On the Kelley file last night, the host [hostess/hostette?] devoted her opening segment to the Donald Trump “ban all Muslims” comment. She had two guests, Andrew McCarthy, an attorney with experience in immigration and terrorism and some past government service, and Sebastian Gorka, Chair of Military Theory, Marine Corps University and an anti-terrorism blogger.
I have not been able to find a transcript of their discussion, but at one point the distinction was made by McCarthy between what is intended to be meant between being a Muslim being “radicalized” and being a “terrorist.”
As he made his point, Kelley interjected [presumably for us, the great public who otherwise would not know, in her view] in terms like the following: “Radicalized, yes, you mean accept Shariah law.”
I want to make some observations on her statement. [Please keep in mind while I watched it as it happened I do not have a transcript before me.]
First, the phrase “Shariah law” is redundant.
Shariah is law. Supplemented by the method of ijtihad [demonstration by means of analogy,] using the Quran and the Sunnah [the traditions conveying Muhammad’s example in word and action] a body of legal literature has evolved. Collectively this is termed “Shariah,” a word which means path or the way. Not unlike the rabbinic notion of halakah it is, for the Muslim, the “way to go” through life.
Second, Shariah embraces what in the West are often regarded as two, separable aspects of life, namely the sacred and the secular.
The rules in Shariah cover any and all circumstances a Muslim may confront while going about daily life. Once again, this is not functionally unlike the orthodox Jewish notion of halakah.
Third, would Megyn Kelley or Andrew McCarthy term an Orthodox Jew a “radical Jew?”
I make these three observations to illustrate what I regard as muddled thinking in the West about Islam. In part [there are other factors in play] this muddle is a consequence of the sacred/secular [or, “profane” in the old-fashioned term] distinction which has been a foundation of western Enlightenment culture since the eighteenth century, if not since the Renaissance.
Thus I would comment:
The Islam challenge to the west is far more complex than is often made apparent, of which the Kelley File example is a mere illustration. For a thorough and informed introductory exposure to a sound western analysis of Islam let me commend Hans Küng’s monumental book, Islam: Past, Present & Future, in which is offered a review of Islam’s almost 1500 year history and a paradigmatic tool for its assessment and impact on our own culture.
clamjamfrey 