![](\"https:\/\/www.altmuslim.com\/ee_images\/sharia_protest.jpg\")
<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/p><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n
Hasn\u2019t the whole notion of shariah in America gotten a bit out of control? No, it hasn\u2019t \u2014 it\u2019s gotten hugely, obscenely, ignorantly out of control. How many of those anti-Islam protesters holding \u201cNO SHARIA LAW\u201d signs (as if anyone were advocating shariah law in the U.S.) actually know what the word means? I\u2019d say, oh, none. <\/p>\n
Roughly. Shariah (also spelled shari\u2019ah or sharia or shari\u2019a) is the Arabic word for \u201cthe road to the watering place.\u201d In a religious context, it means \u201cthe righteous path.\u201d Loosely, it can mean simply, \u201cIslam.\u201d <\/p>\n
There are six principles of shariah. They are derived from the Qur\u2019an, which Muslims believe is the word of God. All Islamic religious rules must be in line with these six principles of shariah. <\/p>\n
Aha! The six principles must be about killing infidels, veiling women, stoning people for adultery, honor killings and female genital cutting, right? Nope.<\/p>\n
Here they are, the six principles of shariah:<\/p>\n
1. The right to the protection of life.
\n2. The right to the protection of family.
\n3. The right to the protection of education.
\n4. The right to the protection of religion.
\n5. The right to the protection of property (access to resources).
\n6. The right to the protection of human dignity.<\/p>\n
Well, bless me, as a pledge-of-allegiance-reciting, California-raised Muslim girl, these six principles sound a lot like those espoused in my very own Constitution of the United States. Except that these were developed over a thousand years ago.<\/p>\n
This is the core of shariah \u2013 these six principles. The term \u201cshariah law\u201d is a misnomer, because shariah is not law, but a set of principles. To Muslims, it\u2019s the general term for \u201cthe way of God.\u201d<\/p>\n
But how do we know what the way of God is? Early Muslims looked to the Qur\u2019an and the words of the Prophet Muhammad to figure this out. They filled books of interpretive writings (called fiqh<\/i>) about how to act in accordance with the way of God. They rarely agreed \u2013 the fiqh<\/i> is not just one rule, but many differing opinions and contradictory rules and scholarly debates.<\/p>\n
Sometimes, shariah also refers to the whole body of Islamic texts, which includes the Qur\u2019an, the sayings of the Prophet, and the books of interpretive literature written by medieval Muslim scholars. The first two are considered divine. The interpretive literature, the fiqh<\/i>, is not.<\/p>\n
The fiqh<\/i> was meant to develop and change according to the time and place \u2014 it has internal methodologies for that to happen. It is not static, but flexible. No religion gets to be 1400 years old and the second largest in the world unless it\u2019s flexible and adaptable.<\/p>\n
The Qur\u2019an is old. The fiqh<\/i> books of jurisprudence are old. To modern eyes, they can look just as outdated as other ancient texts, including the Bible and Torah. That\u2019s why, just like the Bible and the Torah, the Islamic texts must be read in their historical context.<\/p>\n
Assuming all Muslims follow medieval Islamic rules today is like assuming that all Catholics follow 9th century canon law. Islam, like Christianity, has changed many times over the centuries, and it continues to change. Focusing only on the nutcases who advocate a return to medieval times is ignoring the vast majority of modern Muslims.<\/p>\n
For example, stoning for adultery is a punishment that appears in fiqh<\/i>, as well as early Judaic law. But it does not appear in the Qur\u2019an. In Islam, therefore, stoning was a result of cultural norms imposed on the religious texts. Moreover, in the fiqh<\/i>, though the punishment for adultery was stoning, adultery was made such a fantastically difficult crime to prove that the punishment was impossible to apply. Historically, stoning was very rarely implemented in the Islamic world, which is ironic, since today the Saudi and Iranian governments apply it as though they\u2019d never heard of the strict Islamic constraints on it.<\/p>\n
The vast majority of Muslims today do not believe in stoning people for adultery, and many are working hard to eradicate it. Stoning is horrific and has no place in our world. The miniscule percentage of Muslims who advocate it are imposing the medieval penalty while ignoring all the myriad limitations meant to make it inapplicable.<\/p>\n
