The Qur`an contains a multitude of legislative provisions and legal prohibitions, which are scattered throughout its chapters (suwar) and verses (ayat). There are a number of rules for the interpretation of these provisions, such as the position of a particular Ayah in the context of the Surah, which in turn is interpreted according to its place in the sequence of revelations, its reference to other revelations and its historical context in relation to certain conditions that existed at the time of the given revelation. These and other rules are called the science of interpretation (ilm usul aI-fiqh). According to these rules, for example, reference is made first to a specific provision and then to a general provision dealing with a particular situation. No general provision may be construed as contradicting a particular provision, and a specific rule supersedes a general statement. However, a general provision is always interpreted more broadly, while a specific provision is interpreted more restrictively. Similar reasoning is permissible, as are analogous applications, unless expressly prohibited. Simplicity and clear language are always preferred. Similarly, the clear spirit of certain rules cannot be altered by inconsistent interpretations. A policy-oriented interpretation within the limits of the rules of jurisprudence is permissible and even recommended, as is the case with the doctrine of ijtihad (progressive thought by analogy). The large amount of fatwas produced in the modern world testifies to the importance of Islamic authenticity for many Muslims. However, there is little research on the extent to which Muslims recognize the authority of various fatwas and pay attention to their decisions in real life.
Instead of reflecting the actual behavior or opinions of Muslims, these fatwas may instead represent a collection of opinions about what Muslims « should think. » [3] Although a lawyer is bound by the writings of his school, he can go against the prevailing opinion of his school and use innovative legal arguments to arrive at what he believes to be a fair result. During the « post-formative » period of Islamic law, the four Sunni madhhabs settled down and transferred mutual recognition. From that moment on, « the independent and unqualified [reasoning] of the individual [jurist] is no longer sufficient to confer authority on an opinion. The authority is now strengthened by the support of the Association of Legal Advisers as a whole, i.e. the Madhhab. (page 31) Therefore, for a fatwā to be convincing, it must be issued in accordance with the jurisprudence of the school. A famous example is the 1998 fatwa issued by Osama bin Laden and four of his associates proclaiming « jihad against Jews and Crusaders » and calling for the killing of American civilians. In addition to its content, many Islamic jurists have pointed out that bin Laden is neither qualified to issue a fatwa nor declare jihad. [5] Recent erroneous and sometimes bizarre fatwas issued by unqualified or eccentric individuals have sometimes led to complaints of « chaos » in IFTA`s modern practice.
[7] Within a school, several opinions may be represented in the fatwās of jurists, but they do not all have the same weight. One view, the Mashhūr, is the « majority opinion » accepted by most scholars and is therefore the predominant opinion of the school. The rājiḥ, on the other hand, is a « favorite opinion » expressed by a single scholar and expresses the opinion he believes to be the Mashhūr. When lawyers undertake to draft fatwās that violate the Mashhūr, they cannot simply ignore the majority opinion or preferred opinions. Instead, they must show that the Mashhūr was wrong or that their reasoning did not contradict him. Only then is a fatwā a legitimate opinion. Muftis acted as an independent researcher in the classical legal system. [4] Over the centuries, Sunni muftis were gradually integrated into state bureaucracies, while Shia jurists in Iran gradually asserted their autonomous authority from the beginning of the modern period. [5] Advances in communication technologies and the rise of the Internet have changed the reception and role of fatwas in modern society.
[5] [25] In pre-modern times, most fatwas issued in response to private requests were read only by petitioners. In the early 20th century, reformist Islamic scholar Rashid Rida responded to thousands of inquiries from the Muslim world on a variety of social and political issues in the regular fatwa section of his Cairo-based magazine Al-Manar. [7] [6] In the late 20th century, when the Egyptian Grand Mufti Sayyid Tantawy issued a fatwa authorizing interest banks, the verdict was hotly debated in the Egyptian press by religious scholars and secular intellectuals. [5] The legal methodology of modern ifta often deviates from premodern practice. [8] While the issue of contemporary fatwas testifies to the importance of Islamic authenticity for many Muslims, little research has been done to determine the extent to which the Muslim public continues to recognize the religious authority of muftis or follow their advice. [8] Modern fatwas are characterized by increasing dependence on the ijtihad process, i.e. court decisions based on independent analysis rather than agreement with the opinions of previous judicial authorities (taqlid). [3] While in the past muftis were associated with a particular law school (madhhab), in the 20th century many muftis began to assert their independence from traditional law schools.
[6] Under European colonial rule, the institution of dar al-ifta was established in a series of madrasas (law faculties) as the central location for issuing fatwas, and these organizations greatly replaced independent muftis as religious leaders for the general population. [6] After independence, most Muslim states created national organizations dedicated to issuing fatwas. One example is the Egyptian Dar al-Ifta, founded in 1895, which served to articulate a national vision of Islam through fatwas issued in response to government and private requests. [5] National governments in Muslim-majority countries have also established councils of high-ranking religious scholars to advise the government on religious issues and issue fatwas. These councils are usually part of the Ministry of Religious Affairs rather than the Ministry of Justice, which may have a more assertive attitude towards the executive branch. [4] According to legal theory, it was up to each mufti to decide when he was ready to practice. In practice, an aspiring lawyer would normally study for several years with one or more recognized scholars and follow a curriculum that includes Arabic grammar, hadith, law, and other religious sciences.