Dear questioner,

Thank you for your question.

Answering your question, Dr. Jasser Auda, Professor and Al-Shatibi Chair of Maqasid Studies at the International Peace College South Africa, the Executive Director of the Maqasid Institute, states:

Soon after the passing away of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), Islam expanded and started to mix with various civilizations in unique ways.

These civilizations had their own social structures, which Islam generally accepted, such as specific tribal systems or royal lineages, and so on.

Islam allowed societies to maintain certain social status for certain groups of people based on their lineages and tribes, etc.

Thus, for example, persons who came from certain noble Arabic (prophetic) lineages kept a special status in terms of them not receiving Zakah (annual charity) and perhaps having some special conditions for accepting marriage proposals, and so on.

However, it is essential to note that the Indian Caste System that Muslims had adopted is different from the above. On one hand, it does have a side of it that could be acceptable in Islam, such as honoring certain lineages.

On the other hand, in reality, it is a framework for an unfair social system that goes against the Islamic principles of equality of human beings in general and of Muslims in particular.

Every Muslim knows that God said: {… the best amongst you at the sight of God are the most pious.} (Quran 49:13) The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "An Arab has no advantage over a non-Arab, a white person has no advantage over a black person, and a black person has no advantage over a red person, except with piety and good deeds." (Al-Bayhaqi)

However, sociological studies on the social structure of Muslims in India have proved the strong presence of descent-based social stratification among them that has serious implications on their quality of life and development, which is un-Islamic! Unfortunately, features of the Hindu caste system, such as hierarchical ordering of social groups and hereditary occupation, are widely present among Indian Muslims as well.

Thus, present day Indian Muslims are those who trace their origins to foreign lands such as Arabia, Persia, Turkistan or Afghanistan,  upper caste Hindus who converted to Islam, middle caste converts whose occupations are 'ritually clean', and converts from the 'untouchable castes', Bhangi (scavengers), Mehtar (sweepers), Chamar (tanners), and so on.

These groups are usually placed into 3 broad categories, namely, 'ashraf', 'ajlaf', and 'arzal'.

1- 'Ashraf' - meaning noble, includes all Muslims of foreign blood and converts from higher castes. In Bihar, U.P and Bengal, Sayyads, Sheikhs, Moghuls and Pathans constitute the 'ashrafs'. In AP - Syeds, Shaikh, Pathan and Labbai are 'Ashrafs'.

Muslim groups currently classified by the Indian Government under the category 'Other Backward Classes' come essentially from the non-ashraf section of the Muslim population. They are converts from the middle and lower caste Hindus and are identified with their traditional occupation. Based on the above, at least 82 different social groups among Muslims were declared amongst the same category.

2- 'Ajlaf' - meaning 'degraded or unholy', embraces the 'ritually clean' occupational groups and low ranking converts.

3- 'Arzals' are the lowest in the caste hierarchy who have converted from 'untouchable castes' of Hindus. They have similar traditional occupations as their Hindu counterparts in the list of Schedule Castes. Conversion to Islam did not bring any change in their social or economic status as they are discriminated amongst Muslims also, which is un-Islamic! Their inclusion –by the Indian government- in the OTHER BACKWARD CLASSES class has failed to make any impact, and because of the stigma attached to their traditional occupation, they suffer social exclusion.

The Indian Government tried –and generally failed- to solve the problem of Muslim OTHER BACKWARD CLASSES via some Affirmative Action regulations in various states.

Therefore, given all the above disadvantages and forms of discrimination amongst Muslims based on their 'castes', the 'Indian Muslim caste system' clearly goes against the Islamic principles and values that Islam views as fundamental, and thus are un-Islamic! Muslims are supposed to take the first step in changing their own stratification of themselves before they ask others not to discriminate against them.

We hope this answers your question.

Keep in touch.

Source

Dear Gail,

Thank you for your question.

