-Muslims constitute a protected
community <i>(dhimmi)</i>. Therefore if it is the duty of the government
to protect the legitimate interest of these "strangers." Hence it is that
we see, during the 'Abbasid caliphate that, far from seeking the assimilation
of "strangers" by force, the government discouraged all imitation of one
by the other: Muslims, Christians, Jews, Magians and others conserved their
own modes of dress, their social manners and their distinctive individualities.
Only a total assimilation, through religious conversion, was sought, and
not a confusion of communities. This is proof enough that the measure had
nothing to do with the religious exigencies of Islam - and in the time
of the Prophet, there was absolutely no trace of it - but a condition of
life, suiting the social conceptions of the epoch: and its essential purpose
was to recognize, at the very first sight, the religious community of each
and every individual. The intention was to protect in this way the culture
of everyone, so that its intrinsic values and defects should come more
into relief. In passing, it may be repeated that the conception of nationality
in Islam is based neither on an ethnic source nor on place of birth, but
on the identity of ideology, i.e., of religion.</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">387: Obligations of women "In religious
matters, her first duty, even as that of man, is to believe in the oneness
of God, which is the only means of salvation in the Hereafter. One knows
that Islam has formally prohibited the use of compulsion to convert anybody
to Islam - and it may be recalled by the way that a non-Muslim wife of
a Muslim man has the full right to conserve her religion and to practise
it in her individual capacity in wedlock - and one also knows that inside
the Muslim community, a rigorous discipline is maintained for its conservation
as a whole and the preservation of its system of life. Treason in this
respect is punished: yet certain cases of the time of Orthodox Caliphs
show that the punishment of women on account of apostasy is less severe
than that of men.</font>
<br>
<p><font face="Times New Roman">533: "In the case of the conversion of
a married man to Islam if his wife is Jewish or Christian and does not
want to be converted with he husband, the marriage continues undisturbed.
If the wife is of the prohibited categories, and persists in her irreligion,
conjugal life must cease immediately; she should be given a reasonable
time to think over, and in the final resort, divorce will have to take
place.</font>
<center>
<p>
<hr>
<br><font face="Times New Roman"><font size=+2>Endnotes</font></font></center>
<p><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p><a NAME="N_1_"></a>1. T.P. Hughes, <i>Dictionary of Islam</i>, Lahore,
Pakistan, Premier Book House.
<p><a NAME="N_2_"></a>2. <i>The New Lexicon Webster's Encyclopaedic Dictionary
of the English Language</i>, Canadian Edition, New York, Lexicon Publications
Inc., 1972.
<p><a NAME="N_3_"></a>3. Keith Crim, General Editor,<i> Abingdon Dictionary
of Living Religions, </i>Nashville, USA 1981
<p><a NAME="N_4_"></a>4. The Hanafi school of law is based upon a Prophetic
Tradition (<i>Hadith</i>) reported by 'Atiyah ibn Qais al-Kilaby (vide
Sarakhsy, Sharha al-Siar al-Kabir, vol IV, 108). The Hanafi scholars rely
on this Tradition: "The Prophet has said: 'Whoever commits murder or fornication
or theft <i>[in our territory]</i> and escapes and then returns with permission,
shall be tried and punished for what he wanted to escape from. Yet if he
has committed murder, or fornication or theft <i>in the territory of the
enemy</i> and came with permission, he <i>will not be tried</i> for what
he committed in enemy territory." However, as to the enforcement of the
law, the Sunnite and the Shi'ite schools of law operate on two different
principles: the Sunnites exercise their enforcing authority/powers within
the legal/geographical boundaries of their own jurisdiction. But under
the Shi'ite law, enforcement powers can be exercised even in foreign lands,
that is to say, beyond the jurisdiction of their own country. In other
words, the Sunnites do not believe in extraterritorial jurisdiction, but
the Shi'ites do.
<p><font face="Times New Roman">As to the enforcement of punishment of
an apostate and the pre-prosecution, pre-trial, and pre-conviction procedures,
see the excerpt of paragraph 332 under the next heading of 'The Muslim
Conduct of State' and <i>Kitab al-Fiqh</i> <i>ala al-Madahib al-Arbaa'h</i></font>
<p><a NAME="N_5_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">5. P.G Osborn, <i>The
Concise Law Dictionary 4<sup>th</sup> Edition,</i> London, U.K., Sweet
and Maxwell, 1954, </font>
<p><a NAME="N_6_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">6. Muhammad Hamidullah<i>,
The Muslim Conduct of State</i>, Lahore, Pakistan: Sheikh Muhammad Ashraf,
1977, page 6</font>
<p><a NAME="N_7_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">7. Sarakhsiy,<i> Sharh
as-Siyar al-Kabir</i>, IV, 162 <i>vide</i> The Muslim Conduct of State.,
paragraph 332.</font>
<p><a NAME="N_8_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">8. Muhammad Hamidullah,
<i>Introduction
to Islam,</i> Lahore, Pakistan; Sheikh Muhammad Ashraf, 1974</font>
<p><a NAME="N_9_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">9. <i>Ibid</i>, para.
