Some fatwas issued recently by jurisprudents in the Muslim world have aroused criticism and derision on the part of Palestinian academics, columnists and newspaper editors. One writer condemned jurisprudents for issuing arbitrary fatwas that serve their own personal interests, or the political interests of some body or faction - sometimes even for a fee. He also criticized their hypocrisy, saying that although they try to monopolize the faith and impose their opinion on others, they do not practice what they preach. Other articles focused on ridiculous and demeaning fatwas issued against women, such as the decree that they must wear a veil revealing only one eye.
Following are excerpts from the articles:
The Jurisprudents Issue Fatwas out of Hypocrisy, Greed, and Personal or Factional Interests
Hafez Al-Barghouti, editor of the Palestinian Authority daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, responded to a fatwa issued by Algerian Salafi sheikh Muhammad 'Ali Farkous (known as Abi 'Abd Al-Mu'izz), who prohibited the eating of a traditional pastry called zulabiyya.
"Every zulabiyya is a forbidden innovation; every innovation is a departure from the path of righteousness; and every such departure [leads straight to the fires of] Hell - though zulabiyya is fried in oil over a fire to begin with, and does not need a fatwa [to send it there].
"[I say that] it is not zulabiyya that is the forbidden innovation here, but the fatwa issued by Algerian sheikh [Muhammad] Farkous, who pronounced zulabiyya a forbidden innovation for no good [religious] reason...
"This inexplicable arbitrariness is the hallmark of many contemporary fatwas, for nearly every [cleric now claims] the authority to issue fatwas on every [conceivable] issue - economic, social, religious or political - just by virtue of being a cleric, though Islam does not [even recognize] the clerics' [authority to impose their opinions on others]...
"[Perhaps] Sheikh Farkous has connections to some pastry restaurant, and issued this fatwa [to harm the business of] a competing restaurant that serves zulabiyya. There have been many cases of financial investment firms enlisting senior clerics to issue fatwas legitimizing their activities. These fatwas, it transpires, were paid for in advance out of the investors' money, [and the investors themselves] woke up [one day] to find that the firm owners had stolen their savings and fled to Egypt or some other country.
"One [Hamas] sheikh banned participation in the 1995 Palestinian elections - but [reversed his decision] in 1996, when he [decided to] run for the Legislative Council. There are also Hamas sheikhs who, a few years ago, sanctioned the resistance and treated anyone who tried to thwart it as a collaborator and traitor - but after Hamas approved the tahdiah with Israel, they issued fatwas stating that anyone who fires [rockets] from Gaza into the occupiers' [territory] is a traitor and infidel.
"Some time ago, I read about a German who converted to Islam during World War I, and explained his decision as follows: 'I found that, in Islam, there is an unmediated [relationship] between man and God. The relationship between them is direct, and this is what persuaded me to convert.'
"[But] the [aforementioned] fatwas reveal that in today's Muslim [world], a sector of priests is emerging, which is monopolizing the faith, interpreting it, and applying ijtihad [i.e. personal judgment] in a way that harms the religion and demeans the tenets [of Islam].
"I know of a sheikh who banned the use of satellite dishes, and attacked people who purchased [them] - but later installed one on the roof of his own home. Asked to explain his conduct, he replied that he likes to watch [TV] programs in order to comment on them... Later, he lambasted the [Turkish TV soap opera] Muhannad and Nour. Asked why he watched it, he answered that his daughter is handicapped, and that if he forbade her to watch it she would set herself on fire..."
Most Fatwas Are Anti-Women
Al-Barghouti pointed out that most of the fatwas harmed women most of all. "Among the 'made-to-order' fatwas, there are some that permit all sorts of marriages, with various names, that are more like prostitution [than marriage]. There are also fatwas that generate dissent rather than unity, and incite to civil war - as if what we need is to follow primitive and ignorant [clerics] who, in the name of religion and devoutness, accuse others of heresy and of straying from the right path...
"An Egyptian cleric issued a fatwa that permits a working woman to breastfeed her [male] co-worker, which makes it religiously permissible for them to be alone in a room together. [1] He did not, however, tell us what would happen if that co-worker got greedy and asked for more and more [breastfeeding] every day..." [2]
"Do Women Need the Luxury of Seeing Out of Both Eyes?"
Dr. Khaled Al-Haroub, a Palestinian researcher at Cambridge University, wrote in a satirical piece published in the PA daily Al-Ayyam: "The nations are in a race to improve the level of education and employment for women, who constitute 50% of society, and the world is working to promote equality in job opportunities between men and women. Our sheikhs, on the other hand, regard women as a tempting piece of flesh that takes up space in the workplace for no good reason.
"In order to suppress the childish Freudian notions racing through their minds, they have come up with an innovation that puts the solutions offered by the other nations to shame. In their opinion, the solution [to the problem of women in the workplace] is for the woman to breastfeed her co-worker...