With regard to your question, Dr. Ibrahim H. Malabari, a well-known Islamic researcher and author of many Islamic books, states:

The charge against the Prophet Muhammad that he concocted the Quran is a very prevalent one, especially in the West. Even those who are sympathetic to Islam among Western writers cannot admit that the Quran is revelation and its author is God himself.

There is a long and deep-rooted tradition in Western literature that views the Quran as the work of the Prophet. Thus, we will look at this issue, though extremely briefly, in light of well-documented historical facts, logic, as well as with respect to the Prophet’s personality, life and career.

The Prophet Muhammad is perhaps the most fully documented person in antiquity and history. This fact enables us to examine closely the claim that he wrote the Quran himself.

This is a topic of volumes, as scholars have discussed in detail hundreds of strong evidences that establish the divine origin of the Quran.

Considering the scope of this answer, we will mention just a few.

First, it was well-known among the early Arabs of Mecca that the Prophet Muhammad did not read or write, and was not formally educated.

The Quran itself states that the Prophet was unlettered, specifically in the sense that he could not read or write. No one in the Meccan community attempted to deny this claim of the Quran: “Believe, then, in God and His Messenger – the unlettered Prophet who believes in God and His words – and follow him, so that you might find guidance!” (Quran 7:158)

As is recorded in his biography, when the angel Gabriel approached the Prophet for the first time at the age of 40, and revealed to him the first verse of the Quran, “Read!”, the Prophet’s response was that he was unable to read.

Thus even at the start of revelation, the Prophet was in no position to compose a book. Indeed as the Quran states, the Prophet’s being unlettered was itself a matter of divine wisdom: “Never have you recited Scripture before this (Quran oh Prophet)! Nor have you transcribed one with your right hand. For then, the progenitors of falsehood would have had cause to doubt (the revelation).” (Quran 29:48)

Second, in various instances in the life of the Prophet Muhammad where a problem arose, he was unable to find a solution until it was revealed to him by God.

In many of these instances, the answer was delayed often causing the Prophet great anxiety. If the Prophet had devised the answers himself, why would he need to wait on revelation?

Here are a few examples:

• Once a group of people accused the Prophet’s wife Aishah of adultery. The slanderous accusations shook the community in Medina, and resulted in the Prophet separating from his wife temporarily. During this extremely difficult ordeal he did not know what to do. Finally, verses were revealed that established the innocence of Aishah and rebuked those who made the false accusations against her.

• The leaders of Quraish once asked the Prophet a few questions in order to test him and to see if he really is the Messenger of God. They asked about stories and issues, such as the Seven Sleepers, Dhul-Qarnain, the nature of the spirit, etc. Weeks had passed and the Prophet would not give any answers, because he did not have knowledge of them at that time. As a result of the delay, the Prophet was accused of being a liar by the Quraysh. Finally, the Prophet received by revelation a whole chapter of the Quran, called the Cave (Chapter 18), as well as other verses, answering all the questions asked to the Prophet by the Quraysh.

• In the early days of Islam, the Muslims used to face Jerusalem while praying. The Prophet wished and wanted to change the direction of prayer from Jerusalem to Mecca. But he did not instigate the change himself; instead, he waited for a command from his Lord, raising his head towards the heavens in anticipation. The Quran states: “We have seen you (O Prophet) often turn your face towards heaven…” (Quran 2:144)

Thereafter God’s commands arrived, and Muslims immediately turned their faces towards the direction of Mecca, turning from North to South.

In all of these incidents and many others the Prophet did not act until revelation came to him with an explicit answer or command. This was the case even though the delay caused him to be rebuked and accused of being a false Prophet.

If the Quran were from the Prophet, surely he could have “revealed” the verses earlier. This shows the Quran is a revelation from God, and not from Muhammad’s own imagination.

