Talk:Fatwa

message: Note added Feb. 2007:  I wrote the few paragraphs below some time ago.  The article now bears no resemblance to the article I was writing about; it is much improved!  The paragraphs below are no 
longer relevant, seems to me.
----
This entry is a bit strange and conflicted, I am afraid.  The article begins by admonishing that the extreme fatawa we have heard so much
about are anomalous and "Such fatwas, however, have caught the attention of the western media and become widely renowned, especially 
among critics of Islam."  This properly points out that the western media has likely gone overboard with reporting such things (they go overboard
on most everything, e.g., the Michael Jackson trial).  The latter part of this sentence seems odd - "critics of Islam"?  Sounds rather 
defensive.  Otherwise, perhaps an  explanation, with examples, of how the critics of Islam have used the extreme examples of fatawa 
is in order; that would be relevant to a general understanding of fatwa.
The aim of the article should be to give curious, uninformed people (such as myself) a balanced description of fatwa and the issues 
surrounding them; it seems to me to fail to do that.  I found the section describing how the various flavours of Islam sometimes do
not agree on fatawa, together with the cases in which one fatwa might take precedence over another, to be most illuminating.
On the other hand, the entry goes on to list only examples of extreme, violent fatawa, including that of Mr. Bin Laden, together with a description
of all the various reasons why Mr. Bin Ladin issued his fatwa.  Come now, this is rather wandering off course, is it not?  It starts to seem like
propaganda, I am afraid; why is Mr. Bin Ladin's (& Co.) fatwa, widely recognized as extreme and deviant, even relevant here?  (It is relevant
on the Wiki page pertaining to Mr. Bin Ladin, to be sure.)  The article gives most attention to the extreme/deviant fatwa, but complains about 
that sort of attention in its introduction.  Surely in the history of Islam there must be more important fatawa than that of Mr. Bin Ladin's?
Perhaps the entry could have a section listing examples of normal fatawa, a section listing examples of fatawa important to the history of Islam, 
and another section listing extreme or extraordinary fatawa.
----
The article is in rather good shape just now and I recommend against messing with it except in one area - the examples. Sadly the fatwa against Rushdie remains famous and must be mentioned. It seems to me that no other political fatwa should be included. For one thing they rapidly become obsolete and irrelevent. Surely some one can find a few harmless fatwas to include as examples. 64.85.225.167 17:23, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More on Violent Examples 

message: The Arabic at the beginning reads [fata:wa:] with ya read as long [a:] (I forget what that's called). But this is commonly seen as fatwah, suggesting to me it's singular [fatwah] (with usually silent [h]) and the form given here looks like a broken plural.
I haven't got access to an Arabic dictionary and can't find anything reliable on the Web for now. Can someone more skilled in Arabic please check? Gritchka 14:07 27 Jun 2003 (UTC)
*"ya" as long a is called "alif maqsura".--KASchmidt 05:11, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: I understand the reasoning that including several death- and war-related fatwas gives a skewed impression.  Nevertheless, I hate to delete information that many people would find useful and important.  What about restoring the links, and adding something in the article that would put them in context, along these lines: "A fatwa can call for the death of a named individual, or some similar act.  Although these are very rare (compared with the vast majority of fatwas, which address more pedestrian subjects), they generally attract a disproportionate amount of public attention."  Would that be accurate? JamesMLane 22:17, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Violent fatwas 

message: The two examples are not exactly representative of what a fatwa is and really sends the wrong impression I believe.  gren 08:43, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: We have two fatwa examples, both of which are "kill this person". Is this the usual tone of a fatwa? I have seen/heard of others that seemed to have a political manuevering aspect to them, cleric A denouncing public persona B.
Are fatwas always big sweeping proclamations? Are they always "thou shalts"? Are there more mundane fatwas in the spirit of "children should remain silent while daddy is trying to pay his bills on AOL"? 
If fatwas are sometimes less politically and socially charged, then one of these would be a better illustration of fatwa. 
If, instead, they are generally a tool of politics, then these might have to suffice.
But the litany of persecution that Rushdie et al endured probably belongs elsewhere.
Williamv1138 15:33, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
:No, it is not at all the usual tone of a fatwa; the vast, vast majority of them are uninteresting proclamations like thou shalt pay thy employees promptly and thou shalt not charge interest even to unbelievers. The death sentences and declarations of war just tend to get more attention in Anglophone media, that's all. —Charles P. (Mirv) 15:50, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  More POV 

