Brunei adopts sharia law

[gslv]

You might find this interesting:


Aurangzeb's Fatwa on Jizya [Jizyah, or Poll Tax]

Much has been made of Aurangzeb's reimposition of the poll tax (jizya, or jizyah) on Hindus. However, as the text of the fatwa, which is seldom read, indicates, an exemption was provided for various classes of people, such as those who were indigent, without employment, unable to work on account of poor health, and so on. Moreover, the fatwa clearly shows that the amount was, far from being uniform, fixed according to a person's ability to pay. The statement that the jizyah was imposed as well on "the people of the Book" -- here doubtless a reference to Christians and Jews -- is particularly significant, since it suggests that there was no animus directed particularly against the Hindus. The translation below is by Anver Emon of the Department of History, UCLA.

Source:

Al-Fatawa al-Alamgiriyyah = Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyyah fi Madhhab al-Imam al-A‘zam Abi Hanifah al-Nu‘man (Beirut: Dar al-Ma‘rifah, 1973), 2:244-245.

If you feel you are much more intelligent then you can discredit UCLA

Manas: History and Politics, Aurangzeb

also hindus had to pay tax to go to different hindu festivals. like puri festival.

 

[jaunty]

What about the people from other religions?

That is my concern. Why should they be forced to live under a set of religious laws from a different religion? If it was only meant for the Muslim population then I'd have no issue with it. Also if a Muslim wants to renounce Islam, would he be tried for apostasy?

 

[gslv]

The 1st part is answered in post 161

second part after the court has delivered their verdict that a murderer be murdered he has the right to plea to family of the victims to forgive and the court begs for mercy on behalf of the murderer...this is the final stage when verdict is given...it then falls in the hands of whose child, father, mother, sister, brother was killed....this is to show that the victim is in charge and has gotten their justice...

why non muslim is not given this power to appeal.

 

[jacksback]

Lovely coming from one who doesnt know what Shariah is...

Scared of the unknown?!


I already did

post 149


Here comes the champion of Islamophobe!!

Quite the contrary. I think people can believe what they want just as long as they leave everyone else alone. What kind of evil backwards people would tax innocent civilians just for simply not believing what they do. It's the most backwards interpretation of faith that exists.

The common man must bow to clerics who work for dictators who own and control everything.

It seems you don't understand that religion is a tool for those in power to control the common man. Nothing more.

You honestly think god has time effort or such basic human desires of control to sit around and write thousands of pages of laws. Are you kidding me? Stone age mentality is just that.

But believe what you want. Just leave the rest of the world alone. We're not interested in being slaves to the interpretations of old archaic backwards thinking men.

 

[Dubious]

The OP says that most of the sharia laws will be applied to non Muslims. That is where my concerns are. I am not sure if one fifth of the population who are non Muslims would like to live under sharia. Remember these people are not outsiders who can just go back to some other country if they are not willing to live under sharia. I am assuming that their opinion was not heard. If that's the case then it's a violation of their basic religious rights. I, for one would not want to live under sharia.

Maybbe trying reading in context:

From Wednesday, residents of the country dominated by Malay Muslims face conviction by Islamic courts and fines or jail terms for offences like pregnancy outside marriage, failure to perform Friday prayers, and propagating other religions.
A second phase comes into effect 12 months later covering offences for theft and alcohol consumption by Muslims, punishable by whipping and amputations. The death penalty, including by stoning, will be introduced in the final phase a year later for offences including adultery, sodomy and insulting the Koran or the Prophet Muhammad. Most of the laws will also apply to non-Muslims.

1stly the laws will be applied because no one is above the law..it lists what Muslims will face then said most will also coz not all are applicable like going to Friday prayer...

As for their opinion heard or not...Was their opinion heard when Brunei took the British law system? Nope so why is this new?

 

[jaunty]

@Chinese-Dragon what do you think about this? There are a lot of ethnic Chinese people (non Muslim) in Brunei.

Maybbe trying reading in context:



1stly the laws will be applied because no one is above the law..it lists what Muslims will face then said most will also coz not all are applicable like going to Friday prayer...

As for their opinion heard or not...Was their opinion heard when Brunei took the British law system? Nope so why is this new?

There is no other context here. The existing laws were not religious. So when you introduce a set of religious laws from a particular religion but force it upon people from all religions then it is a violation of religious freedom.

 

[T-123456]

That is my concern. Why should they be forced to live under a set of religious laws from a different religion? Also if a Muslim wants to renounce Islam, would he be tried for apostasy?

Dont think he would be tried for apostasy,just killed in a Sharia way(stoned,chopped,hanged?)i guess.

 

[gslv]

Maybbe trying reading in context:



1stly the laws will be applied because no one is above the law..it lists what Muslims will face then said most will also coz not all are applicable like going to Friday prayer...

As for their opinion heard or not...Was their opinion heard when Brunei took the British law system? Nope so why is this new?

when brunei was given independence bcoz british were not their own ppl and ppl of brunei didnot like the british. will king of brunei give independence to those who doesnot want to live under shariat or brunei considers others second class citizens.

