In today’s Sydney Morning Herald, Gerard Henderson writes:
Warrant for Terror shows there has only been one fatwa issued by Sunni Islam leaders condemning terrorism. In March 2005 some Spanish Muslims issued a fatwa opposing Osama bin Laden. But, according to Bar, this “has not been backed up by any leading Islamic scholar in Spain or in the wider Muslim world”.
While the overwhelming majority of Muslim leaders decline to condemn al-Qaeda’s killings, it makes sense for Westerners to be vigilant about terrorism. Or even obsessed.
Only one fatwa from Sunni Islam leaders condemning terrorism? I had to re-read that claim a few times to make sure I wasn’t seeing things. Anyway, I spent approximately ten seconds on Google and was able to find this helpful list drawn from just one of the many groups within Sunni Islam. Of course, there are plenty more besides that as anyone with a passing acquaintance with the topic would be well aware.
15 comments ↓
Here are a few more:
http://www.mujahideenryder.net/
http://www.livingislam.org/maa/dcmm_e.html (very big but important article dissecting the terrorism/suicice-bombing mentality from a jurisprudence perspective)
Actually, in today’s world, everyone can issue a fatwa.
If he were to Google the Australian Imam’s conference, he would come up with the media release, in which the Imams (representatives of the Muslim community, about 100 of ‘em) specifically denounced all forms of terrorism in the past and in the future.
The reason you didn’t hear about it in the media? Because Andrew Robb had a hissy fit that his speech had to be translated into Turkish and Arabic for a few Imams, and that was more newsworthy than all Australian Imams denouncing terrorism. And they say there isn’t an agenda!
For those interested in the Australian Imams’ collective condemnation of terrorism, you can read it here:
http://www.immi.gov.au
In the Sunni world, who can issue a fatwa?
Anyone who has done the required amount of study and mastered the necessary subjects. Bear in mind,though, that it is still considered a legal opinion only - different scholars can and often do contradict each other depending on their reasoning etc.
We do not have an organised system like the Marja Taqlid, which is pretty cool btw.
All a fatwa is is a religious opinion on a particular issue. It is therefore usually offered by a scholar who is properly qualified in Islamic jurisprudence (a field known in Arabic as ‘fiqh’). However, unlike organised religions, no Muslim is bound to follow it or even agree with it; and it is not uncommon to find other scholars differing on various rulings.
That is the problem, All:
http://atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IG04Df03.html
To excommunicate people who pay their own LIVES to protect their country, while those who issue these kind of fatwa doing nothing but sitting blinded by their ignorance !
To excommunicate anyone who testifies; I bear witness there is no God except Allah and Muhammed is the messenger of Allah deserves Allah’s punishments, and I pray they get.
Cowards!!
And speaking of “cowards”:
http://www.forbes.com/business.....84185.html
Gess, that’s true. However, at the same time the fact that no one person or class of people has a monopoly on the truth is one of the great things about our religion. I am not familiar with the Taliban fatwa you mention, but certainly any sheikh who disagreed could offer their own fatwa on the issue correcting them. That, to my thinking, is far more preferable than a situation where one sheikh or group of sheikhs has absolute religious authority. Unfortunately, the occasional dodgy fatwa is the price we must all pay for being free from the sort of clerical tyranny that affected other faith communities in the past.
Amir,
I was not advocating an Islamic Vatican.
Let me ask you a question. If every Sheik can issue a fatwa, then how can the Muslim find unity?
We have never had unity of opinion (or uniformity) from after the death of the Prophet (saw) until now so I do not think unity (in the sense that we normally speak of it) is ever going to be attainable. However, what we can hope for is a unity of purpose in which we respect and recognise the plurality of legitimate opinions that can exist on an issue. Therefore it’s a kind of unity in diversity (if that makes sense).
[…] The one in which militant madman cultists stop stealing the name of our religion.Austrolabe has a link to a Sydney-Morning Herald piece by Gerard Henderson, head honcho of right-wing […]
[…] The one in which militant madman cultists stop stealing the name of our religion.Austrolabe has a link to a Sydney-Morning Herald piece by Gerard Henderson, head honcho of right-wing […]
Why people take ‘Unity’ to mean ‘Uniformity’, and attack any deviation from the status quo?
Leave a Comment