عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

The Battle of the e-Muftis
Author : Dominic Casciani
Date Added : 14-05-2015

The Battle of the e-Muftis

A Report by the BBC

 

In one corner, there's the religious establishment of a global faith - complete with 1,400 years of collected learning. In the other, there is the self-styled Islamic State (IS) and its daily dose of propaganda videos flooding the internet. Have traditional clerics got what it takes to be heard in this digital culture war?

Even if every Muslim scholar in the world constantly tweeted against IS, young Muslims on social media could simply turn their backs and carry on reading IS's output. But Jordan's e-Muftis are among those beginning, slowly, to put up a fight online.

Earlier this year, IS posted a video showing its fighters burning alive Jordanian air force pilot Muad al-Kasasbeh, in revenge for the country's role in international air strikes.

The group then backed that up with postings claiming a religious justification for the murder - and they trolled anyone who said otherwise.

I asked the Grand Mufti of Jordan, Abdul Kareem Khasawneh, what he and his department were doing to counter Islamic State's online narrative. A mufti is a state-appointed Islamic scholar who interprets the faith for day-to-day life, answering queries from the faithful.

Given IS's powerful online presence, are sermons in the mosques enough to defeat the extremist mindset?

"To be realistic, [Islamic State] has acquired a great deal of experience as far as communication and social media are concerned," the Grand Mufti told me. "I don't think the department can carry out such a task on its own."

IS has used an estimated 46,000 Twitter accounts alone. Is he online, I asked?

"The young generation have more power to do this than the older one," he replied.

But then his team showed me something surprising.

A couple of floors up from the Grand Mufti's office, is a growing electronic department. It's staffed by young scholars, led by Dr Jamil Abu Sarah.

Like his boss downstairs, Abu Sarah wears a religious gown and tall hat. Unlike his boss, he's young and fiddles with his smartphone.

"We communicate with the audience through different mass media like Facebook, Twitter and so on," he tells me.

"These are the means through which the world communicates nowadays. Many years ago, if we wanted to publish a ruling, we would print 2,000 copies and spread them, give them out to people.

"But now we can reach 100,000. Our audience is international. We are introducing translations of these fatwas - we've started with English."

The digital strategy has resulted a slick website that promotes the fatwa denouncing IS.

There are plans to expand to a presence to all the most popular social media platforms - and the team wants it status to be set to "available", 24 hours a day.

Abu Sarah says he has successfully made some young potential extremists think again, but his resources and current following are minuscule compared with his IS adversaries.

When the group's supporters spotted the Jordanian Muftis' efforts, they began attacking the site, posting messages aimed at undermining them because of their official role in the Jordanian state.

"When they killed the pilot, they came and made comments that it's lawful to torture him burn him alive," says Abu Sarah.

"We gave them clear answers and they were in communication for several days.

"Now we are not waiting for them to come and visit our website... Rather, we're now paying a visit to their websites and accounts. And we will address them with the language of true Islam."

Jordan's e-Muftis are not the first in the religious establishment to speak out.

Last year, Saudi Arabia organised an anti-IS campaign involving 40 TV channels. Scholars took questions on phone-in shows and they even had a stab at hashtags.

The day after the campaign's launch, IS posted one of its most gory epics yet - a video that, like many others, went viral.

In the West, there are some efforts too. The British-led Imams Online group is regularly posting counter-IS messages. It has even launched a glossy digital magazine called Haqiqah - meaning The Reality - to counter IS's equivalent, but utterly gory, publication.

 

To read this article from its original source, please click here

 

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

What is the ruling on someone who is uncertain whether he omitted one of the ab‘āḍ of the prayer, such as being uncertain whether he omitted the first tashahhud?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The ab‘āḍ include the middle tashahhud and the qunūt in Fajr prayer — for which sujūd as-sahw (the prostration of forgetfulness) is prescribed if left out. Whoever is uncertain, during the prayer, whether he omitted one of these elements, should proceed on the assumption that he did not perform it, and should perform sujūd as-sahw accordingly.
It is stated in ‘Umdat as-Sālik (p. 63): "If he is uncertain... whether he omitted a specific ab‘āḍ element, or whether he performed sujūd as-sahw, or whether he prayed three or four rak‘ahs — he proceeds on the assumption that he did not do it, and performs sujūd as-sahw."
The original principle (al-aṣl) for someone uncertain about [having performed] the first tashahhud is that he assumes he did not perform it. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

"I told my family at night: 'I will fast tomorrow as qaḍā' (a make-up fast),' but I forgot to make the intention before sleeping. Is my fast valid?"

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
 
The intention is obligatory in acts of worship. For obligatory fasting, the required intention is to resolve to fast during the night [before dawn]. Its proper locus is the heart, while verbalizing the intention out loud in acts of worship is a sunnah — so that the tongue may align with the heart. If the intent behind the statement in question was the intention to fast, then it is valid; but if the intent was merely to inform someone, or reflected hesitation or doubt, then it is not valid.
 
It is stated in *Bushrā al-Karīm* (Vol.1/P.216): "It is a sunnah to verbalize the intention — that is, whatever has already been intended in the heart, whether an obligatory or a voluntary act — such as specifying the number of rak‘ahs, just before the opening takbīr — so that the tongue may assist the heart, and because this is further removed from whispered doubts (waswasah), and in order to accommodate the view of those who held it obligatory in every act of worship that requires an intention (even though this is a minority position), by analogy with Ḥajj."
 
Accordingly: if the intention to fast arose in your heart before the second adhān [i.e., before Fajr], then your fast is valid.
 
And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Should missed Sunnah prayer be made up?

Making up missed voluntary acts of worship is from Sunnah.

See More