Rights of children

What are the rights of wife, children on the man.

Praise be to Allaah.

1 – The wife’s rights:

These have been discussed in detail in the answer to question no. 10680

2 – The children’s rights.

Allaah has given children rights over their parents just as the parents have rights over their children.

It was narrated that Ibn ‘Umar said: “Allaah has called them abraar (righteous) because they honoured (barru) their fathers and children. Just as your father has rights over you, so too your child has rights over you.

Al-Adab al-Mufrad, 94.


The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, according to a hadeeth narrated by ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar,

“… and your child has rights over you.”

[Muslim, 1159].

The child’s rights over their children include some that come even before the child is born, for example:

1 – Choosing a righteous wife to be a righteous mother.

It was narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“A woman may be married for four reasons: her wealth, her lineage, her beauty and her religious commitment. Marry the one who is religiously committed, may your hands be rubbed with dust (i.e., may you prosper).”

[Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 4802; Muslim, 1466].

Shaykh ‘Abd al-Ghani al-Dahlawi said: Choose from among women those who are religiously committed and righteous, and who are of good descent, for if a woman is of illegitimate descent, this bad characteristic may be passed to her children. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“The adulterer — fornicator marries not but an adulteress — fornicatress or a Mushrikah; and the adulteress –fornicatress, none marries her except an adulterer — fornicater or a Mushrik”

[al-Noor 24:3]

Rather Islam recommends compatibility for the purpose of harmony and to avoid a person being shamed if he marries into a family that is not compatible.

Sharh Sunan Ibn Maajah, 1/141

Rights after the child is born:

1 – It is Sunnah to do tahneek for the child when he is born:

It was narrated that Anas ibn Maalik (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The son of Abu Talhah was sick. Abu Talhah went out and the child died, and when Abu Talhah returned he said, “What happened to my son?” Umm Sulaym (his wife) said, ‘He is quieter than he was.” Then she brought him his dinner and he ate, then he had marital relations with her, and when he finished she said, “They buried the child.” The following morning, Abu Talhah went to the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and told him what had happened. He said, “Did you have marital relations last night?” He said, “Yes.” He said, “O Allaah, bless them.” She later gave birth to a boy. Abu Talhah said to me, “Keep him until I bring him to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).” He brought him to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and I sent some dates with him. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) took him and said, “Is there anything with him?” They said, “Yes, some dates.” The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) took some and chewed it, then he took some from his mouth and put it in the child’s mouth (tahneek), and named him ‘Abd-Allaah.

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 5153; Muslim, 2144

Al-Nawawi said:

The scholars are agreed that it is mustahabb to do tahneek with dates for the child when he is born; if that is not possible then to use some similar kind of sweet. The dates should be chewed until they become soft enough to be swallowed, then the child’s mouth should be opened and a little of the dates put in his mouth.

Sharh al-Nawawi ‘ala Muslim, 14/122-123

2 – The child should be given a good name, such as ‘Abd-Allaah or ‘Abd al-Rahmaan.

It was narrated from Naafi’ that Ibn ‘Umar said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“The most beloved of your names to Allaah are ‘Abd-Allaah and ‘Abd al-Rahmaan.”

[Narrated by Muslim, 2132]

It is mustahabb to give the child a Prophet’s name:

It was narrated that Anas ibn Maalik said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“A child was born to me last night and I called him by the name of my father Ibraaheem.”

[Narrated by Muslim, 2315]

It is mustahabb to name the child on the seventh day, but there is nothing wrong with naming him on the day of his birth, because of the hadeeth quoted above.

It was narrated from Samurah ibn Jundub that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“Every child is in pledge for his ‘aqeeqah which should be slaughtered for him on the seventh day, his head should be shaved and he should be named."

Narrated by Abu Dawood, 2838; classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, 4541

Ibn al-Qayyim said:

The purpose of naming is to define the thing named, because if there is something whose name is unknown it is difficult to refer to it. So it is permissible to name him (the child) on the day he is born, and it is permissible to delay the naming until the third day, or until the day of the ‘aqeeqah, or before or after that. The matter is broad in scope.”

Tuhfat al-Mawlood, p. 111

3 – It is Sunnah to shave the child’s head on the seventh day and to give the weight of the hair in silver in charity.

It was narrated that ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) slaughtered a sheep as the ‘aqeeqah for al-Hasan, and he said,

“O Faatimah, shave his head and give the weight of his hair in silver in charity.” So she weighed it and its weight was a dirham or part of a dirham."

Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 1519; classed as hasan by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi, 1226.

4 – It is mustahabb for the father to do the ‘aqeeqah, as stated in the hadeeth quoted above, “Every child is in pledge for his ‘aqeeqah.”

Two sheep should be sacrificed for a boy and one for a girl.

It was narrated from ‘Aa’ishah that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) commanded them (to sacrifice) two similar sheep for a boy and one for a girl.

Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 1513; Saheeh al-Tirmidhi, 1221; Abu Dawood, 2834; al-Nasaa’i, 4212; Ibn Maajah, 3163

5 – Circumcision

It was narrated that Abu Hurayrah said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“The fitrah is five things, or five things are part of the fitrah: circumcision, shaving the pubic hairs, plucking the armpit hairs, clipping the nails and trimming the moustache.”

[Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 5550; Muslim, 257]

The child’s rights with regard to education and upbringing:

It was narrated from ‘Abd-Allaah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“Each of you is a shepherd and is responsible for his flock. The ruler who is in charge of people is a shepherd and is responsible for them. The man is the shepherd of his household and is responsible for them. The woman is the shepherd of her husband’s house and child and is responsible for them. The slave is the shepherd of his master’s wealth and is responsible for it. Each of you is a shepherd and each of you is responsible for his flock.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2416; Muslim, 1829.

So parents must take care of teaching their children the duties of Islam and other virtues that are recommended in sharee’ah, and worldly matters that they need in order to live a decent life in this world.

The man should start by teaching them the most important things, then the next most important. So he starts by teaching them correct ‘aqeedah, free from shirk and bid’ah. Then he teaches them the acts of worship, especially prayer. Then he teaches them and trains them in good manners and characteristics, and everything that is good.

Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) when Luqmaan said to his son when he was advising him: “O my son! Join not in worship others with Allaah. Verily, joining others in worship with Allaah is a great Zulm (wrong) indeed”

[Luqmaan 31:13]

It was narrated from ‘Abd al-Malik ibn al-Rabee’ ibn Sabrah from his father that his grandfather said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“Teach the child to pray when he is seven years old, and smack him if he does not pray when he is ten.”

Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 407; Abu Dawood, 494. Classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, 4025

It was narrated that al-Rubayyi’ bint Mu’awwidh said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sent word on the morning of Ashoora’ to the areas where the Ansaar lived (on the outskirts of Madeenah), saying:

"Whoever did not fast this morning, let him not eat for the rest of the day, and whoever started fasting this morning, let him complete his fast. She said: We used to observe this fast after that, and we used to make our children fast and make them toys of wool; if one of them cried for food we would give him that toy until it was time to break the fast."

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1859; Muslim, 1136

It was narrated that al-Saa’ib ibn Yazeed said: I was taken for Hajj with the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) when I was seven years old.

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1759

Training in good manners and characteristics:

Every father and mother should train their children in praiseworthy characteristics and good manners, whether towards Allaah, His Prophet the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), towards their Qur’aan and ummah, and with everyone whom they know and who has rights over them. They should not behave badly with those whom they mix with, their neighbours or their friends.

Al-Nawawi said:

The father must discipline his child and teach him what he needs to know of religious duties. This teaching is obligatory upon the father and all those in charge of children before the child reaches the age of adolescence. This was stated by al-Shaafa’i and his companions. Al-Shaafa’i and his companions said: This teaching is also obligatory upon the mother, if there is no father, because it is part of the child’s upbringing and they have a share of that and the wages for this teaching may be taken from the child’s own wealth. If the child has no wealth then the one who is obliged to spend on him may spend on his education, because it is one of the things that he needs. And Allaah knows best.

Sharh al-Nawawi ‘ala Saheeh Muslim, 8/44

The father should bring them up with good manners in all things, eating, drinking, dressing, sleeping, going out of the house, entering the house, riding in vehicles, etc, and in all their affairs. He should instill in them the attributes of a good man, such as love of sacrifice, putting others first, helping others, chivalry and generosity. He should keep them away from evil characteristics such as cowardice, stinginess, lack of chivalry, lack of ambition, etc.

Al-Manaawi said:

“Just as your parents have rights over you, so too your child has rights over you, rather many rights, such as teaching them the individual obligations, teaching them Islamic manners, giving them gifts equally, whether that is a gift, a waqf, or other gift. If preference is shown with no reason, that is regarded as invalid by some of the scholars and as makrooh by others.

Fayd al-Qadeer, 2/574

He must also protect his sons and daughters from everything that may bring them close to the Fire. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“O you who believe! Ward off yourselves and your families against a Fire (Hell) whose fuel is men and stones, over which are (appointed) angels stern (and) severe, who disobey not, (from executing) the Commands they receive from Allaah, but do that which they are commanded.”

[al-Tahreem 66:6]

al-Qurtubi said:

al-Hasan commented on this verse by saying, Command them and forbid them. One of the scholars said: (The phrase) Ward off (or protect) yourselves includes children, because the child is part of him, as it says in the verse (interpretation of the meaning): “…nor on yourselves, if you eat from your houses…” [al-Noor 24:61], where the various relatives are not mentioned individually. So he should teach him what is halaal and what is haraam, and make him avoid sin, and teach him other rulings.

Tafseer al-Qurtubi, 18/194-195.

