|
Final Word on the issue of massage parlours
26|05|2006 |
adduonline
The reporters of Haveeru Daily newspaper, for the second time,
have done something commonly referred to as 'investigative
journalism' to determine whether massage parlours are to be
allowed or banned. If newspaper reporters have assumed the role
of a law-maker, what then is the purpose of a government ? The
reporters then published their conclusion in which they
presented their arguments supporting a ban on massage parlour
business. Also, an online poll was available in the internet
edition
of the newspaper for the readers to air their opinions as to
what they think about such parlours. The result was an an
overwhelming support for a ban. Can this be a reflection of the
growing Islamic sentiment or a deep rooted for the hatred for
the government ? Or are some people extremely jealous of the
those business premises because they are making money ? Although
we cant dig into people's heart, analysing the prevalent thought
patterns of the people on other topics might be helpful in
arriving at a plausible answer ? Ever since, the doors of
'freedom' were flung open, we are witnessing all kinds of vices
from A to Z committed and the attention of masses being diverted
to '27 years'. The so called political magazines are bold enough
to make disparaging remarks about the third khalifah Uthman bin
Afaan(ra). Politicians are lying and slandering without any
qualm of conscience. Intellectual integrity is becoming extinct.
The most preferable political website of the people happens to
be a porn site .The political party which claim to be
spearheading the campaign against massage parlours is happy to
accept funds from the government. The same government which this
party declared as 'rule of Pharoah'. This party has set an ugly
precedent of twisting Islam to suit the circumstances.
Taking into account the fact that people feel ''okay'' about
these dangerous trends, it is not shocking to see people of a
different calibre also exercising their freedom which resulted
in the birth of massage parlours. Some people may argue that the
case of these parlours is greatest of the evils. So, who is
going to set the standard for evaluating the degree of evil ?
Aside from that, the oft repeated arguments used to justify a
ban on massage parlours are weak from an Islamic perspective. It
is said that these running these parlous leads to other evils.
And those are supporting the permissibility of parlours argue
that 'massage parlous do not produce evil things'.
Fostering this kind of circular debate is going to cause more
confusion. At the heart of the debate is the usage of a weak
principle of Islamic jurisprudence known as 'Malaat ul afaal'.
Simply put, 'malaat ul afaal' means 'fearing the consequence of
actions'. Some ulema adopted this principle for extracting
Shariah rules. But it would be clear that the reason why they
used this principle is because it an offshoot of the discussion
related to Al-qadaa wal qadar. The ulema who were the Ahlhe
Sunnah adopted this principle
To refute this principle there are a number of points that need
clearing up.
1. the definition of hukm shari. which is an Ijmah amongst the
scholars is the ''the address of Legislator, upon the actions of
the slave''. So Allah (SWT) addresses the actions of human, not
the malaat i.e. results of actions.
2. Also Fiqh is defined as, which is agreed upon, as the
''knowledge of the practical Shari'ah matters (al Masa'il al 'Amaaliyyah)
that are derived from their elaborated evidences (adillah al
Tafsiliyyah)''.
So again, the focus of fiqh , is the The word Al 'Amaaliyyah is
appended to the term in order to emphasise that fact that the
Hukm (commands) is related to our Amaal, i.e.. to our actions
only. In other words, anything that is not related
to people's actions are not considered as part of the Fiqh.
Therefore, to say that massage parlours should be banned
because of the potential evil consequences is pointless. Such an
approach leads to making the mind (aql) the source of
Shariah rules. The application of this principle, can contradict
hukm shari and the mind becomes arbitrator in determining
haraam and halaal based on perceived results. So for examples,
if Riba is widespread in the economy lot of harm will be caused
to the one who avoids riba (i.e. adhering to the hukm shari).
This harm needs to be avoided. Using this principle 'malaat ul
afaal' riba has to allowed. Therefore, this principle cannot be
used as a comprehensive principle to extract laws.
As regards the correct judgement on massage parlours, there is
no need to bang our heads over 'whether evils things can occur
or not'. A correct ruling can be extracted directly from the
linguistic connotation of the relevant texts, without the usage
of any principles. The first problematic aspect of the issue
that Islam addresses is the related to man-woman relationship.
Islam forbids a man and woman to be in seclusion even if no evil
is likely to place. As said earlier Hukm Sharii is related to
the actions of the human, not the results. Also, even though
some experts are at pains to explain the scientific benefits
(which is not relevant to the issue), it is not the scientific
healing which these parlours are selling. It seems as if the
universal scientific healing processes become suspended in the
case of a man providing the therapy to a man or in the case of a
female providing the services to females. So, it is actually
femininity that is on sale. To this effect, Islam forbids women
to work where her femininity is used. These two evidences are
strong enough to pass a judgement on this issue.
Conclusion
Adopting correct Islamic process of viewing issues will solve
our problems and prevent problems from arising. Weighing the
seriousness of sins based on perceived consequences can
potentially lead to the distortion of the entire deen. The
halaal and haraam is not determined by what newspaper reporters
analysis after they themselves had indulged in the action.
May Allah help us in understanding the deen in the correct
manner.
Ends.
|
