There is no Islamism in Islam

[RevolutionThroughReason]

I'm not even sure what you're talking about even now; I think you're on your own little excursion.

[Manzareh]

"Only twice in the entire history of mankind have nuclear missiles been used! And then against its enemies!!'... Oh ok that's alright then good defense of your secular grandads.. What? Hold on, writing 'history of mankind' doesn't make the use of nuclear missiles sound any less criminal, taking into consideration the recent inventions of nukes, also I suggest you look at the effects of nuclear missiles, even once is too much, specially for a supposed superior people with a superior education, political system and way of thinking.

You people are too quick to judge the REACTIONS of people that happen to be Muslim but your mainstream media brains have been molded to never think about the ACTIONS carried out to these people in the first place.

[DaZahroJaam.]

I'm not even sure what you're talking about even now; I think you're on your own little excursion.

of course you don't. how convenient for you.

manzareh, go brush your teeth or do something that does not require for much brain stimulation. don't hurt yourself.
you have only been trained to bite people when the word islam is mentioned. your brain doesn't process much, it only reacts to things.

[Manzareh]

of course you don't. how convenient for you.

manzareh, go brush your teeth or do something that does not require for much brain stimulation. don't hurt yourself.
you have only been trained to bite people when the word islam is mentioned. your brain doesn't process much, it only reacts to things.

There's no biting from me, I'm simply putting into perspective other sides of the stereo typical knowledge you have of Islam, since it's something I'm spiritually conscious of - I can't help but explain the bigger picture in your biased arguments (which would be ideal with a bunch of single minded people of your caliber all watching the same news channel). You see Islam/Muslims/Shariah being put on a equal platform in a debate against global terrorism/militant secularism/implementation of present democracy/western politics and view that as a defence..well say the truth hurts, i guess it hurts you like a bite when Islam/Muslims are defended. But yeah, ok whatever.

[Manzareh]

their condemnation and the usa apologizing for mistakingly barbequing innocent civilians hold the same amount of merit.
present sharia to a state as the phenomenal political system when it can prove it's self to be that in all it's aspects by stepping above every other option out there. the only country that has taken advantage of their nuclear weapons is the united states and those morons are not a good example of anything let alone seculirsim. even with that, it has been used twice in the history of mankind and against it's enemieies.
how many suicide bombers have we had in the last 10 years and how often has it been used on people other than afghans themselves?? the very fact that they could not prevent these individuals from being brainwashed is their incompetience.
they have all the time in the world to chase down individuals, skin them or bury them alive to teach others of the importance of following islam properly but heaven forbid should anyone gather a few people and teach them something that does not involve smashing someone's skull in half.
if you can't teach islam as a religion properly, on what grounds are you going to justify forcing on people the sharia law as a political system?? bring forward the idea when you have a proper system that can prove it's self rather than the shallow excuses.

Almost some good points here lass. You still need to focus more on actions rather than reactions though, if you want to mention suicide attacks at least ask why are all of a sudden people doing these crazy suicide bombings, how figures have just sprung up over a decade all of a sudden. look at the statistics when crimes like suicide bombings started occurring by muslims against Muslims and against non-muslims alike. As bad as they are there's no point comparing suicide bombers side by side to the people which are responsible for making them into suicide bombers in the first place by giving them reasons to kill themselves and take innocent lives aswel. Root causes of situations (problems) in countries with a majority Muslim population are not because of Shariah but because of the absence of shariah and the public order it brings. People are doing evil things like taking innocent lives through suicide blasts demonstrating a hatred and resistance to the implementation of foreign interference even if it means going against their religion. It goes deeper than this there's also scholars that are payed to spread an extreme ideology and create chaos, they get the vulnerable, the weak..those that have lost family members through bombings & those that seek revenge for lost livelihood - brainwashed into thinking something outrageous as killing innocent civilians is justified.. However, In the end you have to ask what was the action for these things to have set off such a devastating reaction..it's definitely not Islam or Shariah because they've been on the back foot and receiving end for quite some time now.

[tor_khan]

Unless you are against Shariah, what is the verdict for implementing Shariah? Top down approach or grassroots up?

Does consensus play a part at all?

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

Unless you are against Shariah, what is the verdict for implementing Shariah? Top down approach or grassroots up?

Does consensus play a part at all?

Please explain what you mean when you say: "implementing Shariah"

[tor_khan]

Unless you are against Shariah, what is the verdict for implementing Shariah? Top down approach or grassroots up?

Does consensus play a part at all?

Please explain what you mean when you say: "implementing Shariah"

I'm not playing with words. Does a state that fully complies with Shariah come about from the bottom and work its way up (through a system of gradual change at the spiritual/civic/legal level) or can this only happen from a position of near absolute power where change can happen more quickly?

