SHARIAH IS NON-POLITICAL — From Speaking Tree, Times of India
Spirit of Islam, Aug 2014, p. 15
By Maulana Wahiduddin Khan
Maulana Wahiduddin Khan is named as the default author of the periodical; a piece that carries another writer’s byline is credited to that writer.
SHARIAH IS NON-POLITICAL From Speaking Tree, Times of India Muslims, in their zeal to conform to religious injunctions, ought not to make a nuisance of themselves, says Maulana Wahiduddin Khan. He points out that following Shariah is a personal matter. T HE Supreme Court issued a ruling on July 7, 2014, that has triggered a new discussion regarding the Shariah and its implications. The gist of this ruling is that fatwas issued by Darul Ifta or Darul Qaza have no legal sanction and no place in India’s constitutional scheme. I think this ruling is right. It does not go against the Shariah. If anything, it goes against those who are running institutions in the name of the Shariah. Shariah, in fact, is a non-political concept. This means that anyone who wants to follow the Islamic way of life in his personal affairs must refer to the Shariah. It is only a matter of personal following; no institution or state is involved in this. Personal Behaviour In Chapter Al-Maidah of the Quran, there is a verse regarding this issue. It says: To every one of you, We have ordained a law and a way. THE QURAN 5: 48 In this verse, the words shir’a and minhaj are used for personal behaviour. They have nothing to do with politics or the state. This verse declares that the ummah (followers) of all the prophets were given a Shariah. And it is established by the Quran that no previous ummah, except the ummah Muhammadiyyah (Muslim community) was able to establish a state. Therefore, we will have to take the word Shariah in the sense that can be commonly applied to all the ummahs. This aspect of prophetic history is enough to believe that the word shir’a or Shariah is used in the sense of personal behaviour. Because, the ummah of all the prophets were common in the matter of personal behaviour and not in political affairs. It was everyone’s need to know the religious teaching regarding his personal life. But as far as political teachings are concerned, they were not required because no government was established by these prophets.

‹ Previous page Next page › About this issue Open in the reader