text:
Explicating the Universal in Formative
Islamic Political Norms
Louay M. Safi
The secular state emerged in modern times in response to religious infighting that plagued Europe for over a century, and put social life on a self-destructing path. The Hundred Year War posed a serious threat to the then emerging modern Europe, underscoring the need to keep the state and church at a comfortable distance.
While the secular state was designed to prevent organized religion from controlling public institutions, it did not necessarily aim at undermining religiosity per se, or alienating religious communities. Rather, it was perceived as multi-religious societys best defense against the imposition of the religious values and worldview of one community on another.
For many Muslims, however, the secular state is viewed as an instrument used to undermine religious heritage and deny the relevance of moral teachings to public life. While this perception has an element of truth, it does not necessarily depict the general nature of western secularism. Evidently, Muslim perceptions of secularism are not formed through an understanding of the original purpose and historical circumstances of western secularism, but is influenced by the Muslim experience of secular dogmatism and the intolerance of the secular state in contemporary Muslim societies, most notably that of Turkey and many Arab and Central Asian states.
Reacting to secular dogmatism, populist Islamic groups have advanced a conception of the state that, while different in substance, is similar in purpose and form to the very secular state they oppose. Like Muslim secularists, Islamic populists see the state as an instrument in the hands of ruling powers for imposing a particular conception of the world on the rest of society. They insist, therefore, that the Islamic state should be charged with the duty of imposing Islamic law on the larger society.
This paper argues that the position of contemporary Muslim populist movements stands in direct contradiction not only to Islamic values and beliefs, but is also contrary to political practices developed in historical Muslim societies. It further explores the extent to which religious beliefs and values were related to the political structure and public policy of the historical Muslim society. The paper contends that the political order that emerged under Islam was never perceived as an exclusively Muslim, but was constructed on the basis of universal principles that transcend sectarian divisions.
The paper, therefore, concludes by underscoring the need to have a fresh Islamically-based conceptualization of political action and organization in ways that would help reclaim the moral core of social life, eroded with the advance of western secularism, without sacrificing the important principles of freedom and equality.
Secularism refers to complex and multifaceted attitudes and practices that cannot be easily captured in a brief description or rendered into a simple definition. While one may find certain similarities between modern secularist attitudes and practices and those that existed in pre-modern societies, it is fair to say that secularism as we know it today is an essentially modern phenomenon that grew in the modern West, and later took roots in different societies.
In its essential sense, secularism denotes a set of notions and values whose aim is to ensure that the state is neither engaged in promoting specific religious beliefs and values, nor uses its powers and offices to persecute religion. To prevent state officials from using their political authority to impose a narrow set of religious attitudes and values on the larger society, and to foreclose the possibility of using religious symbols to agitate one religious community against another, western intellectuals embarked on a project that aimed at separating political authority from religious affiliation. To do that, the Enlightenment scholars embraced a set of concepts and principles, and used them as the basis for reconstructing modern European consciousness. The new political ideology advanced by Enlightenment activists and thinkers emphasized concepts such as equality, freedom of conscience and conviction, and the supremacy of law, all of which were advocated by the Religious Reformation that put an end to the ancient regime of Europe.
The underlying socio-political morality advocated by the pioneers of the secular state in Europe was derived from the religious tradition delineated by the religious reformists of fifteenth century Europe, but argued in rational terms and common-good logic. Early advocates of the separation of state and church, such as Descartes, Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau, had no intention to undermine religion, or faith in the divine, but rather predicated their reformist ideas on the notion of God and civil religion. Descartes, for instance, argued "that the certainty and truth of all knowledge depends uniquely on my awareness of the true God, to such an extent that I was incapable of perfect knowledge about anything else until I became aware of him."[1] Similarly, Rousseau, while critical of the way religion was traditionally taught and practiced, recognized the need, even the necessity, of religious commitment and faith for the modern state to function properly. He, therefore, identified a number of "dogmas", and argued for their inclusion in the "civil religion" he advocated: "The existence of an omnipotent, intelligent, benevolent divinity that foresees and provides; the life to come; the happiness of the just; the punishment of sinners; the sanctity of the social contract and the law these are the positive dogmas. As for the negative dogmas I would limit them to a single one: no intolerance."[2]
Even Kant, who limited the notion of truth to empirical experience and labored to set morality on rational foundation insisted that "without a God and without a world invisible to us now but hoped for, the glorious ideals of morality are indeed objects of approval and admiration, but not springs of purpose and action."[3] However, by denying the possibility of transcendental truth, and as a result of the relentless attack on the authority of revelation as a source of ethical and ontological knowledge, secularist scholars have been able to successfully marginalize religion and undermine morality. The efforts to ground morality in utility and cost-benefit calculation, rather than truth, proved to be counter intuitive and futile, and gave rise to egoism and moral relativism.
There were, of course, intellectuals who have less sympathy to religion particularly among French intellectuals, but these did not represent the larger sentiments of the great majority in Europe. The French revolution displayed a clear anti-religious sentiment, but these were not, as Nietzsche was to discover later, directed against religion per se, but against organized religion represented primarily by the Catholic church. Modern philosophy, being an epistemological skepticism, is, Nietzsche argued, covertly and overtly, anti-Christianalthough, to say this for the benefit of more refined ears, by no means anti-religious.[4]
The essential secularist sentiment is, therefore, rooted in the religious reformation; more specifically, it is rooted in the Protestant revolt against religious hierarchy and centralized religion. Secularism was not originally intended as a way to separate religion from society or religious consciousness from political action, but only to isolate the state from the church structure and to separate religious and political authorities.
