The same goes for Turkiye, but I think it's nonsense to call yourself "secular" and "theist". Secularism for theists is akin to shirk.
Kadark
Secular Islam
- Thread starter Kadark
- Start date
The same goes for Turkiye, but I think it's nonsense to call yourself "secular" and "theist". Secularism for theists is akin to shirk.
Kadark
No, you can be secular while being theist.
Lakum deenukum waliya deen [109:6]
Look up the Medina Constitution. Being secular does not have to encroach on your religion
So then, let us have a goodwilled discussion with no cynicism or anger. Agreed?
First of all, what is your definition of "secular"? Second of all, do you believe that the laws of the Qur'an should be implemented as the federal laws of a Muslim state?
I recite this passage during every prayer, Sam. No need to remind me.
Kadark
So then, let us have a goodwilled discussion with no cynicism or anger. Agreed?
First of all, what is your definition of "secular"? Second of all, do you believe that the laws of the Qur'an should be implemented as the federal laws of a Muslim state?
I recite this passage during every prayer, Sam. No need to remind me.
Kadark
Like India, everyone is free to follow their beliefs and the laws embrace everyone equally [we still have affirmative action, but hopefully that won't last forever] while being sensitive to religious differences.
I think even a modern Islamic society [like Indonesia, for instance], can be secular if it follows the system of Mohammed in Dastur-ul-Medina:
1. The security (dhimma) of God is equal for all groups,[18]
2. Non-Muslim members have equal political and cultural rights as Muslims. They will have autonomy and freedom of religion.[19]
3. Non-Muslims will take up arms against the enemy of the Ummah and share the cost of war. There is to be no treachery between the two.[20]
4. Non-Muslims will not be obliged to take part in religious wars of the Muslims.[21]
The last one [4] obviously refers to the struggles of the Muslims from those who were persecuting them
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Muslims_by_the_Meccans
and is less likely in the modern context, unless you consider instances like where the Hizbollah is left to defend the Shias because they happen to be a minority in the Lebanese society and are left to the mercies of the Israelis, i.e. in cases, where the majority fail to provide them with political and social security.
Yes, but India is not a Muslim state. Turkiye, on the other hand, is. I am asking you, an individual Muslim, as to whether or not the laws from the Qur'an should be made the federal laws within a Muslim state. Let's not beat around the bush here, because it's a very straightforward question, requiring a very simple answer. To answer "no" is, in fact, a subtle form of shirk. To suggest that the laws conceived by man somehow take precedence over the divine laws of the Qur'an alludes to one thing, and one thing only: a manmade system of law is superior to that of God's. The system Muhammad used, which you quoted, is not secular; rather, it is religious in the sense that the Qur'an supports it. As a Muslim, you should know that in a Muslim state, the laws of the Qur'an take precedence over all, and they're to be implemented nationwide. In a non-Muslim state, we "do in Rome as the Romans do", so long as there is no persecution.
Following Muhammad's system is not secular, Sam. It is religious. Secularism is a concept which minimizes religion's influence; more commonly, it is the separation of religion and state. Do you truly believe Muhammad would support this notion of secularism?
Kadark
Ah yes, Turkey is not an "Islamic state" is it? But that apparently is what a majority of the Muslims living there want. So I consider it as a sharia or consensus, which is also a part of Islam. Note that nowhere in the Quran does it say that any particular social system should be followed, the options offered are diverse, with a range of legal and socio-political systems discussed and their relative merits in different circumstances perused. What, according to you, in the context of this wide range of options, is an "Islamic system"?
Read the Dastur ul Medina and Hilf al-Fudul. Clearly, he did.
Not at all. The majority of the Muslims in Turkiye prefer secularism. In fact, most Turks will tell you they need secularism, or else their nation will end up "like Iran". Additionally, it's important to note that when Abdullah Gul was nearly finished removing the hijab ban for universities, well over one million Turks led a protest in the name of "secularism".
A photo illustrating the fervor of over one million idiots:
This is secularism, Sam. What would Muhammad say?
Islam is a comprehensive system of worship and legislation. The acceptance of secularism means abandonment of Shari`ah: a denial of the divine guidance and a rejection of Allah’s injunctions. It is indeed a false claim that Shari`ah is not proper to the requirements of a Muslim state. The acceptance of legislation formulated by humans means a preference of the humans’ limited knowledge and experiences to the divine guidance.
