|
|

 |
|
Fatwa on Suicide as a Tactic
by Shaykh Dr. Abdalqadir
As-Sufi
|
|
17/02/2004 |
Because of the
terrible suffering and grief that the practitioners of suicide
have brought on their families and loved ones, in the first
instance, and because of the damage this has done to the
honour of the Muslims in the second instance, and because of
its being a cause of rendering some kuffar deaf to the call of
Islam in the third instance, many brothers and sisters have
come to us asking for clear guidance in this matter.
In
the tradition of the Fuqaha of the Mother of the Madhahibs,
the School of the People of Madinah, when judgments are
required concerning a matter the first question to be asked
is, "What is this matter, and what is its origin?" On
examining this we find that the term suicide has acquired two
connotations. Firstly, what it is in itself, and secondly, a
conjoining of what it is with its effects. It is the
transference from the legal and actual reality of what it is
to this second state, which is in fact an evaluation, that has
proved part of the confusion for our Muslim nation.
The act itself has no ambiguity in meaning or
evaluation. Suicide is the act of taking one's own life, that
is to say it is the act of killing oneself. It is an act of
murder perpetrated on oneself. Since this in itself is in the
words of the great German writer Ernst Jr, "Part of the
patrimony of mankind," it follows that it is something any one
of the human race can perform. Of course, in the eyes of the
humanists, and therefore atheists, the body is the person's
property and thus the act of suicide is the highest spiritual
confirmation of the practice of human rights. Since this is an
awesome human prerogative, it therefore requires that we first
look at it in the widest terms.
Firstly we note that
among the people of Fitra, and by that we mean those who live
in a primal, pre-industrial and non-money economy, the
practice is, according to those who study such societies,
basically unheard of. Thus, in the Fitra the act of suicide is
virtually unthinkable to such a degree that the exception
would prove the rule. In the advanced societies which have
evolved a social system, and which are referred to in the
Qur'an as 'the People of the Cities', suicide does become
manifest. In so-called civilised society, as we have just
defined it, the record of suicide begins to emerge. The main
general group of suicides in every society is put down among
the community of the insane. It follows from this that one of
the categories of the suicide enactor is madness. There seem
to be two types of madness which end in the act of the sick
person taking their life, and they could be seen as
representing two extremes. One form of suicide is the result
of a state of frenzy, that is hyper-activity. The other form
of suicide is its opposite, and is a result of the depressive
and catatonic state of the ill person, that state representing
an opposite condition of non-action. As a further category of
mental disturbance one would also subsume those who commit
suicide while in the throes of sexual passion, itself often
categorised as, or perpetrated in the name of, love. This
pathetic and tragic condition was described in detail by the
great writer William Shakespeare in his famous 'Romeo and
Juliet'.
A further category of suiciders which is yet a
further result of the state system, can be found in the prison
suicide. While this particular syndrome goes back in time over
hundreds of years, as the epochs have darkened, so the prison
suicide syndrome has increased. For this reason it can be
found in detail in the writing of Dostoevsky and later in the
evidence of Solzhenitsyn, this latter writer discoursing on
the subject at length in his study of the communist prison
system, 'The Gulag Archipelago'. It would appear that the
greater number of these particular suicides stemmed from a
despair arising from the nihilistic conviction that there was
no escape.
Nevertheless it is important to put on
record that having examined the issue in great detail we find
that in the late stages of advanced capitalism, which is the
dominant culture in which we now all live, there has been an
increasing attraction for an indulgence in the act of suicide,
to such an extent that it could be characterised as an
important and significant political act of nihilism performed
among the intellectual elite who have embraced the nihilist
and thus atheist philosophy, politique and economique.
Significantly, this act of suicide in the modern age has taken
on a increasingly jewish identity. Jewish communities have
experienced collective suicide, either through despair or
refusal to surrender, in their history. The suicides of the
jews of Masada, when surrounded by the Roman army, is famous.
So too are recorded events of suicide under christian
persecution in the cathedral towns of York and Norwich, and in
many places in France and Germany. In the modern age a
positive rash of suicides seem to have beset the jewish
intellectual elite. To name but a few, the poet Mayakovski,
and the novelists Italo Calvino and Stefan Zweig, in varying
circumstances killed themselves. The child psychologist Bruno
Bettelheim, having survived the concentration camps, committed
suicide by tying a plastic bag over his head. Both the
philosopher, Wittgenstein, and the Marxist theorist,
Althusser, killed themselves, and the philosopher Otto
Weininger killed himself in Beethoven's house. The phenomenon,
however, is far from being reserved for the judentum, and many
of the christian elite followed the fashion-among writers,
from Virginia Woolf to Ernest Hemingway and
Montherlant.
