Various Questions
Hadith of poking with foot
NNM wrote in a message
Wa ʿalaykum as-Salam wa rahmatullah:
Imam Ahmad reported that Abu Hurayra (Allah be pleased
with him) said, "The Prophet (Allah bless him and give
him peace) passed by a man who was lying on his
stomach, so he poked him with his leg [correction: foot]
and said, ʿThis is a posture that Allah the Mighty and
Majestic does not like.'"
Questions:
1) Is this a sahih hadith?
It was questioned by al-Bukhari and Ibn Abi Hatim due to its
discrepant chains although the authorities term them strong.
The poking is mentioned in the narration of Abu Dawud
and - with many chains - Ahmad from the Companion Yaʿish
ibn Tikhfa or Tighfa ibn Qays al-Ghifari (ra) with good chains.
One good-chained narration in Ibn Majah and Ahmad comes from
Tikhfa (ra) himself, also a Companion.
One weak-chained narration by Ibn Majah comes from Abu Dharr (ra).
There are four alternate wordings: "On his/my stomach/face."
There are also the wordings: "This is a posture Allah abhors"
and "This is the posture of the people of Hellfire." These
are strong warnings.
Other strong-chained narrations in al-Tirmidhi and Ahmad, both
from Abu Hurayra (ra), do not mention the poking. See a
documentation of its chains in Sahih Ibn Hibban (Risala ed.
12:359-360).
2) What is said to someone who objects: "i dont think
this is the proper way of ADAB....our prophet ﷺ
wudn poke some one with his leg...because this shows
disrespect to that person"
First, he lacks adab that borders on kufr in criticizing an
action that may well have been done by the Prophet ﷺ and
second, the meaning of such an act is understood from its
actual context, not from anachronistic speculation.
Plucking off eyebrows
Question:
My wife asked me about shaping her eyebrows. All that
I know is that it is haraam for her to pluck the eyebrows.
I've already read the hadith about women wearing false hair,
tatooing, pluck eyebrows, and placing gaps between the teeth.
I need to know the complete ruling on shaving/plucking the
eyebrows. Are there any exceptions? Can my wife trim her
eyebrows to make them even with one another or to make the
hairs look like they go in the same directions (she has
little wild hairs on her eyebrows which make them look wild
and uneven). If it is ok for her to do so, then I don't
have a problem with it.
Reply:
The Prophet said - Allah bless and greet him:
"May Allah curse women who wear false hair or
arrange it for others, who tatoo or have
themselves tatooed, who pluck facial hair or
eyebrows or have them plucked, and women who
separate their front teeth for beauty, altering
what Allah has created!"
Al-Dhahabi cited it in al-Kaba'ir [the Enormities] and
he said: "It is agreed upon [by al-Bukhari and Muslim]."
Both al-Dhahabi and al-Haytami include plucking off
facial hair among the enormities.
The enormity lies in the permanency of the change as elucidated by
the phrase "altering what Allah has created." Impermanent changes
such as dyeing or trimming hair are not prohibited. So the
prohibition does not preclude the use of scissors for clipping,
and Allah knows best. There are also exceptions to the prohibition
on women plucking off facial hair:
Ibn Hajar al-ʿAsqalani said in Fath al-Bari (10:378) in commentary of this hadith:
Al-Nawawi said: "An exception from the prohibition
of plucking off facial hair is when a woman has a beard,
mustache, or hair growing between her lower lip and chin,
in which cases it is not unlawful for her to remove
it, but rather is commendable (mustahabb)," the
permissibility being on condition that her husband knows
of it and gives his permission, though it is prohibited
if he does not, because of the deception it entails.
Mufti Lajpuri's Fatawa Rahimiyya even states it is
required (wajib) for her to pluck such hair from her face.
Hadith of Adam (as) 60 cubits
Wa ʿalaykum as-Salam wa rahmatullah:
Someone has claimed that Ibn Hajar (rh) rejected the
hadith that stated that Ali (ra) was 60 cubits tall in
his book Fath ul Bari and that the reasoning was
archaeological evidences which didn't conform to the
hadith?
Ibn Hajar did not reject the hadith but said that there
was an apparent contradiction between its wording of
sixty cubits and the archeological findings of the
people of Thamud whose distance from the time of Adam (as),
he said, "is less than the time elapsed between them
and the beginning of this Umma." This is phrased as just
a thought that causes the explanation of the hadith to be
problematic, not a rejection of the basis of the hadith.
Further, one might see a problem in the objection itself.
In sum, (1) the assumption that Ibn Hajar "rejected" the
hadith of the sixty cubits is inaccurate even if thus
forwarded by M. Zubair Siddiqi in his _Hadith Literature_
and (2) the problem raised by Ibn Hajar is open to question.
Surely the archaeological information would be
subservient to the knowledge of hadith?
The knowledge imparted by hadith is assumptive (zanni) and
becomes categorically binding only with the mutawatir.
Further, is there true conflicting information here, i.e.
correctly interpreted and dated findings?
Writing S.A.W.
nowadays, many people write sal'am (in urdu) or SAW
(in English), this is extremely forbidden and Haraam.
Subhan Allah! Not true.
Vest (not T-shirt)
1) Is it permissible to wear a vest (ie, both shoulders are naked) to
perform Salah if there aren't any extenuating circumstances.
2) Is it permissible to lead the prayer in this state?
3) Is it permissible to pray behind an Imam who has only a vest on?
Yes to all three.
What is Deobandi and Wahabi
Deobandi = Pertaining to the school of Deoband, India, which is principally
Hanafi.
Wahhabi = Pertaining to the school of Muhammad ibn ʿAbd al-Wahhab presently
followed by the Saudis.
Questions about belief
Wa ʿalaykum as-Salam wa rahmatullah:
What is the ruling about people who are born in poverty or war. They
may not have the means to learn about Islam and thus die in disbelief
through no fault of their own?
Allah does not take to task a people before He sends them a messenger.
What about people who are born after the door of repentance is closed
(i.e. near the Day of Judgement). Will they be condemned?
After that very last sign (the rising of the sun from the West) there would be no time for a newborn to grow into the age of accountability in which repentence comes into play.
I have the means to seek answers to such questions. What about people
who are being persecuted for their religion and don't have any means
to attain true belief if they have doubts - e.g. Palestinian muslims?
They are in the very midst of means and the heartland of belief (Syro-Palestine).
We are living very comfortable lives. Will be questioned for not
fighting Jihad to end the atrocities being suffered my Muslims all
over the world?
We will be questioned about Salat and then the way we spent our lives and property. If it was done correctly, it is all Jihad.
I am thinking of the Hadith that mentions that anyone
who dies without the intention to fight Jihad will die on a branch of
hypocrisy.
One should ask for Shahada in one's duʿa and Allah is able to grant it in the way He sees fit.
One of the miracles of The Qur'an is it's inimitable language.
However if people are born in a society that doesn't speak Arabic
will they be held accountable for not recognising this miracle -
through no fault of their own.
The answer is in the question. One is not held accountable for something in which one is not at fault. The lexical Iʿjaz of the Qur'an is a miracle directed first and foremost at Arabic speakers, most especially the Arabs. Hence an obdurate Christian or Jewish Arab is irremediable.
Given that Allah (SWT) does not require worship and can do whatever
He wishes without any assistance, why were the Angels created?
Allah requires worship but does not need it. The Angels were created to worship and obey Allah. The two propositions are compatible.
I understand that the reason for our creation was to see which of us
would pass the test of this life - i.e. we were given free will.
However the Angels have no free will so they are not being tested.
The last sentence is not agreed upon among those who have delved the topic, which excludes us for good reason: knowing and meeting our own human responsibilities is by far the priority.
Please reply to me and give me some advice or recommend books I
should read/ courses I should go on/ people I should meet. I don't
know where else to turn - I don't want to die in disbelief. May
Allah (SWT) reward you for your effort.
Keep a good opinion of your Lord, focus on regular practice beginning with the five prayers, read the lives of the Awliya' after your daily page(s) of Qur'an, and (intend to) keep company with traditional Sufis. May Allah have mercy on you and all of us.
Nifaq and splitting hearts
I'm simply hoping to find information re: the hadith (if I have it
right) wherein the Prophet ﷺ tells the Ummah (and others) that he
ﷺ had not been sent to look into peoples' hearts.
Wa ʿalaykum as-Salam wa rahmatullah:
In Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim from Abu Saʿid al-Khudri (ra):
[After a distribution of the spoils] There got up a man with sunken eyes, raised cheek bones, raised forehead, a thick beard, a shaven head and a waist sheet that was tucked up and he said, "O Allah's Apostle! Be afraid of Allah." The Prophet said, "Woe to you! Am I not of all the people of the earth the most entitled to fear Allah?" Then that man went away. Khalid bin Al-Walid said, "O Allah's Apostle! Shall I chop off his head?" The Prophet said, "No, for he may offer prayers." Khalid said, "Numerous are those who offer prayers and say by their tongues (i.e. mouths) what is not in their hearts." Allah's Apostle said, "I have not been ordered to search the hearts of the people or cut open their bellies." Then the Prophet looked at him (i.e. that man) while the latter was going away and said, "From the offspring of this (man there will come out (people) who will recite the Qur'an continuously and elegantly but it will not exceed their throats. (They will neither understand it nor act upon it). They would go out of the religion (i.e. Islam) as an arrow goes through a game's body." I think he also said, "If I should be present at their time I would kill them as the nations a Thamud were killed."
In Sahih Muslim from Anas (ra):
The Companions were talking about Malik ibn Dukhshum, and they wished that the Prophet ﷺ would curse him so that he should die or meet some calamity. The Prophet ﷺ said: "Does Malik ibn Dukhshum not testify to the fact that there is no god but Allah and that I am the Messenger of Allah?" They said: "Yes, he no doubt says this but it is not in his heart." The Prophet ﷺ replied: "No-one ever witnesses that there is no god but Allah and that I am Allah's Messenger and then enters the Fire nor is consumed by it." Anas said: "This hadith impressed me so much that I ordered my son to write it down and he did." Muslim narrates it.
Correcting Others' Belief
In my circle yet there are so many friends of mine, even relatives
who realy dont care about thier aqeeda and even some are having
corrupt aqeeda. I feel very unconmfortable to speak or deal with
a person having corrupt aqeeda, but at the same time I want to work
to make them understand the real problem, but I dont know the
perfect way. Here in India, Pakistan the situation is worst, No body
want to listen to anybody. I am sure you must be knowing all these
problems.
I seek your guidence, how to approach blank people and misleaded,
to get back to real madhab, because realy there are so many innocent,
who are misleaded by thier tricks. I have obesereved there are so many
tableegis who are not aware of thier aqeeda and when we starts to
tell about it they just say "you sunni have nothing but blaming to these
poor tableegis who are working hard for deen"
2:112 Nay, but whosoever surrendereth his purpose to Allah while doing good,
his reward is with his Lord; and there shall no fear come upon them neither
shall they grieve. Also 4:125 and 31:22.
There is consensus in the commentaries that these verses point to the two
conditions of acceptance of any deed in Islam:
1- It must conform with the Divine Law
2- It must stem from sound intention.
This is why the Sufi Masters stressed knowledge of the Qur'an and Sunna
first, then purification of the nafs. Without realizing these two goals,
one's faith and deeds remain vulnerable to destruction.
However, one should advise oneself first and the Prophet ﷺ said that
the best duʿa is that one makes for oneself. This is because only through
reforming oneself can one help others. Short of this it is only the blind
leading the blind, even with so-called best intentions.
Al-Shaʿrani said in Lawaqih al-Anwar [al-ʿUhud al-Muhammadiyya]:
"The general covenant was taken from us by Allah's Messenger -- Allah bless
and greet him -- that we should not dispute in one of the sciences of the
Law except with the intention of supporting the Religion and on the
conditions of sincerity and full consciousness (hudur) of Allah Almighty and
Exalted. These [intention and conditions] must be based on unveiling
(kashf), not conjecture, self-display, heedlessness, or presumption; and
with the texts of the authorities before his eyes.
"One who undertakes such work must have a teacher imbued with the sciences
of the Law who has looked into the totality of the proofs of the Schools
that are practiced and studied, trained in the path of the [Sufi] Folk in
the degrees of sincerity.
"As for one who puts this covenant into practice without a teacher, then he
is in the majority of cases displaying himself."
And Allah knows best.
Hajj Gibril
questions - nasiha
As-Salamu ʿalaykum wa rahmatullah:
Is it permissible to eat at or even enter places such as Mcdonalds
restaurant even though the food itself is not explicitly or apparently
haraam?
Yes, because there must be positive knowledge or conviction of the haraam
nature of an animal food or ingredient, or of its slaughtering process for
that food or ingredient to be haraam. Mere suspicion is enough for
abstaining, out of scrupulosity, from eating at or entering such places, but
not enough for declaring it impermissible. And Allah knows best.
What is the Shar'ee ruling regarding eating at or going into places which sell alcohol?
Makruh if one can do otherwise, haram if one does so just because they sell
alcohol or to support or promote such sale. And Allah knows best.
At what point in the history of the resurgence of Islam are
we at this very moment in time? Is there a downhill phase or uphill going
on
at the moment? What do the Adillat-Shar'ia mention regarding how and when
and where the Islamic resurgence will begin where Muslims will again begin
to revive the Khilafah?
We are at the lowest point in the history of the resurgence of Islam right
now except for the Friends of Allah that are scattered here and there on the
globe, and even they are not permitted to show themselves. The phase is
downhill with respect to the beginning of the Umma, and uphill with respect
to the expectation of deliverance. The latter was described in great detail
in the narrations pertaining to the Fitan and the conditions of the Last
Hour.
How can I , on an individual level, ensure that I
don't fall into the trap that so many youth have and may do of becoming
either morally and religiously lax or entering into a phase of belonging
to a neo-Kharaji group?
Keep Salat, travel to visit a holy person, and remember that { the Hour is
near} and { Do not let length of time harden your hearts as were hardened the
hearts of those before you} .
One thing that bewilders me is that how did the British Manage to cause
all this fitna mentioned in the above book by exploiting only a few
members
of the Muslim ummah like Ibn Abdul Wahhab, Mustapha Rashid Pasha, Abduh,
etc. etc. when the Khilafah and Uthmani Sultanat could not have been
broken
up by people like Khwaarij, Shi'a, Yazidis, Gengis khan's Barbaric Army,
etc. etc. How comes single individuals like those above managed to cause
such a great loss to the Islamic Empire?
They didn't. They entered into a larger scheme of history at a time Allah
saw fit to more fully disclose to us what happens when we put the world
before the hereafter.
What approach should I use in warning and trying to
prevent those who are in these two mentioned groups of Muslims from
becoming
members of them e.g. counselling or talking to them, warning and
explaining
to them the history of these fanatical groups or will this cause more
resentment?
Sincerity and your best effort in addressing their need from you if they
have any, and trust in Allah to do the rest.
What hope do we have of
re-establishing the khilafa as long as the followers of the above
mentioned
carachters like the "Salafi-Saudi" state are present?
It is fard to keep not only hope but certainty that Allah will re-establish
the Khilafa, and its signs are all around us so we know it is very near, and
He will do so with or without us regardless of the presumed obstacles. The
Khilafa is divinely appointed, it is not a question of human organization or
power. AND THERE IS NO KHILAFA BEFORE AL-MAHDI.
Is it permissible in Islam to play games such as chess or draughts or
any
game for that matter whether it be on computer or on board?
ʿAli and Ibn ʿUmar - Allah be well-pleased with them - detested chess
because of those who neglected worship due to it and because of the gambling
and betting involved. This is why it was forbidden (cf. Sahih Muslim vol.
IV,no. 5612) and the Faqih of Madina, al-Qasim ibn Muhammad - Allah be
well-pleased with him - said: "All that distracts from remembrance of Allah
and Salat is dice (maysar)."
Otherwise, al-Nawawi said "In our school it is makruh, not haram, and this
is the position reported from a number of the Tabiʿin" while al-Qurtubi said
in his Tafsir, it is permitted once in a while without being disliked
according to the vast majority of the Fuqaha' and despite the misleading
words of Ibn Kathir in his Tafsir, "Malik, Abu Hanifa, and Ahmad stipulated
that chess is haram while al-Shafiʿi disliked it."
It is established that Abu Hurayra (who entered Islam in the year 7 after
the Hijra) and others of the pious Salaf played chess - but not as an
all-consuming activity. In the final analysis the correct position in the
matter seems that of Imam al-Shafiʿi - Allah be well-pleased with him - who
said: "It is disliked and not forbidden, for a number of the Companions
played it and countless of the Tabiʿin and those after them" while the Hafiz
Ibn Hajar said: "There is not one firmly-established narration to prohibit
chess, neither sahih nor hasan." [Fayd al-Qadir.]
Note: The hadith "Whoever plays chess and dice is as one who dipped his hand
in swine's blood" is inauthentic. The correct wording does not mention chess
but only dice, narrated from Burayda by Imam Muslim in his Sahih.
6. What does islam say about going to football matches? what about
spending
about 300 pounds for a season ticket?
Lahw. Israf.
What does Islam say about the following:
a group of young muslim brothers choose football players and create a full
team on paper and then as each player within an individuals team scores
goals etc. they get points added on to their team. At the end the one with
the least points has to buy everyone a pizza. The thing what I am
concerned
about is the fact that thse young muslims seem to concentrate alot on such
activities and very little, if any, on learning and implementing the
religion. what naseeha should be given to them regarding this?
Add the condition that the one with the most points has to give a ten-minute
talk on a verse or hadith of his choice after they finish playing and
eating.
Hajj Gibril
Sources Of Islamic Law
Assalam alayk Brother,
I know of no evidence that these four sheikhs are to be the guides of
the ummah as you have described. Please explain this to me brother.
Wa ʿalayk as-Salam. The evidence is Ijmaʿ of the Umma. The wellsprings of
the Law are Four: Qur'an - Sunna - Ijmaʿ - Qiyas. There is Consensus about
the first three, so it is useless to dispute the validity of Ijmaʿ as a
principle, and it is further useless to dispute the fact that its definition
does not take into account the non-Sunni sects. I agree with you that this
may appear highly arbitrary but it is a Divine Hukm with its roots solidly
planted in the Qur'an and Sunna and you will need, not polls of fellow US
Muslims, but an actual teacher in Usul to help you begin to see that.
Otherwise, you are probably wasting your time. Success is from Allah.
Hajj Gibril
Talibaan & Idols
M H S wrote:
"We ask the Taliban government of Afghanistan to stop the destruction of
Buddhist statues and relics in their country. Their decision is un-Islamic
and very dangerous. It will give a very bad name to Islam and will create
hate against their people among the nations of the world. It may also
create intolerance and hate crimes against Muslims in Buddhist and other
non-Muslim countries.
Their decision is probably based on (1) the Prophetic example and (2) the
Prophetic injunction to ʿAli and others and therefore is not "unIslamic" in
absolute terms as the above seems to suggest. What he may have meant is that
it is unIslamic at this point in time because it is illegible to the world
other than as an act of inept barbarism.
Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) preached the
message of God to the people of Makkah, and when they accepted Islam he
then asked them to clean the Ka'bah from idols because it was originally
built for the worship of one God.
It seems Mr.Siddiqui needs to brush up on the Sira or at least watch the
movie "The Message" which is accurate enough to correct himself in the above
respect. The Prophet ﷺ certainly did not ask anyone but went ahead and
toppled, destroyed, erased, and removed the idols and images from outside
and inside the Kaʿba even when many of the Kuffar had not yet accepted
Islam, much less helped him eradicate them.
Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)
never told Muslims to destroy other people's places of worship or their
symbols.
Mr. Siddiqui should brush up on al-Bukhari and Muslim also. The Prophet
ﷺ gave explicit orders for the Muslims to raze any worshipped grave
and/or statues or other pagan symbols wherever they saw them. Do not confuse
the latter with churches and synagogues.
The statues in Afghanistan are its historic treasures. They are very
useful for Afghans and others to know about Afghanistan's past history and
its transformation into a Muslim community that recognized Tawhid and
worshiped only one God. Islam also teaches respect of other religions'
holy places and sacred symbols. Past generations and governments of
Afghanistan did not destroy these images and yet Islam flourished in
Afghanistan. In many other countries where Muslims are a majority, and
have ruled those lands for centuries, they did not destroy the religious
symbols of other people. Such images and symbols of the past still exist
in almost all Muslim countries.
This is by and large true and correct. The Salaf left those statues in place
in Afghanistan although they were more scrupulous and closer to the time of
sheer idolatry than we. Why pretend that we must do something that they and
all our pious predecessors did not consider such destruction necessary nor
even recommended? What is worse, the Afghans have huge problems and
priorities which they have not yet addressed, much less resolved.
The Taliban should not have any fear that their people will worship those
statues. Afghans have been very staunch believers in Tawhid for centuries
despite the presence of these statues. The Taliban should focus on the
Islamic education of their people and give them good examples of Islamic
kindness, mercy, respect of human rights and care for men, women and
children. These positive measures will strengthen the faith of the Afghan
people in Islam much more then the negative methods of suppression or
destruction."
I agree. On the matter of Tawhid there is no fear that such statues pose a
threat to the Religion in that part of the world, nor that the pyramids of
Luxor form a risk that pharaonic cults make a comeback in the land of Egypt.
I believe this and other recent examples show a real lack of wisdom and
compassion in this orphaned and widowed Muslim land upon
which trod the feet of the Companions of the Prophet ﷺ . Add to this
that the primary income of the Talibans is apparently the cultivation and
exportation of drug plants, which is completely illicit. No, this cannot
possibly be Islam. May Allah forgive us and change us for the better.
Hajj Gibril
and also:
And for this reason, Allah prohibited us in the Quran
from cursing false gods lest the pagans curse Allah.
When Mecca was conquered the Prophet ﷺ destroyed the idols of the Kaʿba
and sent out ʿAli (ra) and others to destroy any statue and grave used for
worship that they would find. Muslim troops would be sent out to that
effect. But at the same time Muslims invited non-Muslims into the fold of a
new order of previously unseen justice and civilization. Today, Muslims are
weak again. And what is being offered to non-Muslims, apparently, except
defiance and scorn?
Hajj Gibril
Regarding Holyness
In my opinion Muslims must not adress any human being as holy.
I wonder if we are allowed to call RasulAllah ﷺ holy, since he is also
"just" a human...
The Most Holy, Blessed, Sanctified, and Exalted Prophet ﷺ said that
this world is unholy except for four things: Dhikr of Allah, all that
relates to it, the ʿalim, and his student.
The Qur'an is holy. The Prophet ﷺ is holy. The friends of Allah Most
high are holy. Ibn al-Jawzi in the introduction to Sifat al-Safwa (his
dictionary of Awliya) said: "They [the Saints] are the purpose of creation."
Everything that is related to Allah Most High is holy and never perishes
while everything else is Batil.
Here are Ibn al-Jawzi's words:
"The Friends of Allah and the Righteous are the very purpose of all that
exists (al-awliya wa al-salihun hum al-maqsud min al-kawn), they are those
who learned and practiced with the reality of knowledge... Those who
practice what they know, do with little in the world, seek the next world,
remain ready to leave from one to the other with wakeful eyes and good
provision, as opposed to those renowned purely for their knowledge." Sifat
al-safwa (Beirut ed. 1989/1409) p. 13, 17.
Probably, the confusion comes from not understanding the words that we use
and tending to limit their use arbitrarily.
I vaguely remember an interesting etymological and comparative discussion on
the meaning of the English word "holy" ( Germanic?) in Martin Lings'
booklet - available in print - _Ancient Beliefs and Modern Superstitions_.
Then I saw the responses from Brothers Dhul-Qarnayn and Mahmud Khan for
which I am grateful.
The discussion brought to mind also, that it is a very small step from
saying he ﷺ is "just a human being" to
denying his Prophetship because the greatest proof of Prophetship is the
muʿjiza, meaning "overwhelming miracle". It was called muʿjiza because it
overwhelms human capacity (mental and physical) to deny, reject, or come up
with anything the like of it. Those who pretend to be not overwhelmed, i.e.
the liars who cover up the truth, use expressions like "he is just a human
being like us." This is a recurrent theme in the Qur'an, quoting the
disbelievers.
No sincere Muslim will say any such thing, except by mistake. Those
who believe rather use words like, "he is a special, unique human being
who receives Divine revelation and converses with heavenly beings. He is not
just a human being like us." Qadi ʿIyad in al-Shifa' said the truth is,
Prophets are human only in externals. Internally Allah Most High gives
them angelic hearts so that they can receive revelation.
At least we should say "The Prophets are human beings the like of whom crush
the imagination and boggle the minds of normal human beings." That would be
a truly scientific observation.
Hence Hassan ibn Thabit said:
"And Allah Most High extracted for him
"a name from His Name to emphasize his greatness:
"The Owner of the Throne is 'Glorified' (mahmudun),
"And here is 'the Most Praised one' (muhammad)."
The above in Arabic, by the way, is a RUQYA for facilitating child delivery
bi idhnillah. Its design is described in al-Zurqani's commentary on
al-Qastallani's Mawahib al-Laduniyya, chapter on the Names of the Prophet
ﷺ .
Similarly the Companions compared him ﷺ to a Light Illuminating
Darkness, to the Full Moon Without Eclipse, to the Peerless One from the
Hashemite House, to ... to.... but never did you hear any of them use such
a miserly expression as "he is just a human being."
Contact with awliya' is astronomical enough for us. Or even reading a book
by one of them such as al-Ibriz, overwhelms the mind enough to prevent us
from calling even them "just human beings". With Prophets, in truth we
must hang our heads in shame even lower but there is no more room. Our
stiff-necked brothers will say we are making sajda.
Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad ©
"Muhammad is the noblest of the Arabs and ʿAjam.
Muhammad is the best of those who trod the earth."
(Al-Busiri)
c/f Prophet's Knowledge of Unseen
This was a helpful post to which can be added the following precision by
Shaykh Ahmad Rida Khan - Allah sanctify his secret.
In al-Dawla al-Makkiyya he says that all agree that knowledge of the
creature is like a drop or less in the ocean of Divine knowledge. The
difference between the two parties is that Ahl al-Sunna consider the drop of
the Prophet's knowledge to be a huge ocean in comparison to the drop of
everybody else's knowledge.
So yes, the Prophet's knowledge has boundaries, but those boundaries cannot
be known by other human beings so they do not exist in relation to them. And
Allah knows best.
GF Haddad
Non-Hajj Sacrifice Requisites?
"Question: What must the Muslim avoid during these ten days if he wants to
offer a sacrifice?
The Sunnah indicates that the one who wants to offer a sacrifice must stop
cutting his hair and nails and removing anything from his skin, from the
beginning of the ten days until after he has offered his sacrifice,
because
the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "When you
see
the new moon of Dhu'l-Hijjah, if any one of you wants to offer a
sacrifice,
then he should stop cutting his hair and nails until he has offered his
sacrifice." According to another report he said: "He should not remove
(literally, touch) anything from his hair or skin." (reported by Muslim
with
four isnaads, 13/146)
There is a stronger, MUTAWATIR hadith in al-Bukhari, Muslim, al-Tirmidhi,
al-Nasa'i, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah, Ahmad, Malik, and al-Darimi that states:
From ʿA'isha:
"I used to prepare the garlands of the sacrificial animals of the Messenger
of Allah ﷺ then he would send his sacrificial animals to the Kaʿba; and
he refrained from none of all the things from which the muhrim refrains
until the slaughter of the sacrifices."
Another wording states: "He ﷺ would stay away from nothing and quit
nothing at that time."
"The Prophet's instruction here makes one thing obligatory and his
prohibition makes another haraam, according to the soundest opinion,
because
these commands and prohibitions are unconditional and unavoidable.
However,
if a person does any of these things deliberately, he must seek Allah's
forgiveness but is not required to offer (an extra) sacrifice in
expiation;
his sacrifice will be acceptable. ..."
The wisdom behind this prohibition of the one who wants to offer a
sacrifice
from cutting his hair etc., is so that he may resemble those in ihraam in
some aspects of the rituals performed, and so that he may draw closer to
Allah by offering the sacrifice. So he leaves his hair and nails alone
until the time when he has offered his sacrifice, in the hope that Allah
will save him in his entirety from the Fire. And Allah knows best..."
According to the vast majority of the authorities including Imams
al-Shafiʿi, Abu Hanifa, Malik, and their Schools, it is neither obligatory
to not touch the hair and nails nor haram to do so. The Sunna in fact
indicates two things and the resolution of this apparent contradiction is
that it is a *recommended sunna* and NOT obligatory to refrain from cutting
hair and nails until the sacrifice is offered.
As for the "soundest opinion" mentioned above is only according to the
Hanbali madhhab and this should have been mentioned in keeping with Islamic
criteria of faithful Nasiha! For the vast majority, however, including Imams
al-Shafiʿi, Abu Hanifa, Malik, and their Schools, hair and nails may be cut
like at any other time, although al-Shafiʿi considers it somewhat disliked
(makruh tanzihi) and so does Malik in one of the two positions reported from
him, while Abu Hanifa sees no dislike in it whatsoever. And Allah knows
best.
Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad ©
With regard to the report adduced by al-Buti in his fatwa
He says that copyright is sanctioned by Islam without a doubt. He quotes
Imam Ghazali, who reports Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal answering one who asked
him
finding a paper with ahadith or whatever else written on it, that has
fallen
from someone: can one copy it before returning it to its owner? Imam Ahmad
said: "No, but he should ask for permission, then write."
There are more than two hundred years between Imam al-Ghazzali and Imam
Ahmad - Allah have mercy on them and be well-pleased with them - and the
latter's position on this or any other topics surely needs not be taken from
outside his madhhab or other than those directly connected with him.
Secondly, assuming the veracity of the report, the meaning of the question
put to Imam Ahmad would be: Can we narrate the hadiths from the owner of the
paper as if he had given us ijaza? This method of narrating from the
original source a "found" (wujida) document is called ijaazat al-wijaada and
is mentioned among the types of isnaads in Manhaj al-Naqd fi ʿUlum al-Hadith
by our teacher Dr. Nur al-Din ʿItr. The Imams of hadiths are known to differ
on this particular issue. Imam Ahmad's position is that an ijaza to narrate
through wijaada is invalid - while many or most other authorities accept it
as valid. In fact, our fashion of saying, X (who perhaps died 200 years ago)
said in his book... is a type of wijaada transmission the validity of which
everybody takes for granted.
You can see that if this evidence were relevant it would actually draw
attention to the jumhur's position which is the opposite of what al-Buti is
attempting to support, except that the evidence, as I said, is not relevant
to copyright issues but to the validity of a specific technique of hadith or
other narration.
After that, Shaykh Buti concluded by refuting the opinion of those opposed
to copyright on the basis that Shariʿa dictates that "whoever owns
something, has the right to dispense of it in whatever way he likes". He
said that whoever buys a book, cannot reproduce it without permission of
the
author because he owns the book only as far as the *material* (as opposed
to
*intellectual*) part of the book is concerned, i.e. the papers and ink,
not
the information documented in the book.
There is undoubted consensus that the rule "whoever owns something has the
right to dispense of it in whatever way he likes" applies for true ownership
i.e. of tangible possessions over which there is no doubt that the right of
property extends and applies. The issue here, however, is a moral or
abstract type of property called "intellectual property," over which there
is disagreement in the Shariʿa, the other side arguing that there is no such
thing as intellectual ownership in Islam other than the common good of the
believers. This is the viewpoint of the Hanafi Shaykh Adib al-Kallas the
student of Sayyidi Abu al-Yusr Ibn ʿAbidin rahimahullah, as I heard it
luminously exposed last ʿEid in his home in Damascus although most of the
mustaftis around him were hoping to hear otherwise. But he was firm in his
answer: Once out there, it belongs to everyone - and there many proofs to
support this fatwa - especially if it is part of the knowledge of the
Shariʿa, which is the common property of the believers. WAllahu aʿlam.
Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad ©
Loan settlement against zakat dues
I HAVE LOANED QUITE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT TO ONE OF
MY FRIEND WHO IS PRESENTLY WORKING IN SAUDI ARABIA.
IT IS BEEN FOUR YEARS NOW & HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY
MONEY BACK. I DID ASK HIM COUPLE OF TIMES WITHOUT
PRESSURING, HOWEVER, I GOT NOTHING EXCEPT BLIND
PROMISES. THEREFORE I AM ASKING YOU THAT IS THERE ANY
PROVISION TO WRITE OFF THE OUTSTANDING MONEY AGAINST
ZAKAT PAYABLE AMOUNT? / WHAT ARE THE POSSIBILITIES OF
OFFSETTING THE LAONED AMOUNT? ALTHOUGH I KNOW IN
PRESENT CIRCUMSTANCES HE WOULD NOT BE ELIGIBLE FOR IT.
There is no provision for you to write off the outstanding money owed to
you against a zakat payable amount owed by you, because zakat is paid for
wealth that has been in one's possession for a year, and out of that same
wealth. At the very least, it must be paid out of wealth that is in one's
possession. Whereas the money owed to you is not in your possession nor has
it been for a number of years. Secondly, supposing your friend were eligible
for zakat remittance, nevertheless it is invalid to use a pardon of
his debt as a zakat remittance. For a zakat remittance to be valid, the
actual, tangible zakat must go from the muzakki's hand to that of the
beneficiary(ies). The only way this could be done in the present case would
be for him to remit you his debt, then for you to give it right back to him
as zakat of your other money. I heard this fatwa from Shaykh Adib Kallas
and Shaykh Wahbi al-Zuhayli in Damascus. And Allah knows best.
Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad ©
Tatoos
Tatoos are forbidden for both men and women except in certain war and
child-abduction situations when tribesmen feared the probability of losing
their sons and daughters to the enemy. If one had them before reverting to
Islam then there is no offence whatsoever and Allah knows best.
Following are the bases for the prohibition of tattoos in Islam.
The meaning of the verse [And obey the Prophet] (4:59, 5:92, etc.) is not
that the Prophet ﷺ is also a judge whose orders and prohibitions are law
issuing from him rather than Allah Most High. Allah Most High declared the
obligatoriness of obeying the Prophet ﷺ only in the sense that He made it
obligatory for us to obey him in whatever he ﷺ orders and makes
obligatory for us to do. It is Allah Most High Who makes it obligatory for
us both to obey and to do, except that the order for some of the acts are
formulated by the Prophet ﷺ. Such formulation is only a proof or sign of
Allah's own binding order. The meaning of [And obey the Prophet] is
therefore "Know that whatever the Prophet ﷺ commands or forbids you to
do, it is I Who commands and forbids you to do" as explicited in the verse
[And whatsoever the Messenger gives you, take it, and whatsoever he forbids,
abstain from it] (59:7). Without such order, the Prophet's ﷺ command
would not have been binding upon us. Illustrating this principle is the
following narration from ʿAlqama:
ʿAbd Allah ibn Masʿud ra said: "Allah Most High curses women who tatoo
others, women who have tatoo applied to them, women who have their eyebrows
clipped, and women artificially tooth-gapped, all for cosmetic purposes,
changing Allah's fashioning." News of this reached a woman of Banu Asad
called Umm Yaʿqub. She came to him saying: "O Abu ʿAbd al-Rahman! I heard
that you cursed such-and-such." He replied: "Why should I not curse those
whom Allah's Messenger ﷺ cursed?" She said: "Lo! I certainly read all
that is between the two covers [of the volume of Qur'an], and I did not find
this." He replied: "Had you read it you would have certainly found it. Did
you not read [And whatsoever the Messenger gives you, take it, and
whatsoever he forbids, abstain from it] (59:7)?" She said yes. He said:
"Allah's Messenger ﷺ forbade it."
Narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim in their Sahihs, Abu Dawud and Ibn Majah
in their Sunan, Ahmad and al-Darimi in their Musnads, al-Bayhaqi in al-Sunan
al-Kubra (7:312) and Shuʿab al-Iman (6:170), Ibn Hibban in his Sahih
(12:314), ʿAbd al-Razzaq in his Musannaf (3:145 #5103), al-Humaydi in his
Musnad (1:53), and Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr in Jamiʿ Bayan al-ʿIlm (2:1181-1182
#2336-2337). Al-Dhahabi narrated it in al-Kaba'ir [the Enormities] and he
said: "It is agreed upon [by Bukhari and Muslim]."
Ibn Hajar al-ʿAsqalani said in Fath al-bari (10:378) in commentary of
this hadith:
Nawawi said: "An exception from the prohibition of plucking away facial
hair is when a woman has a beard, mustache, or hair growing between her
lower lip and chin, in which cases it is not unlawful for her to remove
it, but rather is commendable (mustahabb)," the permissibility being on
condition that her husband knows of it and gives his permission, though
it is prohibited if he does not, because of the deception it entails.
End of excerpt.
Mufti Lajpuri in his Fatawa Rahimiyya declared it required (wajib) for her
to pluck such hair from her face.
There is a kind of temporary metaphorical "tattoo" that is desirable for
women: to dye the hands and feet with henna. Of course women also use it for
the face and hair, and men for the beard. In some countries of the Borneo
peninsula men also apply it on their hands and feet on the occasion of
weddings, although it is actually forbidden in their [Shafiʿi] madhhab.
However, it would be wrong to call all this tattoo since that word lexically
means an _indelible_ marking of the skin.
A man came to the Prophet, Peace be upon him, with his hands dyed with
saffron. This is a removable, temporary skin ornament, yet the Prophet ﷺ
did
not even return his salam. All he said to him was: Go wash this away. He
went and came back, and there was a little bit left. Again the Prophet ﷺ
did not address him except to tell him to wash it away more thoroughly. So
this is a lesson for men that decorating/altering the skin in such manner is
not allowed.
Another factor which makes it prohibited is that tatooing is the fashion of
unbelievers, and the Prophet ﷺ said: "Whoever looks [i.e. wilfully] like
a people is one of them." And Allah knows best.
Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad ©
Studying Islam in Yemen
s-Salamu ʿalaykum:
In his beautiful page on "Studying Islam in Yemen,"
(xL =broken link 2020-10-02: http://www.abuhanifah.8m.com/Yemen.html), brother S E says, "It is more important that the shaykh love the student than that the student love the shaykh."
This sentence drew my attention because it obviously came out from personal experience and so must be very true to the one who experienced its meaning.
However, Sidi ʿAbd al-ʿAziz al-Dabbagh in al-Ibriz stated that in reality, the very reverse is true. Meaning, it is absolutely vital for the student to love the Shaykh and far more important than vice-versa.
The reason for this is that the love of the student for his Shaykh is an eye and ear-opener, it brings out the best in the student and prepares in the best way to learn from the Shaykh. The Shaykh always loves his students, he loves those Allah has placed in his care more than a mother cherishes her infant. However, as much as a Shaykh loves his student, or a father his son, if on the receiving end there are only deaf ears and a rush to misguidance, then on the giving end there is nothing that can be done. I.e. nothing other than ask Allah Most High to guide them beyond the usual causes and effects. Look how much the beloved Messenger of Allah ﷺ loved his uncles and supplicated Allah for their guidance.
The only relation of senior to junior in which the rule does not apply that the junior MUST love the senior to benefit, Sidi ʿAbd al-ʿAziz al-Dabbagh said (qaddas Allahu sirrah), is the relation of Allah to the servant. In the latter relation, if Allah decides to love that servant, then it does not matter at all where or who that servant is: he will be raised instantly and "despite everything" including himself........
Hajj Gibril
GF Haddad ©
Copyright in Islam
Like you said, there is a difference of opinion among the Ulema about
copyright laws, so they cannot be declared haram. Furthermore, the Shariʿa
dictates that the law of the land - yes, ostensibly man-made laws - be
obeyed as long as this can be done without disobedience to Allah and the
Prophet. And with regard to copyright laws, there is no problem in obeying
them in most cases that can be imagined but Allah knows best.
Hajj Gibril

|