Death by Hadith: A report on the banality of Islamic murder

(The execution of 35 year old Zarmina after 2 days of brutal torture after which she "confessed". Courtesy rawa.)

Today, several newspapers carried an article on an execution by the Pakistani Taliban. The Taliban kills people at the drop of a hat, so most people might not even have bothered to go into the details of this particular Taliban murder.

The report, filed from Islamabad, Pakistan, began thus:

ISLAMABAD: A teacher who once fought as a mujahideen against Soviet occupation forces in Afghanistan as been gunned down by the Taliban in Pakistan’s troubled Swat valley for not hiking up his ‘salwar’ or trousers above his ankles.

Now for those who do not know much about Islam, this might seem a little odd. A war hero murdered for the length of his pants?! Is this a mistake?

Unfortunately, not. This is not a mistake. This is Shari'a law. Shari'a law is Islamic law, based on what is written in the Kuran and the Hadith. So why does Shari'a law want to kill those who prefer to wear long trousers? Because the in the following Hadith (and many others like it), Muhammad says that a man who wears long trousers will burn in the fires of hell! Don't believe me? Read for yourself:

Hadith Sahih Bukhari
Volume 7, Book 72, Number 678:

Narrated Abu Huraira:

The Prophet said, "The part of an Izar which hangs below the ankles is in the Fire."

Here the "fire" refers to hell fire.

Now here is what I would like the readers to ponder. Based on such a silly meaningless Hadith, a man lost his life today. Under Shari'a law, murder is banal. Death is banal.

Think about it. Do you want such a law to govern every aspect of your lives? Is that life? Or the existence of a Kuranic/Hadithic automaton? Wear your pants above your ankles, do not shave, color your beards red like Muhammad did, beat your wives if they disobey you, kill anyone who leaves Islam, murder all polytheists, wage war upon Kafirs,..., copy Muhammad in every regard,... Why? Because this is the will of Allah, and we only have Muhammad's word for this. Also included in the word of Allah are that Muhammad should have sexual access to all his slave girls, and his wives should silently bear his sexual excesses, Muhammad should have his own daughter-in-law Zainab as his own wife, and so on. Words of Allah, or the clever manipulations of a 7th century warlord who used one of the oldest tricks in the book - the "I am in touch with God himself, so you guys better listen to what I say" argument? You be the judge.

Shari'a law is a law for the primitive bedouins of 7th century arabia. It does not belong to the modern age, or to any place with more subtleties and more life than the arabian desert. Recognize it for what it is, and fight to keep it where it belongs. Not here!