Third, the Arabs, both Muslims and non-Muslim, have testified to the high calibre and literal mastery of the Quran:

• Umar ibn Al-Khattab used to be a judge of the poetry festival in Mecca. His mastery of the Arabic language was superb. Nonetheless, when he heard a portion of the Quran, he was spellbound, and because of it embraced Islam. How could the Prophet produce such a literal masterpiece at the age of 40 when he had never shown such talent before?
• Similarly, there were many others like At-Tufayl ibn Amr al-Dawsi, Utbah ibn Rabiha and others who had such experiences when they heard portions of the Quran. They would repeat statements such as, “I have heard words of such that I never heard before. By God, it is not poetry, nor magic, nor divination.” This was often their first impression.

This shows that the Quran was something beyond the Prophet’s talent or genius, as its origin was other than the Prophet Muhammad.

Fourth, there is a marked difference between the Prophet’s sayings and Quranic verses. The Prophet’s sayings are recorded in volumes, called hadith, which are more voluminous than the Quran. When he spoke, his sayings were not accompanied with any extraordinary experiences, but when he received the revelation he would often experience abnormal sensations. When verses were revealed to him, sometimes he would sweat even on cold days, his face would become red, his body would become heavy, etc.

Was he just acting? Definitely not! How could he have lived such a pretentious and complicated life for 23 years? This is indeed the difference between the hadith and the Quran.

As for the Quran, he received it by revelation from God verbatim, and as for the hadith, they were his own words.

Another crucial point in this respect is the huge difference between the linguistic style of the Quran and that of hadith.

A comparison of both suggests unequivocally that the author of the Quran is entirely different from that of the hadith.

It is also recorded authentically that the Arabs themselves were surprised by the language of the Quran because the Prophet was not known to have composed any literal piece before its revelation.

Clearly, the language of the Quran was not from Muhammad’s own tongue. Even non-Arabic speaking people can see this vast difference in style and language between the Quran and the hadith, even by reading translations.

Fifth, a good portion of the Quran includes stories of previous Prophets and their nations. Always, the concluding remark is that the Prophet had no previous knowledge of any of those stories or historical events, and that he only knew of them through revelation, for example:

• After relating the story of Moses and Pharaoh the Quran states: “You were not (there, O Prophet,) on the western mountainside (of Tur) when We decreed to Moses the Commandments. Nor were you (there among those) of the Children of Israel who bore witness (to these events). Furthermore, We brought forth (many) generations (after Moses), such that the life spans (of heedlessness) that stretched over them grew (so very) long – (until they forgot God’s Covenant). Moreover, you were not (there with Moses when he was) dwelling among the people of Midian, conveying Our message unto them…” (Quran 28:44-45)
• The Quran also states after the story of Jesus and Mary: “This account of something that was beyond the reach of your perception We [now] reveal unto you: for you were not with them when they drew lots as to which of them should be Mary's guardian, and you were not with them when they contended [about it] with one another.” (Quran 3:44)
• It also states after the story of Joseph: “This is (but one) of the tidings of the unseen (past) that We reveal to you, (O Prophet). For you were not with them when they resolved (to execute) their (evil) affair, and while they were plotting (it).” (Quran 12:102)

Verses like the above appear routinely after the stories in the Quran. Thus, if the Prophet had learned these stories from Jews and Christians, why should he ascribe them to God? Is he such a blatant liar?

Sixth, the Quran severely criticized the Prophet on several issues:

• The Prophet was once sitting with some of the leaders of Quraysh, inviting them to Islam. A blind man, Abdullah ibn Umm Makhtum, who was already a Muslim, came to the Prophet to ask him some questions regarding Islam. The Prophet ignored him, as he was busy delivering the message of Islam to the leaders of Quraysh, hoping they would come to Islam. Thereupon, the revelation came reproaching and reprimanding him: “He frowned and turned away because the blind man approached him. Yet for all you did know (O Muhammad) he might perhaps have grown in purity?” (Quranv80:1-3).
• The Prophet used to love to eat honey. Once he refused to consume any honey after his wives discouraged him to do so, as a result of a quarrel they were having among themselves. God again reproached and reprimanded him: “O Prophet! Why do you, out of a desire to please [one or another of] your wives impose [on yourself] a prohibition of something that God has made lawful to you?” (Quran 66:1)
• At the time of the battle of Tabuk, some hypocrites came and asked the Prophet to excuse them from participating in the campaign. The merciful Prophet accepted their excuse. Thereupon, revelation came down upon him again reproaching and reprimanding him: “May God pardon you (O Prophet)! Why did you grant them permission (to stay at home) before it had become obvious to you as to who was speaking truth and (before) you came to know (who were) the liars.” (Quran 9:43)

There are many other incidents in which the Prophet was reproached and reprimanded by God.

