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 on speaking while relieving oneself?

It is disliked for one relieving himself to speak while doing so, except out of necessity. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, and is it permissible to slaughter the ewe if one knows it is pregnant?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a person slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, the fetus becomes lawful (ḥalāl) by virtue of its mother's slaughter (tabaʿan li-ummihā).
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.6/P.158): "A fetus found dead [after the mother's slaughter], or found alive but in a state resembling that of a slaughtered animal [i.e., dying shortly after], becomes lawful — whether or not it had grown fur — provided it is found in the womb of a mother that was lawfully slaughtered, whether her slaughter was by cutting the throat, or by an arrow or hunting dog sent after her. This is based on the ḥadīth: 'The slaughtering of the fetus is [effected by] the slaughtering of its mother' [narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who graded it ḥasan, and by Ibn Ḥibbān, who graded it ṣaḥīḥ] — meaning that the slaughter which rendered the mother lawful renders the fetus lawful as well, by virtue of following her; and because the fetus is one of her constituent parts, and her slaughter renders lawful all of her parts."
This ruling differs, however, from the case of one who knows from the outset that the ewe is pregnant [and intends to sacrifice her specifically as the udḥiyah while pregnant] — in which case, according to the Shāfi'ī school, she does not fulfill the requirement of a valid sacrifice.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Bujayrimī 'alā al-Khaṭīb (Vol.4/P.335): "A pregnant animal does not fulfill the requirement [of a valid sacrifice], and this is the authoritative position (al-mu'tamad), because pregnancy diminishes the quality of the meat. As for why such an animal is nevertheless counted as complete [i.e., fully valid] in matters of zakāh, that is because the intent there is reproduction (nasl), not the quality of the meat.". And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

What is the ruling on one who vows to fast a specific or non-specific year? Are the two Eids, the days of Tashreeq, Ramadan, and the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding included in them? And do these days break the consecutiveness if it was intended?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If someone makes a vow (Nadr) to fast a specific, designated year, this vow does not include the days of Eid, the days of Tashreeq (the three days following Eid al-Adha), Ramadan, or the days of menstruation (Hayd) and postnatal bleeding (Nifas). Furthermore, there is no requirement to make up (Qada) these specific days.
 
However, if someone vows to fast a year that is not specifically designated (i.e., any twelve-month period) and stipulates that the fasting must be consecutive, they are bound by that condition. They must not fast on the days of Eid, during Ramadan, or during menstruation, but they are required to make up these days afterward—with the exception of the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, which do not need to be made up.
 
It is stated in Hashiyat al-Bajuri ‘ala Sharh Ibn Qasim ({Vol.2/P.606): 'If one vows to fast a specific year, the Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, and days of menstruation or postnatal bleeding are not included. This is because Ramadan does not accept any fast other than its own, and the others do not accept fasting at all. Therefore, they do not enter into the vow, and no makeup is required for them because they are legally excluded—contrary to Al-Rafi’i regarding menstruation and postnatal bleeding.
 
If one vows to fast a non-designated year: if they stipulated consecutiveness (Tatuabu’) in their vow, they must fulfill it; otherwise, they are not bound to it. Consecutiveness is not broken by the days that do not enter into the specific year vow (Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, menstruation, and postnatal bleeding). However, one must make up the days missed—excluding the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding—immediately following the end of the year. As for the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, it is not made up, contrary to Ibn al-Rif’ah, who argued that it must be made up just like Ramadan.' And Allah the Exalted knows best.

Is a person who is in a state of Janabah (major ritual impurity due to having a marital intercourse, ejaculation, menstruation, and post-delivery impurities) sinful if he/she goes about his/her daily life activities in that state i.e. without making Ghusl (ritual bath)?

It goes without saying that a Muslim should always be in a state of ritual purity so as to be able to perform prayers and recite Quran. It is from Sunnah (Prophetic tradition) that a Muslim hastens to make Ghusl from Janabah, but he/she is not sinful in case he/she delayed that provided that he/she doesn`t miss prayers. However, it is permissible for him/her to go about their daily activities while in a state of Janabah, but had better bathe in order not to miss any prayer.

See More