Fatwas and Osama Bin Ladin

[Devadatta]

This is an obvious question, so my apologies if it's already come up and been dealt with.

We all know about the fatwa issued by Ayatollah Khomenei and laying a death sentence against Salmon Rushdie for writing a novel thought to be disrespectful to the Koran. At the same time, it's been said that to date no prominent Muslim cleric has issued a fatwa involving any censure, much less a death sentence, against Osama Bin Laden, despite the incalcuably greater harm he's done (and is doing) to the cause of Islam.

If the above is accurate, I would welcome any Muslim's comments on why it is so. If this is not accurate, I would welcome news of any fatwas against Osama Bin Ladin that have been issued.

Below I've pasted a quick definition of "fatwa" I found online, so that you know the understanding I'm speaking from, and to save you some time.

Thanks in advance for your help in this.

Definition: A fatwa is an Islamic religious ruling, a scholarly opinion on a matter of Islamic law.

A fatwa is issued by a recognized religious authority in Islam. But since there is no hierarchical priesthood or anything of the sort in Islam, a fatwa is not necessarily "binding" on the faithful. The people who pronounce these rulings are supposed to be knowledgable, and base their rulings in knowledge and wisdom. They need to supply the evidence from Islamic sources for their opinions, and it is not uncommon for scholars to come to different conclusions regarding the same issue. As Muslims, we look at the opinion, the reputation of the person giving it, the evidence given to support it, and then decide whether to follow it or not. When there are conflicting opinions issued by different scholars, we compare the evidence and then choose the opinion to which our God-given conscience guides us.

 

[Yaqinud Din]

Here is what Shaykh Abdul-Aziz Bin Baz had to say about OBL

[font=Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, san-serif][font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"So my advice to al-Masari[/font][font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif], al-Faqih, Bin Laden, and all those who traverse their way is to leave alone this disastrous path, and to fear Allah and to beware of His vengeance and His anger, and to return to guidance and to repent to Allah for what has preceded from them…"[/font][/font]

Also here is the Islamic view on Suicide Killing

Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen on Attacking the enemy by blowing oneself up in a car

Question: What is the ruling regarding acts of jihaad by means of suicide, such as attaching explosives to a car and storming the enemy, whereby he knows without a doubt that he shall die as a result of this action?


Response: Indeed, my opinion is that he is regarded as one who has killed himself (committed suicide), and as a result he shall be punished in Hell, for that which is authenticated on the authority of the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam).

[((Indeed, whoever (intentionally) kills himself, then certainly he will be punished in the Fire of Hell, wherein he shall dwell forever)), [Bukhaaree (5778) and Muslim (109 and 110)]].

However, one who is ignorant and does not know, and assumes his action was good and pleasing to Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala), then we hope Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala) forgives him for that which he did out of (ignorant) ijtihaad, even though I do not find any excuse for him in the present day. This is because this type of suicide is well known and widespread amongst the people, so it is upon the person to ask the people of knowledge (scholars) regarding it, until the right guidance for him is differentiated from the error.

And from that which is surprising, is that these people kill themselves despite Allaah having fordbidden this, as He (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala) says:

{And do not kill yourselves. Surely, Allaah is Most Merciful to you}, [Soorah an-Nisaa., Aayah 29].

And many amongst them do not desire anything except revenge of the enemy, by whatever means, be it halaal or haraam. So they only want to satisfy their thirst for revenge.

We ask Allaah to bless us with foresight in His Deen and action(s) which please Him, indeed He is all Powerful over all things.

Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymeen
Kayfa Nu'aalij Waaqi'unaa al-Aleem - Page 119

Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen on Committing suicide

Question: What is the ruling regarding suicide in Islaam?

Response: Suicide is when a person kills himself intentionally by whatever means. This is haraam and regarded as amongst the major sins, and likewise included in the general statement of Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala):

{And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell to abide therein, and the Wrath and the Curse of Allaah are upon him, and a great punishment is prepared for him}, [Soorah an-Nisaa, Aayah 93].

And it is established from the Sunnah on the authority of the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) who said:

((Indeed, whoever (intentionally) kills himself, then certainly he will be punished in the Fire of Hell, wherein he shall dwell forever)), [Bukhaaree (5778) and Muslim (109 and 110)]. In reality, the one who commits suicide, generally does so because of his desperate situation, either as a direct result of an act of Allaah or a human being. So you find him unable to cope with that which has afflicted him, and in actual fact he is like one who is calling for help from the scorching heat of the fire. So he has progressed from that which was tough (bad) to that which is worse. And if he was patient, then Allaah would have assisted him in dealing with the difficulty.

Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymeen
Hope this helps

 

[Devadatta]

Here is what Shaykh Abdul-Aziz Bin Baz had to say about OBL

[font=Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, san-serif][font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"So my advice to al-Masari[/font][font=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif], al-Faqih, Bin Laden, and all those who traverse their way is to leave alone this disastrous path, and to fear Allah and to beware of His vengeance and His anger, and to return to guidance and to repent to Allah for what has preceded from them…"[/font][/font]

Also here is the Islamic view on Suicide Killing

Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen on Attacking the enemy by blowing oneself up in a car

Question: What is the ruling regarding acts of jihaad by means of suicide, such as attaching explosives to a car and storming the enemy, whereby he knows without a doubt that he shall die as a result of this action?


Response: Indeed, my opinion is that he is regarded as one who has killed himself (committed suicide), and as a result he shall be punished in Hell, for that which is authenticated on the authority of the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam).

[((Indeed, whoever (intentionally) kills himself, then certainly he will be punished in the Fire of Hell, wherein he shall dwell forever)), [Bukhaaree (5778) and Muslim (109 and 110)]].

However, one who is ignorant and does not know, and assumes his action was good and pleasing to Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala), then we hope Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala) forgives him for that which he did out of (ignorant) ijtihaad, even though I do not find any excuse for him in the present day. This is because this type of suicide is well known and widespread amongst the people, so it is upon the person to ask the people of knowledge (scholars) regarding it, until the right guidance for him is differentiated from the error.

And from that which is surprising, is that these people kill themselves despite Allaah having fordbidden this, as He (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala) says:

{And do not kill yourselves. Surely, Allaah is Most Merciful to you}, [Soorah an-Nisaa., Aayah 29].

And many amongst them do not desire anything except revenge of the enemy, by whatever means, be it halaal or haraam. So they only want to satisfy their thirst for revenge.

We ask Allaah to bless us with foresight in His Deen and action(s) which please Him, indeed He is all Powerful over all things.

Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymeen
Kayfa Nu'aalij Waaqi'unaa al-Aleem - Page 119

Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen on Committing suicide

Question: What is the ruling regarding suicide in Islaam?

Response: Suicide is when a person kills himself intentionally by whatever means. This is haraam and regarded as amongst the major sins, and likewise included in the general statement of Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala):

{And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell to abide therein, and the Wrath and the Curse of Allaah are upon him, and a great punishment is prepared for him}, [Soorah an-Nisaa, Aayah 93].

And it is established from the Sunnah on the authority of the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) who said:

((Indeed, whoever (intentionally) kills himself, then certainly he will be punished in the Fire of Hell, wherein he shall dwell forever)), [Bukhaaree (5778) and Muslim (109 and 110)]. In reality, the one who commits suicide, generally does so because of his desperate situation, either as a direct result of an act of Allaah or a human being. So you find him unable to cope with that which has afflicted him, and in actual fact he is like one who is calling for help from the scorching heat of the fire. So he has progressed from that which was tough (bad) to that which is worse. And if he was patient, then Allaah would have assisted him in dealing with the difficulty.

Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymeen
Hope this helps

I can't tell you how grateful I am for this, Yaqinud. While the question of the comparative silence on OBL remains open, the comments regarding his foot solidiers and suicide bombing are most welcome.

As a follow up question, do you think that many clerics are intimidated from more decisively condemning and opposing OBL?

Otherwise, I think it would be interesting and helpful to many of us if you continued to post these sorts of opinions. I personally will read them with great interest.

One final request: it would also be helful to include some background on the clerics you quote, i.e., where they're located, whom the represent, etc.

Thanks again for your time & effort on this important question.

Peace.

 

[Yaqinud Din]

I don't think they are intimidated I think they don't have a voice in the west Muslims have been condemning OBL even before 9/11 but nobody would listen to what we had to say.

Who is Shaykh Ibn Uthaymeen

Abu 'Abdullaah Muhammad ibn Saalih ibn Muhammad ibn 'Uthaymeen at-Tameemee an-Najdee was born in the city of Unayzah, Qaseem Region on 27th Ramadhaan 1347 A.H./1926 C.E. in a famous religious family.

