[Reader-list] Who gives muftis the right to give fatwas?

Wed Jul 1 23:09:20 IST 2009

Dear Rahul
No law or system of governance is ideal for all. Indian constitution
does not keep everyone happy. For all practical purposes, democracy
does not guarantee justice (and even equality) to all, although it
maybe the most ideal system today. The panchayati system in rural
India still gives most power to the high-caste goons.
Afghan mujahids (or criminal gangs) would have used some other law to
suppress women and kill innocent people if shariat was not there. Its
how you use the law in your favour, even if it looks the most
innocuous or balanced.

J

On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Rahul Asthana<rahul_capri at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Javed,
> Yes this answers my query. Now we can discuss further.
> 1.Do you think laws are made on a best case scenario?
> 2.Do you think we can rely on the better judgement of the majority when we choose to be governed by a law?
> 3.Can you tell me if it is POSSIBLE or not for the Shariat to be interpreted in a Taliban kind of way?
> It is precisely for the reason that many interpretations are possible (a Taliban kind of implementation is one of them) that non Muslims,women etc should reject Shariat.Hypothetically, suppose your support for Shariat passively enables an entity like Taliban to come to power.I am assuming you in a democracy you would vote for a political party who stands for Shariat) then would you accept some responsibilty for that or call them "non Muslims" or "bad Muslims" and shrug your shoulders?This is exactly how the rise of Taliban has played out in Pakistan.
> This discussion may be academic because as you have already said that owing to  allegiance to your religion abiding by Shariat is your duty.No secular jurisprudence can provide you an alternative to that.So I thank you for discussing this with me anyway.
> See, the thing is,that liberal interpreters of Shariat want the ideology behind their islamic identity to be just another secular humanist philosophy so badly that they think they can just shut their eyes, click their heels together, and it will all happen just as they want to.Other liberals like Shuddha should realize the danger inherent in this kind of exercise.
>
> Thanks
> Rahul
>
> --- On Wed, 7/1/09, M Javed <javedmasoo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> From: M Javed <javedmasoo at gmail.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Who gives muftis the right to give fatwas?
>> To: "Rahul Asthana" <rahul_capri at yahoo.com>
>> Cc: "Shuddhabrata Sengupta" <shuddha at sarai.net>, "sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
>> Date: Wednesday, July 1, 2009, 10:26 AM
>> Rahul, which shariat are you
>> referring to when you ask my opinion.
>> What is the definition of shariat which I want to be
>> governed with? I
>> have my own definition of shariat, and I would be very
>> happy to be
>> governed under that. My shariat is very much from Islam,
>> but it gives
>> queers the right to live happily.
>>
>> Hope that answers your query.
>>
>> Javed
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 11:06 PM, Rahul Asthana<rahul_capri at yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Dear Javed,
>> > I don't think you have thought this through,which is
>> why you are unable to make the distinction between "adopt
>> something from the shariat" and "being governed by
>> shariat".I just wanted to know whether you are in favor of
>> making "Shariat a basis for governance" or not.This is the
>> key .Everything else is just gravy.
>> > Thanks
>> > Rahul
>> > --- On Tue, 6/30/09, M Javed <javedmasoo at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> From: M Javed <javedmasoo at gmail.com>
>> >> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Who gives muftis the
>> right to give fatwas?
>> >> To: "Rahul Asthana" <rahul_capri at yahoo.com>
>> >> Cc: "Shuddhabrata Sengupta" <shuddha at sarai.net>,
>> "sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
>> >> Date: Tuesday, June 30, 2009, 10:40 PM
>> >> Dear Rahul
>> >> Here is my clearer position: I have been brought
>> up in an
>> >> orthodox
>> >> Muslim family where shariat was/is considered the
>> ultimate
>> >> law/norm to
>> >> follow for a Muslim. But in my childhood days it
>> wasn't
>> >> considered
>> >> such an evil thing (as Taliban has made it to be).
>> Let me
>> >> tell you,
>> >> following shariat in our daily lives is very
>> different from
>> >> making it
>> >> as a basis for governance. Shariat as a basis of
>> governance
>> >> is not
>> >> something fixed any way - it has been interpreted
>> >> differently in
>> >> different Islamic countries. Indonesia, Malaysia
>> or Turkey
>> >> also follow
>> >> shariat but their systems are much more liberal.
>> That is
>> >> why I insist:
>> >> please don't see shariat only through the eyes of
>> the
>> >> Taliban/Afghanistan.
