“SHARIAH” PERCEIVED NEGATIVELY BY MANY PEOPLE INCLUDING MUSLIMS. WHY IS THIS SO? HOW CAN THIS PERCEPTION BE RECTIFIED?

Shariah is strictly defined as the straight path (Surah An-Nur 24:46) of the divine law. The sources of Shariah comes from the Quran and Hadiths (Prophet Muhammad’s explanations and examples). Surah An-Nur 21:46 states that “We have certainly sent down distinct verses. And Allah guides whom He wills to a straight path”.

There are tremendous amount of discussions and debates on Shariah as it covers the whole spectrum of the Islamic believes, practises and way of life. Shariah deals with subject matters such as crime (Jenayat), politics, economics (Muamalah) as well as the interaction of one human to another (Fiqh). Islam in itself is the definition of “the way of life”. Islam is a preactical religion and as agreed by most scholars Shariah is the formal code of conduct or a set of defined rule of law for all Muslims.

Eventhough Shariah has always been a debatable issue, the implementation of Shariah is a long term goal for some sections of people from Muslim countries, including Malaysia. However, attempts to impose Shariah laws have been accompanied by high degree of controversies, violence and in some countries such as Sudan, war has been waged because of this issue. These oppositions on the implementation of Shariah Laws do not only come from the Western countries but by the Muslims as well.

Studies have been conducted to evaluate this issue and the general consensus or misconception derived from all of these studies is that Shariah Laws is perceived to be oppressive, draconian, rigid and do not perform well in a modern society.

 PERCEPTION TOWARDS SHARIAH

Shariah has been receiving negative lights not only by non Muslims but also by Muslims. This perception has been widely discuss not only by scholars but by the Muslim and non Muslim societies alike. One of the reasons that may be wrongly highlighted in all of these discussions are the heavy penalty of the Hudud Law.

Hudud literally means “limit” or “restriction”and the word is often used in Islamic literature for the bounds of acceptable behaviour and punishments for serious crimes. In Shariah law, hudud normally refers to the class of punishment that are fixed for certain crimes which include theft, fornication and aultery (zina), consumption of alcohol or other intoxicants, murder and apostasy. As with any legal system, it is very common to have a set of punishments for certain crimes committed, and even in our currrent legal system, there is a codified act of Parliament which is known as the Penal Code. The problem arise is when Hudud Law is potrayed as an archaic and draconian form of law which puts its emphasize on the heavy and “inhumane” penalty as expressed by some. The penalty of cutting of hand for thieves, stoning of adulterous and other form of punitive capital punishments was put in the crux of the discussion and was always made as an example ever so often.

Not many discussion would emphasize on what is the underlying objectives of these punishments and higlight on how hard it is for a judge (Qadhi) to pass a judgment due to the high degree of certainty and accuracy sought by the Hudud Law before a prima-facie case is proclaimed and thus a judgment can be passed. Requirement such as confessions from four eye-witnesses of well respected men, free (not a slave), adult Muslim, in a healthy state of mind must be presented in court as the basis in forming a judgment by the Qadhi. The four men must make an oath under the Quran that all of them saw with their own eyes that such crime had happened. If there is even a a small discrepancy or slight differences in their testimonies, the Qadhi should do nothing else but acquit the accused. With this high degree of liability and accuracy required by the prosecutor in order to pass a judgment, a crime under the Hudud Law is not an easy case to proof let alone to execute the accused.

Another misconception towards Islam which was highlighted in great length is on the rights or to be more precise the lack of rights of women and children in the society. Shariah law was presented in such a way that it is oppressing, backwards and do not have any protection to women and children. This matter is somehow accorded when laws such as; it is acceptable to beat wives, child marriage, perceived unfair distribution of inheritance to women, to name a few was always highlighted in discussion against Islam worldwide. The discussion on these issues would normally end in a bad note for Shariah law implementation as concentration was always focussed that men have the right to exercise these laws as it is already stated in verses of Quran or quoted from Hadith. These samples of Shariah laws have imprinted a negative impression towards not only to the non Muslim but to the Muslim as well especially to those who do not have enough knowledge in this area or those who are ignorant of the Shariah law.

The underlying reasoning for the introduction of these laws was rarely discussed objectively. All parties should discuss this issues by presenting arguments and evidences that can support both arguments. For instance, in relation to issue regarding that a husband is permissible to beat his wife, there are some rules before this right can be exercised. However, most of these rules are from the interpretation of Scholars based on their research from Quranic verses and Hadith. In reliance to these Scholars interpretation, some men have abused this right to the extent of beating their wife at their whimp and fancies in the name of exercising their rights.

