Johnny Boy You write: Originally posted by Johnny B: Intresting exchanges here !! Despite my lack of belief in certain doctorine one must be senseless to not have enjoyed the amount of cincere attempts made towards what seems to be innocent subject matter, namely a comparasion between Islam and Democracy. Great openning line indeed JB! A failure to cincerely define Islam as Theocracy has led the exchanges into a narrow path where the only seed left to the debators seems to be semantic hair-spilitting , namely what certain Arabic word means and what it's "rea l" meaning is in it's "real" context...... and so forth. in short, a real Scotishman fallacy savehaven.[/QB] If I recall the scottishman fallacy, it went like this: 1. No Scottishman lie 2. Mr. Hollaway lied 3. Therefore, Mr. Hollaway is not Scottsh. I fail to see the above fallacy or any similar analogy to it anywhere in the discussion., If you can find, please alert me, I will remove it! You write In an attempt to relive the thread i'd say the comparasion of Islam to Democracy is unfair to boot and biased as it camouflages Islam(a religion) as a widespread contemporary governmental system.[/QB] Answer: In comparison, we only compare the context, In Islam, a Devine System is followed, as believers have accepted His Sovreignty, while in Democracy, the wishes of the majority of voters is followed, even if the minority objects to it. You write: Islam is a belief systam, therefore it falls under the category of Theocracy, hence a comparasion between Theocracy and Democracy would be more fair and into the level, though what is more unfair is there're different types of Democracies which are not mentioned..[/QB] Answer: That is a fallacy, not all belief systems fall under Theocracy. Another implied fallacy is that Islam is like Christianity or Judaism, who have never developed a system of government, applied civic laws, economic system, just like any temporal government. So grouping Islam with other religions and then putting all of them in a box called Theocracy is over simplification. "Christianty" accepted separtion of state and church, while Judaism, a nationlaist religion regulates the lives of Jews only according to the Torah. You write: In Theocracy (Religious authority) the ultimate ruler is God ( Allah if you must) and God's wills and laws will be interpreted by totaliterian ecclesiastical authorities ( Human beeings who claim to KNOW what God wants), first off is ofcourse God's messenger(s) and those who understand "the messenger(s)" best, the rest have no say whatissoever in how and why they have to conduct a life of devotion to that authority due to their ignoranc and inability to crack "the code". A code obviously meant ONLY for the elite to crack and the wrath of God is scary enough to keep the masses at bay, while the love of God is sweet enough to lock them with whatever they desire in this life but can't attain, in an imaginary next one , be it food, wine, sexuality etc etc. This my freinds is the Authority brother Nur is talking about when he said: "Islam is an Arabic word that means among several meanings, Surrender, submission, acceptance and reverence of a Sovereign Authority etc" Answer: Islam begins with the definition of who is Sovereign, SAMAD, who weilds power and must be followed, thus Messengers have delivered the messages to humans and thus some followed and some rejected. Demcoracy, begins with the Definition of of Who is Sovereign, it assigns the PEOPLE to be the Sovereigns, who are masters of their destiny, thus, since they have to share this Sovereignty, they settled to vote for every issue and the wish of the majority to be followed. Who is in greater ERROR then, someone who follows a GOD, or someone who claims to Be GOD? As you can see, both are belief systems, at odds I may add. You write: To compare a governmental system where citizens can and have the right to say what they think is best for the themselves by having their say on any subject matter that is of concern to them and a self-appointed totaliterian ecclesiastical authority that interpretes the supposedly God's wills and laws for them and imposes on them is obviously pregnant and begers blind belief at best and beeing apologetic towards the so called "learned" in fact, but brother Nur is onto something one might assume..[/QB] Answer: Governmental system is defined as: "The act of governing; the exercise of authority; the administration of laws; control; direction; regulation. 1. Islam had gooverned the lives of people for 1400 years, the Caliphate just ended in 1924 in Turkey. 2. Allah is teh Sovererign, the authority is by virtue of Devine mandate according to the teachings of the Prophet. 3. Administration of Laws ( Sharia) is in effect to this day though watered down . 5. Dirction and Regulations: Islam is the only system that actually shows a clear direction, that connects this temporal life to the next, through Devine regulations. You write: Theocracy have failed itself in the ancient nations,it gave birth to a line of totaliterian dictatorship dynasties, kings,sultans,kalifs, and more, whereas democracy survived and gave people back their rights to conduct their lives as they see fit and compete about their God's sympathy against the elite's monopoly on it on equal basis and that explains both the hatred the religious elite harbours against Democracy and what is generally wrong with Theocracy, though that doesen't absolutely mean Democracy is the best system mankind has come up with but anyone who want to venture a responsible idea can and will see the difference..[/QB] Answer: What you fail to understand is a system and the human application of the system. It would have been just if you have mentioned that Islam initially was applied correctly to flourish and conquer, as the miracle of the 7th century, later, due to failure of the Caliphs to live up to Islams ethics, the Caliphs failed, the system did not. You write: If Islamic theocracy( or any other religon's for that matter ) was purely devine and robust, the very people who lived with Mohammed ( pbuh ) woulden't fight among themselves and kill each other in pursuit of power. .[/QB] Answer: This is a Scottishman never lie Fallacy! Devine systems dont fail if the Devine directions are followed. In your examples, people failed to follow the Devine direction. You write: "For anyone who is familiar with the Arab history, the dynasty of the Arab Clan "kureish" and the Islamic khalifas dynasty , the war of the Camels, the birth of the Shiites etc etc , speaks its language of truth.".[/QB] Answer: So do the endless stories of the Romans and Greeks, lotts of killing, robbery and ruthless slavery, it was the hallmark of the Jaahili system wherever and whenever found, to this day. You write This is not to bash any religion from my part but an attempt to show where brother Nur went wrong in his comparision and to enlight where it should go. [/QB] Answer: If that was not bashing, I dont know what an objective comment is. Here is what I call an impartial western philopsopher's objective statement about Islam and Muhammad; " I have always held the religion of Muhammad (read Islam) in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence which can make itself appeal to every age. I have studied him - the wonderful man and in my opinion far from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Saviour of Humanity. I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world, he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness: I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today." ----Sir George Bernard Shaw Nur