The tone started to change, however, a century later among progressive European intellectuals who saw in religion a negative force whose elimination, they believed, was essential for further emancipation and progress. Karl Marx, while agreeing that the secular state has successfully neutralized religion and purged it from the public sphere, still saw a great danger in religious life. This is because, he argued, secularism reduced religion into a private matter only insofar as the state is concerned. However, the privatization of religion gave it in effect more influence in the organization of civil society. Even in the United States where religion has been domesticated and individualized to the greatest extent, it continues to divide society into distinct religious communities, thereby allowing for the formation of internal solidarity with a clear bearing on economic life. Religion, Marx further thought, is an instrument is the hands of privileged classes to justify social misery and economic inequality In The Jewish Question, Marx has the following to say about the need to emancipate humanity from religion:
The decomposition of man into Jew and citizen, Protestant and citizen, religious man and citizen, is neither a deception directed against citizenhood, nor is it a circumvention of political emancipation, it is political emancipation itself, the political method of emancipating oneself from religion. Of course, in periods when the political state as such is born violently out of civil society, when political liberation is the form in which men strive to achieve their liberation, the state can and must go as far as the abolition of religion, the destruction of religion. But, it can do so only in the same way that it proceeds to the abolition of private property, to the maximum, to confiscation, to progressive taxation, just as it goes as far as the abolition of life, the guillotine.
Nietzsche, like Marx, condemned religion as a negative social force responsible for preserving the meek and the weak, and hence weakening the human race. By praising poverty and glorifying the taming of the natural instinct, Nietzsche insisted, religion contributed to delaying the refinement of the human species. By giving comfort to the sufferers, courage to the oppressed and despairing, a staff and support to the dependent Christianity, he contended, preserved too much of what ought to perish.[5] Unlike Marx, who saw religion as an obstacle in the way to achieving universal equality, Nietzsches rejection of Religion in general, and reformed Christianity in particular, was anti-democratic, directed against the egalitarian spirit it promoted, and hence against its failure to promote the order of rank, a hierarchical social order which he believed to be both intrinsic to humanity and desirable to social life.[6]
Many Muslim intellectuals insist today that Islam is an integral part of the state. The state in a society committed to Islam, they stress, is by definition an Islamic state since political authorities are bound to Islamic law, which has a direct bearing on constitutional law. This has created confusion about the nature of the Islamic state, and has given rise to apprehension on the part of modernist scholars who feared that remarrying Islam and the state is bound to give birth to theocracy.
The confusion is, of course, not limited to outside observers and commentators who tend to extrapolate in their analysis from the historical experience of western society, but also affect those who advocate the formation of political state on the basis of Islamic values. The difficulty arises from the efforts to combine the principle of popular government with that of a state bound by the rules of Islamic law. This confusion is, in my opinion, the result of equating the political structure of the Ummah with the political structure of the state, and consequently, mixing up the Shariah functions with that of the state. This confusion is not restricted to obscure works. Rather it is found in the works of influential contemporary Islamic thinkers. Under the title The Objectives of the Islamic State Abul Ala Mawdudi, for one, points out two kinds of objectives to be assigned to the Islamic state: negative objectives like deterring the aggression and preserving the freedom of people and defending the state,13 and positive objectives such as banning all forbidden things which have been condemned by the Quran.14 Mawdudi concludes by affirming the totality of the states objectives on the basis of the comprehensiveness of the Shariah objectives. He writes:
Obviously, it is impossible for such a state to limit its framework, because it is a totalitarian state encompassing the whole human life, and painting every aspect of human life with its moral color and particular reformist programs. So nobody has the right to stand up against the state and exempt himself from the liability by saying that this is a personal matter, so that the state does not intrude. In brief, the state encompasses the human life and every area of civilization according to its particular moral theory and particular reformist program. So, to some extent, it is similar to the communist and fascist state. But despite this totality the Islamic state is free from the color that dominates the totalitarian and authoritarian states of our age. Thus the Islamic state does not curtail the individual freedom nor has it much room for dictatorship or absolute authority.15
The above statement reflects the state of confusion we just pointed out. In a single paragraph the author characterizes the Islamic state as totalitarian, likens it with the communist and fascist states, and stresses that no one has the right to stand up against the state and resist its intrusion into personal life. He then backs up, two sentences later, denying that the Islamic state may curtails individual freedom.
Certainly the claim regarding the totalitarian character of the state is the result of mixing state functions relating to the Shariah's legal dimension with the functions of the Ummah concerning moral and educational dimensions. The differentiation between these two kinds of objectives is, thus, of vital importance to prevent the state from imposing on the larger society a normative order based on a narrow interpretation of the law. The Islamic state, it should be emphasized, is not an institution devoted to advancing the interests of the Muslim community, but a political system based on universal principles, and one committed to maintaining peace, security and welfare for all citizens, irrespective of their doctrines, religions, nationality, race, or gender.
As will be shown bellow, the Islamic system in the past did not lead, nor should it lead in the future, to imposing a narrow and limited concept or a particular opinion on society. This is because the principle of religious and doctrinal plurality has been considered since the very inception of the Ummah, as a cardinal political principle. Here the Quranic verses both the, Makkan and Madinan, clearly stress on the centrality of the principle of religious freedom in the Islamic concept.
