Internet
Fatwa
and
the
Making
of
New
Muslim
Spaces
Jessica
L.
Beyer
and
Iza
Hussin∗
Research
theoretical
frame:
Using
the
institution
of
the
fatwa
as
a
lens,
the
central
question
of
this
on‐going
project
is:
how
do
the
spaces
within
which
the
politics
of
authority
and
law‐making
occur
alter
their
meanings,
their
content,
their
language
and
their
audience?
By
comparing
three
websites
that
offer
online
fatwa,
we
seek
to
understand:
How
do
these
sites
provide
Muslims
living
in
non‐Muslim
states
with
answers
to
questions
about
political
representation,
participation
and
exclusion?
How
is
the
internet
changing
the
ways
in
which
people
imagine
themselves
in
relation
to
their
communities,
thereby
changing
the
relationship
between
state
and
society?
More
broadly,
how
is
authority
made,
maintained
and
challenged
on
fatwa
sites?
What
are
the
local
politics
of
these
trans‐global
spaces?
Do
these
sites
represent
a
new
space
of
law
for
Muslims?
Our
initial
research
investigates
fatwa
websites
using
dual
methods
of
observation
and
content
analysis.
Observation
began
in
April
2009
and
is
currently
ongoing.
Case
selection
was
made
on
the
basis
of
traffic
and
age
of
site
not
only
because
the
number
of
viewers
could
be
construed
as
a
proxy
for
impact,
but
also
because
it
means
the
sites
are
fairly
stable
and
are
unlikely
to
disappear
suddenly.1
Our
cases
are
chosen
from
the
set
of
highly
trafficked
sites
that
have
existed
for
at
least
two
years.
Our
data
collection
is
in
line
with
the
Association
of
Internet
Researchers
Ethics
Working
Group
recommendations
based
on
user
expectations
and
conducting
online
research.2
Through
our
comparative
observations
of
three
online
fatwa
sites,
we
raise
questions
on
the
negotiation
of
Muslim
disputes
and
the
making,
un‐making
and
transformation
of
Islamic
authority
in
varied
and
multiple
venues.
Each
site
is
hosted
in
one
place
but
is
capable
of
being
accessed
by
Muslims
worldwide;
each
allows
almost
complete
anonymity
but
offers
a
large
audience;
each
refers
to
geographically‐bound
schools
of
Islamic
law
but
extends
far
beyond
their
reach.
I.
Islamonline.net:
Visitors
to
Islamonline.net
can
read
fatwa
through
the
‘Living
Shari’ah’
section,
either
through
the
heading
marked
‘Ask
the
Scholar’,
or
through
the
‘Fatwa
Bank.’
The
array
of
options
and
information
is
dizzying,
and
the
immediate
impression
given
by
almost
every
page
of
the
site
is
of
a
multiplicity
of
topics,
covering
an
enormous
range
of
*Jessica
Beyer
is
a
doctoral
candidate
in
Political
Science
at
the
University
of
Washington;
Iza
Hussin
is
Assistant
Professor
of
Political
Science
at
the
University
of
Massachusetts
Amherst.
These
research
findings
have
been
presented
at
various
venues,
including
the
American
Political
Science
Association,
the
Middle
East
Studies
Association
and
the
Law
and
Society
Association,
and
the
paper
on
which
they
are
based
is
in
review.
Please
do
not
circulate
or
quote
without
permission.
Comments
are
welcome:
hussin@legal.umass.edu.
1
Site
stability
poses
a
significant
challenge
to
internet
researchers.
2
Charles
Ess
and
the
Association
of
Internet
Researchers
Ethics
Working
Group
(2002),
“Ethical
Decision‐making
and
Internet
Research:
Recommendations
from
the
AoIR
Ethics
Working
Committee.”
Accessed
March
18,
2008
at
www.aoir.org/reports/ethics.pdf
issues:
each
page
points
in
dozens
of
different
directions.
Once
in
the
Fatwa
section,
the
choices
do
not
decrease,
but
become
more
structured:
‘Ask
the
Scholar’
lists
fatwa
by
title,
name
of
the
questioner,
and
the
date.
The
entries
are
arranged
chronologically,
so
that
the
range
of
issues
and
the
diversity
of
participants
are
immediately
clear.
In
the
week
Sept
21‐
27
2008,
for
example,
six
questioners
were
listed,
who
identified
as
being
from
Turkey,
France,
Canada
and
the
United
Kingdom.
The
issues
covered
ranged
from
matters
of
worship
during
Ramadhan
(the
month
of
fasting),
religious
obligations,
interfaith
relations,
taxation
and
social
behavior.3
‘Fatwa
Bank’
is
a
search
page
that
allows
searches
by
words,
topics
(17),
and
muftis
(about
two
hundred
are
listed
in
the
drop‐down
menu).
These
fatwa
include
questions
asked
on
the
site
itself
and
questions
excerpted
from
other
sites.
