Are Elections Haram? Says Who? And Based on What? Part 2 | February 20, 2005
Press Ctrl & + to increase text size.
Dr. Pasha
If you want to quote any of the material in this book- whether its ideas or words – do so only with proper, open and unambiguous acknowledgment and credit to the author. If you want to reproduce and sell or otherwise market it, seek express permission from the author prior to doing so. Contact:
Admin [at] ISLAMICSOLUTIONS [dot] com
To do otherwise is unlawful. Call it Haram if you want to. Or call it a sin if you want to. In English language, the best-case scenario falls under the broad category of plagiarism. It is also a violation of copyright laws.
CONTENTS:
(2) What Exactly Is Haram?
(3) What Is a Fatwa, anyway?
Haram this, Haram that, Halal something else!
Here we are, running around, happily calling things Halal and Haram, and still not too many of us seem to be clear in our minds about what Haram or Halal really is.
Let me put it this way: Haram and Halal are two of the most beautiful contributions of Islam to human welfare and progress in this world – and of course in the next world. For, whenever Islam does something to make our earthly life better, that same thing ends up being a valuable asset in our next life as well. That is the nature of things Islamic.
That is the nature of things that God Almighty does – things that we know to be truly from God. They simultaneously improve for human beings the prospects of a good life in this world, as well as the prospects of eternal bliss in the next world. Allah calls it Hayaat Tayyibah – Life Beautiful – in the Qur’an. People may use this criterion as an indication of what may or may not be truly from God.
It is all part of that unbounded mercy, love, grace and compassion of our creator to which we are introduced right at the outset in the Qur’an: Ar-Rahman, Ar-Rahim. Halal and Haram are thus a reflection of that superabundance of mercy (Rahmat) with which God Almighty sent his beloved prophet, Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, to all the worlds.
Human Bondage:
Before him – before Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, that is – the world was a daunting and difficult place for the faithful. The smallest of sins often required the toughest of penances. The quality of mercy was severely strained.
Forgiveness, compassion and absolution from sin were meticulously measured out by those who were supposed to possess special powers and qualifications not available to ordinary human beings. And human lives and liberties were firmly held in human hands – often selfish, cruel and greedy hands – some religious and some not so religious.
In some cultures, menstruating women had to be banished from home for the duration of their periods. Elsewhere, even the youngest and prettiest of widows were consigned to a lonely single life without any hope of remarriage.
Christian monks and Hindu rishis endured superhuman hardships and privations in the pursuit of penance and self-purification. The world everywhere was under the complete autocratic control of the royalty, clergy and the noblemen.
The overwhelming majority of the human race – common men and women – often had no rights, recourse or status. They were mostly at the mercy of the whims and fancies of their religious and secular overlords and masters.
Women from East to West and from North to South were mostly chattel – used as property and denied the right to own property. They were often treated in the cruelest and most humiliating manner and were attached to their men by their names, who also owned all property in the family.
In a practice reminiscent of the female infanticide prevailing in some parts of the world today, female infants were buried alive by their own fathers out of shame and rage.
In an environment rife with political bondage and religious tyranny, kings were kings by divine right – and so were many religious leaders and practitioners. Not because any of them had done anything noble or great to deserve the title.
Humanity was in bondage and suffering everywhere. In such a lopsided world, right was what the kings, the clergymen and the nobles said it was. And wrong was what they declared to be wrong. Generally, there was neither justification at the start nor recourse at the end.
Islam Rescues Humanity:
It was in such an unequal and unhappy world that Islam came and immediately set about rescuing humanity and transforming the world into a better and a more congenial and conducive place for all. It pronounced all human beings to be equal of one another – regardless of race, color, gender, birth-place or status.
Said the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam:
“Kullukum Min Adam – You are all from Adam.
Wa Adam Min Turab – And Adam was from dirt.”
This is as clear, complete, emphatic and categorical a declaration of human equality and commonality as there has ever been or there can ever be. And yet its simplicity and compactness is nothing short of miraculous.
Usury – exorbitant interest the rich charged the poor for loans the poor often desperately needed – was one of the primary means by which the rich controlled and dominated the lives of the poor in society generation after generation. The Qur’an declared interest not only forbidden but an open declaration of war upon God and his prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam.
On the day of the final Hajj at Makkah, the Prophet, Sallallahu ‘Alaihi wa Sallam, said he was taking all outstanding interest and putting it under his feet and stamping upon it.
