Another Broohaha

"SHARIA LAW IN UK INEVITABLE SAYS DR. WILLIAMS"

Thanks to the dear old Archbish of Canterbury, Islam and Muslims are once again on the front pages of most of the newspapers and the usual rabidly anti-Islam columnists are gleefully sharpening their knives. To be fair to the bearded one (the A of C that is), I doubt it was his intention to stir up trouble. He seems to realise that there is more to Shariah than the hudd penalties (capital punishment for murder and adultery, and hand-chopping for persistent theft which is not due to extreme need), and he would like us all to sit down and have a sensible discussion over a nice cup of tea.

Clearly Shariah law has an image problem in the west. It is assuredly not the way it is painted in the media here. As I Muslim I understand 'Shariah' to be - the guidelines given by God as to how He wants us to live our lives. It encompasses many things, for example worship, and how we conduct relationships with others. It literally means 'the Road' or 'the Way'.

Non-Muslims in the west immediately think of 'stoning women' or 'chopping hands' when the hear the words 'shariah law'. They also think of countries like Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran and believe that these countries follow Islamic Law. This is very far from the truth. There is no country in the world in which Islamic Law/Shariah is implemented. If it was, believe me I for one would be the first one to hop on a plane and emigrate there.

Regarding adultery, firstly let me say that men and women are equally guilty before God and the punishment applies to both of them. If you look at the record of countries like Iran you will find that both men and women are executed for adultery in roughly the same numbers (and men are executed for rape) however in the western press you will only find reports of cases of executed women.

If Islamic Law were truly implemented, adultery would be next to impossible to prove. It requires the testimony of four witnesses of good character, and they have to be able to swear that they saw penetration take place. Not that they saw two naked people rolling around on top of each other, but that they actually witnessed the male member penetrate the female genitals. (pardon my explicitness but that is the law, and Islamically speaking there should not be any squeamishness when it comes to such a serious issue).

Two other issues should make it even harder to bring forth an accusation of adultery against anyone:

1. in Islam it is absolutely forbidden to voice an unconfirmed suspicion of adultery or other immoral behaviour without definite proof. If anyone accuses someone of adultery without bringing forth the required witnesses, they are to be flogged and their witness is for ever after disregarded, a source of great shame for them.

2. as Muslims we are absolutely forbidden to spy or pry into other people's private rooms or dwellings. If there is a knock on my door and I don't see anyone there when I look through the spyhole, I usually guess it is a Muslim caller who has stood to one side after knocking so that they don't inadvertantly see into my home without being invited by myself. That is the custom and to do otherwise is seen as terribly rude.

The Prophet (peace be upon him) never pursued cases of adultery against anyone. In the rare cases where the punishment of death was applied, it was always people coming to him and confessing their sin and demanding punishment. Once, a man confessed to committing adultery and asked for the punishment, which the Prophet pbuh ordered to be carried out. Later on, those who carried out the punishment reported that the man had run away but they chased him and brought him back and killed him - the Prophet pbuh told them "You should have let him go". From this it seems very clear that only those who ask for the punishment should have it carried out on them.

Given all of the above, it is amazing that anyone should ever be convicted of adultery. That, I am sure, is exactly how it should be, not the awful cases that are reported sometimes about rape victims being flogged in Pakistan or women being sentenced to death after retracting their confession (in the case I remember the Sudanese woman was in any case divorced, so even if she had illegal sexual intercourse it was fornication rather than adultery - and the punishment for fornication in Islam is 100 lashes).

There is one more thing to say about adultery - those who believe in the Old Testament (ie Jews and Christians) have no basis for calling the death penalty for adultery barbaric as it clearly commanded by God there. Even if they believe that law is now abrogated, there is no doubt that it was once a command of God that the adulterer receive the death penalty, and for a certainty many people in old testament times were stoned to death for this (as well as other things - see the OT for a full list).

As for public flogging as a punishment for other, minor, offences - in many cases it could be better than a prison sentence, more effective as a deterrant and also more humane than locking people up. There are strict guidelines for flogging, it is not meant to be as bloodthirsty as pirate whippings or slave whippings you might see in TV dramas.

Hand-chopping? as I mentioned already, if someone steals because of extreme need (I mean of food or other sustanence for him/herself or his family) then the punishment does not apply. Only persistent thieves who do so for profit are meant to be punished in this way. And I don't have a problem with that, I save my compassion for people who are victims of theft and not the greedy perpetrators. It can be absolutely devastating to be the victim of a burglary, or even a handbag snatch or pickpocket or something.

The real irony here is that the first Islamic community, headed by the Prophet peace be upon him, was a model of tolerance and inclusiveness. The sizeable number of Jews in the community were given the right to live by their own laws and conduct their own affairs according to their scriptures - although they also had recourse to the Islamic legal process if they wished.

Teddy Bears and Prophets

I got a bit of a shock last night when the ITV news was on and I thought I heard that the teacher at the centre of the row over the teddy bear called Muhammad had got fifteen YEARS in jail. I had to wait until later to find out that it was actually 15 days.

I am with the Muslim Council of Britain when it says: "the authorities have grossly over-reacted" and "Gillian should never have been arrested, let alone charged and convicted of committing a crime." A quick look around the online Islamic community of message boards and e-groups finds no support at all for the conviction of this teacher and actually a lot of anger and exasperation against the Sudanese authorities.

These days I approach the papers with a lot of trepidation. If I'm feeling a bit fragile I will avoid them altogether. Try reading the 'comments from readers' attached to an article about Muslims and you will never venture outside your door again (if you belong to this barely-tolerated faith). In this case the accusations of dangerous fanaticism seem to be richly deserved, and I can only offer up a prayer that we won't all be tarred with the same brush.

Still, having said all that.....listening to Jane Moore this morning talking about the selfless British teacher who, out of the kindness of her heart because surely she couldn't be getting paid much, chose to go to the third world to help them out by educating their children, and look how they repay her!

Well that just stinks of cultural arrogance to me. Which got me thinking about the whole episode a little bit differently. A teddy bear is a western cultural icon, not a global one. Having a soft stuffed animal and making it a focus of emotional attachment or attributing human emotions to it is pretty much taken for granted here in 'the West'. In other parts of the globe it might be regarded as eccentric at best or even contemptible or sinister. The whole exercise of sending a child home from school with a stuffed animal and a note saying "my name is (whatever), please look after me and take me places with you" sounds peculiarly British and twee, and the idea that you can just take that exercise anywhere in the world and not meet with any objection or opposition is a bit arrogant.

Of course there is a political element to the story as well - the Sudanese are under pressure internationally over Darfur and are full of resentment against 'the West'. So it's not just straightforward religious fanaticism.

In any case, I do feel very sorry for the teacher and don't think she has done anything deserving of punishment whatsoever. I don't find anything in Islamic law that says otherwise.