is it sharia?

[firenze]

some non-muslims criminals living under shariah are given the punishments what their religion has prescribed[which usually are strict than Islamic punishments] for them[if they desire].

Let me give you little bit history, even in Ottoman empire their was no Shariaah. Now this maybe a shock for some so-called Muslims, Ottoman implemented a system called "Millat System" in which all humans are equal regardless of their religion. Western penal code is based on Millat system.

Their was no Shariaah in Moorish Spain where we rule 800 years.

This is our history, now can someone tell me are we right today, or we were at that time, when we ruled the world.

...

[hareem01]

@firenze

Let me give you little bit history, even in Ottoman empire their was no Shariaah. Now this maybe a shock for some so-called Muslims, Ottoman implemented a system called “Millat System” in which all humans are equal regardless of their religion. Western penal code is based on Millat system.

Their was no Shariaah in Moorish Spain where we rule 800 years.

This is our history, now can someone tell me are we right today, or we were at that time, when we ruled the world.

…

Well the idea of “everyone is equal regardless of their religion in front of a Qadhi or judge” comes from Shariah and perhaps you should read the proper concept of Millet System.

The millet concept has a similarity to autonomous territories that has long been the European norm for dealing with minority groups. The millet system has a long history in the Middle East, and is closely linked to Islamic rules on the treatment of non−Muslim minorities (dhimmi). The Ottoman term specifically refers to the separate legal courts pertaining to personal law under which minorities were allowed to rule themselves (in cases not involving any Muslim) with fairly little interference from the **Ottoman government](Government of the classical Ottoman Empire - Wikipedia).**
People were bound to their millets by their religious affiliations (or their confessional communities), rather than their ethnic origins, according to the millet concept.[2]](Millet (Ottoman Empire) - Wikipedia) The head of a millet, most often a religious hierarch such as the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople, reported directly to the Ottoman Sultan. The millets had a great deal of power — they set their own laws and collected and distributed their own taxes. All that was insisted was loyalty to the Empire. When a member of one millet committed a crime against a member of another, the law of the injured party applied, but the ruling Islamic majority being paramount, any dispute involving a Muslim fell under their sharia−based law.
Later, the perception of the millet concept was altered in the 19th century by the rise of nationalism within the Ottoman Empire.

[firenze]

@hareem01

Well the idea of “everyone is equal regardless of their religion in front of a Qadhi or judge” comes from Shariah and perhaps you should read the proper concept of Millet System.

The millet concept has a similarity to autonomous territories that has long been the European norm for dealing with minority groups. The millet system has a long history in the Middle East, and is closely linked to Islamic rules on the treatment of non−Muslim minorities (dhimmi). The Ottoman term specifically refers to the separate legal courts pertaining to personal law under which minorities were allowed to rule themselves (in cases not involving any Muslim) with fairly little interference from the **Ottoman government](Government of the classical Ottoman Empire - Wikipedia).**
People were bound to their millets by their religious affiliations (or their confessional communities), rather than their ethnic origins, according to the millet concept.[2]](Millet (Ottoman Empire) - Wikipedia) The head of a millet, most often a religious hierarch such as the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople, reported directly to the Ottoman Sultan. The millets had a great deal of power — they set their own laws and collected and distributed their own taxes. All that was insisted was loyalty to the Empire. When a member of one millet committed a crime against a member of another, the law of the injured party applied, but the ruling Islamic majority being paramount, any dispute involving a Muslim fell under their sharia−based law.
Later, the perception of the millet concept was altered in the 19th century by the rise of nationalism within the Ottoman Empire.

Thanks for clarifying and further elaboration on Millat System, i will definitely look into in more detail.

But the point persists, can we implement Hadood laws in today’s world, people gave examples of Saudia Arabia, but they didn’t see the ground realities, its kingdom there with worst of dictatorship one can imagine. Shariaah or strict implementation of Islamic penal code is only for those individuals who are not part of so-called elite.