The
whole
effect
of
this
arrangement
is
of
a
large
array
of
resources
for
the
Muslim
–
the
online,
English‐speaking,
fatwa‐seeking
Muslim—to
gather
independently,
in
order
to
equip
him/herself
for
life
in
a
complex
world.
The
central
fatwa
is
delivered
and
arranged
according
to
juristic
tradition,4
with
a
few
significant
departures:
the
name
of
the
questioner
is
given
(although
this
may
be
a
first
name
or
a
pseudonym),
the
questioner
and
the
mufti
may
occupy
different
locations,
the
answer
is
introduced
by
the
authors
of
the
site,
and
immediately
visible
to
the
site’s
audience,
who
read
it
alongside
its
marginalia.
Different
muftis
utilise
different
methods
of
argumentation
and
citation,
some
citing
textual
sources
(most
often
Qur’anic)
for
their
rulings,
and
some
employing
only
reasoned
argumentation
with
no
reference
to
Islamic
texts.
Islamonline.net,
while
it
offers
a
perspective
on
Islamic
life
it
terms
‘wasatiyya’
(moderate,
the
middle
path),
does
not
promote
a
specific
school
of
jurisprudential
thought.
For
example,
‘Mazin’
asked
a
question
entitled
‘Duties
of
Muslims
Living
in
the
West’,
which
was
dated
27
May
2007
and
was
answered
by
Yusuf
Al‐Qaradawi,
and
assigned
the
topic
‘Da’wah
to
non‐
and
new
Muslims.’
The
name
of
the
Mufti
linked
to
a
short
biography.
The
‘Answer’
began
with
a
formula,
repeated
on
almost
every
fatwa
on
the
site:
a
greeting
to
the
questioner,
followed
by
a
short
supplication
invoking
the
name
of
Allah
and
God’s
blessing
on
the
Prophet.
An
opening
paragraph
glosses
the
issue
before
leading
into
the
fatwa
itself;
in
this
case,
the
site
authors
thanked
the
questioner
for
his
confidence
in
them,
“and
we
implore
Allah,
from
the
depth
of
our
hearts,
to
guide
the
baffled
Muslim
Ummah
to
the
best,
and
to
gather
Muslims
together
to
work
for
the
common
weal
of
Muslims
every
where.”5
The
fatwa
itself
stated
five
classes
of
religious
duties
for
the
Muslim
living
in
the
West:
“the
duty
to
keep
one’s
identity,”
“the
duty
towards
one’s
family,”
“duty
of
Muslims
3
‘Toothpaste
and
Fasting’,
‘Repeating
the
Adhan
or
Breaking
the
Fast?’,
‘Should
I
Accompany
My
Wife
on
Hajj?’,
‘Exchanging
Happy
Ramadan
Wishes’,
‘Zakah
and
Tax
Deduction’,
‘Misbehavior,
Is
Religion
to
Be
Blamed?’,
‘Entering
Non‐Muslim
Places
of
Worship’.
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1118742803355&pagename=IslamOnli
ne‐English‐Ask_Scholar/Page/FatwaCounselE,
accessed
Sept
29
2008.
4
The
pattern
by
which
fatwa
compilations
are
arranged
is
similar:
themed
sections,
with
specific
subjects,
the
name
of
the
mufti
and
his
location.
(al‐Fatawa
al‐Islamiyya,
al‐Azhar
1982,
cited
in
Masud
et
al
1996).
5
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline‐English‐
Ask_Scholar/FatwaE/FatwaE&cid=1119503544980,
accessed
29
September
2008.
2
towards
one
another,”
“duty
of
Muslims
towards
the
society
where
they
reside,”
and
“duty
to
adopt
and
champion
the
rights
of
the
Muslim
Ummah.”
Immediately
following
the
fatwa
were
links
to
‘Related
Questions’:
“American
Muslims:
Faithful
and
Active
Citizens,”
“Muslims
in
the
West
&
Agonies
of
Their
Fellow
Brothers,”
and
“Justice
and
Compassion:
Ethics
and
Our
Responsibilities.”
At
the
very
bottom,
the
fatwa
closed
with
the
formula
‘And
Allah
knows
best.’
Islamonline’s
self‐presentation,
articulated
under
“About
Us,”
reflects
its
concern
to
be
user‐friendly,
contemporary
and
attractive.
This
strategy
seems
to
be
the
most
effective
of
the
Internet
fatwa
sites
surveyed
in
this
study.
Since
its
establishment
in
2007,
it
has
become
the
4000th
most
visited
site
in
the
world
(in
comparison,
the
other
two
sites
in
this
paper
rank
at
above
100,000),
and
is
in
the
top
200
of
sites
visited
from
Jordan,
Yemen,
Egypt
and
Kuwait.
24%
of
its
audience
logs
on
from
Egypt,
17%
from
Saudi
Arabia,
4%
from
the
United
States,
2%
from
each
of
Sudan,
India
and
the
United
Kingdom,
0.5%
from
France
and
Turkey.
