A recent Egyptian TV program showed how Islamic Sharia laws many prescriptions do not merely clash with modern-day concepts like free speech and religious freedom, but even with medicine and science.
On September 16, popular TV persona Wael El-Ibrashi hosted Dr. Zaghlul al-Naggar, a prominent Islamic thinker and Chairman of Egypts Committee of Scientific Notions in the Quran, on the topic of medical science and Islam. Inevitably the idea of drinking camel urine as a form of therapyfirst proposed in the 7th century by Muslim prophet Muhammadcame up.
Not only did Dr. Naggar promote this practice, but he made the staggering announcement that right now in Egypt a medical center in Marsa Matrouh actually specializes in treating people with camel urine, all in accord with the prophets advice.
--------------------------------------------
In fact, both ideasdrinking camel urine and drinking Muhammads urineare traced to the prophets own words, and, accordingly, are aspects of Sharia-medicine. In a canonical tradition, Muhammad once told some men who were sick to drink the milk and urine of camels, and they recovered and grew fat, that is, they were healed (more information on this practice can be found in a modern-day fatwa in the English language aptly titled The Benefits of Drinking Camel Urine.)
Likewise, Egypts Grand Mufti, Ali Gomaa, once wrote that drinking Muhammads urine was considered a great blessing.
All of this sheds light on the totalitarian nature of Sharia law, which treats, not just the Quran, but canonical hadiths, or traditions and sayings of Muhammadwhich is where both urine drinking ideas appearas sacred and not to be questioned. Saudi Arabias highest Islamic authority until he died in 1999, Sheikh Bin Baz, held that the earth was flat and that all scientific evidence otherwise was a Western conspiracy, simply because the Quran 18:86 claims the sun sets in a pool of mud, suggesting that the earth is flat.
The greater lesson for non-Muslims is that, if Islams most prominent thinkersthe many ulema, muftis, sheikhs, and Islamic thinkers like Naggar himselftenaciously cling to Islams teachings even when they defy objective science (not to mention grossly defame Islam), surely they must cling to those other ironclad teachings that deal with subjective matters, from freedom of religion to freedom of speech, to hostility, jihad, and subjugation for the infidel.
