36 thoughts on “Watch “Do You Really Understand Sharia?” on YouTube

      1. KMAK

        They don’t have to since unlike Raymond Ibrahim, Christian Prince and other internet idiots that you blindly look up to I don’t pretend to be a scholar.

        Liked by 2 people

      2. Since you are a scholar and historian then why don’t you debate Christian Prince. Let’s see who is the real scholar. Barking dogs seldom bites. So will you call CP right now for one on one debate.


  1. I found this a fair introduction to the Sharia, as it concerns Muslims, but it doesn’t mention the only parts of the Sharia which cause concern to non-Muslims. The video states that one of the goals of Sharia is to protect religion. That is is true but only one religion. Those of us who have read manuals of fiqh such as the Reliance of the Traveller or the Hedaya are often horrified at the attitude displayed toward non-Muslims either living in a Muslim state (as in the rules of Dhimma) or yet to be taken over (by jihad). For instance, this excerpt from the Hedaya (book 9 p140):

    “War must be carried on against the infidels, at all times, by some party of the Mussulmans. The sacred injunction concerning war is sufficiently observed when it is carried on by any one party or tribe of the Mussulmans; and it is then no longer of any force with respect to the rest. It is established as a divine ordinance, by the word of God, who has said, in the Koran ‘SLAY THE INFIDELS’; and also by a saying of the prophet, ‘war is permanently established until the day of judgment’.”

    And for those who haven’t read it here is a selection of the more alarming parts of the Reliance of the Traveller:


    1. stewjo004

      @ ECAW

      To begin a fiqh book (btw fiqh is NOT Shariah) and is not binding on Muslims this is what the Shafi’s ae throwing out in the discussion.

      Next, most of your excerpts are just plain incorrect and we have textual evidence to refute the Shafi’s opinions on matters, for example, you quote:

      “h8.24 “It is not permissible to give zakat to a non-Muslim”.

      Uhh yes, it can it’s one of the 8 categories of zakat:

      Charity is meant only for the poor, the needy, the people who assess and distribute it, THOSE WHOSE HEARTS NEED WINNING OVER… (9:60)

      You are simply quoting things without actually understanding the discussion going on then put your own personal commentary on them. The fact that you didn’t know a basic thing like fiqh and Shariah are different things is enough to show you are not qualified to speak on the subject.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. stewjo004

        @ ECAW

        Ahhh for giggles I’ll throw another one out here with your quote in the post. Read the post s.l.o.w.l.y instead of being fixed on the big scary “slay the infidels”.

        In this passage, they are quoting evidence that fighting is in the Qur’an for example:

        Kill them wherever you find them and drive them out from where they drove you out from. To create turmoil is worse than killing. Do not fight them at Masjid Al Haram unless they attack you there. ˹But˺ if they attack you there you may kill them. That is the reward of those who persist in being disbelievers. And if they stop, then you stop, because God is Extremely Forgiving and Always Merciful. (2:191-192)

        Why are you all divided about the hypocrites, when God Himself has turned them upside down and thrown them back because of what they’ve earned? Are you trying to guide those God has left to stray? If God leaves anyone to stray, you will never be able to find a way for them.
        They wish you would disbelieve like they have so that you can become equals. So do not dare take them as allies until they migrate for God’s Cause. If they turn on you, then capture and kill them wherever you encounter them and take no allies or supporters from their ranks. But as for those who seek sanctuary with people who you’ve made a peace treaty, or those who are remaining neutral because their chest gets tight from the very thought of fighting against you or their own people. Had God wanted He could have given them power over you, and they no doubt would’ve fought you, ˹so˺ if they stay away, do not want to engage you and offer you peace, then God gives you no permission to fight them. You will also find others who are opportunist wishing to be safe from you, and from their own people, but whenever they’re back in a situation where they’re tested, they succumb to it. If they don’t stay away, offer you peace, or restrain themselves from fighting you, capture and kill them wherever you encounter them. I have given you clear authorization against such people. (4:88-91)

        All their saying is the injunction is in there.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. There is no discussion in the section I quoted of the Hedaya which lessens or nullifies the quote about slaying the infidels and war until the day of judgment. If you are quoting the Koran to refute it then you are arguing with al-Marghinani not me.

        Yes, I have noticed how Allah tended to limit his military objectives to the Kaaba and the surrounding territory but these compilers of Islamic Law all seem to have got the impression that Allah meant the whole world. Strange that, isn’t it?

        As for the bit about hypocrites, there is no point quoting the Koran to me. I am not a Muslim and regard the Koran as no authority for anything.


      3. I know full well that there is a theoretical distinction between Sharia and Fiqh but in practice the Fiqh manuals are the closest that non-Arabic speaking non-Muslims will get to Sharia. Here is a discussion about the difference between Sharia and Islamic Law (which I daresay you will accept is the subject of Fiqh) by Rumee Ahmed:


        You will see that he cannot pin Sharia down. He points out that it means different, even opposing, things to Muslims and even suggests that it exists only in the future.

