Hamad Al-Majid writes in his Asharq Alawsat column about how fatwas (okay, fatawa) and those who issue them have become commodities in the marketplace of public opinion. Telling people what they want to hear is not the same as telling them what they should hear. Again, politics and religion become messily intertwined, along with a dose of personal vanity, and the result is chaos within the Umma.
Scholars and What the Public Wants
Dr. Hamad Al-MajidIf it were possible, the general public would pick and choose the religious opinions and fatwas of scholars in the same manner that listeners pick their favorite music on the well-known radio program “As Requested by the Listeners.” Scholars are no less on trial by the public than they are by the rulers, and there are many historical examples of a scholar being put on trail by a ruler, but there are only a few examples of a scholar being tried by the public at large. Perhaps the most prominent and famous example of how a scholar was put on trial by a ruler can be seen in what happened to Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal on the issue of the “createdness” of the Quran [The Mihna]. The scholars of the time resorted to equivocation in order to avoid a confrontation with the ruler [Caliph Al-Ma'mun], however when it came for Imam Ahmed Ibn Hanbal’s turn to answer [on the issue of the "createdness" of the Quran] the public played a positive role, for they were waiting pens at the ready for his statement, and this gave him the strength to uphold his [contrary] opinion and endure the torture and humiliation he was subject to as a result of this.
The problem is that following the digital revolution, the public has become obsessed with the large numbers of scholars, preachers and writers across the Arab world and pressure is being exerted on them preventing them from voicing their opinions and convictions. In some cases such convictions are limited to just a few lines of writing, or are only whispered quietly in private. It would be no problem if these opinions were largely confined to judicial issues of no importance to the structure, cohesion, and security of society, for example if this issue was on the religious permissibility of financial underwriting or whether or not it is permissible to listen to music. However the problem arises when a scholar or preacher chooses to remain silent on a fatwa or opinion that has serious consequences [for society].
When Arab countries were facing the threat of Al Qaeda expansion during the past 10 years, during which time Al Qaeda limited its attacks to US interests in Arab countries, condemnation of this was almost non-existent, or at the very least extremely rare, and in most cases such condemnation was locked away and confined to private gatherings. In addition to the fact that attacks such as this are a violation of the country’s agreements and treaties, they also resulted in the death of a number of innocent Muslim citizens. Therefore scholars, preachers, and writers, should have condemned these attacks and denounced them as crimes in a much stronger manner than they did, and this condemnation would have reverberated across the Arab world.
…
The Israeli paper Jerusalem Post makes note of the chaotic situation as well. In this piece, it highlights Saudi Arabia’s attempt to bring fatwas under control. Of course, any attempt to standardize something will have its critics as well. The article gives some of those critics space to express their views…
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
January:29:2010 - 11:39
Al-Majid is really tackling 2 different subjects. The wide availability of fatwas on the web and the unwillingness of Muslim scholars to condemn something if it doesn’t affect them directly. The first subject is interesting but not important to those who aren’t Muslims. The second is critical given the large scale Muslim immigration into the West.
Fatwas themselves are only the tip of the iceberg. Any casual reader will have read numerous stories of what Saudi textbooks teach about non-Muslims in their religious curriculum. (Just google saudi religious curriculum and see what you get.) The Saudis always say that it doesn’t exist or that they have gotten rid of it, but that is just a line of bull. They need to get at the root of the intolerance inherent in their ideology. It may not be in all of Islam but given the amount of money they have it is the kind of ideology that is becomming most widespread in the Muslim world.
January:29:2010 - 13:00
“Al-Khalil explained that this contradicted the very nature of Islam, which allows people to choose for themselves who is qualified to issue a fatwa.”
Choose choose choose choose choose. Did someone say choose? That is a special word!
January:29:2010 - 14:56
Any casual reader will have read numerous stories of what Saudi textbooks teach about non-Muslims in their religious curriculum.Al-Khalil explained that this contradicted the very nature of Islam, which allows people to choose for themselves who is qualified to issue a fatwa right
January:29:2010 - 23:48
People seem to use fatwas as the magical way to not be responsible for their actions. As long as they have a fatwa to refer to- they’re good. And there are fatwas to be found to cover just about every action in life however mundane.
When I converted, it had been explained to me more than once in great detail about how Islam has no clergy and how clergy can set things wrong. Ha. Well, I was raised Catholic and I know clergy when I see it. Anyway, unless someone is in an actual lawmaking juristic position- where what they say has the force of law in the country in which I reside- I don’t feel obligated to follow these people at all.
January:30:2010 - 12:16
@4
in a real islamic state, a single person would not have lawmaking authority. in saudi arabia, a fake islamic state, “official” fatwas are pushed as more legitimate in a clergy-like fashion. on personal matters, these fatwas tend to be stricter. but what bothers me much more is that their political fatwas are in-line with al-Saud’s wishes. they will use treacherous islamic terms against any opposition to the state and vice versa.
i see this ‘chaos’ as a good thing. it will force people to think about who can they trust. fatwas are to be explained through the Quran and the Sunnah. if there were official clergy, they could simply issue a ruling without explanation and claim that it is binding. so, over time, the ‘best’ scholars will win.. those who make the most sense.
even earlier islamic history has seen despotic rulers, but the scholars were independent and played an oversight role over the ruler. but an official clergy like in egypt and ksa is something new. authority should be earned, not given. i believe this is the intention of islam.
January:31:2010 - 02:21
If we are to put a puppet out there, I have a special request (access to his strings) AND:
“Let him be just of sound mind and let him let me drive!”
I suspected an F bomb coming up somewhere perhaps from Dr. Hamad. Congrats!