Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
article292
Description :
Dialogue 13th of April around the moratorium on corporal punishment, stoning and the death penalty in the Islamic World
Tariq Ramadan
Page 1/4
Dialogue 13th of April around the moratorium on corporal punishment, stoning and the death penalty in the Islamic World
Question posed by Mounim EL YACOUBI: Dear Tariq, Thanks for your efforts to promote ethics and justice in the Islamic world and everywhere. I totally agree with your moratorium because the laws are currently applied in a way which is opposed to their very essence. And Islam is justice, and we, as Muslims cannot tolerate anymore the unjust applications of these laws. I want to draw your attention to some reactions that followed your call for the moratorium. An example is an article written by Yasser Azza3atira on the Moroccan journal Attajdid: http://www.attajdid.ma/. In this article, Yasser hinted (in one sentence) at the very beginning that you were talking about a moratorium. After that, and throughout the article, he kept saying that you were advocating and asking for removing these laws, not calling for a moratorium. Not only that, at one point, he stated that the analogy you gave between your call and Omar Ibn Al-Khattab moratorium is not correct because Omar only suspended the law in question for a period of time (sic) as if you weren't actually calling for a moratorium with debates, but for a mere elimination of the laws right now. This drives me crazy. How can a journalist say this while your call is very clear? Is it lack of professionalism, dishonestly, incompetence? Anyway, I'm afraid your call can be misinterpreted in the Arab and Islamic world and I hope you will find a way to explain again and again (unfortunately) your proposal through Arab medias and especially Arab TV channels. Thanks Mounim Answer by Tariq RAMADAN: Dearest brother Mounim, Thank you for your message and comment. This is exactly what is happening. Scholars and people are "projecting" thoughts, intentions and objectives on my call that are not there. The text, the arguments and the objectives are perceived through the prism of "pro-Western approach" or "against Islam"... This is why I am saying that the reactions to this call are working as "indicators" or "revelations" as to the state of the debate in the Islamic world. We are here at the heart of our "internal crisis" unable to listen to a critical argument coming from within. Anyone criticising from within is perceived as working for outsiders or "the Other", not to say "The Enemy". These kinds of reactions are not coming only from the "ordinary Muslims" but from scholars and even ulam' and this is why I am ready to continue this struggle in the name of Islam, in our name... I got so many contradictory reactions revealing exactly your point that this, in itself, is but a confirmation of the content of the Call. May Allah help us and guide us Question posed by Samir: Salam Alaykoum Tariq, I have pasted two statements that you probably have heard about. Can you please lay out your arguments ? (for full article http://www.islamicawakening.com/vie...) "Some may start calling for moratorium on the family law of Islam also, and some others on the business and finance laws of Islam, and some may ask for moratorium on the whole Shari`ah" “I do have a great respect and love for Dr. Tariq. [But] If we call today for an international moratorium on corporal punishment, stoning and the death penalty, then tomorrow I am so worried that they may ask Muslims to suspend their Friday Prayer,” These statements are coming from Ulema's. I'm very disappointed about the methodology they chose to debate. I hope you'll raise the debate at a serious level. Would you say that violence in the name of Allah requires an urgent and specific processing? Thanks Salam Alaykoum Samir Answer of Tariq RAMADAN: Dear brother Samir Thank you for your question. I am not so disappointed about the kind of responses I got for I was expecting such arguments. I can understand that Muslims are worried about where "innovations" and the ideas of a "progressive Islam" could lead us. These concerns are not understandable but are nonetheless legitimate. We have to be explicit as to our faithfulness to the fundamentals of Islam and the classical tradition. This is what I am advocating. It is in the name of this classical tradition and the requirements of the Islamic teachings that I am questioning the current application and the silence of the ulam'. We are dealing with the hudd that are understood as the farthest limits (and the harshest) concerning the implementation of the penal code. To suspend their application does not mean that we should not think of a penal code in the meantime. What is meant is that we must stop the injustices and the irreversible sanction. If it is not possible to question the consistency of our legal practices with the scriptural sources it means that we have a real problem, a deep intellectual crisis. We,
Page 2/4
Page 3/4
Salam Alaykoum Tariq, I have another question that is very basic, so I apologize if I'm too simple. Please assume that I'm a basic Muslim with low amount of education/conceptualisation/... Here is the question: Based on Coran, Sourate 24, Verse 1 and 2, what is the path from those verses to the call for a moratorium? I know that most of the Ulema's will tell me it is too difficult for me but I'm a rebel and I take the opportunity to ask you. Please remain simple especially considering the nature of the first verse of that Sourate. Again I support your call. Thank you Salam Alaykoum Samir Answer of Tariq RAMADAN: Salam my dear brother, No it is not too difficult for you and your question is more than legitimate. The second verse of the sour 24 deals with "az-znia wa zn" (women and men engaging in illicit sexual relations) and the text is qat' ath thub and ad-dalala (definitive as to its authenticity and its meaning). This is the proof that such texts exist and there are no arguments or discussions about the fact that they are part of the Islamic corpus and teachings. We are dealing with a text, now, all the ulam' have understood that to identify and to judge someone as being zn or zna one needs specific proof, strict conditions and a specific moral environment. This is exactly the point of the call: the texts are here but what is required in our specific contexts to remain faithful to the spirit of justice that the whole Islamic message is carrying? It is not enough to quote the verses... to understand them is imperative and to be consistent when applying them is a moral obligation. This is the purpose of the call... This is the end of this session. Thank you for your questions. Continue to remain in touch in sh ar-Rahmn and may Allah protect us, guide us and love us. SalamulLahi 'alaykum jam'an.
Page 4/4