Spending:

This is one of the father’s obligations towards his children; it is not permissible for him to fall short in that or to neglect this matter, rather he is obliged to do this duty in the fullest sense.

It was narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“It is sufficient sin for a man if he neglects those on whom he is obliged to spend.”

Narrated by Abu Dawood, 1692; classed as sahan by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, 4481.

Another of the greatest rights is to give the child a good upbringing and take good care of him or her – especially in the case of girls. The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) encouraged this righteous deed.

It was narrated that ‘Aa’ishah the wife of the Prophet (S) said: A woman came to me with two daughters and asked me for food, and I could not find anything except one date which I gave to her. She shared it between her two daughters, then she got up and went out. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) came in and I told him what had happened. He said:

“Whoever is in charge of any of these girls and treats them well, they will be a shield for him against the Fire.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 5649; Muslim, 2629

Another important matter which is one of the rights of children to which attention must be paid, is treating children fairly. This right was referred to by the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in the saheeh hadeeth:

“Fear Allaah and treat your children fairly.”

(Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 2447; Muslim, 1623). It is not permissible to show preference to females over males, just as it is not permissible to show preference to males over females. If the father makes this mistake and shows preference to some of his children over others, and does not treat them fairly, this will lead to many evils, such as:

The harm that befalls the father himself, for the children whom he denies or deprives will grow up to hate him. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) referred to this in the hadeeth narrated by Muslim (1623) when he said to the father of al-Nu’maan, “Would you like them to honour you equally?” He said, “Yes.” In other words, if you want them all to honour you equally, then be fair in giving gifts to them.

Another evil consequence is the children hating one another, and stoking the flames of hatred and enmity between them.

And Allaah knows best.

Source : Islam Q&A

More to read :

• Ban TV to protect children's health, top psychologist tells EU politicians
• Background TV 'can harm children's speech'
• Why breakfast TV is now toast for my children
• Children who watch more than two hours of TV a day 'are twice as likely to develop asthma'
• The 15 ways in which too much TV wrecks your child's health
• Four hours of TV a day raises heart risk (even if you’re fit)
• Too much TV IS bad for children: The heart attack risk facing young couch potatoes
• Young children believe TV images are real
• Watching grown-up TV 'makes children more likely to have underage sex'
• Children who get more than two hours of TV a day 'can suffer psychological damage'
• Screen addicts: Children spend more time in front of a computer or television every day than they spend exercising every week

Ruling on cursing specific people

What is the ruling on cursing (and not just insulting) the Jews and Christians or other groups, whether living or dead? May Allaah reward you with good.

Praise be to Allaah.

The author of Lisaan al-‘Arab [a famous Arabic-language dictionary – Translator] said: La’n (curse) means being cast out far from goodness, and it was said that it means being cast away far from Allaah, and from people.

Cursing happens in two ways:

Cursing the kuffaar and sin in general terms, such as saying “May Allaah curse the Jews and Christians,” or “May Allaah curse the kaafirs, evildoers and wrongdoers,” or “May Allaah curse the wine-drinker and thief.” This kind of curse is permissible and there is nothing wrong with it. Ibn Muflih said in al-Adaab al-Shar’iyyah, 1/203: “It is permissible to curse the kuffaar in general.”

The second is where the curse is applied to a specific person, whether he is a kaafir or an evildoer, such as saying, “May Allaah curse So and so,” mentioning him by name. This may fall into one of two categories:

1 – Where there is a text which states that he is cursed, such as Iblees, or where there is a text which states that he died as a kaafir, such as Pharaoh, Abu Lahab and Abu Jahl. Cursing such persons is permitted.

Ibn Muflih said in al-Adaab al-Shar’iyyah, 1/214: “It is permissible to curse those concerning whom there is a text stating that they are cursed, but there is no sin involved if one does not do this.”

2 – Cursing a particular kaafir or evildoer concerning whom there is no text stating that they are cursed – such as wine-drinkers, those who offer sacrifices to anything other than Allaah, the one who curses his parents, those who introduce innovations in religion, and so on.

“The scholars differed as to whether it is permissible to curse these people, and there are three points of view:

(i) That it is not permissible under any circumstances

(ii) That it is permissible in the case of a kaafir but not of a (Muslim) evildoer

(iii) That it is permissible in all cases.”

Al-Adaab al_Shar’iyyah by Ibn Muflih, 1/303

Those who say that it is not permissible quoted a number of texts as evidence, including the following:

1 – The report narrated by al-Bukhaari (4070) from ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar, that he heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), when he raised his head from rukoo’ in the final rak’ah of Fajr prayer and said:

“O Allaah, curse So and so, and So and so, and So and so,” after he had said, “Sami’a Allaahu li man hamdih, Rabbana wa laka’l-hamd.”

Then Allaah revealed the words (interpretation of the meaning):

“Not for you (O Muhammad, but for Allaah) is the decision; whether He turns in mercy to (pardons) them or punishes them; verily, they are the Zaalimoon (polytheists, disobedients and wrongdoers)”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:128]

2 – The report narrated by al-Bukhaari (6780) from ‘Umar, that there was a man at the time of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) whose name was ‘Abd-Allaah, but his nickname was Himaar (donkey), and he used to make the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) laugh. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had had him flogged for drinking, then he was brought one day and he commanded that he be flogged, and a man who was there said, “O Allaah, curse him, how often he is brought [for this reason]!” But the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“Do not curse him, for by Allaah what I know about him is that he loves Allaah and His Messenger.”

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 6/511.

It is permissible to curse all those whom Allaah and His Messenger have cursed, but as for cursing specific people, if it is known that the person died in kufr, then it is permissible to curse him. But with regard to a specific [Muslim] evildoer, we should not curse him, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade cursing ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Himaar who used to drink wine, even though he had cursed the wine-drinkers in general; however cursing a specific person if he is an evildoer or promoter of bid’ah is a point of dispute among the scholars.

And Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said in al-Qawl al-Mufeed, 1/226.

The difference between cursing a specific person and cursing those who commit sin in general is that the former (cursing a specific person) is not allowed, and the latter (cursing the people who commit sin in general) is allowed. So if you see an innovator, you do not say, ‘May Allaah curse you,’ rather say, ‘May the curse of Allaah be upon those who introduce innovations,’ in general terms. The evidence for that is the fact that when the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) cursed some people among the mushrikeen and followers of jaahiliyyah and said: “O Allaah, curse So and so, and So and so, and So and so,” he was told not to do that when Allaah said (interpretation of the meaning):

“Not for you (O Muhammad, but for Allaah) is the decision; whether He turns in mercy to (pardons) them or punishes them; verily, they are the Zaalimoon (polytheists, disobedients and wrongdoers)”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:128]

This was narrated by al-Bukhaari.

And Allaah knows best.

Source : Islam Q&A

Related articles:

• Is it a sin to insult one’s Muslim brother?

Role of parents towards their children in a society that does not help in raising children properly

A very common problem seen in youth in western countries is that their parents allow them to indulge in some form of haram in the hope that that will stop them from committing worse haram. An example of this is that parents will say that they allow their children to indulge in music in the hope that that will stop them from going out with bad people or leaving their home all together. Parents are afraid that if they enforce the law of Allah in their homes, that their children will leave. What is Islam’s position on this sort of compromise? Some parents also say that they only have the duty to tell their children something is haram, and then their children have to choose for themselves because they are already young adults (i.e. 13 -18 yrs old and unmarried, living at home). Don’t the parents have to forbid haram by all means, or do they just say that is haram and then leave them be? To what extent do parents have to go to forbid their children from haram? Parents also believe that once their children reach the age of puberty they are no longer responsible for their sins or actions, and so say they will have no sin if they advise their children something is haram and then leave them. Is this true? Or do parents always have the responsibility of forbidding their children from haram, and will they be responsible if they see their children doing haram and just leave them after advising them?

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

The success or failure of the Muslim in raising his children depends on a variety of factors, which undoubtedly includes the environment in which they live, which plays a major role in the success or failure of that upbringing.

Please see the answer to question no. 52893.

Secondly:

The parents have to understand that Allaah has given them responsibility over their children, and they have to fulfil the trust as Allaah has enjoined in the Qur’aan. The Sunnah also confirms this command in many saheeh ahaadeeth. The texts of the Revelation also warn the one who does not look after his flock sincerely and who neglects the trust with which Allaah has entrusted him.

It was narrated that Ma’qil ibn Yasaar al-Muzani said: I heard the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say:

“There is no person whom Allaah puts in charge of others, and when he dies he is insincere to his subjects, but Allaah will forbid Paradise to him.”

According to another report:

“… and he is insincere towards them, but he will not smell the fragrance of Paradise.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari (6731) and Muslim (142).

See the answer to question no. 20064.

Thirdly:

Allaah has enjoined those who are in charge of children to raise them from when they are very small to obey Allaah and love Islam. Even though they are not accountable because they have not reached puberty, one should not wait until puberty to teach them, guide them and tell them to obey Allaah, because in most cases at that age (i.e. puberty) they will not respond unless they have been brought up in this manner and have learned it from their families since a young age. Hence parents are enjoined to teach young children how to pray from the age of seven and to smack them if they do not pray when they are ten. The Sahaabah used to make their young children fast, so as to get them used to loving Islam and its rituals, so that it would be easy for them to follow its commands and keep away from the things it forbids when they grow up.

It was narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:

“Teach your children to pray when they are seven years old, and smack them if they do not do so when they are ten, and separate them in their beds.”

[Abu Dawood (495), classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood.]

It was narrated that al-Rubayyi’ bint Mu’awwidh ibn ‘Afra’ said: On the morning of ‘Ashoora’, the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sent word to the villages of the Ansaar around Madeenah, saying:

“Whoever started the day fasting, let him complete his fast, and whoever started the day not fasting, let him complete the rest of the day (without food).”