 

[Soumitra]

You see unlike the western laws, Shariah does not cater for heinous crimes, they dont make tax payers pay to house and feed heinous offenders (rape is a heinous crime as it destroys the woman completely forever from psychological to physical to no room in society no matter how much one denies it it is the truth!)

I ask this same question, when even a gora's wife/ daughter is put in the shoes of a rape victim he would wanna kill the rapist...so why do people object when Shariah says yes thats what it should be? So only your daughter and wife are sacred what about someone else's the state needs to protect everyone's daughters, wives and sisters not just yours!


Which has yet to show success!

I fully agree with death penalty for rape specially in cases like Nirbhaya Delhi Gang Rape but in the eyes of conservative Mullahs even normal pre marital relation between boys and girls will be akin to rape and will lead to a death penalty.

 

[Dubious]

why non muslim is not given this power to appeal.

Says who? If you are asking why a non-Muslim family is not asked for forgiveness...

I am not sure if they are distinguished...as far as I have read it says the murdered...doesnt state the religion....

If it is not the case then I am guessing that it may be because the pardon is asked in ALLAH's name to be merciful as ALLAH will be merciful on those who are merciful to His people....

 

[jaunty]

Dont think he would be tried for apostasy,just killed in a Sharia way(stoned,chopped,hanged?)i guess.

Yea stoning seems to be an option mentioned in the OP.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

You might find this interesting:


Aurangzeb's Fatwa on Jizya [Jizyah, or Poll Tax]

Much has been made of Aurangzeb's reimposition of the poll tax (jizya, or jizyah) on Hindus. However, as the text of the fatwa, which is seldom read, indicates, an exemption was provided for various classes of people, such as those who were indigent, without employment, unable to work on account of poor health, and so on. Moreover, the fatwa clearly shows that the amount was, far from being uniform, fixed according to a person's ability to pay. The statement that the jizyah was imposed as well on "the people of the Book" -- here doubtless a reference to Christians and Jews -- is particularly significant, since it suggests that there was no animus directed particularly against the Hindus. The translation below is by Anver Emon of the Department of History, UCLA.

Source:

Al-Fatawa al-Alamgiriyyah = Al-Fatawa al-Hindiyyah fi Madhhab al-Imam al-A‘zam Abi Hanifah al-Nu‘man (Beirut: Dar al-Ma‘rifah, 1973), 2:244-245.

If you feel you are much more intelligent then you can discredit UCLA

Manas: History and Politics, Aurangzeb

This is beyond ridiculous. What you have done is third class reference building, sorry to say. Aurangzeb's Fatwa (though he couldn't have done that legally, it should be called the firman) is mentioned in the source in his court. The source is his own court chronicle. Using that as a primary and final source to prove a point is beyond ridiculous, besides being juvenile. This is something analogous to the following example -

http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/soc/faculty/mann/ETHNIC.pdf

Yes - I have quoted the same source that you did. Here it says that the Untermenschen or sub humans should be legally subdued and penalties imposed on intermixing. Now does it mean that is the absolute truth. What I did not stress upon is that it was quoting the Nuremburg Laws of 1935, and not giving its own judgement on the matter.

Also you can honestly give up convincing Indians on Shariah. No Indian non Muslim will live under Shariah in their own country - you can be assured about that. One time in the past taught us enough lessons.

 

[Dubious]

Why didnt he do this when he was younger?
What about the people from other religions?
Does a rape victim need 4 male witnesses?

Uncle...Rape doesnt...but if you accuse a woman of sleeping out of wedlock then the accuser needs to provide the evidence in the form of 4 witness...if 4 are provided the 4 will be whipped along with the accused for not stopping the crime! Not sure which 4 will come forward for a whipping!

Other religious people can practice but cant preach...

 

[T-123456]

Uncle...Rape doesnt...but if you accuse a woman of sleeping out of wedlock then the accuser needs to provide the evidence in the form of 4 witness...if 4 are provided the 4 will be whipped along with the accused for not stopping the crime! Not sure which 4 will come forward for a whipping!

Other religious people can practice but cant preach...

I would like to know your personal opinion on Sharia Law,would you want to live under that Law?

 

[Dubious]

Quite the contrary. I think people can believe what they want just as long as they leave everyone else alone.

Thats what Shariah says...let them practice...did you even read OP? I guess not!

What kind of evil backwards people would tax innocent civilians just for simply not believing what they do. It's the most backwards interpretation of faith that exists.

What are you talking about?

The common man must bow to clerics who work for dictators who own and control everything.

Believe what you want to...You are hear to leash out anyway...carry on..

It seems you don't understand that religion is a tool for those in power to control the common man. Nothing more.

You honestly think god has time effort or such basic human desires of control to sit around and write thousands of pages of laws. Are you kidding me? Stone age mentality is just that.

But believe what you want. Just leave the rest of the world alone. We're not interested in being slaves to the interpretations of old archaic backwards thinking men.

I would like to know your personal opinion on Sharia Law,would you want to live under that Law?

Depends whose implementing it...If Taliban..hell no!