The difference between legal judgment and personal opinion
Sameh Askar
On Monday, May 29, 2017
There is no such thing as a “Shari’a Ruling” outside the Noble Qur’an
All opinions without the Book of God are personal opinions, including (hadiths – interpretations – fatwas) and saying that one of these things is a legal ruling is a blasphemy against religion and the attribute of infallibility and sanctity to people’s opinions..
Even the Qur’an’s rulings are not all absolute..some of them are restricted, such as cutting off the hand of a thief, for example, with the difference in it, whether it is a moral (preventing the hands from stealing) or real amputation, complete amputation of the member or mutilation (which does not apply, but sunni traditionalist believe it to be), but its purpose in the end is (deterrence) and religion does not put methods in themselves as ends.. may The methods vary, but the goal is the same.. For example, the story of Joseph did not include cutting the hand, but rather the Qur’an mentioned the prison sentence by admitting without denying it
Even cutting was an ancient culture that developed from older punishments for the thief, for example, among the Sumerians and the Pharaohs. It was narrated that the punishment for theft may reach the death penalty, and sometimes flogging and mutilation of organs.. Legal or divine..this may fit the time and customs of the Bedouins in the peninsula 1400 years ago..
By the way: The saying that cutting off the hand of a thief is an obligation that is suspended during a time of famine is incorrect. The thieves are now released from prisons, as the majority of Arab countries are now in financial crises and some of them have reached the point of starvation, and not imprisoning the guilty turns society into a forest in which the strong kill the weak..
The narration of Omar’s suspension to the point of theft they used to codify the limit and increase its commitment.. This came out of a mind that saw Omar’s act (divinely) that includes at the same time an acknowledgment of the brutality of the punishment and its harm to society, then who determines whether this is starvation or not?..some of the sheikhs Sultan in the Mamluk state considered famines to be a shortcoming of the common people and spending on hashish instead of food. Now one of them will come out to say the same thing and hold the youth responsible for the famine by spending on mobiles, cigarettes and banhu..!
Then if the border in itself was an end, it would have eliminated the crime, but this is a means, and it is historically proven that all the countries that implemented the border increased the number of crimes, Saddam Hussein cut off the hand of the thief in the year 94, Pakistan, Mauritania, Sudan, Iran and Saudi Arabia are countries where the border is applied until now, but with In Saudi Arabia, 38 car thefts were recorded per day, an average of 1,200 cars per month. This is car theft only, which is not registered.. Pakistan, where the number of thefts in 2005 reached more than 90,000 cases of theft per year.. Count with me how many hands they will cut?…These It is not enough for the whole people.
On the other hand, I look at the extent of theft in Sweden and the Scandinavian countries.. these do not apply borders, but with science they have reached a culture that elevates society and reduces the amount of transgression, so treating a mistake is not necessarily a mistake like it..
The misfortune in someone saying the legal ruling may reach the point of denying the Qur’an in favor of the fatwas of the sheikhs, which is a deliberate disruption of the sacred text that was widespread in the time of the Umayyad and Abbasid state and we inherited it until it became (the rule of the predecessor) that it is forbidden to go out and challenge it as a known denial of the religion by necessity, and the Salafi doctrine is common that the hadith abrogates The Qur’an is one of the ways to challenge the Book of God and distort religion in favor of human sayings.