After that, we used to fast on this day, and we would make our children fast too, even the little ones in sha Allaah. We would make them toys out of wool, and if one of them cried for food, we would give (that toy) to him until it was time to break the fast.

Narrated by al-Bukhaari (1960) and Muslim (1136).

Just as they raise them to do acts of worship, they should also prevent them from doing haraam things. If the child does an act of worship, the reward will be for him and for the one who taught him and encouraged him to do it. As for doing acts of disobedience or sins, the minor does not sin, rather the one who enabled him to do it and left the door open for him to do it and did not close it, is sinning. As for the one who tells him to do it, he is like the one who did it.

Hence it is not something extreme at all if a Muslim raises his children to obey Allaah and prevents them from doing haraam things, such as males wearing gold or silk, or females wearing male clothing, or lying, stealing, swearing and other sins. Similarly, it is not something extreme if a Muslim raises his daughter to be modest and chaste and not to mix, because if a person gets used to something when he is young, there is the fear that he may persist in it.

Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

Even though the child is not accountable, his guardian is, and it is not permissible for him to enable him to do something haraam, for he will get used to it and it will be difficult to wean him from it.

Tuhfat al-Mawdood bi Ahkaam al-Mawlood (p. 162).

And he (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

The one who neglects to teach his child that which will benefit him and leaves him with no care has done a very bad deed. The corruption of most children is due to their parents and their neglect of (their children), because they neglect to teach them the obligations and Sunnahs of Islam. So they neglected them when they were small, and (the children) turned out unable to benefit themselves or to benefit their parents when they are old.

Tuhfat al-Mawdood, p. 229

The scholars of the Standing Committee were asked:

With regard to my small children, should I teach them the etiquette of Islam and make the young girls wear Islamic clothes, or this regarded as extremism? If my doing this is correct, what is the evidence for it from the Qur’aan and Sunnah?

They replied:

What you have mentioned about making girls wear loose and concealing clothing and making them get used to that from a young age is not extremism, rather you are doing the right thing in giving them an Islamic upbringing.

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ghadyaan.

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (25/285, 286).

In his book Majmoo’ah As’ilah Tuhimm al-Usrah al-Muslimah, Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

The scholars say that it is haraam to dress a child in clothes that it is haraam for an adult to wear. Clothing on which there are images is haraam for an adult to wear, so it is also haraam for a child to wear it.

What the Muslims should do is to boycott such clothes and shoes so that those who want to spread evil and corruption will not be able to reach us by these means. If they are boycotted they will never find a way to make them reach this land.

After that, he was asked:

Is it permissible for male children to wear things that are only for females, such as gold and silk, etc, and vice versa?

He replied:

This is to be understood from the first answer. I said that the scholars say that it is haraam to dress a child in clothes that it is haraam for an adult to wear. Based on this, it is haraam to dress male children in that which is only for females, and vice versa.

After that, he was asked:

Does this include isbaal or making clothes come below the ankles for male children?

He replied:

Yes, it includes that. End quote.

And Allaah knows best.

Source : Islam Q&A

Related articles :

• Her son has committed an immoral action; will she be brought to account for his actions?

The reason why the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married ‘Aa’ishah despite the age difference

A Christian colleague of mine asked me why the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) when she was nine years old and he was nearly sixty, and was he intimate with her at that age or what? In fact I do not know how to respond to that.

Praise be to Allaah.

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) after he married Sawdah bint Zam’ah (may Allaah be pleased with her). She – ‘Aa’ishah – was the only virgin whom he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married. And he consummated the marriage with her when she was nine years old.

Among her virtues was the fact that the Revelation did not descend when he under one cover with any of his wives other than her. She was one of the dearest of all people to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and news of her innocence was revealed from above the seven heavens. She was one of the most knowledgeable of his wives, and one of the most knowledgeable women of the ummah as a whole. The senior companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to refer to her opinion and consult her.

With regard to the story of her marriage, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had grieved over the death of the Mother of the Believers Khadeejah, who had supported him and stood by his side, and he called the year in which she died The Year of Sorrow. Then he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married Sawdah, who was an older woman and was not very beautiful; rather he married her to console her after her husband had died and she stayed among mushrik people. Four years later the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) married ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her), and he was over fifty. Perhaps the reasons for the marriage were as follows:

1 – He saw a dream about marrying her. It is proven in al-Bukhaari from the hadeeth of ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to her:

“You were shown to me twice in a dream. I saw that you were wrapped in a piece of silk, and it was said, ‘This is your wife.’ I uncovered her and saw that it was you. I said, ‘If this is from Allaah then it will come to pass.’”

[Narrated by al-Bukhaari, no. 3682]. As to whether this is a prophetic vision as it appears to be, or a regular dream that may be subject to interpretation, there was a difference of opinion among the scholars, as mentioned by al-Haafiz in Fath al-Baari, 9/181.

2 – The characteristics of intelligence and smartness that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had noticed in ‘Aa’ishah even as a small child, so he wanted to marry her so that she would be more able than others to transmit reports of what he did and said. In fact, as stated above, she was a reference point for the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) with regard to their affairs and rulings.

3 – The love of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) for her father Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him), and the persecution that Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him) had suffered for the sake of the call of truth, which he bore with patience. He was the strongest of people in faith and the most sincere in certain faith, after the Prophets.

It may be noted that among his wives were those who were young and old, the daughter of his sworn enemy, the daughter of his closest friend. One of them occupied herself with raising orphans, another distinguished herself from others by fasting and praying qiyaam a great deal… They represented all kinds of people, through whom the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was able to set out a way for the Muslims showing how to deal properly with all kinds of people. [See al-Seerah al-Nabawiyyah fi Daw’ al-Masaadir al-Asliyyah, p. 711].

With regard to the issue of her being young and your being confused about that, you should note that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) grew up in a hot country, the Arabian Peninsula. Usually in hot countries adolescence comes early and people marry early. This is how the people of Arabia were until recently. Moreover, women vary greatly in their development and their physical readiness for marriage.

If you think – may Allaah guide you – that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not marry any virgin other than ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her), and that all his other wives had been previously married, this will refute the notion spread by many hostile sources, that the basic motive behind the Prophet’s marriages was physical desire and enjoyment of women, because if that was his intention he would have chosen only those who were virgins and beautiful etc.

Such slanders against the Prophet of Mercy (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) by kaafirs and others of their ilk, are indicative of their inability to find fault with the law and religion that he brought from Allaah, so they try to find ways to criticize Islam with regard to issues that are not related to sharee’ah.

And Allaah is the Source of strength. May Allaah send blessings and peace upon our Prophet Muhammad and his family and companions.

For more information see Zaad al-Ma’aad, 1/106.

Source : Islam Q&A

Related articles:

• The Prophet’s dream about marrying ‘Aa’ishah
• Rather concerned about the age of Aisha (R.A) at the time of her marriage to Muhammad (S.A.W.)
• What can we do to prove to non-muslim that Rasoolul-allah is correct? He did not marry Hazrat Ayesha (as) when she was still young
• Why Prophet Muhammad Married Aisha When She Was Only 9?

I am confused about whether the qubda lenght of the beard is sunnah or wajib

I am confused about whether the qubda lenght of the beard is sunnah or wajib. Everybody is on the world wide web is saying that it is wajib to have at qudha lenght.

But then I read this:

Shaykh al-Hadith ‘Allama Ghulam Rasul Sa’idi al-Hanafi (hafizahu Llah) has a thorough analysis of the subject in his Sharh Sahih Muslim (urdu), where he quotes from many of the great Hanafi authorities, like Ibn Hummam (Fath al-Qadir), Badr al-Din al-‘Ayni (al-Binaya), Zayd al-Din Ibn Najim (Bahr al-Ra’iq), al-Shurunbulali (Hashiya al-Durar wa al-ghurar), Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari (al-Mirqat), al-Haskafi (Durr al-Mukhtar), Ibn ‘Abidin (Radd al-Muhtar), al-Tahtawi (Hashiya ‘ala Maraqi al-Falah) – Ramatu Llahi ‘alayhim ajma’in – all stating that the qubda is ‘sunna’.

Most of the quotes go in the line of ‘wa huwa ay al-qadr al-masnun fi al-lihya al-qubda’, or ‘… bi qadr al-masnun wa huwa al-qubda..’, or the like.

After quoting all these (and more) authorities he (‘Allama Sa’idi) comments that from Imam Abu Hanifa to Imam Ibn ‘Abidin, the Hanafi fuqaha have held that the handful (qubda) is sunna, but that one of the later ‘ulama – Shaykh ‘Abd al-Haqq Muhaddith Dehlawi (RahimahuLlah) – in expressing his own opinion said that one handful is wajib, and that the fuqaha in their statements that it is sunna meant that it is proven by sunna but is in fact wajib, and that some later scholars followed him in this, but he notes that the Shaykh didn’t provide any dalil on this reading of the ‘ibarat.

Then he goes on to comment on the Shaykhs opinion and in a very respectful but firm manner refutes it, concluding that according to the majority of the Ahnaf the beard itself is wajib and the handful (qubda) length is sunna.

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful

Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatuh

Please refer to the following answer on the wujub of qabdah length of the beard.

And Allah knows best

Wassalaamu `alaykum

Ml. Asif Umar,
Student Darul Iftaa

Checked and Approved by:

Mufti Ebrahim Desai
Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In'aamiyyah

Proof of Wujoob

There are various Ahaadith of Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] in which the keeping and lengthening of the beard have been ordered. We will just mention a few that prove the above claim.

1) Imaam Bukhari (Rahimahullaah) reports on the authority of Imaam Naafi' [ra] who narrates from Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) that Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) said,

"Oppose the Mushrikeen (polytheists); lengthen the beards and trim the moustaches."

