Author: Kanchan Gupta
Publication: The Pioneer
Date: October 7, 2006
This conversation began in the sparsely furnished
but cavernous office of Mohammed Sayed Tantawi, the Grand Sheikh of Al Azhar,
in medieval, or Islamic, Cairo. It continued with other sheikhs of the world's
oldest university and the highest seat of Sunni theology over cups of scalding
oversweet coffee. In between, there was a detour by way of evenings spent
with young, educated Arabs in Jeddah, the gateway to Mecca, symbol of global
Islam.
The common thread that ran through this conversation
was Islam's response to jihadi terrorism. Is causing death and destruction
in the name of Islam justified? Does Islam prescribe punishment for terrorists?
Should Muslims protest if a terrorist is made to feel the pain he/she inflicts
on others?
I met Sheikh Tantawi three months after the
December 13, 2001 terrorist attack on Parliament House. A parliamentary delegation
had by then visited Cairo to sensitise the Egyptian Government about the facts
of the case, especially Pakistan's role in the attack, and present dossiers
that I had helped prepare. The Egyptians didn't need much convincing: Their
embassy in Islamabad had been blown up by jihadis on November 19, 1995.
The Grand Sheikh, in a grey gelabeya and a
white wraparound turban, was surprisingly well informed about the attack on
Parliament House and when I popped the question - what does he have to say
about the attack? - sputtered in rage. "Terrorism is aggression against
innocent men, women and children," he said, waving his hands to indicate
rejection of any contrary suggestion.
"In the name of Islam I reject and condemn
the aggression against innocent people, regardless of whatever side, sect
or country the aggression comes from," he added, spacing out the words
so that my interpreter would not miss out on any. Islam, he said, "shows
no mercy to such aggressors (as those who attacked Parliament House)".
Later, over many cups of Turkish coffee, an
Al Azhar sheikh who is acknowledged as a scholar of sharia'h explained to
me what the Grand Sheikh meant by "no mercy". It is often claimed,
he said, that apostasy and murder - apart from adultery - are the only crimes
that invite the death penalty under Islamic law. "But capital punishment
is not meant to apply only to change or renunciation of faith," he said,
adding, "it is also meant to punish acts such as treason, joining forces
with the enemy, and sedition".
Another sheikh, who is often denounced by
Islamists for not endorsing the "martyrdom" of Palestinian suicide
bombers, stressed the need to mete out harsh punishment to terrorists. "At
the end of it all, yes, eternal punishment for the crimes we commit in this
world are in Allah's hands," he said, and then asserted, "but we
should not forget that there is a place for punishment in this world as well."
He should know. Islamic Egypt had no compunctions
about sending Sayyid Qutb, the chief ideologue of Islamism, to the gallows
on August 29, 1966 for "plotting to overthrow the state". Earlier,
Hassan al Banna, founder of Muslim Brotherhood, the mother of all jihadi organisations,
was shot dead by the mukhabarat in February, 1949, for encouraging armed insurrection.
What emerged from these and other conversations
with scholars in Al Azhar whose knowledge of Islamic theology is impeccable
and whose faith in Islam is unquestionable is in sharp contrast to what is
being claimed by Islamists - and their fellow travellers - championing the
cause of Mohammed Afzal Guru.
Harsh punishment, all of them said, serves
as "a deterrent for those who harm innocent people or threaten to destabilise
the foundation of society". Two crimes in particular, they insisted,
should fetch the death penalty: Intentional murder and fasaad fi al-ardh ("spreading
mischief in the land"). It was also pointed out to me that unlike Christianity,
Islam prescribes capital punishment for "those who threaten to undermine
authority or destabilise the state".
Scholars of Islam have variously interpreted
fasaad fi al-ardh and over a period of time, "spreading mischief in the
land" has come to mean a variety of crimes or deviant behaviour that
"affect the community as a whole, and destabilise society". Some
of the crimes that come under the rubric of fasaad fi al-ardh are treason;
apostasy; terrorism; land, sea or air piracy; rape; adultery; and, homosexuality.
Ahmed and his friends, whom I met through
a common friend in Jeddah, are more informed about the world of high finance
than Islamic theology. But they are devout Muslims who chose to return to
Saudi Arabia than stay on in the US after their graduate studies in some of
the top business schools.
And their views on terrorism run contrary
to popular notions of Saudi Arabia as a seething mass of Osama bin Laden clones.
"We have been taught, and we believe, that Islam forbids inciting terror
in the hearts of defenceless people, the destruction of buildings and properties,
the bombing and maiming of innocent men, women, and children," Ahmed
said, adding, "Islam does not subscribe to the view that a political
cause can be advanced or assisted by such immoral acts."
Perhaps they were echoing the views of Sheikh
Abd al-Aziz bin Abdallah Aal al-Sheikh, the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, head
of the Saudi commission of senior Islamic scholars and the supreme Islamic
authority in the kingdom that lives by the unflinchingly strict code of Wahabi
Islam. Asked for his views on Islamist terrorism, including hijacking of aircraft,
attacks against security personnel and suicide operations - like the one on
Parliament House - he described them as "illegitimate" and "having
nothing to do with jihad in the cause of Allah."
After the public execution of three terrorists,
who had been found guilty of bombings, killing security personnel and using
a car seized from an expatriate Indian, on an April Friday, Sheikh Abdul Aziz
Al-Maiman, a well-known Saudi religious scholar, added another definition
to fasaad fi al-ardh: Such crimes, he said, "are called acts of corruption
in Islam, and the Quran has warned people against indulging in them".
As for the beheading of three terrorists on
a Friday in a public square of Sakaka after the jumma prayer, the sheikh explained
it as 'just punishment' for their crimes against innocent people, security
personnel and the state: "In Islam, those who are found committing such
acts of corruption as killing, stealing and kidnapping are punished severely
and therefore are executed or crucified."
The 'Friends of Afzal Society' should be grateful
that in secular India, the courts have not decreed that he be decapitated
or crucified on Vijay Chowk in full public view of those, including good Muslims,
who believe terrorists like him are a threat to open society and democracy.
