Registered user login:

A fatwa for every occasion

Ziauddin Sardar

Published 02 August 2007

The Muslim world has gone fatwa-mad. Or rather, it has gone mad through fatwas. From Egypt to Pakistan, learned and not-so-learned sheikhs and imams are issuing fatwas on everything, from who can be just ifiably killed to whose breasts you are allowed to suck. Fatwas are being announced on satellite channel phone-ins, on dedicated websites and by special committees set up by radical and terrorist organisations. Nothing, it seems, is out of bounds or too absurd to be the subject of a fatwa.

A fatwa is a legal statement issued by a qualified jurist. But it is not a binding legal edict. As an opinion of an individual religious authority, it can be accepted or dismissed, depending on one's own inclinations. Most fatwas are based on the teachings of the established schools of Islamic jurisprudence - four if you are Sunni, two if you are Shia, six if, like me, you want a slightly bigger shopping mall to find a suitable product.

On the whole, fatwas have served a useful purpose in Muslim societies. They have been used to settle disputes in marriage, divorce and inheritance or to provide guidance on certain matters of ritual. Their function was to promote social harmony. They were never, and never were meant to be, instruments of power.

But all this changed on 14 February 1989. Ayatollah Khomeini's fatwa against Salman Rushdie not only introduced the term to the west, it also transformed it into a powerful device. From simple opinions based on obscur antist law, fatwas became ideological tools that could be used rather effectively against your enemies. Where Khomeini led, all sorts of ignorant and semi-literate mullahs followed. Fatwas have become an essential weapon of ideological war.

The fatwa issued in December by a cleric in Pakistan's North-West Frontier Province provides a good example. Posted on walls in the town of Darra Adam Khel, it described all human rights organisations, including the Red Cross, as agents of "the Jews and the west". It urged Muslims to target such groups as a duty, by murdering members, destroying their homes, burning their vehicles and seizing their assets.

According to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, it is one of countless fatwas to emerge from NWFP targeting human rights organisations and activists, particularly women. The fatwa posted on the website of the top Saudi cleric Abdul Rahman al-Barak gives an insight into the ideological nature of these declarations. A close confidant of the royal family, Barak issued his edict in January, just after Saudi officials expressed concern at "Iranian-backed Shia militias butchering Iraqi Sunnis". Barak describes the Shias as "the most evil sect" and implies that their killing can be justified.

On the Indian subcontinent, fatwas are used as weapons against the marginalised. The powerful obtain fatwas to harass the less pri vileged. Sunnis use fatwas to persecute Shias, minority sects and Christians; chauvinists use them to oppress women. In most cases, the spurious nature of these fatwas is all too evident. But some fatwas aim to find innovative solutions to theo logical dilemmas. What, for example, are pious Muslims to do with men and women mixing freely in a modern office, given Islam's clear ruling that adults must be kept segregated?

Dr Izat Atiyah of Cairo's al-Azhar University, Sunni Islam's most prestigious institution, issued a fatwa that solves the problem. Women working in offices with men should breastfeed them - five times. This would enable women to take off their veils and expose their hair to strange men, and so treat them as family. "Breastfeeding an adult puts an end to the problem," Dr Atiyah declares triumphantly.

Why worry about Islamophobia and those who paint Islam in all the colours of darkness? Some Muslims do a good enough job of making a mockery of Islam themselves, thank you!

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • NowPublic
  • Reddit

4 comments from readers

theWanderingLark
28 August 2007 at 06:23

This further highlighted the fact that perhaps the problem is not that there are no fatwas issued for guidance, but people would need to adhere to them.

ardee
27 November 2007 at 07:14

Yes fatwa mad with no authority. Absolutely no guidance from the Quran. They suck it from their thumbs. Fatwa mad mullahs

Saqib Sattar
30 December 2007 at 17:09

'Why worry about Islamophobia and those who paint Islam in all the colours of darkness? Some Muslims do a good enough job of making a mockery of Islam themselves, thank you!'

Yes, one of whom is called Ziauddin Sardar!

Unfortunately you have taken a few aberrant ideas and taken the whole concept of ijtihad into a joke, when in fact seeking religious guidance on every aspect of life, which actually earns reward has been part and parcel of islam from its inception.

I thought it was quite funny, that your daughter complained '"You're being stopped from integrating," Maha Sardar, an entrepreneur, said: "When I went to the bar to train as a barrister I had to go 12 dinners and they were all about alcohol. It's an archaic cultural thing. I felt very isolated but to qualify as a barrister, I had to attend all 12."

'http://www.guardian.co.uk/islam/story/0,,1647171,00.html'

Perhaps the poor little thing should have consulted daddy, who would have informed her not to mention such things, for the non-Muslims would poke fund at Islam.

On another thing Zia, if you are of the belief that the Shariah is essentially the construct of men, and that we need to reconstruct it, why have you teached your daughter the impermissibility of alcohol?

Perhaps it may be down that at heart you still have some 'conservative' values, which you choose to still follow under the rubric of Islam. If that is the case, please understand that others may also have such values, and do not deserved to be lampooned by the likes of you.

ardee
11 January 2008 at 13:54

Dear Saqib

Yes Shariah is the innovation of the clergy and not from the Quran.

The impermissability of alcohol is a Quranic injunction so Shariah has no claim over it.

Shariah concocts such stupid things as stoning to death for adultary which has absolutely no Quranic reference.

Shariah concocts mu'ta, not the Quran.

Shariah concocts instant divorce. The Quran gives a 3 month procedure.

The list goes on and on.

Shariah is the imagination of the clergy.

The Quran is the Criterion.

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before your comment is displayed on the website

We want to encourage people to comment on our content and to exchange views with other readers and hope this will be done on a courteous basis. However, if you encounter posts which are offensive please let us know by emailing comments@newstatesman.co.uk and we will take swift action where necessary.

About the writer

Ziauddin Sardar, writer and broadcaster, describes himself as a ‘critical polymath’. He is the author of over 40 books, including the highly acclaimed ‘Desperately Seeking Paradise’. He is Visiting Professor, School of Arts, the City University, London and editor of ‘Futures’, the monthly journal of planning, policy and futures studies.

Read More

Vote!

Should world leaders be forced to stay at the table until their plates are clean?

Win Manu Chao
Albums!

Plus limited edition shirts and vinyl

Enter online