6- Levels of Denouncement for Wrongdoings in the Muslim World:

Generally speaking, the
denouncement of an action or wrongdoing in the Muslim and Arab world can be effective in deterring others from doing it again if it follows certain criteria, which includes the following:

1-
To be directed against a person rather than just the act itself. For example, the Quran did not only denounce adultery, but
also warned that the 'persons' who do it will face severe punishment in hell. Even the fatwa against Salman Rushdie
represents this concept.

2-
Uses powerful expressions such as 'Kufr' and 'Redda'. There are several levels of describing mistakes in Arabic and Islamic
literature. In order of less severe to more severe, the following Arabic words could be used to
denounce a person who
commits a wrongdoing: Khatyea(made a mistake), Muzhneb(committed a minor sin), Faal Fahesha (committed major sin),
Mujrim (criminal), Kafer(Infidel), and Murtad (apostate).

Denouncing terrorists with weak expressions may serve a political purpose of improving the image of Islam, however, this is not likely to deter young Muslims from repeating the same act.

On the other hand, using the expression 'Murtad' is the most powerful way to denounce the terrorists, as according to traditional Islamic teaching, the ultimate consequence for this is going to hell forever.

3- Unconditional-

Denouncement for the evil nature of the act itself, not because it was 'not beneficial' to Muslims. The latter implies that it is okay to take a particular action if it is beneficial to Muslims.

4-
Must be general to all acts irrespective of the faith of the victim. Denouncement of acts of terror for killing Muslims is indirect approval of acts of terror that kill non-Muslims.

5-
Does not give any justification for the act.

7-Deceiving Fatwas:

Analysis of several statements and denouncements for
terrorism by leading Islamic organizations and individuals after 9/11 (33) reveals the following:

1-
Almost all of the statements did not mention Bin Laden by
name.

2-
None of these fatwas
considered Bin Laden and the terrorists as apostates.

3-
Many of these fatwas
denounced killing "innocents" without clearly defining what is
meant by this expression. In the context of denouncing terrorism it is vital to clarify that a non- Muslim, or "Kafer" (infidel) is not viewed as an innocent person by many Islamists and leading Islamic scholars. In their view, this person has committed the worst crime imaginable by not following Islam. In fact, those who do not follow Allah and Islam are considered by Islamists to be subhuman who must be fought.

These forms of 'deceiving fatwa' serve the purpose of improving the image of Islam in the West
without upholding the main role of fatwa, which is, in such circumstances, to deter young Muslims from doing these acts of
violence or participating in them in any way ever again.

As noted before, this type of fatwa is a form of "passive terrorism" that sends a message of support to the terrorists and can partially explain to us why the phenomena of violent Jihad and terrorism are still powerful in the mind of many young Muslims.

If the leading Muslim
scholars issued fatwas that were truly powerful, they can significantly help in deterring young Muslims from participating in terrorism or supporting it.

Let us now take a deep look at some of the well-known fatwas that were issued against terrorism:

1.
Amman statement that was issued by more than 50 leading Islamic scholars to denounce
terrorism.

The Fatwa did not mention any terrorist by name.
The denouncement was for terrorism (not the terrorists).
It did not mention killing non-Muslims.
The Fatwa only discussed killing Muslims. Failure to clearly mention the killing of non-Muslims is a form of hidden approval for killing the latter.
The Fatwa stated that "Equally, it is not possible to declare as apostates any group of Muslims who believes in Allah the Mighty and Sublime and His Messenger (may Peace and Blessings be upon him) and the pillars of faith, and respects the pillars of Islam and does not deny any 'Maloom Mina Al-Din Bil-Darura' - necessary article of religion." This very last sentence in the Fatwa indirectly conveys a message to the Jihadists that it is OK for them to kill Muslims who deny any "necessary article of the religion," such as those who refuse to practice Islamic or Sharia Law.

Let us now take a deep look at some of the well-known fatwas that were issued against terrorism:

1. Amman statement that was issued by more than 50 leading Islamic scholars to denounce terrorism.
The Fatwa did not mention any terrorist by name. The denouncement was for terrorism (not the terrorists).

It did not mention killing non-Muslims. The Fatwa only discussed killing Muslims. Failure to clearly mention the killing of non-Muslims is a form of hidden approval for killing the latter.
The Fatwa stated that "Equally, it is not possible to declare as apostates any group of Muslims
who believes in Allah the Mighty and Sublime and His Messenger (may Peace and Blessings be upon him) and the pillars of faith, and respects the pillars of Islam and does not deny any 'Maloom Mina Al-Din Bil-Darura' - necessary article of religion." This very last sentence in the Fatwa indirectly conveys a message to the Jihadists that it is OK for them to kill Muslims who deny any "necessary article of the religion," such as those who refuse to practice Islamic or Sharia Law.

2. The Fatwa issued by the Fiqh Council of North America that was supported and endorsed by more than 100 Islamic
organizations and individuals in the US, including CAIR.

It did not mention by name Bin Laden or any terrorists who participated and planned the attacks of 9/11.
It considered terrorism
"haram" (forbidden). This level of denouncement put terrorism at the same level as eating pork,
which is also "haram" in Islam.

