certifired_img

Books and Documents

Islamic Sharia Laws (07 May 2013 NewAgeIslam.Com)



Renewing Qur’anic Studies in the Contemporary World

 

 

By Nasr Hamid Abu-Zayd

The events of 9/11 and subsequent terrorist violence have stimulated tremendous interest, and concern regarding the socio-political and intellectual conditions of the Muslim world, and how they impact the West. Yet, confusion about the “true” nature of Islam, and the threat we are facing remains prevalent among Western policy-makers, journalists and the general public. To a substantial extent, this confusion among Western observers arises from the fact that Muslim fundamentalists deliberately and consistently promote a “reading” of Islam whereby every socio-political issue must be viewed through a suffocatingly narrow theological lens. As a result, all too many analysts in the West have displayed the unfortunate tendency to conflate the religion of Islam with “Muslims” and “the Muslim world,” employing these terms loosely and interchangeably when describing a variety of pathologies that afflict contemporary Muslim societies throughout the world. This, in turn, has the effect of converting socio-political controversies into theological ones, and thereby generating within non-Muslims a profound unease with and mistrust of Islam, and its adherents, as well as blindness on how to address the problem of Muslim radicalism.

Promoting the notion of a single unified entity called the Ummah (“the Community of Believers”), Muslim fundamentalists ignore the enormous social, cultural and theological diversity that exists both within, and between, the world’s various Muslim-majority states. Even within the Arab Middle East, Saudi Arabia’s official Wahhabi Islam is highly distinctive, characterized by numerous features completely at odds with the traditional Islam historically practiced by most inhabitants of Mecca, Medina and the wider Arab and Islamic world. The Wahhabis, like other Muslim fundamentalists, propagate the naive concept of an ideal and ahistorical Islam, which is narrowly defined, restrictive, legalistic, monolithic, compulsory and supremacist vis-à-vis not only those of other faiths, 290 MUSLIM CRITICISM OF APOSTASY AND BLASPHEMY LAWS but even the vast majority of Muslims, who remain traditional in their beliefs. This version of Islam is that of the “sword,” as prominently displayed in the flag of Saudi Arabia. The Islam of mercy, compassion and profound spiritual devotion, which regards the world’s cultural and religious diversity as a divine blessing, is far beyond the reach of the fundamentalists’ narrow vision.

 Indonesia’s former president, Kyai Haji Abdurrahman Wahid, rightly identified this “extreme and perverse ideology in the minds of fanatics” – widely propagated throughout the world, with the aid of Arab petrodollars – as the source of a compelling threat not only to the West, but to Muslims and Islam itself: “This crisis of misunderstanding – of Islam by Muslims themselves – is compounded by the failure of governments, people of other faiths, and the majority of well-intentioned Muslims to resist, isolate and discredit this dangerous ideology. The crisis thus afflicts Muslims and non-Muslims alike, with tragic consequences. Failure to understand the true nature of Islam permits the continued radicalization of Muslims world-wide, while blinding the rest of humanity to a solution which hides in plain sight.”1

It is imperative that Muslims and non-Muslims alike free ourselves from the framework of the fundamentalists’ monolithic discourse on Islam. Otherwise, we will either misjudge Islam, by conflating it with the dominant discourse of the radicals – just as Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders, in his video Fitna, mirrors the ideology of Osama bin Laden – or we will adopt an unrealistic and apologetic stance, de-contextualizing Islam from past and present circumstances, so as to convince ourselves that it is “purely a religion of peace,” divorced from the violence so often committed in its name.

The first view maintains that Islam is evil, dangerous and incapable of being reformed. This “anti-Islam discourse” mirrors and echoes the Islamist viewpoint, which is thus taken for granted as representing the one and only “true” Islam. The second approach is equally unrealistic, presenting Islam as a well-defined ethical, spiritual and purely idealistic a-historical religious phenomenon. The problem with this approach is that it totally ignores the reality on the ground in the Muslim world, where radicals have often succeeded in donning a mantle of religious authenticity, and are rapidly advancing towards their goal of “welding” Islam to their virulent socio-political ideology. Rather than fall into the trap of either demonizing or idealizing Islam and Muslims in general, we must realistically assess conditions in the Muslim world, and develop a balanced, mature understanding of Islam itself, consistent with the needs of humanity and life in the modern world.

One highly effective way to accomplish these objectives is to reject the fundamentalists’ dogmatic framework and instead locate Islam within its historical context, in order to understand how it emerged, and how it developed within Arabia and other parts of the world. In particular, this requires us to approach the Qur’an, Islam’s foundational scripture, from an objective historical perspective, examining how it was transmitted, propagated, codified and ultimately canonized. Through this process, we can begin to determine the “spheres” and limitations of the meanings it provides, and thus ascertain its significance within the context of various contemporary societies, free of extremist dogma and the ideology of religious hatred, yet richly imbued with moral and spiritual import. Such a mature, spiritual and “contextualized” understanding of the Qur’an will displace the fundamentalists’ monolithic and ahistorical worldview. Widely disseminated, it will allow pluralism and tolerance to become the dominant discourse within Muslim societies worldwide. Such an understanding also represents an appropriate way to respond to criticism of Islam, the Qur’an and the Prophet. Intellectually sound responses that convey the spiritual message of Islam should be employed rather than angry rhetoric, which only encourages violence.

The Socio-Political and Cultural Contexts

According to Islamic belief, the Qur’an is the speech of God, which conveys the “message” revealed to humans through Muhammad, who was the messenger of God, and human himself. A message represents a communicative link between a speaker and recipient, delivered via a code or linguistic system. Without such a code, messages will not be intelligible to recipients. In the case of the Qur’an, the Arabic language – the human code of the recipient – is the code of communication between the Divine and humans, simply because the Divine code, if any, is unlikely to be comprehended by humans. Besides, the message was not intended for the recipient (Muhammad) alone; rather, it was meant to be transmitted to the recipient’s community and beyond. Therefore, it had to be comprehended by the Arabic-speaking community of Mecca and the Arabian Peninsula in general. “We never sent a messenger but with the language of his people, that he might make it clear for them,” states the Qur’an (14:4).2

  Since the speaker (God) cannot be the object of scientific study, it is only possible for scholars to approach the message as encoded in the language of the recipient and his community. To accomplish that objective, scholars need all available information about the first recipient, Muhammad, and his surrounding community. In other words, scholars must begin their analysis of the Qur’anic message by studying its contextual reality and 7th century Arab culture. “Reality” here refers to the socio-political conditions that encompassed those who were addressed by the Qur’an, including its first recipient, and which framed their lives, thought and actions. Culture includes the conceptual framework embodied in a language, in this case, the language in which the Qur’an is expressed. To analyze the Qur’anic message by studying its socio-political and cultural reality is to start with empirical facts. The scholarly analysis of such facts can help us to achieve an accurate understanding of the Qur’an, including the realization that the Qur’an is a product of 7th century Arab culture.

The overarching reality, however, is far more complex than this. While arising within the particular culture of 7th century Arabia, the Qur’an was taken to heart by its recipients and in turn produced a new culture, imbued with profound spiritual as well as socio-political and cultural dimensions. The Qur’an’s linguistics exhibit a number of unique characteristics which were widely acknowledged and admired by contemporary Arabs, including some of Muhammad’s opponents. From this uniqueness emerged the notion of the absolute “inimitability” – i’jaz – of the Qur’an. Although it is necessary to analyse and interpret the Qur’an within the contextual environment in which it originated, the understanding of the Qur’an possessed by the first and subsequent generations of Muslims should by no means be considered absolute or final. The specific linguistic encoding dynamics of the Qur’an allow an endless process of decoding. In this process, we should not simplify or ignore its contextual socio-political and cultural meaning; in fact, this “meaning” is vital to indicate the direction of any “new” or contemporary message of the text. This direction facilitates our transition from the text’s literal “meaning” to its “significance” in any given socio-cultural context, including the present. It also enables the interpreter to correctly and efficiently extract the “historical” and “temporal” elements of the message, which carry no significance in the present context.

In other words, the “deep structure” of the Qur’an must be reconstructed from the surface structure, which was specific to 7th century Arab culture. Subsequently, this deep structure must give rise to other, surface structures, including contemporary ones, suitable to successive generations of Muslim society in various regions of the earth. This entails an interpretive diversity – clearly seen throughout Muslim history, particularly as practiced by Sufis, or Islamic mystics – without which the Message would “harden” and degenerate, and the Qur’an would become, as it is now, subject to political and other forms of self-interested manipulation exercised by so-called “guardians” of Islam. The innovative approach to Qur’anic study that I have long proposed in my various writings3 on the process of modern Qur’anic interpretation entails the use of traditional exegetical methods and modern linguistic methodologies, in addition to the analysis of socio-historical reality and culture.

By recognizing the difference between the original contextual “meaning,” which is virtually fixed because of its historicity, and the “significance” in a particular socio-cultural context, which is changeable, and furthermore, by realizing that the significance must be strongly related and rationally connected to the meaning, we can produce more valid contemporary interpretations. Of course, any interpretations of the Qur’an produced using such a methodology are not exempt from the reality that every interpretation is historically and culturally constructed.

Blasphemy and Apostasy Laws Stifle Progress and Hinder Peaceful Coexistence

In early Islam, there emerged a debate between a rational school of theology known as the Mu`tazial that claimed that the Qur’an is “created” not eternal and other theological schools of thought that through its International Institute of Qur’anic Studies (IIQS). The International Institute of Qur’anic Studies has its base of operations in Indonesia, where Kyai Haji Abdurrahman Wahid and Dr. Syafi’i Ma’arif – former heads of the world’s two largest Muslim organizations, the Nahdlat ul Ulema and Muhammadiyah, with a total of 70 million members – work closely with the IIQS, serving as its patrons and senior advisors. Renewing Qur’anic Studies in the Contemporary World 293 held that the Qur’an is the “eternal” verbatim speech of God. In the Mu’tazilites’ view, an “uncreated” Qur’an is inconsistent with the concept of pure monotheism, Tawhid, a pivotal concept in Islam. Socio-historical analysis demonstrates that these schools did not hold their respective views in a vacuum; rather, they expressed in religious terminologies the different socio-political positions of their adherents. Eventually, the notion of an “eternal and uncreated” Qur’an became the dominant accepted dogma in Sunni Islam. Unfortunately, the history of this debate is either unknown or ignored by nearly all contemporary Sunni clerics and scholars. Instead, the doctrine of “eternity” is presented as the Truth, while the doctrine of “creation” is denounced as heresy.

As a result, the notion that religious texts, although Divine and revealed by God, are culturally constructed and historically determined is not only rejected by the Muslim establishment, but actively condemned as “apostasy.” There is frequently no clear distinction made between heresy, blasphemy and apostasy within the Muslim world. Instead, Islamist radicals deliberately conflate these terms in order to attack any discourse that strays from the narrow bounds of their fundamentalist ideology. Having been at the receiving end of such allegations – and driven from my home in Egypt to exile in the Netherlands – I can state with conviction that charges of apostasy and blasphemy are key weapons in the fundamentalists’ arsenal, strategically employed to prevent reform of Muslim societies, and instead confine the world’s Muslim population to a bleak, colourless prison of socio-cultural and political conformity. There is little hope of escape from this imprisonment, as long as fundamentalists – and the opportunistic and/or authoritarian regimes that compete with them in a chase to the lowest common denominator of Islam – continue to serve as prison guards and wardens.

Laws penalizing blasphemy and apostasy exist in most Muslim-majority countries throughout the world, and act as a severe constraint upon the use of reason to explore and understand the contemporary significance of the Qur’an’s profound message. By forcefully silencing critical inquiry, such laws play directly into the hands of Islamic radicals, who seek to unify and politicize Muslim societies not only against the West, but against the very concept and principles of modern life, such as freedom, justice, human rights and the dignity of man, which are themselves inseparable from the right to freedom of conscience and expression. Perhaps the greatest irony is that these core principles – which lie at the heart of any just and humane society – are deeply embedded in the message of the Qur’an itself, and yet ignored by Islam’s most fervent, and violent, “defenders.”

For although the Qur’an prescribes no earthly punishment for either blasphemy or apostasy, the historical development of Islamic law has widely, though not universally, prescribed the death penalty as punishment for both. A critical historical study of the Qur’an, Hadith and Shari’a would reveal the human origin of these interpretations, and hence their complete inappropriateness within a modern context. This objective historical approach to studying the foundational elements of Islamic law is fiercely resisted by many clerics and mullahs. Yet it is absolutely vital, if we are to liberate the “deep substance” of the Holy Qur’an’s message, which proclaims the Prophet Muhammad (and hence, by implication, Islam itself) to be “a blessing for all creation.”294 MUSLIM CRITICISM OF APOSTASY AND BLASPHEMY LAWS

The late Nasr Hamid Abu-Zayd was Academic Director of the International Institute of Qur’anic Studies (IIQS), a branch of LibForAll Foundation. He is the author of numerous scholarly works on Islam in both Arabic and English and is known for developing a humanistic interpretation of the Qur’an. Formerly Professor of Arabic Literature at Cairo University, he left when Egypt’s highest court ruled that, because of his views, he was an apostate and must be forcibly divorced from his Muslim wife. He also received death threats from Ayman Al Zawahiri of Al-Qaeda. Abu-Zayd held the Ibn Rushd Chair of Humanism and Islam at the University for Humanistics in the Netherlands and was awarded the Ibn Rushd Prize for Freedom of Thought in 2005. He died in Cairo on July 5, 2010.

Reference:

1. Wahid, Abdurrahman. “Right Islam vs. Wrong Islam,” Wall Street Journal, December 30, 2005, http://www.libforall.org/news-WSJ-right-islam-vs.-wrong-islam.html.Renewing Qur’anic Studies in the Contemporary World 291

2. See my lecture, “The Qur’an: God and Man in Communication,” inaugural lecture for the Cleveringa Chair at Leiden University (November 27th, 2000)

http://www.let.leidenuniv.nl/forum/01_1/onderzoek/2.htm.292 MUSLIM CRITICISM OF APOSTASY AND BLASPHEMY LAWS

3. I have more recently pursued my work in this area in conjunction with LibForAll Foundation (www.libforall.org),

Source: SILENCED: How Apostasy And Blasphemy Codes Are Choking Freedom Worldwide. Edited by Paul Marshall and Nina Shea, OXFORD University Press PP. 448

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/islamic-sharia-laws/nasr-hamid-abu-zayd/renewing-qur’anic-studies-in-the-contemporary-world/d/11448

 




TOTAL COMMENTS:-   21


  • A Poem by the Nizam of Hyderabad           

    When shall the mocking world withhold its blame,
    When shall men cease to darken thus my name,
    Calling the love, which is my pride, my shame?

    The joy of love no heart can feel alone,
    The fire of love at first unseen, unknown,
    In flames of love from either side is blown.

    O, Asif, tread thy pathway carefully
    Across this difficult world; for canst thou see,
    A further journey is awaiting thee.

         Asif (Mir Mahbub 'Ali Khan, Nizam of Hyderabad)

     

     

     


    By Nazm - 5/15/2013 3:33:40 AM



  • citing such fictional stories doesn' add credibility. cite the passage from quran. 

    At this you will seek a lame excuse that you cannot read Arabic. but am sure you can read english, and if you are to be believed, you have to dig evidence saying quran says so and so. have you understoood it properly, dear Mr. rameshji?

    By sadaf - 5/15/2013 1:46:19 AM



  • Dear Sadaf,
       What happened in kerala is not isolated love marraiges between two. It was an organised attempt to convert by cheating,using the openness in the hindu/christian society. Love jihad was most cunning and tracherous way of islam on non muslims.( both christians and hindus were pray). By brushing aside love jihad as simple love marraiage you are actually condoning these . .  
      I gave these examples only to demonstrate that islam mostly spread through violence. Calling them unislamic does not prove islam is a peaceful religion.

    By ramesh - 5/14/2013 11:58:22 PM



  • Love Jihad is the name that people like you give to any Muslim fellow loving or being loved by any Hindu, resulting in their marriage and conversion of that Hindu to Islam.

    It is the conversion of Hindu to Islam that is the problem to you. Else why should you have problem if all Hindus convert to Islam when I can have no problem if all Muslims convert to Hindus?

    I call all that you have said as fiction because none of these is Islamic and Islam has no agenda for such things. 

    Can you or Secular Logic prove it citing the verses of Quran, where it is asked to indulge into these?

    Muslims need reform but that it doesn't mean they will have to acknowledge and accept what is fiction. Muslims need to be educated, worldly or scientific knowledge and then reeducated about Quranic wisdom. That is the reform that is needed. Islam prohibits from killing, but those who think they are Muslim and yet they kill they need to be re-educated about what Islam says about killing and so on.

    People like Ramesh, Suresh, Ganesh, need not be worried about reform among Muslims. All that you have to do is sing in chorus what moderate Muslims sing. 


    By sadaf - 5/13/2013 11:06:15 PM



  • when the whole world is experiencing this enchanting peace, what's our problem?

    do we want to go back to the strife torn hatred filled world of tolerance and humility?

    what's wrong with us? the peace we see today from the explosive cocktail of religion is something humanity has worked hard, fought tooth and nail for. this peace is something we are not letting go in a hurry. unless of course you can show us something bloodier, more discriminatory, more abhorrent; then we all will latch on to it.

    all religions will be ruled by the least edifying of its edicts. so get used to it!

    By hats off! - 5/13/2013 10:57:48 AM



  • Dear Sadaf,
     What is fiction in my statement?  Love jihad in kerala or rape/kidnap jihad in pakistan or the raising intolerance in bangladesh? All these realities have become fiction for you because it is embarassing. The first step towards reform is acceptance of crime committed/being committed. If you term these crimes  as fiction you cannot reform. It is people like you who will not allow islam to reform but allow to decay.

    By ramesh - 5/13/2013 10:03:13 AM



  • and yes, all that you have alleged is fiction. you people are myth worshippers, so myth making is quite expected.
    By sadaf - 5/12/2013 7:46:32 PM



  • and it is your job to offend. keep offending. and have bloodied nose dear Mr.Rameshji. and then please do not cry foul.
    By sadaf - 5/12/2013 7:42:50 PM



  • Dear sadaf,
         You are mentioning about kerala case which contains a high percentage of muslims. Just a few a years ago 6000 hindu girls were duped in love jihad. This you may have forgotten or desire to forget or feign not  to remember. Hopefully  entire hindu society will also forget this incident.  Islam has continuously used various jihad methods for propagation. In kerala muslims are in minority and hence love jihad is used. In pakistan where muslims are in vast majarity,it is kidnap and rape jihad.  In bangladesh hindus and buddhists are under under attack. Exodus is in trickle now,but will become an avalanche later. This is how islam spreads.  But it is your job to defend .Keep defending.
      You are still defending aurangazeb's killing of guru tej bahadur. It is just shame.  

    By ramesh - 5/12/2013 9:19:52 AM



  • Dear Ramesh ji, your Tej Bahadur episode may be an exception and the Pir Baba of Pakistan may be an exception, and for you exceptions does make rule.

    Indonesia, Malaysia have several times more numbers of Muslims than entire Arabian Peninsula put togather.

    Kerala's example you simply chose to ignore. The number of Muslims in Kerala alone exceeds the entire Arabian Peninsulas population. None of these places was conquered by sword.

    Need more example of exceptions.

    India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, all put together was conquered by swordsmen some 500 years later when Muslims were already there and were as evenly spread out as they are today. They could hardly convert already Muslim population into Muslim yet again!

    Moreover swordsmen have no ability to convert. You can yourself see, how unpopular Talibans are among Hindus; not to speak of how unpopular they are to New Age Islamists.

    Coming back to Tej Bahadur Ji, who knows what happens to an individual and why, and what threat he/she poses to the power of the day. Do you think that Aurangzeb had a personal enemity or even acquaintance of who Tej Bahadur was? He must have got information through some court official who might have ensured that Tej Bahadur doesn't survive and presented the case to Aurangzeb. When Aurangzeb did not spare his brother and father, do you think, Aurangzeb cared who Tej Bahadur would later turn out to be? Political decisions with all its exactness of the day cannot be accepted as argument to tarnish or making a hero of someone. 

    By sadaf - 5/11/2013 3:51:08 AM



  • Dear Sadaf,
       You are quoting indonesia  where you believe islam has spread without sword. Exceptions do not make the rule. Have you forgotten the killing of guru Tej bahadur by aurangazeb for not converting? For you who argue that aurangazeb was not a bad human being ,everthing will be O.K.
      You are quoting Ajmer baba. Again he is an exception. Dont you know  a  pir in pakistan is actively involved in forcible conversions of hindu girls?
       Dont you know that on an average one hindu girl is kidnapped and converted in pakistan? It may be a  peacful means for you  as  the hindu girls are just raped and not killed?  Hence not just sword but rape is also a method for conversion./spread for islam.
      You are asking why hinduism has not spread through Trishul? The answer is hinduism is not a proselytising religion.
     You are asking why Iam still a hindu if sword was used for conversion? Iam just fortunate that my forefathers did not yield to sword or any other temptations.
     If islam had been a peaceful religion,then New Age Islam is not required. You can continue with old age islam.

