Note: For several decades, humanity has partially bid farewell to the world of face-to-face conversations, increasingly preferring to conduct their affairs through various virtual networks rather than dedicating time to family and friends to spend a few hours with them. Indeed, communication and technology have facilitated many matters, but they have also become a barrier to human interactions.
Perhaps until recently, no one imagined that the presence of certain individuals in cyberspace could lead to separations, disputes, misunderstandings, and, in some cases, fraud. One reason might be that, based on an unwritten tradition in our country, the proper culture of using a technology is not established before it enters the market. Nonetheless, such incidents have occurred and continue to occur, and we witness various forms of unethical behavior.
The importance of this issue is twofold because we live in an Islamic country whose governing system and people’s culture are rooted in Islamic teachings and jurisprudence. Naturally, anyone with even a slight adherence to religious etiquette strives to observe certain principles in cyberspace, striving to be a true Muslim. Just as they consider themselves accountable to religious obligations in the real world, they hold themselves equally responsible in cyberspace.
To examine these issues, particularly the necessity of deriving and presenting the jurisprudence of cyberspace, we have engaged in discussions with several experts, the results of which are presented below:
Hujjat al-Islam Seyyed Mahmoud Mortazavi Hashtroudi, referring to the importance of deriving, presenting, and elucidating the jurisprudence of cyberspace, stated: “To understand the necessity of cyberspace jurisprudence, we must first define cyberspace and jurisprudence. Jurisprudence refers to the way and method of living from before birth until after death. In other words, the scope of jurisprudence encompasses a person’s life from before birth to after death.”
The secretary of the Association of Communication and Propagation of Qom Seminary continued: “Jurisprudence alone comprises three sections: major jurisprudence, which we refer to as theology and beliefs; middle jurisprudence, which we call practical and theoretical ethics; and minor jurisprudence, which pertains to practical matters. However, the general term ‘jurisprudence’ is typically applied to minor jurisprudence, and practical manuals (risalah ‘amaliyah) are written based on it.”
The researcher added: “If we wish to engage in activities related to issues such as cyberspace, media, internet sciences, and the like—which we must—since jurisprudence is the charter of life, the necessity of its involvement in cyberspace matters arises here. Thus, we must identify issues and subjects and gradually derive rulings and matters accordingly.”
Mortazavi Hashtroudi, emphasizing that cyberspace should not be underestimated and that this environment is not merely virtual, said: “On the contrary, it is a real space, though it is conventionally called virtual. It is a space where people are present 24 hours a day, where transactions, exchanges, and small and large matters take place. It is not illusory. An illusion refers to something that does not exist and is merely in the realm of imagination and fantasy, whereas this space is a reality.”
He added: “The God present in cyberspace is the same God who exists in reality. If I falsely attribute something to someone in cyberspace, it constitutes slander. Or if I spread falsehoods, it becomes the dissemination of lies. In the real world, such gossip and dissemination of falsehoods were limited, but in the space called cyberspace, the scope is vast. Consequently, there is a need for the jurist to issue comprehensive rulings on these matters in light of this space.”
Similarly, Seyyed Alireza Al Davoud, stating that unfortunately, we still lack a practical manual on cyberspace jurisprudence, remarked: “Despite the many years since the internet entered our country, the critical issue of cyberspace jurisprudence has been greatly neglected, whereas learning the religious rulings of cyberspace jurisprudence is obligatory and essential.”
The media literacy instructor continued: “One of the serious problems in today’s cyberspace, where unethical behavior and various forms of vice are abundant, is the failure to observe the obligatory, forbidden, recommended, disliked, and permissible rulings. If these rulings were observed, it would lead to the enhancement of ethics and the realization of a civilized society and Islamic civilization in this space.”
He asserted: “For example, if someone is slandered in cyberspace, or if backbiting occurs behind someone, or if individuals commit other major sins, it is the duty of other users in this space to enjoin good and forbid evil. It is obligatory in such circumstances to defend the person whose rights have been violated and to protect their reputation.”
The media researcher, stating that due to the absence of cyberspace jurisprudence and the negligence of responsible institutions, we face numerous problems, noted: “The proper use of cyberspace is conditional on two principles: being wholesome and using it as needed. However, in today’s environment in our country, due to a lack of media literacy, neither officials nor the public pay special attention to these two golden principles.”
Al Davoud, emphasizing that in today’s world, we face significant issues such as big data collection and data mining, stated: “According to Quranic verses and jurisprudential discussions, opening any path for the domination of non-Muslims over Muslims is deemed forbidden. Unfortunately, today, with the theft of our Muslim people’s information through platforms like Telegram, with its VPNs and affiliates, and social networks like Instagram and other related cyberspace services, we witness a clear and evident violation of the principle of negating domination (nafy sabil). Non-Muslims, by analyzing collected data, inflict various blows on us, including security, economic, social, and cultural damages.”
The cyberspace researcher, emphasizing that the lack of elucidation of rulings regarding vices is one of the reasons for their prevalence in society, noted: “This elucidation must be done through propagation and modern persuasive methods, and we must familiarize people with these rulings in contemporary language, a responsibility that falls upon supervisory, governmental, and educational institutions.”
However, Hujjat al-Islam Mohammad Kahvand, a researcher in the field of cyberspace and media, stated: “Generally, the existing jurisprudence we have does not intervene in all matters and subjects. In fact, the jurist entrusts subject identification to experts and leaves the application of that identification to religious principles to the obligated individual. For example, in the case of music, the jurist states that frivolous music is forbidden.”
The professor continued: “For instance, the question arises whether it is permissible to be active on a specific social network like Telegram, Twitter, or Instagram. In response, the jurist’s method is not to engage in subject identification, investigate the implications and consequences of that foreign social network, who established it, what their purpose was, or what consequences mere membership might entail. Instead, the jurist issues a general ruling, stating that if it aids an oppressor, leads to corruption, or if a person enters the network with the intent to sin, it is forbidden; otherwise, there is no issue.”
He added: “Most obligated individuals who hear this ruling from the jurist are not subject experts themselves and do not know whether, for example, membership in networks like Telegram, Twitter, or Instagram falls under these categories (e.g., aiding an oppressor) or not.”
The researcher asserted: “Many cyberspace activists claim that we conduct cultural-political activities on foreign social networks, and these activities strike a blow against the enemy, meaning our work is not aiding the oppressor but fighting against it!”
He said: “This is how adhering to the jurist’s fatwa creates numerous problems. Some say we should not join foreign social networks, while others say there is no issue. In cyberspace jurisprudence with a social and governmental approach, the cyberspace expert must also be a jurist and consider matters comprehensively so that the outcome of their fatwas does not resemble the current state of our country’s banking system.”
Kahvand stated: “In cyberspace jurisprudence with a governmental and social approach, we not only examine matters analytically but also consider the synthesis and interrelation of these elements. For example, when a social network enters the country, it brings about various economic, security, political, and cultural effects that must be considered. Additionally, attention is given to whether we can control this space or not. Is our role merely to be users, and even then, users under domination, or should we, like leading countries in this field, also enter the realm of governance? These matters are examined under the discussion of cyberspace jurisprudence.”
He concluded: “The outcome of cyberspace jurisprudence with a social approach would certainly not be the current situation, where the enemy’s virtual missiles (Facebook, Telegram, Twitter, and Instagram) have an effective range reaching the most private matters of our country’s people. Instead, just as in physical warfare, we do not allow the enemy to enter our territory and push the battlefront hundreds of kilometers beyond our borders, our virtual missiles (Eitaa, Bale, Gap, Soroush, Parsijoo, and the like) should have an effective range thousands of kilometers away, attracting users from other countries as well.”
Source: Shabestan News Agency