261</font>
<p><a NAME="N_10_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">10. <i>Ibid</i>, para.
440</font>
<p><a NAME="N_11_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">11. <i>Ibid</i>, para.
264</font>
<p><a NAME="N_12_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">12. <i>Ibid,</i> para.
119</font>
<p><a NAME="N_13_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">13. <i>Ibid</i>, para.
118</font>
<p><a NAME="N_14_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">14. <i>Ibid</i>, para.
265</font>
<p><a NAME="N_15_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">15. <i>Ibid</i>, para.
119</font>
<p><a NAME="N_16_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">16. 'Abd al-Rahman
Jaziri, Urdu translation, Munzur Ahsan Abbasi, <i>Kitab al-fiqh Ala' al-Madahib
al-Arba'ah, </i>Lahore, Pakistan, Ulama Academy, 1985 </font>
<p><a NAME="N_17_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">17. Mohamed S. el-Awa,
<i>Punishment
in Islamic Law, </i>Indianapolis, MD: American Trust Publications, 1982.</font>
<p><a NAME="N_18_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">18. Muhammad Hamidullah<i>,
The Muslim Conduct of State</i>, Lahore, Pakistan: Sheikh Muhammad Ashraf,
1977, paragraph 10</font>
<p><a NAME="N_19_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">19. Collectively, it
would be a fair estimate to say that they comprise an overwhelming majority
of say 95% or so of the total Muslim population. No reliable statistics
are available to this writer at the present time.</font>
<p><a NAME="N_20_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">20. A very small minority,
perhaps an estimated 5% or so of the total Muslim population. No reliable
statistics are available to this writer at the present time.</font>
<p><a NAME="N_21_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">21. (Baydawi Minhaj
al-wusul pp. 37-38); Nasafi, Manar al-anwar fil Usul al-Fiqh, pp. 24-29;
Khallaf, Usul al-Fiqh, pp. 194-195. Examples of these forms of usage may
be found in the first authority, i.e. Baydawi.<i> vide</i> Mohamed S. el-Awa,
<i>Punishment
in Islamic Law, </i>Indianapolis, MD: American Trust Publications, 1982.</font>
<p><a NAME="N_22_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">22. Muhammad Hamidullah,
<i>Introduction
to Islam,</i> <i>op cit.</i></font>
<p><a NAME="N_23_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">23. Muhammad Hamidullah,<i>
Introduction to Islam</i>, <i>op cit</i>. paragraph 391</font>
<p><a NAME="N_24_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">24. Shaikh Burhann'd-din
al-Marghinini, <i>al Hedaya,</i> Eng. trans. Charles Hamilton, Islamic
Book Trust, New Delhi, India, 1982</font>
<p><a NAME="N_25_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">25. Akbar S. Ahmed,
<i>Postmodernism
and Islam,</i> Rutlege, 1992</font>
<p><a NAME="N_26_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">26. Muslims consider
themselves as comprising the Dar al-Islam, 'literally, "The Household or
the Land of Submission" (and the rest of the world is regarded as Dar al-Harb,
literally "The Household of the Land of Warfare"). According to the <i>Radd
al-Mukhtar, </i>Vol. III,<i> </i>"Land of Islam is a country in which the
edicts of Islam are fully promulgated.</font>
<p><a NAME="N_27_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">27. A country belonging
to infidels in which, according to the <i>Qamus,</i> peace has not been
proclaimed between Muslims and unbelievers.</font>
<p><a NAME="N_28_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">28. This distinction
is important in view of the fact that what the Islamic Law <i>(Shariah)</i>
says, may or may not be, correctly incorporated into the local legislation
of Muslim countries, mainly because of <i>their own</i> interpretations
which is quite permissible under the Islamic System. The Muslim population
living in such countries in effect have no choice but to follow the local,
man-made laws. To be valid, these laws must be derived from and based upon
the <i>Shariah</i>. They may be at variance in respect of the details of
a secondary nature, (not in respect to the principles of law) with the
pristine Islamic Law of the <i>Shariah</i> contained in the Qur'an and
the <i>Sunnah</i>. </font>
<p><a NAME="N_29_"></a><font face="Times New Roman">29. Marmaduke Pickthall,<i>
Cultural Side of Islam,</i> Lahore, Pakistan, Shaikh Muhammad Ashraf, 1976.</font>
<p><a NAME="30new"></a>30. Syed Mumtaz Ali and Dr. Anab Whitehouse, <i>Oh!
Canada: Whose Land? Whose Dream?,</i> The Canadian Society of Muslims,
1991
<p><a NAME="31"></a>31. <font face="Times New Roman">Excerpt from:
The Shorter Encyclopedia of Islam, by H.A.R. Gibb and J.H. Kramers, E.J.
Brill, 1995, Leiden, The Netherlands, pg. 15</font>
<p> </td>
</tr>
</table>
<center>
<p><a href="index.html">home</a> | <a href="#TOP">top of page</a></center>
<p><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p>]]>