The coronavirus is probably the greatest disruption of our lifetimes and it has, throughout the world, left any people grappling with the repercussions of the pandemic. As COVID-19 sweeps across the globe, it is forcing religions to adapt and take action to prevent infection. The crisis has brought with it differing views and challenging decisions made especially within the religious and medical spheres.

In South Africa, as in other parts of the world, the temporary closing of masajid has given rise to debate with some believing that it goes against the very grain of Islamic law whilst others take the stance it is for the very principle that Islam holds above all else–the sanctity of life.

The panel discussion with Ml. Tahaa Karaan, Ml. Ebrahim Bham and Dr Zameer Brey allowed us insight into the decisions made by Ulema together with the advice of medical professionals on the reasons for the temporary closure of masajid. All the panellists agreed that they understood the opposition’s reasons for wanting to keep masajid open.

Ml. Bham responded to the reasons there was the call from JUSA on 22^nd March to the suspension of the congregational prayer in the masajid and of the limiting of musalees to just five when government hadn’t taken such measures. He explained that the spreading of the virus which a fear of losing life or limb and this with other reasons allows for such measures taken. They decided not without consultation but from a consensus from several Ulema from many countries, across different ideologies to enshrine the Islamic ideal of the sanctity of life.

Ml. Ravat then posed the question to Ml. Karaan regarding government was allowing taxis and certain business to run under the banner of essential services, although the measures of social distancing wasn’t being adhered to whilst masajid which they argue is an essential service as it caters to a spiritual need, are closed. Ml. Karaan respectfully said it was “rooted in the idea that everyone should be treated equally.” However, he says that one must examine the spirit in which they decided.

He explained that as Muslims and being part of a greater society, we must focus on our responsibility to and civic duties upon the entire nation and the world at large. He referred to the fact that it is the “attitude toward the problem” that needs to be looked at as many some arguments are what he called “petulance of infancy” – the argument of “why should we be forced into restrictions when the taxis and supermarkets are not.”  He explained that we should not need someone to tell us to take certain steps but as responsible citizens to be aware and conscious of our civic and social duties, even though others may not be doing the same thing at the same time.

As Muslims and South African, we should have made the decision that we would adopt the mode of behaviour is to the best advantage to society.

Dr Zameer Brey mentioned that the choices we must make under the circumstance have highlighted how connected we are – “each persons’ action affects the whole.” He also reminded us that as Muslims we are responsible for our actions, thus, the decisions made today will be what future generations will see us as – “a part of the solution rather than the problem.”

A pertinent point made by Ml. Karaan was that spirituality is not only found in salaah in a congregation but that more spiritual nourishment is in isolation, when one is on his own and in prayer at home.

He then gave a brief history of incidences in the past from Islamic history that gave us direction regarding the handling of situations such as the crisis today and mentioned the fact that we needed to look from a retrospective and prospective angle to gain a better understanding and knowledge, mentioning that Nabi Muhammad SAW said that intelligent and fortunate is he who learned the lesson and that a mu’min does not fall into the same hole twice.

An important point that Ml. Karaan referred to the Plague of Amawas when Amr ibn al-As (RA) informs the people to spread out away from the infected area another companion criticises him vehemently but Amr ibn al-As responds saying that he would not respond to him as this was not the time for an argument.  Understandably, some people will get overwhelmed and react emotionally. The true leader needs to ignore such emotions and do what is best for the community regardless of feelings. Feelings don’t save lives, policies do.

He also explained that although the books of fiqh are not absolute about every situation, we understand that it states the precedent and not to a specific situation. He also clarified that fuqaha can be wrong in some situations, in their chosen decisions, but only hindsight will show this.

Dr Zameer brought from a human perspective that may have been lost in the smoke created in the volatile debate and that is how those, in particular, the Ulema must feel regarding having to decide on shutting the doors to the masajid and staying away from their congregations.

But he also spoke on how religious gatherings have been the mechanism of a wider spread. A simple example of a Jumu’ah salaah that attended by musalees not only from the immediate vicinity but also from other areas. Any infection carried away from the area will make contact tracing impossible and thus widen the circle of spread. As we learn more about the disease, we see more people being infected by those who are asymptomatic which then makes a stronger argument as to the temporary closing of the masajid.

Other reasons he spoke on included that many musalees are of the older generations which make them more susceptible to the disease and that there are surfaces in the masajid that cannot be cleaned constantly to hamper the spread of the virus, like your taps and carpets. And even if the many measures of hygiene were adhered to, it is almost impossible to stop humans from encountering each other effectively. To disregard the law and the medical reasoning mentioned is wrong.

An important point he made, which we see unfolding daily on our screens and newspapers in other parts of the world, is that the actions taken early in the pandemic reflect on the curve during the pandemic.

Ml. Karaan brought up another important aspect that many Muslims may have regarding our masajid. Although it is a house of Allah SWT, we understand that there is no guarantee that no wrong or untoward actions or events would occur in a masjid. The murders of Umar RA and Ali RA were both murdered inside the masjid. Another pertinent example he gave was that a simple disease like Athlete’s Foot cannot be eradicated in masajid.

Ml. Bham spoke on the aspect of risk assessment, saying it was better to over-react rather than under-react.

Responding to whether he foresees an extension to the lockdown, Ml. Karaan said that they will rethink their position after the mass testing and the decision taken by the government.

He shared his sentiments on how he would feel if they made the extension: “I shudder to think of a Ramadhan without Taraweeh or an Eid without hearing Takbeer.”

One other important point he made was that although the government has allowed certain groups, the ability to carry on with work, etc., that it did not mean that if they give legal consent that the risk is mitigated.

In closing, he had some wise words to share on how to handle the differing of opinion, especially among the Ulema – “Maintain full respect of those who oppose you. The person you differ with still has integrity.”

And he reminded us all that the bickering and quarrelling among the Ulema will keep Allah’s rahmaah away from us all.

Dr Zameer in his closing statement sounded the clarion call of all of those in the medical frontline – “This is very real – you have a choice to do what is right and be remembered as those who took the fickle but correct decision to help save our people, unite to do the right thing.”

Ml. Bham concluded saying that we should not assume who is more pious than another as only Allah knows you who is pious, quoting a learned scholar: “I prefer Allah SWT making my judgement than have people judge me.” He agreed that debate was good, but should not be based on ridicule, which was a sign of frustration and not getting through to the people.

“We are one state, we are one people, we are one nation, each citizen has the right to petition but others can petition against them.”

The message from the panellists is one that calls for unity and patience in the face of an invisible and equal opportunity opponent.

By Annisa Essack