message: This article makes me sick. CoolGuy 03:40, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sick 

message: I read the bit about fatwas not being binding in some circumstances, but I'd be curious to know if fatwas can potentially still be binding even if they contradict secular law. I've heard that in Islam, there is no division between the secular and the religious, so maybe my question doesn't make sense.
Some historical background about fatwas may also be useful, eg what was the first fatwa, are fatwas a core part of Islam, and if not, why did they arise? Andjam 12:48, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fatwas and secular law 

message: '(neitherr one is considrred a scholar qualllified to issue Fatwas, merely Jihadists'
How does this square with
'Because Islam has no centralized priestly hierarchy, there is no uniform method to determine who can issue a valid fatwa and who cannot.'
Doesn't this mean it's POV as to whether or not Mr. Bin Laden can issue a fatwa?
If there's uncertainty, would it be better if we listed as the main example the one against Rushdie? Andjam 13:35, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who can issue a fatwa? 

message: Being born and raised Muslim Sunni and have been a Sufi of North African Tariqas for 12 years I think I can answer this, I can go to a Clerric and asskkk him a mundaane question about ritual purity and technically it's a Fatwa. More complicated issues like, is Sulman Rusdie attacking the religion therforee it's ok to kill him takes a scholar to answer. Now a Fatwa is merly an OPINON or an interpretation of a Qur'anic passage, an it iss NOT bindding. So when I watch a Jihadist on TV, he's no scholar or any of that, say: kill, you know where he's coming from. While he is entiteled to his opinion, which might Technically qualify as a Fatwa, he's no scholar, and the Fatwa has littlle impact if any.
--The Brain 00:25, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who can issue a Fatwa: 

message: This doesn't need to be in both Fatwa and List of famous fatwas, does it? Andjam 07:05, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope. Removed. -- Eagleamn 09:11, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fatwa against nukes 

message: I added a bit about extreme statements on religious or political subjects being called fatwas.  I remember that Pat Robertson's statements on Chavez was called a fatwa, if you look on google there's some 42,000 articles that have the term "Pat Robertson" and fatwa in them.
JesseG 03:24, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Many of the uses of the word fatwa for Pat Robertson's comments use the word as synonymous for "hit job". The consensus for this page is that this page should not give undue prominance to these kinds of fatwas. Also, do google hits alone equate to noteability? Andjam 04:00, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's good in the context of describing word use. It would segue nicely from "are not at all representative, despite the attention they draw in media, but have become widely renowned" in fact. (Changed) Fool 16:01, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other uses 

message: I moved to the 2nd paragraph the statements about how the overwhelming majority are mundane, and a few are death sentences or declarations of war.  I mentioned the Salman Rushdie fatwa in this paragraph and was amazed that anyone had thought it was a good idea for the article to edit it out.  When a Westerner hears "fatwa", that's the one that comes to mind, and it must be discussed.
I've been told that once a fatwa is issued, it's irreversible if the issuer of the fatwa dies, though this seems to be contradicted by the tone of this article.  How often does this situation come up?  Tempshill 04:25, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let's not be coy 

message: What Fatwas are: Legal opinions concerning Islamic law by Muslims (which Muslims is debatable). They are not blanket condemnations of people- but actions. Even Usama's (you know which Usama) fatwas are against "Those who...[insert action here]" Fatwas cannot be initiated against people because they are not warrants. They are used as such... but they are not. More importantly according to Islamic doctrine. no one can be judged until their death, and even then man's judgement is unimportant. Fatwas are very much like court rulings, they apply to everyone in the same situation-if they don't they are not true fatwas. So called "mundane" fatwas are in fact important to some- mundane is a POV word. Whether or not I should recite the Quran when someone dies may not be important to some but it may be important to me.  Considering that this article is FIRST on a google search for the term, we have a responsibilty towards utmost accuracy. 
If we agree on nothing else it is that.Angrynight 04:03, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  What fatwas ARE... 

