Refutation of Sheikh Yousuf Al-Abeeri's Fatwa Appearing in Taliban Website Nawa-e-Afghan Jihad Supporting Wanton Killing of Innocent Civilians and Thus Justifying The 9-11 Attacks - Part-2
By Mohammad Yunus, New Age IslamCo-author (Jointly with Ashfaque Ullah Syed), Essential
Message of Islam, Amana Publications, USA, 2009
16 Dec 2012
This recurring refutation is in continuation of the Part-1
of conclusive refutation of the Fatwa posted Dec. 05.
Background
As in Part-1, the Al-Abeeri’s Fatwa maintains the standard
juristic methodology of quoting a related, obliquely related, generic or even
unrelated Qur'anic verse and then tabling the opinions of different scholars
/theologians (ulama/Imams) to connect the quoted verse with the theme of the
fatwa through a scholastic method of deduction.
Part-1cited the verses from Surah al baqara - 2:194 (once),
al-Nahl 16:126 (four times) and the passages 16:126-128 and 42:39-42 on like
for like defensive or punitive measure in warfare as the nucleus of its
arguments. This part repeats the verses 2:194 and 16:126 rendered below and
adds another unrelated verse from Surah al Isra - 17:15 as the foundation of
its arguments:
“The sacred month is for the sacred month, and for the
prohibited things, there is the Law of Equality (Qisas). Then whoever
transgresses the prohibition against you, you transgress likewise against him.
And fear Allah, and know that Allah is with Al-Muttaqun.” (2:194)
“And if you punish (your enemy, O you believers in the
Oneness of Allah), then punish them with the like of that with which you were
afflicted. But if you endure patiently, verily, it is better for As-Sabirin
(the patient ones, etc.). (16:126).
“And no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of
another” (17:15)
The following refutations concerning the verse 16:126 have
already been established in the Part 1 of the Refutation:
i) Point
4. “The emphasis on enduring an affliction in patience in Al-Nahl - 16:126-128
points to a softer response to an oppression, so as not to be excessive in
response
ii) Point 5.
Tables untenable arguments to transform the "general circumstances and the
context of the revelation" of the verse 16:126 into "specific for
special circumstances"
iii) Point 6
establishes that “by any stretch of imagination the passage 16:126-127 does not
support the fatwa”
iv) Point 7
notes the incongruity in anchoring the verse 16:126 to the Prophet’s reported
intention to take like for like revenge for mutilation of corpses and
connecting it his subsequent forbiddance of this barbaric custom after the
revelation had come about.
For clarity of presentation, as in Part-1, this second part
is also broken down into reader-friendly components and each component is
refuted one by one.
Fundamental Truths and Terms of Reference.
As in the discourse refuting Part-1 of the Fatwa, this part
is scrutinized against a number of fundamental and irrefutable points
illustrated in Part 1 and summarily noted below against bullets:
I. The Qur'an and
Qur'an alone is the final authority for supporting a fatwa that could be
binding on the community for all times.
II. The validity of all past ‘fatwas’ is contingent to their
compatibility with the Qur'anic message.
III. The 'fatwas' and reports quoted today may have
inevitably suffered distortion, forgery or unwitting printing or transmission
error.
IV. ‘The classical theory of ijma (consensus of scholars)
was not recognized in full even during its formative period. Because of its
purely theoretical nature and perhaps for want of some definite practicable
machinery, it could not be utilized to reform the Muslim society [1]
V. Any statement or
account in the secondary theological discourses of Islam that are in conflict
with the letter and spirit of the Qur'an must be treated as context/ era
specific, forged or fabricated
VI. The Qur'an calls for use of reason (aql), reflection
(fikr), logical thinking (fiqh) as well as mutual consultation as long as consensus
does not conduce to grave sins and abominations such as gross injustice to the
weak (42:37/38). The spirit of upholding universal justice is reinforced by the
Qur'an's categorization of justice as a harrama or binding instruction (6:152)
that must be upheld justly (4:58), even if a matter concerns
"yourselves" (ones own self), (your) parents or relatives, the rich,
the poor (4:135) or those against whom you nurture any hatred (5:8).
VII. The Qur'an abolished the notion of collective and
arbitrary punishment - killing any person (a man, a woman or a slave) of a
tribe to retaliate the killing of its corresponding member by any person of
that tribe.” (2:178).
VIII. Scholars agree
that the work of Ibn Hisham, compiled about two hundred years after the
Prophet's death, which with time became the primary source material on the
Prophet's life cannot be treated as an authentic historical record - at best it
is an embellished history [1].
