Fatwa culture and the juvenile Muslim mind

Barry Duke describes how Islam militates against interaction and integration in liberal Western societies. This article first appeared in the Freethinker in August, 2007

MUSLIMS, we are told, constitute the most disadvantaged minority group in the UK, and many commentators across the political spectrum feel that it is incumbent on us, the host nation, to do more to help them out of poverty, and bad housing, and into work. And we must engage, much better than we do at present, with disaffected Muslim youth in particular, as they make up around a third of the Muslim population.

Furthermore, we must stop referring to the current wave of terrorism and planned terrorist acts as “Islamic” or “Islamicist” or “Islamist” or “Muslim” terror, as this only marginalises the alienated even more, and fuels further discontent, not to mention temper tantrums on a seismic scale.

But what few, if any, public figures will come straight out and say is that you cannot engage the unengageable.

Muslims are a sizeable minority in the UK – around 1.6 million. But there are many other groups who, despite retaining their distinctive identities, have eased themselves comfortably into our liberal Western democracy, embraced the best of our values, and, as a consequence, are excelling in just about every field of endeavour. They are highly valued contributors to our country – not a drain on our resources.

The success of these groups – be they Hindu, Sikh, Jew or Taoist – stems directly from the fact that their beliefs do not actively militate against integration (or even engagement with the host nation) in the same intractable way that Islam does.

To get some measure of Islam’s attempts to keep its adherents completely quarantined from the “sins” and the “dangers” of non-Islamic host cultures, I spent the best part of an entire day trawling Islam’s most sophisticated website, Islamonline.net, which has the slogan “Allah Almighty knows best”.

The site is renowned for its comprehensive “fatwa bank,” detailing, in question-and-answer format, everything that is halal (acceptable) or haram (forbidden) in Islam. New fatwas are added each day.

At the end of this sometimes amusing, but mostly depressing and tedious exercise, it became abundantly clear to me that Islam treats its adherents like tremulous, insecure children who cannot be allowed to function without having the minutae of their lives scrutinised by some nit-picking imam, mufti, sheikh or scholar, who then pronounces whether this action or that is halal or haram.

If the thousands of “ask the imam” questions posed are genuine – and I have no reason to believe they are not – they reflect such a degree of uncertainty, trepidation, fear, guilt, ignorance and paranoia that one is left feeling that Islam is far more of an obsessive-compulsive disorder than a religion.

Hundreds of questions concerning eye-glazingly trivial issues jostle for the attention of the all-male panellists on the site. Here is a typical example:

Is it permissible [in Islam] for a man to remove hair from the chest, back, and between the eyebrows?

Where else but in Islam does one need to seek religious clarification over an issue as trite as this?

The answer?

Brother, first of all, we’d like to say that we are impressed by your question, which emanates from a thoughtful heart. May Allah Almighty help us all adhere to the principles of this true religion, Islam, and enable us to be among the dwellers of Paradise in the Hereafter, Ameen.

As for your question, Dr Rif’at Fawzi, professor of Shari’ah at Cairo University, states:

There is no evidence from the Qur’an or the Sunnah that forbids cutting short the hair from the chest and back; but the removal of hair from these parts may be considered a form of imitating women, something forbidden according to the hadith: ‘May Allah’s curse be inflicted on women imitating men and vice versa.’ As for women, it is permissible for them to remove hair from these parts because it causes them harm.

As for removing the hair from between the eyebrows, it is lawful, because it is not part of the eyebrows. But as for plucking the eyebrows, it is forbidden and not permissible in Islam, according to the Hadith: ‘May Allah’s curse be inflicted upon women who pluck their eyebrows, and women hired to do this.’

Questions such as these, and the answers they elicit, are the stuff of pure comedy.

But many of the fatwas dished out stop being amusing when you consider how negatively they are likely to impact on Muslims’ relationships with their non-Islamic hosts.

Let me begin with something as simple as music, which weaves its way in and out of our lives in a myriad ways. When it is music of our own choice it is pleasurable, but when it leaks out of iPods or is piped down the telephone line or into a lift it can be an irritating intrusion. But we tolerate these annoyances, because – for better or worse – that’s what we do.

For Muslims, however, music is generally haram, because Imam Abu Haneefah – one of four famous Imams of jurisprudence (80AH-150AH or 699-767   AD) “detested singing and considered it sinful”, according to a piece posted on Islamicweb.com.

