Following the example of Imam through live broadcasting and juristic reasoning

Perhaps the recent debate on the issue of following the example of the imam via live broadcasts (radio, internet or television) is not deserving of attention, but it is a new example of the ways of thinking and how to interact with the rich idiosyncratic heritage on the one hand, and the challenges of the present time on the other hand and that the technology is culminating in .

Initially, we must decide that the juristic disagreement and the multiplicity of opinions is not an accident. Whoever dives into the details of jurisprudence, whether before or after the formation of doctrinal doctrines, knows well the breadth of the disagreement (in branches and origins), but it is contained and organized with the formation of the four schools of thought that prevailed and prevailed.

The difference here is that the old fiqhi disagreement was taking place in the pre-modern context, while the current disagreement is taking place in a digital time, and in a different political world; therefore it is important to consider how the mufti with a heritage composition deals with its sources in response to an event of the digital age. The second difference: that the old disagreement was based on a coherent system of reasoning and arguments determined by the principles and rules of juristic doctrine, and adding the suffix to the former in a noticeable Hajj vitality.

This article will be detailed in the second difference only to clarify how protesting the permissibility of modeling via live broadcasts is not based on a coherent inference system, and I will use a methodology that has been considered and applied in a number of studies, which is what I call the "juristic system" or "systemic consideration."

The imam, through live broadcasts, prevented multiple bodies and assemblies, including: the European Council for Fatwa, the World Federation of Muslim Scholars, the Council of Sharia Scholars in America, the Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta, etc., and some of them spoke of Friday prayers only, and some of them spoke of group prayer.

But if we consider the fatwas of the imams of following the example of imam through live broadcasts - and they are individuals - we find inferred between them in two ways: analogy with partial issues in doctrinal doctrines, or resort to general rules. Because I previously explained - in a previous article - my opinion on the way in which the general rules are used and their weaknesses, I will limit the speech here to the method of measurement or graduation.

The partial measurement course sees that it is possible to measure the imitation of the imam through live broadcasts of prayer in congregation between two ships close at sea, or to follow the example of people in homes with a wall between them, or the congregation with the presence of a river separating the worshipers; all of the issues discussed by ancient jurists in order to discuss a condition "Place contact" in the validity of the example and group access.

The problem is that whoever performs such a measurement jumps from discussing the various images of the place's connection to a completely updated image that is the default location of the live broadcast. Unlike the jurists about the previous parts, it is based on an agreed upon principle, which is the union of the place. What are the limits of this distance that cuts off contact with the place? It is clear that custom has a visible effect on its appreciation. Hence, al-Majez was to explain to us how following the example, broadcasting does not violate the condition of the location being connected.

Among the strangest inferences here, some of them inferred by the expansion and the size of the mosques, and the follow-up in them was achieved by sound without the image, because the mosque, even if it became the size of a city, remains one place and this is not the subject of discussion at all, so how can we move from the real, large place to the virtual place through live broadcasts?

The foregoing explains how this “graduation” on the issues set forth in the schools of thought is not upright, and therefore the previous imams stipulated conditions for whoever graduates on the doctrine, as if he is diligent in the doctrine surrounding his branches and sockets, so we are facing measurements that have taken us to what is far from the subject of the original measurement, which is Here is the unity of the place!

Some of the distinguished scholars tried to overcome this problem of its origin, and he said that the condition of the union of the place between the imam and the congregation is "an allegation that has no evidence", and the evidence here is "a text or its meaning", but the funny thing is that when he deduced that it is permissible to follow the example of validity through live broadcasts, he did not come not By text and not in its meaning, but rather he made a mental argument that the Imamate is "reasonable in meaning" and that its means have changed.

The strangest thing is that he made the speech of the jurists in the condition of the union of the place "revolves around the meaning of the possibility of follow-up or lack thereof", and this is not accurate; the Hanafi school for example is that the union of the place is a condition "because following the example requires dependency in prayer, and the place of prayer supplies requires dependency in the place is necessary, and when The difference in the place is that there is no dependency in the place, so there is no dependency in prayer, because there is no need for it.