IX. Even from a purely secular perspective, the Qur'an
having been recited in bits and pieces, recorded and memorized at the same
historical point "does provide a firm basis of undoubted
authenticity" [2].
Statement-by-Statement Scrutiny and Refutation of the Fatwa
1. Having concluded
Part-1 with Qur’anic verses on restraint Part-2 begins with a self-contradictory
statement: "So, the verse demonstrates that practicing maslah (mutilation
of corpses) is a taboo but when taking revenge, this prohibition stands
annulled though the verse is general in nature.”
Refutation. On one hand the Fatwa concedes that mutilation
of corpses of the enemy (as some Muslim martyrs reportedly suffered at the
battlefield of Uhud) is a mere taboo, on the other it validates it on the basis
of the quoted Qur'anic verse (16:126), while admitting that the " the
verse is general in nature.” The argument tabled is thus simply inverted –
quoting a verse calling for restraint to support like for like retaliation for
mutilation of corpses
2. It then tables the following quotations (i, ii, iii),
first two from Ibn-e-Taimiyyah (1263-1328) supporting mutilation of corpses and
a third from a hadith.
i) "As the
Muslims have a discretion of not resorting to it (mutilation) as enduring
patience is better for them, they can resort to it as a part of invitation to
the infidels to imaan (faith) and prevent them from aggression."
ii) "Although maslah (mutilation of dead bodies) has
been forbidden, God has declared it mubah (discretion) for Muslims to resort to
mutilation against the infidels in case they have resorted to mutilation
against them on the basis of Sura Al-Nahl - 16 :126 (the verse already quoted
four times in Part-1, under points 4,5,6
and 7 as summarily reviewed above) .
iii) A tradition is [from Masnad Ahmad in the hadith of
Simrah bin Jundab and Imran bin Hiseen] is however quoted that has the Prophet
forbidding the mutilation of corpses."
Refutation: As under point 4,5,6,7, Part 1, the verse Surah
al-Nahl on restraint in quoted to justify mutilation of corpses in like for
like retaliation and the Prophet is quoted to forbid it. The theme however is
not relevant to the Fatwa at all, but is constantly bringing the barbaric
imagery of mutilation into the reader’s mind flanked by a Qur’anic verse on
restraint and the reported Prophet’s forbiddance of this custom that was
reportedly carried out by a few women of the victorious Quraish army in the
battlefield of Uhud (624).
3. The Fatwa then goes on to argue the exact method of
killing the enemy - whether killing an infidel in two strike will be a
transgression if the infidel had struck only once.
Refutation. These issues appeared important to the terrorist
factions of early of Islam, notably the kharajites) and demonstrate the
hair-splitting literalism of their brutal ideology. But the kharajites were
expelled from the pale of Islam, as their very name suggests – kharajite means
those who have exited themselves from the community. Their ideology was never a
part of Islam and stands anti-Islamic today.
4. As retaliatory killing of innocent women and children
conflicts with the Qur’an’s statement: “And no bearer of burdens will bear the
burden of another,” (17:15), the Fatwa
challenges the rationale of the Qur’an with this statement: “So this point of
view is wrong.” It substantiates its refutation of the Qur’anic pronouncement
by suggesting that the Prophet fought with the fighters of the Quraish though
the treaty was breached only by some particular members of the tribe. Using
this analogy, the Fatwa concludes, “if
the enemy kills women and children among the Muslims, there is the
justification of killing women and children of the enemy.”
Refutation. The argument is self defeating as it questions
the validity of a key Qur'anic pronouncement (“And no bearer of burdens will
bear the burden of another,”) which is
repeated several times in the Qur'an.
5. The author also questions the Prophet's decision to fight
the Quraish tribe although the peace treaty was violated by some specific
individuals - Bani Bakar bin Wayl or the sardars of Quraish, not the whole
tribe.
Refutation. The author of the Fatwa is taking the conduct of
war on person to person basis. This was relevant in the pre-Islamic days when
avenge was taken on head to head basis. With the formation of an integrated
community in Medina - a community that comprised all native tribes regardless
of religion, man to man encounter was ruled out. This argument has no relevance
to the theme.