Lately the concern over how religious commitments relate to the exercise of power reached into the ranks of Islamists. Mainstream Islamic groups have been moving gradually away from the early concept of centralized Islamic political order envisaged by early leaders, such as Hassan al-Banna and Taqiyuddin al-Nabhani. Leaders of major Islamic movements in Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, Syria, Turkey, and Tunisia, to name a few, have come openly in favor of a democratic, pluralistic political system in which freedom of speech and association is guaranteed for citizens, regardless of their political orientation or religious affiliation.[7]
The notion of the Islamic state advanced today by populist writers is, as I tried to show above, a mixture of the nationalist structure of the modern state with the communal structure of historical Shariah. The concept of the state that emerges as a result is in a complete contradiction with the nature and purpose of the polity found by the Prophet, or developed historically by successive Muslim generations. A quick review of the guiding principles of the first Islamic polity reveals the disparity between the two. The principles and structure of the early Islamic polity are epitomized in the Compact of Madinah (Sahifat al-Madina) that formed the constitutional foundation of the political community established by the Prophet.[8]
The Compact of Madinah established a number of important political principles that, put together, formed the political constitution of the first Islamic state, and defined the political rights and duties of the members of the newly established political community, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, and drew up the political structure of the nascent society. The most important principles included in this Compact are as follows:
First, the Compact declared that the Ummah is a political society, open to all individuals committed to its principles and values, and ready to shoulder its burdens and responsibilities. It is not a recluse one, whose membership rights and securities are restricted to a select few. The right to membership in the Ummah is specified in: (1) accepting the principles of the Islamic system, manifested in the commitment to adhere to the moral and legal order; (2) declaring allegiance to the system, through practical contributions and struggle to actualize the objectives and goals of Islam. Thus, allegiance and concern for public good are the principles determining the membership of the Ummah as defined by the first article of the document: This is a Compact offered by Muhammad the Prophet, (governing the relations) among the believers and the Muslims of Quraish and Yathrib (Madinah), and those who followed, joined, and labored with them.[9]
Second, the Compact delineates a general framework that defines individual norms and the scope of political action within the new society, but preserved the basic social and political structures prevalent then in tribal Arabia. The Compact of Madinah preserved tribal structure, while negating tribal spirit and subordinating tribal allegiance to a morally based legal order. As the Compact declared that the nascent political community is an Ummah to the exclusion of all people, it approved a tribal division that had already been purged of tribal spirit epitomized by the slogan my brethren right of wrong, subjecting it to the higher principles of truth and justice. The Compact therefore declared that the emigrants of the Quraish, Banu al- Harith, Banu al Aus, and other tribes residing in Madinah, according to their present customs, shall pay the blood wit they paid previously and that every group shall redeem its prisoners.[10]
Islams avoidance of the elimination of tribal divisions can be explained by a number of factors that can be summarized in the following three points. (1) The tribal division was not mere political divisions but also social divisions providing its people with a symbiotic system. Therefore, the abolition of the political and social assistance provided by the tribe before developing an alternative should have been a great loss for the people in society. (2) Apart from its being a social division, the tribe represented an economic division in harmony with the pastoral economy prevalent in the Arabian Peninsula before and after Islam. The tribal division is the ideal division of the pastoral production as it provides freedom of movement and migration in search of pasture. Any change in this pattern requires taking an initiative first to change the means and methods of production. (3) Perhaps, the most important factor that justified the tribal division within the framework of the Ummah after the final message had purged the tribal existence of its aggressive and arrogant content, is the maintenance of the society and its protection from the danger of central dictatorship, that might come into existence in absence of a secondary social and political structure and concentration of political power in the hand of a central authority.
Hence Islam adopted a political system, based on the concept of the one Ummah as an alternative for the divisional tribal system and upheld the tribal division having cleared it from its aggressive elements. It left the question of changing the political structure to gradual development of economic and production structures. Although Islamic revelation avoided any arbitrary directives, aimed at immediate abolition of the tribal division, it criticized openly tribal and nomadic life.[11]
Third, the Islamic political system adopted the principle of religious tolerance based on freedom of belief for all the members of the society. It conceded to the Jews the right to act according to the principles and rulings in which they believed: The Jews of Banu Auf are one community with the believers. The Jews have their religion and the Muslims theirs. The Compact emphasized the fundamentality of cooperation between Muslims and non-Muslims in establishing justice and defending of Madinah against foreign aggression. The Jews must bear their expenses and the Muslims their expenses. Each must help the other against anyone who attacks the people of this Compact. They must seek mutual advice and consultation. It prohibited the Muslims form doing injustice to the Jews or retaliating for their Muslim brothers against the followers of the Jewish religion without adhering to the principles of truth and goodness. To the Jew who follow us belongs help and equality. He shall not be wronged nor shall his enemies be aided.[12]
Fourth, the Compact stipulated that the social and political activities in the new system must be subject to a set of universal values and standards that treat all people equally. Sovereignty in the society would not rest with the rulers, or any particular group, but with the law founded on the basis of justice and goodness, maintaining the dignity of all. The Compact emphasized repeatedly and frequently the fundamentality of justice, goodness, and righteousness, and condemned in different expressions injustice and tyranny. They would redeem their prisoners with kindness and justice common among the believers, the Compact stated. The God-conscious believers shall be against the rebellious, and against those who seek to spread injustice, sin, enmity, or corruption among the believers, the hand of every person shall be against him even if he be a son of one of them, it proclaimed.[13]
Fifth, The Compact introduced a number of political rights to be enjoyed by the individuals of the Madinan State, Muslims and non-Muslims alike, such as (1) the obligation to help the oppressed, (2) outlawing guilt by association which was commonly practiced by pre-Islamic Arab tribes: A person is not liable for his allys misdeeds; (3) freedom of belief: The Jews have their religion and the Muslims have theirs; and (4) freedom of movement from and to Madinah: Whoever will go out is safe, and whoever will stay in Madinah is safe except those who wronged (others), or committed sin.[14]
Adhering to the guidance of revelation, the Ummah has respected the principle of religious plurality and cultural diversity during the significant part of its long history. The successive governments since the Rashidun period have preserved the freedom of faith and allowed non-Muslim minorities not only to practice their religious rituals and proclaim their beliefs, but also to implement their religious laws according to an autonomous administrative system.16 Likewise, the Ummah as a whole has respected the doctrinal plurality with both its conceptual and legal dimensions. It has resisted every attempt to drag the political power to take side with partisan groups, or to prefer one ideological group to another. It has also insisted on downsizing the role of the state and restricting its functions to a limited sphere.