Imaam Naafi' (RA) further states, 'And ibn Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) during Hajj or Umrah used to hold on to his beard with his fist and cut off whatever was in excess of that.' (Bukhari vol.2 pg.875; Kitaab-ul-Libaas no.5892)

Note: This Hadith has also been narrated by Sayyiduna Abu Hurayra [Radhiallaahu anhu] and he is also reported to have trimmed his beard upto one fist.

The verdict of the growing of the beard being Waajib (obligatory) is deduced from this Hadith. That is because any explicit command of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) will be regarded as Waajib, if there is no apparent, clear reason/proof which states that that particular command is for Istihbaab (preference). This is an established fact in Usool-ul-Fiqh (principles of jurisprudence). Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] has commanded the Ummah to lengthen the beards. Allah Ta’ala has mentioned in the noble Qur’aan, ‘Those who disobey his (Rasulullah – Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) should beware of a trial or painful punishment that will afflict them.’ (Surah Noor 63)

Allamah Nawawi (RA) has explained that this Hadith has been reported with various wordings:

• The word, ‘Waffiroo’ is mentioned in Sahih Bukhari (Hadith5892)
• In another narration of Bukhari. The words ‘Ufoo’ is mentioned (Sahih Bukhari Hadith5893)
• The word ‘Arkhoo’ is mentioned in Sahih Muslim (Hadith602)
• The word ‘Awfoo’ is mentioned in Sahih Bukhari (Hadith5892) and Sahih Muslim (Hadith601).

All these words imply the same meaning and that is to lengthen and to increase the growth of the beard. (Fathul Bari vol.10 pg.429, 431; Sharh al-Nawawi alaa Saheeh Muslim vol.2 pg.143)

Hafiz ibn Jareer al-Tabari (ra) has stated that some Ulama have totally disliked that one trims his beard at all, while others have permitted trimming upto a fist length. (Fathul Bari vol.10 pg.430)

2) When the two messengers of Kisraa (Khusru – the Persian King) came to Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam], they had long moustaches and shaved beards. Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam turned his face away in disgust and asked them,

"Who commanded you to do this (despicable deed)?"

They replied, ‘Our Lord, (i.e. King)’ At this, Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] mentioned,

"But my Lord has commanded me to lengthen my beard and shorten my moustache."

[Tabaqaat ibn Sa’ad vol.1 pg.147; Taareekh Tabari vol.2 pg.267-266; Bidaaya wan Nihaaya]

3) In this narration, Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] has stated that to lengthen the beard is infact the command of Allah Ta’ala Himself.

Furthermore, the Wujoob is further emphasized by the fact that Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) did practice on this in his entire life. Know well that Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) did not trim his beard in his life. In fact, the beard of Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] was dense and almost covered his blessed chest. (Shamaail Tirmidhi Hadith8; Dalaail al-Nubuwwah of Imaam Bayhaqi vol.1 pg.235)

Actions of the Sahaaba [radhiallaahu anhum]

The narrator (Ibn Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) himself trimmed his beard upto a fist's length, this implies that the Wujoob of keeping a beard is up to a fist length only (this will be explained shortly).

Furthermore, this (trimming upto a fist length) has also been reported from Sayyiduna Abu Hurayra (Radhiallaahu Anhu) and other Taabi'een. (Tamheed of ibn Abdul-Barr al-Muntaqaa and Fathul Baari vol.10 pg.430). Bear in mind that Sayyiduna Abu Hurayra [radhiallaahu anhu] has also narrated a Hadith wherein we are commanded to lengthen the beards. (Sahih Muslim Hadith 602)

Moreover, for the benefit of your knowledge, the sayings and actions of the Sahaaba (Radhiallaahu Anhum) is a Hujjah (proof). This is also an established principle in Usool-ul-Fiqh.

A Misconception

Many individuals who fail to understand the above, argue that it is Waajib to keep a beard, but there is no mention of any specific length in the Hadith. Hence, if one has a bit of hair on his face – irrespective of the length – it would be permissible, because this is also called a beard!

They also argue that to keep a beard upto a fist’s length is the act of a Sahaabi [- Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Umar - radhiallaahu anhu – and Sayyiduna Abu Hurayra – Radhiallaahu anhu] and it is not the command of Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam]. Hence, the one who chooses not to do so will not be contravening any command of Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam], so why is such emphasis being put on the length of one fist?

This – unfortunately – is a result of a lack of understanding of the actual wording of the Hadith. Firstly, in the Hadith we have quoted, Rasulullah [sallallahu alayhi wasallam] has commanded us to lengthen the beard and not just to ‘keep’ a beard. The difference between the two is quite clear. If one just ‘keeps’ a shortened beard, he will not be fulfilling the command of Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam].

Therefore, the one who intentionally keeps a trimmed beard will not be fulfilling the command of lengthening the beard. The lengthening is Waajib, not just having any sort of a beard.

Secondly, the Hadith – as is clear – is general and does not specify any length of the beard. The words, ‘u’ful lluhaa / waffiroo-lluhaa’ in the Hadith commands us to lengthen the beards, which will (literally) mean, ‘it is Waajib to let the beard grow’ upto whatever length it reaches. If we did not have the narration of Naafi' that Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Umar (Radhiallaahu Anhu) did trim his beard, then this would have been the case.

However, the narrator himself (Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Umar and Sayyiduna Abu Hurayra – radhiallaahu anhuma) as well as other Taabi’een (Radhiallaahu Anhum) did trim their beards upto one fist’s length, the Ulama have deduced that this means that the Wujoob (obligation) of lengthening is only upto a fist’s length. Neither can we say that it is not permissible to trim it at all – resulting in the accusation of the Sahaaba (Radhiallaahu Anhum) of contradicting the explicit command of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) and especially the narrator, (Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Umar and sayyiduna Abu Hurayra - Radhiallaahu Anhuma). Nor can one claim the permissibility of trimming it upto less than a fist’s length, for there is no proof for this in Shari’ah.

Hence, if a person has to trim his beard up to a fist's length it would be permissible and if he does so up to shorter than a fist's length, he will be going against an act which is Waajib and this is not permissible, and if he chooses not to trim it at all, this will also be permissible.

The practice of the Sahaabi [radhiallaahu anhu] here is used for 'permissibility' of cutting upto a fist's length, because – being the narrator – this is what he understood to be the intended meaning of Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam]. In other words, the Sahaabi [radhiallaahu anhu] had understood that the command of Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] of lengthening the beard only applies upto a fist’s length and not more. That is why they (the sahaabah concerned – Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Umar and Sayyiduna Abu Hurayra - radhiallaahu anhuma) used to trim what was in excess of one fist. It is not Waajib to follow them in doing so. What is Waajib in this situation is to let it grow, and the action of the Sahaabi is used only to explain that Waajib and restrict going against that.

Severity of the Sin

One should ponder over the narration that we have quoted concerning the two messengers of the Persian King. How Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam] turned his blessed face away from them in disgust. Remember, these were Kaafirs (disbelievers). Imagine if Rasulullah [sallallahu alayhi wasallam] turns his face away from a Muslim on the day of Qiyaamat because he did not have a proper beard! Imagine the plight of that person, Allah forbid.

Furthermore, as for the act of shaving, by doing so, one is actually imitating the appearance of women. Rasulullah [Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam] has cursed those males who aspire to resemble the females and vice versa. (Sahih Bukhari)

After all, what is it that stops us from at least adopting the outer features of Rasulullah [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam]. Why is it so difficult to make our faces resemble in some way the Mubaarak and blessed face of our beloved Nabi [sallallaahu alayhi wasallam]. The translation of an Arabic couplet is as follows:

‘And resemble them if you cannot be identical. Verily the resemblance of the noble ones is also a form of success.’

Lastly, we hope that this article eradicates all misconceptions regarding the length of the beard. In fact, this would be sufficient for a sincere reader. May Almighty Allah grant each and every Ummati (follower) of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) the ability to keep a beard that fulfils the requirements of the Shari’ah, Aameen.

and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best

Mawlana Muhammad ibn Mawlana Haroon Abassommar
FACULTY OF SPECIALTY IN HADITH SCIENCES

Checked & Approved by: MUFTI EBRAHIM DESAI (FATWA DEPT.) - with comments

May Allah Ta’ala accept the noble effort and research presented by Moulana Muhammad Saheb, Aameen. We urge each and every Ummati to read the article carefully and practise upon it. The beard is regarded as an integral part of Islam, and a great Sunnah of Rasulullah [Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam], all the Anbiyaa [alayhimus salaam] and the Sulahaa. Adverse conditions should not deter us from fulfilling the obligation of lengthening our beards and fulfilling this great Sunnah of Rasulullah [Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam]

Source : Askimam.org

Ibn Mubaarak and the Barkat of Halaal Food

Most Muslims must have heard the name of the illustrious Saint, Hadhrat Abdullah Ibn Mubaarak (rahmatullah alayh). His father, Mubaarak, was the slave of the Qaadhi of the City of Ray. The piety of his slave had made an indelible impression o­n the Qaadhi who was a very wealthy and prominent member of the community. Inspite of high-ranking and elite members of the community proposing marriage for his daughter, the Qaadhi married his daughter to his slave, Mubaarak.

The Qaadhi Saheb too was a pious man, hence he made the decision to have his daughter married to his slave. Taqwa was the criterion for his decision. After the bride was delivered to her husband Mubaarak, the now freed slave, he did not consummate the marriage for forty days. Both he and his wife remained in Ibaadat for this period. Meanwhile Mubaarak ensured that he fed his wife with halaal tayyib food for forty days.
After three days had passed without consummation, his wife complained to her husband. Mubaarak replied: "Undoubtedly, your father is a pious man. However, he is a Qaadhi. I have doubts o­n the absolute purity of his wealth and what he had fed you. I desire that before consummation of the marriage, any mushtabah food which you may have consumed at your father’s home be worked out of your system so that Allah Ta’ala blesses us with pious offspring." When the pious lady heard this explanation she understood, was overjoyed and she joined her husband in the 40 day I’tikaaf. Thereafter the illustrious Abdullah Ibn Mubaarak, the Imaam of the Ummah of the time was conceived.
This is the effect of halaal tayyib food. It is precisely for this reason that Allah Ta’ala emphasizes to His Ambiya the importance of consuming halaal tayyib food. In such food there is Noor which brightens the Rooh of the Mu’min. o­n the other hand, in haraam and mushtabah food there is nothing but zulmat (spiritual darkness) which utterly ruins the spiritual fibre of the Mu’min. Taufeeq for A’maal-e-Saalihah is negated despite the realization of the importance of such deeds and despite the intellectual perception of the necessity of righteous deeds. But, the weakened Imaan tarnished and damaged by haraam and mushtabah food cannot generate sufficient energy to fight and thwart the commands of the nafs to be spiritually lethargic and perpetually incline towards evil. Muslims should realize that consumption of haraam and mushtabah is not a trivial issue. It is a fatal poison for Imaan.
The Majlis Vol 15 No 11
Source : themajlis.net

In Islam, why dogs are considered impure animal

In Islam, why dogs are considered impure animal?

All creatures are the creation of Allah Ta'ala and do deserve the recognition of being a creation of the Almighty. As much as Muslims detest even the sight of pigs - it is the creation of Allah Ta'ala - and because Allah has placed life into it, we cannot inflict pain nor torture the pig. Similarly Allah Ta'ala created the dog from among His creation. This does not mean that we should love the dog. It is perhaps the indoctrination of the Western culture that 'The dog is Man's best Friend'.

The theory that 'dogs are very dependent on Human affection' is a myth - again culture and custom has helped to develop this unnatural behaviour. Allah Ta'ala the Creator of this Universe - having created the dog would surely have known that the dog requires Human affection and love to exist in this world. Rasulullah (Sallallaaahu Álayhi Wasallam) would have advised us, Muslims, to keep dogs as pets. On the contrary, we are instructed not to keep dogs as pets and 'love' them as exemplified by the non-Muslims. Remember our life is structured and bound by the Shariah i.e. The Noble Qur'an and the beautiful example of Rasulullah (Sallallaaahu 'Alayhi Wasallam).

Consider these Ahaadith: Hadhrat Abu Talha (Radhiyallaahu Ánhu) reports that Rasulullah (Sallallaaahu 'Alayhi Wasallam) said,

"Angels do not enter a house wherein there is a dog or an animate picture."

[al-Bukhaari 2986]. Hadhrat Ibn Abbas (Radhiyallaahu 'Anhuma) reports from Hadhrat Maimoona (Radhiyallaahu 'Anha) that once Rasulullah (Sallallaaahu 'Alayhi Wasallam) became sad; and said that Jibra'eel (Álayhis Salaam) promised to meet him at night but did not turn up.

"By Allah what has kept him back," said the Prophet (Sallallaaahu 'Alayhi Wasallam). Then he realised a puppy was under his bed. He ordered that the puppy be removed and the area be sprinkled with water. In the afternoon when Jibra'eel ('Alayhi Salaam) came, Rasulullah (Sallallaaahu 'Alayhi Wasallam) enquired as to the delay. Jibra'eel ('Alayhi Salaam) said that we, the group of Angels do not enter a house wherein there is a dog or pictures.

[Muslim 3928]

In the light of these Ahaadith and other narrations it is not permissible to keep dogs as pets. The household is deprived of the Mercy of Allah Taãla. However, Jurists have stated that it is permissible to keep a dog for security purposes, farming and hunting. The saliva of a dog is Najis (impure). If it touches the clothes or body, that portion also becomes impure and must be washed. and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best.

Mufti Muhammad Kadwa
FATWA DEPT.

CHECKED AND APPROVED: Mufti Ebrahim Desai

Source : Askimam.org

Related articles :

• I am having problem cause they (housemate) have a dog here and it keeps touchin me.
• We kept a dog in our house for safety purporse only, it stays outside of the house only
• There are no dogs currently present, but they have been there in the past
• Washing after being licked by a dog
• Will I remain Clean If a dog passing by touches me

Joining Shoulders and Feet in Prayer Rows

By Shaykh Abu Asim Badrul Islam

There has been a growing tendency in recent times within some quarters of the Muslim Ummah to attempt to understand the hadiths of the beloved Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) without the proper prerequisite knowledge of fiqh and its principles. Movements have emerged, a fundamental part of whose methodology it is to take hadiths in their apparent and literal meanings, without attempting to understand the actual purpose of any hadith. The issue of how those in congregational prayer should stand is no exception. They have looked at the chapter in Sahih al-Bukhari entitled Bab ilsaqi ‘l-mankibi bi ‘l-mankibi wa ‘l-qadami bi ‘l-qadami fi ‘l-Saff (Chapter regarding the joining of shoulders to shoulders, and feet to feet in prayer rows) and the athar of Sayyiduna Nu’man ibn Bashir and that of Sayyiduna Anas (may Allah be pleased with them) (hadith: 725) and without even attempting to use their intellect to explore the various interpretations to which the wording is open, they seek to enforce on the Muslims the physical joining of shoulders and feet with one another when standing in the prayer row. The ‘ulama of the madhhabs (that is, the four established schools of Islamic law) have always maintained that this is not how these athar are to be understood.

Imam ‘Allamah Sayyid Anwar Shah Kashmiri (may Allah mercy him) has discussed this issue at some length in his commentary of Sahih al-Bukhari, Fayd al-Bari (2:301-302). He explains how it would be very difficult, if not impossible, for people to physically join their shoulders and feet when standing in the prayer row. Those who seek the physical joining of feet and shoulders argue their case pointing at the letter ‘ba’ used in the abovementioned athar. The rule in grammar that ‘al-ba li ‘l-ilsaq’ (the letter ba is used to denote physical contact) is not to be understood in this context as a full physical contact or ilsaq. For, if this were the case, how would they explain the sentence Marartu bi Zayd? Does this mean that the subject (fa’il) of the verb passed by, or with, Zayd whilst physically sticking to him?

When any verse, hadith or athar is ambiguous or open to interpretation, we must look at the practice of the Companions (Sahabah) and the Salaf (those illustrious Muslims who succeeded the Sahabah). It would appear that neither the Companions nor the Salaf were in the habit of physically joining their shoulders and feet in the way that some Muslims so painstakingly do today. Imam Anwar Shah Kashmiri states that this interpretation has not been adopted by any of the madhhabs but by the abovementioned Muslims only.

The intention of the athar, with its ambiguous wording, is that the shoulders and feet should be straight and parallel, that there should be no gap for Shaytan between any two people standing in a row, and that the rows should be straight. It does not mean shoulders and feet should be in physical contact. This interpretation is also given by Imam ‘Allamah Badr al-Din al-’Ayni in his monumental ‘Umdat al-Qari (commentary of Sahih al-Bukhari - 5:377) and Imam Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani in his unparalleled Fath al-Bari (2:611).

Another explanation given by Imam Kashmiri is that the specific wording could have been not of the noble Companions to whom they are attributed, but of the narrators. This practice is well known in the science of hadith.

In his Lami’ al-Darari ‘ala Jami’ al-Bukhari (1:279), the great shaykh Imam Mawlana Muhammad Zakariyya Kandhlawi has mentioned some very logical arguments supporting the above interpretations. He writes that physically joining shoulders and feet would only be possible when the shoulders of all those standing in the row are at the same height and their feet are of the same length. Moreover, to do this, all the people standing in the row would have to spend some time before saying the takbir and entering their prayer to get their shoulders and feet in the right place. Clearly, this would be contrary to khushu’, the desired calmness and the spirit of Salah.

After providing similar explanations as the ones mentioned above, ‘Allamah Mawlana Zafar Ahmad ‘Uthmani in his Imdad al-Ahkam (1:290) states: “Even if [for argument's sake] it is accepted that physical contact of ankles is required by the Shari’ah, the question arises as to whether this is so in every part (rukn) of Salah or just some [parts]. If it is said that it is required in every part, one must ask how this is possible in the sitting posture. If, on the other hand, it is said that physical contact is only required in some parts of Salah, the question would follow as to what evidence has specified these parts of Salah while others are excluded? If it said that the physical contact of ankles is difficult in the sitting posture and therefore it is exempted in such a posture, then we will say the same regarding the standing posture; those standing in the prayer row find this very difficult. One may try doing this and see for themselves…

“The words of the Companion Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) have been reported in Fath al-Bari from Ma’mar: ‘Had I done this with any of them today, he would have fled like a wild ass’ (2:612). This clearly indicates that after the demise of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) Sayyiduna Anas did not join his ankles with people standing next to him in prayer. This is proof that the joining of ankles is not a desired Sunnah act. For, had it been so, none of the Companions would have forsaken it for the fear of others disliking it. People would also dislike a practice only when it is not normally done in Salah. If a practice is normally done in Salah, then there is no reason for people to dislike it. Thus, if the joining of ankles were to be a desired Sunnah, it would have been a general practice of all of the Companions, and the Followers (Tabi’un) would have taken this as a Sunnah element of Salah. Hence, there would have been no reason for anyone to dislike the joining of ankles. Just as it can be understood from the above statement of Sayyiduna Anas that he would avoid joining his ankles with those of others standing next to him fearing they would dislike it, it can be inferred that this practice [of joining ankles] was not the general practice of the Companions or the Followers. This is evidence of its not being a desired Sunnah. This is the reason why [to the best of my knowledge] there is no command to join ankles in the hadith of the beloved Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace).”

Bibliography

Ahmad ibn ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani, Fath al-Bari bi Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, 17 vols (Riyadh: Dar Tayyibah, 2005).

Badr al-Din Abu Muhammad Mahmud ibn Ahmad al-’Ayni, ‘Umdat al-Qari Sharh Sahih al-Bukhari, 25 volumes (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah, 2001).

Muhammad Zakariyya Kandhlawi, Lami’ al-Darari ‘ala Jami’ al-Bukhari, 3 volumes (Karachi: H M Sa’id, no date).

Sayyid Anwar Shah Kashmiri, Fayd al-Bari ‘ala Sahih al-Bukhari, 6 volumes (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-’Ilmiyyah, 2005).



Zafar Ahmad ‘Uthmani, Imdad al-Ahkam, 4 volumes (Karachi: Maktabah Dar al-’Ulum Karachi, 1421 AH).

Source : Deoband.org

Organ Donation

Is it permissible for a Muslim to consent for the removal of parts of his body while he is alive, for transplantation for the benefit of close relatives?

 

Answer: This is not permissible under any circumstances. Organs may not be taken from even a dead body. Man is not the owner of his body. He may therefore not give away any parts of his body. If he was the owner of his body, suicide would have been permissible. The Shariah also prohibits the derivation of any use whatsoever from parts of the human body.

Can organs of non-Muslims be used in Muslims?

Answer: This is not permissible under any circumstances.

When is a person pronounced dead in Islam? Organs like the heart and kidneys are useful if removed while they are receiving adequate blood perfusion. It is for this reason that when a person is pronounced "brain dead" with only a machine keeping him alive, the organs are removed. Thereafter the machine is switched off. What is the Islamic viewpoint of this concept and its application?

Answer: Firstly, it is not permissible to remove any organs from the human body, whether the person is alive or dead. Secondly, the concept of brain dead is rejected by Islam. It is a concept created to deceive and soothe the minds of people to enable doctors to slaughter a living person for grabbing his organs. As long as the slightest blood perfusion takes place, the person is alive, i.e. the Rooh is still in his body. The machine will `sustain' life only as long as the time of Maut has not arrived. The Qur'aan categorically declares:

"No person will die but with the permission of Allah at the appointed time."

It is not the machine which ensures the perfusion of the blood and it is not the machine which keeps the person alive. If a machine can keep a person alive, it will mean that the answer for Maut has been found. Man can then escape death and be kept perpetually alive. Malakul Maut can then be `defeated'. The perfusion of blood and remaining alive are the effects of the presence of the Rooh (Soul) which is the life-giving substance. After the departure of the Rooh, nothing can ever keep the blood flowing and keep a person alive.

Source : TheMajlis.net

Ruling on organ donation

In Islam is it allowed to donate your organs to people that need it, when the die?.

Praise be to Allaah.
In the answer to question no. 49711 we stated that the (scholarly) view that it is permissible to donate organs is most likely to be the correct view, so long as the donation will not lead to the death of the donor.

Here we will quote resolutions of the Islamic Fiqh Council of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which support the fatwa mentioned above. These resolutions were issued after lengthy discussions among a number of fuqaha’, doctors and specialists. We will quote them here in full because of the medical and shar’i information they contain.

In statement no. 26 concerning one person benefiting from the body parts of another, living or dead, it says:

The Islamic Fiqh Council which convened in the fourth conference in Jeddah in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia from 18-23 Safar 1408 AH/6-11 February 1988 CE, after studying fiqhi and medical research submitted to the Council concerning the issue of one person benefiting from the body parts of another, living or dead, has determined the following:

In the light of the discussions that highlighted the fact that this issue is something that come about as the result of by scientific and medical advances, with clear positive results that in many cases are accompanied by psychological and social harm if it is practised without shar’i guidelines and controls that protect human dignity and also seek to achieve the aims of sharee’ah which tries to achieve all that is good and in the best interests of individuals and societies and promotes cooperation, compassion and selflessness,

And after highlighting the main points of this topic whereby it may be discussed and categorized, the following was determined:

With regard to definition:

Firstly: What is meant here by ‘organ’ is any part of a person, be it tissues, cells, blood and so on, such as the cornea, whether it is still attached or has been separated.

Secondly: The use or benefit that is under discussion is a benefit that is dictated by necessity in order to keep the beneficiary alive or to keep some essential or basic function of his body working, such as his sight and so on, provided that the beneficiary is one whose life is protected by sharee’ah.

Thirdly: These kinds of benefit or use are divided into three categories:

(i) Transplant of organ from a living person

(ii) Transplant of organ from a dead person

(iii) Transplant from a foetus

(i) The first category, which is transplant of an organ from a living person, includes the following:

- Transplant of an organ from one place in the body to another place in the same body, such as transplanting skin, cartilage, bone, veins, blood and so on.

- Transplant of an organ from the body of a living person to the body of another person.

Organs in this case may be divided into those on which life depends and those on which life does not depend. With regard to those on which life depends, they may singular organs, of which there is only one in the body, or there may be more than one. The former includes organs such as the heart and liver, and the latter includes organs such as the kidneys and lungs.

As for those on which life does not depend, there are some that control basic functions in the body and some that do not. There are some that are renewed automatically, such as blood, and some that are not; there are some that have an effect on offspring and on the genetic makeup and personality of the individual, such as testicles, ovaries and cells of the nervous system, and some that do not have any such effect.

(ii) Transplant of an organ from a dead person

It may be noted that death falls into two categories:

1- Brain death in which all bodily functions cease completely and cannot be brought back medically.

2- Where the heart and breathing cease completely and cannot be brought back medically.

Both of these categories were discussed in the resolution passed by the Council in its third session.

(iii) Transplant from a foetus. Use or benefits in this case fall into three categories:

1- Where the foetus is aborted spontaneously (miscarriage)

2- Where the foetus is aborted deliberately by medical or criminal means

3- Where fertilization is done outside the uterus.

With regard to shar’i rulings:

-1- It is permissible to transplant an organ from one place in a person’s body to another place in the same body, but attention must be paid to ensuring that the expected benefits outweigh any possible harm; that is subject to the condition that this is done to replace a lost organ or body part, or to restore its regular shape or function, or to correct a fault or remove a deformity that is causing the person psychological or physical harm.

-2- It is permissible to transplant an organ from the body of one person to another if it is an organ that renews itself automatically, such as blood and skin. But attention must be paid to the condition that the donor be fully qualified and fulfil the shar’i conditions.

-3- It is permissible to make use of organs that have been taken from the body of another person due to sickness, such as taking the cornea from the eye of a person whose eye has been removed due to sickness.

-4- It is haraam to transplant an organ on which life depends, such as transplanting the heart from a living person to another person.

-5- It is haraam to transplant an organ from a living person when its removal may cause an essential function to cease, even though his life does not depend on it, such as taking the corneas of both eyes. But if he will still have partial function after removing it, then the matter is subject to further discussion as we shall see below in section 8.

-6- It is permissible to transplant an organ from a dead person to a living person whose life or basic essential functions depend on that organ, subject to the condition that permission be given by the deceased before his death, or by his heirs after his death, or by the authorities in charge of the Muslims if the identity of the deceased is unknown or he has no heirs.

-7- It should be noted that the agreement on the permissibility of organ transplants explained above is subject to the condition that this is not done by selling the organs, because it is not permissible to subject human organs to sale under any circumstances.

As for the beneficiary spending money in order to obtain the required organ where necessary or offering compensation or honouring the donor, this is subject to ijtihaad and further discussion.

-8- All cases having to do with this topic are subject to further research and discussion, and they should be studied and discussed in a future session in the light of medical data and shar’i rulings. And Allaah knows best.

Quoted from Resolutions of the Islamic Fiqh Council.

For more information please see the answer to question no. 2159

And Allaah knows best.

Source : Islam Q&A

Folding One’s Clothes for Salah

By Shaykh Tameem Ahmadi

Question
A person saw an Islamic program in which it was mentioned that the folding of trousers or shalwar is not permitted due to a hadith stating that the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) prohibited the folding of clothes. It was also mentioned in the program that folding trousers from either the bottom or top is not permitted. This is the first time I have heard this. Can the ‘ulama shed some light on this issue?

Answer
In regards to folding one’s clothes while praying and the issue of isbal (wearing one’s garment below the ankles), Shaykh al-Hadith Mawlana Muhammad Zakariyya Kandhlawi (may Allah have mercy on him) writes in Lami’ al-Darari[1] (vol. 1, pg. 327-28):

“Qadi ‘Iyad considers the tying back of the hair and folding of the clothes undesirable for the person performing salah, this is regardless of whether he does it outside or inside salah, and he mentions that the scholars are unanimous that this does not invalidate the prayer.

“‘Allama ‘Ayni writes in Al-Talwih: ‘The ‘ulama are in consensus that it is makruh (disliked) to pray with the clothes/sleeves folded up, or hair tied up in a bundle, or tucked into the turban. But this is only makruh tanzihi (against the preferred manner; undesirable), so if he does pray in this manner, he has done a wrong, but his prayer will be regarded valid.’

“Mawlana Gangohi says: ‘A person should not pray in such a condition (as mentioned above) because the desired method is that a person prays in the most presentable manner as possible. And the manner in which a person ties his hair back, etc. is against the normal habit of the Arabs; rather their usual habit is that they leave the hair open.’

“Qastallani says: ‘He should not hold his garments with both hands while going into ruku‘ (bowing) and sujud (prostration) because the hair and clothes prostrate along with the worshipper. Also, if a person holds back his hair and clothes from touching the ground, he resembles the arrogant people (who regard it below their dignity to let their clothes touch the ground, even when in worship).’”

From these statements we have understood the following points: [1] To pray with the hair tied back and the clothes folded does not invalidate the salah; [2] to pray in such a manner is makruh tanzihi (against etiquette); [3] One should perform the salah in the most presentable manner; [4] the clothes and hair also prostrate before Allah Most High, thus they should not be held back from doing so; [5] it resembles the action of arrogant and proud people.

Whatever the case may be, all of these statements indicate that to perform salah with folded clothes is against the preferred mode of worship.

As for praying in a condition where the garments are dragging on the ground or are below the ankles, Imam Abu Dawud narrates in his Sunan from Abu Hurayrah (Allah be pleased with him) that there was a person praying in a condition in which his lower garment was hanging below his ankles. The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) commanded him to perform wudu’ (ablution) twice and then the Companions inquired from him, ‘O Messenger of Allah! Why did you command him to perform wudu’ and then remained silent?’ The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) replied: ‘He was praying whilst wearing his lower garment below his ankles, and verily Allah Most High does not accept the salah of a person who hangs his izar (lower garment) below his ankles.’

The following points are to be understood from this hadith:
[1] To hang the garments below the ankles is a major sin; it is for this reason the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) commanded the person to repeat his prayer and ablution as penalization (zajr) and reprimand (tawbikh) as is mentioned by ‘Allamah Tibi and Ibn Qayyim Jawziyya in his Tahdhib al-Sunan.

[2] The hadith is clear and explicit in the fact that the impermissibility of isbal is not conditional to pride and arrogance alone. Rather there are other narrations which clearly state that isbal in itself is a sin and an indication of pride and arrogance is its perpetrator. This is mentioned in the hadith, ‘Beware of hanging the garment below the ankles for indeed, this action in itself is an action of pride and arrogance…’ Narrated by Abu Dawud and al-Tirmidhi from Abu Juray Jabir ibn Sulaym (Allah be pleased with him).

[3] The gravity of the sin of isbal, in which the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and give him peace) commanded the worshiper to repeat his prayer and wudu’, cannot be compared to folding up of the garments which the fuqaha (Islamic jurists) have clearly mentioned to be against etiquette. Rather it will be necessary to fold those garments which are hanging below one’s ankles to abstain from a major sin despite the fact that one might be doing what is against etiquette. For example, if one’s prayer cap falls off the head in prayer, the Islamic jurists have stated that one should put it back on the head with one hand if possible. This action (despite being little) is better than praying bareheaded which is more undesirable than the minimal movement in salah (‘amal qalil).

[4] Isbal (whether done with or without pride) is also against the normal mode of dress of the believers; rather the sign of a believer is that he wears his garment to the middle of the shin, and if not to the middle then he is allowed up to above the ankles. This means that when a person is engaging in isbal he is simultaneously involved in sadl as well, which is wearing the garment in a mode it is not normally to be worn in. He is thus combining many undesirable acts in one.

In regards to this issue our Akabir ‘Ulama have chosen the stance that corresponds to the riwaya (hadith narration with sanad) and diraya (meaning and commentary of hadiths). For further reading, refer to Imdad al-Fatawa (vol. 4, p. 121) and Shaykh al-Hadith Mawlana Zakariyya’s discussion on this in Awjaz al-Masalik.

And Allah Most High knows best.

1. “Written in Arabic, a collection of the unique remarks and observations on Sahih al-Bukhari presented by Shaykh Rashid Ahmad Gangohi . These life-long acquired wisdoms were recorded by his student Shaykh Yahya Kandhlawi (Shaykh Zakariyya’s father) during their lessons. Shaykh Zakariyya edited, arranged, and commented on his father’s compilation, clarifying the text and adding a comprehensive introduction at the beginning.” (White Thread Press, “Shaykh al-Hadith Muhammad Zakariyya Kandhlawi”, http://whitethreadpress.com/authors/shaykh_zakariyya.htm)

Source : Deoband.org

Response From al-Ghazali to Abu Bakr Ibn al-’Arabi al-Qurtubi concerning Taqleed

Epistle of Imam al-Ghazali to the faqih Abu Bakr Ibn al-‘Arabi al-Qurtubi concerning the obligation for the ‘alim who is not a mujtahid to follow the madhhab of his Imam under all circumstances

By Maulvi Muhammad Yusuf

Al-Ghazali explained the obligation of following an imam even if he “assumes “the proof of his Imam is “weak” succinctly in a letter to Abu Bakr Ibn al-‘Arabi (d. 543), the Maliki faqih and muhaddith, who asked him if it were permissible for one who had a degree of knowledge to make ijtihaad and go against his imam if he thought his position was weak and the position of another imam was strong.

That precious letter, which is only a couple of pages long, has been reported in its entirety in Miyar al-Mu’rab, an important work of Maliki fatwa compiled by Ahmad ibn Yahya al-Wansharisi (d. 914). He told him quite frankly in that letter that we have no business doing ijtihaad since we do have the qualifications; then since we do not have the qualifications, there can be nothing to prompt us to make ijtihaad but vain desire (hawa’). Here follows the text of the matter:

The Qadi Abu Bakr Ibn al-‘Arabi {d. 543, Fez] wrote to the Shaikh, Hujjatu ‘l-Islam, Abu Hamid al-Ghazali [d. 505] concerning [the case of] a person who was following [Imam] Malik and there is an issue (mas’alah) in which Malik holds it to be haram (prohibited); whereas, [Imam] al-Shafi’i says it is halal (lawful). May [that person follow whichever one of them he likes in this particular issue and in general may] one follow whichever imam he pleases in certain particular issues [of fiqh]?:

The Question of Qadi Abu Bakr Ibn al-‘Arabi:

What is the meaning of the ordinary people[1] following those imams rather than some of the Companions [of the Prophet (on whom be grace and glory from Allah)]? Is it permitted for a person who is following [Imam] al-Shafi’i to follow a Companion since the Companions are less likely to make any mistakes; that is confirmed by the saying of the Prophet (on whom be grace and glory from Allah): “Follow among those after me, Abu Bakr and ‘Umar. O Allah, cause the truth to be with ‘Umar.”[2]

Furthermore, is it necessary for the ordinary person [that is, the non-mujtahid] to conform to the opinions of the imams [the Arabic term here is muqalladun which literally means “those who are followed”] even if he has a something of an ability for ijtihaad? If so, what is the proof for that?

If we permitted the people to follow a teacher and a faqih in the matter of basic religious beliefs (usul al-din) without them [that is, the common people] knowing the proofs [for what they believe][3], then what is the difference between them and those whose statement Allah reported [in His words], “We found our fathers following a certain religion [that is, idolatry] and we are following in their steps (43:22)”; reproaching them for blindly following their fathers. Elsewhere, in His Book, Allah reproached the unbelievers saying “[Do they disbelieve in Our Messenger and claim he is mad], and do they not look at the kingdom of the sky and the earth and what Allah has created [that they might reflect on the omnipotence of Allah and realize that what He says to them is true]”? (7:185) Then in the hadith [about the interrogation in the grave][4] and the punishment in the grave, it is reported that the hypocrite says [when asked by the two angels Munkar and Nakir: “Who is your Lord? What is your religion? Who is your prophet?]: “I do not know really, I heard the people saying something, so I said it too”; whereas, the believer will reply: “My Lord is Allah, and my religion is Islam, [and my prophet is Muhammad].” [Does not this hadith indicate that blind following is not sufficient?]

Is it permitted for an ‘alim [he means her the ‘alim who is a mujtahid] to follow another ‘alim who is like him, or of a higher degree than him [keep in mind that there are degrees of ijtihaad] in some question [without knowing his proof] even though he is able to verify the truth by himself by making ijtihaad in the same way that it is permissible for him to follow another ‘alim concerning the direction of the Ka’ba (the qiblah), and concerning whether or not some available water is pure and suitable for purification [for the performance of ablution, or the washing of impurity from one’s body or clothing or place of prayer] although he was able to verify that himself? Please explain all these matters to us in detail. May Allah reward you.

The Answer of Abu Hamid al-Ghazali:

It is not permitted for an ‘alim who is a muqallid [that is, he is not a mujtahid of whatever degree] to chose what is the best position [on an issue] according to his own opinion, nor that which he feels is most appropriate; rather, he must follow the opinion of his imam whose madhhab he believes to be more correct than that of others.[7] Then, he must follow that imam in every single issue of fiqh; thus it is not permissible for a Maliki [for example] to change and follow the madhhab of al-Shafi’i [on a particular issue]; however, if he feels that Shafi’s madhhab is more sound, then it is incumbent on him to follow him in every issue. However, if that is not the case [that is, he does not feel that the madhhab of al-Shafi’i, [for example,] is more sound, there is no call to oppose his own imam [and follow al-Shafi’i] except vain desire (al-hawa’).

Also, it is not permitted for the mujtahid to oppose the opinion that is the result of his ijtihaad, just as it is not permitted for the follower (muqallid) to oppose [the mujtahid] whom he is following; there is no difference [between the two; that is, between the mujtahid and the muqallid in this matter since each is bound to follow a mujtahid] except that the muqallid seeks the best [mujtahid] imam, while the mujtahid seeks the best of the two [or more] opinions.

Every Muslim has to follow what he feels is right in all matters of worship; now the muqallid achieves this by considering to be correct what his imam says because he has already come to the conclusion that the madhhab of his imam is sound. His deciding that the madhhab of his imam is sound is similar to a person’s finding a good doctor in a strange land, for he would accomplish that by hearing what the people say, or by observing to whom most of the people are going, or by hearing from one or two trusted sources [that a certain person is a good doctor] with the result that he is satisfied in his heart about the correctness of their opinion; thus, a person might here from his parents about the greatness of Malik, or of al-Shafi’i, so that he believes that and his heart is satisfied with that.[8] Then, after arriving at such a conviction, it is not permitted for him to oppose it [by doubting the correctness of the opinion of his imam in a particular issue since that involves undoing a reasonable conviction for the sake of a whim]; if he were to claim that I feel that the one whom I follow is mistaken in this particular issue, his claim is to be rejected since that is not the prerogative [that is, that is not the business] of a muqallid (one who follows) [since he is not a mujtahid he has no qualification, nor any means to verify that his imam is mistaken on that particular issue].[9]

A person’s undertaking ijtihaad in certain particular issues of fiqh [if he is not a mujtahid] is a mistake; for he thereby presumes that he knows what the imam whom he follows does not know in those issues in which he undertakes to make ijtihaad himself, and that is stupid [because a non-mujtahid is not equal to a mujtahid, nor is the non-mujtahid competent to judge when the mujtahid whom he normally follows in other matters might be wrong].

As for the question about the propriety of following [Imam] al-Shafi’i in an issue in which al-Shafi’i differed with a Companion, we are bound to believe that al-Shafi’i only did that because he knew a proof stronger than the opinion of that Companion [a hadith of the Prophet (on whom be grace and glory from Allah), for example, or the saying of another Companion more in keeping with general principles of the shari’ah], for unless we believe that, it means we are implying that al-Shafi’i did not recognize the rank of the Companions and that is impossible. This is the reason [that is, the imams opportunity to be able to know all the proofs and to see the strongest proofs] is the grounds for preferring the madhhab [that is, the school of thought, or the position] of later scholars [that is from generations of the later Followers and the Followers of the Followers] over their predecessors [from among the Companions and the early Followers] in full recognition of the superiority of the earlier generations over the later ones. The earlier generation [that is, the Companions and the early Followers] heard hadith individually [that is, they heard themselves from the Prophet (on whom be grace and glory from Allah), or from a limited number of Companions] and then they dispersed in the lands; their fatwas and their decisions differed from place to place [according to the knowledge that was available to them wherever they were]; indeed, it happened that hadith would reach them with the result that they changed their opinions in matters they had already given fatwas on and made decisions. In this early period they were not free to collect all the hadith together because they were busy in jihad and in establishing the religion; however, by the time of the Followers of the Followers, Islam had become established and the people were able to devote their energies to collecting the hadith from distant lands by undertaking long journeys. The scholars in this later period gave their decisions after surveying the sources of the law in their entirety. They did not differ with the fatwas of their predecessors except for the sake of a stronger proof. That is why we do not have a madhhab called Bakri [after Abu Bakr], or ‘Umari [after ‘Umar].

As for that taqlid which has been condemned, it is that which involves going against the proofs [in other words, it is anti-rational]. The unbelievers worshipped idols that neither comprehended nor heard, and thereby they denied the manifest proofs [that their worship was in vain]. It is opposing the dictates of reason that is condemnable.[10]

Then as long as the muqallid achieved the truth by following someone in either the area of fundamental beliefs (al-usul), or in the rules of law (al-furu’), that is satisfactory; learning the rational basis of those beliefs [or those rules] is not obligatory on every individual [rather it is an obligation on the collective body of the ummah (the nation of Islam); that is it is fard kifayah].[11]

[Finally], it is not permitted for an ‘alim [who is a mujtahid] to follow another ‘alim [who is also a mujtahid] neither in the matter of fatwa, nor in the matter of the qiblah [that is, the direction of the Ka’bah][12]; and [in the case of the qiblah] if the time for prayer is short [and one feared that by the time one finished making ijtihaad (for example, by taking bearings from the stars)], there is a difference of opinion among the authorities, and [in the opinion of al-Ghazali], there is nothing wrong with the ‘alim [who is a mujtahid] making taqlid of the ‘alim [who is a mujtahid] in the matter of the qiblah, if the time for prayer were short.
_____________________________
[1] He means the people who are not mujtahids as is learned from the usage of the experts in the science of the principles of fiqh and from what Abu Bakr Ibn al-‘Arabi says in other places in this letter.

[2] The first half of this hadith was reported by al-Suyuti in his al-Jami’ al-Saghir; he ascribed it to Ahmad, al-Tirmidhi, and Ibn Majah and initialed it as rigorously authentic (sahih); he indicated that the Companion who reported it was Hudhaifah. Al-Munawi mentioned in his commentary that while al-Tirmidhi had graded the hadith as authentic (hasan) and while some muhaddithun found fault with the chain of narration of the hadith on the grounds of discontinuity, yet Ibn Hajr pointed out that there are corroborating hadith from other companions (shawahid) which strengthen this riwayah and authenticate it. In fact al-Suyuti mentioned after this hadith another one with similar meaning from Abd Allah ibn Mas’ud. The second half of the hadith is actually another hadith of the Prophet (on whom be grace and glory from Allah).

[3] This is the sound position of the orthodox community. It provides that if one believes that Allah is one, and that there are angels and there is a judgment and that Heaven and Hell are real simply because somebody told you so that is sufficient. However, it is most difficult to find a person who does not have some rational grounds for what he believes. Even if you were to ask the Muslim street cleaner, why he insists on the unique transcendence of Allah, he could tell you in his own awkward way. And if you asked how he knows that Hell is real, he would say because it is mentioned in the Qur’an and the Qur’an is the Book of Allah. He could give you a simple rational basis for his belief that the Qur’an is the Book of Allah.

[4] Ibn al-‘Arabi is referring to a famous hadith reported by al-Bukhari and Muslim and Abu Dawud (in the chapter Bab al-Mas’alah fi ‘l-Qabr wa ‘Adhabi ‘l-Qabr, nos. 4751, 4752);and others with different wording.

[5] يبدو لي أن هنا تحريف في العبارة وأن كلمة غير زيادة وإلا العبارة غير مناسبة لما سبق من الكلام, وكذلك فيما يأتي بعد قليل.

[6] أحمد بن يحيى الونشريسي, المعيار المعرب, 11/163-165, دار الغرب الإسلامي, بيروت, 1401هـ-1981م.

[7] Imam al-Ghazali’s statement here is based on the view that it is incumbent on us to follow the greatest, and it is not acceptable to follow the merely great; this mas’alah is referred to as taqlid al-mafdul in the presence of al-afdal; many ulama permit it. Taking the viewpoint that it is not permitted, al-Nasafi says that we should believe that our imam is right although it is possible that he is wrong [that is, on a given issue]; whereas, the imam who opposes him is wrong although it is possible that he is right. That is because we must recognize that our imam is not infallible. This matter was discussed by Ibn ‘Abidin in the introduction to his Radd al-Muhtar.

[8] Note that this is note blind following as the pseudo-Salafis pretend; rather, it is a conviction based on strong evidence; moreover, it differs in every way from the anti-rational following (taqlid) of people like the Christians and pagans, since there taqlid is against the evidence.

[9] There appears to be something wrong in the wording of the Arabic as it appears in the published text of al-Miyar al-Mu’rab, and I suspect the copyist, or typist may have made a mistake in transcription, so I have rephrased the passage slightly in order to render something more fitting with the context. The literal meaning of the passage is: “And were he to say I feel that the opinion of the one whom I followed in this particular issue is not sound in other issues, that is not the prerogative of a muqallid.”

[10] Following blindly the Christian leaders, for example, in their claim that God is three in one, and one in three, or that Jesus is the some of God, is condemnable because that is anti-rational; what they profess requires that the eternal ceased to be eternal and acquired an originated attributed; in other words they profess that God ceased to be God; and that is rationally impossible. On the other hand, our following the Prophet (on whom be grace and glory from Allah) in those matters which we are beyond our experience like the Resurrection and the Judgment is not anti-rational, because those things are not rationally impossible, the One who created the first time, can create the second, and if He can create, certainly He can judge. Rather, are following him is wisdom because Allah demonstrated his truthfulness by many types of miracles which no creature could possible perform. In the same way, our trusting in the mujtahid without understanding in many cases his proof, or even sometimes when we think that he has contradicted the proof is wisdom because we know that we are not qualified to deuce the whole corpus of the law by ourselves; whereas, the nation of Islam (al-ummah) testified that each one of the four mujtahid imams was qualified to deduce it. Thus, we are sure that the proof is with the mujtahid whether or not we know what that was, or think we know, or know that we do not know.

[11] Although taqlid is acceptable in matters of belief as it is in matters of law, it is rare that one follows another in this area without some rational proofs as I mentioned above. Furthermore, while knowing the rational proofs is not a requirement, it is highly recommended that every Muslim should acquire some rational basis for what he believes because if one does not have such a basis, his beliefs cannot be strong and they are liable to be undone by the occurrence doubt. By rational basis, we do not mean what the ulama who are specialists in the field; that is, the mutakallimun, refer to; rather, the simple, every day logic of the common Muslims, such logic as Ibrahim (on whom be peace) demonstrated when he saw the star rising and asked himself, it that could be his Lord, then when it saw it set, he realized that it could not be his Lord because his Lord could not be one who sets. Similarly, the famous verse of the Bedouin women who declared: “Tracks indicate that somebody passed by, and camel dung indicates that there is a camel about; so how should the dark night and the sky raised on high not indicate One omniscient, expertly informed”?

[12] Ijtihaad in the matter of the qiblah will only be an issue if one were in the wilderness, or at sea, or in the air and there were not any mosque there, nor any local person to ask.

Source : al-faqih.com