>>473293
the key is cutting the tip off of your penis

Second Mormonism when?!

>>473293
I'm noticing a pattern here

So basically the Jews have allowed themself to influenced by agents of Satan?

>>473293
Utterly trash analogies. The complex diversity of thought and how the various Abrahamic religions percieved orthodoxy vs. heterodoxy has shifted in much more nuanced ways throughout their respective histories.

That's more a recent thing, thanks to the Turks enforcing legal unity on Islam. Before, there were four schools of sharia in sunni islam, each of which had its own court system and with rules as to whether each could appeal to the other in cases where followers of different courts went to trial.

>>473432
Tell me more.

>>473617
Most of what I know about its nature as a polylegal system comes from this guy

http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Course_Pages/Legal_Systems_Very_Different_13/Book_Draft/Systems/Islamic_Law_Chapter.htm

>The first and most important thing to realize about Islamic law is that, seen in its own terms, it is the law of God not of man. No society, now or in the past, could enforce Shari’a, because no human had complete and correct knowledge of its content. Strictly speaking, what traditional Islamic courts enforced was not Shari’a, God’s law, but fiqh, jurisprudence, the imperfect human attempt to deduce from religious sources what the law ought to be. That fact helps explain how Sunni Islam was able to maintain four different but mutually orthodox schools of law. There could be only one correct answer to what God wanted humans to do, but there could be more than one reasonable guess.

>How was fiqh deduced and applied? The scholar started with the sources of revealed knowledge—the Koran and the words and acts of Mohammed and his companions as reported in hadith, traditions. From that information a sufficiently learned religious scholar, a mujtahid, deduced legal rules. Over time, the scholars separated into four schools, each consisting of multiple generations building on the work of its predecessors, each identified with the name of a particularly distinguished scholar thought of as its founder. The schools were generally similar but differed in the details of their approaches to interpretation and the rules they deduced; each regarded the others as orthodox.

>>473697
>It was a polylegal system; disputes within each community would go to that community's courts. In at least some times and places, parties creating a contract, a partnership, a marriage, could choose which legal system they wished to create it under and would be bound to the rules of the legal system in any future dispute. What happened in a dispute between parties adhering to different legal systems is not entirely clear, and probably varied across time and space. One possibility was for the plaintiff to choose the court, another for the defendant to.
>While law was in theory independent of the state, in practice, in most historical Islamic societies, state created rules played a significant role. It was up to the ruler to appoint the qadi and to enforce his judgments and the ruler could, by his control over jurisdiction, determine what court a case went to. Under the Abbasids, the second Islamic dynasty, the police (shurta) began to investigate, try and punish offenders outside of the fiqh courts. The inspector of the marketplace (muhtasib) created and enforced commercial regulations. The mazalim courts initially existed to investigate misconduct by officials, including qadis, but over time expanded to take jurisdiction over additional areas. Finally, the ruler was entitled to create administrative regulations to implement fiqh or fill in gaps in the law through the mechanism of siyasa, creating rules additional to and even to some degree contradictory to the rules of fiqh.

The comparison is flawed because Jews don't read or even believe in the Torah and also because they worship Satan.

>>473707
>The Ottomans supported the Hanafi school of law, giving it an effective monopoly of law within the core areas of the empire and a superior position in areas where other schools had been dominant prior to the Ottoman conquest. Qadis of the other schools were subordinate to the Hanafi qadi, who could reverse judgments that strayed too far from Hanafi doctrine. Over time, more and more of the legal scholars in those areas defected to the Hanafi school, that being where the money, jobs, and power were to be found.

>The Ottoman Sultans took the position that if Hanafi teaching permitted several alternative interpretations of the law they had the authority to tell judges which interpretation they must follow, even if it was not the one dominant in the scholarship of the school. And the Sultans proclaimed their own legal rules, kanun, in theory in support of fiqh but in practice sometimes inconsistent with it. Thus fiqh, according to all four schools, forbade loans at interest. Kanun provided for a maximum interest rate.

>Interference by the authorities was not limited to the final stage of courts. Under the Ottomans there was a Grand Mufti appointed by the Sultan with ultimate authority over the appointment of qadis and the running of mosques and madrassahs.

>The causes that led to the increasing power of the nation state in the west, as signaled by the replacement of feudal monarchy by absolute monarchy, operated in the Islamic world as well, most notably in the Ottoman Empire. The annexation of the waqfs by the Ottoman authorities on the theory that the money would be administered by them for the purposes for which it had been donated parallels the earlier confiscation of the lands of the monasteries by Henry VIII. The result, in both cases, was to eliminate institutions that to some degree competed with the state for power and resources.