When a Crisis Empties Mosques: A Case Study of Muslim Responses to the Pandemic’s Challenges in Regards to Spiritual Care and Communal Rituals in Austria and Germany

1 Pandemic in Islam – A Brief Overview

Van Ess describes the human experience with pandemics in the following terms: “Those who die of them [epidemics] usually die unnoticed; those who survive them or learn of them talk about them and transcend them to a parable” (van Ess 2001, 5). Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī further illustrates how history possesses an almost unbroken chain of devastating epidemics and pandemics among humankind to which societies and cultures had to react in different ways (Cf. Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī 2015).

While it is undeniable that this circumstance also applies to the Islamic cultural sphere, in Islamic cultures a pandemic is often perceived somewhat differently than in non-Islamic cultures. Since late antiquity, Islamic history has witnessed a long series of plagues, which caused great damage to different regions and had left many casualties and due to which communal prayers and religious rituals, such as pilgrimages, were often suspended. Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (d. 1449) for example lost three of his six children during the bubonic plague and wrote one of the most famous books about the plagues in premodern times. Of the famous historical pandemic and epidemic are the plague of Emmaus (a city close to Palestine) in 638/639, al-jārif (an all-out plague) in Basra in 69/688, the ṭāʿūn al-fatayāt (plague of the girls) in 87/705, and the so-called aṭ-ṭāʿūn al-aʿẓam (the greatest plague) in 833/1147, which claimed the lives of a many people there was not enough manpower available to bring in the harvest during harvest season. Such experiences have yielded a rich and distinctive literary tradition dealing with plagues and their repercussions not only on body but also on soul.

The plague of Emmaus in 638/639 and the Muslims’ responses to it still influences the current discourse about COVID-19. Muslims divided into two groups: one considered the plague a manifestation of God’s divine mercy and a shortcut to paradise, while the other saw in it a manifestation of divine punishment ignited by human sins. Interestingly, both groups backed their interpretations up with prophetic sayings (Cf. van Ess, 2001, 6)

The perception, interpretation, and reaction to pandemics and epidemics vary across cultures and regions, despite shared human experiences. Within European cultures, however, the various epidemics and pandemics – such as the London plague of 1665, the plague of Marseille in 1720/21, and the infamous and recurring bubonic plague – became a topic of literary reflection in the form of novels and plays. (Van Ess 2001, 5–7). In an Islamic context, the reflection was conducted from both a legal and a spiritual perspective and took on the form of short treatises^[1], which until now hold special authority for Muslims.^[2] However, the classical European literary works hardly influence the current discussions of COVID-19 in Europe.

In some cultures, people who die of plagues are seen as victims to be mourned or commemorated out of sympathy. Muslims, however, consider the deceased as Šahīd (martyr). In various places, the Qurʾān speaks of the reward that awaits those who die as martyrs. According to Surah 3: 169–171 and 2:158, martyrs are not dead but remain alive; promised tremendous reward, mercy, forgiveness and (after death) immediate entry into paradise. There are three main groups of martyrs: those who are martyrs in this world and in the hereafter, those who are martyrs only in this world, and those who are martyrs only in the hereafter. This last group includes people who die naturally during the pilgrimage as well as those who die by drowning, disease or pandemic. This understanding entails not only a theological debate about the interpretation of pandemic as a mercy or punishment of God but also an intense discussion about pastoral care and how Muslims react to the pandemic. The idea of martyrdom makes dealing with the crises a complex process as well as a source of consolation for believers.

Current Muslim discussions about COVID-19 are ambivalent and driven by theological interpretation of the pandemic, which can be divided into two positions: for some, the pandemic is a phenomenon subject to samʿīyāt (revealed knowledge), and hence considered as rijz (punishment, inflected by God) or waḫz al-jinn (punishment of demons) for the unbelievers while simultaneously being a mercy for the muʾminūn (believers) (Cf. Abdallah 2020, 333–340). A plague is at time interpreted by some as a kind of manifestation of divine justice not only in the Middle Ages, but also in the time of the Enlightenment and the contemporary era. So, in the 18th century for example, when the plague spread in the eastern area of the Islamic Empire, the sultan of Morocco, Muḥammad b. Suleiman (1760–1822), rejected the experts’ recommendation to close the borders and to assign Moroccan pilgrims to quarantine. He followed the opinion of some scholars who saw the plague as a test and mercy from God. And COVID-19 was considered at the beginning of its outbreak as “divine” retribution for the oppression of the Uyghurs in China.

For others, the pandemic is a natural phenomenon that ought to be dealt with scientifically, namely by applying social measures and following the regulations of health authorities.

When we look at the Qurʾān, we find that it does not confirm either view. In several verses, the Qur’an describes people’s hardships because of natural disasters, diseases, and diminution of property and offspring as punishments and trials. Prophetic stories in the Qurʾān often refer to such calamities as punishments for the respective people for their disbelief or for turning away from God’s way, as in the story of Nūḥ, Hūd or Ṣaliḥ (Cf. Q 54:11–12; 7:71–72 & 7: 77–78). In other Quranic passages, however, such painful experiences are presented as tests for believers, with the story of Job being one example (Q 38:44, cf. also 21:83). Sura 7, for instance, describes such events as divine signs; exegetes have differing opinions about what exactly is meant by signs. The majority of exegetes understand it to be a test and a punishment for those who did not want to believe in Moses. The word rijz, which occurs in this passage in two consecutive verses (Q 7:134–135) is equated with punishment. Yet the nature of this punishment is disputed. Aṭ-Ṭabarī (d. 923) reports various opinions in this regard. According to him, Ibn ʿAbbās and Ibn Jubair, among others, understand rijz to mean ṭāʿūn (the plague), while Mujāhid and Qatāda understand it to mean ʿaḏāb (a painful punishment), without defining it further, whereby rijz can be understood as a generic term for the signs mentioned above (cf. aṭ-Ṭabarī 1994, vol. 13, 70–71). In the Qurʾān, two terms are used in this context: rijs (uncleanness/ filthy) and rijz, with both terms appearing ten times in the Qurʾān.^[3] While the latter stands for punishment, the former is ambiguous and may refer to impurity, sin, shame or evil (s. e. g. Q 5:90 and 33:33), Satan (Q 6:125), prohibitions (Q 6:145), displeasure (Q 7:71), hypocrisy/doubt/unbelief (Q 9:125), or idols (Q. 22:30). The Quranic discourse thus appears to provide little input for dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic in particular, even though it plays an important role in its interpretation.

However, the reactions of Muslim communities to COVID-19 pose a number of questions of a normative, ethical, and theological nature. COVID-19 has shown that faith communities must cope with new challenges. The professionals’ dilemmas have become everyday topics of discussion, e. g. the issue of triage, skipping spiritual care, or suspending communal prayer. Issues that were marginal a few years have become relevant. How will a faith community look in the post-pandemic era? Can we draw theological principles for this “new” era from the Qurʾān? The topic is complex, cannot be treated comprehensively, and needs several interdisciplinary studies. In order to address some of these questions, this article aims to describe and analyze how some Muslim communities have responded to the pandemic.

2 COVID-19 and the Reactions of Muslims: Practical Examples

COVID-19 is a huge challenge not only for the health care system but for the economy and the educational system as well. Amid the long-winding struggle between the state and the pandemic, the role of faith communities, especially those of Muslims, is almost neglected, although believers are not spared from the pandemic. Muslim communities found solutions to compensate the temporary cancellation of fundamental parts of their collective religious practice during the “hard lockdown” in Austria and Germany. Muslims communities connected both among themselves and with the wider society. They faced the problems and communicated with the isolated and secluded members. The three case studies that follow should contribute to the assessment of how religious minorities managed to overcome the challenges posed by the pandemic and how, they at times used the very dramatic circumstances to create new bonds both internally and externally.

In the following section, I examine how Muslim communities reacted to the pandemic, using three topics as examples: communal prayer, almsgiving, and pastoral care. In this section, I identify the emergence of what I call “caring communities”, a concept that reflects the initiatives and types of solutions Muslim communities have developed as a response to the challenges of COVID-19. The cases from Austria focus on the model of “virtual mosques” which has been developed by some Muslim organizations. The case from Germany presents the challenges of “pastoral care.”^[4] Finally, I will examine the effects of the current pandemic on the social solidarity within Muslim communities and the solutions proposed both in Germany and Austria (online zakat).

