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

[Rahul Asthana]

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: &lt;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: &lt;https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>