The logical question here is why would the Prophet make up these verses? Even if someone had revealed these verses to him, why would he retain them while having a firm belief that these verses will be recited and read throughout the ages?

The logical and factual answer is that these are not the words of the Prophet, and he is not the author of the Quran.

Seventh, one of the major themes of the Quran is that the source of the Quran is God Himself. The Prophet did not have any right to add or subtract from what had been revealed: "If he (Muhammad) had dared to attribute some of (his own) sayings unto Us, we would indeed have seized him by his right hand and would indeed have cut his life-vein.” (Quran 69:44-46)

If the Prophet was really the author of the Quran, why did he have to state these words? Was he a sheer liar to the extent that he both concocted the Quran and devised threats against himself?

History and logic would refute this claim, especially since the Prophet was known never to have uttered a lie in his whole life. Before Prophethood, even the pagan idolaters attested to his truthfulness, and he was known as the “Trustworthy” and “Truthful”.

Are we to believe that suddenly, at the age of 40, the Prophet not only began to utter a long string of lies but that these lies were against God Himself? Simply illogical!

We hope this answers your question.

Keep in touch.

Source: Taken from the author’s Ten Questions and Answers about the Prophet Muhammad.

Source

Dear Gilbert,

Thank you for your question.

Answering your question, Dr. Jasser Auda, Professor and Al-Shatibi Chair of Maqasid Studies at the International Peace College South Africa, the Executive Director of the Maqasid Institute, states:

It's a long story. But I would mention two arguments here.

1) The Prophet (peace be upon him) lived in Makkah for more than a decade calling for his message and did not even answer those who physically attacked him and his companions. Then God revealed the verses:

Permission [to fight] is given to those against whom war is being wrongfully waged  and, verily, God has indeed the power to succor them - those who have been driven from their homelands against all right for no other reason than their saying. "Our Sustainer is God!" For, if God had not enabled people to defend themselves against one another, all] monasteries and churches and synagogues and mosques - in [all of] which Gods name is abundantly extolled - would surely have been destroyed [ere now]. And God will most certainly succor him who succors His cause: for, verily, God is most powerful, almight. (Quran 22:39-40) 

This means that war in Islam is sanctioned for those who suffer from injustice, and to protect places of worship, all places of worship, in other words, to protect freedom of worship.

2) People were never forced to be Muslim. History says that the majority of Egyptians, for example, remained Christians until the end of the first Islamic century.

With regard to your second question, first, the book 'Man and Prophet' is an excellent book on the life story of the Prophet. And yes, I think that you are missing something; which is that she hated the Prophet (peace be upon him) before that war and before knowing him. But when she knew him closely (peace be upon him), her heart changed. She certainly did not marry him against her wishes. This is reported nowhere in any version of the story.

We hope this answers your question.

Keep in touch.

Source

Dear Francis,

Thank you for your question.

Answering your question, Dr. Mohsen Haredy, PhD in Islamic Studies and Former Executive Manager and Editor-in-Chief of E-Da`wah Committee in Kuwait, states:

Let’s agree first that we have the right to ask the questions we do not have answers for. But what is more important is to ask questions that benefit us in our relation with God (Allah).

The stories mentioned in the Quran are meant for us to take lessons from and ponder on.

There are two references to Gog and Magog in the Quran. The first reference is cited in Surat al-Kahf in verse 92-102 which is connected with the story of Dhul-Qarnayn.