What a revolution it was that Islam, the Qur’an and this unlettered man Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, had unleashed upon the world! Right when the world most needed it. And how thorough and profound that revolution was – socially, economically, politically, morally and in every other way!
It is this most thoroughgoing of all sociopolitical and economic revolutions that some naïve followers of Islam – and some equally naïve or misguided people outside the fold of Islam – tend to brand as “religion,” which they then try to consign mostly to the margins of life.
Fat’h, not Conquest:
Shakespeare would have said Islam came; Islam saw; and Islam conquered. And Shakespeare would have been right – except perhaps for one small detail: the concept, culture, language, behavior and consequences of what the world knows as “conquest” were entirely alien so far as Islam and Prophet Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, were concerned.
That means Islam – under the guidance of the Qur’an and under the direct leadership of Prophet Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, did not “conquer” anything or anyone. It just went about being Islam – the true, sweet, beautiful and all-round savior of everyone everywhere – and Allah then, out of his infinite grace, “opened” people’s hearts, minds, lives, lands, villages, towns and cities to the indomitable beauty and charm of Islam and Muslims.
Fat’h – a miraculous divine opening – is what the Qur’an called it and a miracle and divine opening – “Fat’h” – is indeed what in every way it was – an opening that came directly from God. And it was a blessing and a boon from the Almighty to everyone involved – “the victor” as well as “the vanquished,” if you want to call them that.
But this Fat’h, coming from Allah as it was, was very different from anything the world has known before or since as “conquest.” The world has seen many a “conqueror” before and since Islam and Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam. But not one of them bears the slightest resemblance to Islam and Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam.
Julius Caesar, for example, was a famous “conqueror.” Alexander was a “conqueror” who was called great in large part due to his “conquests.” Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand “conquered” Granada in 1492.
Napoleon was a “conqueror” who burned down two-thirds of the houses in Moscow when he invaded Russia. The British were “conquerors” of Delhi’s last bastion of the Mughal Empire in India. Hitler killed millions of Russians in his nearly 900-day siege of Leningrad (St. Petersburg) and Russian invasion.
The Allies were “conquerors” of Germany and Japan in World War II and soon thereafter the French and then the Americans were out to “conquer” Vietnam. George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld are “conquerors” of Afghanistan and Iraq in our own time.
The world knows only too well what these “conquerors” and their “conquests” brought to Moscow, the Middle East, Delhi, Jallianwala Bagh, Leningrad, Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Hanoi, Afghanistan and Iraq – and how these “conquerors” acted and conducted themselves through every stage and aspect of their invasions and “conquests.”
Nor can the world easily forget the horrors of the Inquisition that the “conquering” state and the Christian church together unleashed on the Muslims, Jews, scholars and scientists of 15th and 16th Century Europe.
Conquest of Compassion:
The world also knows that a “conquest,” or the air, demeanor or attitude of a “conqueror,” is not what Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, brought to Makkah, when he entered that enemy capital at the end of two decades of bitter and bloody struggle, in which his enemies had, among other terrible things, torn off and chewed on the liver of his uncle Hamza (May Allah be pleased with him!).
As he rode into the “conquered” forbidden city of Makkah – which God Almighty had miraculously thrown open for him as he was later to throw open the sacred city of Jerusalem to his follower Umar – his head was bowed so low out of humility before God that it was brushing the mane of his mount.
A blanket amnesty then descended upon former enemies and their leaders were honored with special consideration.
That is the kind of “conquest” that “conqueror” Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, brought to the “conquered” enemy stronghold of Makkah.
Not one house was burned. Not one woman was raped, dishonored or insulted. Not one baby was butchered. Not one property was looted. Only a handful of hardened criminals, their number in low single digits, lost their lives in punitive law enforcement action.
The world has never seen a “conquest” so complete, so thorough or so compassionate either before or since the “conquest” of love and mercy that Prophet Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, bestowed upon the city of Makkah and its “conquered” people.
Who but Allah’s mercy to all the worlds – Rahamatullil ‘Aalameen – could have done that?
A Revolution of Mercy:
So, here was Islam, all of a sudden, a revolution of mercy, justice, fairness, equality and compassion. Islam was now breaking down the barriers that had sundered the human race forever – and leveling the playing field for all, as it had never been leveled before.
