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

My brother works in a conventional bank and gave me one of the gifts distributed to bank employees — what is the ruling on accepting it?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
There is no objection to accepting such gifts, because the physical gift itself does not carry any inherent prohibition — unlike stolen property. Sin does not transfer or extend to the one who receives the gift, for Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "And no bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another." [Al-Anʿām/164]
The evidence for this is that the Prophet ﷺ himself ate from the food of the Jews, conducted transactions with them, and purchased from them — and it is well known that their wealth was intermingled with ribā. Similarly, the wealth of conventional ribā-based banks is a mixture of the lawful and the unlawful.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "It is not forbidden to transact with one whose wealth is predominantly unlawful, nor to eat from it — as al-Nawawī affirmed in al-Majmūʿ." [Tuḥfat al-Muḥtāj, Vol. 9/P.389] And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on discharging one's zakāh obligation through the provision of a specific benefit (manfa‘ah) — such as performing a surgical operation for a patient, or providing housing to a tenant, and counting the value of this service as zakāh?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is obligatory to pay zakāh from the actual asset (‘ayn al-māl) upon which zakāh is due, except in the case of zakāh on trade goods ('urūḍ at-tijārah), which is paid based on their monetary value. In all cases, zakāh must be given in the form of tamlīk (a full transfer of ownership), based on the words of Allah, the Mighty and Majestic (which mean): "Zakāh expenditures are only for the poor and for the needy, and for those employed to collect [zakāh], and for bringing hearts together [for Islam], and for freeing captives [or slaves], and for those in debt, and for the cause of Allah, and for the [stranded] traveler — an obligation [imposed] by Allah. And Allah is Knowing and Wise" [at-Tawbah/60]. The letter "lām" (لِ) in this verse — as in "lil-fuqarā'" ("for the poor") — indicates possession/ownership (lām al-milk).
It is not permissible to fulfill one's zakāh obligation by providing a benefit or service (manfa‘ah) — such as housing, education, or medical treatment — in place of the zakāh itself. This is because zakāh must be paid as wealth (māl) that is transferred into the ownership of the poor recipient, whereas such services are intangible benefits that are not, in themselves, capable of being formally transferred in ownership (ghayr qābilah lit-tamlīk). And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What are the key differences between the 'aqīqah and the uḍḥiyyah?

 All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
The following are the key differences between the 'aqīqah and the uḍḥiyyah:
First: The 'aqīqah is slaughtered as an act of drawing closer to Allah the Almighty and expressing gratitude for the blessing of a newborn child. The uḍḥiyyah, on the other hand, is slaughtered as an act of drawing closer to Allah and expressing gratitude to Him specifically during the days of slaughter (ayyām al-naḥr).
Second: The 'aqīqah is performed on the seventh day from the birth of the newborn, whereas the uḍḥiyyah is performed on Eid al-Aḍḥā and its time extends for three days after the Eid.
Third: The 'aqīqah is performed once in a lifetime for the newborn, whereas the uḍḥiyyah is recommended every year for the one who is financially capable to offer it.
Fourth: It is Sunnah for the one intending to offer the uḍḥiyyah to refrain from cutting his hair and nails until after he has slaughtered. This is not a Sunnah for the one intending to perform the 'aqīqah.
Fifth: It is Sunnah for the 'aqīqah to be cooked and distributed to the poor in its cooked form. The uḍḥiyyah, by contrast, must be distributed as raw meat. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on swearing an oath by the Prophet ﷺ, and does such an oath take effect according to Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, requiring expiation upon its breach?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Swearing an oath by a created being is disliked (makrūh) in our Shāfiʿī school. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Swearing by a created being is disliked — such as swearing by the Prophet, the Kaʿbah, Jibrīl, the Companions, or the Prophet's family. Al-Shāfiʿī, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: 'I fear that swearing by other than Allah the Almighty may constitute an act of disobedience.' The scholars of the school explained this to mean: that is, something forbidden and sinful — indicating that he had some hesitation in the matter. Al-Imām stated: the established position of the school is that it is categorically not forbidden, but rather disliked. Furthermore, whoever swears by a created being, his oath does not take effect and no expiation (kaffārah) is required if he breaks it." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn wa ʿUmdat al-Muftīn, Vol. 11/P.6]
According to the Ḥanbalī school, however, expiation becomes obligatory upon one who swears by our master the Prophet ﷺ and then breaks his oath. Imām al-Bahūtī al-Ḥanbalī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "No expiation is required for swearing by other than Allah the Almighty, even if the oath is broken — because expiation was made obligatory for swearing by Allah and His attributes, out of reverence for His names, and nothing else is equal to Him in this regard... except in the case of swearing by our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, for expiation becomes obligatory when one swears by him and then breaks the oath. This was explicitly stated in the narration of Abū Ṭālib, because he is one of the two conditions of the two testimonies of faith by which a disbeliever becomes a Muslim. Ibn ʿAqīl held the view that swearing by any of the other prophets, peace and blessings be upon them all, carries the same ruling." [Sharḥ Muntahā al-Irādāt, Vol. 3/P.441]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More