What is the authenticity of the story of Abdullah ibn Hudhafah, and does its ruling apply to the prisoners of Palestine, and are those among them who die considered martyrs? And is it permissible for the prisoners themselves to issue fatwas regarding the hunger strike?

Most scholars of Islam are of the opinion that a hunger strike is permissible if it serves a recognized benefit, provided that it does not lead to death or a dangerous state. This is the view of the majority of contemporary scholars. Al-Qaradawi cited as evidence for its permissibility the Almighty's saying: "{pleasing to the farmers so that He may enrage by them the disbelievers}" (Al-Fath: 29) and His saying: "{And they do not tread any path that enrages the disbelievers, nor do they gain from an enemy any gain, except that it is recorded for them as a righteous deed}" (At-Tawbah: 120). Thus, anything that enrages the disbelievers is praiseworthy in Islamic law. As for what was narrated about Abdullah ibn Hudhafah, it was deemed weak by Al-Albani.

Scholars have differed on whether it is obligatory or permissible for one in dire necessity to eat from a dead animal. The majority held it to be obligatory, while others considered it permissible but not obligatory.

As for issuing fatwas, it is permissible for anyone who is a qualified jurist to issue fatwas for themselves and for others, whether they are striving (mujahid) or sedentary. However, whoever is not qualified should not issue fatwas for themselves or for others.