Showing posts with label maliki. Show all posts
Showing posts with label maliki. Show all posts

Saturday, September 18, 2010

muslims, islamic law and public policy in the united states

Muslims, Islamic Law and Public Policy in the United States By Sherman A. Jackson is an interesting discussion of the duality and double-consciousness which comes with being a Muslim living in a non-Muslim country, specifically how can one reconcile the demands of a "traditional" rulings of Sunni fiqh with the living in the U.S. under a secular constitution.

Sunday, August 29, 2010

sausage and the law

Mark Twain once said, "Those who respect the law and love sausage should watch neither being made." But as a Muslim, I would actually argue that he was wrong on both counts. First, anyone who eats (pork) sausage should find out exactly what they are putting into their bodies with a quickness.

But in terms of the law (at least the shariah) I've had an interesting time trying to learn more about usul al-fiqh. Right now I'm in the middle of Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence by M.H. Kamali. Unfortunately I was only able to find it free online after ordering it on Amazon. The book goes into a fair amount of detail on how the ulema across different schools of thought derive legal rulings from the Quran and sunnah and the chapters are nicely organized according to various sources or principles. I found it refreshing because it gave me respect for some of the logical and linguistic nuance which goes into harmonizing different texts. It was also comforting to see that local customs, public interest, and avoiding harm are also considered in the shariah and allow it to be more flexible than many people realize.

In case you don't have time to read a 300 plus something book on usul al-fiqh, The Fundamental Principles of Imam Malik's Fiqh from Muhammad Abu Zahrah is organized in much the same way as Kamali's work except it is much more abbreviated and emphasizes the Maliki school's opinion.

Some other interesting pages:
Maxims of Islamic Jurisprudence from Al Majalla (an Ottoman law Manual) gives 100 different legal aphorisms which guide legal reasoning, from a Hanafi perspective.

The blog, Scholar's Pen: The Tools of a Mujtahid- A glance at the Hanafi Methodology gives a brief summary of some of the distinctive principles of the Hanafi school.

While The Principles and Codes of Law of Hanafi Fiqh by Hadhrat Moulana Ashraf Ali Thaanwi is another large book, full of untranslated legal terms and is much less clear than Kamali's work.In fact, these last three sites are all a bit technical and would make much more sense after reading the first two pieces.

Planet Grenada: differences between schools

Sunday, March 02, 2008

"i'm sushi"

Since I am actually on the Su-Shi (Sunni-Shia) blogring but it's been over a year since I have made any sushi-related posts, the following seems overdue.

In the article Sunni & Shia: I’m “Sushi”, Dr. Hesham A. Hassaballa gives a description of the "su-shi" position, at least as it relates to himself:
In fact, there was no such thing as “Shia” or “Sunni” throughout the period of the four Caliphs. The first time the term “Shia,” was even used was during the civil war between Ali (r) and Mu’awiyah (r). Those who supported the claim of Ali (r) to the Caliphate were termed Shiat Ali, or the “Party of Ali.” Yet, it was not a “sect,” as we understand it today. In fact, it took decades, if not centuries, for the “doctrines” (for lack of a better term) of Shi’ism and Sunnism to fully develop.

Nevertheless, at its essence, the difference between Sunni and Shi’i is jurisprudential: Sunnis believe that political (and by extension religious) leadership can reside with anyone in the larger community, as long as the community accepts said person’s qualifications. For Shi’is, however, political (and religious) leadership must be within the House of the Prophet (pbuh). Another important distinction between Sunnis and Shi’is is the issue of the probity, or upright character, of all of the Companions. It is a fundamental part of Sunni doctrine, whereas some Shi’is do not necessarily ascribe to this. That is it.

Now, over time, these two “philosophical” differences developed into distinct schools of thought, especially with respect to matters of Islamic law. But, again, that took centuries to develop. Furthermore, many people associate with Shi’is an intense love for the House of the Prophet (pbuh). Yet, is this not an essential aspect of Sunni belief as well? Could one be Muslim and not love the family of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)? Both Imam Malik (r) and Imam Abu Hanifah (r), two stalwarts of the Sunni community, were ardent supporters of the House of the Prophet (pbuh). In fact, they could be called “Political Shi’is” because of this support.

[...]

Now, technically, I am a Sunni, of Maliki/Hanafi (or “Malifi") leanings. But, I have a deep and profound love of the House of the Prophet (pbuh). Even though I will not be pounding my chest on Ashura, like many Shi’is do, the murder of Imam Hussein was extremely painful for me. He is my Imam, too. All of the Imams of the House of the Prophet (pbuh), in fact, are my Imams. So, I am proud to call myself a “Sushi,” as well. And I don’t even like fish.


Grenada's past:
egypt and the shias