Any one who undertakes to study the political history of Islam would soon realize that all political practices, which violated the principle of religious freedom and plurality, were an exception to the rule. For instance, the efforts of the Caliph al-Mamoon to impose doctrinal uniformity in accordance with the Mutazili interpretations, and to use his political authority to support one of the parties involved in doctrinal disputes, were condemned by the ulama and the majority of the Ummah. His efforts to achieve doctrinal homogeneity through suppression and force eventually clashed with the will of the Ummah, which refused to solve doctrinal and theoretical problems by the sword. This compelled Al-Wathiq Billah, the third caliph after al-Mamoon to give up the role assumed by his predecessors and abandon their oppressive measures.
Obviously, Muslims have historically recognized that the main objective of establishing a political system is to create the general conditions that allow the people to realize their duties as moral agents of the divine will (Khulafa), not to impose the teachings of Islam by force. We, therefore, ascribe the emergence of organizations working to compel the Ummah to follow a narrow interpretation, and calling for the use of the political power to make people obedient to the Islamic norms, to the habit of confusing the role and objectives of the Ummah with the role and objectives of the state. While the Ummah aims to build the Islamic identity, to provide an atmosphere conducive to spiritual and mental development of the individual, and to grant him or her the opportunity to realize his or her role and aims of life within the general framework of the law, the state makes efforts to coordinate the Ummahs activities with the aim to employ the natural and human potentials and possibilities to overcome the political and economic problems and obstacles that hinder the Ummahs development.
Differentiating between the general and particular in the Shariah and distinguishing between the responsibilities of the Ummah and the state, is a necessity if we want to avoid the transformation of political power into a device for advancing particular interests, and ensure that state agencies and institutions do not arrest intellectual and social progress, or obstruct the spiritual, conceptual, and organizational developments of society.
Historically, legislative functions in Muslim society were not restricted to state institutions. Rather there was a wide range of legislations related to juristic efforts at both the moral and legal levels. Since the major part of legislation relating to transactional and contractual relations among individuals is attached to the juristic legislative bodies, the judicial tasks may be connected directly with the Ummah, not with the state. The differentiation between civil society and the state can only be maintained by dividing the process of legislation into distinct areas that reflect both the geographical and normative differentiation of the political society
The importance of the differential structure of the law is not limited to its ability to counteract the tendency of centralization of power, which characterizes the western model of the state. Rather, it is also related to guarantees extended to religious minorities. The Islamic model should maintain the legislative and administrative independence of the followers of different religions, as the sphere of communal legislation does not fall under the governmental authority of the state. On the other hand, the majoritarian model of the democratic state deprives religious minorities of their legal independence, and insists on subjugating all citizens to a single legal system, which often reflects the doctrinal and behavioral values of the ruling majority.
The early Muslim community was cognizant of the need to differentiate law to ensure moral autonomy, while working diligently to ensure equal protection of the law as far as fundamental human rights were concerned. Thus early jurists recognized that non-Muslims who have entered into a peace covenant with Muslims are entitled to full religious freedom, and equal protection of the law as far as their rights to personal safety and property are concerned. Muhammad bin al-Hasan al-Shaybani states in unequivocal terms that when non-Muslims enter into a peace covenant with Muslims, Muslims should not appropriate any of their [the non-Muslims] houses and land, nor should they intrude into any of their dwellings. Because they have become party to a covenant of peace, and because on the day of the [peace of] Khaybar, the prophets spokesman announced that none of the property of the covenanter is permitted to them [the Muslim]. Also because they [the non-Muslims] have accepted the peace covenant so as they may enjoy their properties and rights on par with Muslims.[15] Similarly, early Muslim jurists recognized the right of non-Muslims to self-determination, and awarded them full moral and legal autonomy in the villages and towns under their control. Therefore, al-Shaybani, the author of the most authoritative work on non-Muslim rights, insists that the Christians who have entered into a peace covenant (dhimma) hence became dhimmis have all the freedom to trade in wine and pork in there towns freely, even though such practice is considered immoral and illegal among Muslims.[16] However, dhimmis were prohibited to do the same in towns and villages controlled by Muslims.
Likewise, early Muslim jurists recognized the right of dhimmis to hold public office, including the office of a judge and minister. However, because judges had to refer to laws sanctioned by the religious traditions of the various religious communities, non-Muslim judges could not administer law in Muslim communities, nor were Muslim judges permitted to enforce shari`ah laws on the dhimmis. There was-spacerun: yes"> Similarly, early Muslim jurists recognized the right of non-Muslims to self-determination, and awarded them full moral and legal autonomy in the villages and towns under their control. Therefore, al-Shaybani, the author of the most authoritative work on non-Muslim rights, style="mso-endnote-id:edn17" href="#_edn17" name="_ednref17" title>[17] Al-Mawardi, hence distinguished between two types of ministerial positions: plenipotentiary minister (wazir tafwid) and executive minister (wazir tanfiz). The two positions differ in that the former acts independently from the caliph, while the latter has to act on the instructions of the caliph, and within the limitations set by him.[18] Therefore, early jurists permitted dhimmis to hold the office of the executive, but not the plenipotentiary minister.[19]
But while early shari`ah law recognized the civil and political rights and liberties of non-Muslim dhimmis, shari`ah rules underwent drastic revision, beginning with the eighth century of Islam. This was a time of great political turmoil throughout the Muslim world. It was during that time that the Mongols invaded Central and West Asia inflicting tremendous losses on various dynasties and kingdoms, and destroying the seat of the caliphate in Baghdad. This coincided with the crusaders control of Palestine and the coast of Syria. In the West, the Muslim power in Spain was being gradually eroded. It was under such conditions of mistrust and suspicion that a set of provisions attributed to an agreement between the Caliph Omar and the Syrian Christians were publicized in a treatise written by Ibn al-Qayyim.[20] The origin of these provisions is dubious, but their intent is clear: to humiliate Christian dhimmis and to set them apart in dress code and appearance. Their impact, however, was limited, as the Ottomans, who replaced the Abbasid as the hegemonic power in the Muslim world, continued the early practice of granting legal and administrative autonomy to non-Muslim subjects.
