[Islam] Due to request, a "reprint"

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Respenus

...because then by definition he would no longer be a Muslim... (in the strictly limited sense of what Skybird is trying to present).

@Skybird:
Any change we might be able to read the full version of the essay? Very, very informing.

In another thread, Respenus has asked me for the complete essay from which I quoted.

This is the reason why I post this again in full. There is no further agenda of mine to start mass-posting on Islam again.

Long time members may remember this essay, from 2005 or so.

Respenus, understand that this was just the first half of a planned two-part series on islamic scirpture and history, but the second part never was written, instead i had another essay on this thing called "Dialogue with Islam". This part here gives a brief summary of Muhammad'S biography, the way the Quran formed up, and the importance of the Hadith.

What does not get metioned here, but also is important, is the canon of scriptures called the Sira (also called the prophet's biography). I also do not put the term "Sunna" into relation to Sira and hadith, but ignore it completely, intentionally. Finally there is the tradition of Sharia, which is less to be understood as a closed scripture in itself, but is a network of interlinks between different parts of the other scriptures, Sira, Hadith, Sunna, and of colurse the Quran.

To understand this, an illustration. In the West we usually talk of Sharia in the meaning of a set or punishable deeds, and the according penalties. This is wrong. In fact Sharia knows five classes of desirable deeds and intentions/thoughts, deeds and thoughts that are to be avoided and are not recommended, and deeds that are forbidden and must be punished. Sharia describes the latter, the punishable deeds, but it does not list the penalties. For finding the penalty, it refers to the Quran again! It is like this with the other things, too, a constant back and forth-linking between the various departments of scripture. You now may understand why it is impossible to think of Islam without sharia, or that Sharia is open to negotiation with western values. In fact is is part of the cement that keeps the ingredients of islam together. Change or remove it, and the building collapses. Though legal schools, of which there are only six dominant, influential ones, may agree or disagree at times in interpreting Sharia, it is important to understand that there are no different traditions of sharia, like there are no different Qurans, only different lineages of juristic scholars. They all deal with one and the same Quran and one and the same Sharia.

Okay, let's go.