As for his disciples, they have explicitly confirmed the prohibition of listening to all musical amusements and pastimes, including wind instruments … all types of tambourines, hand drums … and even the striking of sticks. They have asserted that such actions constitute disobedience to Allah and that the performer of such action is sinful. They have further stated that it is incumbent upon the Muslim to struggle to avoid listening to such things, even if he were passing by or stationed near them (without any wilful intention). Abu Haneefah’s closest disciple, Abu Yoosuf, stated that if the sound of musical instruments and amusements were heard coming from a house, the house could be entered without permission of its owners and the noise silenced.

That passage – dare one say it – would have been music to ears of those fanatics who targeted Bali nightclubs five years ago, killing and maiming hundreds, and those who tried to detonate a car-bomb outside a club in central London in June. These places were targeted precisely because of their music and alcohol content, and because men and women were associating freely with one another.

Last month, Johann Hari, the Independent columnist, wrote of first encountering the radical Islamic group Hizb ut-Tahrir on the streets of East London.

At the Brick Lane Festival – a glorious burst of Hindu and Sufi Muslim music and laughter – they handed out leaflets telling Muslims they should not be present because the event contained ‘alcohol, dancing and free-mixing of sexes’. One Muslim girl snapped, ‘But those are all of my favourite things!’

To be fair, some Islamic authorities take a less harsh line on music. Here is an “enlightened” view from Sheikh Ahmad Kutty, a senior lecturer and an Islamic scholar at the Islamic Institute of Toronto:

What is commonly known as Western music is associated with sensuality, lust, and greed, all of which are diseases of the soul, so we cannot approve of listening to music with such an association. But if you’re able to single out and isolate music or songs with noble and pure messages and themes that ennoble the soul and spirit, you may listen to them as an occasional outlet provided that this does not distract you from the remembrance of Allah or performing your obligatory duties.

Another issue that puts Muslims in direct conflict with their host society is alcohol. We know that Muslims are not allowed to drink, but Islamonline makes it clear that they should also have no truck with people who do drink, or with places that serve drink.

Alcohol, whether we like it or not, is at the heart of every aspect of social activity in the West, and, in the UK, hotels, bars, restaurants, clubs, etc, are among the main providers of employment. But, because Muslims are told that it is haram to be involved in the serving of alcohol, those of a more pious nature – ie the majority – are forced to deny themselves employment in these service industries, as indeed they are in places like supermarkets or off-licences.

This from Dr Sano Koutoub Moustapha, professor of jurisprudence and its principles at the International Islamic University, Malaysia:

Alcohol is considered the mother of all sins and impurities … All in all, Muslims are not allowed to sell or buy or drink or even facilitate the process of selling or buying or transporting alcohol.

And from Dr Monzer Kahf, a “prominent” economist and counsellor:

Eating in halal restaurants that sell alcohol is permissible as long as you don’t share the same table with a person who drinks. It is, however, shameful for such restaurants to offer halal meat side by side with alcoholic beverages.

Similarly, Islamonline makes it clear that it is haram for taxi-drivers to transport passengers carrying alcohol, and that, wherever possible, they should avoid transporting people to or from haram venues such as bars, casinos, nightclubs and the like.

Muslims are also forbidden to drink non- alcoholic beer and wine. In response to a questioner who asked about these beverages, Islamonline provided this answer:

Both alcoholic and non-alcoholic beers and wines are haram. Once the beer or the wine is produced, alcohol is extracted from it to make it non-alcoholic. Never is 100 percent of the alcohol removed. The Islamic principle is that if the whole of a thing is haram, the part of it is also haram.

The Islamic Religious Council of Singapore, adds this:

Our position is that non-alcoholic beer is not halal. Our position is based on the premise that (1) It is drunk as an alternative to something which is haram, that is, alcoholic beer, and (2) The culture of wine and beer drinking which the drink entails is non-Islamic and, therefore, haram.

Therefore, based on the principle of blocking the doors to transgression in Islamic jurisprudence, non-alcoholic beer is haram.

After reading this, a mischievous thought popped into my head. Alcohol might well have prevented the Iraq war. If the drunken imbecile George W Bush had not swapped the demon drink for God – and had done the world an enormous favour by bladdering himself into an early grave – the catastrophic invasion of Iraq would never have occurred, and thousands of Muslim lives would have been saved.

But, as Islamonline insists, “Allah Almighty knows best.”

The banking industry – which employs millions in the West – is another potential source of conflict between religion and employment. While Islam does not frown on Muslims taking a job in a bank, it does stipulate that a Muslim must avoid being involved in any aspect of interest charging.

Here’s a question posed by a Muslim in the US.

My parents have recently heard from an eminent sheikh that one should not even eat in the house of one who works in a bank or is involved in riba [bank interest] as this is the equivalent of eating haram. As a result of this, for example, my parents have taken to not going to my uncle’s house (a very close family member) as his house is all built on haram.

And here is the answer:

First of all, we’d like to clarify that there’s no doubt that riba or interest is haram. However, a Muslim is permitted to work in a conventional bank as long as he or she does not prepare, write, sign or be a witness to riba contracts. Also, eating in the house of a person who is working in a bank or dealing with riba is not prohibited.

Dr Monzer Kahf, an economist and counsellor added:

There is no doubt that riba is one of the gravest of sins… It is worse than adultery, as the Prophet said in an authentic hadith. On the other hand, we have to be clear and put every thing in its right perspective. Nowhere in the Qur’an or the Sunnah or the recorded fiqh of all schools of fiqh do we find that we are required to boycott a person who deals in riba. We are required to keep advising him or her to quit the haram occupation.

That last sentence is repeated time and again in Islamonline. It is used, for example, in answer to a Muslim who was in a quandary over his job as an internet café manager in the US. He was concerned that people were using his computers to enter chat-rooms, and to look at pornography. He was advised to tell his customers not to use chat-rooms or view “objectionable” material, and to throw them out if they refused. The bottom line was that his job itself was haram, and his best solution was to quit it.

Islamonline does not like the internet, insisting that it is mainly in the control of “innovators”. Innovation, apparently, is a dirty word in Islam.

The cumulative effect of endless fatwas which declare that this occupation or that is haram is that vast areas of employment are effectively put beyond the reach of Muslims, and may go a long way to explain why, of all the minority groups in the UK, Muslims suffer the greatest from unemployment. Muslim leaders, of course, never see it from that perspective, and wrongly attribute this sorry state of affairs to “Islamophobia.”

Add to that the huge number of social strictures placed on young Muslims, and you have a recipe for frustration, fury, jealousy, resentment and hatred.

Which neatly brings me round to the most vexatious subjects in Islam: sex, sexuality and nudity. It’s an issue questioners return to time and again, and the answers given serve only to deepen frustration, ignorance, guilt and confusion – and, of course, reinforce prejudice.

One question, though, that had me laughing out loud was:

Are we allowed to masturbate during Ramadan? Does it break the fast if we do it?

The answer was this:

Ramadan is the month of mercy, forgiveness and seeking protection from the hellfire through various acts of worship. It is a special month in the sense that we are supposed to make the best use of our time to draw closer to Allah the Almighty by doing good deeds and staying away from bad deeds … that is why a Muslim should not only avoid the haram during Ramadan, but should not even think of it, as he or she is supposed to be involved in worship and increasing his or her good deeds.

As far as masturbation is concerned, we are required to avoid it at all times and not only in Ramadan.

Another Ramadan question that amused me was “During fasting I get a very dry throat. Are we allowed to swallow our own spit a little?” The answer was yes, but it was preceded by the inevitable windy guff about the question coming from “a thoughtful heart”, when, in truth it had clearly sprung from an empty head.

The masturbation question would, I imagine, have elicted a number of disapproving clucks among the Islamonline’s panel of bearded “experts”, but I guess the following – “how do I deal with homosexual friends?”– must have blown fuses all over its network.

Here’s the answer:

First of all, it should be clear that Muslim scholars are in agreement and have reached consensus – based on what has been revealed in the Qur’an and what has been authenticated in the Prophetic Sunnah – on prohibiting both gayness and lesbianism because in each of the two actions there is an assault on the humanity of a person, destruction of the family and a clash with the aims of the Lawgiver, one of which is the establishment of sexual instincts between males and females so as to encourage the institution of marriage.

Dr Muzammil Siddiqi, president of the Fiqh Council of North America, added:

We should deal with them in the same way we deal with any people who are involved in alcoholics (sic), gambling or adultery. We should have deep repugnance to their acts and we must remind and warn them. Those who insist on this lifestyle consider it legitimate and feel ‘gay pride’. We should not associate with them and should not take them as friends. We should certainly avoid those people.

And this from Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, the “moderate” Muslim buddy of London Mayor Ken Livingstone.

Muslim jurists hold different opinions concerning the punishment for this abominable practice. Should it be the same as the punishment for fornication, or should both the active and passive participants be put to death? While such punishments may seem cruel, they have been suggested to maintain the purity of the Islamic society and to keep it clean of perverted elements.

When confronted with nudity, or partial nudity, Muslims – who are taught from infants to be deeply ashamed of their naked bodies – are required to avert their gaze.

Islamonline says this is virtually impossible in certain circumstances, and advises the faithful to avoid places where one is likely to encounter such “sin”.

It bluntly declares:

Don’t go to the beach. Beaches and amusement parks attract many skimpily dressed people. Try to avoid such places. Instead, visit mountain areas, forests, and so on, which are vast and remote and where not so many people congregate in one place. Such places are also more enlivening for the spirit. Another alternative to beaches and amusement parks is interesting museums, where you will have plenty of other things to look at than half-naked bodies.

Museums? This puzzles me. Islam’s irrational antipathy towards art, and sculpture in particular, goes back centuries. In 1193, the son of Saladin, Al-Aziz Uthman, tried to demolish the Great Pyramids of Giza, Egypt, because they were an affront to Islam.

The reason why we can still visit them today is because the task at hand proved so big that he eventually gave up the attempt. He did, however, manage to inflict visible damage to Menkaure’s Pyramid, the smallest of the three.

A while back, an attack on statues at a museum in Cairo by a veiled woman screaming, “Infidels, infidels!” shocked the outside world. She had been inspired by Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa, who quoted a saying of the prophet Mohammed that sculptors will be among those receiving the harshest punishment on Judgment Day.

Al Qaradawi agrees that “Islam prohibits statues and three-dimensional figures of living creatures” and says that “the statues of ancient Egyptians are prohibited.”

In the Brussels Journal (May 15, 2007) someone writing under the name “Fjordman” said:

As a European, I fear for the future of the Louvre in Paris, the National Gallery in London, the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam and Michelangelo’s paintings in the Sistine Chapel in Rome. There is every reason to believe that they will end up the same way as the Bamiyan Buddhas. Although it may not happen today, tomorrow or even the day after tomorrow, sooner or later, pious Muslims will burn these works of art, and doubtless consider it their sacred duty.

Muslim immigration now threatens many of the masterworks of the Western tradition of art – the most inventive and groundbreaking mankind has ever seen – with annihilation. History will never forgive us for our cowardice and stupidity if we allow these treasures to be destroyed just because we think history is boring or don’t want to say anything unfashionable about other cultures.

The official reason given by Muslims for why non-Muslims are not allowed to visit the cities of Mecca and Medina is because they might damage or destroy the Islamic holy sites. But since Muslims have a proven track record of more than a thousand years, from Malaysia to Armenia, of destroying non-Muslim places of worship or works of art, perhaps we should then, in return, be entitled to keep Muslims permanently away from our cultural treasures?

Back to nudity. Islamonline also sounds a warning about visiting parks.

This doesn’t mean never taking the kids out to enjoy the slides and see-saws or having barbecues there. It does mean, perhaps, having activities on days that are cooler, or at times when the sun is not as hot and intense. This way, the prime time for sunbathing has passed, and most people either leave or feel cool enough to put some more clothes on.

Here I must declare an interest. On sunny summer days, whenever I have some leisure time, I like nothing better that to hit Brighton’s main nudist beach. I find it relaxing and pleasurable – except, occasionally, on those days when groups of Muslim youth “accidentally” discover the secluded area, and stand gawping and making deprecatory remarks about the sun-bathers, who, by and large, ignore their hostile stares, or their childish giggles. Occasionally an irate naturist, usually a woman, will tell them to “fuck off”.

Ex-Muslim Abul Kasem writes prolifically about Islam, sex and sexuality. In one essay posted on the internet, he sets out

To expose the hypocrisy, double standard, unfairness, absurdity and sheer irrationality of Islam when it comes to sex.

He also examines the barbaric rules that Islam inflicts on innocent people for having a simple sexually satisfying relationship whether married or not.

If you ever thought that Allah gave you sexual organs for your use as per your desire, then perish that thought. From birth to death, from adulthood to old age, from house to desert, every aspect of the use of your very own private part is controlled by innumerable, mindless, cruel and oftentimes utterly despicable Islamic rules written in the Sha’ria, the so-called divine laws of Allah.

The late Ayatollah Khomeini, Iran’s spiritual leader, introduced the death penalty for homosexuality, but bizarrely saw nothing wrong in a man sodomising a very young female, even an infant. This is one of his fatwas.

A man can marry a girl younger than nine years of age, even if the girl is still a baby being breastfed. A man, however, is prohibited from having intercourse with a girl younger than nine, but other sexual acts such as foreplay, rubbing, kissing and sodomy are allowed.

A man having intercourse with a girl younger than nine years of age has not committed a crime, but only an infraction, if the girl is not permanently damaged. If the girl, however, is permanently damaged, the man must provide for her all her life. But this girl will not count as one of the man’s four permanent wives. He also is not permitted to marry the girl’s sister.

Khomeini also wrote in his book Tahrirolvasyleh (fourth volume, Darol Elm, Gom, Iran, 1990):

A man can have sex with animals such as sheep, cows, camels and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village; however, selling the meat to the next-door village should be fine.

The oddest question on the site – and one which, to my mind, best illustrates how deeply mired Islam is in superstitious bilge – came from someone called Nancy in Egypt, wanting to know whether it was possible for a man to marry a Jinni.

Never having come across a  Jinni (except in fairy-tales), this question pulled me up short. But thanks to a fatwa issued by Sheikh M S Al-Munajjid, a “prominent” Saudi Muslim lecturer and author, I was soon to be enlightened.

Allah Almighty has created certain creatures, some of them are known to us and some of them are not …

The Qur’an and Sunnah indicate that Jinn exist, and that there is a purpose for their existence in this life, which is to worship Allah Alone with no partner or associate. Allah Almighty says: ‘And I (Allah) created not the jinns and humans, except they should worship Me (Alone).’ (Adh-Dhariyat: 56)

Scholars are in disagreement over the difference between Jinn and demons. Some of them say that the word Jinn goes far to encompass the Jinn as well as the demons. The word also includes believing and unbelieving Jinn.

The world of the Jinn is an independent and separate world with its own distinct nature and features that are hidden from the world of humans. Jinns and humans have things in common, such as the ability to understand and choose between good and evil. The word Jinn comes from the Arabic root meaning ‘hidden from sight’.
Allah has created different types of Jinn. Among them are some who can take on different forms such as dogs and snakes; some who are like flying winds with wings; and some who can travel and rest.

Every individual among the sons of Adam has a Jinn who has been appointed to be his constant companion.

The Jinn live where we do live on this earth. They are mostly to be found in ruins and unclean places like bathrooms, dunghills, garbage dumps and graveyards. Hence the Prophet taught us to take precautions when entering such places.

Some Jinns are Muslims and some are non-Muslims.

Saying Bismillah (in the Name of Allah) before entering one’s home, eating or drinking, and having intercourse will keep Satan from entering the house or partaking with a person in his food, drink and sexual activity. Similarly, mentioning the name of Allah before entering the toilet or taking off one’s clothes will prevent the Jinn from seeing a person in a state of undress, or harming him.

Getting to the nub of the question, the Sheikh says jurists define marriage as “a contract that makes it lawful for a man to make love to a woman without there being a lawful prohibition to this marriage.” A lawful prohibition here refers to marriage to another man or to a hermaphrodite, a polytheist woman, a closely related woman, or a female Jinn (Jinni).

Marrying a Jinni “may result in bringing forth a child having Jinn characteristics”, which is a good reason for not permitting such a union, he added. Another “expert” pointed out that, because Jinn were essentially shape-changers, they might conceivably also change sex, so a man marrying a Jinni risks finding himself in an illicit union with a male, should the Jinni suddenly wake up one day brandishing a penis.

If Islamonline and sites like it have any value at all, it is to offer proof to us infidels that Islam is not merely out of step with civilised Western values – it is out of step by centuries.

If all the time spent by Islamic professors and Imams and sheikhs and mufti mulling over trivia like eyebrow plucking and masturbation and Jinn, and how to avoid facing Mecca when taking a dump on the moon, were put to better use, the Islamic world would not be wallowing, as it does now, in a morass of ignorance and stupidity, violence and sectarianism.

It is nothing short of tragic that the pinnacle of the Islamic world’s technological achievements in the 21st century are suicide bomber belts and bicycles designed to hide the lowers portions of women.

To dignify such a pitiful, pathological, obsessive religion with respect, and to make efforts to accommodate its never-ending demands, is to invite catastrophe.

Furthermore, it does a terrible disservice to the many thousands of Muslims who would like nothing better than for us to help them exit Islam and enter the real world, where interminable whining and periodic bouts of rage are indulged in only by spoiled sprogs and spotty adolescents, who soon get the message that if they don’t stop grizzling we’ll soon give them something to grizzle about.

But give Islam an inch, and you can be certain it will seize the whole nine yards, as Ophelia Benson, of the website Butterflies and Wheels, made clear in this eloquent and passionate paragraph written after the latest tantrums thrown by infantile flag- and effigy-burning Islamaniacs when Salman Rushdie was knighted:

Along with not giving them an inch it’s crucial that we keep explaining to them and to the fans of inch-giving why we are not giving them an inch and why they have no right to an inch and why they have no legitimate grievance about their non-receipt of an inch. We have to keep explaining loudly and softly, briefly and at length, rudely and politely, and always lucidly. We have to keep on and on and on doing it until they get the point. ‘No inch is forthcoming because you have no, repeat no, legitimate claim to an inch. Now go away.’