In order to offer a realistic picture, I present and discuss voices and examples from different organizations: small communities, individual mosques, and umbrella organizations. The examples from the field of pastoral care mainly come from Germany. I was personally involved in this case, which enables me to reflect on my own experiences. In this case the institute represents the pastoral care in the federal state of Baden-Württemberg (BW), which is home to the second largest Muslim community in Germany.

I chose the month of Ramadan 2020 for several reasons. For Muslims, it is not only a time of fasting, but also a time of spiritual devotions, family reunions, and community gatherings. The decision to close the doors of communal worship was an extremely difficult one during this month.

3 Conclusion

COVID-19 has made people aware of their vulnerability and weaknesses: social isolation, economic loss or unfulfilled spiritual needs are just some of its manifestations. The loss of a job and the associated problems, such as not being able to pay for rent or other necessities; the prohibition of meeting dear people, work colleagues, one’s own children and grandchildren and the associated loneliness and social isolation; the closure of synagogues, churches and mosques and the resulting loss of important spiritual rituals; or simply being of an older age or suffering from a chronic illness and therefore being at risk of becoming a “guest” in the intensive care unit have become everyday experiences.

The pandemic has initiated a series of debates on theological issues and their place in modern society. The COVID-19 crisis highlights that it is time to start thinking and rethinking the new context and the challenges and what they reveal about our religiosity, the resilience of our values, theological education, and theological-legal norms.

It was not surprising how many and multifaceted – and sometimes even contradictory – opinions circulate on social media. For Muslim imams and spiritual leaders, however, this meant a new way of working and a new terrain they had to tread. They had to accept new routes in order to be pastorally available to their members. Just as the composition of Muslim communities is diverse, so were the reactions. The idea of the “Virtual Mosque” is becoming a reality after once having even been considered a betrayal of the religion. Once established, it might not only make the classical mosques appear superfluous or, at best, transform them into social leisure clubs, but it will also rekindle the European debate about “imported” imams – and pose challenges to the role of Islamic theology in Europe altogether.

Imams and other religious leaders will have to familiarize themselves with the Internet and virtual communication in the future; it is highly likely that the classical form of communication will not remain the same. This is crucial in order not only to reach the younger generation, as has been identified long ago, but more generally, to be noticed at all.

The pandemic has engaged the public in topics and dilemmas usually reserved for professionals. Topics such as ethics within the pandemic, entitlement to treatment, rejection of the elderly and sick, or triage, to only name a few are no longer areas exclusively debated by scholars but have become everyday topics. Muslim communities can and should get involved and design educational programs for adults in the form of “adult education.”

There is still a lack of empirical studies about the offers of Muslim organizations, their content, methodological-pedagogical, and theological background. For example, what role does the Holy Scripture, the Qurʾān, play? Which topics dominate the discourse? How does the offer relate to the real world in this time marked by the pandemic? How are the listeners addressed? How do the preachers present themselves?

The pandemic has highlighted the role, influence, and responsibility of Muslim organizations in caring about the well-being of their members in times of hardship. Thus, reducing mosques to their superficial function as prayer rooms is inappropriate and runs counter to their perception as social partners.

Lastly, we need more studies to learn about and discuss the effect of the pandemic on religious communities and examine the efficiency of the offered programs to keep our communities dynamic during COVID-19. In what way will the “Virtual Mosque” affect our understanding of spiritual health? How do we approach the religious rulings regarding mosques? These should not be considered short-time questions but profound and far-reaching issues to stay even after the end of the pandemic as an ongoing debate for new possibilities of re-structuring communities.

In all cases presented here, it becomes evident that the pandemic brought about new challenges for the religious personnel who were not prepared to deal with a crisis of such magnitude and with impact on all areas of life and its repercussions on their communities. Many Muslim organizations are attempting to fulfill their responsibilities in the crisis as partners in society and to continue – despite frequent closures of mosques – to serve as conversation partners and providers of pastoral care for their members. The discussion of the pandemic has shown that Islamic (and religious in general) traditional literatures are by no means obsolete or useless. They offer points of guidance and provide impetus for the further development of Islamic theology in the contemporary era. In this regard, we should strive towards developing a theology and theory that is rooted in praxis and that moves from praxis into theory and back into praxis. As for the future, it is our mission and duty to translate our experiences with the present pandemic and develop a new interpretation of our perception of religiosity and ethics, and for that it is essential that we pose more critical questions.