Islam & Secularism

2030_17_sitiaishahaslah wrote:

2030_17_Sajed wrote:

Islam wrote:

2030_17_aisha.tahir wrote:

2030_17_sitiaishahaslah wrote:

Sir

...lol

We do not need to know whether Malaysia is a secular or slamic state through their statments. There is an American proverb says: Actions speak louder than words.

Yeah, I have to agree with this. What they claim to be is completely irrelevant if they do the exact opposite. With that being said, I can't really give my opinions on this question because I am very ignorant of Malaysia's situation.

btw if you don't mind me asking, which course are you from and in which section? Your username apparently doesn't mention all those details when it's supposed to.

the discussion is on the islam n secularism so if u dont mind since we are studying in Malaysia we do need to know the current issue nowadays so, the reason i mentioning the statements by The Famous Malaysians Prime ministers are that, so we can see a good example and do discussion on how to differentiate the differences on the secularism and the islamic state. our job as students of ISLAMIC WORLD VIEW CODE 2030 SECTION 17 IS TO DISCUSS AMONG EACH OTHER NOT TO CRITICIZE EACH OTHER SO TAKE IT EASY AS WE ARE NOT PERFECT LIKE PEOPLE WHO ALWAYS GIVE 'COMMENT', WE ARE ALL THE SAME.....PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!

I apologize for the misunderstanding. What I meant when I said "I agree" was with the "Actions speak louder than words" proverb, not with the relevance of the discussion. My statement following that was also based entirely on the proverb. Like I said, the reason I'm not giving my feedback on the Malaysia issue is because I don't KNOW anything about it, not because it's not important. I'm sorry that my statement was misinterpreted and I will edit it to remove the ambiguity. Thank you for pointing it out.

hurm.. thats why i ask..are we in between?? haha... is it really exist the stage between them...

cool babe...dont take it serious...we are in the learning process...don't too emotional...and to 'others', please dont disturb the forumm...

so cool!!!

2030_17_hazrin_adzha wrote:hurm.. thats why i ask..are we in between?? haha... is it really exist the stage between them...

In fact, we have to have a complete bondage in all spheres of life, so we can't worship God in some aspects of life and in others we do not.

Islam wrote:

2030_17_hazrin_adzha wrote:hurm.. thats why i ask..are we in between?? haha... is it really exist the stage between them...

In fact, we have to have a complete bondage in all spheres of life, so we can't worship God in some aspects of life and in others we do not.

in other words, we must worship God in all aspects of life. am i right??

2030_17_amiza wrote:

Islam wrote:

2030_17_hazrin_adzha wrote:hurm.. thats why i ask..are we in between?? haha... is it really exist the stage between them...

In fact, we have to have a complete bondage in all spheres of life, so we can't worship God in some aspects of life and in others we do not.

in other words, we must worship God in all aspects of life. am i right??

oBsOlutely sir

As said above, Islam means to worship Allah in all aspects of life, which means secularism must be completely eradicated. I guess what they mean by "in between" is that it's going through a transition from Islam to Secularism, or from Secularism to Islam (hopefully the latter). It's not completely secular or completely islamic yet but it's heading straight towards one of them.

2030_17_Sajed wrote: It's not completely secular or completely islamic yet

I guess there is a contradiction in this sentence, because if the state is not completely Islamic state then it is a secular state.

Islam wrote:

2030_17_Sajed wrote: It's not completely secular or completely islamic yet

I guess there is a contradiction in this sentence, because if the state is not completely Islamic state then it is a secular state.

It's not a contradiction. Secularism is to completely separate religion from any specific aspect of life. In this example, the Islamic influence lives on and gets stronger day by day. To the extent that there is a possibility of it turning into an Islamic state in the near future. This transient state cannot be considered purely secular nor can it be purely Islamic.

You yourself said: " to completely separate religion from any specific aspect of life"

So if there is a state that seprates religion from from aspect of its international relations as an example, would you say it is a secular state? because you said ( any aspect).

assalamualaikum...
there is an article said that:
Secularism may be accepted in a Christian society but it can never enjoy a general acceptance in an Islamic society. Christianity is devoid of comprehensive system of life. For Muslim societies, the acceptance of secularism means something totally different; i.e. as Islam is a comprehensive system of worship (`ibadah) and legislation (Shari`ah), the acceptance of secularism means abandonment of Shari`ah, a denial of the divine guidance and a rejection of Allah’s injunctions.For this reason, the call for secularism among Muslims is atheism and a rejection of Islam....
wallahualam

Islam wrote:You yourself said: " to completely separate religion from any specific aspect of life"

So if there is a state that seprates religion from from aspect of its international relations as an example, would you say it is a secular state? because you said ( any aspect).

That was to describe secularism, not a secular state in particular. Going by your example, that particular aspect regarding international relations would indeed be run by a secular system, but the state as a whole is not necessarily secular. Of course, since there IS a secular system within the state, it cannot be considered purely Islamic, even if everything else appears Islamic, which I think is what the posted meant by "in between".

2030_17_syazwani.najman wrote:assalamualaikum...
there is an article said that:
Secularism may be accepted in a Christian society but it can never enjoy a general acceptance in an Islamic society. Christianity is devoid of comprehensive system of life. For Muslim societies, the acceptance of secularism means something totally different; i.e. as Islam is a comprehensive system of worship (`ibadah) and legislation (Shari`ah), the acceptance of secularism means abandonment of Shari`ah, a denial of the divine guidance and a rejection of Allah’s injunctions.For this reason, the call for secularism among Muslims is atheism and a rejection of Islam....
wallahualam

Yup. Because Islam is a Deen while Christianity is only a religion, that is restricted to beliefs and rituals (in present time, that is, and with all those different sects of Christianity, there are probably exceptions which I'm unaware of).

2030_17_syazwani.najman wrote:assalamualaikum...
there is an article said that:
Secularism may be accepted in a Christian society but it can never enjoy a general acceptance in an Islamic society. Christianity is devoid of comprehensive system of life. For Muslim societies, the acceptance of secularism means something totally different; i.e. as Islam is a comprehensive system of worship (`ibadah) and legislation (Shari`ah), the acceptance of secularism means abandonment of Shari`ah, a denial of the divine guidance and a rejection of Allah’s injunctions.For this reason, the call for secularism among Muslims is atheism and a rejection of Islam....
wallahualam

yaa.i had read about this article once.
interesting.
"the acceptance of secularism means abandonment of Shari`ah, a denial of the divine guidance and a rejection of Allah’s injunctions."

Sir

we have to distingush between two things: Islamic state & Muslim state. ( Every islamic state is muslim state, and the opposite is not always correct)

It is not necessary to have an islamic consitution in order to be an islamic state. Many muslim countries mention in their consitution that they are islamic states.

Let's talk frankly and in practice: when we talk about an islamic state everybody usually would point to Saudi Arabia, but for me, I consider it a secular state, even though its people are muslims and its government follows Islamic law in some areas. Why? because, for instance, the political and economic decisions in Saudi Arabia do not depend on الحكم الشرعي. if that the case, we can never say simply it is an islamic state.

Islam wrote:Sir

we have to distingush between two things: Islamic state & Muslim state. ( Every islamic state is muslim state, and the opposite is not always correct)

It is not necessary to have an islamic consitution in order to be an islamic state. Many muslim countries mention in their consitution that they are islamic states.

Let's talk frankly and in practice: when we talk about an islamic state everybody usually would point to Saudi Arabia, but for me, I consider it a secular state, even though its people are muslims and its government follows Islamic law in some areas. Why? because, for instance, the political and economic decisions in Saudi Arabia do not depend on الحكم الشرعي. if that the case, we can never say simply it is an islamic state.

In my opinion, I don't think there are any true Islamic states in the world today. I agree with what you said over here though. Just because they claim to be Islamic doesn't mean that they are.

salam..this is my first time in this forum, actually this is really a fantastic topic 'secularism'. focusing on ;islamic state, i would say none of us here can give an exact definition of islamic sate, this is due to the fact that the scholars themselves had different opinion pertaining to requirement to establish islamic state. i believe most of us (and layman oustide there) believe and uphold the islamic state is a state that follows all islamic teaching and values in all aspects:legislation,administration,morality and many more without any restriction and it is enforce in absolute.this is what happen in malaysia where people condemn the current government on the basis of unislamic and failed to enforce hudood laws,they only use "hudood laws' as indicator to justify malaysia as non islamic state.factually, imam al khaitami (scholar from shafie school) said that it is sufficient enough that a state is govern by a muslim leader to be recognized as an islamic state, no matter he is fasiq, did corruption,or etc, prof hashim kamali of the view that hudood laws is not the requiremnt,it is flexible according to the urf (custom)
strictly speaking, i disagree with some group who contend that khilafah system is the only system for a state to be recognized as an islamic state,i think they are too rigid. as we know during the demise of the prophet he did not appoint anyone to replace him,then the sahabah did consultation (shuroo),and the appoinment of other caliphs are different as well. this indicates that we are free to choose any syatem we want as long as we do not deviate from the fundamental aspect in islam and at the same time practise shuroo in all matters.............one thing that i regret about muslim these days is they willigly work together with non muslim to 'kill' other muslim who is their brother. remember the great sin in islam not do corruption, drink liqour ,adultery but THE GREAT SIN is KUFR

We do not ask for following the ISlamic law in each and every single issue and in evey single time. But rather we ask for subjecting the government to the islamic constitution. that should the principle in the first place, and then will try to follow that constitution as much as possible.

i wrote according to the perspective of society, so why not u tell us what is the fundamental principle that should be adpted n the constiittion to be regarded as islamic state?i believe the best moel to be followed is dustur al madinah which is the first constituion in the world, but frankly,i believe, constituion is worth or valuable in the eyes of academician like us, but people outside there they want to see the implementation. malaysia for instance, there are a lot of proviions that is pareller to islamic principles but it is not sufficient enugh because people does not apply it wholelly as a way of life

Question for you:

Do you think that Turkia is a secular govenrment?

the answer of this question will clarify the issue.