        You don’t like my quoting the Reliance? This is what it says about “those whose hearts need winning over”:

        h8.14 The fourth category is those whose hearts are to be reconciled. If they are non-Muslims, they are not given zakat, but if Muslims, then they may be given it (O: so that their certainty may increase, or if they are recent converts to Islam and are alienated from their kin).

        There is no discussion going on about it, only rules, as you will know if you have actually read section h8.


  2. stewjo004

    @ ECAW
    See now QB and I are about to engage in a “fiqh” discussion

    @ QB
    Yes, this is what they’re discussing. The stronger evidence imo is they can be given it from Ibn Kathir(rh):

    “For instance, the Prophet of Allah gave something to Safwan bin Umayyah from the war spoils of Hunayn, even though he attended it while a Mushrik. Safwan said, “He kept giving me until he became the dearest person to me after he had been the most hated person to me.” Imam Ahmad recorded that Safwan bin Umayyah said, “The Messenger of Allah gave me (from the spoils of) Hunayn while he was the most hateful person to me. He kept giving me until he became the most beloved person to me.” Muslim and At-Tirmidhi collected this Hadith, as well… Some people are given because some of his peers might embrace Islam, while others are given to collect alms from surrounding areas, or to defend Muslim outposts. Allah knows best.


    Liked by 1 person

      1. stewjo004

        @ QB

        Alrighty, as I have never heard non-Muslims not being eligible for zakat (not saying you’re wrong just talking about my ignorance) what does the opposing side believe “those whose hearts need winning over” are and what is their proof to limit it only for Muslims when the meaning of the ayat is general?

        Liked by 1 person

      2. The verse is general, but like I said, it’s only referring to sadaqah, not zakat. Those are two different forms of charity. So giving sadaqah to a non-Muslim is fine.

        However, IslamQA states that zakat can be given to a nom-Muslim who heart may be softened and who is perhaps considering converting to Islam. So it’s a very narrow window.


        This also seems to be the view of some other scholars as well:


        Liked by 1 person

  3. stewjo004

    @ ECAW

    Not really difficult that difficult Rumee Ahmed (whoever that is) like you simply doesn’t know what he’s talking about, ready?

    1.Shariah- Things clearly stated in texts. For example, charity must give every year:

    Charity is for the poor, who working in God’s Cause have become restricted and are unable to travel through the land. A person ignorant about their situation would think they’re free of need because of their modesty. You will know them by their mark, they do not go around and beg from people. So whatever you spend in good, have no doubts, God is well aware. (2:73)

    Muslims must do this as it is clearly stated textually

    2.Fiqh- Situations not clearly stated in texts so a series of principles are used to attempt to derive an answer.

    A. Quran
    B. Hadith
    C. Consensus of Muhammad’s(saw) disciples
    D. Analogy
    E. Arabic Linguistics

    Not that much rocket science to it. Also, English speakers have an abundance of accredited schools and teachers used here you go:

    Also because you don’t understand the discussion you sound ignorant. The Shafis were attempting to argue those whose hearts need winning over is recent converts however we have a HADITH that counters that argument. Again this is was their SOLE opinion that has evidence to the contrary.

    Moving on I know the Quran has no authority to you genius but if you’re going to discuss ISLAMIC LAW it’s kinda important to quote it right? Do you see now how these simple things show you’re not qualified to discuss the subject and are only spreading false info that you probably copy and pasted from somewhere else? It would be equivalent to me saying:


    When we’re discussing property laws in the US state of Maryland. It doesn’t matter if it’s authoritative or not when the discussion is on the law.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Okay, so we have established that you know better than al-Shafi’i, al-Marghinani and Rumee Ahmed, a professor of Islamic law:
      Presumably you also know better than Andrew March who says in the video above “While the Sharia is not just law, it is law”.

      I hadn’t realised I was in the presence of such a towering authority. Perhaps I should ditch all those people and just take your word for everything. But I must say I do not find your claim about “clearly stated texts” rings true. I do happen to know quite a lot about the Koran and find almost all of it ambiguous, confused, self-contradictory and scientifically absurd (for instance Allah has shown in the section about inheritance that by the early 7th century he hadn’t yet mastered basic fractions. Let’s hope he has improved his arithmetic since then).

      Nor do I accept that it is necessary to quote the Koran when discussing Islamic law. The scholars who created the manuals of Islamic law did that already in their works so, unless the aim is to reinvent the wheel, I think their books can be taken as stand alone documents. Accordingly, when I read about, for instance, the “obligatory character of jihad” (Reliance section o9.1) it does nothing to persuade me of the benign character of Sharia. Nor does your hostile, defensive response to intellectual challenges.

      And no, I do not cut and paste. Everything I write comes from my own investigations of Islam.


