Jamal Zarabozo – Human Rights Cultural Values In Islam Part 2

			No more conflict with the Islamic law. What will our stance be as true Muslims? Please clarify in
the context of the 2000 Act of Parliament.
		

			I hope you don't expect me to be familiar with the 2000 Act of Parliament.
		

			Basically, as the professor cinema has told us, and we there is no obedience to the created, if it
involves disobedience to the Creator.
		

			So therefore, if there's any any laws
		

			that are passed that violate the Sharia, in particular, those laws
		

			that are preventing us from doing what we are supposed to do as a Muslim, then obviously we do not
obey them.
		

			And we find any means that we can to avoid avoid, again.
		

			If there's any law, for example, that restrict us concerning something that is permissible for us in
our shootout, then it might be a different issue, in the sense that if we can avoid it easily, if we
can avoid it easily, then we avoided and so therefore, we don't get us selves in any trouble here.
And the Sharia is neutral with respect to that. But in that, in essence, the basic point is, if
there's any law required asking any Muslim to do something, which goes against the Sharia, then he
does not obey that law
		

			faizi
		

			ensure Islamic human rights through an Islamic State. Is this correct? Please explain the
relationship between Islamic human rights and the Khalifa.
		

			Yeah, of course, the Islamic human rights, which are basically they're all the rights laid out in
this video, you will not be able to find them, you will not find them implemented unless the Sharia
is implemented. And in general, you will not find the Sharia implemented unless there is an Islamic
State.
		

			So therefore, any we as Muslims, even, we're not able to implement all of these things, because of
the fact that we don't have the Islamic State. However, at the same time, we should try to implement
all of them, and support all of them and stand for all of them that we can, given the situation that
we are facing. So in other words, just because we don't have the Islamic State in which the whole
Sharia is being implemented, we are doing we do our best to implement as much of the Sharia as we
can, as ourselves in our communities. And we do our best to try to support any further
implementation of the Shia, given the powers of the stream that we have.
		

			Just someone just asking about any good books on this topic, human rights in Islam.
		

			There are there are some books, some I would not recommend.
		

			There are a couple of books one is by appeal, forget.
		

			I think chef Lapin.
		

			It's, it's, it's more of a book that discusses the western concept of human rights, and then
discusses the Islamic concept, and then discusses the number of the rights within Islam, and then
answers those objections to the Islamic law and the implementation of Islamic law. And that's why
I've been laughing, but i don't i think i think the name of the book is called human rights in
Islam. It has been published before and there's a new edition coming out, inshallah. It's both in
English and Arabic. There's a new edition coming out by the Institute
		

			in Virginia, the Institute of Islamic and Arabic studies in America.
		

			We've got a few we've got a few questions.
		

			I only take questions that are related to the topic on the topic. Okay. Can you highlight
		

			that Western thought is often presented at international law, such as the UN international human
rights?
		

			Yes, but the question here says that Western thought is often presented as international laws. Well,
the problem is
		

			that they have been able to convince
		

			the other countries of the world to pass these laws.
		

			You know, for example, the the declaration in 1948. Now granted, a number of Muslim countries that
exist now weren't even countries at that time, like Algeria and others, and many of the others were
newly independent.
		

			And in many times the the rulers were basically just replacing the colonials they were the same as
the colonials, but they were now from the local local area. So they sign those declarations. Now,
actually, the way
		

			In 1948, there was a difference of opinion about what was the legal effect. As soon as the Soviet
Union signed it, they said, Well, actually, these are all just recommendations anyway. And they're
not law.
		

			So the the the one that was ratified the two that were ratified in 1966, and went into law in the
1976. These, again, they're presented mostly from the west, but the other people signed. Now not all
the countries have signed the Declaration of civil and political rights and the other one of 1966.
Those countries who have not signed it, they cannot be held responsible for but to date, I think
something like 140 countries have have signed it. So the problem is not, they're not saying this is
Western thought, let's make it international law and force everyone to accept it. But they're taking
their Western thought and presenting it in international bodies, and the people are signing it. And
		

			once they sign it, then it becomes international law.
		

			Okay, this question, say, Why is there a constant attack on the Taliban about, about them violating
human rights? Are the Taliban following the Quran and Sunnah?
		

			Like, I mean, if you just heard the lecture on human rights,
		

			so you have an idea what perspective they're coming from, you know, you draw you you destroy an
idol, violating human rights.
		

			You say the Quran says that the woman has to wear hijab violating human rights. Okay, so that's why
they're coming from a perspective, that you have human rights, and all religions, and all laws have
to be subjugated to it. And of course, Afghanistan has signed those earlier declarations. So they
have them kind of, in a sense, because they don't recognize the fact that if you change the
government, and then you say, well, we change the government and our religion says this, they don't
recognize it as not a valid argument and in
		

			an international law. So I mean, why they're constantly attacking them is always the same for the
Sudan. And why are they boycotting them? Why are they putting so much restrictions on them? It's
obvious, because they are applying Islam Islam violates what they consider human rights. And as we
said, they're actually human rights are not based on anything really, about the the total aspect of
the Taliban and how much they're playing. I don't have probably enough information about them, I
have not really studied them in great detail to answer that question.
		

			Is it permissible or advisable for Muslims to seek to establish the Sharia by means of democracy, ie
participation in elections as an Islamic party? If not, what are the alternatives?
		

			Well, I'll be I'll be kind of very blunt on
		

			this question.
		

			And that is my personal view is if you seek to establish the studio through a democratic means
		

			it's not going to work.
		

			It's not going to work because
		

			the powers that be as they're cold, are not going to are not going to stand for it. I mean, we saw
it in Algeria.
		

			You know, the Muslims could win an election, you know, 99.9%, you know, just like the Egyptian
President every time and, and, you know, the next day, all of a sudden, there's a military takeover.
Gee, how did that happen? What a surprise, you know, don't really expect too much. But the problem
is that what really what we really need is the masses, the Muslim masses as a whole and he needs to
develop their Islam needs to develop their faith. So that any a group or small group of them or any
any kind of outside influence cannot just come in and destroy what they have established. Because
the Muslims are strong, they will stand up for the shittier and even if people for example, wanted
		

			to make Riba halal, even if people wanted to distribute * or whatever, the Muslims
themselves would not stand up for it, they will not accept every Muslim society you see now the
Muslims himself are accepting it you know, even if they call it an Islamic State, and even if
Muslims have taken some form of power when these evil forces come in and spread these things, the
Muslims you know, not all of them obviously, but the Muslims accepted and that is our basic problem
right now. Until we change that and we're not willing to accept anything except what Islam permits,
then inshallah we'll be implementing the Sharia and not bowing down to any other force or power.
		

			Okay, hey, um, brothers and sisters, we will have to end the question session there. Can you please
keep student because there's some important announcements to be made. Just keep keep facilities
		

			Hello, Mallika, how
		

			can I first of all remind any brothers and sisters who have not registered that we do need it