A final category would be added to the
varied groupings defined by motive, and that would be those
who fall into a very modern category and one which has been on
a continual curve of increase since the first collapse of
capitalism in 1930, and that is suicide by debt anxiety. From
the spectacular leaping out of skyscrapers during the crash in
the 1930s, to the unnumbered dead who have evaded the
unpayable debt by having it written off on the deposit of a
handful of sleeping pills, thus and thus the usury system has
claimed a community of the self-destroyed.
From all of
this it follows that the act of suicide, the philosophy of
suicide and the clinical character of the suicider are
inseparable parts of a dominant culture whose character is
nihilist in every aspect-the destruction of the biosphere
precedes the self-destruction of the biological entity-and who
grants no value or importance to the act of suicide or the one
performing it, and by that extension grants no possible
significance to the rest of its surviving society. The planet
is valueless, the society is valueless, the person is
valueless, and human actions are valueless. The suicider makes
no protest against the valueless society, but offers a
confirming equation of nihilism. The distinguished
psychiatrist R. D. Laing defined it as an act of defiance and
insult against the loved ones in order to punish them, as if
to demonstrate, "There you are! You did not love me!"
Francoise Sagan, in a famous text attacking suicide, accused
the suicider of throwing his corpse in one's face, saying,
"You see? Nothing you could do could stop me!"
It is
inescapable from all of this that suicide represents an
experience of the absence of love, and by self-definition an
ultimate act of hatred of oneself as the unloved object,
whether the context be political, or personal, or
madness.
Our next responsibility is to examine suicide
within the ethos of the Muslim Ummah. There is simply no
reference to suicide for whatever motive in the social life of
the Muslims, apart from those aberrational phenomena as
defined above. However, suicide does emerge as a social
phenomenon among one sect of Muslims whose deviation in fact
does not allow us to categorise them as Muslims, but only as
emerging out of Islam in a desperate attempt to reach over to
the powerful community of the kuffar, and in the process
subvert the Muslims into defecting from their Deen. These are
the Isma'ili. It is important to recognise the position of the Isma'ili in a political sense, for their dialectic is a
movement, or rather a moving, from the confines of the Fara'id
of Islam into a wild and abandoned release from the moral and
civilising strictures of Divine Revelation. Not
insignificantly, the Isma'ili geographically were situated in
that zone that is now Lebanon, Israel and Palestine. It will
be seen that we can derive a direct line from historical
Isma'ilism to the contemporary practice of a political
Isma'ilism. The ruined castles of the Isma'ili sect can still
be seen on the skyline of the now doomed Middle-East. They are
the result of the deviation of a deviation. The first
deviation from our point of view is Shi'ism, which in its
central form still locates itself within adherence to the Five
Pillars. However, what in the viewpoint of the great body of
Muslims represents a vital omission, the denial of Khilafa
until the end of time, opened the door for one sect of their
people to extend the deviation as follows.
Having denied Sultaniyya, which by its power constricts the Muminun to obey
the known Shari'at, it then activates that denial of Amr not
by a refusal of Amr but by the substitute of an unappointed
Amir, a kind of surrealist Amir as opposed to a real one, an
Amir that nobody knows. An Amir that nobody chose. A wild man
who offers a wild release from how things are. Isma'ilism
begins by simply ignoring Islamic rule, governance and Amr. In
its place it offers a wild resistance both to Muslim authority
and kafir authority. Answerable to no Muslim leader, it pulls
the ground from under the known Muslim structures while
claiming its glory for apparently attacking the enemies of
Islam. The christians and the Muslim leader Salahuddin were
both targets of Isma'ili fury. The first significant aspect of
Isma'ilism, and this has to be recognised in the modern
context, is a mocking rejection of Islamic fiqh and Fuqaha,
and the replacing as we have said of real Amr with a quite
unreal or surreal leadership. The Old Man of the Mountains was
self-appointed, and so an opposite to the way that Khilafa
based itself on an appointment confirmed by a known Jama'at.
Just as he hid in the Lebanese mountains, with a cohort
unknown to the Muslim community, so Bin Laden hides in his
mountains with his unknown cohort, a secret society without
acclamation of its leader or public bayat to him. Similarly, a
secret junta manages the affair in Palestine, its only public
acclamation the funeral takbirs of its victims.
The
leader of the Muslims can only be a leader of their community.
In that sense, the Isma'ili leader is not a leader of anything
or anyone. He does not rule in any sense, but he does activate
the irrational dynamics of destruction and self-destruction.
In that sense he is a macabre activator of the Mahdi image. He
is an anti-Mahdi. This is why it can be understood that the
Shi'a cast them out as kuffar. The secret doctrine of
Isma'ilism was the abolition of the Shari'at and its
replacement with a magical haqiqat and angelology. Thus
everything is permitted-which is the nihilism of the kuffar.
