عربي
Home


Articles

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 for a menstruating woman to recite the Quran from the computer without actually touching the Quran?

It is not permissible for a woman in her menstrual period, or in postpartum to recite the Quran, even by heart, or without actually touching the Quran itself. Recitation itself is what is prohibited on her regardless of how it is done. However, it is permissible for her to surf through the Quran by her eyes, or to recall it in her head without uttering the words. There is no harm for her to look at the Quranic verses on the computer without touching it, or to utter the words as this is called looking not reciting or reading.

Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on offering a sheep as a sacrifice (Udhiyah) if its fat-tail is sound, except that when it was young, the tip of its fat-tail was cut so that it would grow larger? And what is the ruling in case of doubt regarding the amount that was cut?

 
In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Cutting a minor, insignificant portion from the tip of an animal's fat-tail (al-alyah) to encourage it to grow larger is not considered a defect, and it does not prevent the animal from being valid for sacrifice (Udhiyah).
 
It is stated in Tuhfat al-Muhtaj (Vol.9/P.352): "There is some scholarly deliberation regarding the common practice of cutting the tip of the fat-tail so that it grows larger. It could potentially be likened to a partial cut of the ear—supported by the jurists' general rule: 'even if it is a small amount.' On the other hand, if it is an exceptionally minor cut, it might have no effect on validity. This is explicitly clarified by the juristic exception to the general rule, which states that cutting a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm. This latter view is more well-founded.
 
Furthermore, I found that some scholars investigated this matter and concluded: 'It should not affect validity if a custom-sanctioned portion of its fat-tail is removed during its youth to make it grow larger and look better, just as castrating a male animal causes no harm.' However, applying this unconditionally contradicts the established texts of the jurists, as understood from what I have laid out; thus, the restriction I specified is what must be relied upon."
 
Similarly, it is mentioned in Nihayat al-Muhtaj (8/135): "If a small piece is cut from the fat-tail to help it grow larger, the most well-founded view is that the sacrifice remains valid, as was given in a formal legal verdict (Fatwa) by my father [Shihab al-Din al-Ramli], may Allah be pleased with him. This is proven by the jurists' maxim: 'The loss of a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm.'"
 
In cases where there is doubt as to whether the portion cut was large or small, the animal is still deemed valid for sacrifice. It is noted in Hashiyat al-Shubramallisi ‘ala Nihayat al-Muhtaj (Vol.8/P.135):
 
"This matter requires careful consideration, but the closer and more correct view is that it is valid. This is because soundness is the default state for the animal from which the piece was cut, and it aligns with what usually occurs—namely, that the part removed to help the fat-tail grow larger is naturally very small." And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

What is the ruling on giving Zakat al-Fitr in cash?

The default ruling is that Zakat al-Fitr should be given as the staple food of the land. In Jordan, for example, the staple food is wheat or rice, and the amount of Zakat al-Fitr is 2,500 grams per person. It is easy to give this amount of rice to the poor and needy, and this is the correct ruling according to all Islamic schools of thought.
However, Hanafi scholars have permitted giving Zakat al-Fitr as monetary value, considering it more beneficial for the poor and easier for the giver.

See More