He received his education from many prominent scholars like Shaykh 'Abdur-Rahmaan as-Sa'dee, Shaykh Muhammad Ameen ash-Shanqeetee and Shaykh 'Abdul-'Azeez ibn Baaz.

When he entered into teaching, a great number of students from inside and outside Saudi Arabia benefited from him. He had his own unique style of interpretation and explanation of religious points. He was from among those scholars who served Islaam without any type of religious prejudice and kept themselves away from the limitations of blind-following. He was distinguished in his great exertion of effort in religious matters and analogical deductions which clearly prove the religious understanding he possessed, and the correct usage of the principles of religion, he adopted.


In giving religious verdicts, like Shaykh ibn Baaz, his Fataawa were based on evidence from the Qur.aan and Sunnah . He had about fifty compilations to his credit. He taught Religious Fundamentals at the Sharee'ah Faculty of Imaam Muhammad ibn Sa'ood Islaamic University, Qaseem Branch. He was also a member of the Council of Senior Scholars of the Kingdom, and the Imaam and Khateeb of the big Mosque of Unayzah city.

The Shaykh passed away on Wednesday 15 Shawwaal 1421 A.H. / 10 January 2001 C.E. He was 74 years of age. May Allaah (subhaanahu wa ta'aala) have Mercy upon his soul, aameen.

Here is a good website http://www.fatwa-online.com
Here is a good site http://www.thewahhabimyth.com
You can find Shaykh Abdul-Aziz Bin Baz bio on the fatwa-online site in biographies 15 century (1400H-1499H)

Hope this helps

 

[Devadatta]

I don't think they are intimidated I think they don't have a voice in the west Muslims have been condemning OBL even before 9/11 but nobody would listen to what we had to say.

Thanks for the links, Yaqinud. I had previously downloaded "The Wahabbi Myth", but haven't had the chance to read through all of it, or explore all of the Web site. The other site looks to be informative as well.

The capsule definition there of Salafism and why the term is preferred over "Wahabbism" is the most straightforward one I've seen. On the other hand, my feeling is that most in the West don't use the term to denigrate Islam. In large measure, I think what we have is a difference in the way we view history. Salafism is what we might call an ahistorical term; it relates to the example of Muhammed and his companions and not to any particular way this example has been followed historically. "Wahabbism", on the other, specifically centres on particular individuals and social histories. I'm sure you would agree that Muhammad Ibn Abdul-Wahhab lived in a particular time and place and promoted Salafism against what he viewed as the innovations of the time. His activities had measurable impacts that can be traced over time. Our view of history in the West centres among other things on just these kinds of individuals and social movements; it's only natural that we view something called "Wahabbism" as a discrete phenomenon in the history of Islam.

I do agree with you that since Salafism is the self-defining term of people in the tradition, it would be better and more respectful if people outside the tradition adopted that term as well. But in terms of better understanding between the West and Islam, it would only be a change of labels: the real difficulties would remain.

One real difficulty was in effect alluded to in your response, when you dated the Shaykh using the Islamic calendar. No problem with that in itself of course - but it only points to the fact that arguably the West and Islam live in alternate universes that to this day only partially overlap. So when you suggest that our media ignores Muslim voices you're right. But it's not just bigotry and self-interest - it's an indication of a general ignorance for which both sides bear responsibility. KSA, for example, is still a land of mystery in the West. I had the experience not long ago of going to the library to find a video on KSA. You may be aware that there are many series of travel and related videos on most countries in the world. For KSA, I found one - and it was issued by the Saudi government, and expressed only a very limited and "official" view.

Hopefully, this situation is changing and evolving even as I type. But I guess what I'm saying is that however important terminological issues may be, what we really need from one another is information bearing on the concrete situations we face.

With that in mind, would you feel free to answer some direct questions based on your own experience as a Muslim? I have no thesis to prove; I'm not looking to lay traps of any kind. Any question I ask regarding your culture, I'll be happy to match with the view from my end, to the best of my ability.

Peace.

 

[Yaqinud Din]

Yes you can ask me anything about Islam and yes I'm a Muslim

 

[Devadatta]

Yes you can ask me anything about Islam and yes I'm a Muslim

Hi again. To begin at the beginning I'm interested in your take on the perceptions of the West in your corner of the Islamic world, including what is taught in school and the range of ideas, attitudes or myths that you observe in your own culture. Now, as I said, I'll do the same from my side, which I was about to do, except that I realized I don't know for sure what part of the world you're speaking from I've assumed it's the KSA, and hence what you might find of interest. So I guess that would be the first thing I'd like to know. I'm in Canada and in a North American milieu which is significantly different in range of attitudes even in comparison to Europe.

So that's the topic I'm proposing. You can start it off, or let me know where you're writing from and I'll start.

Cheers.

 

[iBrian]

Just to add to the original subject of fatwa:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4694441.stm

More than 500 British Muslim religious leaders and scholars have issued a fatwa in response to the London bombs. The religious decree expresses condolences to the families of the victims of the atrocity and wishes the injured a speedy recovery.

It states Islam condemns the use of violence and the destruction of innocent lives and says suicide bombings are "vehemently prohibited".

The formal legal opinion was issued by the British Muslim Forum at Parliament.

More than 50 Muslim religious leaders from around the UK stood together outside the Houses of Parliament to hear the fatwa read out.

 

[Yaqinud Din]

Devadatta I can not answer because I'm not from the Kingdom in fact I'm Irish

 

[Devadatta]

Just to add to the original subject of fatwa:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4694441.stm

Thanks, Brian. Excellent news. There was also a very good bbc article online dealing with the madrassas in Pakistan, Musharraf, and the unfortunate underlying politics. I missed the article you've posted here (or it wasn't there yet), so much appreciated.

Cheers.

 

[iBrian]

I actually had to do some digging around for the story - didn't see it in the normal areas, just as a footnote in another story.

 

[earl]

Thanks for posting the "good" news, Earl

 

[Devadatta]

For the first time Muslims leaders in Canada meet collectively to condemn terrorism. Here's the link: http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/07/21/Canadian-Islamic-response-050721.html

 

[thipps]

H|,
Interestingly, Shiekh bin Baaz and Shiekh Ibn Uthaymeen are exactly those people whom, when the time is convenient, people will label as Wahhabis (synonymous with terrorist). go figure.
Al-Qaeda is not & never has been an "Islamic force" if i cud call it that. The vast majority of imams in the Muslim world both since & well before 9/11 have consistently & widely condemned suicide bombings in particular & terrorism in general. a few days ago, 500 British imams issued a fatwa prohibiting suicide bombing & the killing of innocents, while Sheikh Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, considered a high authority for the world’s one billion Sunni Muslims, has repeatedly condemned terrorism in all its forms. The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), condemned the Sharm El-Sheikh blasts. In 2004, CAIR launched a petition drive, called "Not in the Name of Islam," designed to disassociate Islam from the violent acts of a few Muslims. The petition, signed by some 700,000 Muslims, states in part: "We refuse to allow our faith to be held hostage by the criminal actions of a tiny minority acting outside the teachings of both the Quran and the Prophet Muhammad [pbuh]." I read on the CAIR website that CAIR turned that petition into a television public service announcement that is being distributed nationwide.
Hopefully, this helps to stop a view being generalized that the word Muslim is synonymous with terrorist... at least in the general public.

 

[Devadatta]

Hopefully, this helps to stop a view being generalized that the word Muslim is synonymous with terrorist... at least in the general public.

Hi Thipps.

Leaving aside the two Sheiks you mention, which were cited earlier in the thread, the 500 Imams are based in the U.K., and CAIR is based in Washington D.C. – and then there’s the Muslims leaders I cited in Canada. Do we see a pattern here?

And as far as the Muslim leaders in Canada go, I understand they did not in fact constitute a majority, did not go so far as issuing a fatwa and – as the new report says – had never issued this kind of statement before, even in the wake of 9/11.

So while I welcome this kind of news and any like news you can pass along, much remains to be done, and I remain of the opinion that not enough has been done within the Muslim community to combat this terrible virus.

Of course I could be wrong, and would be happy to be proved so, but understand that among non-Muslims my opinion is not uncommon. And it’s not an opinion based on racism or bigotry or hatred of Islam or the belief that Al Qaeda represents Islam. It’s based on the simple observation that a virus originating from Muslim countries continues to spread and the Muslim world as a whole appears fairly passive or acquiescent in the face of it.