As for other scary stories attributed to shari\u2019a, like honor killings, veiling of women, and female genital cutting, these are cultural practices and not Islamic. They are practiced by non-Muslims of certain cultures as well as Muslims.<\/p>\n
Shari\u2019a is a set of religious principles and is not the law of the land anywhere in the world. The 50-some Muslim-majority countries are all constitutional states and nearly all of them have civil codes (many of these based on the French system). Being Muslim does not require a governmental imposition of something called \u201cshari\u2019a law,\u201d any more than being a Christian requires the implementation of \u201cBiblical law\u201d (though there are, of course, a tiny minority of both Christians and Muslims who do advocate such things, including Sarah Palin<\/a>).<\/p>\n As for Islam being a political system, there is nothing in the Qur\u2019an about an \u201cIslamic state,\u201d and the Prophet himself never tried to implement an \u201cIslamic state,\u201d despite hysterical accusations to the contrary. Those under his leadership practiced a variety of religions.<\/p>\n Traditionally, in the Islamic world, the institutions that governed were always separate from the institutions that developed religion. In fact, they often checked and balanced one another. Although no civilization has been free from all conflict, every Islamic empire was a multi-religious, multicultural empire, in which religious minorities were governed by their own laws.<\/p>\n The term \u201cIslam as a religion and a state\u201d really only became popular in the 1920s, as a reaction to Western colonization of the Muslim world. In fact, Islam contains plenty of concepts consistent with modern democracy \u2013 for example, shura (consultation) and aqd (a contract between the governed and the governing). In other words, Muslims can be perfectly comfortable in America, following state and federal laws.<\/p>\n The Qur\u2019an contains many verses advocating religious tolerance, too, though the anti-Islam protesters won\u2019t believe it. The Qur\u2019an says that: God could have made everyone into one people, but elected not to (11:118); God made us into different nations and tribes so that we can learn from one another (49:13); there is no compulsion in religion (2:256); and that we should say, \u201cto you your religion, to me mine\u201d (109:6).<\/p>\n The only verses about fighting in the Qur\u2019an refer specifically to the polytheistic Arab tribes who were trying to kill the Prophet in the 7th century. So the Islamophobes who look in the Qur\u2019an for the fighting verses and assume that these verses refer to them personally are simply being narcissistic. Contrary to counting Jews and Christians as \u201cinfidels,\u201d the Qur\u2019an repeatedly commands particular respect of Jews and Christians. It is established in Islam that you don\u2019t need to be Muslim to go to heaven.<\/p>\n Repeating a lie over and over again doesn\u2019t make it true; but it certainly results in people believing the lie. That\u2019s what the Islam-haters are counting on. That, and the ignorance about Islamic tenets.<\/p>\n So the best thing to do is find out what Islam really is about. Talk to a Muslim in person. Read an introduction to Islam (try a fun one like mine<\/a>). Read Loonwatch<\/a> to read about the holes in the anti-Islamic rhetoric. Or take a look at the University of Georgia\u2019s informational website<\/a> on Islam, for some quick answers and further reading. If you read the anti-Islam fear-mongering websites, all you\u2019ll learn will be tall tales.<\/p>\n Bigotry may be a human tendency, but America has never stood for bigotry. I believe in an America that stands for pluralism and multicultural understanding. The hysteria and hate toward Muslims \u2013 resulting in several acts of violence against Muslims just this week, such as a stabbing and arson \u2013 is un-American. We must stop it, and the first step is understanding and education.<\/p>\n Sumbul Ali-Karamali is an attorney with an additional degree in Islamic law, as well as the author of \u201cThe Muslim Next Door: the Qur\u2019an, the Media, and that Veil Thing<\/a>.\u201d This article was previously published in The Huffington Post<\/a><\/i><\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Assuming all Muslims follow medieval Islamic rules today is like assuming that all Catholics follow 9th century canon law. Islam, like Christianity, has changed many times over the centuries, and it continues to change.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-3936","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"yoast_head":"\n