Here it was, setting slaves free and asking slave owners to feed, clothe, shelter and treat their slaves in the same manner as themselves and their families. It even made slaves part of the household of the owner.
Here was Islam mandating humane treatment of animals and issuing proclamations for the protection of crops, trees, forests, waters, oceans, and other parts and aspects of the public space and environment.
Here was Islam all of a sudden conferring rights upon women they had not known before. Here was Islam in one stroke banning female infanticide and calling it one of the worst crimes and sins. Never since has female infanticide been a part of Muslim culture even in the worst of times.
Abolishing Religion:
And then Islam did something else – totally unimaginable to the rest of the world, even to this day: it ended and abolished religion altogether the way the world had known and practiced religion till then.
Islam did so by abolishing the entire class of clergy as well as the very institution of the church. It further declared that all human beings had ready, direct and unfettered access to God Almighty – without the intercession or intermediacy of a confessor, a shaman, a priest or a pundit.
Before his death, the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, declared: I leave behind two things that will keep you from going astray provided you held on to them firmly – the book of Allah and my own practice of it.
That means humanity – or at least that part of it that embraced Islam and became Muslim – was now being told to sink or swim in a world without religion, priests, pundits, shamans, clergy, temples, tabernacles, altars, sanctum sanctorums and sacraments, using as its supreme guide only the book of God and the practice of the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam.
The sun never rose on a mightier day for human freedom, empowerment and independence.
In what is perhaps one of the most revolutionary pronouncements of all time, Islam then declared that the entire earth, from one end of it to the other, was now turned by God into a Masjid (a mosque) for the Prophet of Islam, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam. And for those who embraced and followed his message of divine liberation.
The whole planet was pronounced to be a place where people from now on could freely worship God, wherever and whenever the time and the occasion overtook them. Human beings no longer needed to look for a temple, a tabernacle, an altar or a sanctum sactorum, or await the availability of the services of a priest or a pundit, to worship God.
All they needed was a clean spot anywhere on God’s big, beautiful planet earth – Good Earth, as Pearl S. Buck once called it – where they could face the direction of Makkah and perform their worship of God Almighty entirely on their own.
To this day, the world is barely cognizant or aware of the existence of a living miracle of this kind or scope in its midst. Nor does it have any understanding of its true scope or dimensions. Nor does the world have the slightest comprehension or appreciation of the kind of walking, living, talking miracle each Muslim individual is.
That every Muslim man and woman, no matter how deeply “religious” he or she may appear to be, is nevertheless free – at least in theory – of the stranglehold of a priest or a pundit on his or her soul and salvation. And that nothing – and no one – separates a Muslim man or woman from God Almighty except his or her own sins, ego and willfulness.
Ending Tyranny:
This was the ultimate in the liberation of the human spirit from bondage to the man-made modalities of clerical and priestly religion. And this was the greatest blow to what Thomas Jefferson called all forms of tyranny over the mind of man.
Thus, Islam changed religion forever by using a very simple formula: it abolished it.
Islam ended religion as much of the world had been practicing it and set humanity free to worship God entirely on its own, using the book of God and the practice of the Prophet of God, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, as its only navigational aids.
Never before had one man – an unlettered man who emerged out of a cave in a barren rock in Arabia – done so much for the mental, physical and spiritual liberation of the entire human race.
The world is yet to fully wake up to the significance and true dimensions and implications of Islam’s Emancipation Proclamation to the human race.
Consent of the Governed:
Islam, however, did not stop with that. On the political front it made the only lawful form of government the one which was based on the informed will and consent of the governed. And it did so in the most elementary and yet the most profound form.
The Qur’an made the seeking and sharing of information and opinion the very basis of human life and interaction at all levels – family, group, organization, society, culture, community, nation, the world. And it made information and opinion exchange central to the entire process of conducting public business.
The simplicity, parsimony and elegance of the words of the Qur’an on this subject are matchless: wa Amruhum Shoora Bainahum. The entire Muslim way of life, and the way Muslims conduct business, must be based on mutual exchange of information, opinion, views, input and advice.
The Qur’an told the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, to seek people’s views, ideas and opinions, and to go after whatever information may be out there, and to solicit whatever input may be forthcoming. It said: wa Shawirhum Fil-Amr.
The principle of the consent of the governed never found a clearer, simpler, more elegant or more forceful expression than this!
