Full transcript
0:00***translated by Prof.Dr. Nükhet Kardam*** Çilingir Sofrası 15 / The Medina Period and Prophet’s Muhammed’s Sense of Justice
0:02Now all cases that need to be adjudicated were brought to Prophet Muhammed
0:08So he asked the people who came to him:
0:10Who are you?
0:12They said they were Jews
0:13Good.
0:15He asked: do you believe in a sacred text?
0:16Yes, we believe in the Torah.
0:18Good.
0:20What was the problem?
0:22Bring the Torah
0:24He opened the Torah
0:26and found out what punishment was recommended for the crime committed.
0:33Then he called the elders of the Jewish community and said
0:36your book says that the verdict for this action is the following
0:44They agreed and said that’s right,
0:47and then the King was informed and implemented the verdict
0:53Later, some problems emerged among the Christians in the community.
0:58The Prophet asked: do you have a sacred text you believe in?
1:02Yes, it is the Bible
1:04So the Prophet now will judge them according to the Bible, not according to the Torah
1:09He asked: What are the rules in the Bible
1:13commensurate with the act committed?
1:16They called the priests of the community
1:22The priests said that there are no rules in the Bible
1:33They said that what we have in the Bible is forgiveness, pardoning those who commit a sin.
1:37But here we are talking about a crime, not a sin.
1:40If you commit a sin, it is something prohibited by God and you ask for God’s forgiveness.
1:44A sin is a mistake that God may forgive.
1:48Sinan: Whereas a crime is an act between people.
1:50Serhan: How can one make a mistake according to God?
1:53A sin is when you act against something that is decreed in the sacred text.
1:59Serhan: So a sin is going against what is written in the sacred text.
2:01Yes, for example, it may say: be good towards your neighbor,
2:07don’t hurt or steal your neighbor’s donkey.
2:10And let’s say you have hurt or stolen the neighbor’s donkey.
2:15That is defined as sin. A sin can only be forgiven by God.
2:22Suppose someone sinned and you say let’s punish him.
2:25You can’t do that.
2:27But a mistake that occurs between people is different.
2:34That’s not called a sin.
2:36That is a crime and an appropriate punishment would be the response.
2:43The punishment can be decided together by a group of appointed people.
2:46We are not talking about a divine rule here.
2:51So the Christian Elders Council came together and pointed out that
2:56there are no rules in the Bible.
3:03So now what are we going to do?
3:09They said we don’t know.
3:10So, the Prophet knew that there is forgiveness in the Bible, but there is also a verse in it
3:16where Jesus says: I did not cancel the shariat.
3:19I did not get rid of it, but I came to complete it.
3:23So that means the shariat of Moses can be applied to Christians as well.
3:34That’s what happened. And the king implemented the verdict.
3:40Now the king was neither Jewish nor Christian.
3:43He was a pagan.
3:47It is very interesting that the king implemented
3:51the verdicts reached by Prophet Muhammed even though they were not based on his own beliefs.
4:01But according to their sacred book, there is a crime.
4:07And Prophet Muhammed has issued a verdict.
4:11The King does not oppose the verdict claiming it doesn't agree with our beliefs.
4:17This is a historic incident that should definitely be explored and researched further.
4:29So then the pagans had some problems.
4:33The Prophet asked them: What sacred text do you believe in?
4:35We don’t believe in any sacred text.
4:39By believing I mean what sacred text they trusted.
4:44Sinan: so that they would not object to its rules.
4:47The Prophet then asked: don’t you have a belief system?
4:53They answered: we believe in our ancestors’ customs.
4:57We go by the customs and traditions that we learned from our elders.
5:02They are not written down rules but everyone knows them.
5:06In that case, the Prophet said, bring your elders here
5:12Serhan: Let’s see what they have to say.
5:14So a group of pagan elders were invited to join them.
5:16The Prophet told them: There is this problem, an act was committed.
5:19According to your traditions and customs,
5:23what is the punishment?
5:25They explained what the punishment would be in general.
5:27The Prophet said: So you live in this culture, in this society and still committed an act
5:31that you knew was wrong.
5:35Yes, we knew.
5:37In that case, you deserve to be punished.
5:40The king then implemented the punishment.
5:43So far so good.
5:46But now there was a different problem, Can.
5:51There is our friend Can behind the camera and there is an extraordinary situation!
5:56Furkan and Can are there,
5:59and we are trying hard not to directly look at them.
6:03Meanwhile they are looking at us with such enthusiasm
6:06that it is hard not to glance at them!
6:08You are probably curious to see them.
6:14Serhan: If we hadn’t lifted the mirror on the wall and put it away, everyone could have seen them.
6:17We lifted the mirror so you wouldn’t see them.
6:22But Sinan is eager for them to sit at the table with us.
6:28Sinan: Let’s change places, they can come here, and we will go there.
6:30I don’t know.
6:32So going back to our story, now there was a problem between two people from different groups.
6:39What is your problem?
6:41This and this
6:43What do you believe in?
6:44One says I believe in the Torah and the other says, I believe in the Bible.
6:48One was Jewish, and the other one Christian.
6:52Good.
6:54The prophet said: Fine, we can implement the rules of the Torah.
6:56The rules of the Torah are valid for both of them.
6:58But there is one problem, says the Christian.
7:00There is no pardoning in the Torah.
7:03But Christ brought forgiveness.
7:09Sinan: So the Bible seems to have superseded the Torah.
7:11No, that’s not what I mean.
7:15Serhan: The question is: are we going to forgive a person or go by the rules?
7:18Exactly. So there is forgiveness and there are rules.
7:22Sinan: This is a very sensitive area.
7:26Forgiveness is about our conscience
7:29while rules are related to the mind, the intellect.
7:31Our mind works with rules.
7:33But our conscience focuses on excuses.
7:37Conscience is based on wisdom.
7:39Was there a reason for committing this act?
7:42Did a person have an excuse in committing this act?
7:44Whereas according to the Torah,
7:46if a person committed an act, that’s it, and he deserves a commensurate punishment.
7:56What Christ brought is to complete, not cancel, the rules that Moses introduced.
8:02He was asked what he meant by ‘completing the rules Moses brought’.
8:05Christ answered:
8:06The last principle of the shariat is that we must love our neighbor just like we love ourselves.
8:12That’s when conscience comes to the fore.
8:14In other words, if you had committed the same act,
8:16What kind of excuse would you have had?
8:18You have to have empathy.
8:20How would you have asked for forgiveness?
8:22Even if you didn’t actually ask for forgiveness, the point is to practice empathy.
8:30This mean focusing on one’s conscience does not negate rules,
8:34But brings in forgiveness and flexibility that might reduce the punishment,
8:40And make it lighter.
8:42This is relevant today when a prison sentence may be reduced depending on a person’s circumstances.
8:46Sinan: such as good behavior. Yes, that’s it.
8:50Judges, of course, go by the laws but at the same time they rely on their conscience.
9:00Perhaps this person was so hungry and poor that he had to steal.
9:05Whereas another thief just stole for the sake of it. Then the rules are implemented fully.
9:09In short, we don’t mean stealing is permitted but a person’s specific situation may be taken into consideration.
9:16Let's say one person breaks the window and steals the baklava, eats it up just for fun of it.
9:24Even though he has the money to buy it himself, in that case he must be punished according to the rules, there is no need for relying on one's conscience.
9:29The other one is hungry and needy, than that is a different situation.
9:36So Christ completes the rules by adding relevant excuses so that conscience may be brought in.
9:44So in that case verdicts must incorporate the Judges' conscience.
9:51Up until now the Prophet could reach a verdict easily.
10:02But now there was a different kind of problem
10:05that occurred between a pagan and a Jew.
10:11Serhan: so traditions versus written rules
10:14So the Jew says, you can judge me according to the Torah.
10:22The pagan says, I should be tried according my own customs and traditions.
10:26Let’s bring the jury.
10:30The Prophet asks the pagan elders what the verdict would be according to their unwritten rules.
10:47They give their answer.
10:49The Torah has written rules,
10:52so the Jewish elders are called in to interpret the rules.
10:58It is very interesting that
11:00Great Britain
11:03did not have a written constitution until very recently.
11:07A written constitution was accepted in much of the world
11:11But the British still administered themselves by their unwritten rules.
11:18So everyone knew them and nobody objected to the verdicts based on them.
11:22Saying that is not what is written there!
11:25Recently they are trying to move towards a written Constitution.
11:28So this is a complex matter.
11:31Serhan: But here the person who is tried obviously does not object either, that means the verdicts are accepted as just.
11:37If he objected, even if he objected
11:40he would be asked: aren’t you from the same culture as others here?
11:46Serhan: I was referring to the British case, where the person who is tried doesn’t object
11:52even though there are no written rules to go by. That means they considered the verdicts fair.
11:57In our society this would be difficult.
12:03In our society, if a judge’s verdict is not found right or acceptable by political leaders,
12:07he may just be removed and appointed to a different district.
12:10You can’t do that in the United Kingdom because the judiciary is independent and has its own internal evaluation process.
12:13So the government cannot make an arbitrary decision regarding the judiciary.
12:19I would like to tell you about a historical incident that is relevant for our discussion here.
12:26This is a real incident.
12:33There is a a Judge in England. He said: There is a rule
12:40and according to this rule a Judge can decide how much he should earn and receives that amount.
12:53The Judge wants to test this rule.
12:58He goes to the bank.
12:59Let's say a Judge's salary would normally be 1000 or 500 pounds
13:07as an unwritten rule.
13:10It is not written down but people know the general ballpark.
13:16Instead, he decides to write down 100,000 pounds as his salary and want to see what happens.
13:21Will they him that amount?
13:24At the bank, the staff members looked at his request with astonishment and say:
13:33Could you please give us a few minutes?
13:35They called their bosses and ask how they should proceed with this request.
13:40What should we do?
13:45The response was: Go ahead and pay him what he asks.
13:52The bank personnel wondered if the judge was in his right mind but he looked like he was fine.
14:00They asked the judge to wait.
14:01Sinan: It takes time to collect the money.
14:03They collected the money requested and delivered it to the judge.
14:07Do you know what the judge did?
14:11He said because he tested his own country,
14:14Serhan: That he is guilty.
14:16No, there is no crime there because he did not go against the law.
14:19But the judge said he can no longer perform his duty as a judge.
14:24He delivered his resignation and left without taking the money.
14:26He said that he proved that
14:29that his country goes by its word.
14:33I proved this to you but now I cannot be a judge anymore.
14:37Serhan: Why not?
14:38Because he tested his country. He did not trust his own government.
14:42Sinan: So he said: How can anyone trust me from now on since I did not trust my own government?
14:47Serhan: Okay, so he demonstrated that he did not trust the very institution that he worked for.
14:53Sinan: He thought who would believe in me and trust me when I did not trust my own government.
14:57Serhan: I see, so he clearly did not trust his government.
15:00But he tested it and you see, this is a complex and contradictory situation.
15:06So what do we do now?
15:08Should we applaud him because he took it upon himself to test this unwritten rule?
15:11Sinan: Bravo!
15:13We applaud him even more because
15:15he could not stay in an institution that he did not trust.
15:19Serhan: So he left his position because he did not trust his own institution.
15:21You can come up with different interpretations.
15:27This is not just relevant for our country
15:29It is not just about the British, this is a big lesson for not just our country but for the whole world, for humanity.
15:39***translated by Prof.Dr. Nükhet Kardam*** Çilingir Sofrası 15 / The Medina Period and Prophet’s Muhammed’s Sense of Justice