    By ramesh - 5/11/2013 3:03:03 AM



  • Dear Sadaf saheb, I liked your retort to Ramesh, especially the parts that say:
    "How will you explain the presence of majority of population of a country being Muslim in Indonesia, where no swordsman conqueror reached? Yes heart conquerors did reach there."

    "How will you explain the story retold by devout Hindus who visit Ajmer Dargah and pay their respect to Mohiyuddin Chishti  who is reported to have arrived in India just as Fa Hian, Huen Tsang and other travellers arrived, but swordlessly?"

    In the first case of Indonesia, there were some Muslim traders who stepped into the country holding in one hand the Quran, the message of love, peace and harmony with non-Muslims, and their means of trade  in the other. Not a single hand of Muslims held the sword.
    While in the case of Khwaja Gharib Nawaz Mohiyuddin Chishti in Ajmer, he had nothing to call people to Islam except his infinite love for humanity and spirit of generosity for the poor irrespective of their race, religion, culture, or caste (that is why he is renowned as "Gharib Nawaz" meaning one who gives to the poor).
    But despite this true story of Islam's spreading retold by you or Mr. Ghulam Ghaus, I cannot simply ignore or discard the illusion of Mr. Ramesh and people like him. I cannot condemn or blame them  for their ignorance, doubts or suspicion about the spreading of Islam. Because I know it for sure that our radical Islamists and Wahabi zealots have left no stone unturned to create these doubts in their minds. People have no time to go deeply into the pages of history, all they could easily do to know about a religion is just to look around, see the actions of its followers and then develop their impression. You know what they say "Seeing is believing". So, people like Mr. Ramesh see what Salafis, Wahabis, Talibanis and other Islamist terrorists are doing to spread Islam and thus make statements like "Islam never spread without sword".

    By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 5/11/2013 12:41:54 AM



  • Dear Ramesh I have rightly typed but you have wrongly imagined and eventually turned the right into wrong. Islam never did spread with the sword. Sadaf sahab has given you a good retort that is manifold in the sense that Islam spread with love, brotherhood and sympathy.  
    By GHULAM GHAUS غلام غوث - 5/10/2013 11:54:23 AM



  • Dear Mr. Ramesh, you think yourself smarter than you are. If Islam did spread through sword, then does it mean that now it is not spreading because the time of sword is over and it has been replaced with the time of bombs- suicide bomb, aerial bomb, nuclear bomb? 

    If bombs and swords represent barbarism, then why Hinduism is not spreading with Trishul? 

    Why still, sword is given as 'sword of honour' to honour someone if it represented barbarism? Sword was the technology of those times. Something like nuclear weapon of present times. 

    Why possessing nuclear weapon is not as derogatory to you as someone of thousand years ago possessing sword? Do you also believe like Talibans that if they will possess Nuclear Bomb, they will spread Islam much faster and Hindus will cower fearing and trembling, changing their religion just as their forefathers did?

    Or, are you saying  that the time of Islam spreading like cheese spread has already arrived with the invention of more and more lethal bombs?

    If Islam did spread with sword, then why you are still a Hindu. How come your forefather survived the sword? Did they run away or they too had the sword? If they too had the sword, then why couldn't their religion spread?

    And how will you explain the presence of huge population of entirely different complexioned Muslims in Kerala (because elsewhere Muslims are always fair) when no Mughals or Lodis could reach them? 

    How will you explain the presence of majority of population of a country being Muslim in Indonesia, where no swordsman conqueror reached? Yes heart conquerors did reach there.

    How will you explain the story retold by devout Hindus who visit Ajmer Dargah and pay their respect to Mohiyuddin Chishti  who is reported to have arrived in India just as Fa Hian, Huen Tsang and other travellers arrived, but swordlessly?   

    By sadaf - 5/10/2013 10:02:09 AM



  • the author says" a critical historical study of quran,hadith and sharia will reveal human origin of  interpretations and hence complete inappropriateness to modern contexts".  What does it mean? Does it mean that quran should not be interpretetted or is not suitable for moderngakeg contexts?
    By ramesh - 5/10/2013 9:35:18 AM



Compose Your Comments here:
Name
Email (Not to be published)
Comments
Fill the text
 
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the articles and comments are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of NewAgeIslam.com.

Content