Talk:Fatwa
From Academic Kids
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)
| Contents |
Violent fatwas
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)
Removed part of sentence
Removed the "though the fatwa has not been lifted by Dar-al-Islam" part.
Dar-al-Islam is an extremely generic term, refering to the totality of lands where Islam is dominant, reminiscient of the term Christendom. The fatwa was issued by Khomeini and Khomeini alone, in an extended sense post-revolutionary Iran can also be viewed to be an caretaker of that fatwa.
"Dar-al-Islam" on the other hand can not lift or impose fatwas, only individual clerics can. Islamic clerics around the world have quite different views on many issues. It is hence non-sense to say that a certain cleric imposed a certain fatwa, and that "dar-al-islam" has never lifted it.
POV
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)
More POV
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 (http://www.islamtoday.com/show_detail_section.cfm?q_id=133&main_cat_id=5) and thou shalt not charge interest even to unbelievers (http://www.islamtoday.com/show_detail_section.cfm?q_id=113&main_cat_id=5). 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)
Since it has been repeatedly pointed out that the two examples given were not at all representative and writing so much about them here produces a profoundly distorted picture of what a fatwa is, I trimmed both drastically and moved the details to the articles on Salman Rushdie and Taslima Nasrin. I also removed category:Freedom of expression, because it's not applicable to the broad subject, but only to a few specific examples. —Charles P. (Mirv) 23:11, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