message: I think  so.Exeunt 15:17, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Fatwas: Awesome?

message: Do we really need a section on slang meaning of Fatwa? IMO this page discusses a profound concept within a religion, and it seems to dilute or "sillify" the page by adding a section on American slang. We're not Urban Dictionary after all. --Popoi 16:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slang? 

message: Removed the assertion that 'Western media frequently uses the term incorrectly'. There was no evidence provided for the claim and although it's probably true that Western media focuses on rulings  such as the Rushdie case and similar, there's no evidence provided that there's a general misunderstanding.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cloudsoup (talk • contribs) 12:38, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Usage in Western Media

message: Could we have a better wording for the introduction, as at present it defines a fatwa as an "opinion" but goes on to discuss whether or not they are "binding". Opinions are not something that are "bound". DionysosProteus (talk) 13:25, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't the arabic term فتوى (fatwa) translated into English as "opinion"? 86.21.101.131 (talk) 19:19, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: Suggest that this section lists contemporary Fatwa in order of proclamation (or reverse order if people prefer), in order not to privilege some over others.  Including more fatwa in this section should give a more balanced view of the variety of fatwa. Nsa1001 (talk) 21:47, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronology of 'Some Contemporary Fatwa' 

message: Contary to Gordonofcartoon's edit, the fatwa is question is issued by the Sharia Court/Committee of the Islamic Cultural Centre and London Central Mosque.  The facsimile of the actual document is reproduced on the website of a registered charity, the Scriptural Reasoning Society, the organisation is question being referenced within the fatwa itself and so it is both also self-referring to the organisation about itself.
Gordonofcartoon's assertions of "not notable" are hardly valid given that the fatwa in question is adopted by the largest Scriptural Reasoning community in the UK, and referred to elsewhere.
Given the other website and blogs, fatwa blogs, etc on this article, the edit was clearly arbitary and prejudicial.
Cf. Wiki article Church of England which publishes canons from the cofe.anglican.org website, Yusuf al-Qaradawi which has a number of references linking to fatwa websites and blogs, etc.
--Scripturalreasoning (talk) 07:42, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As I said elsewhere, this is just an organisation-to-organisation communication, self-published on the website of what appears to be the recipient. There is no sign of third-party reportage by significant sources outside the transaction (e.g. newspapers), raising problems of notability and sourcing, and it's undue weight to place it among the many well-sourced ones that have been notable enough to appear in regional and national news. Gordonofcartoon (talk) 13:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scriptural Reasoning Fatwa 

message: The more common English plural appears to be "fatwas". Merriam Webster does not give the Arabic plural, and Google NGrams show much more usage for "fatwas". http://ngrams.googlelabs.com/graph?content=fatwas,fatawa&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=0&smoothing=3 -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:07, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  Also, the article is inconsistent on whether the Arabic plural is fatāwā or fatawā. Jpatokal (talk) 12:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  English plural 

message: Under the "popular misconceptions" section, it states that the scope of fatwas is generally not absolute in that Muslims may disagree with individual fatwas. However, the last sentence of the section says, "On the other hand, some fatwas are absolute." This is not explained and seems to contradict the rest of the section. Kansan (talk) 20:05, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, and removed. NW (Talk) 15:53, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction under "Popular misconceptions" 