      1. You still don’t get it. Sharia is far more complex than you idiots make it out to be. That was the point of the video too. There are varying opinions on different issues. It’s not all a monolith.

        And as for your so-called “investigations”, we could care less. Unless you have studied under actual specialists of Sharia law, your investigations are meaningless and have no application to Muslims.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Quranetc – I do get it. There are different opinions on different issues and it’s not all a monolith. I never thought otherwise.

        I do not think what I have found in the texts has any applications to Muslims. You are caught in a mental black hole from which you will never escape. But it does have some application to non-Muslims. They need to be warned about the reality of Islam. I have invited you to disprove my views but you respond only with hostility and insults. You have strengthened my beliefs about Islam and the deleterious effects it necessarily has on its adherents.

        So long.


  4. stewjo004

    @ QB

    Obviously, Shamoun isn’t getting zakat lol. I’m talking about if we have a convert for example and their parents were on the fence from what their kid told them so we gave zakat to pay their rent that month or something like that.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Zozo the monkey, unless you have something to contribute to the discussion, it’s best to keep out. Your idiotic links don’t mean anything.

    Christians do evil things too, moron. And they use the Bible to justify it.


    And let’s not forget that the Lord’s Resistance Army in Uganda has killed and enslaved more people than Al Qaeda and ISIS combined.

    So get a life, ok monkey? 😉


  6. stewjo004

    @ ECAW

    Actually, I am currently studying my minor in fiqh so thank you for the compliment but I assure you I am not a scholar yet.

    Rushee Ahmed (again these western nobodies they get off the street hold no weight in Islamic scholarship) like you doesn’t know what he’s talking about. My definition can be found by people who ACTUALLY are learned in fiqh again another English resource for you to use:

    The Evolution of Fiqh: Islamic and the Madh-habs by DR. Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips

    This person is MY teacher. Next, you either researched nothing or have lack the skill for it because you didn’t know the difference between “fiqh” and “Shariah” and quoted some “mystical definition” of what it is. Also if you half knew what you were talking about, you would understand these books are them attempting to present their initial positions THEY ARE NOT BINDING. For example when QB and I discussed charity

    QB’s fiqh opinion: Non-Muslims cannot receive it
    My fiqh opinion: They can

    Neither one of these positions is law we are stating our initial positions upon the question asked. Notice as EVIDENCE (i.e. the thing you said you didn’t need to read but are somehow “intellectual” lol) was presented QB shifted his position. Also to further prove how outclassed you are in this discussion, fiqh is ALWAYS changing because that’s its purpose. New situations arise the principles are used to determine an answer.

    As with your desperate deflection so you can save face:
    “I was just trying to have an intellectual discussion but now blah, blah, blah, blah”

    No, you weren’t lol. Let’s read some of your “highlights” from your link posted:

    Cult Status
    We have a word for religions which seek to control every last detail of the believers’ lives with threats of violence for non-compliance, that word being “cult”. Islam is indeed surely a cult, just the biggest in history. HERE Ali Sina details the characteristics which show beyond doubt what Islam really is. Once seen, it is impossible to view Islam in the same light again. Pity the poor cult members unable to escape Mohammed’s malignant mind control, and their victims over 1400 years.

    [this is pretty rich considering Mohammed began his career in Medina as a caravan raider]

    [thus allowing the Imams who refused to pray over the London Bridge jihadis’ bodies to fool the kuffar, details HERE].

    [perhaps explaining the dearth of great Muslim scientists, despite the myth of the Golden Age]

    Man gtfo here with the lying. You had NO INTENT when starting the conversation you were attempting to “be funny”. As a final note, I could care less what you think of Muslims you don’t even know how to properly wipe your own butt. Now go ahead and run away because you weren’t expecting this heat from people who know what they’re talking about.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Atlas

      Lol that was glorious!
      I knew this guy was just another snake.
      Look how he responds: ‘So you know better than X,Y, Z?’.
      Lool if that’s his go to answer then what’s the point of having a discussion since you can use that answer everytime you get refuted. That only allows for answers that agree with him. What a pathetic loser.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. stewjo004

        @ Atlas

        Oh I was ignoring the authority fallacies. Here’s the thing you can’t debate someone and teach at the same time. Since this guy knows nothing about Shariah or fiqh its hard to explain what he’s quoting is. Again Shariah is laws and principles which is what this post is about. He is simply quoting the Shafis fiqh opinions fron the Middle Ages (I have to check and see if they currently hold these). It’s just annoying because he wants to act like an “intellectual” who’s “exposing the truth about Islam” but doesn’t even have a rudimentary understanding of the field hence retarded statements like “I don’t need to read the Quran or hadith they aren’t binding on me” or “Islamic scholars already went through for me”.

        Liked by 2 people

  7. stewjo004

    @ QB

    Why does your blog seem to make these freaks come out the woodworks lol? Seriously I have never talked to people like this in real life, thank God most people are respectful and curious.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s