The political complications are of course enormous. Many hands have stirred the pot. American money, Western money, and Saudi money have all gone to the funding and training of jihadis, first to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. Pakistan, for its own complicated political and strategic reasons has variously supported, tolerated or been intimidated by jihadis grown on its own soil. Not just one genie but thousands have been created and let out of the bottle. This is a hideous problem.

But you know I have simple messages for both sides, the West and Islam. On my side of the pond, I say forget about dully wondering “why do they hate us”, and do more than the never-ending round of hunting down the bad guys. Find out what’s going on from our end and make structural and political changes, and changes in the shape of alliances which have become counter productive. The time of either apologetics or apologies for Western power is over. It’s time for intelligent rather than simply military action.

And to Muslims I say the time of public relations is over. The bigots are not your problem. Your problems are within your midst. I personally feel no compunction or guilt in claiming that Muslims are not doing enough and in urging Muslims to do more. It’s been said many times that this highjacking of Islam is a Muslim problem and can only be solved by Muslims. I believe that. But the rest of us can’t be content to sit by, wringing our hands, out of fear of offending.

It may an extraordinary presumption on my part to speak so directly. But there are far more terrible things going on than a bit of plain & honest speech between fellow human beings.

Peace to you, your family & your country.

 

[Yaqinud Din]

I disagree Muslims have done alot we say over and over that we disagree with OBL and all people like him but the truth is bad Muslims make good news in the west thats a fact.

I'm very sick of people saying do more do more we can only do what we can do and we have done alot.

Devadatta you are not a Muslim so you don't know what is going on in the Muslim community we are doing alot in the cummunity but you can't see it because your not a part of the community.


Devadatta go tell the Muslim familys who have had family members killed by bigots in the usa and Europe and to worry.

 

[Devadatta]

I disagree Muslims have done alot we say over and over that we disagree with OBL and all people like him but the truth is bad Muslims make good news in the west thats a fact.

I'm very sick of people saying do more do more we can only do what we can do and we have done alot.

Devadatta you are not a Muslim so you don't know what is going on in the Muslim community we are doing alot in the cummunity but you can't see it because your not a part of the community.


Devadatta go tell the Muslim familys who have had family members killed by bigots in the usa and Europe and to worry.

I don't know if I quite understand your last comment, but otherwise I appreciate your honest response. You're right to be frustrated. You see the merits of your culture from the inside, and know the 90% that's going right as opposed to the 10% that's going wrong.

But as an ordinary person I have a right to be concerned. It's not just that I'm potentially at risk taking a bus to work in the morning - that's the least of it. It's the long term pattern that most concerns me: a downward spiral of increased jihadism met by increased military action by the West. We're heading in a potentially disastrous direction that could make what's happened so far seem trivial.

And sure, people are making efforts on all sides, and I don't mean to sound apocalyptic. But I also think the danger is real and we can hardly afford to relax or be too polite in the face of it.

Again, I respect your frustration and know that your impulse to defend the honour of your culture is honourable. And realistically as a single person you can on only deal with so much. I don't know where you're writing from, but wherever you are will have its own specific context and perspective on what needs to be done.

But what I have observed on this forum is that I've yet to hear from any Muslim admitting to any systemic problem, whether on the level of government, religion or culture. No Muslim from KSA, for example, has ever remotely criticized his or her own government. Instead, the responses have nearly uniformly been what I would call exercises in public relations.

Like the frustration you've expressed, this of course is understandable. My impression is that many Muslims still see themselves as underdogs if not altogether under the thumb of the West. So it's not easy to look in the mirror.

The pressing reality remains, however. And as an ordinary person I have the right to urge everyone to look in that mirror. And you have a right to your own frustrations. If these reciprocal rights result in an honest exchange like this, I think it's a good thing, and probably about as much as a forum like this can accomplish.

Peace to you & your family, wherever you are.

(Please check out the thread I'm just about to start in the politics section: Where the West is wrong.)

 

[thipps]

Hi Thipps.

Leaving aside the two Sheiks you mention, which were cited earlier in the thread, the 500 Imams are based in the U.K., and CAIR is based in Washington D.C. – and then there’s the Muslims leaders I cited in Canada. Do we see a pattern here?

