Kings of the past used to claim authority over the masses through self-proclaimed association with some kind of gods. The pharaohs of Egypt were famous of this. The Japanese emperors also claimed lineage to some god. Somewhat less absurd claims come in form of the divine rights of kings. Through the concept of divine rights, the rulers obtained their rights to rule by authority supposedly invested in them from above, not from below unlike, modern and liberal democratic system. The bottom line is that their decision is absolute. Any act of questioning these authorities is as good as questioning the authority of god.
Questioning the authority of god in any conservative society familiar with lynching, beheading and burning at the stake is not something one would like to do so openly.
This idea is dangerous for the obvious reason. It implicitly equates an entity formed by humankind to god. To god-fearing society, the power of pharaohs, emperors and kings are absolute, regardless of the idea of right or wrong. Such scenario is a fertile ground for tyranny.
As society matures, individuals become to realize the fallibility of these rulers and began to learn to disassociate these rulers from some all mighty beings. This realization has been crucial in creating freer societies in which individuals are empowered to take their fate into their own hands.
The trend of self-empowerment is observable in Malaysia but there are no doubt challenges. One of the challenges lately came in form of religious edicts read out by the National Fatwa Council. Tomboys and Yoga are recently declared banned for Muslims by the Council.[1]
The edicts have been criticized for trying to dictate lifestyle of an individual. Others accuse the Council of having nothing better to do, judging from the triviality of the issues addressed, compared to the issue of corruption for instance, by the Council.
Utusan Malaysia on its front page today reports that the President of Persatuan Peguam Syarie Malaysia (PGSM; roughly the Sharia Lawyers’ Association of Malaysia), Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar is responding to that criticism by advocating for legal action to be taken against the critics of the decisions of the National Fatwa Council. He rationalizes his position by stating any challenge mounted against the Council is a challenge to Islam.[2]
In that statement is the assumption that the Council represents Islam and inevitably, god. The problem is, they have nothing to prove their appointment by god as the representatives of god or Islam. Neither does the PGSM.
In fact, Islam itself says there is no god by God alone. An act of equating anything to the God is considered a big no no in the religion. Yet, here we have Muslims trying to do that and labeling other Muslims as doing what no Muslims should do.
People like Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar seek to invest the National Fatwa Council with powers by limiting individuals’ right to self-determination. In doing so, he basically accepts the words of the Council as absolute, probably as good as the words of the god the Council is supposedly to represent.
This is clear in the way he is responding to the criticism directed to the National Fatwa Council. Rather than reasoning his support for the Council’s decision, he instead seeks to end the ongoing conversation on the matter while backing his demand with threat. He seeks to make the words of the Council, and his, as absolute, regardless the idea of right and wrong.
The streak of authoritarianism is unmistakable.
[1] — PUTRAJAYA: The National Fatwa Council has declared that yoga is haram (prohibited) in Islam and Muslims are banned from practising it. [Fatwa Council deems ancient form of exercise from India ‘haram’ for Muslims. Mazwin Nik Anis. The Star. November 23 2008]
[2] — KUALA LUMPUR 23 Nov. — Persatuan Peguam Syarie Malaysia (PGSM) mendesak kerajaan menggunakan peruntukan undang-undang di bawah Enakmen Kesalahan Jenayah Syariah dan Kanun Keseksaan bagi bertindak ke atas pihak yang mempertikaikan institusi fatwa.
[…]
”˜”˜Mencabar keputusan Majlis Fatwa Kebangsaan adalah sama seperti menghina agama Islam kerana institusi fatwa mempunyai peranannya yang tersendiri dan diiktiraf syarak serta Perlembagaan Persekutuan. [Fatwa: Ambil tindakan. Hernan Hamid. Utusan Malaysia. November 24 2008]
2 replies on “[1838] Of the National Fatwa Council is not a god”
Dear Hafiz,
You might be next in line after RPK. As someone said do as i say, don’t do as i do!
[…] Ibrahim’s argument about the fallibility of the ulamas, Hafiz’s view that ulamas may be committing THE “big no no” by equating their word …, and Sakmongkol’s continued exploration on Islam and […]