Saturday, June 02, 2012

Islam Without Sharia The Islamic Liberal Version


Shariah, Is It Really Only Human Product Law Products?
Such a way is indeed a cunning trick of the liberals in order to include doubts on Islamic law. They use logic that is too shortsighted, but quite effective for those who are less prudent and superficial in their knowledge. So that you can easily be cheated outright.

Who says shariah is a product of human creation? If it is only human-made, it must have been devastated. Because Islamic syariah age is over 1,400 years old.


But today scholars in Sudan remain in the same opinion as Chinese scholars about sharia details. Likewise, Egyptian scholars continue to hold the same view with Indonesian scholars. All scholars still agree that adultery, homosexuality, lesbianism are haram. All continue to agree that khamar, gambling, stealing, deception and the rest of the law are also haram. Even in the details of sharia matters, the majority remains the same.


If only man-made, the ulama must have changed it, added it, reduced it or slipped it. But apparently not, the Islamic sharia remains intact as it was just yesterday afternoon. Even though there is a span of 14 centuries. With the exception of liberals whose hobbies divert sharia, there is not a single cleric who ruffles it.


The existence of differences in schools, it turns out only revolves around ijtihad which is not too practical. In fact, it is only natural that a Muslim cleric to change the results of ijtihad. But in an essential case, all remain in one line. Why is that?

The answer is because the Shari'a is nothing but the Al-Quran and the Sunnah, which are then stripped of its contents, made systematic in order to facilitate the translation, and drawn legal conclusions. Although there is a human role in the process, our essence is still carrying out the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Ulamas have never made their own laws, except only from those two sources.

Thus, it is a fatal mistake to conclude that Shari'a is a product of human hands.


Is Classic Interpretation Moving On to Time?

If this assumption is true, there is no harm as well. Because of our past the Muslims is a time of success. We are proud of our glorious past.
In contrast to the past western people, liberalist teachers. Their past were dead bodies, bloodshed, tortures, wars, sorrows of sorrows, stupidity, obscurity and absurdity of the church. It's natural that they are anti-anti with the term past.

On the other hand, for us Muslims, remembering the past, the emergence of pride, the rise of self-esteem and the integrity. How sophisticated Europe and the torture came to the land of Islam with awe. Their king came prostrate and kissed the shoes of the Islamic caliphs.

So what is feared by the term 'dragging us to the past'?
Except for the liberalists who are shortsighted in Islamic history, no Muslim is ashamed of his past. We are Muslims who are proud of our past, proud of our predecessor generation. They are bright stars in the sky that illuminate the universe.

Will the interpretation of the new text have meaning if the context is in accordance with the present context rather than the past context?

In this world there are things that change, but not everything changes. Even we are no stranger to the term 'history will repeat', even though the culprit is different.
Likewise with Shari'a law, it does not need to be changed as long as it does not change. In the past, what was called zina was an illegal relationship between men and women, not a mahram. Times want to change, still adultery still exists and still continues. Therefore the sharia rules remainup to date.

Men still adultery with women. It has been around for a long time and today still happens. Then what business do we have to change the definition of zina? Men must have been interested when they saw a woman's nakedness, then what was the matter we had to redefine the notion of genitalia.

Unless later all humanity turns all into robots, their heads made of metal, their eyes from marbles, their hair from wire, hands, bodies and legs from steel, then at that time we conduct a review of the limits and definitions of male and female genitals.

The change in the world exists, but is limited to only certain regions. While most of the essence and phenomena of life remain the same. Therefore the laws remain the same. Even if there must be adjustments to sharia law, it must meet the terms and conditions. And this has been done by the scholars since long ago. Even sharia has been able to answer the problems that would have happened in the future.


What is the science of Fiqh which is a product of law that cannot be separated from the political context of the Abbasid dynasty, where is the history of Islam in the expansion phase at that time ??

This is the most erroneous view of the orientalists and liberals about the history of Islam. Everything about Islamic law is always related to political upheaval in a certain period.
Of course all of that is not without purpose. Their aim is to tarnish Islam from two sides at once. First, they want to tarnish the political history of the Islamic world. Almost all Orientalist theories about the history of Islam are very raw, ordinary, too speculative and simplify the problem. Coupled with rotten intentions that had been burning from the start.

Secondly, they also want to strike Islamic law, by accusing that the Islamic Shari'a is only made by the royal scholars, which are organized for political purposes only.Astaghfirullahal-adhzim.

How funny and superficial it is to analyze the 'experts'. Where did they get such wild ideas. If only they wanted to learn Arabic, then read the original book of Islamic history, of course they would not be trapped by this carelessness.

Did they not read the history of the scholars? Don't they know that there are so many scholars who are actually hostile to the caliphs? See how Imam Malik and Imam Ahmad were tortured and imprisoned by the authorities. See how Al-Hallaj ibn Yusuf did wrong to the scholars.

If it is said that the scholars wrote sharia with their hands for the sake of the authorities or were influenced by the authorities, it would be very strange. Events like this are only possible in Europe, where the fact is that the king and the church are working together for the common good. The king has an interest, while the pastor (church) also has an interest. Incidentally, each has potential. The king has power and weapons, the church is good at preaching. So the collaboration of the king and the church greatly adorned European history. Although each of them still has a protected area.

But in Islam this is not the case. The ulama were never afraid of the authorities, especially if the ruler was wrongful. And the rulers were very respectful of the scholars, because they knew that the scholars spoke honestly and said with heart. Not at all tempted by money, rank or position.


Kerancuan For Liberalis

We can only look at pity for our brothers who are contaminated with liberal misguided notions. They are still very young, not even a few of them are actually smart and accomplished students. But unfortunately they are still too innocent and easily fooled by their own seniors.

Is it ***, seeing the Jewish professors have fallen in awe. In their brains as if they understood history and sharia it was only their orientalist teacher. Even though their teachers are still learning to spell, their knowledge is superficial, therefore they are very unworthy to be heard, let alone followed.

How can they claim that they are scientists or researchers, if they read history only from a translation book? They should be ashamed of the titles that lay in disrepute.

Unfortunately, the sparkling accessories had dazzled many of our Muslim students, especially in Islamic colleges themselves. And finally, not a few of them were tempted and then tried. Especially when lured by scholarships abroad, they certainly don't miss it and are very proud. In their realm of thought, if there are Islamic students sent to America, Europe or Australia, that is the peak of their dreams. Later you can speak English cas-cis-cus while showing off his PHd title.


Even though what really happened was nothing but the process of 'total brainwashing', then when they came home the victims could ramble strangely about religion and sharia. And it is definitely eccentric and perverted.


Sayyid Qutub has been targeted

No half-hearted, in Egypt there were Sayyid Qutub who were given scholarships to America. He was a genius student, clever and very accomplished. The mode is the same as that experienced by our students, given scholarships to America to undergo 'brainwashing'.

But apparently Allah SWT is Powerful, instead of being brainwashed, Sayyid Qutub is able to break all the arguments of the orientalists. He even returned to his country and joined the Al-Ikhwan Al-Muslimun movement. In spite of their disappointment in seeing their operating failure on this one, the Western conspiracy forces ultimately worked with the Egyptian authorities to arrest him and ultimately sentenced him to death. He was martyred in the presence of Allah SWT by leaving glorious works.


But what about Indonesian students? Can they behave like Sayyid Qutub? Can they be dispatched to the United States far away, but then break the lecherous professor's argument there? Are there those who can keep their heads in front of the Gentile Jewish professors, without having to be ashamed, insecure and ignorant of their religion?


It seems we still have to be disappointed for this one business. Because what happened was just the opposite, every time a student came home from America to study religion, it would certainly become a fan of liberalism. They are nothing but slaves who have bought their brains, souls and hearts. Really worrying.

How many more will be following?

Wallahu a'lam bishshawab.

Wassalamu 'alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh,

Ahmad Sarwat, Lc.


Source: rumahfiqih.com


Fimadani/The Truth Seeker Media

Related article: