Dear Members,
Al-salaamu alaykum wa rahmat-Allaahi wa barakaatuhu (Peace be upon you,
and the mercy of Allaah and His blessings).
The topic for today's reading is :-


      ISLAMIC STATE AND RELIGIOUS MINORITIES.

                   BY
           Muqtedar Khan, Ph.D.

The Taliban are gone but they have left us with several serious questions
about the future of religious minorities in Islamic states in particular and
religious states in general.

Today there are at least three major conceptions of religious states –
Jewish, Islamic and Hindu. Israel strongly identifies itself as a Jewish
state; Nepal is a Hindu state and India under the growing influence of Hindu
Nationalism is toying with the idea of Ram Rajya – Hindu statehood. Iran,
Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Sudan and Afghanistan under Taliban
claimed to be Islamic states.

Religious states face a significant challenge from diversity. They seek to
advance and establish a specific normative social agenda. In order for these
states to be successful it is important that the population share the
ideological beliefs of those who hold power. The presence of diversity and
difference of opinion between the populace makes it necessary for the state
to privilege one element of the citizenry over others thereby
institutionalizing discrimination and intolerance.
The Challenge of Diversity
Islamic states inevitably treat non-Muslim citizens as less than equal
curbing their access to power and religious freedom.  Even in Israel, which
is a democracy, religious minorities face discrimination. In 1976 when
Israel captured Jerusalem, 28% of its population was Christian and now only
2% of Jerusalem’s inhabitants are Christians.  Christians may become extinct
in their own holy city and the primary reason for this is the religious
importance of Jerusalem to Jewish state.  This is a sobering example of how
in spite of democracy a religious state can marginalize religious
minorities.
Malaysia is an example where religious ideology and democracy mix very well.
Malaysia is 65% Muslim and strongly identifies itself as an Islamic state.
It is a very active member of OIC (Organization of Islamic Conferences).  In
spite of its Islamic identity, Malaysian Muslims share power and wealth with
Christians, Buddhists and Hindus who are all equal citizens of the country
and have equal rights and duties.

But religious minorities in some Islamic states, such as Afghanistan under
the Taliban, suffer institutionalized discrimination because of these
states’ legalist orientation and their obsession with the Islamic
jurisprudence. Some of the legalist positions in Islamic states are so
strict that non-Muslim minorities find it a challenge to live normal
lives.Blasphemy laws and apostasy laws are well known for the problems they
cause minorities. Narrow interpretation of the role of women in Islamic
societies has also restricted the scope of possibilities for non-Muslim
women.

The Objectives of an Islamic Society
The Maqasid al Shariah (the objective of the Islamic law/way) are falah
(welfare) and hayat-e-tayyabah (good life) for the members of the community.
  But when contemporary Islamists operationalize this divine vision of the
Islamic state, they define the Islamic state as that which implements the
Islamic law. Islamic law is divine in its origin, and since God does not
need the consent of his creation, Contemporary Islamists insist on imposing
Islamic law even without consent. Due to colonization, and prior to it, due
to the decline of Islamic intelligentsia, Islamic legal tradition remains
fossilized and is still struck in the middle ages.   Islamic state therefore
becomes a reduced to a coercive institution seeking to enforce a system of
laws that were deduced from Islamic sources several centuries ago.

The irony of this reality is that in seeking to impose Islamic law and
create an Islamic state, Islamists are actually in direct opposition to the
spirit and letter of the Quran. The Quran is very explicit when it says
“there is no compulsion in religion,” (Quran 2: 256).  Elsewhere the Quran
exhorts Jews to live by the laws revealed to them in the Torah. In fact The
Quran expresses surprise that some Jews sought the arbitration of the
Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him) rather than their own legal tradition
(5:43). The Quran also orders Christians to live by their faith; “So let the
people of the Gospel judge by that which Allah has revealed therein, for he
who judges not by that which Allah has revealed is a sinner,” (Quran 5:47).
From these verses it is abundantly clear that an Islamic state must advocate
religious pluralism even to the extent of permitting multiple legal systems.

Democratic polities are much better at dealing with minorities who do not
subscribe to state ideology because they are based on constitutional
guarantees of human rights conceived at the level of the individual – the
smallest minority. In a sense on some issues, such as the bill of rights in
the American system – the individual over rules even the majority opinion.
Contemporary Islamic states have yet to develop a legal framework that
ensures that there is no compulsion in religion and no discrimination
against religious minorities even though the above-identified sources
provide a clear Quranic foundation for guaranteeing religious freedom beyond
even the scope of the American bill of rights.

Lessons from Medina
Unlike the present day Islamists, Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), when he
established the first Islamic state in Medina – actually a Jewish-Muslim
federation extended to religious minorities the rights that are guaranteed
to them in the Quran.  Prophet Muhammad’s Medina was based on the covenant
of Medina, a real and actual social contract agreed upon by Muslims, Jews
and others that treated them as equal citizens of Medina. They enjoyed the
freedom to choose the legal system they wished to live under. Jews could
live under Islamic law, or Jewish law or pre-Islamic Arab tribal traditions.
There was no compulsion in religion even though Medina was an Islamic state.
The difference between Medina and today’s Islamic states is profound. The
state of Medina was based on a real social contract that applied divine law
but only in consultation and with consent of all citizens regardless of
their faith. But contemporary Islamic states apply Islamic law without
consent or consultation and often through coercion.

It is a sad commentary on contemporary Islamists that while democracy is a
challenge to contemporary Islamic states, it was constitutive to the first
Islamic state in Medina established by the Prophet of Islam.



With the very best of good wishes,
Musa Amadu Pembo
Glasgow,
Scotland
UK.
[log in to unmask]
Da’wah is to convey the message with wisdom and with good words. We should
give the noble and positive message of Islam. We should try to emphasize
more commonalities and explain the difference without getting into
theological arguments and without claiming the superiority of one position
over the other. There is a great interest among the people to know about
Islam and we should do our best to give the right message.
May Allah,Subhana Wa Ta'Ala,guide us all to His Sirat Al-Mustaqim (Righteous
Path).May He protect us from the evils of this life and the hereafter.May
Allah,Subhana Wa Ta'Ala,grant us entrance to paradise .
We ask Allaah the Most High, the All-Powerful, to teach us that which will
benefit us, and to benefit us by that which we learn. May Allaah Subhanahu
Wa Ta'ala grant blessings and peace to our Prophet Muhammad and his family
and
companions..Amen.

_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>

To view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>//\\<<//\\>>