- Joined
- Jul 20, 2011
- Messages
- 60,915
- Reaction score
- 46,566
Huh, did not know that but it makes a lot of sense. What a lot of people don't understand about sharia in the premodern era is that it wasn't a top down system but rather it was a bottom up, grassroots system that relied on the moral authority, not coercive power, of the judges(or in this case Sufis). People often relied on trusted third party mediators to arbitrate disputes in the world before an expansive, bureaucratic justice system imposed by a central state monopolized that role. Often it could be a respected village elder or something like that but if those failed then sharia courts would be the last resort.I am glad someone knows their history of South Asia in this thread. From what I have read one main reason for the conversion of Punjabi and Sindhi people to Islam was that Sufi missionaries were used as mediators in land disputes and my ancestors were very impressed with the fairness and thoughtfulness in which the Sufi's solved these land disputes.
Don't blame non-Muslims for that misunderstanding though since its one shared by modern Muslims who want to flip the sharia on its head and turn into into something more like Western law in terms of being a coercive top down structure. But that goes against the spirit of the sharia which assumes the jurist is a respected member of the community, not some alienated bureaucrat