Hostname: page-component-788cddb947-m6qld Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-10-15T10:54:11.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Relevance of Muhammadan Law in the Twentieth Century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2009

A. A. A. Fyzee
Get access

Extract

Lieutenant-General Sir John Bagot Glubb ends his work on The Great Arab Conquests with the following words:

“The relations between Christianity and Islam today justify a brief comment. As Muhammad himself declared, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are three related religions. If we consider them alone, their differences may appear profound, but when compared to Hinduism, Buddhism or Communist atheism, they appear by contrast closely connected with one another. Yet many people regard Christianity and Islam as the great rival religions. This illusion takes its origin, I believe, from political rather than religious causes.

“As our narrative has shown, the first Arab conquerors regarded Byzantium as their principal enemy. In the subsequent Arab conquests of North Africa and Spain, in the Crusades, in the invasion of the Balkans by the Turks, and in their long hostilities with Czarist Russia, nearly all Muslim wars have been directed against Christians. Conflicts between Hindus and Muslims in India have been on an altogether smaller scale and Muslims have scarcely ever been involved in hostilities against Jews except in the last forty years in Palestine.

“This long-standing rivalry between Christians and Muslims has been due to political and geographical accident rather than to basic religious differences. Now that materialist atheism is challenging all spiritual values, the two religions might well make common cause against those who deny the existence of God altogether. There is, I believe, an immense field in which the two could co-operate.

“The Arabic-speaking world, after four centuries of obscurity, is once again playing its part in history.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Cambridge Law Journal , Volume 21 , Issue 2 , November 1963 , pp. 261 - 269
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Law Journal and Contributors 1963

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1963, p. 371.

2 Hurgronje, C. Snouck, Selected Works (Brill, 1957), pp. 100–101.Google Scholar The bracketed words are added by me.

3 Law in the Middle East. Edited by Majid, Khadduri and Liebesny, H. J., Vol. I, Origin and Development of Islamic Law (Washington, D.C., 1955), p. 28.Google Scholar

4 Of Burhān al-din al-Marghīnānī. Translated from a Persian rendering by Ch. Hamilton (London 1870), Book XX, p. 334. Hanafi Sunnite School.

5 Of Nawawī. Tr. into English by L. C. W. van den Berg and E. C. Howard (London, 1914), Book 65, p. 500. Shāfi'ī Sunnite School.

6 Of Abū Hanīfa al-Nu'mān b. Muhammad. Edited by Fyzee. Vol. II (Cairo, 1961), Book 26, p. 525. Fatimid Shiite School.

7 See Fyzee, Outlines of Muhammadan Law (2nd. ed.), p. 16.

8 Minhaj Et Talibin (Minhaj al-Talibin). Translated by van den Berg and Howard, op. cit. Introduction xi.

9 Mahmassani, S., Philosophy of Jurisprudence in Islam (Leiden 1961).Google Scholar Preface by Professor Nabih Amin Faris.

10 Fyzee, Outlines, p. 28 (revised figures in the 3rd edition, in course of publication).

11 Ritter, H., “Autographs in Turkish Libraries,” Oriens VI (1953), pp. 63Google Scholar and 65.

12 An elementary treatment of this topic will be found in the Introduction to my Outlines of Muhammadan Law (2nd ed.), Oxford University Press, 1955Google Scholar; reprinted, 1960; 3rd ed. in the course of publication.