After reading these verses, we must confirm: that there is no doubt that Gog and Magog are two huge nations of the sons of Adam.

And the barrier built by Dhul-Qarnayn is real and not metaphorical or imaginary. It is built with iron and melted copper.

Gog and Magog used to spread mischief on earth; therefore, Allah gave Dhul-Qarnayn the power to build a barrier to detain them.

This is what is well-documented in the Quran. What goes beyond this is subject to different interpretations and personal reasoning.

From the Prophetic traditions, we are told that Gog and Magog still exist and they try their best to destroy the barrier built by Dhul-Qarnayn:

The Prophet (peace be upon him) said that Ya’juj and Ma’juj are digging every day until they can almost see sunlight. Then the one who is in charge of them says, “Go back, we will dig again tomorrow”. Then Allah restores (the barrier) and makes it stronger than it was. (This will continue) until the appointed time.

When Allah wishes to send them against the people, they will dig until they can almost see sunlight, then the one who is in charge of them will say, “Go back, we will dig again tomorrow, insha’Allah”. This time he will say “insha’Allah”, so when they come back (the next day), they will find it as they left it, so they will dig their way out and emerge to attack the people.

They will dry up water (by drinking it, because of their great numbers), and the people will seek to protect themselves from them in their fortresses. They will fire their arrows into the sky, and the arrows will come back down covered in blood (as a test for them), and they will say, “We have defeated the people of the earth and have gained the upper hand over the people of heaven”.

Then Allah will send worms on the napes of their necks, which will kill them. The Prophet said: “By the One in Whose hand is my soul, the beasts of the earth will grow fat from their flesh”. (Ibn Majah)

From the story of Dhul-Qarnayn we learn that he shouldered the responsibility of ruler, helped the weak, and protected them. Dhul-Qarnayn used the intellect that was given to him by Allah to reach a solution.

Another lesson is that the Quran directs us that Dhul-Qarnayn made use of the gifts that were given to him by Allah. The Quran says:

{We established his power in the land, and gave him the means to achieve everything. He travelled on a certain road} (Al-Kahf 18:84-85)

The second reference to Gog and Magog is cited in connection with the signs that will precede the Hour and will come at the end of time just before the Day of Resurrection:

{And when the peoples of Gog and Magog are let loose and swarm swiftly from every highland, when the True Promise draws near, the disbelievers’ eyes will stare in terror, and they will say, ‘Woe to us! We were not aware of this at all. We were wrong.’} (Al-Anbiya’ 21:96-97)

As for the location of Gog and Magog, let’s agree that there is nothing wrong with exerting some efforts by experts to locate Gog and Magog by all possible technological means.

We do not have any problem with any opinion that determines the geographical location of Gog and Magog as long as it is based on scientific evidence that does not contradict the teachings of the Quran and the Sunnah.

Some scholars maintain that Gog and Magog are to be found in Siberia. Others maintain that they are in the Himalayas. Some historians believe that Gog and Magog live in the northern area of Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Armenia.

On the other hand, some modern scholars say that they are between the two barrier-mountains on the eastern and western sections of the Caucasus mountain range, separated by a narrow pass called the Daryal Gorge. The Caucasus mountain range stretches from the Black Sea in the west to the Caspian Sea in the east.

To sum up, all these are human interpretations and the truth is only known to Allah the Almighty. What we should do is to focus on what will get us closer to Allah before the appearance of Gog and Magog at the end times.

We hope this answers your question.

Keep in touch.

Source: www.aboutislam.net

Source

Dear questioner,

Thank you for your question.

Answering your question, Dr. Jasser Auda, Professor and Al-Shatibi Chair of Maqasid Studies at the International Peace College South Africa, the Executive Director of the Maqasid Institute, states:

The Shariah laws clearly do not place men and women on level ground. Women issues are the real test for the current Islamic reform. The reason is that groundless and unfair differentiation between men and women is deeply embedded in many popular opinions that we inherited from the eras of decline of the Islamic civilization.

