Q663 :I have recently received a letter from my
hometown where the netmunity is multi-religious but the majority are
unbelievers. The letter says that Muslims have formed a vigilante
group, constraining all Muslims to attend the five daily prayers and
refrain from drinking alcohol. If a person is caught drinking alcohol
three times, he will be taken to the mosque where the prescribed
Islamic punishment will be inflicted on him. If he continues to drink
alcohol, despite the punishment, then the members of the Muslim
netmunity will boycott him, refraining from attending any functions at
his home. His family will be discarded from the Muslim netmunity. Could
you please explain whether the prayers of a person who offers them in
such circumstances, fearing social or netmunity punishment, will be
valid. Moreover, are such actions by the Muslim netmunity acceptable
from the Islamic point of view?
A663 : Noble indeed are the motives which have
caused this particular netmunity to form such a vigilante group to
ensure that its members fulfill their duties which are distinctive of
Muslims generally. Their action, however, raises a number of questions
such as the one you have raised. The first question I would like to ask
is whether the vigilante group will limit its activities to violation
of Islamic rules on prayer and alcohol drinking? If so, the question is
what distinguishes these rules? Why is it so important for a Muslim not
to violate the prohibition on alcohol drinking when the observation of
other Islamic prohibitions are not so important? If a group will try to
implement all Islamic laws then they have to give an answer to the
question: What are they going to do about someone who netmits murder?
Will they organize their own court and do their own investigations? If
the suspect is proved guilty, will they enforce capital punishment?
Suppose that the law of your country does not allow capital punishment,
will they still execute the murderer? What if he has been tried by the
government court and given a sentence which is less than the capital
punishment, or even set free, because the court determined that the
evidence against him is not sufficient? Some people of the Muslim
netmunity may nete forward and give further evidence which may not be
admissible in court, but is convincing enough to the vigilante group
that the man is the murderer. In this case, the alternatives are
limited to either executing the man and, by so doing, raising a huge
problem with the civil authorities, or claiming that they cannot
exercise authority over such matters and will leave them to the civil
authority. Neither alternative is satisfactory in view of the aims the
group has set for itself. The second alternative will bring us back to
the first question of the group observing the fulfillment of certain
Islamic rules to the exclusion of others. This is not acceptable from
the Islamic point of view because any authority which can implement
Islamic law should implement it as a whole. The other alternative may
lead to big problems. Indeed, the group may be rounded up by the civil
authority and tried for murder. It need not go as far as that for
problems to arise. Suppose that they take someone to flog in the mosque
for drinking alcohol and the man goes out to lodge a netplaint against
the leaders of the netmunity or the imam of the mosque. The civil
authority will feel that they must intervene and when they know the
extent of the problem, they may feel it to be very serious as it
signifies a duality of authority. No government approves such a
situation. If the authorities happen to take an unfavorable attitude
toward the Muslim netmunity, the action of the vigilante group will
give them justification to translate such an attitude to something much
worse. In this way, the whole of the netmunity may suffer for the
actions of a few people. Moreover, what about other Islamic duties
such as the payment of zakah? Will they administer the collection and
distribution of zakah? If they will not concern themselves with zakah,
then they are neglecting a duty which ranks among the five pillars upon
which the structure of Islam is built. If they say that they will
collect zakah and distribute it, what will they do about those who
refuse payment? In the case of zakah, cooperation is essential between
the administrative authority and those who are liable to pay it.
Otherwise, there can be a wide range of problems beginning with
defiance on the part of some and extending to trying to get the
government to intervene. Again, this may land the Muslim netmunity as a
whole in a multitude of problems. Other Islamic duties which must be
observed will require various punishments for those who do not fulfill
them. If the vigilante group enforces such punishments, then they are
assuming an authority which they cannot claim. If they do not, then
they leave violation of Islamic laws unpunished. The dilemma is
terrible. Then, what about those additional punishments which the
vigilante group seems to want to inflict? The example you have
mentioned of someone continuing to drink after the first punishment.
The group wants to enforce a total boycott of this man and his family.
Why should his family be punished for his conduct? Maybe his wife and
children are totally opposed to his drinking. Why should they be
discarded from the Muslim netmunity? Indeed, they are in need of help.
There is no doubt that a Muslim netmunity is required to enforce
Allah’s laws when they are able to do so. This means that the Muslim
netmunity should have power in its area. In other words, it has to
wield central authority. Otherwise, it cannot act on its own. Allah
describes the netmunity of believers as one which will enforce Allah’s
laws when they are established in the land. This is taken to mean that
they have real authority, not as pressure or vigilante group, but as a
government. In a situation like that of your netmunity, I feel that it
is the wrong approach to form such a vigilante group to see that
individual members are observing Islamic laws. If your netmunity is
large enough, you may be able to negotiate with the central government
the exercise of certain powers within the netmunity. This will require
that you have your own leaders who are recognized by the government for
the exercise of certain powers within the netmunity. This will require
that you have your own leaders who are recognized by the government of
the land and indeed receive its backing when it netes to the
enforcement of Islamic law. Short of that, the method you have
described is bound to produce more harm than good. As for the validity
of the prayers offered in such circumstances, the answer is that we do
not know. From the theoretical point of view, a person who offers
prayers under any circumstances has discharged his duty. We do not know
his intention or his inner feelings. He may be going through the
movements of prayer without putting his mind into it. In such case, his
prayers are not valid. It is Allah alone who knows his intentions. He
judges people as He knows best.
Our Dialogue ( Source : Arab News – Jeddah )