>> >>
>> >> Whatever name you give it, the point is, is your
>> system of
>> >> governance
>> >> favourable for you. At the moment I am governed
>> by
>> >> democracy, whether
>> >> I like it or not. There are many things I hate in
>> >> democracy, and would
>> >> love to change them one day (if I could), even
>> adopt
>> >> something from
>> >> the shariat. Is there something wrong with that?
>> >>
>> >> Javed
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 6:55 PM, Rahul
>> Asthana<rahul_capri at yahoo.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Dear Javed,
>> >> > Could you make your position clearer on this
>> issue?
>> >> You say-
>> >> > "My second minor difference is: when you say
>> "We are
>> >> not governed by
>> >> > the Shariat, and I hope we never will be". I
>> am not
>> >> sure if Shariat is
>> >> > all evil."
>> >> > So, do you wish or do you not, to be governed
>> by
>> >> Shariat?
>> >> >
>> >> > (Not wishing to be governed by Shariat does
>> not mean
>> >> that it is evil.It also does not mean that we
>> can't adopt
>> >> good things from it.)
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks
>> >> > Rahul
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > --- On Tue, 6/30/09, M Javed <javedmasoo at gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> From: M Javed <javedmasoo at gmail.com>
>> >> >> Subject: Re: [Reader-list] Who gives
>> muftis the
>> >> right to give fatwas?
>> >> >> To: "Shuddhabrata Sengupta" <shuddha at sarai.net>,
>> >> "sarai list" <reader-list at sarai.net>
>> >> >> Date: Tuesday, June 30, 2009, 3:46 PM
>> >> >> Dear Shuddhabrata
>> >> >> Actually I have a slight digression from
>> your
>> >> answer. I
>> >> >> don't care
>> >> >> what fatwas the muftis give within their
>> own
>> >> coterie (I'm
>> >> >> sure
>> >> >> homosexual behaviour exists in the
>> Deoband madrasa
>> >> too),
>> >> >> but the
>> >> >> problem comes when this news is flashed
>> on the
>> >> front-page:
>> >> >> it
>> >> >> basically sends a clear signal that
>> "Muslims" in
>> >> general
>> >> >> are against
>> >> >> homo-sexuality and this is yet another
>> example of
>> >> how
>> >> >> bigoted the
>> >> >> entire community is, and there are
>> absolutely no
>> >> liberals
>> >> >> (or
>> >> >> queer-friendly) people among the Muslims
>> and so
>> >> on, which
>> >> >> is not the
>> >> >> case. In a way, any controversial fatwa
>> from the
>> >> Deoband
>> >> >> (whichever
>> >> >> damn topic) is taken by the media as a
>> hot saucy
>> >> news to be
>> >> >> flashed to
>> >> >> show the backwardness of Muslims. But my
>> question
>> >> is
>> >> >> (especially to
>> >> >> the mainstream media), do these damn
>> fatwas
>> >> really
>> >> >> represent the
>> >> >> entire Muslim community? Are they so
>> important
>> >> that you
>> >> >> have to flash
>> >> >> them as headlines.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> My second minor difference is: when you
>> say "We
>> >> are not
>> >> >> governed by
>> >> >> the Shariat, and I hope we never will
>> be". I am
>> >> not sure if
>> >> >> Shariat is
>> >> >> all evil. Although I don't practice it
>> strictly,
>> >> but I know
>> >> >> it has
>> >> >> many good things in it which make at
>> least the
>> >> good part of
>> >> >> Islam
>> >> >> alive. Don't see it only through the eyes
>> of the
>> >> Taliban.
>> >> >> Whether we
>> >> >> get governed by the shariat or not, I
>> hope we
>> >> could at
>> >> >> least adopt the
>> >> >> good things about it. And Shariat is not
>> a fixed
>> >> set of
>> >> >> rules; it can
>> >> >> be and should be open for interpretation,
>> which
>> >> these
>> >> >> muftis have
>> >> >> stopped doing.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks any way.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Javed
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 10:53 PM,
>> Shuddhabrata
>> >> >> Sengupta<shuddha at sarai.net>
>> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> > Dear Javed,
>> >> >> > Thank you for forwarding this. I
>> don't know
>> >> who gives
>> >> >> these muftis and
>> >> >> > tuftis the right to give fatwas, I
>> think they
>> >> give it
>> >> >> to themselves. And
>> >> >> > since they routinely issue fatwas on
>> all
>> >> manner of
>> >> >> ridiculous matters, we
>> >> >> > might as well treat this one too
>> with the
>> >> lack of
>> >> >> seriousness that it
>> >> >> > deserves.
