Islam is not a Nokia

There is nothing wrong in being modern, that’s if you’re a fan of mobile phones. As times change, they (mobiles) need to be redesigned from shape to size. But religion is not a Nokia. Last week Ameer Ali former head of AFIC outraged Muslims across Australia with his comments about the Prophet s.a.w.s. and the Qur’an. In the article entitled “Prophet not perfect, says Islamic scholar” (The Australian, 04/10/06) written by Richard Kerbaj, he spoke about the “flaws” of the best human ever to walk this earth – prophet Muhammad s.a.w.s., he questioned the veracity of the Qur’an, called for the reinterpretation of it, trivialized Sunnah and so on. With the following article I will examine some of these statements, as well as his ’so called’ apology. One apology for Muslims and another one for the editor of “The (Un)Australian” newspaper.

more on aswj.com.au

Such as the issue of smoking and how it is linked to the verse in the Quran “and do not kill yourselves” etc. The fatwa given by Ibn Baz RH that smoking is harram was linked to the Quran and Sunnah, and you will see this link in many of the fatwas given on contemporary issues.

But once more the discussion is moving towards Legal Jurisprudence, so why people are calling for re-interpretation of the Quran is beyond me.

The problem with talking about the need for a ‘modern’ Islam is that these people ignorantly assume that the Islam that has existed for 1,400 years or more is incapable of dealing with new issues that have just appeared. That is, of course, complete rubbish and it is a nonsense to talk about there being a need for radical, new interpetation of the Qu’ran or some such. Of course, such claims travel well in the press because they reinforce the idea that there is a tension between Islamic law and modernity.

There is also a misunderstanding as to the word ‘itjihad’ which I think clouds these sorts of discussions.  Thanks to the efforts of Irshad Manji and others, the word has taken on a postmodernist hue where it now means, in the minds of many people, the freedom for laypeople to interpret religious texts without any reference to the traditional rules and principles of usool al-fiqh.

This is getting way too confusing. Are we supposed to follow ruling and teaching of the Quran set in a 1400 years ago context? Are we to follow interpretations of the Quran by scholars of 500 years ago?

Muslims today face dilemmas that the Sahaba (RA) and societies of the past did not face. We face issues which are not directly addressed by the Quran nor the Hadith and Sunnah. Are we allowed to practise Ijtihaad in todays society – or do we as usual refer to previous scholars such as ibn kathir, taymiyyah et al and leave ourselves in darkness?

Some one please enlighten me.

Firstly who in their right mind (as a Muslim leader and I use the term leader loosely here) would accept an interview with Richard Kerbaj considering his track record in attacking Islam and expect any good to come of it?

Secondly this talk about re-interpretation and it came up again in this interview, are they talking about Islamic Jurisprudence or what? You cannot simply Re-tafsirify the Quran, Islam does not work that way. The sources of Tafsir are clear first the Quran (verses that explain other verses), then the Sunnah, then the sayings of the Sahaba.

I like how Stephen asked him “Are you creating your own Islam?”