Naden sis The full paragraph of the Quote is: "Your conclusion does not follow your 2 premises. Sharia, by definition, is a heavily man-influenced set of legislation through the influence of qiyaas and igmaac." Answer: Please clarify how I misquoted, I cant see it? On your second point, we have no disagreement, I agree with you that there is a general framework and detail work for shuuraa which leaves a lot of room for interpretation, which in turn gave birth to the science of Fiqh as we know it today and the four schools of thought ( Madhaahib). You write: "My main disagreement remains to be your narrow definition of shura as a process operating within an interpretation of Quran and Sunnah in developing sharica." Yaa ghaliya; it was reported that the Prophet SAWS said, "I have left for you two sources if you abide by them, you will never get lost again ( Like people of the book, Christians and Jews, who took freedom to follow conflicting human ideas, when clear Devine instruction was at hand, as a result we got lost just like they have lost the way) The Two sources are Quraan and Sunnah. You write: " Shura is much broader than that, may not necessarily refer to the Quran & Sunnah, and is open to everyone in society and not just people who should have a cerfication in the area of their expertise to offer an expert advice, though I agree with you that they should do their homework" Yaa Ghaaliya, Shuraa has many levels of application, the higher level of shuraa is Strategic, it sets vision and mission (Purpose for which we exisit), second level is Tactical, which translates the mission to actionable goals, third level is Operational, processes and procedures and the last level is Executive. Mixing between these levels spells confusion. At the highest level, the Strategic level ( Maqaasidul Sharica), here is the equivalent of the Constitution, its similar to Constitutional Scholars in a Democracy, in Islam we need scholars well versed in Quraan and Sunnah ( our Constitution) to set the general scope of the Sharia, as it trickles down, more detailed requirements are debated in Shuuraa, the Tactical Scholars are those who can translate the broad direction of the strategies ( Maqaasidul Sharica) to current questions in theory, again they are expected to know two main issues, the current affairs that calls for the Shuraa and the output from the (Maqasidul Sharica) in the form of fatwas and supporting verses and hadeeths, the next level down is the Operational level, which bridges between the Strategic/Tactical and the Executive, their role is like the committee of ways and means, and their output is passed to the executive branch who discuss ( Shuraa)how to best execute the sharia on specific daily affairs of the public from traffic ligt, social issues to Business law. And finally you can have a neigborhood shuraa, PTA (parent Teacher Association) sport commitee shuuraa, etc. which are equivalent to the last level (the executive level), in this last level, professionals are needed not Jurists, no need to know the higher level stuff, just accept to always work within the framework of the Maqasidul Sharia wich validates all actionable activities, examples of Suraa here for example are how to control crime, waste management and recycling, and domestic violence among many other issues in any community. Nur

Akhi Toosiye Bismillah wa bihi nastaciin. Markii erey la dhex geliyo Qoutes sida " Muslim" waxaa loola jeedaa sheegasho uu qofkaas isagu sku sheegay oon loona qirsaneyn loona diiddaneyn. Shareecaddu wexey u taqaanna (ZACM) inaad tiraahdo " qofkaas wuxuu sheegtay sifadaas" Shareecadda waxaa ku soo arooray inuusan qofku is Tazkiyeynin, macneheedu yahay inuu qofku wanaag isku sheego, siduu Allah Quraanka ku yidhi, " Falaa tuzakuu anfusakum, huwa aclamu biman ittaqaa" Isla markaasna, shareecaddu kuma soo aroorin in ey diidday in lagu sheego qof inuu sheegtay sifad. Caa'isha ummul Muminiin oo maseyrsan ( Hinaase) ayya xitaa Rasuulka Allaa ku tiri " Wa tazcumu annaka Rasuulu Allahi" , waxaad sheeganeysaa inaad tahay Rasuulkii Allah. oo ah erey qaldan, sababtoo ah, qofkuu shaki ka galo Rasuulnimada Rasuulka diinta wuu ka baxayaa, haseyeeshee Caaisha Hinaase ayaa ku xambaaray ereygaas, dhabna ka ma aheyn, loomana qaban. Muslim nimadu wey caddahay haddii loo cuskado shareecadda qodobadeeda, haseyeeshee waxaa badtay baryahaan jaahilnimo dadku ay jaahil ka yihiin shareecadda iyo sheegasho Islmaannimo, taasoo u baahan in dadka cilmiga leh ay u cadeyaan caammada ( Laymen) shareecadda sidey u kala saartay macnaha Islaanimada munafiqnimada, kufriga iyo shirkiga. Wallahu aclam. InshAllah, I will switch back to the English if you dont mind so that the audience can follow with us the original question that you have raised of the Defition of Islam. and Muslim. Nur

Walaal Positive Haddaad ka carootay in aan adiga kuula jeeday ereyga "Muslm" , waad ii gaftay, adiga kuula ma jeedin. Nur

Sami Al-Arian's Long Ordeal By Stephen Lendman 27/03/08 "ICH" -- - Sami Al-Arian is a political prisoner in Police State America. This article reviews his case briefly and updates it to the present. Because of his faith, ethnicity and political activism, the Bush administration targeted Al-Arian for supporting "terrorism." In fact, he's a Palestinian refugee, distinguished professor and scholar, community leader and civil activist. Nonetheless, the FBI harassed him for 11 years, arrested him on February 20, 2003, and falsely accused him of backing organizations fronting for Palestinian Islamic Jihad - a 1997 State Department-designated "Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO)." A week later, in spite of his many awards, impeccable credentials and tenured status, University of South Florida president Judy Genshaft fired him under right wing pressure. Since February 20, 2003, Al-Arian has been imprisoned - first at Tampa, Florida's Orient Road jail, then on to more than a dozen different maximum and other federal prison facilities. He's currently on hunger strike at Warsaw, Virginia's Northern Neck Regional jail after being transferred back March 18 from Butner, North Carolina's medical prison. Al-Arian's trial began in June 2005 and was a travesty. It lasted six months, cost an estimated $50 million, and the prosecution called 80 witnesses, including Israeli intelligence agents and victims of suicide bombings to prejudice the jury. It introduced portions of hundreds of wiretapped phone calls from over a half million recorded; "evidence" from faxes, emails and what was seized from his home; quotes from his speeches and lectures; conferences, events and rallies he attended; articles he wrote; books he owned; magazines he edited; and various publications he read - all legal and in no way incriminating unless falsely twisted to appear that way. After years of effort and millions spent, Al-Arian was exonerated. On December 6, 2005 after 13 days of deliberation, the jury acquitted him of all (eight) "terrorism" charges. They were deadlocked 10 - 2 for acquittal on nine others. All of them were false and unjust. Nonetheless, within days, the Justice Department said it would re-try him on the lesser charges. His lawyers called it legal but a highly unusual move. At the same time and in secret, a plea bargain deal was struck. It stipulated: -- Al-Arian neither engaged in or had any knowledge of violent acts; -- that he would not be required to cooperate further with prosecutors; and -- that he would be released on time served and deported voluntarily to his country of choice. In the meantime, Al-Arian remained in custody pending sentencing and deportation on May 1, 2006. He expected to be free and his ordeal ended. Instead, the presiding judge changed the deal. He sentenced Al-Arian to the maximum 57 months, gave him credit for time served, and ordered him held for the remaining 11 months, after which an April 2007 deportation would follow. Now it's extended as explained below. In October 2006, assistant prosecutor Gordon Kromberg violated plea bargain terms by subpoenaing Al-Arian before a grand jury. His defense attorneys tried to block it by citing his "no-grand jury cooperation" provision to prevent DOJ from springing a perjury-obstruction trap. Defense's motion was denied, and on November 16 Al-Arian refused to testify and was held in contempt. A month later, the grand jury expired, a new one was convened, and Al-Arian was again subpoenaed to testify. He continued to refuse, was held in contempt, and had his sentence increased without mitigation to April 7, 2008. On March 3, 2008 Kromberg ordered Al-Arian before still another March 19 grand jury, three weeks before his scheduled release and deportation. On the same day, Al-Arian began a hunger strike against the government's continued harassment. It's his third one but is life-threatening for a man in his condition. He's diabetic and needs regular sustenance to avoid serious health problems. His January through March, 2007 strike depleted one-fourth of his body weight, gravely harmed him, and ended only at the urging of his family. He's now 20 days into his latest fast, lost 30 pounds, is weakening, and his life is endangered. On March 12, Al-Arian was transferred to the Butner, North Carolina medical facility where treatment is poor, the staff indifferent, and in Al-Arian's case hostile to a designated enemy of the state. On March 18, he was returned to Warsaw, Virginia's Northern Neck Regional jail ahead of his third grand jury appearance. Again, he refused to testify, so he'll likely face new contempt charges and continued confinement. George Washington University Law School Professor Jonathan Turley heads up Al-Arian's legal team. On March 3, he released the following statement: "On behalf of Mr. Olson and Mr. Meitl and the entire legal team, (we are greatly disappointed by) the Justice Department('s) continu(ing)....effort to mete out punishment that it could not secure from a jury. Having lost (its) case (it's) openly sought to extend (Al-Arian's) confinement by daisy-chaining grand juries. As in other cases, the government has given Dr. Al-Arian the choice of an obvious perjury trap or a contempt sanction. (Either way assures his imprisonment. This) choice....is obnoxious to our legal system and contrary to any standard of decency. The mistreatment of Dr. Al-Arian remains an international symbol of how the Bush Administration has discarded fundamental principles of fairness in a blind pursuit of retribution against this political activist. We stand committed to fighting this great injustice and hopefully reuniting Dr. Al-Arian with his family and friends." In the meantime, his long ordeal continues at a time lawlessness prevails over justice, and we're all Sami-Al-Arians in America's "war on terrorism."