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

I'm not playing with words. Does a state that fully complies with Shariah come about from the bottom and work its way up (through a system of gradual change at the spiritual/civic/legal level) or can this only happen from a position of near absolute power where change can happen more quickly?

You question implies a certain conception of what Sharia is.

Sharia is not like communism or any other type of system you can implement.

Sharia guides people towards establishing a just society from scratch. There is not tresh hold for when you can start implementing Sharia.

Specific legislative aspects of Sharia can only be applied when there is a government.

Laymen have no say in anything. They are not consulted and their concensus has absolutely no meaning. Only scholars and those appointed as imams/leaders have the legal status of ruling and governing.

[tor_khan]

You question implies a certain conception of what Sharia is.

Sharia is not like communism or any other type of system you can implement.

Sharia guides people towards establishing a just society from scratch. There is not tresh hold for when you can start implementing Sharia.

Specific legislative aspects of Sharia can only be applied when there is a government.

Laymen have no say in anything. They are not consulted and their concensus has absolutely no meaning. Only scholars and those appointed as imams/leaders have the legal status of ruling and governing.

I know that, but that does not exactly answer the question I started with. However if some aspects can only be applied when governments are in place, this could be either a top down approach or a grassroots up approach.

The difference is the psyche of the people and which approach works on that level. Ultimately people want to feel involved.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

I know that, but that does not exactly answer the question I started with. However if some aspects can only be applied when governments are in place, this could be either a top down approach or a grassroots up approach.

The difference is the psyche of the people and which approach works on that level. Ultimately people want to feel involved.

People must be prepared before the states affairs are handed over to Muslims. However, there is no permission need from the people. Its easier when they accept Islam and are willing to cooperate. You cant establish an Islamic government where most people are kaafirs.

The first Islamic state in Madina did not require permission from the Jews and Pagans while they are a substantial part of the Madani society.

[Badlun]

The question should be where haven't they been there? Shari'ah is a very sophisticated system of analysis of social issues and how to tackle them. It's very detailed in Every Major Fiqh book. You said that you read Al-Quduri, Al Hidayah and Durr Al Mukhtar, did you actually read them or did you just repeat their names because you know their popularity. If you ever read and study these books some of the things they refer to are more advanced in their thinking than Western Law even is till this day. Islam has proven itself many times in 1400 years. Abbasids, Ghaznawids, Andalusia, Uthmaniyah. These were historical super powers. All were Muslim and all depended on Shari'ah.

The lack of Islam in the West has nothing to do whether it works; It has to do with the Clash of Civilization; the West will never accept anything that isn't Western in origin, but they want everyone to accept Western ideologies. The West should not be used as a measure of the merits of something, because cultural opinions are highly unreliable and subjective. '

If Muslims had the modern science and technology and applied it within the framework Islam, then it would be unstoppable. Only reason Muslims do not is because Muslims became Lazy, But Islam teaches us to develop; if people ignore Shari'ah it is their own fault. Like I said Islam and Shari'ah are TOOLS, no tool will work unless it is applied. Just like You cannot see the benefits of Computer unless you turn on the computer. Same with Islam. Secularism only succeeded by corruption and cheating; Which you call Realpolitik.

I have read all these books word by word under formal guidance of a teacher like a typical Talib of a madrassah. What I have found in these books of practical significance are the parts of beliefs, worship and morality. Parts related to dealings, economy etc have moral importance but you cannot base the polity, society and economy of a state on those few injunctions.

For God sake admit that western system is more sophisticated , practicable and useful for today's world not those decrees in these obsolete books. Books written 1300 years back cannot suit 2014. Yes the sections on beliefs, worship and morality do not change and thus still applicable.

We buy a tool which works. Sharia simply does not work so we do not use it. Democracy works so its every where. Secularism now has market even in Muslim world. Muslims are lazy because they think Sharia will work. Muslims like in Turkey did not sue Sharia but opted for secularism and Turkey is now the superpower of Muslim world. Today's Islamists are capitalizing on the progress already made by secularists. Still Turkey is constitutionally secular. The more you find Sharia like in Somalia or Afghanistan, the more you will find problems.

If you want to see Afghanistan as developed as USA, the only route is to apply what USA applied which is secularism and democracy. There is no other way out. Enough is the experience with Sharia for 1400 years.

[Badlun]

The first Islamic state in Madina did not require permission from the Jews and Pagans while they are a substantial part of the Madani society.

Do you think in the last 1400 years there was any subsequent Islamic state on the model of Madina fully compliant to Sharia or Islamism?

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

Do you think in the last 1400 years there was any subsequent Islamic state on the model of Madina fully compliant to Sharia or Islamism?

Yes, it even exists today in some parts of Afghanistan, Somalia, Pakistan and Yemen.