And it was at a time when this concept was unfamiliar to the rest of the world by over 1000 years. And when the doctrine of the divine right of the kings to rule whom they wanted and how they wanted was considered as self-evident and unassailable as the presence of the midday sun in a clear blue sky.
And the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, in turn operationalized and humanized this universal divine principle as only he could. He told the people that when three of them set out together on a trip, they – those three – must choose one of them as their leader.
The concept of political choice, voting and elections was never laid out more robustly and succinctly, or stated at a more fundamental level, or formulated in a more sweeping manner. Thus, choice of leadership, starting at the most rudimentary level (three people on up), was thrust right into the hands of the people – the ordinary people.
The Qur’an introduced a brand new concept and term into human language called The People – Annaas! – a gender-inclusive new term that subsumed every human being of every stripe, color, rank and status. Not “Mankind” as some of the translators, themselves prisoners of archaic pre-Islamic thought and language, tell us, but The People.
The Qur’an uses this expression well over 200 times. It was in Annaas – The People – that God Almighty had now vested the right and the power to choose their own rulers and leaders. The rest of the world would not wake up to this idea for an entire millennium.
At the other end of the spectrum, the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, also strongly and clearly spelled out the duty of the electorate and the governed – The People – to be assertive, outgoing and forthcoming in matters of public policy, practice, participation and debate.
He pointed out that the essence of the culture, the new social and political ethos, created by Islam lay in providing proper advice, counsel, opinion, input, information and feedback to those in power. And he did it in two divinely inspired and timeless words. “Ad-Deen, An-Nasihah,” he said.
Humanicide:
And then Islam turned its attention to the long and backbreaking list of religious and social taboos under which humanity had labored for so long and took much of the mystery out of them. It then reduced the list to a few clearly identified items, most of which made ready and intuitive sense to most people.
The lawful it simply called Halal. And the unlawful it called Haram. They are both as clear as they can be, said the Prophet, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam – if we would be careful about the gray area in between.
Thus murder was Haram. In fact, according to the Qur’an, taking of a single life without due process was tantamount to wiping out the entire human race from the face of the earth – from beginning to end. Murder in Islam was thus not just Haram, it was Humanicide: killing off humanity as a whole.
And there were some other things that were clearly labeled as Haram. Infanticide was Haram. Drinking alcoholic beverages was Haram. Willful cruelty to animals was Haram. Eating of pig was Haram. Disobedience of and rudeness to parents was Haram. Gambling was Haram.
Sex outside marriage was Haram. Backbiting was Haram. Causing undue social unrest and disorder, and running around making trouble and mischief in the world, was Haram. Gobbling up the wealth and property of orphans was Haram.
Social Empowerment:
Allahu Akbar!
What a revolution this was – in social, religious and political thought and practice! And how clear cut some of these things are that are declared to be Haram – by Allah and equally by Allah’s messenger, Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam.
Thus, in Islamic culture, Halal and Haram became means of empowering the Muslim community and the human race on the one hand and of saving them from things and activities that were inherently bad for them on the other hand. Things that the Qur’an called Khaba-ith – bad, impure, evil things.
The evil in some of these things was evident for all to see, even though the evil inherent in some of them was known only to Allah. But Allah the most wise, most knowing and the most caring and kind asked human beings to stay away from them all because of the evil and harmful qualities he knew they possessed.
Humanity owes Islam an enormous debt of gratitude for how Islam in one clear swoop knocked off the burden of taboos humanity had carried on its back for so long. And how Islam freed humanity from the chains and shackles of religious hardship and bondage that had held her captive everywhere!
It is of this glorious outflow of divine mercy and of this magnificent tradition of human liberation that Halal and Haram are truly a part and a harbinger. But from a purely technical point of view, they are just two expressions out of the pages of Islamic law and jurisprudence.
But no matter how you look at them, in reality, like everything else Islam touches or teaches, these are also some of the most amazing things that we can think of in relation to human life on earth.
Together, they reflect the two distinct positions the law takes in relation to the things human beings do or consume – not just the law made by humans but law revealed by God Almighty.
That means Haram is that which has been specifically designated to be unlawful and impermissible by God and his messenger, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam. And Halal is that which is permissible and lawful according to the law and culture of Islam – which means pretty much everything else.
That also means no one but God Almighty and his messenger (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam) have the right or authority to pronounce something Haram. And all that is not specifically designated by God and his messenger, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, to be Haram, is most likely to be Halal.
