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

[Rahul Asthana]

Ok so its time for truisms and platitudes now.
"Indian constitution does not keep everyone happy."
Can you elaborate?
"The panchayati system in  rural India still gives most power to the high-caste goons."
Can you elaborate? Can you quote the relevant articles of the panchayati system which "give most power to high-caste goons"?

Let me add that the function of constitution is not to "keep everyone happy",whatever that means.It is supposed to provide a basic framework and some non amendable laws.The basic framework and non amendable laws cannot be altered,even if there is  majority will to do so.

--- 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, 11:09 PM
> 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/>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
>