No, i dont. Maybe because you missed where i mentioned "Sheikh Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, considered a high authority for the world’s one billion Sunni Muslims, has repeatedly condemned terrorism in all its forms."
Let me add that earlier this year, a leading Saudi cleric Sheikh Abdulrahman Al-Sudeis told pilgrims to Makkah that “faith does not mean killing Muslims or non-Muslims living among us. It does not mean shedding blood, terrorizing or sending body parts flying.”
I agree with Yaqinud Din. A few nut-heads blowing themselves up makes for better news than the saudis issuing rulings against terrorism. Thats why you think muslims are not doing enough. The thing is who's listening? Some fool comes on the television and (the news-caster having claimed the speaker being an expert and everyone obviously believing so) says 'Muslims arent doing enough'... people will believe it.

Of course I could be wrong, and would be happy to be proved so, but understand that among non-Muslims my opinion is not uncommon. And it’s not an opinion based on racism or bigotry or hatred of Islam or the belief that Al Qaeda represents Islam. It’s based on the simple observation that a virus originating from Muslim countries continues to spread and the Muslim world as a whole appears fairly passive or acquiescent in the face of it.
The political complications are of course enormous. Many hands have stirred the pot. American money, Western money, and Saudi money have all gone to the funding and training of jihadis, first to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. Pakistan, for its own complicated political and strategic reasons has variously supported, tolerated or been intimidated by jihadis grown on its own soil. Not just one genie but thousands have been created and let out of the bottle. This is a hideous problem.

Firstly, stop using the word "jihadis" as if it is synonymous with terrorists. It really doesnt help anyone. I dont like to say this to people but (its unavoidable) those who use it in that way show thier ignorance. Stop using terms that the media or whoever it is teaches you.The word terrorism came into wide usage only a few decades ago. One of the unfortunate results of this new terminology is that it limits the definition of terrorism to that perpetrated by small groups or individuals. Terrorism spans the entire world & manifests itself in various forms. Its perpetrators do not fit any stereotype (eventhough it is now being seen in the UK specifically that if you aint a white-guy, better be careful or you could get killed by the police). Those who hold human lives cheap & have the power to expend human lives, appear at different levels in our societies. An individual who blows himself up on a civilian bus has committed an act of terrorism. Likewise, “carpet bombing” of entire cities, & using the weapon of sanctions that starve tens of thousands of children to death, is also an act of terrorism.
Secondly, i feel that either you are confused or you just put the blame for all these terrorist acts on Muslims worldwide when you said "It’s based on the simple observation that a virus originating from Muslim countries". Nothing could be further from the truth as we have been trying to tell people around the world that these are individual acts not sanctioned by Islam. it seems it is falling on deaf ears. you admit that "American money, Western money" has stirred the pot... The reality is that you seem not to understand that the latter made the pot and put the fire under it as well. As you sow, so shall you reap. You seem obsessed with Bin laden. who do you think trained and armed him?

But you know I have simple messages for both sides, the West and Islam. On my side of the pond, I say forget about dully wondering “why do they hate us”, and do more than the never-ending round of hunting down the bad guys. Find out what’s going on from our end and make structural and political changes, and changes in the shape of alliances which have become counter productive. The time of either apologetics or apologies for Western power is over. It’s time for intelligent rather than simply military action.

You wont find me appologizing for the actions of a few nut-heads either. And lets not insult the intelligence of people by thinking and making others think that these things are done because "they hate our way of life. they hate freedom..." bla bla bla. I've heard it enough times from BUsh/Blair and Co. On american radio shows etc. I seriously wonder who is foolish enough to believe what these people are saying.

And to Muslims I say the time of public relations is over. The bigots are not your problem. Your problems are within your midst. I personally feel no compunction or guilt in claiming that Muslims are not doing enough and in urging Muslims to do more. It’s been said many times that this highjacking of Islam is a Muslim problem and can only be solved by Muslims. I believe that. But the rest of us can’t be content to sit by, wringing our hands, out of fear of offending.

It may an extraordinary presumption on my part to speak so directly. But there are far more terrible things going on than a bit of plain & honest speech between fellow human beings.

Peace to you, your family & your country.

Everyone should condemn terrorists who kill innocents. And similarly, we should surely condemn leaders of the international community for allowing millions of Palestinians to be deprived of their land, freedom & rights for more than half-a-century;for ultimately condoning the illegal invasion of Iraq, which we all know was waged on a succession of false pretexts;the 500,000 Iraqi children who lost their lives due to US-led sanctions on their country, a loss that was termed by a former US Secretary of State as being “worth it”. thier foriegn policies are geared in the wrong direction. As far as I can see, if the West were to put its own house in order, the terrorists would either fade away or be completely & utterly isloted so that they would choke to death.
Hope that was honest enough for you.

 

[Devadatta]

No, i dont. Maybe because you missed where i mentioned "Sheikh Muhammad Sayyed Tantawi, considered a high authority for the world’s one billion Sunni Muslims, has repeatedly condemned terrorism in all its forms.".

Hi Thipps. I posted a complete reply to your post in the "Politics & Society" section and in the thread "Where the west is wrong". I thought it made more sense there, in terms of what we've been discussing.

Cheers.

 

[su13]

Hi there,

Thought this link might be useful for the purposes of this discussion...

http://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/terror.htm


This link leads to a collection of Muslim statements condemning the 9/11 attacks and targeting of civilians. As you'll see, many of these statements come from outside North America and Europe. The fatwa of Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi (and other Egyptian scholars) is particularly enlightening, and it's reproduced in verbatim below:

"Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi [Grand Islamic Scholar and Chairman of the Sunna and Sira Council, Qatar]
Judge Tariq al-Bishri [First Deputy President of the Council d'etat, Ret., Egypt]
Dr. Muhammad S. al-Awa [Professor of Comparative Law and Shari'a, Egypt]
Dr. Haytham al-Khayyat [Islamic Scholar, Syria]
Mr. Fahmi Houaydi [Islamic Author and Columnist, Egypt]
Sheikh Taha Jabir al-Alwani [Chairman of the North America Fiqh Council, Sterling, Va.]


This English version was translated from the original Arabic, authorized and approved by authors of the statement.

Following is the fatwa text:

In The Name of God, The Compassionate, The Merciful

Legal Fatwa

This is the reply to the (religious) inquiry presented by Mr. Muhammad Abdur-Rashid, the most senior Muslim chaplain in the American Armed forces. It concerns the permissibility of the Muslim military personnel within the US armed forces to participate in the war operations and its related efforts in Afghanistan and elsewhere in other Muslim countries.

In his question he states that the goals of the (war) operations are:

1) Retaliation against those "who are thought to have participated" in planning and financing the suicide operations on September 11th, against civilian and military targets in New York and Washington (he then detailed the consequences of these operations.)

2) Eliminating the elements that use Afghanistan and elsewhere as safe haven, as well as deterring the governments which harbor them, sanction them, or allow them the opportunity for military training in order to achieve their goals around the world.

3) Restoring the veneration and respect to the US as a sole superpower in the world.

Furthermore, he concludes his inquiry by mentioning that the number of the Muslim military personnel, in the three branches of the American armed forces, exceeds fifteen thousand soldiers. Hence, if they refuse to participate in fighting, they will have no choice but to resign, which might also entail other consequences. Finally, he asks if it is permissible, to those who can transfer, to serve in different capacities other than direct fighting.

The reply:

Praise be to God and peace and blessing be upon the messengers of God. We say: This question presents a very complicated issue and a highly sensitive situation for our Muslim brothers and sisters serving in the American army as well as other armies that face similar situations. All Muslims ought to be united against all those who terrorize the innocents, and those who permit the killing of non-combatants without a justifiable reason. Islam has declared the spilling of blood and the destruction of property as absolute prohibitions until the Day of Judgment. God (glory be to He) said: " Because of that We ordained unto the Children of Israel that if anyone killed a human being - unless it be in punishment for murder or for spreading mischief on earth- it would be as though he killed all of humanity; whereas, if anyone saved a life, it would be as though he saved the life of all humanity. And indeed, there came to them Our messengers with clear signs (proofs and evidences), even then after that,
many of them continued to commit mischief on earth." 5:32

Hence, whoever violates these pointed Islamic texts is an offender deserving of the appropriate punishment according to their offence and according to its consequences for destruction and mischief.

It's incumbent upon our military brothers in the American armed forces to make this stand and its religious reasoning well known to all their superiors, as well as to their peers, and to voice it and not to be silent. Conveying this is part of the true nature of the Islamic teachings that have often been distorted or smeared by the media.

If the terrorist acts that took place in the US were considered by the Islamic Law (Shar'iah) or the rules of Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh), the ruling for the crime of "Hirabah" (waging war against society) would be applied to their doers. God (Glory be to He) said: "The recompense of those who wage war against God and His Messenger and do mischief on earth is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off from opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is
their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter. Except for those who (having fled away and then) came back with repentance before they fall into your power; (in that case) know that God is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." 5: 33-34

Therefore, we find it necessary to apprehend the true perpetrators of these crimes, as well as those who aid and abet them through incitement, financing or other support. They must be brought to justice in an impartial court of law and punish them appropriately, so that it could act as deterrent to them and to others like them who easily slay the lives of innocents, destroy properties and terrorize people. Hence, it's a duty on Muslims to participate in this effort with all possible means, in
accordance with God's (Most High) saying: "And help one another in virtue and righteousness, but do not help one another in sin and transgression." 5:2.

On the other hand, the source of the uneasiness that American Muslim military men and women may have in fighting other Muslims, is because it's often difficult- if not impossible- to differentiate between the real perpetrators who are being pursued, and the innocents who have committed no crime at all. The authentic saying by the prophet states: "When two Muslims face each other in fighting and one kills the other, then both the killer and the killed are in the hell-fire. Someone said: we understand
that the killer is in hell, why then the one who's being killed? The prophet said: because he wanted to kill the other person." (Narrated by Bukhari and Muslim.)

The noble Hadith mentioned above only refers to the situation where the Muslim is in charge of his affairs. He is capable of fighting as well as capable of not fighting. This Hadith does not address the situation where a Muslim is a citizen of a state and a member of a regular army. In this case, he has no choice but to follow orders, otherwise his allegiance and loyalty to his country could be in doubt. This would subject him to much harm since he would not enjoy the privileges of citizenship without performing its obligations.

The Muslim (soldier) must perform his duty in this fight despite the feeling of uneasiness of "fighting without discriminating." His intention (niyya) must be to fight for enjoining of the truth and defeating falsehood. It's to prevent aggression on the innocents, or to apprehend the perpetrators and bring them to justice. It's not his concern what other consequences of the fighting that might result in his personal discomfort, since he alone can neither control it nor prevent it. Furthermore, all deeds are accounted (by God) according to the intentions. God (the Most High) does not burden any soul except what it can bear. In addition, Muslim jurists have ruled that what a Muslim cannot control he cannot be held accountable for, as God (the Most High) says: "And keep your duty to God as much as you can." 64:16. The prophet (prayer and peace be upon him) said: " when I ask of you to do something, do it as much as you can." The Muslim here is a part of a whole, if he absconds, his departure will result in a greater harm, not only for him but also for the Muslim community in his country - and here there are many millions of them. Moreover, even if fighting causes him discomfort spiritually or psychologically, this personal hardship must be endured for the greater public good, as the jurisprudence (fiqhi) rule states.

Furthermore, the questioner inquires about the possibility of the Muslim military personnel in the American armed forces to serve in the back lines - such as in the relief services' sector and similar works. If such requests are granted by the authorities, without reservation or harm to the soldiers, or to the other American Muslim citizens, then they should request that. Otherwise, if such request raises doubts about their allegiance or loyalty, cast suspicions, present them with false accusations, harm their future careers, shed misgivings on their patriotism, or similar sentiments, then it's not permissible to ask for that.

To sum up, it's acceptable - God willing- for the Muslim American military personnel to partake in the fighting in the upcoming battles, against whomever, their country decides, has perpetrated terrorism against them. Keeping in mind to have the proper intention as explained earlier, so no doubts would be cast about their loyalty to their country, or to prevent harm to befall them as might be expected. This is in accordance with the Islamic jurisprudence rules which state that necessities dictate exceptions, as well as the rule that says one may endure a small harm to avoid a much greater harm.

And God the Most High is Most Knowledgeable and Most Wise.

Rajab 10, 1422 AH / September 27, 2001

Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi [Grand Islamic Scholar and Chairman of the Sunna and Sira Council, Qatar]
Judge Tariq al-Bishri [First Deputy President of the Council d'etat, Ret., Egypt]
Dr. Muhammad S. al-Awa [Professor of Comparative Law and Shari'a, Egypt]
Dr. Haytham al-Khayyat [Islamic Scholar, Syria]
Mr. Fahmi Houaydi [Islamic Author and Columnist, Egypt]
Sheikh Taha Jabir al-Alwani [Chairman of the North America Fiqh Council, Sterling, Va.] This English version was translated from the original Arabic, authorized and approved by authors of the statement.