Based
on
internet
averages,
Islamonline.net
is
visited
disproportionately
by
females
in
the
age
range
18‐24,
people
who
have
children,
are
college
educated
and
browse
the
site
from
home.6
The
site
also
provides
news
content
from
an
Islamic
point
of
view,
and
actively
promotes
input
from
academics,
professionals,
activists
and
experts
in
fields
outside
of
Islamic
law.
“IOL’s
main
bilingual
competitors
are
the
Saudi‐based
IslamToday.net
and
the
Qatar‐based
IslamWeb.net.
These
portals
are
associated
with
different
contemporary
schools
of
Islamic
thought;
IslamOnline
declares
its
support
for
wasatiyya,
the
so‐called
Islamic
centrism
or
Islamic
mainstream.”7
The
site’s
major
personality,
Shaykh
Yusuf
al‐
Qaradawi,
has
amongst
the
largest
followings
in
the
Muslim
world,
and
his
sermons,
lectures,
writings
and
interviews
have
been
widely
broadcast
through
multiple
media—
satellite
radio
and
television,
print,
radio,
and
other
online
outlets.
Islamonline.net
was
established
through
a
University
of
Qatar
program
with
Qaradawi’s
support,
and
is
still
owned
by
the
Al‐Balagh
Cultural
Society,
of
which
he
is
the
chair.
Until
the
spring
of
2010,
management
and
content
of
the
site
were
provided
by
roughly
150
employees
in
their
office
in
Cairo.
However,
there
have
been
no
new
fatwas
since
February
2010,
and
the
format
and
content
of
the
site
appears
to
be
moving
away
from
fatawa
–
which
are
no
longer
easily
accessible
on
the
site
‐
to
article
content.
Initial
inquiries
indicate
that
political
struggles
between
the
Qatari
owners
of
the
parent
company
and
the
IslamOnline
staff
in
Cairo,
including
Qaradawi.
Much
of
this
dispute
appears
to
focus
on
the
site’s
progressive,
inclusive
content.
8
6
We
use
Alexa.com
figures
for
internet
traffic.
7
“IslamOnline.net:
Independent,
interactive,
popular,”
Arab
Media
and
Society.
Issue
4
Winter
2008.
“IslamToday.net
is
part
of
the
new
awakening
(sahwa)
in
Saudi
Arabia,
a
moderate
Salafi
movement
(a
position
that
leans
towards
wasatiyya
discourse)
which
follows
the
ideas
of
Salman
al‐‘Awda,
who
is
one
of
the
most
popular
independent
sheikhs
in
Saudi
Arabia.
IslamWeb.net
is
the
website
of
the
Qatari
Ministry
for
Religious
Affairs.”
8
Mona
Abdel‐Fadil,
“The
Islam‐Online
Crisis:
A
Battle
of
Wasatiyya
vs.
Salafi
Ideologies?”,
CyberOrient,
Vol.
5,
Iss.
1,
2011.
Coverage
of
this
struggle
since
March
2010
has
been
limited:
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/news/islam‐strike,
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/news/islam‐online‐replaced‐already,
http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/news/islam‐online‐cairo‐staff‐launch‐new‐website
3
II.
Islamonline.com
Visitors
to
Islamonline.com
encounter
a
site
that
provides
news,
video
content,
educational
programming,
job
listings
and
business
news.
As
with
Islamonline.net,
this
site
has
a
wide
range
and
comprehensive
aspirations—the
visitor
may
navigate
to
multiple
topic
areas
from
the
first
page,
and
the
range
of
topics
is
vast.
However,
whereas
Islamonline.net
seems
to
emphasize
matters
of
family,
personal
interest,
health
and
Islamic
education
on
these
subjects,
Islamonline.com
focuses
upon
matters
of
finance,
jobs,
business,
geopolitics
and
education
on
Islamic
history
and
philosophy.
On
the
fatwa
page,
more
than
2200
fatwas
are
listed
chronologically,
and
cannot
be
searched
by
theme
or
keyword,
although
there
are
links
to
the
right
for
“Most
Popular,”
“Most
Commented,”
and
“Most
Emailed”
fatwas.
The
questions
deal
mainly
with
matters
of
everyday
conduct
and
worship:
the
correctness
of
particular
prayer
formulations,
conduct
at
work/school/in
family
matters
and
business,
seeking
rulings
for
innovated
practices,
matters
of
ritual
purity
and
gender
relations.
There
are
no
choices
of
mufti
available—
fatawa
appear
to
be
taken
from
other
sites
and
posted
on
the
fatwa
page,
moderated
and
perhaps
edited,
with
comments
from
users
below.
Recently,
these
comments
have
been
disabled
and
no
longer
appear
alongside
the
fatwa.