message: Maybe this cource can be used for something in that section: . Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:53, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversial fatwas 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Fatwa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071015070419/http://app.com.pk:80/en/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14998&Itemid=2 to http://www.app.com.pk/en/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14998&Itemid=2
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090313114637/http://www.pbs.org:80/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html to http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110723082020/http://www.dawnnews.net/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/12-deoband-ulema-term-all-taliban-actions-un-islamic--bi to http://www.dawnnews.net/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/12-deoband-ulema-term-all-taliban-actions-un-islamic--bi
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: "Egypt is host to thousands of ancient statues and drawings that do not seem to have bothered Muslims for the past 1400 years." This doesn't sound very encyclopaedic. Equinox (talk) 17:20, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inappropriate tone? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Fatwa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20071015070419/http://app.com.pk:80/en/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14998&Itemid=2 to http://www.app.com.pk/en/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14998&Itemid=2
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:24, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There appears to be confusion of what is a fatwa.  This page refers to the verdict with respect to tobacco (also found on the Mirza Mohammed Hassan Husseini Shirazi:  "(misunderstood as a fatwa)" implies that the verdict was NOT a fatwa, yet when following the link for 'fatwa' included in that article, this article (Fatwa article) uses this same verdict as an example of a fatwa!  There seems to be disagreement at to whether this verdict was or was not a fatwa.  But more importantly, if there is any question as to whether it was or wasn't, then it should NOT be used as an example of a fatwa on this page.  This needs to be corrected in order to avoid confusion, rather than attempting to resolve a disputed subject -- for both this page and the Mirza Mohammed Hassan Husseini Shirazi page.  Jdevola (talk) 14:14, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusion Clarification or Correction 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Fatwa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090205150644/https://www.asharqalawsat.com:80/english/news.asp?section=3&id=5572 to http://www.asharqalawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=3&id=5572
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090722104106/https://middleeastinfo.org:80/article4171.html to http://middleeastinfo.org/article4171.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061106194110/https://www.mathaba.net:80/0_index.shtml?x=302258 to http://mathaba.net/0_index.shtml?x=302258
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110726004900/https://www.mfsd.org/fatwaenglish.htm to http://www.mfsd.org/fatwaenglish.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160101011140/https://www2.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/12/26/christmas-greetings-chime-despite-edict.html to http://www2.thejakartapost.com/news/2012/12/26/christmas-greetings-chime-despite-edict.html
*Added  tag to https://fiqh.islamonline.net/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:03, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Fatwa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151015225516/http://www.moroccoboard.com/news/5238 to http://www.moroccoboard.com/news/5238
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:32, 30 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Fatwa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://www.alkhabar.ma/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B4%D9%8A%D8%AE-%D8%B9%D8%A8%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B2%D9%85%D8%B2%D9%85%D9%8A-%D9%84%D9%80-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AE%D8%A8%D8%B1-%D9%86%D8%B9%D9%85-%D9%85%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%B3%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%86%D8%B3-%D8%B9%D9%84%D9%89-%D8%AC%D8%AB%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B2%D9%88%D8%AC%D8%A9_a36869.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140714191202/http://www.patrika.com/news/hariat-courts-have-no-legal-sanction-and-no-one-is-bound-to-accept-a-fatwa-supr/1016459 to http://www.patrika.com/news/hariat-courts-have-no-legal-sanction-and-no-one-is-bound-to-accept-a-fatwa-supr/1016459
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120716150825/http://dinarstandard.com/marketing/IP_PnG0303506.htm to http://dinarstandard.com/marketing/IP_PnG0303506.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:29, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Fatwa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090717082127/http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar%2FFatwaE%2FFatwaE&cid=1119503546692 to http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar%2FFatwaE%2FFatwaE&cid=1119503546692
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090717080127/http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar%2FFatwaE%2FFatwaE&cid=1119503543874 to http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar%2FFatwaE%2FFatwaE&cid=1119503543874
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090717082116/http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1119503545220&pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar%2FFatwaE%2FFatwaEAskTheScholar to http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1119503545220&pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar%2FFatwaE%2FFatwaEAskTheScholar
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160303185342/http://www.globalwebpost.com/farooqm/writings/q-academic/econ_fatwa.html to http://www.globalwebpost.com/farooqm/writings/q-academic/econ_fatwa.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:54, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified