Articles

The Language Unjustly Treated in Media
Author : Dr. Hassan Abu_Arqoub
Date Added : 12-10-2022

The Language Unjustly Treated in Media

 

World Arabic Language Day is celebrated every year on 18 December. The date coincides with the day in 1973 that the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted Arabic as the sixth official language of the Organization.

If we ponder upon the situation of the Arabic language in media, we will be extremely saddened by the amount of negligence and abuse it has experienced despite being an official language of United Nations. 

Instead of reinforcing this language, instilling it in the minds of the younger generations, and straightening their tongue with it, media is waging undeclared war against it.

 

First Model: As heard on some radios and satellite channels, colloquial Arabic is used. This deprived listeners from tasting the sweetness of this mother tongue and gave prevalence to the non-standard version.

Even more astounding is that some broadcasters working for Jordanian radios speak non-Jordanian dialects. You would hear, for example, Natrinkum, Khalikun Ma`na, La Tfillo, Haida, and Laik. We respect every dialect but this eliminates our Jordanian dialect and adds insult to injury. Therefore, it isn`t strange that some shop owners were affected by this colloquial Arabic to the extent of writing (Ahwah) instead of (Gahwah).

 

Second Model: Speaking a foreign language. Some Arab media persons try to give the impression that they are educated and civilized through speaking different languages. When he/she coughs, he/she says: "Sorry." When he/she interrupts someone, he/she says, "Excuse me" and so on. Even more gruesome is that names of foreign programs are transliterated. For example, (اراب ايدول), (سوبر ستار), (اكس فاكتور). As if we are unable to translate their meanings, with my own reservation on the content of such programs for this is another story.

 

Third Model: Linguistic and Grammatical Errors. This is like an open-ended sea. I remember correcting my language through listening to BBC broadcasters of the Arabic section. However, now I have to correct their mistakes so that my own children don`t learn them, because media is an effective tool in either educating or making people ignorant. One linguistic mistake is using the word (Nalfit) in the expression "Nalfit Enayat Assadah AlMoshahideen" to mean "Attract" while it means the opposite. An example on a grammatical mistake is the word (جميلةٍ) in the sentence "شهدت عمان مبارياتٍ جميلة. This word should be (جميلةً), not (جميلةٍ).

Since language expresses the identity of its speakers, it is imperative that we re-embrace our beloved language and learn it better, in addition to conducting proofreading on language used in media. This is because media makes generations, builds their intellect, and corrects their language. Actually, assassinating language is as bad as assassinating character. Rather, it is worse since it destroys the identity and civilization of a whole nation.

Non-Arabs have even given respectable testament to the Arabic language. The famous German literary figure Goethe said: "No other language has ever achieved this degree of harmony between the spirit, the word and the calligraphy as the Arabic language; a strange consistency in the same body."

I`m definitely a lover of this language, and call on everybody to be as such.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




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

Is it permissible to eat from an Udhiyah slaughtered on behalf of a deceased person?

Praise be to Allah, and prayers and peace be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible to eat from the sacrifice (uḍḥiyyah) that is offered on behalf of a deceased person. This is the madhhab (school of thought) of the Hanbalis. In this case, the heirs take the place of the deceased as if he were alive, with the same rights to eat from it, give it in charity, and offer it as a gift.
 
It is stated in Maṭālib Uli al-Nuhā (Vol.2/P.472): "Offering a sacrifice on behalf of a deceased person is better than offering one on behalf of a living person, because the deceased is unable (to perform deeds) and is in need of reward. It is to be treated like a sacrifice on behalf of a living person in terms of eating, giving charity, and giving gifts." And Allah Almighty knows best.

What are the Sunnah acts of fasting?

● Delaying Suhoor (pre-dawn meal) as long as there is no risk of Fajr beginning.
● Hastening Iftar (breaking the fast) immediately after confirming sunset.
● Performing I‘tikaf, especially during the last ten nights of Ramadan.
● Reciting the Quran frequently.
● Avoiding idle and useless talk.
● Being generous and charitable.
● Guarding oneself from desires.
● Purifying oneself from major impurity (janabah) before Fajr.

A man led the people in prayer as imam, and at the end of the prayer he performed a prostration of forgetfulness (*sujūd al-sahw*) because he had omitted a short *sūrah* after al-Fātiḥah. What is the ruling on his prayer and that of those praying behind him?

 

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
According to the Shāfiʿī school, it is sunnah to recite a sūrah after al-Fātiḥah in the prayer. One who omits it has a valid prayer, and no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw) is prescribed for omitting it. If someone performs sujūd al-sahw for its omission while knowing the ruling and remembering it, his prayer is invalidated. But one who is ignorant of the ruling, or who did so out of forgetfulness, his prayer is not invalidated, because this is among the matters that are obscure to people, and ignorance of it is not restricted to those who recently entered Islam.
Shaykh al-Islām al-Shams al-Ramlī said in Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj ilā Sharḥ al-Minhāj (Vol.2/p.70): “The remaining sunnahs are not compensated for by prostration, such as the remembrances (adhkār) of bowing and prostration, that is, the opening supplication (duʿāʾ al-iftitāḥ) and the sūrah, in accordance with the base rule, because they are not of the same nature as what has been reported [as compensable]. If one prostrates for any of them deliberately, his prayer is invalidated, unless he is excused due to ignorance. As for the objection raised that the ignorant person does not know that sujūd al-sahw is prescribed, and whoever knows it knows its place, this is refuted by denying such a necessary connection, for the ignorant person may hear only that sujūd al-sahw is prescribed before the salām, and so assume that it applies to every sunnah and is not restricted to its prescribed place.”
This is among the matters that are obscure, in which the mukallaf is excused for ignorance, as stated by al-Shabrāmallisī in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.70).
However, if the imam prostrates, and the follower (maʾmūm) presumes that his imam’s prostration is for a reason for which one does not prostrate, it is not permissible to follow him in it, so long as the follower knows the ruling.
Accordingly, the prayer of one who did not recite a sūrah after al-Fātiḥah is valid, and sujūd al-sahw is not prescribed for it. Whoever prostrates out of ignorance or forgetfulness, his prayer is valid, because this is among the issues hidden from the general public. But whoever prostrates while knowing the ruling and remembering it, his prayer is invalidated. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on wiping the front of the head beneath the ḥijāb, and is it permissible to wipe over the ḥijāb if it was put on while in a state of purification (wudu`)?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is permissible to wipe the front portion of the head (nāṣiyah) with the fingertips. It is likewise sufficient to place a wet hand over a head covering (ḥijāb), provided the moisture actually reaches the hair beneath it — if it does not, it does not suffice. A head covering is not treated in the same manner as leather socks (khuff) and may not be wiped over in lieu of the head itself.
Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Majmūʿ (Vol.1/P.407): "If a person is wearing a turban and does not wish to remove it — whether for a valid reason or otherwise — he should wipe the entire front portion of the head... The same ruling applies to whatever a woman wears on her head. If, however, he confines himself to wiping over the turban without wiping any part of the head itself, this does not suffice — and there is no disagreement among us on this point." He further states: "A woman is like a man in the manner of wiping the head... She should insert her hand beneath her head covering so that the wiping falls upon the hair itself. If she places her wet hand over her head covering, our scholars stated: if the moisture does not reach the hair, it does not suffice her." And Allah the Almighty knows best.