The
majority
of
the
site’s
fatwas
seem
to
be
taken
from
a
Saudi‐based
fatwa
site
called
‘IslamQ&A’,
whose
fatwas
are
provided
by
Sheikh
Muhammed
Salih
Al‐Munajjid,
“a
known
Islamic
lecturer
and
author...using
only
authentic,
scholarly
sources
based
on
the
Quran
and
sunnah,
and
other
reliable
contemporary
scholarly
opinions.
References
are
provided
where
appropriate
in
the
responses.”9
These
references
include
Ibn
Taymiyyah,
hadith
texts
(al‐Muslim)
and
specific
numbered
fatawa
issued
by
the
“scholars
of
the
Standing
Committee
for
Issuing
Fatwas.”
These
sources
have
the
official
sanction
of
the
Saudi
government;
Sheikh
al‐Munajjid
has
been
affiliated
with
the
Islamic
Propagation
Office
in
Riyadh,
and
the
Standing
Committee
comes
under
the
General
Presidency
of
Scholarly
Research
and
Ifta
of
the
Kingdom
of
Saudi
Arabia
(which
also
runs
its
own
site.)10
Similar
to
the
question
asked
above
on
Islamonline.net,
concerning
Muslims
living
in
non‐Muslim
states,
was
a
question
entitled
“Advice
for
the
Muslims
in
Finland,”
dated
April
10
2008.11
The
question
began,
“We
are
a
Muslim
community
35,000
to
40,000
members
including
all
different
sects,”
and
went
on
to
enumerate
the
differences
amongst
Muslims
in
Finland.
Recently
a
group
of
Sunni
Muslims
has
mobilized
to
form
a
political
party
whose
platform
includes
the
establishment
of
shari’ah
in
Finland.
The
questioner
asked
for
a
fatwa
on
the
general
issue
of
involvement
in
the
electoral
politics
of
a
non‐Muslim
state.
9
http://www.islam‐qa.com/en/ref/islamqapages/2.
Usage
data
for
this
site
resembles
that
of
Islamonline.net
–
disproportionately
college
and
graduate
school‐educated
women
between
18‐24,
with
children,
accessing
from
home.
The
largest
audience
for
this
site
logs
on
from
Saudi
Arabia
(31%),
and
the
site
offers
different
content
in
English,
Mandarin,
Uygur,
French,
Spanish,
Korean,
Indonesian,
Russian,
Hindi,
Turkish,
Urdu
and
Arabic.
10
http://qqq.alifta.net/Default.aspx.
This
site
is
clearly
an
official
Saudi
government
portal
for
the
dissemination
of
fatwas
issued
by
the
Standing
Committee;
it
contains
no
overtly
political
fatwas,
and
no
explicit
comment
on
life
outside
of
Muslim
societies.
11
Advice
to
Muslims
in
Finland:
http://islamonline.com/news/articles/3/Advice‐to‐the‐
Muslims‐in‐Finland.html
4
The
mufti’s
reply
covered
three
areas—the
specific
situation
of
Muslims
in
Finland,
general
advice
to
Muslims
living
in
non‐Muslim
states,
and
a
particular
response
to
the
establishment
of
a
political
party
with
an
Islamic
platform
in
Finland.
From
the
start,
this
fatwa
differed
from
that
issued
to
much
the
same
question
on
Islamonline.net,
in
its
general
advice
to
Muslims
living
in
non‐Muslim
states:
“First
and
foremost,
every
Muslim
should
try
to
return
to
his
homeland,
and
those
who
have
become
Muslim
should
move
to
a
Muslim
country
where
they
can
practice
their
religion
safely.”
For
those
unable
to
do
so,
their
first
priority
is
a
focus
on
Islam
and
Islamic
orientations
for
their
immediate
families
and
circles,
and
to
recognize
that
the
differences
between
Muslims
is
a
far
less
critical
danger
than
that
between
Muslims
and
Christians.
The
idea
of
establishing
an
Islamic
state
provoked
a
heated
response
from
the
mufti,
as
“imaginary
dreams
and
farfetched
thinking,”
whose
consequences
for
Muslims
might
be
dire.
Instead,
political
efforts
should
be
aimed
at
preserving
Muslim
identity
and
correcting
negative
perceptions
of
Islam,
through
‘gentle’
methods
stating,
“You
should
direct
your
daa’wah
[outreach]
to
leaders,
politicians,
decision
makers,
journalists,
writers
and
all
classes
of
people.
Perhaps
Allaah
will
guide
one
of
them
who
will
become
very
influential.”
Traffic
data
on
the
site
provides
a
somewhat
different
profile
than
Islamonline.net:
this
is
a
far
less
trafficked
site,
ranked
at
167,
866
most
visited
in
the
world.
The
largest
proportion
of
its
visitors
come
from
Egypt
(23%),
where
it
is
the
6659th
most
visited
site.
15%
of
visitors
log
in
from
India,
6%
each
from
Indonesia,
the
United
States
and
the
United
Arab
Emirates,
and
2%
from
the
United
Kingdom
and
Canada.