6. The Fatwa then refers to the alleged massacre of some 700
jews as reported in Ibn Hisham's embellished biography [2] held authentic by
Muslim theologians/ historians for political and emotional reasons. He argues
that since the Prophet could punish the whole community for the decision of its
elders and a family pools money to ransom a killer, a community of people must
share the punishment of crime committed by its leaders. It then invokes the
pre-Islamic tribal custom to nominating one of its members to be killed as
retaliatory punishment as a proof of the collective responsibility of the
community. The Fatwa then quotes the following Qur'anic verses to substantiate
its hypothesis of proposing/ inflicting collective punishment for the crime
committed by few.
“And fear a trial which will not strike those who have
wronged among you exclusively, and know that Allah is severe in
penalty."(Al Anfal- 8:25)
“And when We intend to destroy a city, We command its
affluent but they defiantly disobey therein; so the word comes into effect upon
it, and We destroy it with [complete] destruction.“(Al Isra- 17:16)
Refutation: The Fatwa fails to recognize that whereas God
can send a disaster to a whole community for whatever reason, humans are not to
act like God. They cannot just drop an atom bomb on a hostile neighbor to
punish it, the way God sends hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis and other
calamities upon large groups of humans. God has no common boundary with humans
and therefore swapping God with man in the Qur'anic verses is not tenable and a
distortion of the Qur'anic message.
7. The Fatwa brings Imam Qurtubi (1214-1273), a famous
mufassir, muhaddith and faqih from Cordoba (Spain) conceivably to lend itself
theological credentials - but it only shows him quoting two verses of the
Qur'an16:126 already quoted in Part-1, 4,5,6,7 Part-2.ii); and Al-Baqara-194 (earlier quoted in Part-1,
3). It then cites an innocuous conjugal incident of the Prophet's life: ‘The
holy prophet (PBUH) retained the cup which was broken by Hadhrat Aiyesha (R.A.)
and returned an unbroken cup saying ‘a cup in lieu of a cup and food in lieu of
food’. From these three totally unrelated illustrations jumps to the conclusion
that the killer will be killed in the same way or with the same tool he has
used to kill his victim, unless he has committed the murder in an immoral way,
say, through sodomy and then goes on to describe the graphic details of such
immoral acts and the barbaric descriptions of punishments such as pushing
wooden shaft through the anus till the enemy is killed – the graphic details
are too revolting to quote.
Summary.
Having largely devoted Part-1 to the theme of mutilation of
corpses in the battlefield that some women from the Quraish (the Prophet’s
enemy) had taken recourse to against Muslim martyrs, Part-2 continues to dwell on this theme
conceivably to bring the barbaric imagery of mutilation into the reader’s mind
side by side with the enunciation of unrelated Qur’anic verses and the Prophet’s
forbiddance of this pre-Islamic custom thereby creating an inter-association
that repetition creates. That is, a casual, fanatic or not-too critical reader
may incorporate or appropriate sadism in his religious thoughts as a prelude to
committing acts of wanton terror.
The Fatwa does not offer any new argument over its Part-1
discourse while each of it fresh statements or components as tabled above thus
it stands indisputably refuted. A verse from the Sura al Isra “And no bearer of
burdens will bear the burden of another” (17:15) it quotes, only weakens its
arguments for inflicting any punishment on the innocent, while two verses on
divine scheme of subjecting humans to calamities is quoted as an unlawful basis
for humans to follow the divine example.
References:
1. Ahmad Hassan, The Doctrine of Ijma in Islam, New Delhi
1992, p. 259].
2. The Classical Biography (Sira) Of the Prophet Is More of
a Story than a Historical Record – It Is a Highly Embellished History
http://www.newageislam.com/ijtihad,-rethinking-islam/muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/the-classical-biography-(sira)-of-the-prophet-is-more-of-a-story-than-a-historical-record-–-it-is-a-highly-embellished-history/d/8883
3. Maxime Rodinson, Muhammad, English translation, 2nd
Edition, London, 1996, p.x, Foreword
Dec. 15, 2012.
Related Articles:
Refutation of Sheikh Yousuf Al-Abeeri's Fatwa Supporting
Wanton Killing of Innocent Civilians-Part 6
Muhammad Yunus, a Chemical Engineering graduate from
Indian Institute of Technology, and a retired corporate executive has been
engaged in an in-depth study of the Qur’an since early 90’s, focusing on its
core message. He has co-authored the referred exegetic work, which received the
approval of al-Azhar al-Sharif, Cairo in 2002, and following restructuring and
refinement was endorsed and authenticated by Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl of UCLA,
and published by Amana Publications, Maryland, USA, 2009.
URL: https://www.newageislam.com/islamterrorism-jihad/refutation-sheikh-yousuf-al-abeeri-part-2/d/9708
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism