خون جوشان امام علی علیه السلام

 

بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم-اززبان ایتالیای به انگلیسی-On the effectiveness of Khomeini"s fatw? against Salman Rushdie

by Deborah Scolart

associate professor of law of Islamic countries at the University of Naples "L"Orientale"-On August 12, 2022, during a literary festival in the state of New Jersey, the writer Salman Rushdie was the victim of a multiple stabbing that almost reduced him to life. Her attacker has been arrested and is awaiting trial. The affair has brought to the fore the fatw? pronounced against Salman Rushdie by Ayatollah Khomeini 33 years ago. • Share

• Tweets
• Views: 927

Summary: 1. Role and function of the fatw? in Islamic law - 2. The text of the fatw? against Salman Rushdie - 3. The subjects of the fatw? - 4. The crime committed - 5. Who must implement the fatw?? - 6. Death sentence without trial - 7. . Role and function of the fatwa in Islamic law

The term fatw? can be translated as an opinion, a legal opinion that can be requested and given in reference to every area of the individual"s life and concern both civil and purely religious matters. The fatw? is not a sentence and has no enforceability; composed of a question and an answer, it can be without motivation, but it is good that it is articulated and understandable, clear in all its aspects-The muft?, holder of what Tyan[1] defines as a jus respondendi similar to the responsa of Roman law, must belong to Islam, be fair (?adl) and capable of i?tih?d, i.e. to reach - through the interpretation of the sources - the solution of the problem that is the subject of the question submitted to him[2-It follows that, theoretically at least, the title of muft? should be attributed only to the mu?tahid[3], a jurist capable of i?tih?d, and not to the muqallid, i.e. to the one who slavishly refers to the interpretationsof the school to which they belong. However, there have certainly been cases, in the past and in the present era, of subjects who invested themselves with the function of mufti despite lacking the necessary scientific qualities, which is possible-precisely because alongside institutional bodies (think today, for example, of the Egyptian D?r al-Ift?? established in 1895 or the more recent - 2012 - Libyan D?r al-Ift??) coexist muft?s who proclaim themselves such and act on an individual level[ 4]. The request for an opinion can come from private individuals as well as from institutions; the need for the believer to live in accordance with values and rules-of the Islamic religion induces, in fact, a constant search for clarification on what can and cannot be done. In the past, it was not infrequently the judge[5] who requested a fatw? and if he was of the same legal school as the mufti, the latter"s opinion was considered binding for the purposes of the judge"s decision, otherwise it served as a mere interpretative indication-The first official muft?s, i.e. designated by political power, already appear at the end of the first century of Islam (beginning of the eighth century AD) even if we can only speak of real institutionalization with the Ottomans, who will make the office part of the state apparatus making the mufti an official, with the šay? al-isl?m of Istanbul at the top of the ?ulam??. It goes anywayrecalled that in the contemporary Islamic world it is very difficult to find laws or regulations governing the institution of the fatw?, so that the classic rules relating to the determination of the characteristics that an individual must possess in order to be called muft? are still valid-thus authorizing the murder "by all zealous Muslims everywhere" of Salman Rushdie and the publishers of his book The Satanic Verses[7]. The fatw? was never withdrawn by Khomeini nor questioned by other Iranian religious authorities after the Ayatollah"s death. On the contrary, it was confirmed in 2005 and then again in its thirtieth anniversary by the current Supreme Guide (rahbar?), Ayatollah Ali Khamenei[8=the 3 million dollar bounty placed on Rushdie"s head by the 15 Khordad Foundation, a religious foundation under the control of the Supreme Guide, is still valid-historians, political scientists, Islamologists, jurists confronted Salman Rushdie; freedom of expression, freedom of religious criticism, freedom of religion were discussed, the consequences of the fatw? were evaluated in terms of Western-Islam relations and there was a debate on what should be-the attitude of Muslim communities in Europe, caught between the need to obey the rules of the country of residence and the desire to protect one"s religious identity against the threats deriving from cultural assimilation and from criticism of-Here we intend, more modestly, to take stock of some aspects of the text"s content starting from a question: is Khomeini"s fatw? against Salman Rushdie, technically, a fatw?? Certainly it lacks the form, and not because it was released orally, which is always possible, but because it lacks the classic question-answer structure which, among other things, characterizes the many fat?was issued over time by Khomeini. the Islamic religious modelThe subjects of the fatw?-The first issue that comes to the fore when observing the content of the text is that the fatw? does not name the recipients of the death sentence, identified only as the author of the book The Satanic Verses, and as the publishers (n?šerin) aware of the content (mottala? az moxtav?-ye ?n-If the author remains easily identifiable, and in fact there is no doubt that it is Salman Rushdie, the question of the n?šerin is more complex. What does "aware of the content" mean-Obviously whoever translates the book and whoever publishes it knows what the text is about. But do they also know that that book can offend someone"s feelings? It is reasonable to expect, from people who translate novels (The Satanic Verses is not an essay on Koranic criticism or a philosophy text, it is a novel-English expression of the current of so-called magical realism like other works by the Author) that recognize the offensive potential for other people"s religious sensibilities (but whose then-Of all the Muslims in the world? Of the leaders of Islamic legal academies? Of the heads of state and government? And if only one of these subjects does not consider the work offensive, how should the publisher be regulated?) of the work they are working on if they do not have the skills-and also at a high level, in terms of religion and Islamic law? This is a huge problem, because it refers to the question of the publisher"s responsibility for the contents it publishes: taken to the extreme consequence, this type of reasoning can imply that every time a text in press mentions the Islamic religion-that same text should either be censored and therefore not published to avoid problems of any kind, or submitted to the prior opinion of an Islamic religious authority (but which one?) who would or would not issue the imprimatur in defiance of freedom of opinion and freedom of press that are recognized in a good number of countries-How specious the argument of the publishers" knowledge of the (allegedly) blasphemous content of Rushdie"s work is also evident from the fact that the book was published in September 1988 and was reviewed by the Iranian press in November; the criticisms were severe, but focused on the quality of the novel and not on its blasphemous character-It was only after its publication on the American market in February 1989 that the crisis exploded[9], thus making many of the analysts of the matter doubt whether the Rushdie case was merely a pretext, and functional to exacerbate the already well-rooted hostility between the US authorities and Iranian-Returning to the question of identifying the subjects to be killed, another non-secondary problem emerges. To whom exactly is Khomeni referring when he speaks of n?šerin? The Persian term literally means publishers; in the English translation that I mentioned at the beginning, the editors are indicated-Khomeini rilasciò la fatw? alla radio in persiano, lingua che oggi è parlata da circa 77 milioni di persone (iraniani, afghani di lingua dari, tagiki e uzbeki) su un miliardo e mezzo di musulmani; è chiaro che la fatw? ha circolato nel mondo in altre lingue oltre al persiano e le traduzioni più o meno accurate possono aver involontariamente concorso a generare l"idea che chiunque fosse coinvolto a qualsiasi titolo nella pubblicazione del libro fosse un destinatario della fatw?[10].tobe countinued

..??)...].]..