The modern state emerged to foster individual freedom from arbitrary rule, and to ensure that the members of the political society assume full control over public institutions. To do so, the modern state found it necessary to free public institutions from the control of all exclusive groups, including organized religions. However, despite the clear desire of the pioneers of the secular state to replace religious morality with civic virtue as the moral foundation of the state, secularism gradually developed anti-religious tendencies, leading to the gradual erosion of the moral consensus. The continuous erosion of morality, and the rampant corruption in modern politics threatens to turn the state into an instrument in the hands of corrupt officials and their egoistic cronies.
This has prompted calls for the return of religion and religiously organized groups into the political arena. Nowhere are these calls louder and clearer than in Muslim societies where Islamic values have historically exerted great influence on the body politics. Unfortunately, the reunion envisaged by the advocates of the Islamic state is often presented in crude and simplistic terms, as it fails to appreciate the great care that was taken by early Muslims to ensure that the state incorporates, both in its objectives and structure, the freedom and interest of all intra- and inter-religious divisions.
This calls upon Muslim scholars to engage in new thinking that aims at redefining political principles and authority. In doing so, Muslim scholars should be fully aware of the need to transcend the historical models of political organizations in Muslim society. Political structures and procedures adopted by early Muslim societies are directly linked to their social structures, economic and technological developments, and political experiences. While historical Islamic models provide a mine of knowledge for contemporary Muslims to utilize, any workable formulation of the modern Islamic model of the state that is true to Islamic values and ethos must emerge out of fresh thinking that takes into account the structure of modern society.
Islamic political thought, I believe, can make a profound contribution towards reclaiming the moral core of social life, and preserving religious traditions, without sacrificing the principle of freedom and equality promoted by the modern state.
The hallmark of Islamic political experience is the limitations historical Muslim society was able to place on the actions of rulers, and the presence of vigorous and robust civil society. Many of the functions the secular state assumes today were entrusted to civic institutions, including education, health, and legislation. The state was mainly entrusted with questions of security and defense, and was the last resort in question relating dispensation of justice. This understanding of state power would potentially free religious communities from intervention of the state and state officials, who tend to enforce their religiously based values and notions on the members of society, including those who do not share with them some of those values and beliefs.
The notions of individual freedom and equality are intrinsic to Islamic political thought, and those principles requires that individuals have the basic civil liberties offered by the modern state. However, by freeing civil society from the heavy hand of the state, and by extending individual liberties to the community, and recognizing the moral autonomy of social groups. Social and religious groups under the Islamic conception of law (shariah) would have the capacity to legislate their internal morality and affairs in their communities. While the new sphere of freedom acquired under this arrangement allow for differentiation among citizens, equality would have to be maintain as the criteria of justice in the new area of public law, and in access to public institutionsi.e. in matters that relate to sphere of share interests and inter-communal relations.
[i] Rene Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy, trans. John Cottingham (Cambridge University Press, 1986), p. 49.
[2] Jean-Jacque Rousseau, The Social Contract, trans. Maurice Cranston (London: Penguin Boo0ks, 1968), p. 186.
[3] Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason, trans. Norman Kemp Smith (New York, Macmillan, 1929), p. 640.
[4] Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil (New York, NY: Vintage Books, 1966) p. 66.
[5] Ibid., pp. 74-5.
[6] Ibid. p. 45.
[7] Rashid al-Ghanoushi, Al-Huriyyat al-Ammah fi al-Dawlah al-Islamiyyah [General Liberties in the Islamic State] (Beirut: Markaz Dirasat al-Wihda al-Arabiyyah, 1993), p. 258.
[8] To review the full text of the Compact of Madinah, please refer to Ibn Hisham, Al-Syrah al-Nabawiyah [The Biography of the Prophet], (Damascus, Syria: Dar al-Kunuz al-Adabiyah, n.d.), vol. 1, pp. 501-2.
[9] Ibid., p. 501.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Quran: Chapters Al-Tawbah 97, and Al Hujurat 14.
[12i] Ibn Hisham, Al- Syrah, p. 501.
[13] Ibid.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Abu al-Ala al-Mawdudi, Nazariyat al-Islam wa Hadiyah (Jeddah: Dar al-Saudiah, 1985), p. 47.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Ali bin Muhammad al-Mawardi, al-Ahkam al-Sultaniyyah (Cairo: Dar al-Fikr, 1983/1401), p.59.
[18] Ibid. pp. 20-23.
[19] Ibid. p.24.
[20] See Ibn al-Qayim, Sharh al-Shurut al-Umariyyah (Beirut: Dar al-Ilm lilmalayin, 1961/1381).
Copyright � 2001 Louay Safi


text:
Tired of kids playing hockey on the street and loud music pounding from your neighbour's all-night-backyard pool parties? Wishing your retirement was a little more peaceful, and socially compatable? It may be time to move to an Adult or Retirement Lifestyle Community?
You will need to know what you will net from the sale of your present property before you go shopping. With that figure in mind, we can help to review your options while saving you time and money. We have senior moving solutions available to assist you every step of the way. Let us help make your next move a smooth transition to a more desireable environment.
Warning: Don't wait until health issues keep you from your goal!
Please complete and submit the following Online Home Evaluation. Remember, the more information given, the more accurate the evaluation. All information you provide is secure and will be kept strictly confidential. To provide a more detailed Comparative Market Analysis, we would be more than happy to drop by and assess your property when you're ready. Thank you for your kind consideration.
Home | Featured Listings | Home Search | Home Evaluation | Calculators | Buying | Selling | Lifestyle | Home Improvement
About Ontario | For Buyers | For Sellers | Moving Checklist | Neighborhood | House and Home | About Us | Our Blog
For Sale By Owner | 1956-2015 Prices | Listing Notifier | Resource Reports | Marketing Plan
Privacy Policy | Site Map | Links | For Agents | Profile | Logout

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Construction Accidents
New York Construction Accident Attorney Peters Berger Koshel & Goldberg, P.C.
Working in construction in New York City can be exciting and rewarding work. It can also be hazardous. Sometimes, no matter how many precautions are taken by construction companies and contractors, accidents happen. An experienced construction accident law firm like Peters Berger Koshel & Goldberg, P.C. doesn't just handle construction accident cases, they truly understand them. They have a thorough knowledge of why and how these accidents happen and why, had proper safety measures been taken, the accident could have been prevented.
New York Labor Laws Protects Construction Workers
Under the law, employers and building owners have an obligation to protect the safety of workers. The law is enforceable equally against property owners, construction company employers, and general contractors. An experienced Brooklyn construction lawyer can use the law to your best advantage.
Why You Need to Call a Construction Accident Law Expert
While any accident in a workplace can be painful, accidents that take place on construction sites can be devastating or deadly. If a worker is involved in an accident, it is important to make sure that there is someone looking out for that worker's best interests. Every worker is entitled to work in a safe environment, but there are times that companies fail to ensure the working area is truly safe. It takes an experienced Brooklyn construction accident lawyer to make sure that the negligent parties' insurance company pay for the pain, suffering, lost wages and medical expenses necessary to guarantee the injured construction worker's recovery.
Common risks construction workers face daily:
- Power tools injuries
- Cranes, forklifts, excavators, backhoes malfunctions
- Demolitions (the Occupational Safety And Health Administration (OSHA) believes these to be the most dangerous accidents)
- General negligence and "corner-cutting"
Brooklyn Construction Accident Lawyer Near You
While it might not seem apparent at first glance, any worker who suffers an accident that is construction related needs the services of a knowledgeable local Brooklyn construction accident lawyer at Peters Berger Koshel & Goldberg, P.C. When it comes to compensation, finding the responsible party is not always an easy task. In some cases, the construction company might be held responsible, but there are times when the property owner bears responsibility, as well as various contractors and sub-contractors. For this reason many workers who are hurt need the services of the attorneys at Peters Berger Koshel & Goldberg, P.C.
Another reason to seek out a local construction accident lawyer at Peters Berger Koshel & Goldberg, P.C. is to help navigate through the different workers' compensations laws currently in effect. These laws, while designed to help injured workers, are often confusing and complicated. Having an attorney explain a worker's rights and protections can go a long way to helping find relief, both financial and medical, after an accident takes place. Our Brooklyn construction accident attorneys work with your workers' comp lawyer to help you obtain maximum recovery from third parties who may be proven negligent.
Free Consultation For Construction Accidents
If a construction worker is involved in an accident, the important thing is to seek out professional help as soon as possible. Before signing any paperwork, contact a Brooklyn construction accident lawyer at Peters Berger Koshel & Goldberg, P.C. Let someone with experience in the field of construction site accidents act as a guide towards explaining, and preserving, your rights to compensation. You can reach us at 718-596-7800 to schedule a Free Consultation.


text:
ADA Signage
Let us be your experts on the requirements of signing your locations for the Americans with Disabilities Act. ADA provides those with special needs, access to public places. We've studied the law and have determined that, in certain instances, signs alone can bring you closer to compliance. Other times the law may require modifications to your physical plant.
S&G Creative
1681 McGaw Ave. • Irvine, CA 92614
Phone 949-252-9100 • Fax 949-252-9107
E-mail firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
Thermal Balance Brakes was a feature company in the July 2011 edition of BusRide Maintenance Magazine. BUSRide Maintenance connects with the BUSRide readers who want to know how their peers diagnose the problem and get it fixed. Focused exclusively on the best vehicle maintenance processes and management practices, we invite all qualified and experienced maintenance professionals in the bus transportation industries — maintenance directors, technicians and mechanics, as well as OEMs, equipment and parts vendors and training institutions — to contribute editorial content. Check out the article by clicking the link below.
New BusRide maintenance article on Thermal Balance Brakes
July 13th, 2011 Tony


text:
I have been quiet for three years now. The reason was I lost the belief that Krishna exist. I haven't written about it while it happened because it was so intensely personal and I guess unreal. I have been a devotee since I was 17 – who was I when I no longer believed? I also knew that even though I was lost for now, if I ever found my way back it would be within Gaudiya Math. I love the richness of the siddhanta, the deepness of it, the never-ending discoveries that could be made (which controversy apparently is my preference of finding treasures) and how it triggers the qualities I really like in myself like doing research, writing and using it as a way of personal growth.
Much can be said about losing ones faith, and I don't think those who believe understand how difficult it is to stop believing. After this experience, words like blooping and the general judgmental understanding by devotees is shallow at best. It was like somebody pulled the ground beneath my feet and I fell… and kept falling for these years. Because I have never become comfortable in not believing. Krishna consciousness wasn't just a lifestyle, it was also a huge part of my identity. Without that identity, a huge part of what generated meaning and purpose in life fell away. Can you imagine how it is to get your identity ripped away from you? The place you generate meaning and purpose in life? What comes after, that can possibly replace that?
Though I was lost, I have missed my faith all the way through and I guess this is why I'm writing now. May be my personal growth has now entered a phase where I'm beginning to become ready… but for what and how?
How am I supposed to find my way back again? Because I miss. And I miss you devotees. Losing you by turning my back has been a real loss, though I'm the one who did it.
I also know I can't go back to the person I was before. I'm not a vegetarian anymore, and I will not go back to it. I have developed an interest in astrology, and my north node is in libra, 1st House for those who are interested in it. This is a really difficult aspect, because I have to develop the self, who I am while Libra and the 1st house is counter. North node is also conjunct the Ascendant and Pluto is close by (5 degree conjunction, 1st House).