"Say! Do you know better than Allah?" (2:140).
A system which is derived from the laws of the Qur'an. What do you think the Qur'an's laws serve as, Sam? Ornaments? For Muslims, the demandments of the Qur'an are to be met unconditionally in a Muslim state. This is what we call Shari`ah.
Muhammad always professed the divinity of the Qur'an, and the infallibility of its laws. To claim otherwise is ... well, laughable. Your idea of secularism may differ from another Muslim's idea of secularism, which is why such an arbitrary system will inevitably collapse. The scriptures of Islam are there for all to see in black and white, clear as crystal; a code unchanged by the times. Secularism preaches the separation between religion and state, and minimizes religion's importance and impact on society. Muhammad lived his life as a religious and pious man, so I would suggest you refrain from demeaning his name with false accusations of secularism.
Secularism is shirk.
Kadark
Certain aspects of Shariah are subjective, such as the hadith and ijma. However, the aspects of which are derived from the Qur'an should be implemented unconditionally. Simply put, there are laws in the Qur'an, and Muslims must follow them. Shirk doesn't have to be as obvious as worshipping a rock, you know.
As I have already shown you, Muhammad's system was not secular. The Prophet once said:
''The Hour will come, when people believe in the stars and reject al-Qadar."
What do you think "stars" symbolizes, Sam? What do you think Muhammad meant by "reject al-Qadar"?
Think about it.
Kadark
I don't think Muhammad would have chastized women for wearing hijabs in institutions of higher education. I don't think Muhammad would reserve the highest positions of military to rabid atheists, ordering them to overthrow the government when it became "too religious". I don't think Muhammad would reject fellow Muslim states in need. I don't think Muhammad would beg and plead for acceptance from rival Christian nations. I don't think Muhammad would remove all traces of religion from his nation's constitution. I don't think Muhammad would replace his traditional Arabic script with a new alphabet in hopes of becoming "modernized". I don't think Muhammad would do everything in his power to destroy his people's customs, traditions, and religion, in hopes of becoming Westernized.
Yes, I suppose I can tell you how Muhammad's graceful system differed from the embarrassment Turkiye calls secularism.
Kadark
Hmm so Turkey is not really secular then, is it? Did they overthrow the religious government?
Our current Republic was founded by atheists and paganistic Jews, so of course it's secular. It separates religion from state, and minimizes religion's importance and impact on society.
That is the definition of secularism.
Look it up.
Kadark
Separation of religion from state is different from abolishing religion from state. A lack of religious freedom is not secular.
The AKP is a conservative party - not a religious one. Do not confuse the two.
Besides, the "religious government" hasn't done much to please the religious, has it? No need to overthrow it if it's obedient.
There is religious freedom, except for the bizarre hijab rule. However, that religious freedom is not "free" to involve itself with government, which is how all secular systems operate.
But of course, Muhammad would have approved, right?
Kadark
So they did not. Seems like you have a contradiction there.
So it would appear that the bizarre hijab rule [the hijab being absent at the time of Mohammed and a legacy of Byzantine propriety] is related to the conclusions that people draw about the hijab and secularism, rather than a ban on religious practice.
However, that religious freedom is not "free" to involve itself with government, which is how all secular systems operate.
But of course, Muhammad would have approved, right?
I think Mohammed would have approved of any legal system that operated by consensus in Muslims, so long as it defended basic human rights and did not oppress on the basis of religion or race.
Did not what? Our military has intervened with government countless times. There was the 1960 coup d'etat, conducted in the name of bringing "democracy" by overthrowing Celal Bayer. There was the 1971 Imposition. There was the 1980 coup d'etat, which was a campaign launched to revive "secularism" in the government. My family has lived through all of these overthrows, so I kindly ask: what are you talking about?
The bizarre hijab rule is related to the architects of modern Turkey, and nothing else.
I don't think you know much about Muhammad.
Muhammad was a warrior who, surrounded by a loyal and righteous army, forcibly removed the polytheism and superstition from Arabia. Muhammad was the one who marched into the Ka'aba and destroyed all 360 idols, one after the other. Muhammad had a clear idea as to how a nation was to be run, and that idea was derived from the highest authority in Islam: the Qur'an. It did not matter to Muhammad that many Arabs worshipped those statues; what mattered to Muhammad was his system, which he knew was better than all other systems.
Kadark