Channel
@EuropeanFatwaCouncil
On this record: Growth · Engagement · Reactions · Posts · Citations · Cite this entry
45subscribers
+4 since we began measuring on 6 August 2026
Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of Under 1,000.
| Telegram ID | -1002503441372 |
|---|---|
| Type | Channel |
| Username | @EuropeanFatwaCouncil |
| Created | 26 June 2025 — measured — dated from the channel’s first post |
| First recorded | 10 August 2026 |
| Last confirmed live | 13 August 2026 |
| Measurements held | 4 |
| Confirmed unchanged | 1 time, most recently 13 August 2026 |
| On Telegram | t.me/EuropeanFatwaCouncil |
| Measured (UTC) | Subscribers | Change |
|---|---|---|
| 13 Aug 2026, 07:47 | 45 | +3 |
| 10 Aug 2026, 17:01 | 42 | no change |
| 7 Aug 2026, 01:46 | 42 | +1 |
| 6 Aug 2026, 20:31 | 41 | first reading |
9 posts held, back to 26 June 2025 — the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 1 pageof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.
ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.
ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate.
| Window | Rolling 30 days · latest post in window 6 August 2026 |
|---|---|
| Posts held | 9 (26 June 2025 – 6 August 2026) |
| Views total | 724 |
| Reactions total | 5 |
| Forwards / comments | not exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated |
| Readings taken | 10 Aug 2026, 17:01 UTC |
Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.
Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.
Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.
15 reactions across 8 posts, in 1 kind.
| Reaction | Count | Share | Share, drawn |
|---|---|---|---|
| ❤ | 15 | 100.0% |
No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.
Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.
Coverage. Reactions were read on 8 of the 9 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 15reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.
Measured over the 9 most recent posts we hold, published 26 June 2025 to 6 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.
NEW ARTICLE 🌹 The Rights Owed to the Qurʾān by Mankind By: Shaykh Dr. Nūr al-Dīn Muḥammad ʿItr (Allah have mercy upon him) Read now: https://europeanfatwacouncil.com/the-rights-owed-to-the-qur%CA%BEan-by-mankind/
❤2
[ NEW FATWĀ ] 🔵 What is the ruling on wiping over socks during wuḍūʾ? ⚫ The socks commonly worn today are not valid for wiping over in ablution, because they do not fulfill the conditions required of leather socks [khuffayn] or of the type of socks that constituted the prevailing custom in the Prophetic era. ⚫ Whoever wipes over such thin socks, therefore, does not have a valid wuḍūʾ, nor a valid prayer, nor a val…
❤1
[ NEW FATWĀ ] 🔵 The Effect of Ignorance on the Validity of Divorce ⚫ It has been established in the Sharīʿa that a person who is ignorant of a legal ruling [ḥukm] is not excused when he is able to acquire knowledge concerning Islam. This is because the capacity to attain knowledge is treated, in matters of legal responsibility [taklīf], as equivalent to knowledge itself. ⚫ Thus, whoever is able to acquire the requ…
❤2
[ NEW FATWĀ ] 🔵 The Extent of Looking/Touching During Medical Examination for a Clinician ⚫ The ʿulamāʾ unanimously agree upon the prohibition of looking at the private parts of both sexes, and the prohibition is even more emphatic when there is a difference of sex. ⚫ However, if a need or necessity arises for treatment and medical care that requires looking at that which is normally unlawful to look at, then the …
❤1
NEW FATWĀ 🔵 How does one fulfil missed prayers [qaḍāʾ fawāʾit al-ṣalāh] when their number is unknown? ⚫️ Whoever owes missed prayers, fasts, or similar acts of worship but does not know their exact number must fulfil them by making them up according to the amount that he believes most likely covers everything he owes. ⚫️ By doing so, his obligation is discharged and he is cleared of liability. https://europeanfat…
❤1
NEW FATWĀ What is the ruling on fasting ʿĀshūrāʾ and what are its virtues? ⚫️ The ʿulamaʾ agreed upon the recommended nature of fasting the Day of ʿĀshūrāʾ (10th Muḥarram) and Tāsūʿāʾ (9th Muḥarram). ⚫️ ʿĀshūrāʾ is a day which the Prophet ﷺ held in great esteem, and numerous virtues have been reported concerning it. ⚫️ It is also recommended on this day to be generous in providing for one’s dependants and family;…
❤3
NEW FATWĀ What is the ruling on seeking fatwā from artificial intelligence (AI)? ⚫️ Issuing fatāwā is a task of immense gravity, reserved for ʿulamāʾ who are the heirs of the Prophets. Those who give legal fatāwā are, in effect, signatories on behalf of Allah, Glorified and Exalted. ⚫️ A fatwā depends upon many conditions that must be met by the muftī, and it may also vary according to the circumstances of the que…
❤3
In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate. May Allah send prayers and salutations upon our master Muḥammad ﷺ, and upon his family and Companions. With the dawn of the year 1448 AH, we are honoured to announce the establishment of the European Fatwa Council. Its purpose is to serve Muslims and to make more accessible the essential legal rulings and practical guidance of Islam that Muslims requir…
❤2
Channel created
Showing the 9 most recent of 9 posts we hold for @EuropeanFatwaCouncil. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked ≈ was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.
Citation-graph rank — 364,445 of 1,183,361entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.
Republished by
Channels on the register that have forwarded this channel's posts into their own feed.
Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.
Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.
Named by
Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.
A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.
A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 13 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.
“European Fatwa Council” (@EuropeanFatwaCouncil), 45 subscribers as measured 13 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/EuropeanFatwaCouncil.
Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.