By Sadia Dehlvi
With Dar ul Uloom, the Deoband and its internal politics who should head the seminary in the news, it must be remembered that Deoband, although important, is not representative of the Muslim majority in India. Muslims in the sub-continent largely follow the ‘Barielvi’ school of thought, those who believe in Sufi traditions.
Founded in 1866 AD, the Deoband seminary teaches and practices an austere, literal interpretation of Islam where there is no room for poetry, music or countless other devotional aspects of Muslim communities. It declares itself as a non-political body, but over the years has been involved in occasional political statements endorsing or criticising politicians and state policies. It supported Congress against in its struggle against British rule, and opposed the partitioning of India on religious grounds.
Some of the other positive aspects of the seminary have been their efforts in engaging actively with the clerics and Muslim youth in the battle against terrorism. In February 2008, an "Anti-terrorism Conference", organized by the seminary denounced all forms of terrorism, declaring that "Islam prohibits the killing of innocent people" and "Islam sternly condemns all kinds of oppression, violence and terrorism".
Over the years, the Deoband seminary has become synonymous with fatwas, legal rulings, usually targeting women and reinforcing the stereo-typing Muslim women. Usually totally out of sync with present day requirements and circumstances, these fatwas that the Dar ul-Uloom, Deoband issued with distressing regularity are usually not taken seriously by most Muslims. However, they provide ample fuel to the media and seem to dominate headlines. The media often is happy to bring out the worst representatives of Muslim opinion, creates their devils and then beats the community with them.
Such conservative rulings on external legal aspects have taken away the centrality of the Islamic discourse based on spirituality. Unfortunately, the inability to communicate alternative enlightened narratives of the inclusive nature of Islam is the collective failure of Islamic scholars, for they remain busy defending their narrow vision and legalistic interpretations. Some of the greatest Muslim authorities have recommended not spending too much time studying the Shariah, for it can blind the essential spiritual dimensions of Islam, mainly ihsan that commands purity of heart and excellence of character.
Apart from the Quran and Sunnah another source of Shariah is ijma, consensus of the scholars. The Prophet’s declaration, ‘Difference amongst scholars is a blessing”, clearly encourages diversity of understanding in Islam. Through the centuries numerous Muslim scholars, Sufis, philosophers, theologians and jurists have elucidated and interpreted the nature of the original vision; importantly in keeping with the needs of their times.
Shariah literally means,’ the road’, signifying the outward path to righteous activity that prepares the body for the Tareeqah, the internal spiritual quest. Shariah law consists of guidelines that can be broadly classified, as actions that are indifferent, recommended, required, reprehensible and forbidden; covering areas outside of defined modern legal systems.
Similar to secular law, distinctions in Shariah are made between the spirit and the letter of the law; based on the Prophet’s most cited saying, ‘All actions are based upon intent’. Shariah laws are contextual to environment, intention and circumstances.
Barring mandatory rules of worship, Islamic rulings have changed through the centuries and have been rooted in varying social orders. Omar, the second ruler of the Muslim Caliphate after the Prophet’s demise did not implement the prescribed punishment for theft during a famine that led to starvation. The fact that Islam is the fastest growing religion with almost five hundred converts daily in today’s world is testimony to its accommodative spirit.
Primarily an oral tradition, some Muslims protested when the Quran became a written document after the demise of the Prophet. Similarly, when loudspeakers were first introduced at mosques, some scholars ruled against their usage. The conservative viewed these changes as bidah, an innovation in Islam.
However, these changes were accepted and implemented for the intent being to create ease for worshippers. Clearly a head covering is preferred in the Shariah, but even that can be contextual. In the aftermath of the 9/ 11 tragedy, some American Muslim scholars issued a fatwa that since Muslims were becoming the target of discriminatory behaviour, Muslim women could avoid wearing the headscarf.
Interestingly, two thirds of the Quran was revealed in the Meccan phase before the prophet’s migration to Madinah. The Meccan revelations largely consist of spiritual narratives calling Muslims to non-violent resistance. This took place at time when Muslim men and women were being tortured and killed for no reason other than accepting Islam. Soumayya, a woman who was tortured to death under the blazing sun, became the first martyr of Islam.
After thirteen years of passive resistance, Prophet Muhammad migrated to Medina; where the rest of the Quran consisting of legal rulings was revealed. These rulings came after the new society had practised non-violence and taught social ideals of tolerance, brotherhood and importantly honouring women.
Prophet Muhammad had around one lakh twenty four thousand sahabah, companions, who rank the highest in Muslim piety. Only ten amongst them issued fatwas, the rest spent time working towards betterment of society. Muslim scholars could well follow this example and concentrate on the economic and educational progress of the community.
Traditionally, Fatwas required scholarship, caution, reflection and deep insights into Islamic philosophy. Enlightenment should accompany the study of religion, not dogma. We now have every other self styled scholar rushing to issue headline grabbing fatwas leading to unproductive sound byte journalism.
In India, Muslims in general and their women in particular are clearly facing an economic, educational and spiritual famine. There is a lack of competent leadership and opportunities in many areas. Edicts coming from Muslim seminaries must be more accommodating in their nature, particularly because we share secular space with Indian brethren of other religions.
Islamic history has countless role models of women empowerment in the area of politics, economics, social engagement and spirituality. Prior to his marriage, Prophet Muhammad worked for Khadijah, a woman trader, who became the first financer of Islam.
The Prophet decreed that a woman’s wealth is discretionary and that she is not obliged to look after her anyone. The ruling presumes that there are women entrepreneurs and working women. It safeguards women from being forced to earn, placing the primary duty of providing for the family on the men.
However, contrary to the Dar ul Uloom rulings, there is nothing in the Shariah that makes a woman’s lawful earnings unlawful for the male members of her family.
It is important to remember that the Shariah came to preserve and not to destroy, to make life easy, not difficult. The spirit of Islam lies not in compulsion, but free will, not in punishment but forgiveness, not in justice but compassion, not in extremism but moderation.
Legal edicts, or fatwas, represent one of the most important tools for the application of juristic rulings in changing contexts. They are important points of reference for jurists who derive rulings relying on legal precedents, among other sources of law. The categorization of abodes—between Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Kufr, or the Abode of Peace and the Abode of War—is an issue on which the schools of jurisprudence have differed. The views and opinions of scholars are varied; their differences, in most cases, are not a result of differences in the body of texts or applied traditions, rather they relate to the understanding of historical circumstances, political situations and the balance of military power between a Muslim state and its non-Muslim neighbors.
A conference of notable Islamic scholars held at Mardin, Turkey recently discussed the contemporary relevance of Ibn Taymiyah’s famous 14th century “Mardin Fatwa”. There are those who have used the fatwa to justify acts of violence committed in the name of Islam, as Abdullah Bin Bayyah, head of the London-based International Centre for Renewal and Guidance, says. His Centre organized the conference in collaboration with Canopus Consulting from Bristol and the University of Artuklu in Mardin. The conference adopted a declaration saying, ‘Anyone who seeks support from this fatwa for killing Muslims or non-Muslims has erred in his interpretation and has misapplied the revealed texts’.