Postive Walaal: Intaadan qof kale ku tuhmin jariimad sidan u weyn, oon dareemayo inaadan ula jeedin waxaad iga sheegtay ayaan doorbiday inaan kuu caddeeyo Sharciga wuxuu Qadhafka ka qabo. Qadhafku Muxuu Yahay? 1. Luqadda: Qadhaf luqadda Af Carabiga ah waa dhagax inaad qof ku TUURTO ood dhaawacdo. Dabadeed ayaa ereygaas loo adeegsaday wax walboo xun oo qof lagu tuuro, ama duro sida in sharafkiisa meel looga dhaco ayadoo labaduba ay wax yeelleeynayaan qofkaas korkiisa ama dareenkiisa. 2. Sharciga: Waxaa loola jeedaa in aad qof ku durto ZINA sida asagoo ku yidhi qof kale " Waryaa Zaani yahow" asagoon la iman afar markhaati oo ka markhaati kacaya tuhunkaas. 3. Xukunkeeda: Rasuulka Allah SAWS waxaa laga soo wariyey inuu yidhi: " Iska jira todobada Muubiqaatka ah ( Dunuubta waaweyn ): a. Shirkiga, b. Sixirka, c. Dilka nafta Allah xarrimay xaq la'aan, d. Cunidda Ribada, e. Cunidda hantida agoonta, e. Dib u gurashada/cararka maalinka la is horjoogo jahaadka, f. Qadhafka Haweenka Muminnatka ah ee warmoogga ah ee Muxsinaatka ah ( aan ceeb laheyn oo lagu been abuuranayo) 4. Xukunka Qadafka. a. Sida ku soo aruurtay ayyadda Surah al Nur (4-5) waa 80 karbaash, hadduusan la iman afar markhaati. b. Xaqqa Qadhafka waa xaq Alle, kama dhacayo ciqaabtaas xataa hadduu cafiyo kii la qadfay. c. Qadafaku ku uma eka Haweenka, ragga iyo haweekaba waa isaga mid xukunkaas. 5. Xaqiijinta Qadafka: Qadafka waxaa lagu xaqiijiyaa: a. Qirasho uu qirto inuu qadfay, b. in labo rag oo Muslima ah oo lagu yaqaanno wanaag, kheyr, runsheeg iyo diin raac fiican ay ku markhaati kacaan inuu Qadhaf la yimid. 6. Goormoo Qadafku Ciqaab Mudanayaa: Shuruudda uu ku muteysto kan wax Qadfay ciqabta waa: a. Caqli, Qaan gaar, Xor; waa inuu kan wax qadhfay uusan ayheyn qof waalan, ama aan war u heyn wuxuu sheegayo,oo xor ah oon lagu qasbin wuxuu sheegay, oo aan da' yareyn. b.Ereyga Qadhfiga waa inuu CAD YAHAY sida " War iga tag ZAANI YAHOW" laakin haddu dhaho " Anugu Zaani ma ahi". macnahaas dadban ma noqonayo Qadfi saa macnooyin badan buu yeelan karaa. c. Waxaan aheyn ZINAA, sida inuu ninku ku yidhaah qof kale " Gaal yahow, sarkhaan yahow" iwm, ma soo galeyso Qadhfiga xukunkiisa, hase yeeshee Qaalliga Muslimka ah wuxuu ku edbin karaa qofkaas si kale oon aheyn 80 karbaash oo u gaar ah kan Qadfa dadka, markii lagu caddeeyo. Nur

Toosiye Walaal, waxaad qortay : ( "muslim " iyo erayo kale oo aad raacisay qadaf ayey kaaga dhaceen") Min fadlak ii caddee waxaad ula jeeddo qadaf? yaan qadfay? ceebtee baan ku sheegay qofkaas aan qadfay? Run ahaantii kaagama baran luqaddan qallafsan oo kale, gaar ahaan annogoo muddo dheer doodi jirney oo umuur intan aad ugu culus ka wada niqaashi jirney. Waxaan rajeynayaa in sabirkaad doodda u leheyd inuusan ka dhammaanin. Tan kale, su'aahsha aad igu warsatay inaan macnaha Muslim ka hadlo lagama joogo labo sano, ee taasna maxaad ula jeeddaa?. Nur

Naden: You write: " Shura by definition, is a heavily man-influenced set of legislation through the influence of qiyaas and igmaac. " Naden: That Definition is erroneous on many counts: 1.Shuraa is not LEGISLATION, its the deliberation that can lead to interpret the moral of the Sharia law ( Maqaasidul Shariica) as applied to a particular issue at hand. 2. Shuraa is A Devine Initiated (Allah ordered His Messenger: Wa shaawirhum fil amr) 3. Shuraa is Heavily Devine influenced (Wa maa kaana li muninin wa laa miminatin idaa qadaa Allahu wa rasuuluhu amran an an yakuuna lahumul khiyaratu min amrihim". 4. Shuraa ( Shaaral Casalu) is Human Extracted procedure from Quraan and Sunnah (Honey), and when ambiguous, like a collection of data points in statsitics, the best-fit-line to the Sharia ( MAIN HIGHWAY) is sought and discussed, the opinions pertaining to this discussion are prioritised according to their proximaty to the STANDARD ( QURAN AND SUNNAH) and then the best opinion becomes a defacto SHARIA adding to the ever increasing body of Dynamic Islamic sharia law. So let us build together a better Definition of Shuuraa than yours, since you seem to have fun with definitions and logical premises that lead to a reasonable conclusion. Sharia in Arabic language is composed of three letters: Sheen, Raa, and Cayn. It has a single root, which illustrates something that is unfolding ahead of an observer. A. From that root, the following Linguistic meanings are derived: Verbs: 1. Sharaca Nur sharcan: meaning; Nur Drank water direct with mouth ( without cup). 2. Sharacat Naden Al Madrasa: meaning; Naden approached school. 3. Sharacat Naden taktub: meaning: She started writing. 4. Sharaca Nur al calama: Nur raised the banner. 5. Sharaca al muqaawilu al tariiqa: meaning, The contractor levelled and spread the road ahead. Nouns: 1. Shaaric: means INITIATOR, SETTER OF AGENDA. 2. Shaaric: means MODEL of NEW METHOD ( SUNNAH). 3. Shaaric: Main Avenue of a Town. 4. Shaarica: Water Supply, continuous without disruption. B. Legal Meanings: 1. Sharc: Clear WAY, METHOD OF DOING THINGS. 2. SHARC: All that Allah and His Messenger ORDAINED to be FOLLOWED. 3. SHAARIC: LAWMAKER ( SOVEREIGN), who delegated His Messenger to deliver the law in writing ( Quraan), sayings ( Hadeeth) action or implied approva. 4. Mashruuc: An Ordinance, An Action driven by a law. Now let us Define Shuraa: The orgin of Shuraa: A. Language: 1. Shaara al casal: meaning, purified and extracted honey from comb. 2. Shirtul casala, ishtartuh: I got net of honey (minus wax) or got the honey after paying money. 3. Ashaara: Pointed out, showed something with finger, words or body language. 4. Istashaara: Seek counsel 5. Shuuraa/mushaawara/tashaawur: Consultation. So Based on above analyses, Shuuraa means, Defintion of Shuraa: "Activity of Extrating the best feasible opinion among many competing opinions submitted by those who are competent by virtue of their specific knowledge to set controls for the upholding of the Moral of Sharia on a given subject". I have previously shown that all matters of concern to a Muslim community falls within the sphere of Allah's Sovereignty, thus, they are under His dominion and hence Muslims are naturally expected to surrender to His Law (Sharia) willingly. Which neccessitates that all issues discussed by a comunity are in line with the wishes of the lawmaker ( Shaaric), in the letter of the law, the Sunnah, and when ambiguous, Qiyas and Ijmaac, both in the moral of such law and method of application. Now let us go back to what I have written "First premise: Shura is Consultation. This is true, based on the verse " Wa amruhum shuuraa beynahum" "matters of concern to them, (are disposed by way of ) Consultation" Second Premise: "Sharia means the law or the way to live." Allah SWT says in Quraan: "He hath ordained for you that DEEN ( CODE of LIFE) which He commended unto Noah, and that which We inspire in thee (Muhammad), and that which We commended unto Abraham and Moses and Jesus, saying: Establish the DEEN ( THE ONLY CODE OF LIFE ALLAH WISHES PEOPLE TO LIVE BY), and be not divided therein. Dreadful for the idolaters is that unto which thou callest them." Allah also says in the same Suraa Shuuraa: "Or have they partners (of Allah, a.k.a Secular Lawmakers) who have made lawful for them in DEEN (CODE OF LIFE) that which Allah allowed not ? And if it was not for a decisive DECREE (gone forth already), it would have been judged between them. Lo! for wrong-doers is a painful doom" based on the above verses and definitions, my Conclusion is also true. Conclusion: So a Muslim is not free to have a consultative meeting that conflicts with the Sharia as Sharia is the broad ball park shuraa takes place Secondly you write: "Your comment that a muslim is not free to have a consultative meeting at odds with Sharia, though that very Sharia is being developed by other muslims, is very strange." Answer: Walaalo, Let us agree that we are discussing Shuraa concept from an Islamic Perspective, not from the Athenian " COMMUNE" concept that influenced emergence of Democracy, because as I warned you before there lies your confusion. Because Democracy is the other side of Sovereignty which belongs to the people who have the right to legislate anything they see fit with majority of votes, while Shuraa is quite the opposite, it begins with acceptance of the Sovereignty of a Devine Law Maker, therefore it does not legislate, Shuraa is just the Devine inspired venue to get a consensus on any matter that causes difference of opinions on the Maqaasidul Shariica ( Moral of the Devine Law) Shuraa in Islam is a deliberation, in which the OBJECTIVE is to reach CONSENSUS ON a MATTER OF CONCERN to A STAKEHOLDERS, with full awareness that there is no matter of real value to humans without a Devine directive ( Quraan and Sunnah) that serves as a broad outline for tackling any propblem. These stakeholders are SUBJECTS of a SOVEREIGN, whose Revelation is the STANDARD GUIDELINE and thus SUBJECTS ARE NOT FREE to DEVISE NEW STAND-ALONE LAWS that CONFLICT with the MORAL or the LETTER of SHARIA LAW. Their role is to argue best interpretation of an AMBIGUOUS ordinance in the SHARIA to tackle a problem faced by the STAKEHOLDERS. In Islam, the first thing we need to make a judgement on any issue is KNOWLEDGE, the more complex an issue the more knowledge is required, since it would be ( darbun minal junuun)( Insantity is trying to get different result by doing the same thing) to try to solve a problem with the exact set of knowledge/information that lead us to that situation in the first place. The purpose of the Devine Revelations, on which we Muslims base our actions, is to satisfy Allah SWT, a.k.a (Cibaada) which is the objective our exisitence on planet earth. Our comfort in this life and the next is what satisfies Allah (...wa in tashkuruu Yardahu lakum), Allah does not want hardship for us, but expediency, haste and cutting corners can be tempting at times with unbearable price tag to pay, both in this life and next, and here is where the concept of Shuraa and Sharia play an important role to make sure that we adhere to the Sharia as close as possible, thus Shuuraa it is a DEVINE INFLUENCED DELIBERATION ( Two angels on our shoulders. Shuraa is a deliberation activity, and like any activity, it has requirements. 1. Particpants in Shuraa must have done their homework, they should have a cerfication in the area of their expertise to offer an expert advice. 2. Participants pledge allegiance to Supremacy of the Sharia which is Allah's law, not a man made law, man's contribution being only its detailing, structuring, clarifying and getting it close to the Moral of the Devine Law Framework which we have discussed previously ( Protection of the Faith, Life, Property, Offspring, mind) 3. Participants base their opinion first on Quraan, secondly on Hadeeth, and then on Qiyaas, Ijtihaad and Ijmaac, each of these stages has requirements to be fulfilled. 4. Proofs to any argument in a Shuraa session can be one of four combinations. A. First the SOURCE of Proof can be: i. THUBUUT: AUTHENTICITY ii.DALALAH: MEANING B. Second, the meaning of Proof can be: i. QADCI: EXACT PRECISE MEANING ii. DHANNI: AMBIGUOUS/BASED ON GUESS WORK. So any issue on the Shuraa table can be one of the above four outcome. 1. Qadciyu Thubuut, Qadciyu Dalaalah. ( Authentic Source, Single meaning) 2. Qadciyu Thubuut, Dhanniyu Dalaalah ( Authentic Source, Ambibuous meaning). 3. Dhanniyu Thubuut, Qadciyu Dalaalah (Ambiguous source, Single meaning). 4. Dhanniyu Thubuut Dhanniyu Dalaalah (Ambiguous Source, Ambiguous meaning). Quraan and Hadeeth ( Saheeh category) are Genuine Sources, and when they have a single linguistic meaning, This is the primary sphere of the Sharia which has no room for discussion, followed by the second case which has a room for Shuraa, and the last two have no judicial significance at all. Wa Allahu Aclam Nur