Haram – Inherently Evil or Harmful:
Here is the key to the puzzle, and it is a most amazing indication of how Islam really looks at our worldly life – our stay here on this earth: Things in Islam are generally presumed to be Halal, unless they are specifically designated and pronounced to be otherwise by God Almighty and his messenger, Muhammad, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam.
The Islamic law in this matter, like in so many other respects, is quite revolutionary. According to Islam, the essential nature of things is to tend toward Halal – that is, lawful and permissible.
Haram is a secondary attribute that things acquire based on direct ruling from God and his messenger, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam! – which in turn is based on the inherent evil, negativity and harm in some of those things.
Haram, therefore, is that which God and his messenger, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, have declared to be unlawful. The underlying rationale is that the Haram thing or practice is generally detrimental to humanity’s wellbeing on earth and to its future life in the hereafter.
That it is Khabith – bad; harmful; ugly; impure; fraught with negative consequences and implications.
That is what makes Haram in Islam such a revolutionary concept, because it makes the physical and spiritual wellbeing of the individual and the community its focal point. It is not an attempt to constrain or inconvenience the individual or the community by imposing on them the burden of unnecessary and irrational taboos and hardships, but a device to liberate and empower them and serve their best interests in this world as well as in the next world.
That means, Allah and his messenger, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, have made only those things or activities Haram that are somehow injurious to the body, mind and soul of the individual and carry negative consequences and implications for the wellbeing of the family, community, society, human species and the world.
Thus, by pronouncing certain things to be Haram, Islam enhances the physical and spiritual wellbeing of the entire human race – and the entire world. It is clear then that the expression Haram, therefore, should not be used lightly or irresponsibly.
It is not surprising therefore that God and his messenger have retained the right, power and authority to declare something Haram (unlawful and prohibited) or Halal (lawful and permissible).
Therefore, in the language and culture of Islam, Haram is that which Allah and his Rasul, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, have clearly, explicitly and specifically made unlawful and impermissible.
As a result, partaking in Haram is a serious violation of Islam and therefore a grave sin punishable by God. It is also illegal and unlawful activity from the point of view of the law of the land and therefore subject to sanctions and penalties in this world where an Islamic order may prevail.
Therefore, good Muslims would try their utmost to stay away from things that are Haram – just like decent, nice and civilized people of any faith and culture anywhere would do their utmost to stay away from breaking the law of the land such as shoplifting, murder, rape or running traffic lights.
Fatwa-Happy Few:
However, Islam is quite stringent when it comes to the criteria for declaring something Haram. As a result, the list of things Haram in Islam ought to be a very short one. And it is. It is amazing how emphatic and clear the Qur’an itself is on this subject. And the Hadith also is quite specific if not guarded on what does or does not constitute Haram.
There, however, is a catch. And it has the effect of radically changing the picture, making the list of Haram things among Muslims a fairly long and lively one. That is because some Muslims are quite happy to extrapolate freely from the Qur’an and the Hadith and use the expression Haram rather loosely and liberally.
They are trigger-happy when it comes to attaching the label Haram to things. As a result, they sometimes tend to shoot from the lip and stretch the list of Haram things and activities to breaking point.
It is one thing to call certain things and practices unacceptable or undesirable, Makruh for example as some scholars of the past used to do, but it is a different matter altogether to rush to attach the label of Haram to something with which we may not be entirely pleased.
The voting and election Fatwa struck me as falling into that unfortunate category. A lot of people may be unhappy about a lot of things that go on in a lot of places in the name of elections and voting. But to start calling them Haram, either just because they are so widely practiced in the West, or because they are often so glaringly flawed in practice, is rather naïve and irresponsible. It is a misuse of the expression Haram.
As Muslims – as guardians of peace and harmony on Allah’s earth which they hold in trust from God – we also need to worry about the extent to which such a rejectionist Fatwa as well as the deeper rejectionist attitude and mindset that give rise to such a Fatwa – would lead to alienation, anomie, frustration, hopelessness, extremism and nihilism among Muslim youth in the West.
This is an extremely relevant consideration as Islam teaches us to be continually mindful of the implications and consequences of our actions and pronouncements. Disturbing and challenging an established social order on whim is not the first line of action in Islamic thought or jurisprudence, even though Muslims are under orders by God to work diligently to make a more just, fair, compassionate and truthful social order prevail everywhere.