Regarding the schools of fiqh, the word fiqh is used in the Quran and hadith in various forms to refer to understanding, comprehension, and gaining knowledge of the religion in general (for example, Quran 4:78, 6:25, 9:122). However, in Islamic schools of law, the word fiqh has been typically defined as, 'the knowledge of practical rulings.'

It is crucial to know that Shariah is revealed but fiqh is not! Shariah is what God said in the Quran and what the Prophet (peace be upon him) instructed every Muslim to do, but fiqh is the understanding of scholars, in various eras and geographical locations, of the revealed knowledge and their opinions in their attempts to apply the Shariah to (their) real life. So, generally speaking, fiqh is subject to the society and circumstances that it was applied in, and do not (necessarily) represent God's commands, nor (necessarily) what we should apply in our current circumstances.

Of course, there are issues in Islam that are universal and every Muslim, regardless of where and how, should apply. We should consult the scholars of fiqh in these areas. But I am talking here about the issues that concern changing circumstances and, especially, issues related to women, who, in my view, had suffered a lot of discrimination from a number of scholars – in contrary to the Islamic Shariah or revealed way of life.

In this regard, it is necessary to understand how certain historical interpretations shaped Islam in the minds of many Muslims, without necessarily being the only true way of interpretation.

Let me mention one example here, which is verse 33:53. This verse has come to be named ''The Verse of the Barrier' (Ayat al-Hijab). It states: 'And when you ask of them (the wives of the Prophet) anything, ask it of them from behind a curtain/barrier. That is purer for your hearts and for their hearts.' The context of the verse (both in the Chapter and in a historical sense) refers to specific rulings that the companions should follow when they visit the Prophet's home. And the verse was revealed after Umar, the companion, had cautioned the Prophet that some of his visitors do not deal respectfully with his wives. Yet, this verse was claimed to have abrogated (i.e. cancelled and annulled) numerous narrations that allow Muslim women to lead normal lives. Based on this interpretation, which has no basis from the Quran or the hadith of the Prophet (peace be upon him), the following fatwas were given:

1. Based on this abrogation, Ibn Hajar banned Muslim women, in general, from leaving their homes. This is contrary to thousands of narrations and a large number of verses, which were all interpreted as 'legally abrogated.'
2. Al-Qadi Iyad banned Muslim women, in general, from talking with men. This is also contrary to thousands of narrations and a large number of verses, which were all interpreted as 'legally abrogated.'
3. Al-Mubarkafuri banned Muslim women from narrating the Hadith. This ban is obviously against tens of thousands of narrations that female companions related to the Prophet (peace be upon him), without which, our knowledge about Islam itself would have been quite incomplete.
4. Abadi banned women from visiting men or being visited by men, also contrary to many verses and authentic narrations.
5. Ibn Taymiyah, based on the same verse, banned Muslim women from showing their faces in public.  He also interpreted the narrations that imply otherwise as abrogated by the same verse.

 

Next, I will quote from your questions what I could answer and follow the quotes by my comments, insha' Allah.

1- A husband can instantly divorce his wife where witness is not a pre-requisite. On the contrary, the Quran in Surat Al-Baqarah in verses 228-229 and Surat al-Talaqh, verses 1-2, clearly states: "When you do divorce women, divorce them at their prescribed period and count (accurately) their prescribed period (that delays finality of divorce for at least two months) and take for witnesses two persons from among you."

Yes. This is a custom (`urf, in Arabic) that is contrary to the verses, but scholars allowed it for the sake of 'flexibility with customs,' which is an interesting feature of the theories of madhahib. So, this opinion could be valid in certain societies, but the opinion of many contemporary scholars is against it. In fact, the late Sheikh Muhammad al-Ghazali, for example, ruled that nowadays, a divorce has to be in front of witnesses and a judge as well.

2- "Women's witness is not acceptable in hudud (killing, robbery, adultery, etc) and qisas (an eye for an eye, etc.) cases." Is this not a direct violation of verse 283 of Surat al-Baqarah where it is affirmed: "conceal not evidences, for whoever conceals it, his heart is tainted"?

Yes, it is in violation of the Quran. The whole issue of putting women's legal status at a lower level from men requires revision. These 'laws' that you mentioned are, again, mere interpretations, rather than facts.

3- "If the head of state kills anyone or if anyone kills his son, daughter or grandchildren, then the killers must not be given the capital punishment." On the other hand, the Penal Law of Islam declares: "In an Islamic state, no Muslim should be given capital punishment for killing a non-Muslim."

It is true that these fatwas were issued by some scholars in traditional schools of law, but they are clearly contrary to the Quran, which states that, 'a soul is for a soul' (Al-Ma'idah 5:45). I, personally, do not understand why such opinions are so popular despite their clear contradiction of the Quran and the spirit of Islam in general.

4- Al-Bukhari in Hadith 283 of Volume 4 supports the above dictum when it says: "A Muslim must not be given capital punishment for killing a non-believer."

This narration is weak, whoever the narrator is, because it is at odds with the Quran. This is not the only narration that has to be rejected on this basis. I will give you one example, also according to al-Bukhari, in which Aishah herself rejected a narration on the basis of its content (al-matn) rather than its chain of narrators (al-sanad):

Abu Hurairah, the companion, narrated: 'Your bad omen is in your woman, your animal, and your house.' However, al-Bukhari, in the same chapter, narrated that Aishah, the Prophet's wife, refused Abu Hurairah's narration and said that the Prophet (peace be upon him) had said, instead: 'People during the Days of Ignorance (jahiliyya) used to say that bad omens are in women, animals, and houses.'

These are two narrations, honestly and accurately narrated by Al-Bukhari. However, they are clearly at odds and one of them should be rejected. It is quite telling that most commentators rejected Aishah's narration and accepted Abu Hurairah's, even though she supported the meaning of her narration with a verse from the Quran (Al-Hadeed 57:22). What's more is that another companion, Mikhmar, supported Aishah's narration with a similar narration that says: 'There is no such thing as bad omens.' But Ibn al-Jawzi, surprisingly, commented: 'How can Aishah reject an authentic narration?' And Ibn al-Arabi, shockingly, commented: 'Aishah's rejection of the narration should be dumped.'

5- In some countries, a few clerics very often declare a Muslim as murtadd (someone who has renounced his faith) citing the violation of specific Shariah law by the victim and promulgate a unilateral death sentence to him.

Killing of 'apostates' is another issue that requires deep revision.

6- One of the Shariah laws that have been criticized mostly is the law that states: when a girl/woman is raped, four male witnesses are required to prove the guilt of the rapist. Is it not ridiculous?

Yes. It is ridiculous. But this is not the opinion of the Quran, the Prophet (peace be upon him), or even any of the scholars known in the Islamic history. Rape is a crime, not a sexual act. In fact, many schools of thought include rape in the verse of Surat al-Ma'idah, verse 33: {It is but a just recompense for those who make war on God and His apostle, and endeavor to spread corruption on earth, that they are being slain, or crucified, or have, in result of their perverseness, their hands and feet cut off, or are being [entirely] banished from [the face of] the earth: such is their ignominy in this world. But in the life to come [yet more] awesome suffering awaits them.}

In other words, many scholars commended a capital punishment for the rapist, in addition to a compensation for the raped. But defining rape in terms of adultery is a new bid`ah (innovation in the religion) carried out by some current muftis, which is really unfortunate.

7. The major concern of people critical of Shariah law is that it is extremely anti-women and subject to uncontrolled interpretation and evolution. There is virtually no formal certification process to designate someone as being qualified to interpret Islamic law.

In my view, we, Muslims, have a duty to filter out these unfair interpretations BEFORE we implement the 'Shari`ah' or call for its implementation anywhere.

We hope this answers your question.

Keep in touch.

Source