Differentiate between customary law and Islamic law?

Answer 1

Customary Law is those legal attributes that come as a result of historical or cultural traditions. Islamic Law is those legal attributes that can be cited to come from the Qur'an, the Hadith, the Sirat an-Nabi, or other Islamic Legal Sources (such as Fiqh). This distinction is often raised when it comes to sensitive issues such as honor killing, which came into Islam through customary law as opposed to Islamic Law and, therefore, should not be used to impugn Islam.

I personally find this argument accurate but disingenuous. While the distinction between customary law and Islamic Law is a true distinction, it almost never used to describe places where the customary law would be seen to be superior to Islamic Law. A perfect instance of this is in the treatment of Polytheists (Mushrikin) - specifically Hindus and Buddhists, who are not supposed to live in an Islamic State, but were allowed to do so in Islamic India (the Mughal Empire) for centuries. This custom of toleration for polytheism comes from the Buddhist rulers who preceded the Islamic Rulers and not from Islamic scriptures, which only hold that Jews, Christians, and Sabians should be tolerated. The other reason that I find this argument bothersome is that we do not see Islamic leadership in various countries campaigning against all customary legal issues, especially malignant ones like honor killing, but selecting certain benign issues like praying at the graves of Sufi Saints to focus their attention on.