>> >> >> > We are not governed by the Shariat,
>> and I
>> >> hope we
>> >> >> never will be. Since we
>> >> >> > are not governed by the Shariat, it
>> hardly
>> >> matters
>> >> >> whether or not Maulana
>> >> >> > Abdul Khalik Madrasi thinks
>> homosexuality is
>> >> an
>> >> >> offence under Shariat Law.
>> >> >> > Not even the relevant (and
>> anachronistic,
>> >> misogynist
>> >> >> and patrarchal)
>> >> >> > sections of Personal Law in matters
>> of
>> >> marriage and
>> >> >> inheritance that govern
>> >> >> > the lives of Indian Muslims have
>> anything to
>> >> say about
>> >> >> sexual relations in
>> >> >> > private between consenting adults.
>> So, not
>> >> even from
>> >> >> the completely
>> >> >> > unacceptabe (to me) standpoint of
>> defending a
>> >> separate
>> >> >> civil code for
>> >> >> > Muslims is it relevant to discuss
>> the fate of
>> >> Section
>> >> >> 377. Maulana Madrasi
>> >> >> > is barking up the wrong legal tree.
>> >> >> > Finally, a small historical
>> digression.
>> >> Section 377
>> >> >> was introduced by the
>> >> >> > British Colonial Administration in
>> India.
>> >> Which, as
>> >> >> far as i recall, was not
>> >> >> > exactly a model Islamic state. In
>> fact, the
>> >> British
>> >> >> Colonial authorities
>> >> >> > presided over the decline and
>> destruction of
>> >> >> 'nominally' Muslim political
>> >> >> > power in India. if, for the roughly
>> seven
>> >> hundred
>> >> >> years preceding the advent
>> >> >> > of British rule in India, when the
>> territory
>> >> happened
>> >> >> to be ruled largely by
>> >> >> > Muslim rulers, (some of whom claimed
>> to be
>> >> guided by
>> >> >> the Shariat) it was not
>> >> >> > found necessary to invoke a
>> draconian law
>> >> like section
>> >> >> 377, are we to then
>> >> >> > understand that the British
>> Colonial
>> >> authority was
>> >> >> more 'Islamic' than the
>> >> >> > Mughal rulers, than the rulers of
>> the Delhi
>> >> sultanate,
>> >> >> and many other kings
>> >> >> > and princes of a Muslim persuasion.
>> >> >> > And finally, how exactly would we
>> remember a
>> >> figure
>> >> >> like the great Ghazi of
>> >> >> > Islam - Mahmud of Ghazna and his
>> love for
>> >> Ayaz, or
>> >> >> Razia Sultana and her
>> >> >> > love for women, or the distinctly
>> queer
>> >> ecstasies of
>> >> >> Amir Khusrau and
>> >> >> > Sarmad. Each one of these people
>> saw
>> >> themselves as
>> >> >> devout Muslim. And there
>> >> >> > was nothing unusual in their being
>> queer
>> >> Muslims.
>> >> >> Islamicate societies all
>> >> >> > over the world have been
>> historically far
>> >> more
>> >> >> tolerant of various different
>> >> >> > kinds of same-sex relationships both
>> male and
>> >> female,
>> >> >> and transgender
>> >> >> > identities, than societies largely
>> anchored
>> >> in
>> >> >> Christian values have been.
>> >> >> > Islam is a sex positive religion.
>> It
>> >> celebrates the
>> >> >> dignity, beauty and
>> >> >> > diversity of the human body and all
>> its
>> >> desires. There
>> >> >> is (and always has
>> >> >> > been) a strong case for a queer
>> theology of
>> >> liberation
>> >> >> that is rooted within
>> >> >> > the Islamicate cultural universe,
>> and it has
>> >> had a
>> >> >> long history, and it will
>> >> >> > have a long future.
>> >> >> > Maulana Madrasi is probably just as
>> ignorant
>> >> of the
>> >> >> traditions he claims are
>> >> >> > his own as Praveen Togadia, the
>> firebrand
>> >> leader of
>> >> >> the Vishwa Hindu
>> >> >> > Parishad, is. They would probably
>> make an
>> >> excellent
>> >> >> couple, locked happily
>> >> >> > together within their private closet
>> of
>> >> paranoia.
>> >> >> > Meanwhile, let us hope that Veerappa
>> Moily's
>> >> supposed
>> >> >> u-turn is only a
>> >> >> > digression, and that the provisions
>> in
>> >> Section 377
>> >> >> that criminalize the
>> >> >> > behaviour of consenting adults in
>> private
>> >> (which
>> >> >> should not be the business
>> >> >> > of the state)  are consigned
>> finally to
>> >> where they
>> >> >> belong - the dustbin of
>> >> >> > history.
>> >> >> > And congratulations to all those who
>> paraded
>> >> on the
>> >> >> streets of Delhi,
>> >> >> > Bangalore, Madras and Calcutta. The
>> future
>> >> belongs to
>> >> >> you (and us all) not
>> >> >> > to the likes of Maulana Madrasi.
>> >> >> > regards
>> >> >> > Shuddha
>> >> >> > On 29-Jun-09, at 3:54 PM, M Javed
>> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Gay sex against tenets of Islam:
>> Deoband
>> >> >> > 29 Jun 2009, 1353 hrs IST, PTI
>> >> >> > MUZAFFARNAGAR, UP: A leading Islamic
>> seminary
>> >> on
>> >> >> Monday opposed
>> >> >> > Centre's move to repeal a
>> controversial
>> >> section of the
>> >> >> penal law which
>> >> >> > criminalises homosexuality saying
>> unnatural
>> >> sex is
>> >> >> against the tenets of
>> >> >> > Islam.
>> >> >> > "Homosexuality is an offence under
>> Shariat
>> >> Law and
>> >> >> haram (prohibited)
>> >> >> > in Islam," deputy vice chancellor of
>> the
>> >> Darul Uloom
>> >> >> Deoband Maulana
>> >> >> > Abdul Khalik Madrasi said.
>> >> >> > Madrasi also asked the government
>> not to
>> >> repeal
>> >> >> section 377 of IPC
>> >> >> > which criminalises homosexuality.
>> >> >> > His objection came a day after law
>> minister
>> >> Veerappa
>> >> >> Moily said a
>> >> >> > decision on repealing the section
>> would be
>> >> taken only
>> >> >> after
>> >> >> > considering concerns of all sections
>> of the
>> >> society,
>> >> >> including
>> >> >> > religious groups like the church.
>> >> >> > Terming gay activities as crime,
>> Maulana
>> >> Salim Kasmi,
>> >> >> vice-president
>> >> >> > of the All-India Muslim Personal Law
>> Board
>> >> (AIMPLB),
>> >> >> said
>> >> >> > homosexuality is punishable under
>> Islamic law
>> >> and
>> >> >> section 377 of IPC
>> >> >> > should not be tampered.
>> >> >> > Maulana Mohd Sufiyan Kasmi, an
>> AIMPLB member,
>> >> and
>> >> >> Mufti Zulfikar,
>> >> >> > president of Uttar Pradesh Imam
>> Organisation
>> >> have also
>> >> >> expressed
>> >> >> > similar views on the issue.
>> >> >> > Kasmi said it would be harmful for
>> the
>> >> society to
>> >> >> legalise gay sex.
>> >> >> > Buoyed by the news that the Centre
>> is
>> >> considering
>> >> >> repealing the
>> >> >> > controversial section of the IPC,
>> members of
>> >> the gay
>> >> >> community on
>> >> >> > Sunday held parades in several
>> cities.
>> >> >> > http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Gay-sex-against-tenets-of-Islam-Deoband/articleshow/4715517.cms
>> >> >> >
>> _________________________________________
>> >> >> > reader-list: an open discussion list
>> on media
>> >> and the
>> >> >> city.
>> >> >> > Critiques & Collaborations
>> >> >> > To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net
>> >> >> with subscribe
>> >> >> > in the subject header.
>> >> >> > To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>> >> >> > List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Shuddhabrata Sengupta
>> >> >> > The Sarai Programme at CSDS
>> >> >> > Raqs Media Collective
>> >> >> > shuddha at sarai.net
>> >> >> > www.sarai.net
>> >> >> > www.raqsmediacollective.net
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> _________________________________________
>> >> >> reader-list: an open discussion list on
>> media and
>> >> the
>> >> >> city.
>> >> >> Critiques & Collaborations
>> >> >> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net
>> >> >> with subscribe in the subject header.
>> >> >> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>> >> >> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
>