Therefore, there was clearly some shooting from the hip on the part of the Muftis – those issuing the election Fatwa – who, it appears to me, had resorted to it without much serious thought or analysis. The Fatwa seems to betray a lack of understanding or appreciation of the intricacies or even some of the basic and self-evident facts of the political process in the West – or anywhere else in the world.
The feet of the Muftis calling elections Haram, Allah bless and guide them and open their eyes to reality, clearly did not seem to be on the ground. On the other hand, the disconnect of these Muftis from reality, political or otherwise, was quite evident.
Questions to Ask:
What everyone should be asking here is if Allah and his Rasul, Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam, have really made voting and elections Haram? We showed earlier just the opposite to be the case.
Are elections and voting inherently evil then – impure and Khabith? That would be a hard case to make, no matter how deep we dig into the malpractices that go into electioneering.
Are they fraught with negative and evil consequences for the individual, community, society and the world? Well, as opposed to what other alternative political method and formulation?
These are some of the main reasons that would justify taking voting and elections out of the big, broad sphere of Halal and put them in the rather small and narrow corner called Haram.
If voting and elections do not fit this evil and diabolical profile, and they clearly do not, then we should stop telling our fragile and gullible youth in the Western world that elections are Haram and start looking for ways to improve them and make them do the job they were really meant to do – put in office the best among us, based entirely on the will, choice, consent and preference of the governed.
That brings me to the next question: What is a Fatwa, anyway?
Let me make it perfectly clear that a Fatwa is nothing more or less than an opinion – presumably a scholarly opinion, often misnamed a religious opinion or worse still a religious edict – a silent ode to the woeful professional inadequacy and cultural illiteracy of contemporary journalism.
A religious ruling or edict a Fatwa certainly is not. Firstly, that is because Islam is not what people call a religion and secondly there is no such thing in Islam as an edict. As for rulings, they can only come from a duly constituted judicial or executive authority such as a judge or a competent government official.
At the same time, Fatwas are an honored Islamic tradition. However, a Fatwa in Muslim culture is primarily an educational and social tool. It is generally a carefully thought out and rigorously researched and reasoned answer given by a scholar or group of scholars to a question of theoretical or practical significance, often in written form.
At least that is how it ought to be and that is how it has been in much of Islamic history and culture – I mean carefully thought out and rigorously researched and reasoned.
Sometimes, the initiative for the Fatwa may come from the scholarly source itself. At other times, and mostly, it is based on questions – often in written form – submitted to the Mufti by those with concerns.
Some questions may reflect the actual practical predicament of the questioner or someone known to the questioner. Some other questions may be hypothetical representations of possible scenarios.
Questions are taken to be good-faith efforts on the part of the questioner to seek knowledge and enlightenment or practical guidance and direction on matters of personal importance.
As a result, a Fatwa may be helpful to anyone and everyone but binding on no one – except the person holding or issuing that opinion.
Binding on Muftis, not on others:
The interesting thing about a Fatwa is that it may not be binding even on those asking the question. That is because asking a question does not imply consent or a contract to comply with the answer.
Nor does a Fatwa carry with it any sanction for noncompliance. Nor does it come with the authority to enforce it and impose any sanction or punishment in the case of failure to comply. In fact, the issuing of a Fatwa is an indication that the Mufti does not have the authority, power or the means to enforce the Fatwa.
However, a Fatwa is generally considered binding on the source issuing it. That is because if someone arrives at a certain conclusion after carefully studying relevant evidence and arguments, that conclusion then becomes the logical choice for that person to act on.
Failure to act on one’s own research, conclusions and stated opinion – Fatwa – may leave a person open to the charge of hypocrisy and lack of seriousness or character or defying and trifling with God’s law as it has become manifest to that person through his own research, analysis and reasoning..
A rejectionist and isolationist Fatwa of this kind – a Fatwa that considers elections and voting Haram and rejects them as normative or acceptable Islamic behavior in society – will indicate that those holding this opinion and issuing this Fatwa will themselves stay away from participation in the electoral process in any form.
But in practice, that may not always be the case with the rejectionist Muftis and their often naïve and unthinking camp followers.
They may all say no to voting and elections as an instrument of political participation, but as human beings, caught in the throes of everyday living, they may not escape situations where they either seek or are offered views, opinions and information from and by others.
And that simply is voting and elections by a different name – and in different contexts.