As for the Shafi’is, they stipulate the condition of the meeting between the imam and the imam for the validity of the example, and that “if the distance is far and the buildings are built - well and surface - the model is not valid, as preventing this will prevent the meeting.” Among the important texts in the Shafi’i school of thought is that the lesson is that “it is prepared together to show the slogan, courtship and solidarity”, so the union of the place is not only intended to be aware of the movements of the Imam; for “if only knowledge of the transfers is sufficient, as Atta said, to invalidate the commanded order, and pray for the group, and everyone prayed In his market or home by the imam praying in the mosque if he knows of his transfers.

From here we find in the books of the Shafi’i school discussions of the various forms of meeting, such as if the imam and the imam were "in a mosque, or in any other space or building, or one of them would be in a mosque and the other in another", etc. It was better for muftis to photograph us the picture of the virtual meeting and then explain to us, is this a meeting like real or not?

If they consider it a real meeting, it no longer makes sense for the distinction to be made between fard and nafel, between the group and Friday, and between the natural conditions and the conditions of need or exception; because we discuss here the concepts and images that verify them, and it is not true that it is said that following the example of broadcasting is legitimate and then it is restricted by arbitrary restrictions such as need Or the exception, and this is not originally realized, as will be seen.

Graduation or measurement is based on two things: editing concepts, and drawing the overall picture that is intended to be measured, because the juristic judgment is related to the clarity of the whole picture, not simply when part of its parts is achieved, or simply by partial similarity without caring for the differences in the group image. Such sectioning occurs with many contemporary muftis, and such measurements cannot be traced to doctrines of jurisprudence, because it is an updated image that does not agree with the overall picture measured.

The prayer of the congregation is dependent on two things: the first: the name itself and its contents deserve to be described as a congregation, and the second: the organization of prayer, which are established and dispersed issues in the branches of doctrinal doctrines, and around it is a long discussion that can be traced from the entrances: Friday and its stripes and its authority, and following the example and impermissibility and images and tapes, And reciting al-Fatiha during prayer, and is prayer without it valid? Is the imam reading a reading for the congregation?

On the one hand, concepts: group and emulation are legal terms, and they have special concepts that differ from linguistic concepts, and the text is based on the broad meaning that includes generalities, specific texts, and inherited work based on followers. The group is based on the availability of the meeting represented in the unity of the place as previously, and on the unity of the place, meanings arise And many supplies related to the pursuit and collection of reward and early intention to observe i'tikaaf, exerting effort and walking to the mosque, establishing rituals and differentiating people in disturbances and kinship.

The Prophet, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, did not authorize the blind person who hears the call to leave the congregation, and i'tikaaf is a special worship once the intention of staying in the mosque, even without action, that is, we are facing a form of composition, will be torn apart by entering into the world of live broadcasting with this image that is now shattered. The group is therefore associated with a system and certain values, some of which have been referred to, stripping it of these meanings and limiting the whole discussion to discussing the development of means only is necessary for phenomena and forms, without the meanings of faith, subsidiary and social.

Also, jumping from "loudspeaker" means to "live broadcast" techniques is a "fallacy" of the term logic, because the amplifiers are only a conduction of sound in one real meeting place, to correct follow-up to the imam if the place spans, it transmits a real sound in the place One time, a contrasting image of live broadcasting open to different concepts of time and space, and on a parallel world is hypothetical.

The jurists also discussed the connection of the rows and the solitary prayer behind the class, all of which are issues related to the conception of the group and its organization, and if the Maliki tolerance does not stipulate the connection of the rows - which is a face of the Hanbalis - then the lack of contact of the rows does not necessarily mean the lack of unity in the place, then the two things must not be confused.

Imamate and imitation are not limited to mere follow-up, but rather, they are complex meanings. If we are limited to mere follow-up, there is no point in distinguishing between live broadcasting and rebroadcasting. Rather, someone who measures this can come to repeat the prayer, which is to make up the prayer at a time that is not due, so why is the unity of the prayer required? originally? Is his document text or mental? It may have been said: The lesson of broadcasting, the presence of the image and sound, and the follow-up is achieved, and this is achieved in every broadcast, even if it is a replay, because for the channel and receiving the viewer is a live broadcast.