Nevertheless, its more then 100+ years, Saudia is giving punishment on Shariaah laws, but these laws can;t able to change the society of Saudia from inheriting the western influence, now after living in the state of denial for years they come to one conclusion, they can’t live with these laws: Women are getting more freedom, they can drive now, Cinemas are opening up, the religious police don’t implement their so-called will on women anymore, now in Riyadh one can seen girls without walking in a tent or Burkha.

Last year Kind Abdullah issue the order of taking the kingdom to western democracy system with-in the time frame of 25 years,… they had local bodies election last year, women are elected too.

What all this shows? proven examples, we can’t implement Shariaah today, its not for today.. it wasn’t for Moorish spain, it wasn’t for Ottoman Empire… so they didn’t add it to state.

I always ask for one example with-in the last 1000 years, where we implement the Shariaah and what was the outcome, ..recent example is Turkey: with-in days it went to westernize system from Caliphate, no one protest except physedo mullah’s. It was actually become the Turkish National Movement to finish the Caliphate system once for all, the last Caliphate Muhmed VI live in exile in Malta then in Italian Riveria where he died. No Muslim country offer him a 2 feet land.

If Muslims are so in love with Shariaah, then what happened to them in Ottoman Empire why they didn’t came out to save the empire from becoming a secular republic? It was the same people, who live under the so-called Shariaah system for more then 600 years, what happened with-in day, they get brain-washed???

[girl2009]

i was so disturbed to see that on geo, cant beleive these ppl are muslims

[ehtasab]

@firenze

Thanks for clarifying and further elaboration on Millat System, i will definitely look into in more detail.

But the point persists, can we implement Hadood laws in today's world, people gave examples of Saudia Arabia, but they didn't see the ground realities, its kingdom there with worst of dictatorship one can imagine. Shariaah or strict implementation of Islamic penal code is only for those individuals who are not part of so-called elite.

Nevertheless, its more then 100+ years, Saudia is giving punishment on Shariaah laws, but these laws can;t able to change the society of Saudia from inheriting the western influence, now after living in the state of denial for years they come to one conclusion, they can't live with these laws: Women are getting more freedom, they can drive now, Cinemas are opening up, the religious police don't implement their so-called will on women anymore, now in Riyadh one can seen girls without walking in a tent or Burkha.

Last year Kind Abdullah issue the order of taking the kingdom to western democracy system with-in the time frame of 25 years,... they had local bodies election last year, women are elected too.

What all this shows? proven examples, we can't implement Shariaah today, its not for today.. it wasn't for Moorish spain, it wasn't for Ottoman Empire.... so they didn't add it to state.

I always ask for one example with-in the last 1000 years, where we implement the Shariaah and what was the outcome, ..recent example is Turkey: with-in days it went to westernize system from Caliphate, no one protest except physedo mullah's. It was actually become the Turkish National Movement to finish the Caliphate system once for all, the last Caliphate Muhmed VI live in exile in Malta then in Italian Riveria where he died. No Muslim country offer him a 2 feet land.

If Muslims are so in love with Shariaah, then what happened to them in Ottoman Empire why they didn't came out to save the empire from becoming a secular republic? It was the same people, who live under the so-called Shariaah system for more then 600 years, what happened with-in day, they get brain-washed????

Dude, you are so lost, you can't distinguish hadd-laws from culture, social laws.

[chacha_Ghalib]

Re: is it sharia?

f***ing animals

these guys don’t know the alif bey of sharia and are out implementing it…

this is what happens when the gov’t props up mullahs… the biggest threat to pakistan is not amreeka or yahoodis or anyone else but jahil mullahs

[Khehkeshan]

@chacha_Ghalib

f***ing animals

these guys don’t know the alif bey of sharia and are out implementing it…

this is what happens when the gov’t props up mullahs… the biggest threat to pakistan is not amreeka or yahoodis or anyone else but jahil mullahs

Exactly, good to see some peple get it

[firenze]

Just receive a link from my Cousin, i didn’t read it completely, but anyway.. hope it will be a good addition to discussion:

Pakistan Flogging & Islamic Justice - Reading Islam.com - Ask About Islam