Selsaral

Obviously your description for what a fatwa is isn't shared by all muslims, perhaps not even by the majority. In the case of Rushdie, it was the highest level religious leaders in Iran who issued the fatwa. These aren't just some fringe radicals, this is the established islamic church. As the following articles describe, a fatwa can mean a death sentence and is often levelled against non-muslims. In the case of the playwrite in England, those who issued the fatwa specifically say that British muslims shouldn't try to assassinate him, but that if he ever travelled to a muslim nation he would face execution. Sure some muslims dispute it, but plenty support it. Read what they have to say on these issues:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2519595.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/641898.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/562358.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/493436.stm

http://europe.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/afr...nigeria.fatwa/

bagong

Whether blasphemy from a non-Muslim (like the playwright or Nigerian journalist) constitute grounds for hadd (mandatory punishment, including execution) is a controversial issue; Ulama have issued contradictory fatwas on the matter.

Whether it is permissible to kill non-Muslims for blasphemy was not the point of my post, however. I was trying to show that the Western media report fatwas in a way that causes confusion over what they really are. The BBC says: "Sheikh X issues fatwa to kill person Y!!!" giving the impression that a fatwa is an Islamic death sentence. This is not what a fatwa actually does; a fatwa establishes that "Action X is Y under Islamic law," where Y can be all types of things: mandatory, recommended, neutral, punishable by death, etc. It is a clarification of a point of Islamic law in cases of confusion.

Example: in the Rushdie case the fatwa established that the parody of Muhammad in the Satanic Verses was an act of kufr (blasphemy), which constitutes irtidad (apostasy), which has a hadd (mandatory punishment) of death for someone born Muslim.

Your links also show another problem with fatwa-reporting in the West: 2 of them were issued by an organisation called Al Muhajiroun. I know little about the organisation, but I doubt that they are actually qualified to act as muftis (fatwa authorities). Basically any old Muslim can make a controversial statement, and the Western media will report it as a "fatwa", whereas the first reaction of Muslims (or people familiar with Islam) would be to investigate whether the person making it is sufficiently trained in the principles of Islamic jurisprudence and knowledgable enough in Qu'ran and Ahadith to be qualified to issue a genuine fatwa.

The most notorious example would be Osama's 1998 statement to kill American citizens, which was universally reported as a "fatwa", when no one with any familiarity with Islamic law could even for a second think that Osama was qualified to issue fatwas.

Selsaral

Your point is well taken about western media's coverage of such proclamations. This is exactly why I tried to choose the BBC articles which represented both sides of the issue. The article about the journalist in Nigeria clearly showed many muslims found the fatwa against her absurd and illegal. It also showed that regardless of that, many found it perfectly legal.

I suppose the reason I disputed your earlier description of a fatwa is because you specifically said 'this-and only this-is considered a fatwa', after describing a purely mundane situation in which it was a simple matter of declaring whether the situation is in accordance with islamic law. Having the supreme holy leader of Iran call for the death of a non-muslim over a book written in a different country and asking all muslims everywhere to assassinate him is obviously grossly different from your description. Also, it shows that it isn't just crackpots etc who issue such drastic proclamations, it is the most powerful and respected islamic religious leaders.

bagong

The whole point is that it isn't different. In one case, a muslim scholar determines whether cloning is permissible under Islamic law, and if not, what penalty for violating this is appropriate. In the other case, a muslim scholar determines whether writing a book parodying the prophet is permissible under Islamic law, and if not, what penalty for violating this is appropriate. When I said "this and only this", I was referring to *procedure*, not *content*. Although I obviously disagree with the Rushdie fatwa, I don't deny that it is perfectly valid within the context of Islamic law: the penalty for apostasy (Rushdie was born a Muslim) is unequivocally death in the Islamic legal tradition, and the Ayatullah is recognised as a legitimate fatwa-issueing authority.

The Nigerian case is much more controversial in this respect. First, it was issued by the deputy govenor of a state in consultation with "Islamic youth groups". There is no indication that any of these people are trained Islamic scholars, much less respected fatwa authorities. Secondly, the Islamic legal tradition is much less clear on the issue of kuffar (infidels) blaspheming outside of the Dar-al-Islam (the Islamic state) than on apostasy of Muslims-by-birth. I am not an 'aalim qualified to issue a fatwa on the matter, but AFAIK there is no legal justification within Shariah for killing *all* blasphemers on the planet.
I never claimed otherwise. I was just pointing out that many fatwas reported in the West are issued by people who are not accepted as legitimate fatwa sources in the Muslim world. But you're right: things like stoning adulterers, executing apostates, amputating hands of thieves, etc. are theoretically accepted by *all* Muslims as the perfectly just Law of God, the ideal blueprint for society. You don't have to be a crackpot to come up with some pretty cruel fatwas.

River

The Quran definitely does not support the flat earth theory. In fact the Quran mentions planetary orbits...this is a strong indication that it does not support the flat earth theory. However , there are verses in the Quran about a day when the earth will be spread out. However , these verses might possibly be talking about the contraction of the universe, when typical laws of physics would/could be violated. For example Entropy will decrease and the universe might possibly be in nonspontaneous mode.

1)However , the Quran definitely supports the Big Bang Theory and Life originating from Water...


Have not "those who disbelieve" known heavens and earth were of one piece,
We parted them and, We made every living thing of water
Will they not then believe? [Chapter: 21, Verse: 30 Noble Quran]



2)The Quran also supports the expansion of the Universe....



"The heavens, We have built with power and, We are expanding it."
[Chapter: 51, Verse: 47 Noble Quran]




3)The Quran supports the existence of multiple Universes.....


"He created seven universes in layers. You do not

see any imperfection in the creation by the Most Gracious.

Keep looking; do you see any flaw? Look again and again; your

sight will return to you stumped and conquered. "

[ 67:3-4 Noble Quran]

Selsaral

Thanks for helping me understand this. Although it's a bit off topic, perhaps you could briefly answer a few more questions I have about this. First, do the different sects of Islam disrespect fatwas issued by their respective muslim scholars? For instance a respected Sunni scholar could issue a fatwa and it could be rejected by most Shiites as not being authentic? Secondly, just how much wiggle room is there for determining who is a respected enough scholar to issue a fatwa? Third apostacy seems to be extremely freely interpreted. According to what I could find on the net, apostacy is simply 'leaving islam', or 'to question an important aspect of islam'. But when a non-muslim insults islam i hear accusations of apostacy, when they clearly cannot 'leave' islam since they were never muslims. Does sharia law really apply to non-muslisms? And does this mean any differing interpretation of the koran is apostacy? Does this mean Shiite and Sunni muslims consider each other to be constantly committing apostacy? Does this mean moves for a more liberal, 'protestantized' islam is apostacy and can carry a death sentence? Could you please elaborate on this?

ashibaka

You have quotes for everything else, so where does the Qu'ran mention planetary orbits, praytell?

bagong

First, do the different sects of Islam disrespect fatwas issued by their respective muslim scholars? For instance a respected Sunni scholar could issue a fatwa and it could be rejected by most Shiites as not being authentic?
Yes, different sects do not always accept each other's fatwas. For instance, Shias employ hadith not found in the authorative collections of al-Bukhari and al-Muslim, and any Shia fatwa based on such "unsound" (a technical term meaning that the hadith's chain of witnesses linking it to Muhammad is considered unreliable) hadith will be rejected by Sunnis.

But even *within* Sunni Islam, there exist 4 different schools of jurisprudence, who use different interpretations of fiqh to derive Islamic law from the same set of scriptures. They are all considered orthodox and equally valid, but they often reach contradictory conclusions. (example: all 4 schools perform the daily prayers in slightly different ways, based on different interpretations of the Prophet's sunnah.)

Secondly, just how much wiggle room is there for determining who is a respected enough scholar to issue a fatwa?

Imam Shafi (the founder of the Shafi'i school of jurisprudence, the first great scholar of Islamic law) wrote:
'Allah has not permitted any person since the Prophet's time to give an opinion except on the strength of established (legal) knowledge. ( Legal ) knowledge includes the qur'an, the Sunnah, Ijma, narrative and Qiyas based on these texts.... Nobody should apply Qiyas unless he is competent to do so through his knowledge of the commands of the Book of Allah, its prescribed duties and ethical discipline, its abrogated and abrogating (communications), its general and particular rules, and its (right) guidance ... No one is competent to apply Qiyas unless he is conversant with the established Sunnah, the opinions of his predecessors, the agreement and disagreement of the people, and has adequate knowledge of the Arabic tongue.'

This is an accurate reflection of conservative opinion on the level of knowledge required to issue fatwas. Clearly it is quite demanding; it takes years of training to acquire the competency Shafi demands.

However, many Islamic modernists feel that this reluctance to allow individual interpretation has made Muslims too sheep-like; that more stress should be placed on personal use of reason to interpret Qu'ranic injuctions in the modern world. Radical Muslims are also prone to individual interpretation, but for very different reasons.

Third apostacy seems to be extremely freely interpreted. According to what I could find on the net, apostacy is simply 'leaving islam', or 'to question an important aspect of islam'. But when a non-muslim insults islam i hear accusations of apostacy, when they clearly cannot 'leave' islam since they were never muslims.
Apostasy clearly refers only to people who were Muslim, although it does distinguish between those born Muslim and converts who later revert.

Does sharia law really apply to non-muslisms?
Yes, non-Muslims living in a true Islamic state would be subject to Sharia (where it does not directly violate their own religion), just as non-citizens living in America are still bound by American law.

And does this mean any differing interpretation of the koran is apostacy? Does this mean Shiite and Sunni muslims consider each other to be constantly committing apostacy? Does this mean moves for a more liberal, 'protestantized' islam is apostacy and can carry a death sentence? Could you please elaborate on this?
The Islam QA website has a fatwa on just this topic:
I read in Question no. 12811 that there are various kinds of major kufr that puts one beyond the pale of Islam. I hope that you could explain that and give some examples of it.

Selsaral

So the fatwas issued against Boris Yeltsin and the playwrite in London are clearly illegal, because they apply to non-muslims in non-mulism states? Even though they said he can be brought to justice if he travels to a muslim state, he still isn't a muslim. It sounds like in this situation it would have more appropriate to communicate how blasphemous and insulting they feel it to be, but that issuing a fatwa stepped over the bounds of what is legal in sharia law.

River

"It is He Who created The Night and the Day,
And the sun and the moon: All (the celestial bodies)
Swim along, each in its Rounded course."
[AI-Qur'an 21:33]

"It is not permitted To the Sun to catch up The Moon,
nor can The Night outstrip the Day:
Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit
(According to Law)."
[AI-Qur'an 36:40]



also....the Sun will extinguish after a certain period

"And the Sun Runs its course For a period determined For it;
that is The decree of (Him) The exalted in Might, The All-Knowing."
[AI-Qur'an 36:38]*

THE SPHERICAL SHAPE OF THE EARTH

In early times, people believed that the earth is flat. For centuries, men were afraid to venture out too far, lest they should fall off the edge. Sir Francis Drake was the first person who proved that the earth is spherical when he sailed around it in 1597.
Consider the following Qur'anic verse regarding the alternation of day and night:


"Seest thou not that Allah merges Night into Day
And He merges Day into Night?
[AI-Qur'an 31:29]

Merging here means that the night slowly and gradually changes to day and vice versa. This phenomenon can only take place if the earth is spherical. If the earth was flat, there would have been a sudden change from night to day and from day to night.

The following verse also alludes to the spherical shape of the earth:


"He created the heavens And the earth In true (proportions):
He makes the Night Overlap the Day, and the Day Overlap the Night."
[AI-Qur'an 39:5]

The Arabic word used here is Kawwara meaning 'to overlap' or 'to coil'- the way a turban is wound around the head. The overlapping or coiling of the day and night can only take place if the earth is spherical.

The earth is not exactly round like a ball, but geo-spherical i.e. it is flattened at the poles. The following verse contains a description of the earth's shape:


"And the earth, moreover, Hath He made egg shaped."
[AI-Qur'an 79:30]

The Arabic word for egg here is dahaha1 which means an ostrich-egg. The shape of an ostrich-egg resembles the geo-spherical shape of the earth.

Thus the Qur'an correctly describes the shape of the earth, though the prevalent notion when the Qur'an was revealed was that the earth is flat.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 The Arabic word dahaha has been
translated by A. Yusuf Ali as
"vast expanse", which also is correct.
The word dahaha also means an ostrich-egg.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------