That the rejectionist Fatwa declaring elections and voting Haram does not make much sense is quite obvious. What may not be so obvious, however, are the negative and deleterious effects these rejectionist Fatwas may have on those who uncritically follow the rejectionist Muftis.
Effects of Fatwas:
For, it is evident that Fatwas – all Fatwas – will have some kind of a social impact. In other words, Fatwas have consequences – personal, social, psychological and political.
So what kind of impact on individuals, groups, the Muslim community and the wider society – and on the role of Islam in that society – are rejectionist Fatwas likely to have?
It is fair to expect that effect to be by and large negative. Besides, the Fatwas may not always take a holistic or even accurate view of things and situations. They may proceed from a fragmentary, distorted or flawed analysis and view of reality and embody opinions stigmatizing and proscribing things – including elections and voting – that may be wrong, unrealistic and counterproductive for the individual and the society.
But rarely, if ever, do rejectionist Fatwas tend to probe or explore functional alternatives for meeting the plethora of personal, social and political needs and circumstances that give rise to voting and elections in a society in the first place.
That means they hardly ever raise the question of what is the political way out for British Muslims – or for French or American Muslims – once a Fatwa has been issued asking them not to participate in elections. If, following the rejectionist Fatwa, they abstain from participation in elections, what are Britain’s Muslim citizens supposed to do?
How are they supposed to register their views, pursue their rights, safeguard their interests, advance their goals and fulfill their social and civic obligations in British society? What exactly is the social, political and economic way out for them?
Lack of Alternatives:
And then what is the alternative political model that is being promoted for Britain, France and other European societies? Are we supposed to replace the governments of Blair, Chirac and Bush, and the political processes by which they came to power, with the governments of Mubarak, Assad, Fahd and Abdullah of the Middle East – and the methods by which they came to be kings and presidents?
It is easy to say “No, we want the Khilafah!” – the kind that prevailed at the time of Hazrat Umar, Uthman and Ali (May Allah be pleased with them!). But how in the world do we expect to reach that miraculous pinnacle of political achievement, if we will not show people even some of the tentative first steps of how to use their political rights, freedom and choice?
At the same time, we should not forget that the ranks of those following rejectionist political Fatwas may include socially disaffected and alienated individuals, particularly youth, whom the sociopolitical processes around them may have failed to engage, integrate and empower. Such people would be inclined to follow rejectionist Muftis due to what they perceive to be the latter’s moral authority or personal charisma. What message does a rejectionist Fatwa send to people like that?
In many cases, the rejectionist camp acts as a source of moral and psychological refuge, solace and succor – often the only one – to disaffected, aggrieved and alienated souls and spirits from society. What prevents some of them form reaching a point of such deep despair with the status quo as to consider violence as a legitimate means of personal or political expression?
Finally, here comes one of the most interesting and instructing aspects of the Fatwa business. It is often no better or worse, and no more right or wrong, than the question that it purports to answer. For, the Muftis – those issuing a Fatwa – generally take certain things for granted.
First of all, they assume good faith on the part of those asking the question.
Second, they assume representation of facts to be accurate, truthful and complete. When one or both of these fundamental assumptions are violated, as they sometimes are, the resulting Fatwa could be misleading and troublesome.
Worth Considering:
Therefore, before someone pulls the trigger on a rejectionist Fatwa next time, let them take the following ideas into consideration:
If they did that they would trigger a healthy debate and discussion in the community – and possibly in the wider society. Such a free exchange of views is the primary foundation upon which stands the edifice of voting and elections in the West – or anywhere else.
Those are also the first shoots of a new spring of political freedom and empowerment for Muslims in the West, and elsewhere, especially the youth.
Wallahu A’alam! Allah knows best.
This brings us to the end of Part II of Are Elections Haram? Says Who? And Based on What?
Inshallah, we will bring you Part III as soon as Allah enables us to finish work on it.
P.S. Do please bear in mind, however, that our manuscripts are mostly drafts in need of further revision, which sometimes we are unable to undertake or complete due to time and resource constraints.
End of Part 2 of 8
Written, January 2001
Modified, 2004, 2005
(To be Revised)
© 2005 Syed Husain Pasha
Dr. Pasha is an educator and scholar of exceptional
talent, training and experience. He can be reached at DrSyedPasha [at]
AOL [dot] com or www.IslamicSolutions.com.