To illustrate further on the issues that was highlighted above, it is fact that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) has never beat any of his wives. Nonetheless, there are contradicting views on a hadith quoted from Sahih Muslim, Book 004, number 2127, which is quoted as follow:

Muhammad b. Qais said (to the people): Should I not narrate to you (a hadith of the Holy Prophet) on my authority and on the authority of my mother? We thought that he meant the mother who had given him birth. He (Muhammad b. Qais) then reported that it was ''A''isha who had narrated this: Should I not narrate to you about myself and about the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him)? We said: Yes. She said: When it was my turn for Allah''s Messenger (may peace be upon him) to spend the night with me, he turned his side, put on his mantle and took off his shoes and placed them near his feet, and spread the corner of his shawl on his bed and then lay down till he thought that I had gone to sleep. He took hold of his mantle slowly and put on the shoes slowly, and opened the door and went out and then closed it lightly. I covered my head, put on my veil and tightened my waist wrapper, and then went out following his steps till he reached Baqi''. He stood there and he stood for a long time. He then lifted his hands three times, and then returned and I also returned. He hastened his steps and I also hastened my steps. He ran and I too ran. He came (to the house) and I also came (to the house). I, however, preceded him and I entered (the house), and as I lay down in the bed, he (the Holy Prophet) entered the (house), and said: Why is it, O ''A''isha, that you are out of breath? I said: There is nothing. He said: Tell me or the Subtle and the Aware would inform me. I said: Messenger of Allah, may my father and mother be ransom for you, and then I told him (the whole story). He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you? She said: Whatsoever the people conceal, Allah will know it. He said: Gabriel came to me when you saw me. He called me and he concealed it from you. I responded to his call, but I too concealed it from you (for he did not come to you), as you were not fully dressed. I thought that you had gone to sleep, and I did not like to awaken you, fearing that you may be frightened. He (Gabriel) said: Your Lord has commanded you to go to the inhabitants of Baqi'' (to those lying in the graves) and beg pardon for them. I said: Messenger of Allah, how should I pray for them (How should I beg forgiveness for them)? He said: Say, Peace be upon the inhabitants of this city (graveyard) from among the Believers and the Muslims, and may Allah have mercy on those who have gone ahead of us, and those who come later on, and we shall, God willing, join you.

From the hadith above, a few interpretations have been formed. Some of the Scholars believed that this is the Hadith to show that it is permissible for a man to beat his wife as it is practised by the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) himself. However, this is not an absolute truth as there are differed explanations that can be derived from this Hadith.  It was explained that the word "struck" as used in the translation of the Hadith is a bad translation in this context. The Arabic word used in the actual Hadith is 'lahaza' , which could also be translated as "push" and at most "slap with an open palm" but not a hard, violent slap (and note translating it as "slap" is weaker and less probable). It was agreed by some Scholars that the correct translation would be: “He pushed me (lahadani) in the chest (fi sadri) with a push (lahdatan) which made me sore (awja'atni)”. It is also very interesting to note that "pushing" of the Prophet does indeed convey the meaning that it is usually mean to drive away evil influence and thought.  Therefore, from the explanation of this Hadith, it is quite clear that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) himself has never beat his wife and therefore for a man to proclaim himself as a devout and pious Muslim, he should not beat his wife.

The misconception or rather misinterpretation that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) advocates child marriages should also be cleared. This is because there are a few conflicting interpretations of Hadiths in regards of Aisya (Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) purported child wife) age when she was married to the Prophet (pbuh). Some interpreted that she was a child of the age of 6 or 9 when she was married to the Prophet (pbuh). However, the general consensus is that it is agreed that Aisya may have been young when she was married off but she was not younger than what was the norm of a marriageable age at that point of time. The accuracy of Aisya’s age is questionable by a lot of scholars and historians as the reliability of the source is also in doubt. We are talking about a scoiety which have yet to have a proper record of registry of birth and where people do not celebrate birthdays and age of a person has always been only an estimation, and to this, Aisya would have been no different. Also, we should also point up the fact that Aisya had already engaged to be married to another person before she was married to the Prophet (pbuh), suggesting that she had already been mature enough to consider marriage for a while, therefore it is difficult to reconcile the fact that has been circulated around that she was 6 or 9 when she was married to the Prophet (pbuh) and thus negates the believe that Islam advocates child marriages.

HOW CAN THIS PERCEPTION BE RECTIFIED? 

Based on the arguments above, perception towards Shariah law should be rectified in order for Islam to be potrayed in a more accurate light which is a religion of peace, harmony and love. In order for this to be achieved, there is a lot to be done by not only the Scholars and Jurists but by all Muslim as a whole.

Focussed should be made on the right area which is for a Muslim to act in a more Islamic way so as to be a role model to the non believers. Encourage more studies and researches to be conducted on Shariah matters for the public to have better understanding of the religion and what is the accurate Islamic ways.

Muslim Scholars should have more open minded discussion regarding to controversial issues as discussed above and should not take the easy way out in dismissing the issues on reliance that it is a divine law and therefore should not be questioned at all. Sincerity in tackling these issues should be shown as eventhough there are Quranic verses and/or Hadiths stated in relation to some controversial issues, interpretation of Scholars play a very vital role. Arabic language is very extensive and immense, it can easily be wrongly interpreted and understood.

The fact that Shariah law is not static and its interpretations and application have changed and continue to evolve over time need to be highlighted and communicated to change the negative perceptions. Everyone must be made to understand that there is no one thing that defined Shariah; as variety of Muslim communities exist and thus each understands Shariah in a different way. There is no one official document that encapsulates the whole of Shariah laws, it is however a divine law from Allah and interpreted by Muslim Scholars over centuries aiming towards justice, fairness, equality and mercy.

CONCLUSION

Islam is a beautiful religion should people take time to learn more about it. The more time spent learning Islamic teachings and Shariah law, one will appreciate more of its beauty and feel the miracle of the Quran. Shariah law is not meant to oppress or undermine people but more of a prevention. Even people from the Western world believes that “prevention is always better than the cure” and it is the time to put this into action.