If the fatwa was truly meant to deter young Muslims from doing terrorism and not just to
improve the image of Islam, it should have considered terror or contributions to it as an act of 'kufr' (an act that makes one an infidel). Failure to do so is a form of passive terrorism, leading to these organizations being perceived as moderates in the West even without effectively denouncing the terrorists.

It only considered the terrorists as "not martyrs" instead of strongly denouncing them by using more powerful expressions such as "apostates."

The former expression is weak and does not imply that the terrorists will not be in Paradise or that they will go to hell. In Islam, many non-martyrs, including the Prophet Mohamed himself, will go to paradise.

An example of the powerful fatwa is the Fatwa issued by Shaikh Muhammad Tahir-ul-Qadri against terrorism at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers in London on March 2,
2010. In this Fatwa the Shaikh described the terrorists as "Infidels" who will go to hell".

Unfortunately, this rare and late fatwa is not very influential as it was not issued by the most influential Islamic scholars or its leading
organizations such as the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC).

The same principle applies to the Fatwa of apostasy against Bin laden that was issued in Spain four years after Madrid train bombings.
If the Fatwa against Bin laden in Spain was truly genuine it should have been issued shortly after September 11 rather than four years later when Muslims in Spain were facing a possible backlash following the Madrid
bombings.

Another good example to send a powerful message of disapproval to the terrorists is when Indian Muslims said they did not want the gunmen killed by the security forces during the attacks in Mumbai, but rather to be buried in Muslim cemetaries (as they considered the terrorists non- Muslims). Refusal to burry a Muslim in a Muslim cemetary is extremely powerful message that can deter young Muslims from pursuing the path of terrorism.

Unfortunately, this type of powerful reaction against the terrorists was unseen in any Muslim community other than Indian one.

The lack of such a strong reaction by other Muslim communities is suggestive of the presence of passive support for the terrorists in such communities. It is also noticeable that none of these fatwas were issued in the Arab world which is considered to be the heart of Islam.

Enlightening.

8-Implications:

1-
Deep understanding of
passive forms of terrorism is needed to be able to distinguish between radical and moderate scholars and organizations. This distinction can allow us to support the moderates instead of giving support to the passive terrorists.

2-
Analysis of the fatwas and other Muslim responses to terrorism can help us evaluate both the extent and the progress of the problem of Islamic radicalism in a given society.

3-
Informing Islamist groups and organizations that pretend to be moderate that their passive support for terrorism is exposed can create some pressure on these organizations to force them to denounce terrorism properly. This can ultimately help in weakening radical Islam.

4-
Issuing strong fatwas against the terrorists needs to be encouraged and promoted within Muslim societies.

EPILOGUE

Passive terrorism is the precursor of active terrorism. Many are already tools of this phenomenon while coming forth as moderates and peaceful. Our war on terror is incomplete unless we confront the passive terrorists who groom, fill up and cover the active terrorists.

However, for this, we require stronger weapon than a missle or bomb. That weapon is non other than the Book of God; Quran. The passive terrorist may be very intelligent, pretentious and deceptive but even the collosal product of his strength, persona and traditions will crumble at the prouncement of the verses of the Book.

PEACE

Good work, Usermane.

I actually thought that this thread would be banned and thats why I didnt comment earlier

I am in agreement with all you have outlined in your post, actually these are problems that need to be confronted by all not just the scholar alone,giving religious verdict " fatwah" only can not solve the problem, untill now, I am not aware that some scholars have supposedly kicked against terrorism in their fatwahs, you see, they can give plenty of fatwahs, however, how many people will get to listen or come across such opinions of the scholars.

If we show in our actions and our words that we are strongly against terrorism and any teachings that promote it, in my view that would have been much more effective in combating terrorism than just saying you did not just support it. I tend to think that having more of demonstrations and protest will do much more than millions fatwahs, so, all I am saying is let us quit the talking and acts, then, the terrorist and the scholars will know they no longer have willing tools to cause mayhem in the name of God.

What more can I say, keep on speaking your mind in spite of the criticism you will attract from the fanatics!

elektra: I really hope this thread does not degenerate into some Islam bashing thread to avoid its deletion.
Usermane, I couldn't have said it better. The voice against Islamic terrorism is very weak in the Muslim community. I really wonder why they always claim not to be in support but are very sluggish to openly and actively condemn these activities.

I really feel that if the true followers of Islam speak up more actively against terrorism, they will drown out the false teachings some Muslims receive which lead to terrorist activity

One of the successful ways to curb terrorism among young muslims is to have the mosques and imam speak against such acts and also have muslims who monitor any radical activities in the mosque.

This has worked to a great extent in the UK. However, it took a serious work from a majorly non-muslim government to do so.

Muslims gotta do more

TheBigUrban2:

One of the successful ways to curb terrorism among young muslims is to have the mosques and imam speak against such acts and also have muslims who monitor any radical activities in the mosque.

Most of the mosques in UK are run and financed by Saudi government backed salafist groups. The salafists are the most extreme sects of orthodox Islam. Not to generalise, most staunch and unrepenting terrorists like Muhammad Yusuf(Boko haram) or Osama bin Laden belong to the Salafi sect. So, how effective have this measure been?

Then again, the mosque is only one of the media through which radicalisation occurs. Books, magazines, internet or lecture are other powerful media of indoctrination into extremism which breeds separatism that in turns breeds terrorism.

Thus, much is still required to combat active or passive terrors by the British government or Muslim moderates.