Or known from here on as: Joy Not-So-Brighton.
A so called ‘expert’ trying to drive a wedge between Islam and the sharia, where none exists, and never has existed. Islam is Islam, even when fried in butter. Andy Bostom once again takes his scalpel to carve away the nonsense and drivel that’s presented as a ‘scholarly work’. This is actually pseudo scholarship, and at its worst, because it’s so damn dangerous.
What Not-So-Brighton doesn’t get:
“the Sharia is the most characteristic phenomenon of Islamic thought and forms the nucleus of Islam itself.”
Listen to her ramble on and Beck nod in agreement, blind leading the blind.
The Dangerous, Mindslaughtered Fraudulence of Joy Brighton’s “Sharia-ism”
Robert Conquest, the preeminent historian of Soviet Communism’s genocidal depredations, characterized the “mental aberration” of all varieties of Western apologists for Communism, as “mindslaughter.”
The term mindslaughter is an apposite description of what activist Joy Brighton is currently promoting (see here, and here) by coining the absurd—and dangerous—idea of “Sharia-ism.” No matter how clumsy and counterfactual her presentation, what Brighton is attempting to foist upon uninformed audiences, i.e., “educating” them about the alleged “difference between Islam and the political ideology behind sharia law,” is profoundly and dangerously misleading.
From my serious compendium on the Sharia, Sharia Versus Freedom, pp. 110-115, here is but a brief corrective to Brighton’s obfuscating and destructive drivel:
According to the most authoritative twentieth-century Western Islamic legal scholar, Joseph Schacht (d. 1969), the sharia, or “clear path to be followed,” is the “canon law of Islam,” which “denotes all the individual prescriptions composing it.” Schacht traces the use of the term sharia to Koranic verses such as 45:18, 42:13, 42:21, and 5:48, noting an “old definition” of the sharia by the seminal Koranic commentator and early Muslim historian Tabari (d. 923), as comprising the law of inheritance, various commandments and prohibitions, and the so-called hadd punishments. These latter draconian punishments, defined by the Muslim prophet Muhammad either in the Koran or in the hadith (the canonical collections of Muhammad’s deeds and pronouncements), included: (lethal) stoning for adultery; death for apostasy; death for highway robbery when accompanied by murder of the robbery victim; for simple highway robbery, the loss of hands and feet; for simple theft, cutting off of the right hand; for “fornication,” a hundred lashes; for drinking wine, eighty lashes. As Schacht further notes, sharia ultimately evolved to become “understood [as] the totality of Allah’s commandments relating to the activities of man.” The holistic sharia, he continues, is nothing less than Islam’s quintessence, “the Sharia is the most characteristic phenomenon of Islamic thought and forms the nucleus of Islam itself.” But Schacht then delineates additional salient characteristics of the sharia which have created historically insurmountable obstacles to its reform, through our present era.
Allah’s law is not to be penetrated by the intelligence . . . i.e., man has to accept it without criticism, with its apparent inconsistencies and its incomprehensible decrees, as wisdom into which it is impossible to enquire [inquire]. One must not look in it for causes in our sense, nor for principles; it is based on the will of Allah which is bound by no principles, therefore evasions are considered as a permissible means put at one’s disposal by Allah himself. Muslim law . . . has always been considered by its followers as something elevated, high above human wisdom, and as a matter of fact human logic or system has little share in it. For this very reason, the Sharia is not “law” in the modern sense of the word, any more than it is on account of its subject matter. It comprises without restriction, as an infallible doctrine of duties the whole of the religious, political, social, domestic and private life of those who profess Islam, and the activities of the tolerated members of other faiths so far as they may not be detrimental to Islam.
Elsewhere Schacht elucidates how sharia—via the uniquely Islamic institution of jihad war—regulates the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims. These regulations make explicit the sacralized vulnerability of unvanquished non-Muslims to jihad depredations, and the permanent, deliberately humiliating legal inferiority for those who survive their jihad conquest, and incorporation into an Islamic polity governed by sharia.