The assassins who were sent to murder were given drugs to
prepare them for the violent acts. The perpetrators of the
hijacking and destruction of the Twin Towers, on the night
before their crime, were witnessed drinking vodka sours and
going off with prostitutes. Drugs and permitted sex were the
rewards of the suicide-assassins of the Isma'ili. Among the
Isma'ili special gardens of remembrance were prepared for the
corpses of the so-called martyrs. Their graves were marked
with portraits and garlands of flowers. Young men were sent
into these gardens to meditate on the glory that had been won
by their martyrs as part of their preparation to follow in
their footsteps. Identical graveyards can be seen in Palestine
today.
It follows from this that a closer look must be
taken at the ethos from which the modern suicide bombers have
emerged. First of all the Palestinian state, or pseudo-state
as presently constituted, does not have an Islamic leader.
From an Islamic point of view President Arafat would be
legally dead if an Islamic trial were held, since this person,
at Oxford and on television, openly insulted Sayedeta 'Aisha,
a crime which the Fuqaha of the School of Madinah consider to
merit capital punishment because of its affront to the blessed
exonerating Ayats in the Qur'an. This is clearly stated in the
Shifa of Qadi 'Iyad.
The so-called governing councils
of Palestine have over the years had less and less possibility
of being identified with the Deen of Islam, either by their
character or social practice. The purpose of their battle, the
creation of a national state, is itself abhorrent. While
fighting to restore land taken from its people has Qur'anic
sanction, Jihad fisabillillah is an entirely different matter.
In order that Jihad takes place the Banner of Islam has to be
raised high, and that implies in turn that it is under an open
and declared Amir fulfilling the significantly restrictive
rules of Jihad itself.
When the Mufti of Jerusalem set
out to attend an Islamic Conference in Johannesburg two years
ago, three entities tried to prevent his appearance at the
Conference: the Israelis, the Saudis and the PLO. This is
because his message was that Al-Aqsa is not the property of
the Palestinian state, but of all the Muslims. Since there is
no Islamic governance in Palestine, the people there find
themselves in the same position as that earlier community
which soon became the prey of a deviant anti-leadership. With
the collapse of the capitalist/communist dialectic it became
clear that there was no power support for the
kafir-nationalist doctrine of self-determination. At that
point they entered into the struggle against the supremely
ruthless kafir-nationalism of the jews. There then began the
adoption of a political Isma'ilism clearly derived from its
historical ancestor and clearly hoping to move to an end
result which was one defined by the Israeli Nobel prize-winner
as being "Two states but one economy!" From the analysis that
we have been pursuing to allow us to reach a clear judgment, a
new set of questions emerge.
1. Who orders the
suiciders to act? 2. By what macabre and false ijtihad are
these acts justified as being part of Islam? 3. Who are
these false Fuqaha, and where have they declared themselves to
the Muslim Ummah?
Let us therefore examine those men
and perhaps now even women who prepare the suicider for his
act of violence. Firstly, is it his own son he is sending to
his death? Secondly, is he sending another's son to his death
in preference to his own? Thirdly, what sort of man,
presumably of a certain maturity, would prefer to send a young
man to his death rather than perform the act himself? These
are questions to which the answers must have bitter and
terrible resonance. The final question that must be asked is,
what can the possible outcome be to a policy based on the
annihilation of your own future? These young men and women are
the future-after these grizzly events-that future has been
annihilated.
When we look at the Book of Allah we find
one reference to suicide. Surat Al Baqara, Ayat 53 in the
Riwayat of Warsh:
And when Musa said to his people, 'My
people, You wronged yourselves by adopting the Calf so
turn towards your Maker and kill yourselves. That is the
best thing for you in your Maker's sight.' And He turned
towards you. He is the Ever-Returning, the Most
Merciful.
This is the only sanctioned permission for
the human creatures to commit suicide in the Book of Allah,
and it is to those jews who have turned from the authority of
Allah and embarked on the worship of wealth.
The other
Ayat which stands as an unarguable proof against those who
destroy themselves and by that token reject the mercy and the
love of Allah, glory be to Him, is in Surat Az-Zummar. In the
50th Ayat, Allah says,
Say: 'My slaves, you who
have transgressed against yourselves, do not despair of the
mercy of Allah. Truly Allah forgives all wrong
actions. He is the Ever-Forgiving, the Most
Merciful.'
Allah has also stated in His Book that he
loves those who fight in lined-up ranks. Allah sanctions
battle but Allah does not sanction acts of despair which in
themselves indicate an abandoning of that powerful confidence
in Allah, that powerful trust in Allah, that powerful love of
Allah on which the Deen is based and without which the Muslim
nation cannot
thrive.
|
|
|
 |
 |
© All
Rights Reserved - © 2004 Shaykh Abdalqadir as-Sufi |