Naden sis You wrote: "Consensus on the best interpretation of religious text/commandments as you have written in your initial essay and subsequent writings is NOT the definition of shura. That is too narrow of a scope. Such an interpretation is left to the religious class of society. It is a closed door process. That is the opposite of shura" Answer: Please read what I wrote once more critically: "The role of a Muslim in the institution of Islam is a SUBJECT, A SLAVE who has to fulfil his Masters commandments. So in Islam, the power is NOT FOR THE PEOPLE. All Power is RESERVED FOR ALLAH ONLY, NOT for those competing to sharing power with him known as ANDAAD ( .......Innal Quwata lillahi Jamiican) The role of the slaves in this institution is consultation of best interpretation of the Devine Commandments, aka (Shuuraa)" Sister: Allah SWT says: If you disagree on an issue (Shey-in) ( any issue), then (to solve) refer to Allah ( Quran) and His Messenger ( Prophet's teachings , Sunnah). Hence Shuraa in Islam is the problem solving process in which we refer to the above guides for a solution for any matter. Your perspective of discussing this topic is alien to Islam, you are separating issues to religious issues and public concern issues, while in Isalm, every aspect of A Muslims life is " Religious", while in the western worldview, there are two distinct aspects to a persons life, thus, the role of democracy in discussing issues common to people who have no shared religious values but have shared interest. Infact, contrary to your assertion, my view is more broad and inclussive of all activities of a Muslim in Shuraa. Yours is the narrow interpretation of Shura, by confining Shura to only the high level scholars Fiqh issues. Your difficulty in grasping the Islamic system of Shura as related to Democracy arises from your attempt to mold Islam in a western package, in Shuraa, regular Joe with no understanding or acceptance of supremacy of Sharia is not qualified to cast his opinion in Shuraa unlike Democracy which gives the right to cast vote to any citizen regardless of the judicial basis of their opinion. Because in Islam the Law ( Sharia) supersedes any Conusltation not in line with it, whereas in Democracy, the consultation supersedes any past Law. In Islam, before we qualify for Shuraa on any issue or concern, we: 1. Unconditionally accept Allah's supremacy, his Sovreignty, his law ( Sharia) as the basis of all of our lives. 2. The Place of Quraan and Sunnah in the interpretation process, 3. Based on the above two, we begin to discuss ( Shuraa) any issue within those constraints. Shuraa means consultation, sharia means the law or the way to live. So a Muslim is not free to have a consultative meeting that conflicts with the Sharia as Sharia is the broad ball park in which shuraa takes place. Qiyaas and Ijmaac are again the fruit of Shuraa on clarification of applicability ambiguities in the Quran and Sunnah to a paticular situation. Nur

Naden Walaalo, You write: " The verse (3:154, I presume) in its entirety does not refer to the common shura as you had discussed in your essay or sharia as you are now alluding" Answer: The verse in Surah Al Imran discussed a spectacular example of the connection between the requirement of following a devine command by way of His prophet in a death and life situation, on one hand and the input some of the companion wanted to have in such a situation which is more dire than any other social situation that can arise in a community, which were the decisive events of the Battle of Badr, they asked " do we have any say in this matter? " they added, " If we had a say, we would not have been killed here" Allah decreed, " O Muhammad tell them, The matter in its entirety belongs to Allah" Amr in Quraanic Arabic language has the following meanings: 1. Issue, matter, agenda to be discussed, 2. Event, accident 3. Command, order, instruction. The context of above verse in Surah Aal Cimraan encompasses all three meanings which is rare, how you may ask. a. The events were driven by Allah, it was not their choice to begin with, ( Li yaqdiya Allahu AMRAN, Kaana Mafcuulaa), AMRAN here means EVENT, as a small number of believers dared to confront a larger army of Quraish, Allah says that even if they have planned " Tawaacdtum", to meet at a certain place and time, they would have differed. b. The Issue was not the mere interception of Qureish's caravan, but it was a Devine prelude to the establishment of the Muslim State, an issue some of the companions did not buy into nor understood it totally, as they tried to interfere with a Devine instruction. c. The Command was to follow the instruction of the Prophet SAWS that was revealed to him by Allah. Now, is the above relevant in the Shura? Wel, sis, you asked me : "how did you come to explain shura as a consultation of best interpretation of the Devine Commandments? Verse 42:38 references shura in relation to the matters common to people" For which I referred to the above verse as an example that all matters and issues in Islam are not left to a Muslim, the Sharia which means the "WAY" in Arabic, includes the guidlines of what is permitted and what is prohibited. When we discuss what is permitted, we are in fact following the Sharia ( the way of Allah) even if Allah did not speak about it explicitly or its an open issue ( Mubaax). Now, let us shed some light on the origins of the Sharia. Sharia or "The Way" and "Shaaric" which means the endorser of ways and means, Allah, by way of his revelations and prophets, and books, has a purpose. 1. Protection of Faith, so any discussion on matters of faith is legitimate if its constructive of the faith , not destructive, shuraa can not be justified to undo the faith that gave it the legitimacy. 2. Protection of Life, so any discussion on matters of life and death must be based on Sharia which is based on the usool al sharia. Control System: Sanctity of Life, Capital Punishment for abusers. 3. Protection of Property, so any discussion on matters that will affect or lead to loss of property or its unjust transfer to others must be based on the Sharia. Control System: Sanctity of Ownership, Prohibition of Ribaa Usury, " Do not consume wealth in your community unjustly" , Punishment for abusers 4. Protection of the Mind, any substance that will render the mind to compromise its full capacity is thus against the Sharia. Control System: Sanctity of the Mind, Prohibition of Alcohol and drugs. Punishment 5. Protection of the procreation, which regualtes relationship of the sexes. Control System: Sanctity of procreation, Prohibition of Sex outside of marriage. Punishment for abusers. With the above background, let us visit your question: "How did you come to define shura as consultation of best interpretation of the Devine Commandments? " I have shown that: 1. All of human activities that needs regualtion fall in one of the above categories, directly or implied. 2. That, Allah is the Sovereign in His Dominion, thus the Only rightful owner of what " Matters" in His Dominion as per the Verse " He is the God at heavens and He is ( also) God on Earth". which demarcates the absolute reach of His absolute authority and rule. 3. That (Shuraa) is the right way to realize Allah's wishes ( Sharia, the Way) which has priority over human wishes and desires aka ( Ahwaa) when they conflict. Nur

The Hidden Casualities of America's "War on Crime" By MARLENE MARTIN The number of people behind bars in the "land of the free" is grown as large as the combined populations of Atlanta, Miami, Minneapolis, Cincinnati, Kansas City and Pittsburgh. That's the shocking fact in a Pew Center on the States report showing that one in 100 adults in the U.S. are in prison or jail--more than 2.3 million people. When it comes to locking up its people, the country that claims to be the "world's greatest democracy" is far ahead of every other nation--ahead of China, ahead of Russia, ahead of all the tyrannies that the U.S. government supports around the world--both in absolute numbers of prisoners and the rate of incarceration. As has always been the case in a country founded on slavery, the inmates of America's prisons are disproportionately people of color. Among African American men over 18, one in 15 are in prison--between the ages of 20 and 34, fully one in nine Black men are behind bars. When those on parole, probation or otherwise involved in the criminal justice system are included, that statistic rises to one in three. As staggering as these facts are, the stories of the individual human beings behind these statistics--men and women whose lives have been destroyed by the criminal justice system--are even more horrifying. Mark Clements is one of them. Mark was 16 years old when Chicago police officers and detectives picked him up on suspicion of setting a fire that killed four people. The white cops worked for Jon Burge--Mark became one of the hundreds of African American suspects tortured until the "confessed" by Chicago police under Burge's command. Mark was kept in lockup for a year until he was old enough to stand trial as an adult. During his sentencing, Mark pleaded before the judge for more than two hours that he didn't commit the crime--that the police had beaten him into confessing. The judge sat with folded arms, staring straight ahead--and after Mark was done, he imposed the "mandatory" sentence of life without the possibility of parole. Mark is 45 today. He has spent two-thirds of his life in prison. And if the state of Illinois gets his way, he will die there. * * * For the past two decades, crime rates have been in long-term decline, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. But the prison population has exploded during this same time. To put this into proportion, between 2005 and 2006, the U.S. prison population rose by more than 65,000, an increase of almost 3 percent, which is on the low side for annual figures over the past 25 years. By contrast, in 1972, the total U.S. prison population was 196,092. Who accounts for the vast number of people warehoused in America's jails and prisons? According to Justice Department statistics, more than half the people in the federal prison system and one in five inmates in state prisons were drug offenders--almost half a million in total. Many of these prisoners were convicted of nonviolent offenses. More than a quarter of drug offenders in state prison are serving time for nothing more than possession. According to the Sentencing Project, arrests for marijuana possession accounted for 79 percent of the growth in drug arrests in the 1990s--despite the fact that not a single death has been attributed specifically to marijuana use, unlike such legal drugs as alcohol and tobacco. David Ciglar pled guilty to growing marijuana seedlings in his garage in Oakland, Calif.--and received the state's mandatory minimum sentence of 10 years. "My family is devastated," says David in the book Shattered Lives: Portraits from America's Drug War. "My wife is living every day wondering if she can make it financially and mentally. My kids don't know why their dad was taken away for such a long time. I have not even bonded with my youngest daughter. She was 2 when I left her." Richard Nixon officially declared the U.S. government's "war on drugs" in 1971, but the drug war didn't really get under way until Ronald Reagan's presidency in the 1980s. The casualties have been mounting ever since. One of the drug war's chief weapons has been the 100-to-1 rule that governs sentencing in convictions for possession and distribution of crack cocaine versus powder cocaine. Under the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act and another law passed in 1988, possession of 5 grams of crack cocaine (about the weight of two pennies) results in a mandatory sentence of five years, while it takes 500 grams of the powder form of cocaine to yield the same sentence. Behind the disparity is an openly racist double standard: African Americans account for most of those convicted and sent to prison for offenses related to crack cocaine--including 82 percent of those prosecuted and jailed at the federal level--even though they are a minority of users. Those ensnared in the drug war aren't typically high-level dealers, either, according to Marc Mauer of the Sentencing Project. "By and large, these defendants are not the kingpins of the drug trade," Mauer wrote. "Data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission document 73 percent of the crack defendants had only low-level involvement in drug activity, such as street-level deals, couriers or lookouts." The drug warriors' justification for the 100-to-1 rule was that crack was so highly addictive, and that its users became super-violent. Many of these stereotypes have been proven untrue, yet the bias in sentencing remains. According to Carol Brook, deputy director of the federal defender program for the Northern District of Illinois, "These disparities exist, even though we know that the physiological and psychoactive effects of crack and powder cocaine are virtually identical. They exist even though the effects of prenatal exposure to crack and powder cocaine are identical. They exist even though the epidemic of violence and rapid spread to youth that crack was suppose to create never happened." Despite the countless reports and studies, and the pleas from drug-war victims, their families and activists, Congress to this day has failed to change the 100-to-1 rule--though the U.S. Sentencing Commission voted last year to modify penalties for crack cocaine offenses. * * * The terrible impact of the "tough-on-crime" crusade can be seen in another disturbing statistic disclosed by the Pew report: More than half of all released offenders end up back behind bars within three years. Some commit another crime, but others are guilty of minor violations of the terms of their release--according to federal statistics, more than a third of people who entered prison in 2005 were arrested for parole violations. This reality isn't altogether surprising given the 20-year trend of dramatic cuts to education programs for prisoners, which have been shown to be the single-most important factor in reducing recidivism. Such programs grew widely as a result of the Attica prison uprising in 1971--as of 1995, there were still 350 programs that allowed prisoners to earn college degrees. But thanks to "law-and-order" measures passed by a Republican Congress and signed into law by Democrat Bill Clinton, they began to disappear. Only 12 of these programs exist today. There are finally some cracks appearing in the "lock 'em up and throw away the key" mentality of lawmakers. Sadly, however, many of the proposals under consideration now aren't driven by a change of heart, but by the financial crisis caused by states facing the burden of paying for incarcerating ever-growing numbers of people. According to the Pew study, five states spend more of their budget on prisons than they do on higher education. Overall, between 1987 and 2007, "state spending on higher education has increased 21 percent, while corrections spending had more than doubled, increasing 127 percent," the Economic Policy Institute reported. This economic burden is forcing some welcome policy changes. In Texas, for example, some drug offenders are being put into treatment programs instead of prison. Other states are also considering early release programs, and the guidelines on crack cocaine offenses accepted by the U.S. Sentencing Commission are being applied retroactively. This is a move in the right direction, but it is taking place too slowly--and the lives of 2.3 million people are wasting away in the meantime. Earlier in March, the writers of the HBO drama The Wire spoke for them in an essay in Time magazine. If asked to serve on a jury in a drug case, they would vote to acquit, the writers said. "No longer," they concluded, "can we collaborate with a government that uses non-violent drug offenses to fill prisons with it's poorest, most damaged and most desperate citizens." MARLENE MARTIN is national director of the Campaign to End the Death Penalty (CEDP) and a frequent contributor to the Socialist Worker.

Urban bro. Tahaara in the Arabic language means Purity and cleanliness. Tahaara in the legal ( Sharc) means Washing off by water , or removing it by sand any ( Najaasa) impurity, filth that is not acceptable with the worship rituals such as prayers, tawaf, and touching or holding the Holy Quraan. There are two types of human Impurity: 1. Major Impurity; ( Ghusl) Menstruation, and Intercourse. 2. Minor Impurity: ( Wudoo) after call of nature. After the cleansening fom above two categories, a Muslim is said to be in a state of purity to worship ( TAHAARA). There are Nine impurities by orgin: A. Man: Urine, feces, male pre-and post ejacultion secretions. B. Animal: Dog, Pig, dead animals. C: Combined: Live Spilled Blood, D. Wine/Beer/ Whisky etc. The reading of the Holy Quran requires cleanliness from najaasa (impurity) only, but wuduu is recommended ( mustaxab) if you can read verses from memory, but touching or holding the Holy Quran requires Wudoo, or complete Tahaara. Wallahu aclam. Nur

Naden sis Sorry for not having time on my hands these days, overwhelmed by work. You write: Nur, how did you come to explain shura as a consultation of best interpretation of the Devine Commandments? Verse 42:38 references shura in relation to the matters common to people. The consultation in this context is not about the divine commandments alone but all their worldly affairs also. These affairs could span the common good affecting a group that lives together in a geographical territory under their control. Walaalo Allah SWT says in Quraan : "Innal Amra kulluh lillah" Meaning, judgement of all affairs that matters to people rightfully belongs to Allah SWT. Based on above, the Sharia is composed of Revelations ( Quran and Sunnah), Qiyaas and Ijmaac. Which gives ownership of the legislation to Allah SWT, and makes man an executor of the law even if its his his best attempt to interpret what Allah would have legislated in light of precedents (Qiyas) or consensus ( Ijmaac). Malika sis you write: "Dont you think,Islam and democracy have some principles in common,the respect for individual rights, liberty, equality, rejection of absolute power, limiting the role of state, and supremacy of the law?" Answer: Democracy means Demo ( People) and Cracy(Rule). Other attributes are not Democracy but ideals that existed way before Democracy exisited. You write: "It is just that after the influx of westerners in the lands of the Muslims they have been able to influence,changes in our juridistial systems hence the confusion...of what is democracy and how does it operate in an Islamic country without the secular influence.." Answer: Demcracy can not operate properly in a genuine Islamic country, the application of Democracy deinies the Sovreignty of God ( Allah) over His dominion, Democracy is the epitome of human rejection of God's authority and Sovereignty over their collective affairs. The confusion you see is when the system is rigged, imagine a cat walking on duck's feet? Nur

Quote of the Year: "The Islamic courts movement was a logical response to the condition of Somalian society, and the complete absence of any law enforcement whatsoever. For the Americans to hold up this movement as proof that "terrorism" has taken power in Somalia is the best evidence that, as Michael Scheuer puts it, the U.S. government is Osama bin Laden’s one "indispensable ally." If al-Qaeda is credited with reversing the threat of a complete social breakdown in Somalia, and the gangster warlords we once held responsible for the country’s torment, in league with a foreign invader, is held up as the only alternative, then surely the terrorist leader is smiling somewhere in a deep dark cave, rubbing his hands together and chortling at his extraordinary good fortune!" Justin Raimondo

قصيدة اعتذار هذا القصيدة اعتذار للرسول الكريم عليه افضل الصلوات والتسليم من الصور المشينة التي رسمت ونشرت مرة اخرى : منقولة للفائدة للشاعر احمد مطر يــا رســول الله عـــذرا قالـت الدنـمـارك كـفـرا قـد اســاءو حـيـن زادو في رصيد الكفـر فجـرا حاكـهـا الاوبــاش لـيــلا و استحلوا السب جهرا حـاولـوا النـيـل و لـكـن قـد جـنـو ذلا و خـسـرا كـيـف للنـمـلـة تـرجــو أن تطـال النـجـم قــدرا هل يعيب الطهـر قـذف ممـن استرضـع خـمـرا دولـــة نصـفـهـا شـــاذ ولـقـيـط جـــاء عــهــرا آه لـــو عـرفــوك حـقــا لاستهامـو فيـك دهــرا سـيـرة المـخـتـار نـــور كيف لـو يـدرون سطـرا لـو درو مـن أنـت يـومـا لاستـزادوا منـك عطـرا قـطـرة مـنـك فـيــوض تستحق (العمر) شكرا يـا رســول الله نـحـري دون نحرك أنـت أحـرى أنت في الأضـلاع حـي لم تمـت و النـاس تتـرا حبـك الـوردي يـسـري في حنايا النفـس نهـرا أنت لـم تحتـج دفاعـي أنت فـوق النـاس ذكـرا ســيـــد للـمـرسـلـيـن رحمة جـاءت و بشـرى قــــــدوة لـلـعـالـمـيـن لو خبت لـم نجـن خيـرا يــا رســول الله عـــذرا قومنـا للصمـت أسـرى نــدد الـمـغـوار مـنـهـم يـا سـواد القـوم سكـرا أي شـئ قــد دهـاهـم مـا لهـم يثنـون صـدرا ؟ لـم يعـد للصمـت معنـا قـد رأيـت الصمـت وزرا ملـت الأسـيـاف غـمـدا ترتـجـي الآســاد ثـــأرا إن حـيـيــنــا بـــهـــوان كان جوف الأرض خيـرا يـألــم الأحـــرار ســـب لــرســول الله ظــهــرا و يـزيــد الــجــرح أنــــا نسـكـب الآلام شـعــرا فـمـتـى نـقــذف نــــارا تـدحـر الأوغــاد دحـــرا يـا جمـوع الكفـر مـهـلا إن بعـد العـسـر يـسـرا إن بعد العسر يسرا احمد مطر

Much Thanks yaa ghaaliya, I just read your response on the run to the gym, very good, maashAllah, will not let you down inshAllah! Nur

Naden sis I hope that you answer my question directly, you seem to be putting more diverging issues on the table which I welcome with delight to discuss on theor own, however, let us get the first one answered straight forward: You wrote: "Arguments can be made for each side but I've always been of the conviction that there is no real basis for this practice in Islam." My question, remains walaalo, what is the "real basis" that would be acceptable to you for the stoning ruling? If Quraan and Hadeeth are not "Real Basis" as you imply with the above analysis of yours from a roughly translated Hadeeth in English, then say so and lets us get on with the discussion. Nur

For many nomads, Democracy stands for modernity, development, technology, free thinking, happiness and freedom. While in contrast, Islam has the connotation of backwardness, old, confining, rigid and against free thinking etc. Before we expound, lets ask ourselves, what is the defintion of Modernism and Backwardness? Modernity is defined as : "the quality of being current or of the present; while backwardness means "Behind others in progress or development" based on the above simple definitions let us verify if indeed the above perception of some Somali Nomads and their non Muslim role models is justified in context. From a historical perspective, the above statements can be both true and false at the same time, its a mumbo jumbo statement, it needs to be "shuwayya shuwayya 3la shawaayah" ( cooked slowly in low heat). First and foremost, Islam has one original release and many updated versions, each one specifically issued for a specific nation and their times, addressing a core problem, the final version being the "Modern" Isalm, issued circa 670 AD was revealed to be the last of all Divine Revelations addressing the combined past core issues such as social ( Regulation in Sexuality, prohibition of illicit sex and perversion) Business and Commerce (Prohibition of Usury), Law and Government ( Islamic Sharia). Democracy on the other hand has a single non updated version formulated by the Athenian Greeks some 2500 years ago. Its an ailing system. Well, saaxib, Islam is an Arabic word that means among several meanings, Surrender, submission, acceptance and reverence of a Sovereign Authority etc. Those who adhere to this Concept are called Muslims ( meaning : Those who are not actively or reactively challenging the authority of their creator) While Athenian Democracy, a 5th century BC concept that ended in the 3rd century AD stood for peoples participation in the decision making process on issues that touch their lives aka politics. Comparing the two concepts is like comparing Papaya to Mangoes, here are some of the differences: Islam stands for the supremacy of THE ONE AND ONLY creator ( Allah) OF UNIVERSE AND ITS CONTENTS, who reserves the law making authority as well as the allegiance of His creatures. The role of a Muslim in the institution of Islam is a SUBJECT, A SLAVE who has to fulfill his Masters commandments. So, the power is NOT FOR THE PEOPLE. The role of the slaves in this institution is consultation of best interpretation of the Divine Commandments, aka (Shuuraa) Looking back in time, Islam was the only religion and faith, its earliest believers were a young newly weds couple, young handsome Adam and His beautiful wife Eva. They were happy, they enjoyed the planet before the co2 pollution , the climate change catastrophe and deforestation, and everything they ate was organic, the planet was a big Island of fun, and there was only one simple law that allowed lots of freedoms, including but not limited to freedom of going nude, with one restriction: to stay away from eating The Forbidden Fruit. So , in that sense, sunbathers in the French Riviera would have considered their ancestors to be very Modern. It follows that humans began populating the planet, each group migrating to different parts of the world, some going north and adapting to the cold temperatures, while some went south to enjoy the equatorial weather and its exotic foods, while a third group migrated east to the savannahs and tundras of Asia and its islands. Once more these nations respectively received the divine code known as Islam, delivered to them by one of their wise men as recorded in Quraan ( Wa in min Qaryatin, illaa khalaa fiihaa Natheer). Based on the above background, let us evaluate the said claims about Islam and Democracy. Being current with the times can be good and bad, if you don't believe me ask your travel agent, why tourists "get away" from modern life to seek some peace in "Backward" places?. Again, being current has many contexts: 1. Current in terms of worldview ( do we all see the same problems?. 2. Current in terms of trends ( Sodomy is currently accepted norm of lifestyle, but God (Old Testament, Quraan) destroyed two towns for the crime. 3. Current in terms of technological advancement. (Galileo, a scientist was hanged for not being current with the church's erroneous interpretation of the Universe) 4. Current in terms of socioeconomic theories ( Capitalism, Socialism, Communism) Democracy, a philosophy which assigns sovereignty to mankind, so that the collective majority of votes make a decision to the minority, can be current if it adopts current trends, likewise, it can be backward if it reverts to an old concept. So, Which concept is more current, more modern, Islam or Democracy? A Self rejuvenating Divine Concept as old as the emergence of man, and as young as 600 AD, or a 2500 year old Man made concept? The confusion can be cleared if we differentiate between Islam and Christianity, the religion of the western nations who champion Democracy. A quick comparison between Islam and Christianity will show that: 1. Islam's holy book is pro scientific exploration, that is why during the Islamic golden age, Muslim Scholars enlightened Europe during its dark ages. 2. Islam encourages thinking, observation and inventions, the holy Quraan explicitly describes the Big Bang, the Expansion of the Universe, and its subsequent collapse, the Big Crunch. 3. Islam encourages continuous improvement of sociopolitical issues for the community. 4. Islam connects this life to the next, so success in this life can lead to success to the next. To be contiuned........... .................... .................... .................... .................. Nur 2008 eNuri Comparitive Concepts The More Informed You Are, The Closer You Are To Islam.

Fenynuus bro. The best option for you to help someone learn the Arabic language is not the Hingaad, as you know the Hingaad is a language skill developed for Somali Speakers to learn reading the Quraan with due respect. Today, there are Arabic language textbooks written for non-speakers ( Ligheyr an naatiqiin), their method is far better and easier than the classical Hingaad ( Alif wax maaleh, baa hoos kaale etc) because that method had done its job in its time, and today, with the advent of modern means of learning, the traditional chalk and talk, wooden board ( loox) and charcoal ink in a dusty makeshift hut with some 80 kids and a macallin dugsi, with a whip and a punishment of ( Wa Al Shams wa duxaahaa) is fast becoming a museum legacy. Depending on your location, there are Arabic schools, and if you are homeschooling, there are Muslim Homeschooling websites that teach Arabic, so, think out of the box, learning Arabic has never been as fun as its today. Note: Some economically foresaken rural and urban parts in Somalia still need the Dugsi. Nur

So, only four votes so far? Is this a vote of boredom of eNuri posts or shyness? anyway, I will go ahead and work on number 4 as it got 3 votes: 4. " Islam a Seventh Century Backwardness?" Saaxib, Which Is More Modern, Islam or Democracy? Nur

Naden walaalo Jazakellahu kheiran for your indirect answer to my question, I understand that the you mean that a real basis for the stoning punishment must be well substantiated in Quraan and Sunnah, if that is your stand, I will do my homework to explore with you its validity. kindly waiting your green light. Nur

Namads I salvaged this old thread to once more stress the lost meaning of Tawheed. A question I like to pose for Nomads to answer is: If a "Muslim" denies, or refuses to accept a ruling Allah's judgment or His His Messengers Sunnah, does that contradict with Tawheed Al Haakimiyah? (which stands for the unification of legislation)? Nur

Khalaf bro. Allah Said in Quraan: " It was not a choice for believers, men and women (to follow their own opinions) once Allah and His appostle have ruled on an issue" When an issue is disputed in Islam, the reference is Quraan and Sunnah, but when you refuse to accept the jusdgement of the source of the ruling itself ( the Prophet of Allah), and call a ruling of his "barbaric", then like Naden said, you are entitled to your own opinion, there is no room for a discussion or explaining left. Naden sis: What would be the "real basis" for this Islamic practice, if any, for you to consider and accept its validity? Nur

Positive bro. I have overlooked this thread for a while, inshAllah I will address your questions in a novel eNuri way soon, I want to call it: Certified Muslim Practinoner Program. ..............So many unlicensed "Mulsims" passing themselves as genuine Muslims, confusing non Muslims! " Rabanaa laa tajcalnaa fitnatan lilladiina kafaruu" amin Time to corect this phenomena with a professionally sanctioned eNuri standards committee! Your Patience Nur

The Point At SOL Islamic page, we attack problems not people, that is a long standing eNuri wisdom. The best way to defend Isalm is to live it by way of our choice of words, a litmus test when in doubt is to ask our selves " would the Prophet SAWS use such a word when confronted in a similar situation"/ The answer is no. So, that sets the standard. When discussing issues, Allah swt teaches us to say good words " quuluu lil naasi xusnaa" and " qawlan sadiidaa" and " wa jaadilhum billatii hiya axsan" And the Prophet SAWS sunnah that says a Muslim does not put people down with comments. " Laysa bil lacaan" Insults are not defined by you, but by the person who feels it, so we have to always walk in their shoes for a mile. Now, the words of asinine ( comes from the latin root of donkey in stooopidity) and "retarded" are not called for to dismiss and argument no matter how far fetched it may seem to you. Its also difficult to separate an attribute we earned with what we say or do, from our person, if what we say is asinine, that will reflect on our person I suggest that you kindly apologise as its an Islamic akhlaaq that if we by way of mistake insult a person, that we make it up in kindness. Nur