In most modern countries, legal rules are established and regulated by the state. The legislation in these countries is not related to faith and is secular in nature. However, in Islamic countries, along with state legislation (and often instead of it), there is a special Muslim law, or Sharia.
From the Arabic language, the word "sharia" is translated as "the righteous path." The origins of Sharia are to be found in the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad and the Qur'an. The life of a prophet is the best example of righteous service to God (Allah) and fellow believers. And in the Quran it is prescribed which deeds are considered righteous and which are sinful. There are also instructions on how to deal with those who have violated religious norms of behavior - that is, a set of commands and prohibitions received directly from Allah.
From time immemorial
Muslims believe: if you follow all the precepts, you can live a righteous life and receive various benefits in life, which are expressed in material prosperity, and after death you can find yourself in paradise. True, there are not so many verses devoted to legal issues in the Koran - no more than 500 out of 6225! There is much more legal information in the Sunnah of the Shariah (legislator) of Muhammad, composed under Caliph Ali, because Muhammad had to sort out controversial situations, eliminate differences and find fair solutions.
Sharia, as divine prescriptions for a righteous life, began to form under the first caliphs. True, and this has been thoroughly forgotten, the religious precepts were based not only on the words and deeds of Muhammad and sacred texts, but also on the customs of the patriarchal Arab society. These customs determined the relations in the community and the family, the distribution of property, compensation for the misappropriation of other people's property, violation of borders, causing physical harm or death, etc. Similar provisions are found in Jewish texts, also allegedly commanded by Jehovah. And in the Christian Bible. Sharia law in this respect was no different from the biblical. Unless they were supplemented by the norms of behavior characteristic of the Arab Muslim of the 7th century. In subsequent centuries, the regulatory framework was expanded by the decrees and orders of the caliphs, as well as local kanuns (laws),which did not contradict Sharia.
What did he install?
Promotional video:
Every Muslim must abide by the rules of ibadat (religious ritual), which include obligatory taharat (that is, purification), namaz (daily prayer five times a day), zakat (property tax levied on the benefit of the poor), saum (fasting when it is forbidden to take food and drink from dawn to dusk), hajj (pilgrimage to holy places for a Muslim), jihad (diligence in faith up to self-sacrifice). Muamalat, on the other hand, denotes relationships within the Muslim community, these are prescriptions for behavior between people. The verses of the Quran and suras describe the rules for the conclusion and dissolution of marriage, the declaration of war and the conclusion of peace, the determination of inheritance rights and the resolution of disputes, exchange and trade, etc. In addition, several sections of the Sharia define the religious dogma and ethical standards that should be guided by devout Muslims. All actions Muslims divided into five categories: obligatory (fard), recommended (mandub), permitted (mubah), disapproved (makruh), prohibited (haram). Muslims were obliged to commit obligatory acts (but only with good intentions and of good will), and to avoid prohibited ones (the consequence of such committing was the Sharia court). It goes without saying that the recommended actions are worthy of committing, and the disapproved ones are not, but most of the human actions fall into the category of permitted and do not receive either approval or censure. However, much depends not on the category of the act, but on the intention. If the intention was not good, then the kindest deed becomes disgusting to Allah. Muslims were obliged to commit obligatory acts (but only with good intentions and of good will), and to avoid prohibited ones (the consequence of such committing was the Sharia court). Of course, the recommended actions are worthy of committing, and the disapproved ones are not, but most of the human actions fall into the category of permissible and do not receive either approval or censure. However, much depends not on the category of the act, but on the intention. If the intention was not good, then the kindest deed becomes disgusting to Allah. Muslims were obliged to commit obligatory acts (but only with good intentions and of good will), and to avoid prohibited ones (the consequence of such committing was the Sharia court). It goes without saying that the recommended actions are worthy of committing, and the disapproved ones are not, but most of the human actions fall into the category of permitted and do not receive either approval or censure. However, much depends not on the category of the act, but on the intention. If the intention was not good, then the kindest deed becomes disgusting to Allah.but most of human actions fall into the category of permissible and receive neither approval nor censure. However, much depends not on the category of the act, but on the intention. If the intention was not good, then the kindest deed becomes disgusting to Allah.but most of human actions fall into the category of permissible and receive neither approval nor censure. However, much depends not on the category of the act, but on the intention. If the intention was not good, then the kindest deed becomes disgusting to Allah.
Some norms came to sharia from fiqh, that is, legal precedents that are not reflected either in the sunnah or in the Koran, but with which the judges had to deal. Subsequently, on the basis of these three sources, rules of conduct were formed, the violation of which required monetary compensation or punishment. Women, unlike men, were relatively powerless. Muslims had priority over non-Muslims. In the Arab world, punishment was usually very severe, and often the perpetrator was sentenced to death. So, death awaited a Muslim for adultery (stoned), for mutiny or murder during a robbery (hanging or beheading), for apostasy and blasphemy. Theft or robbery was punishable by cutting off the hands. Against this background, the punishment for drinking alcoholic beverages (40 strokes with a stick) seems like child's play.
Unlike Roman law
Unlike Roman law, in Muslim law there was an inequality of categories of things and an inequality of men and women, Muslims and non-Muslims before the law.
According to Sharia law, all things were divided into two categories: things belonging to Muslims, and things taken out of public circulation. From circulation was taken out that which cannot be divided or appropriated without prejudice to others: sea, air, desert, mosques and minarets, etc. It also removed from circulation that which was not beneficial or contradicted the principles of the faith - unclean products, books contrary to Islam, etc. Ownership was different from ownership. The land was considered the property of Allah, but the Caliph had to manage it, who could transfer part of this land to temporary possession (and take it away if he considered it expedient). The lands seized from the enemy became the public property of all Muslims, they were disposed of by the state. Later there were possessions received for service, and possessions,on which non-Muslims could stay for a fee. And the lands received by mosques, madrassas, shelters, cemeteries, etc., were taken out of circulation.
Shariah regulated the performance of obligations and the execution of transactions. Some obligations were unilateral and took the form of religious vows, if they were not fulfilled in time, then the violator would bring an atoning sacrifice. Certain transactions were prohibited by Sharia law, such as transactions with non-Muslims to sell land to Muslims or Muslim slaves. Transactions involving coercion, deception or immoral purposes were also prohibited. The transfer of the property of a Muslim into the hands of a non-Muslim was considered an immoral affair. So non-Muslims could not inherit the property of a Muslim.
In the Sharia court, both civil and criminal cases were dealt with by the same qadi. There were no prosecutors or lawyers, and the process itself was conducted in a mosque. Rumors or the judge's own discretion were considered evidence, along with testimony. The testimony of women was valued twice less than the testimony of men. And until the 8th century, all business was conducted orally.
A means of rallying the masses
Christianity is seven centuries older than Islam. By and large, Muslims do not live in the 21st (from the Nativity of Christ) century, but in the 15th (from the birth of the Prophet Muhammad). Relatively speaking, if you imagine what was the religious and legal situation in Europe in the 15th-16th centuries, then you will be surprised to note that this is the time of the most cruel church diktat. Faith in those days was the only guideline that allows you to separate your friends from others. This is the time of persecution of dissidents, the "Hammer of the Witches", the fires of the Inquisition, church courts. It took Christian countries several centuries to separate secular laws and church laws. Perhaps the same number of centuries will be required for this in those Islamic countries where legal norms are inseparable from Sharia.
In Saudi Arabia, for example, secular legislation does not exist at all, and in India, Lebanon, Syria and many African states, everything related to family and family property is decided according to Sharia law. The right has a secular character only in the countries of Central Asia (which is understandable: they were part of the Russian Empire and the USSR) and in Turkey, which is striving to get into the European Union. And the return to Sharia norms for these Islamic countries has become an indicator of religious and national identity! A source:
"Mysteries of History"