In addition to the foregoing, in the TV follow-up there is a time interval that lengthens and shortens according to the type of broadcast and channel policy, which leads to the missing of one or more corners, and the follow-up to the real imam is disrupted, and if the follow-up to his image occurred on the screen, some of the scholars say: This follow-up is definitely real and not fantasies He is not upright, because what is transmitted is his image, and it is a fantasy, not reality.

Some jurists discussed the image on the mirror, and the Shafi’is and others considered it a fantasy and arranged rulings on it. If a woman’s divorce had commented on her vision, then he saw her in the mirror, they said: The divorce does not happen, because he only saw her image and did not see it as a reality, and the designation of this space by default is only a sign Its distinction from the real world, as well as the digital world, is completely contrary to the real world in many philosophical, legal, and human aspects.

As for prayer systems, a question arises regarding it: Is there a correlation between the validity of following the imam and the validity of the individual’s prayer itself? The Hanbali scholars do not differentiate between the two, because they see that the congregational prayer is one system, and if it is not correct to follow the example of the prayer, the prayer is not valid, and therefore they require - from the beginning - that the worshiper intend to follow the example to be achieved as a "imam" and for the imam to be an imam, and accordingly, if the part of the systems falls, all of it falls And whoever separated the group without an excuse invalidated his prayer, because he separated it with an excuse, then he completed his prayer separately.

As for non-Hanbalis, they do not stipulate that the intention of the imamate and following the example of the imamate is to be fulfilled, and the Shafi’is differed in the solitary prayer behind the row, and their doctrine is that it is valid but it is not correct to follow it, i.e. it does not get the reward for congregation, but the validity of his prayer alone is not absolute; He had recited Surat Al-Fatihah for himself, because they saw - like the Hanbali partly - that following the example and validity of prayer is one thing in relation to Friday prayer and not others, because Friday prayer is not valid alone, because this is part of the worship systems themselves and their organization, as they have different systems that must be nurtured, and the lack of Reciting al-Fatihah is prejudicial to one's prayer, if the imitation of the Qur’an is disturbed, and then j Har Prayer whole systems.

This discussion is not limited to the methodology of reasoning, and what I call "systemic consideration" of jurisprudence, but also extends to a general understanding of religiosity and the role of the individual in it. The door of licenses and excuses is an important part of the Sharia, and licenses have its own law that moves the movement of individuals in time, space and place.

The legal rulings are divided into two parts: the mandatory rulings (the duty, the forbidden, the delegate, the bad and the permissible), and the positive rulings (the reason, the barrier and the condition ...), and each mandatory ruling must have the status judgments in which it comes down and affects it, and this varies according to individuals, because the speech of the street is revealed according to Individuals and their movement in time and space, and according to the individual differences between them (body, gender and ability). Devotion to God must take place from them in all their conditions: in good and bad times, in urban and travel, in health and sickness, and of the scientist and the ignorant, each according to him, and the law governing all of this is: "What you can."

But when the Corona pandemic came - “social isolation” was imposed by the force of preventive medicine or by the force of law - these attempts to invent new forms of meeting and group emerged, as if there is no conception of worship except by meeting even by default, which is a transgression of the philosophy of jurisprudence and its system as I explained it!

This is despite the fact that the epidemics are not a new descent, but many of them witnessed Islamic history, and worship under it is not an unprecedented situation, just as epidemics are an emergency and not a permanent situation even if it takes a long time, and in the door of licenses and excuses is sufficient and wide, and in the chapter on naafil a capacity of capacity, and its duty Instead, the delegate is paid in individual or group conditions as possible (in a mosque and without it, by two or more, in the Qur’an, etc.).

And the assignment rule is subject to positive law, and the street is more afraid of His servants, and it is he who has defined the borders and licenses for them, and addressed them with what they can. Naafil is the place of houses, and the original worship in which there is transmission or prophetic work, and the creation of a new body in it is forbidden. God only knows.