"Were it not for our sharp-witted sheikhs, we would have been afraid [to let] our women go to the market, where [danger] lies in wait for them day and night. Only our sheikhs - with their fatwas that penetrate the women's organs in order to protect them - [were astute enough] to realize that a veil with a slit for both eyes can cause civil war and corrupt youth, and thus to decree that [a woman must wear] a veil exposing only one eye. After all, do they need more than one eye to see their way around and examine the produce at the market? Do they [really] need the luxury of seeing out of both eyes? One is enough.
"[Our sheikhs] also had the perceptiveness to realize that women who wear eyeshadow are, [and always have been,] a grave [danger] to millions of young men throughout the ages, who collapse like a house of cards whenever they spy a woman's eye powdered in blue. [A veil] revealing only one eye will protect them against this terrible threat of beauty...
"I must say that a one-eyed veil has a certain modernistic [appeal]. Picture the right eye open, and the left hidden by a black veil [worn] over a black robe. Isn't that a captivating artistic image that even Salvador Dali, king of surrealists, could not have come up with? Moreover, we must remember that our honorable jurisprudents have granted women a great deal of freedom - which reflects the tremendous respect they have for them and for their liberty - by allowing them to choose, with complete independence, which eye to use and which eye to hide. Why, they can even switch between the right eye and the left! Does a Muslim Arab woman need more freedom than that?
"In the opinion of our great jurisprudents, women are a [source of] disaster. They are the root of all evil in the universe, and their every thought is devoted to tempting innocent men and leading them to hell. Therefore, the best [solution] is to marry them off at a tender age, as one of our genius jurisprudents recently decreed. This means marrying them off at the age of nine. The honorable sheikh justified this by saying that he sees many nine-year-old girls who display signs of [sexual] maturity and are ripe for marriage.
"Oh sheikh, you deserve the highest medal of honor for backwardness and atrophied [thinking]. If we had a shred of civil [responsibility], we would have sent you and many others of your ilk straight to jail, and left all of you to spend the rest of your lives there."
"If Not For [the Sheikhs], We Would Have Continued... Letting [Our Children Laugh and Chortle in the Company of That Scoundrel, Mickey Mouse"
"Imagine what a disaster it would be if we had no jurisprudents, clerics, or sheikhs to ward off the conspiracies hatched against us day and night by the infidel West, the atheist East, the sinful North and the pagan South. Every morning we wake up to a conspiracy, and every night we go to bed after nipping yet another plot in the bud.
"During the afternoon and the evening, we are [surrounded by] conspiracies, and we breathe them, read about them, see them flickering on the screen and hear about them on the radio. We find conspiracies in the elegant containers of women's beauty parlors, and conspiracies in sardine cans and tuna cans. We ordinary folk cannot [even] grasp the multitude of conspiracies that lie in wait for innocent men [in the form of] promiscuous women, or those that lie in wait for the innocent women [in the form of] wolf-like men, not to mention the conspiracies threatening our children...
"What would happen if we stopped the mouths of these honorable sheikhs with wax and shut them up in a lunatic asylum? Imagine the terrible catastrophe and the mental vacuum [that would ensue]... If not for them, we would never rest easy, [knowing that] they protect our borders and our border cities. If not for them, we would have continued to horribly neglect our children by letting them laugh and chortle in the company of that scoundrel, Mickey Mouse. In our ignorance, we though him an ordinary mouse until our sheikhs exposed him, Allah preserve them so that they [continue to] support us and [protect us] from our profound backwardness. [Thanks to them], we now see [Mickey Mouse] in all his hideousness: a minion of the cursed devil in the guise of an innocent mouse, [waiting] to inflict deadly damage on the minds of our children." [3]
In another Al-Ayyam article, Palestinian columnist 'Abd Al-Nasser Al-Najjar wrote about a recent fatwa permitting a woman to beat her husband: "The ultra-modern sheikh [who issued this fatwa] presented it as a shield that allows the woman to defend herself if [her husband] beats her up. The day after [it was issued], a heated debate broke out among the Al-Azhar scholars, who argued about the validity of such fatwas.
"We ask: Why involve religion in these issues and [thus] turn [religion] into a [symbol of] backwardness? Why issue fatwas permitting beatings and violence? Why shouldn't religion focus on the call for love, peace, and tranquility, instead of on the call to beat people and teach women karate?" [4]
Endnotes:
[1] This fatwa argued that the breastfeeding creates a bond of kinship between the man and the women, making it permissible for them to be together in private. See MEMRI Inquiry and Analysis No. 355, "Al-Azhar Lecturer Suspended after Issuing Controversial Fatwa Recommending Breastfeeding of Men by Women in the Workplace," May 25, 2008, Al-Azhar Lecturer Suspended after Issuing Controversial Fatwa Recommending Breastfeeding of Men by Women in the Workplace.
[2] Al-Hayat Al-Jadida (PA), October 21, 2008.
[3] Al-Ayyam (PA), September 29, 2008.
[4] Al-Ayyam (PA), November 11, 2008.