I have an intense need to figure myself out and how I want to live my life, being true to my values. As of now this is counter to bhakti which require unconditional service to Krishna. And my need is to really develop myself – and slowly and carefully approach the faith again. And what better way than to read siddhanta and writing about it, since this is who I am. But I can't do anymore deprivation stuff. I don't have it in me to give anything I don't want to give. I don't have it in me to deprive myself of anything. I need to love the bejesus of myself.
There is a very real resistance in my towards doing any service to Krishna. I have to heed that resistance for now. During the last year I have been part of the scouts, and I learned acts of service there and learned to extend myself in ways I haven't done as a devotee. It has been eye-opening and one way of learning how unconditional service works. It's just another path that has the same destination.
I need to do what I want to do – and if it happens to coincide with service to Krishna, then good. I literally can't do anything that goes counter to who I am. There is something within me that needs that space to grow right now.
So I would like to know how other devotees lost their faith and came back. How did it work for you? What steps did it entail – what growth needed to happen and how did you approach the faith again? Please share your wisdom with me.


text:
Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor
Chemotherapy (chemo) uses anti-cancer drugs injected into a vein or taken by mouth to kill cancer cells. These drugs enter the bloodstream and reach almost all areas of the body, making this treatment useful for some types of cancers that have spread.
Chemo is most often used to treat pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) if they:
- Have not responded to other medicines (such as somatostatin drugs or targeted therapy),
- Have spread to other organs,
- Are large or growing quickly,
- Are causing severe symptoms, or
- Are high grade (grade 3)
The most commonly used drugs for pancreatic NETs include:
- Doxorubicin (Adriamycin)
- Streptozocin
- Fluorouracil (5-FU)
- Dacarbazine (DTIC)
- Temozolomide (Temodar)
- Capecitabine (Xeloda)
- Oxaliplatin (Eloxatin)
Some tumors might be treated with more than one drug. Possible combinations include:
- Doxorubicin plus streptozocin
- 5-FU plus doxorubicin plus streptozocin
- Temozolomide plus capecitabine
- 5-FU plus streptozocin
How is chemotherapy given?
Chemo drugs are typically given into a vein (IV), either as an injection over a few minutes or as an infusion over a longer period of time. This can be done in a doctor's office, chemotherapy clinic, or in a hospital setting.
Doctors give chemo in cycles, with each period of treatment followed by a rest period to give you time to recover from the effects of the drugs. Cycles are most often 2 or 3 weeks long. The schedule varies depending on the drugs used. For example, with some drugs, the chemo is given only on the first day of the cycle. With others, it is given for a few days in a row, or once a week. Then, at the end of the cycle, the chemo schedule repeats to start the next cycle.
The length of treatment for advanced pancreatic NETs is based on how well it is working and what side effects you have.
Possible side effects of chemotherapy
Chemo drugs attack cells that are dividing quickly, which is why they work against cancer cells. But other cells in the body, such as those in the bone marrow (where new blood cells are made), the lining of the mouth and intestines, and the hair follicles, also divide quickly. These cells are also likely to be affected by chemo, which can lead to side effects.
The side effects of chemo depend on the type and dose of drugs given and the length of time they are taken. Common side effects can include:
- Nausea and vomiting
- Loss of appetite
- Hair loss
- Mouth sores
- Diarrhea or constipation
- Increased chance of infections (from having too few white blood cells)
- Easy bruising or bleeding (from having too few blood platelets)
- Fatigue (from having too few red blood cells)
Most side effects go away after treatment is finished. Tell your cancer care team about any side effects or changes you notice while getting chemotherapy, so that they can be treated promptly. Often medicines can help prevent or minimize many of the side effects. For example, your doctor can prescribe drugs to help prevent or reduce nausea and vomiting. In some cases, the doses of the chemo drugs might need to be lowered or treatment might need to be delayed or stopped to keep the effects from getting worse.
More information about chemotherapy
For more general information about how chemotherapy is used to treat cancer, see Chemotherapy.
To learn about some of the side effects listed here and how to manage them, see Managing Cancer-related Side Effects.
Last Revised: October 30, 2018
American Cancer Society medical information is copyrighted material. For reprint requests, please see our Content Usage Policy.


text:
Old science magazines can be an unexpected source of pathos. I own a copy of National Geographic from February 1958 that features, among other topics, a long piece titled "Exploring Our Neighbor World, the Moon." It was that February when the U.S. Senate convened a committee with the aim of establishing a new government agency to explore outer space. Several months later, NASA would be born. The first moon probes would not follow until shortly thereafter. So, this article, which describes in detail a stroll on the lunar surface, is largely a work of speculative fiction.
This is my favorite kind of writing about the moon, untainted by too much direct knowledge. I like, especially, H.G. Wells' heroic effort in 1901—The First Men in the Moon is breathtaking because it was so far off the mark. When Dr. Cavor's homemade space sphere lands in the basin of a vast crater, the surface appears dead on arrival: "a huge undulating plain, cold and gray, a gray that deepened eastward into the absolute raven darkness of the cliff shadow."


text:
I am running experiments on several cell lines where I need to measure the metabolic activity of these cells.
I am plating cells in DMEM with varying concentrations of FBS (20% - 0%) and have run into the problem of FBS interference. Using Alamar Blue, the cells which are serum starved have the highest flourescence and the cells lose flourescence as the FBS concentration increases. After some more reading, I have found that FBS is known to quench this reaction.
Is there a metabolic assay which I can use which will not be directly affected by the FBS concentration?
I would hate to have to create a standard curve for every FBS concentration I am using...


text:
Mtragyna Speciosa trees are very old and the kratom that comes from it is nothing new in Southeast Asia. For centuries, the people of the areas have been chewing, drying and grinding the plant leaves for their own use. However to the rest of the world, kratom pills are a very new experience. There are also many different recipes for people to opt for. The supplement is now found in pill form, making it easier for people to add to their daily routine. Measuring dosages is also much easier. However, there may be downsides to opting for pills or tablets instead of Kratom powders or tinctures. This is something that everyone considering them needs to look into.
