Introduction

Hujjat al-Islam Dr. Ahmad Ali Qane’, one of the few communication scholars who has experienced this field both theoretically and practically, has authored various books and articles in the realm of media and communication, including Discourses on the Jurisprudence of Culture and Communication. Coupled with his extensive missionary activities inside and outside the country, he is one of the best individuals to discuss the competitive advantages of media jurisprudence in the international arena. A faculty member at Imam Sadiq University, he believes that while Shia media jurisprudence has significant distinctions and advantages over other religions and sects, it cannot effectively address media-related jurisprudential issues without serious attention to subject identification and the objectives of Sharia. The full text of Contemporary Jurisprudence’s exclusive interview with this professor of media and communication jurisprudence follows:

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What competitive advantages does Shia media jurisprudence offer that are understandable to the contemporary world for its presence in the international arena?

Qane’: The first advantage is that Shia jurisprudence, under which media jurisprudence falls, is in accordance with human nature (fitra). Shia jurisprudence considers both this world and the hereafter, paying attention to the afterlife and resurrection. It addresses all aspects of individual and collective life—material, spiritual, social, political, and economic—because it views humans as a whole whose ultimate felicity must be ensured. This means that the Almighty, Ever-Present, All-Knowing, All-Powerful, and Self-Sufficient God seeks to guide humanity toward felicity.

Moreover, Shia jurisprudence, compared to the jurisprudence of other religions and sects, has undergone the least alteration and distortion. The status of other religions is clear, as they have been subject to significant distortions. Regarding other Islamic sects, fabrications have occurred in both their theological and jurisprudential discussions. Therefore, Shia jurisprudence, as a denomination with the least alteration and fabrication, holds a significant advantage over other religions and sects, which is also evident in media jurisprudence.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What are the distinguishing features of media jurisprudence compared to other religions and sects?

Qane’: Shia jurisprudence was expounded over 250 years by our infallible Imams (peace be upon them), whom we consider to possess divine knowledge and infallibility. This prolonged 250-year exposition played a significant role in familiarizing people and Shia followers with the Shia denomination, to the extent that Imam Reza (peace be upon him) stated, “If people knew the virtues of our words, they would follow us.” Beyond that 250-year period of presence, even now, the Imam of the Time is present and, in a way, continues to guide us. Therefore, we can say that our Prophet is still alive, as Imamate is the continuation of Prophethood. Consequently, one distinguishing feature of Shia jurisprudence in all fields, including media jurisprudence, is that its exposition was both more prolonged and conducted by infallible figures. In contrast, non-Shia jurisprudence, such as Sunni jurisprudence, did not follow this pattern. After the Prophet’s passing, the prohibition of recording hadiths occurred, and fabrications and forged narrations by Jews and Christians entered Islam. As mentioned, other religions have undergone such extensive distortions that God Almighty revealed a new religion. The issue of distortions in other religions is referenced in the Quran and is also attested by human reason upon examining their texts.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: Does the current media jurisprudence have the necessary capacity to engage in the international arena, or does it require changes in methods of deduction, rules, or evidence?

Qane’: This jurisprudence has the necessary capacity because God Almighty, who is eternal and everlasting, has unchanging divine laws and traditions. Human nature (fitra) is constant and neither changes nor is replaced. Just as Islam does not change, the general principles of jurisprudence remain fixed, as do the methods of deduction, rules, and evidence. Therefore, there is no reason to suggest a need for changes in the methods of deduction, rules, or evidence. However, as you know, throughout history, jurists have differed slightly on which rule to apply to a given issue. For example, the late Muqaddas Ardabili deduced rulings in one way, while Sheikh Ansari did so differently. Even now, for instance, regarding the money individuals set aside for Hajj registration, one jurist may say it is a form of investment and subject to khums (a religious tax), while another may argue it is an expense and not subject to khums. Thus, methods and rules do not change, but which rule to apply—whether a case falls under the principle of ease (yusr) or precaution (ihtiyat)—is a matter of disagreement. Therefore, in response to this question, I assert that Shia jurisprudence has the necessary capacity. However, a jurist must carefully consider the current global conditions to determine which method, rule, or principle to apply. That the core of jurisprudence has the required capacity and does not need changes in methods, rules, or evidence is, in my view, beyond dispute.

Contemporary Jurisprudence: What actions and policies should be implemented for media jurisprudence to engage in the international arena?

Qane’: There are two key points here:

First, in media jurisprudence, care must be taken to identify the nature of the subject. The well-known principle in the science of jurisprudence—that understanding the nature of a subject is like understanding the cause in relation to its effect—is truly valuable and fundamental. Our jurists face the same issue in other matters: they cannot issue a ruling until the nature of the subject is clear. For example, in the past, selling blood was for consumption and thus forbidden, but now it is for saving lives and thus permissible. This is an example of a change in the nature of the subject, even though the subject itself appears unchanged. Or, regarding money, there is debate about whether its nature lies in its numerical value or its purchasing power. Unfortunately, many scholars currently say that the nature of money is its numerical value, whereas what exists in society and is universally understood is that the value of money lies in its purchasing power, not its numbers. This difference in the nature of money leads to significant jurisprudential differences among jurists in matters such as usury, interest-free loans, khums, zakat, and the like. Therefore, in media jurisprudence, we must precisely identify the subject. If we fail to do so and rely solely on generalities, absolutes, or practical principles, we will not follow the correct path and will not arrive at a correct ruling.

Second, Shia jurisprudence, compared to Sunni jurisprudence, has paid less attention to the objectives of Sharia (maqasid al-shari’a), which I consider a shortcoming. While we adhere to the words of the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) and sacred texts, we must also pay attention to the objectives of Sharia and make greater use of reason. For media jurisprudence to engage in the international arena, we must use reason as a jurisprudential source—not merely as a tool for understanding texts, verses, and narrations—and also focus on the objectives of Sharia.

For example, in jurisprudential discussions on covering (satr) and looking (nazar), it is stated that the opposite gender must cover themselves, and one must avoid looking at the opposite gender in prohibited contexts. Regarding the ruling on viewing images of uncovered women broadcast through media such as television, social networks, or computers, if we consider the objectives of Sharia, we must say that the effect produced in real-life settings from seeing prohibited parts of the opposite gender also occurs in virtual settings, with no significant difference between the two. Therefore, their rulings are the same. However, without considering the objectives of Sharia, some may rely on the principle of exemption (bara’a) and issue a fatwa stating that since there is no certainty of prohibition, it is permissible.

The response is that both the generalities and absolutes that God Almighty has stated regarding covering and looking apply to both real and virtual settings. Moreover, when considering the objectives of Sharia, we observe that the effect produced by seeing the uncovered body of the opposite gender is largely the same in virtual and real settings. Thus, Imam Reza (peace be upon him), when explaining why one should not look at the body of the opposite gender, said it is to prevent the arousal of desire. In this statement, he is referring to the objectives of Sharia. Some objectives of Sharia are explicitly mentioned in the Quran and narrations, while others can be identified through reason and human experience.

In conclusion, in jurisprudential matters, particularly media jurisprudence, the jurisprudence of the Prophet’s Household (peace be upon them) has the capacity to address all issues, provided that, first, greater attention is paid to subject identification and, second, to the objectives of Sharia.