Compared
to
the
average
internet
user,
users
of
Islamonline.com
are
more
likely
to
be
45‐65
in
age,
male,
have
graduate
degrees,
have
children,
and
access
the
site
from
home
as
well
as
work.
Unlike
Islamonline.net,
the
site
users
are
neither
disproportionately
female
nor
young.
The
site
is
owned
by
Al‐Jazeera
Publishing,
founded
in
London
in
1992
and
operating
out
of
Dubai.
It
is
not
affiliated
with
the
news
channel
Al‐Jazeera,
against
which
it
has
appeared
in
name
usage
lawsuits.12
It
has
also
contested
the
use
of
“Islamonline”
by
Islamonline.net.
While
it
has
relatively
little
self‐description,
each
page
ends
with
legal
disclaimers
(non‐liability
for
investment
advice
and
advertising
or
other
damages)
and
the
statement,
“IslamOnline
is
the
leading
and
orginal
Islamic
portal
on
the
Internet.
Based
in
Dubai
IslamOnline's
objective
is
to
portray
a
positive
and
accurate
picture
of
Islam
to
the
world
as
well
as
providing
support
services
for
Muslims
as
well
as
for
non
Muslims
wishing
to
explore
Islam.”
III.
Askimam.org
Askimam.org
ranks
in
the
same
range
of
popularity
on
the
Internet
as
the
previous
website,
Islamonline.com,
but
unlike
both
of
the
other
sites,
is
based
outside
the
Middle
East/Arabic‐speaking
world
(South
Africa)
and
draws
its
largest
audience
from
outside
the
region
as
well.
44%
of
its
traffic
comes
from
Bangladesh,
21%
from
Pakistan,
20%
from
the
United
States
and
2%
from
Malaysia13.
Askimam.org
users,
compared
to
the
average
12
WIPO
Arbitration
and
Mediation
Center,
Administrative
Panel
Decision:
“Jazeera
Space
Channel
TV
Station
v.
AJ
Publishing
aka
Aljazeera
Publishing,”
Case
No.
D2005‐0309.
http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2005/d2005‐
0309.html
13
Alexa.com
5
Internet
user,
are
disproportionately
male,
between
35‐44,
have
graduate
school
degrees,
have
children
and
log
on
from
home.14
“About
Us”
states:
“Ask
the
Imam
is
an
online
question
and
answer
service
open
to
all.
Its
goal
is
to
provide
easy
access
to
common
Islamic
questions
and
answers
to
anyone
using
the
world
wide
web.”
The
contact
information
for
the
site
is
a
post
office
box
address
in
Alexandria,
Virginia.
The
home
page
of
the
site
makes
clear
that
fatawa
are
the
only
content.
The
banner
reads,
in
Arabic,
“In
the
Name
of
Allah,
the
Compassionate,
the
Merciful,”
and
refers
to
itself
using
the
name
also
generally
used
by
state
and
official
fatwa
bodies
–
Dar
al‐Ifta.
In
English,
below,
the
site
is
entitled:
“Online
Islamic
Q&A
with
Mufti
Ibrahim
Desai.”15
The
main
body
of
the
page
lists
fatawa
by
day,
on
the
left
is
a
list
of
categories
(from
‘Basic
Tenets
of
Faith’
to
‘Worldly
Possessions’.)
The
largest
number
of
fatwas
are
in
the
category
Marriage
(2200),
the
next
largest
categories
being
Prayer
(977)
and
Jurisprudence
(890).
On
the
right,
buttons
allow
the
user
to
search
for
fatwas,
ask
a
question
or
see
a
fatwa
at
random;
there
are
links
to
various
departments
of
Madrassah
Inaamiyah,
the
Islamic
school
at
which
the
mufti
teaches.
These
appear,
with
early
research,
to
be
organizations
connected
to
the
Indian
Deobandi
school
and
the
global
Tablighi‐Jamaat
movement,
broad‐
based
Muslim
organizations
devoted
to
education
and
outreach
to
Muslims,
and
whose
ideas
have
become
extremely
influential
among
Muslims
in
South
Asia,
the
United
Kingdom
and
various
other
non‐Arab
Muslim
communities,
in
particular
within
the
South
Asian
diaspora.
In
part
because
of
this
wide
geographic
spread,
Askimam.org
presents
a
number
of
seemingly
contradictory
positions
on
life
outisde
the
majority‐Muslim
world.
For
example,
a
questioner
wrote
in
to
AskImam.org
to
ask,
“Can
a
Muslim
living
in
a
non‐Muslim
country
participate
their
court
system
by
agreeing
to
the
call
of
jury
duty
from
the
government?”
The
reply
stated
that
because
passing
a
verdict
on
someone
is
passing
judgment,
the
judgment
must
be
based
on
religious
texts
even
when
judging
non‐Muslims.
Even
in
many
Muslim
countries,
the
fatwa
argued,
it
is
not
always
the
case
that
judgment
is
made
on
this
foundation.
Thus,
“it
is
not
permissible
to
serve
on
the
jury
or
work
in
any
other
part
of
the
courts
which
judge
between
people
on
the
basis
of
something
other
than
that
which
Allaah
has
prescribed.”
In
contrast,
a
questioner
wrote
in
complaining
that
in
the
UK
he
can
receive
a
ticket
if
he
parks
his
car
in
prohibited
spots
on
the
street,
even
if
the
street
is
empty
and
no
harm
is
being
caused.
He
asked,
“if
we
ignore
paying
them
without
any
harm
coming
from
that
is
it
permissible
or
is
it
a
right
of
theirs
to
issue
these
fines?”
The
reply
stated
that
traffic
laws
are
based
on
safety
and
that,
“determining
whether
or
not
harm
is
caused
by
parking
in
this
place
is
not
something
to
be
decided
by
individuals;
rather
it
is
to
be
decided
by
the
people
in
charge
of
these
affairs.”
Thus,
the
questioner
must
not
evade
his
punishment.
Both
questions
were
answered
by
the
same
scholar,
one
instructed
the
questioner
to
question
state
authority
whereas
the
other
reinforced
state
authority.
While
the
questions
dealt
in
contemporary
quandaries
of
citizenship,
the
fatawa
drew
on
classical
juristic
texts
and
reasoning
about
the
relationship
between
the
state
and
religion.
14
Alexa.com
15
AskImam.org:
http://askimam.org/index.php
6
The
making
and
unmaking
of
new
Muslim
spaces
These
initial
broad
comparisons
and
empirical
observations
paint
a
picture
of
internet
fatwa
activity
that
is
ideologically
and
theologically
diverse,
geographically
dispersed
and
varied
in
intent,
methods
and
narrative.
Without
jumping
to
any
firm
conclusions
as
yet,
a
few
themes
are
emerging
for
analysis:
non‐state
authorities
are
providing
strategies,
theologies
and
narratives
for
Muslim
orientations
to
politics
in
non‐
Muslim
states;
while
the
audience
of
each
site
is
widely
dispersed,
there
are
patterns
of
dispersal
that
seem
to
parallel
that
of
other
worldwide
Muslim
organizations,
diaspora
and
intellectual
movements;
some
of
these
sites
are
run
by
independent
entrepreneurs,
some
by
official
Islamic
authorities,
and
some
by
state
governments—each
of
these
not
only
court
multiple
audiences,
but
present
varied
spaces
for
the
dissemination
of
their
message.
The
classical
doctrine
of
fatwa‐seeking
and
fatwa‐granting
provides
a
forum
for
legal
and
religious
advice
that
is
authoritative
but
not
enforced,
confined
to
the
relationship
between
seeker
(mustafti)
and
mufti,
locally
specific
and
context
specific.
New
media
have,
since
the
compilation
of
fatwas
by
schools
of
jurisprudential
thought
in
the
16th
century,
on
to
radio,
television
and
news
publications
of
fatwas
for
general
education
and
consumption,
allowed
for
the
privacy
of
the
seeker
while
publicizing
the
fatwa
itself.16
To
a
certain
extent,
this
is
still
what
the
Internet
provides,
but
with
a
few
key
differences—the
terms
of
anonymity
have
been
extended,
such
that
questions
on
all
areas
of
public
and
private
life
(even
in
a
field
that
has
historically
been
very
candid
on
matters
of
sex
and
other
private
conduct)
may
be
asked
and
answered
without
fear
of
exposure.
Perhaps
for
this
reason,
the
tone
of
questions
and
of
their
answers
seems
to
bear
traces
both
of
the
confessional
and
the
Dear
Abby
column,
pastoring
to
the
needs
of
a
global
anomie.
Transaction
costs
of
asking,
receiving
and
reading
fatwas
have
been
reduced
to
the
time
and
energy
necessary
to
write
and
read
emails.
Fatwa
sites
receive
and
answer
questions
at
a
far
more
rapid
rate,
and
from
a
far
wider
geographical,
linguistic,
cultural,
social
and
age
level
than
ever
before.
However,
some
boundaries
remain—that
of
schools
of
jurisprudence,
access
to
the
internet,
and
to
the
languages
necessary
to
operate
in
this
field,
class
and
education,
and
a
particular
orientation
towards
technology
and
its
role
in
religious
education
and
the
spiritual
life.
Other
barriers
may
be
more
or
less
visible
in
this
sphere:
these
sites
are
owned
by
private
organizations,
staffed
by
largely
anonymous
workers,
paid
for
in
largely
undisclosed
ways.
The
moderation
of
questions
and
answers
is
opaque,
and
at
times
the
sources
of
juristic
reasoning
undeclared.
The
authority
of
the
muftis
to
pronounce
opinions
is
contingent
on
the
judgment—and
choice—of
each
user,
but
when
their
credentials
are
presented,
often
in
ways
consonant
with
classical
Islamic
law,
these
credentials
are
difficult
to
ascertain.
Informal
interviews
with
even
the
most
open
and
choice‐friendly
site,
Islamonline.net,
indicate
that
although
the
site
gives
the
appearance
of
hundreds
of
muftis
among
whom
the
seeker
may
choose,
generally
it
is
the
staff
of
the
site
who
choose
the
mufti,
and
they
pair
the
questioner
with
a
mufti
from
the
same
locale.
The
users,
too,
occupy
multiple
and
mobile
localities,
each
site
appealing
to
an
international
community
defined
by
diaspora,
language,
political
leanings,
economic
interests
and
theological
sensibilities.
16
Masud,
Muhammad
Khalid,
Brinkley
Messick,
and
David
S.
Powers.
Islamic
Legal
Interpretation:
Muftis
and
Their
Fatwas.
Cambridge,
MA:
Harvard
University
Press,
1996.
7
While
these
sites
allow
religious
scholars
to
weigh
in
on
conundrums
engaging
vastly
different
cultural,
socio‐legal,
and
political
contexts,
thereby
extending
the
reach
of
their
authority,
the
new
medium
also
provides
opportunities
not
previously
available
to
ordinary
people.
For
example,
when
our
research
began,
IslamOnline.net
included
discussion
forums—since
disabled—which
allowed
users
to
talk
amongst
themselves.
In
these
forums,
users
discussed
many
topics,
including
their
opinion
of
scholarly
reasoning
on
the
site.
Participants
usually
did
not
discuss
scholarly
reasoning
with
which
they
agreed,
but
rather
picked
apart
scholars’
answers
or
logic,
reinterpreted
religious
texts,
and
sometimes
questioned
scholar
credibility.
IslamOnline.com
allowed
users
to
comment
on
questions
and
answers:
a
questioner
asked
if
he
was
required
to
tell
his
new
wife,
married
in
a
new
country,
that
he
was
married
to
another
woman
in
his
home
country,
thereby
making
the
new
wife
a
second
wife.
The
scholar
answered
that
he
was
under
no
obligation
to
tell
his
new
wife
about
his
previous
wife.
Two
users
commented,
responding
at
length
that
they
were
dissatisfied
with
the
scholar’s
response
because
he
was
advising
the
man
to
begin
a
marriage
from
a
foundation
of
deceit,
which
would
doom
the
marriage.
In
another
question/answer
a
user
asked
if
she
were
sinning
if
she
gave
the
TV
remote
to
someone
else
to
turn
it
on
for
her.
The
responding
scholar
provided
a
long
answer
weighing
in
on
whether
the
television
was
evil,
citing
religious
texts.
Underneath,
a
user
commented,
“Get
a
life.”
Thus,
the
ability
of
users
to
interact
and
interpret
the
law
themselves
presents
another
possible
disruption
of
traditional
hierarchies.
However,
these
sites
are
by
no
means
democracies,
and
the
transgressions
of
space,
hierarchy
and
access
they
allow
are
bounded
in
ways
that
seem
to
reinscribe
particular
lines
of
authority
and
religiosity.
At
one
and
the
same
time,
they
reinforce
adherence
to
a
legal
order
(Islamic
law),
the
personal
embodiment
of
sacred
tradition
(the
mufti)
and
the
charisma
of
particular
figures
(such
as
Shaykh
Qaradawi).
The
uncertain
fate
of
Islamonline.net
serves
as
a
clear
example
of
how
states,
owners,
shari’ah
authorities
and
participants
in
a
fatwa
site
can
engage
in
multiple
struggles
for
control
over
a
site
domain,
its
content,
its
daily
operations,
its
usage
and
its
symbolic
meaning.
The
removal
of
user
comments
in
the
fatwa
section
of
Islamonline.com
shows
another
way
in
which
initially
porous
media
can
become
more
highly
policed
by
their
authors
and
owners.
However,
entrepreneurs
have
carved
out
spaces
of
expertise
even
within
this
bounded
domain—
scientific
knowledge,
technical
experience
and
access
to
the
advantages
and
challenges
of
life
in
the
West
all
can
authorize
someone
to
express
a
judicial
opinion
where
the
texts
and
classical
authorities
are
silent.
Indeed,
life
in
‘the
West’
itself
is
a
qualification
that
has
gained
some
religious
authorities
audiences
they
might,
by
virtue
of
their
secular
educations
or
locations
outside
of
the
traditional
centers
of
Muslim
learning,
not
previously
have
attracted.
New
kinds
of
Islamic
authorities
and
interpreters
have
emerged
through
technological
opportunities—
“creole
pioneers,”17
such
as
some
of
the
fatwa‐givers
on
Islamonline.net
who
are
engineers
in
Manchester,
England
by
day,
and
dabble
in
jurisprudence
by
night;
those
who
use
the
Internet
to
recruit
for
specific
purposes,
social,
political
or
economic;
states
and
governments
who
seek
to
magnify
and
further
consolidate
their
message
and
use
the
17
Anderson
2003
8
Internet
as
one
forum
among
many.
Each
of
these
agents
are
present
on
the
fatwa
sites
we
have
seen,
and
their
presence
is
marked
by
varied
approaches
to
sacred
text,
authoritative
discourse,
techniques
of
persuasion
and
debate,
interactivity
with
their
audience
and
openness
to
the
world
beyond
their
virtual
walls.
One
of
the
obvious
and—for
users
of
these
sites
as
well
as
other
types
of
Islamic
authorities—troubling
characteristics
of
Internet
fatwas
is
the
inability
to
ascertain
and
verify
a
mufti’s
qualifications
and
abilities,
and
the
lack
of
accountability
of
these
muftis
to
their
constituents.
The
Internet
grants
a
measure
of
anonymity
to
both
the
fatwa‐seeker
and
the
fatwa‐giver,
and
whatever
increased
usage
and
access
it
may
allow—bringing
in
young
women,
Muslims
living
outside
of
Muslim
communities,
and
seekers
of
many
kinds—it
may
also
weaken
the
premises
by
which
the
institution
of
the
fatwa
has
legal
and
normative
authority.
In
the
realm
of
Internet
fatwa,
some
of
the
qualifications
that
authorize
a
mufti
are
easier
to
ascertain,
and
perhaps,
therefore,
have
become
more
prominent,
than
others—the
list
of
educational
attainments,
scholarly
networks
and
legal
experience
of
a
mufti
are
often
publicized
on
the
sites,
but
how
about
the
mufti’s
character
and
reliability?
His
or
her
soundness
of
mind
and
knowledge
of
local
context?
Upon
what
relationship
is
loyalty
to
a
mufti
to
be
established?
Particularly
for
Muslims
who
seek
guidance
in
navigating
states
that
are
not
seen
to
be
representing,
or
even
recognizing,
their
normative
or
their
legal
adherences,
these
sites
provide
some
middle
ground
between
outright
resistance
and
assimilation.
Some
sites
seem
to
advocate
avoidance
of
the
non‐Muslim
state
as
much
as
possible,
while
others
recommend
strategic
activism
as
minorities
within
participatory
democracies,
and
others
still
encourage
migration
back
to
an
imagined
Muslim
homeland.
These
orientations
to
the
non‐Muslim
state
appear
neither
to
be
determined
by
the
geographic
origin
of
the
fatwa,
nor
any
fixed
approach
along
Islamic
lines
of
legal
logic.
While
Islamonline.net
seems
geared
to
outreach
to
Muslims
based
on
an
activist
and
progressive
platform,
Islamonline.com
seems
far
more
concerned
with
preserving
Muslim
community
through
avoidance
of
the
non‐Muslim
state,
and
Askmufti.org—written
from
within
a
non‐Muslim
state
itself—counsels
acceptance
of
the
state’s
power
and
strategic
accommodations
to
its
politics.
Conclusions
and
further
research
Online
fatwa
sites
are
arena
of
struggle
over
the
multiple
pressing
issues
of
contemporary
Muslim
life:
they
provide
a
new
space
for
the
reassertion
of
some
kinds
of
Islamic
and
state
authority,
as
well
as
an
opportunity
for
debate
over
the
terms
by
which
Islamic
legitimacy
is
built
and
shari’ah
guidance
applied.
Each
site,
while
sensitive
to
global
currents
and
state
power,
is
also
responsive
to
a
particular
set
of
local
concerns,
dependent
on
the
muftis
and
their
real
and
imagined
audiences.
We
see
two
directions
for
future
inquiry:
the
first
will
draw
connections
between
the
mechanics
of
online
fatwa
sites
and
their
discursive
‘culture’;
the
second
will
aim
at
a
deeper
understanding
of
the
relationship
between
online
fatwa
discourse
and
the
wider
shari’ah
politics
with
which
they
are
associated
and
into
which
they
percolate.
First:
the
political
and
moral
economy
of
each
site
depends
largely
upon
its
owners,
its
authors
and
muftis,
each
with
their
own
concerns
and
constraints;
while
the
users
of
each
site
also
contribute
questions,
comments
and
an
audience,
their
role
in
the
workings
of
the
site
is
conditioned
by
each
site’s
structure.
The
site’s
structure,
therefore,
is
a
key
determinant
of
9
its
political
culture;
more
research
needs
to
be
undertaken
to
see
beyond
the
text
of
a
site,
into
its
owners,
filters,
authorship,
archiving
and
other
systems
components.
Second:
the
link
between
site
discourses
and
the
lived
experiences
of
its
users
is
unclear:
when
a
fatwa
is
sought,
how
often
is
its
advice
applied?
How
are
its
terms
and
authority
understood?
How
do
uses
choose
among
muftis
and
fatawa,
or,
for
that
matter,
fatwa
sites?
And
to
what
extent
do
states
and
state
shari’ah
authorities
monitor
the
content
of
these
sites,
produce
their
own
content,
and
react
to
online
debates?
These
questions
remain
to
be
answered.
10