TABLE OF CONTENTS: Review | Where to Buy | Powder Doses | Tea Recipes | Is Legal? | Top Strains | Maeng Da | Bali | Sumatran | Malay | Thai | Liquid Extracts | Capsules
Review of Kratom Pills
It's worth looking into the reviews of those who ingest the supplement in pill form. Most report very few differences between the effectiveness when compared to the powder form. This is good news, but here are more facts:
The potency is no different between pill and powder. You will still get the same type of powder within the capsule as you would if you bought the powdered form.
The dosage is much easier to get right. There is no need for scales to measure anything out as it is already done for you. You will usually take between 500 and 666 mg in a capsule, depending on the supplier. You will need to check the box to find out the exact amount to make sure you take enough. If you find "extract" powder pills these are much stronger and you will not need to take as much.
The timing of the effects to take place can take a little longer when taking the pill form. Some users find that it takes up to 30 minutes longer to feel the effects compared to taking the powder. But this also depends on type of kratom.
Kratom Tablets vs. Powders
The taste of the pill is usually the reason people opt for them. The flavor of the plant can be tasted with the powder and is often described as being bitter. When people opt for the powder form, they will usually take it with drinks or in food to avoid the bitterness. Capsules can be quickly swallowed with water, eliminating the problem of taste. It is a short cut but great for those who want an easy and tasty natural supplement.
The Best Pills for Sale
Pills are also much more convenient than other forms. It's just like taking your normal vitamins and other medication. It is very easy to carry around kratom pills for whenever you need them.
There is no need to worry about preparing the dosage or the mess afterwards. You don't need to mesure it and you can take the pills anywhere you want.
It doesn't matter which type of strain you get. The popular ones are all in pill form now. You just need to make sure you read descriptions and reviews to make sure you get the best version for your specific needs.
Red Bali, Red Thai or other red leaf kratoms are best for those who want to relax. Maeng Da Capsules are the latest favorites and come from Mekong River in Vietnam. These pills are potent, so you don't need to take as many to get the same effects.
Buying Kratom Pills
It doesn't really matter which one you choose as long as you've done your homework. That will help you find one that works just for you, and you will know the right dosage. Give it some time to feel the effects at first and avoid taking pills without food. If you take the pills with a large meal, be prepared to give the benefits some more time to take effect. Pills really do make it easier to enjoy the kratom effects wherever you are and whatever time you need to take them.


text:
So why should the guys have all the fun? Although I must say after watching my son play football for 4 years now (kiddie level - but look out high school next year!) I finally understand it a bit better. But only a little. I think my favorite part is the munchies - and I'm all stocked up! I heard that on average, folks eat 1200 more calories on Super Bowl Sunday...
But here's a little fun for you too. I've put a poll in my sidebar and I hope you'll play along! And, if you place a $30 order or more, today only (Sunday, 5 Feb) - then you may choose between either a package of Twinkle Hearts or Stars as my thank you!
You can email me your order, or shop online on my secure website!
Enjoy the game...and the food. :)


text:
Short Game Review: Nier
Nier is kind of a weird game, but not weird in sufficiently interesting ways to come with a strong recommendation from me. It's a Japanese action RPG (i.e., no turn-based, menu-navigating combat) which occasionally borrows gameplay from shoot-em-ups, Diablo-style games, and text adventures. It makes not-so-subtle references specifically to certain Final Fantasy games, Zelda, any game that has you go around killing giant monsters based on the unspoken assumption that big monsters probably have keys in their bellies, and surely others I missed. Unfortunately, I wouldn't say that Nier is ever more than the sum of its parts, and many of the aforementioned parts are kind of poorly done.
To the game's credit, a few of the characters are fun, and the combat is occasionally interesting in the latter half of game—but I think I was over 10 hours in before I had a full party of NPCs and fights started being somewhat more interesting. The story had a great deal of potential, but rather than simply tell a story that makes sense from beginning to end, the game leaves a lot unexplained after one playthrough; I'm reading now online about how you need to play through two or three different ways for different endings and to actually get the subtext of what was going on (i.e., some characters' dialog is undecipherable until your second playthrough). I wish I could say that I'll endorse any game with a cast of characters as bizarre as this one—including a talking book, a foul-mouthed and seminude woman, and a friendly skeleton/magician—but I'll withhold that endorsement until the sale price drops below twenty bucks.


text: The RHR family and Atlantic Canadian music community is dealing with the loss of friend and musician Jay Smith. The Smith family trust has been set up – with donations collected to be held for his two beautiful children. You may donate through the the 'donate' button on the front page of www.mattmays.com or sonicrecords.ca


text:
Please note: The Buy Button on this page will take you to Amazon.com for final purchase.
You may buy from other sources if available, listed below.
If you are ready to live your life free of guilt and shame, and learn how to walk in spiritual freedom, this book is for you.
From her childhood days to her life as a mother and struggling wife, Ashley D. Wille searched for answers.
Yet true and lasting satisfaction always proved just out of reach. Now, in midlife, I have come to find my soul satiated in God. Through sweet surprises, difficult climbs, and excruciating valleys, the Master's hand has shaped me. All along the way, God has taught me many things. What He has taught me most is that many of my beliefs about Him were wrong.
In heartfelt snapshots of a life, author Ashley D. Wille shares her insights and innermost struggles. Through her profound experiences, she shows how she was able to break through false layers of thinking and move into a deeper relationship with God.
It is packed with truth! I have grown so much in reading it.
– Lisa Jorgensen, newlywed, Christ Presbyterian Church, Atlanta
Keywords:-Spirituality, Religion, God, Christ, Jesus, Intimacy, Freedom.