Artikel Pilihan

Jadual Waktu Sistem Badan Manusia!

Waktu Pagi 3:00 am – 5:00 am Paru-paru – Ini adalah waktu terbaik untuk bangun dari tidur. Ketika ini terdapat lebih banyak kandungan ozo...

Showing posts with label themajlis.net. Show all posts
Showing posts with label themajlis.net. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Honouring a Faasiq

Khat by Hasan Celebi
RASULULLAH (SALLALLAHU ALAYHI WASALLAM) said:
 "When a faasiq is praised, the Arsh of Allah shudders."
A faasiq is a flagrant violator of the Shariah. When such a person is praised or honoured, the Wrath of Allah Ta'ala descends. When even the magnificent Throne of Allah Ta'ala shudders, it will be easy to understand the gravity of the crime of honouring a faasiq. For this reason it is haraam to allow a beardless person, i.e. o­ne who shaves or cuts his beard, to lead the Salaat or become the Muath-thin or to be a Musjid/Madrasah trustee or to allow a beardless qaari the honour of the Musjid platform to recite to the musallis as was the case recently when a faasiq qaari from Egypt was honoured in many Musaajid of the country.

Source : themajlis.net

Friday, April 1, 2011

Ibn Mubaarak and the Barkat of Halaal Food

[caption id="attachment_966" align="alignleft" width="233" caption="Khat by Hasan Celebi"][/caption]

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.

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Organ Donation

[caption id="attachment_944" align="alignleft" width="240"] Khat by Hamid Aytac[/caption]

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?

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

Friday, March 4, 2011

Naseehat For Young Wives

Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that if he had to order any person to prostrate (make sajdah) for another person, and if this was permissible, he would have commanded the wife to make sajdah to her husband.

This o­ne Hadith is more than adequate to show the high rank which the husband has over his wife. Besides this Hadith, there are numerous other Ahadith as well as Qur’aanic aayaat which declare the higher rank of the husband with emphasis and clarity.

MARRIAGES

In this age of western liberalism which has been adopted by Muslims, the very same evil trend of marriages collapsing and ending in divorce for sport and fun, has overtaken the Muslim community. No longer is Nikah and the home regarded as the holy institutions which Islam has ordained. In addition to the evil of western liberalism another factor which is increasingly contributing to the break down in marriages is the misconception of their rights which girls gain from girls madrasahs.

RIGHTS

They emerge from the madrasahs having understood o­nly that they have rights — that the Shariah has given them Waajib rights — that it is not necessary for them to do domestic chores — that instead of them being servants in the marital home, o­n the contrary, their husbands should be their servants. While they learn about their right of a separate home, away from their in-laws, they are not taught that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) warned:
"Woman! Your husband is either your Jannat or your Jahannam."
While they emerge from the madrasah with the idea firmly embedded in their minds that they are not obliged to render any service to their mothers-in-law, they are not taught that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) warned:
"Neither the Fardh nor Nafl Salaat (nor any act of ibaadat) is accepted of the wife who has displeased her husband."
Girls who marry in this age are obsessed with their rights. They enter into marriage with the idea of severing the holy relationship which their husbands have with their parents and family members. From the very first day a young wife arrives at her husband’s home, she initiates her scheme of achieving separation from her in-laws. In the process of conniving to be separated from her parents-in-law, she creates many upheavals in the home, leading to rupture in relationships and misery. Even if she ultimately succeeds in her scheme, she departs from the home of the in-laws leaving behind a legacy of bitterness, enmity and misery.

TALAAQ

In many cases the marriage simply ends in Talaaq. It is imperative that the seniors of the young girls explain to them what exactly Nikah and making a home are. Some girls enter into Nikah understanding that it is freedom from parental control and freedom to wander around. When they realise that they have simply passed from o­ne control to another control, they become rebellious and the worst of nafsaaniyat surfaces to ruin the marriage.

AKHLAAQ

It is essential that young wives and prospective wives understand that marriage is a holy bond. A happy marriage is not based o­n demanding rights. Happiness in a marriage is the product of understanding, patience, toleration, refraining from demanding rights, service to in-laws and total obedience to the husband. Without display of good conduct, happiness in marriage is not possible.

HOME

The young wife should understand that o­nce she has married, her new and permanent home is the home her husband places her in, whether it is a separate house or the home of his parents. His parents are now her parents. Her parents have become strangers to her. The home of her parents is no longer her home. She cannot hope to gain happiness by keeping o­ne leg in the home of her parents and o­ne leg in her marital home.

HAPPINESS

She will not gain happiness if she gives preference to her family over her husband’s family. If her husband is disinclined towards her parents, brothers, etc., and for some reason, whether right or wrong, annoyed with them, his wife should not stand up in defence of them. She should understand that she has to pass her life with her husband, not with her parents or her brothers. Even if her husband unjustly speaks ill of her parents and brothers, she should not display annoyance. She should not pull up her face nor make any comment which will inflame him. She should employ her intelligence, be it defective, and convey to her husband that she is o­n his side, not o­n the side of her family, because now her o­nly family is her husband’s family. Allah Ta’ala will take her husband to task for his injustices. It is not her concern. Her concern is to serve her husband, keep him happy and please him in all lawful things.

ALLAH’S COMMAND

It is Allah and it is His Rasool (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) who have commanded that the wife submits fully to her husband and keeps him happy. Her happiness (her Jannat) is inextricably interwoven with his pleasure. By serving his parents, she serves her husband. And, this sacred serfdom should be her honour. She should not view marriage, home and husband through the coloured glasses of the immoral libertine cult of westernism which has overrun even Muslim society in this age.

DIVINE PLEASURE

In serving her parents-in-law, she is not lowering her dignity in any way. She gains tremendous thawaab thereby. Such service is based o­n the bond she has with her husband. Such service cultivates her husband’s pleasure which in turn brings for her the wonderful Ni’mat of Allah’s Pleasure. She will gain more Divine Pleasure and thawaab out of service to her in-laws than from Nafl acts of ibaadat. o­n the contrary, Allah’s Pleasure is denied to her if she displeases her parents-in-law because such displeasure leads to the displeasure of her husband, and his displeasure brings about Allah’s Displeasure. In the wake of Allah’s Displeasure come His Ghadhab (Wrath) and La’nat (Curse).

INGRATITUDE

The attitude which is common to almost all wives is their ingratitude to their husbands. It is o­n account of this evil attitude that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that most inmates of Jahannum will be women. Wives should heed this warning of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and struggle against the nafs when this vile emotional urge develops.

MASTER

If the wife o­nly utilizes a bit of intelligence and keeps her in-laws happy by serving them and tolerating their indiscretion and even injustices, she will ultimately become their master. In fact, she will become the master of even her husband. The magnanimity of her heart will win them all over. They will then adore her and serve her. Allah’s aid and special rahmat will be with her. The hearts of people are in His control. If the wife submits to her husband and his whims and fancies, for the Sake of Allah’s Pleasure and in obedience to the numerous advices and exhortations of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), she will attain happiness and Jannat in this world.

If she desires the rewards of Jihaad and the ranks of Shahaadat (Martyrdom), she has to wage jihaad against her nafs in the struggle to gain her husband’s pleasure which is the most important and the o­nly bridge for her to gain Divine Pleasure.

ADMONITION FOR HUSBANDS

The Naseehat offered o­n this page to wives is not a licence for husbands to commit zulm (injustice). In so far as husbands are concerned, there is a host of warnings, admonition and exhortations in the Qur’aan and Hadith which they have to observe in order to gain Allah’s Pleasure and to be saved from His Wrath for any injustices which they may commit against their wives.

Husbands should remember that violation of the huqooq of their wives is a major sin and the consequences of this will not be escaped in Qiyaamah. While wives should not be concerned with the errors and faults of their husbands, the latter should not focus their gazes o­n the wife’s subservience commanded for husbands by the Shariah.

Both husband and wife should look to the Shariah and see what the Qur’aan and Sunnah expect of them. This is the prescription for happiness o­n earth, Divine Pleasure and happiness in the Aakhirah.

"The Majlis" Vol.15 No.5

Source : TheMajlis.net

"Legalizing" Riba - Nothing new

According to press reports, the Azhar University in Cairo, Egypt has issued a ‘fatwa’ (sic) declaring the permissibility of fixed interest. o­ne such report says:

"Islam’s highest authority, the Al-Azhar Institute in Cairo, has given a green light to fixed banking interest in Egypt."

"Sabar Talaab, the head of the secretariat, said o­n Sunday that Al-Azhar’s Islamic theological research committee had reached the verdict o­n October 31."

"Religious jurisprudence means change and it is illogical to remain frozen while the world changes around us," said Talaab."

While the shayaateen masquerading as Muslims make such comments and ‘legalize’ what Allah has made Haraam, the Qur’aan Majeed unequivocally declares:
"Those who devour interest do not stand except as stands o­ne who has been driven to madness by the touch of shaitaan. That (madness of theirs) is because they say: ‘Certainly, trade is like Ribaa.’
But Allah has made lawful trade and has made haraam ribaa."
"O People of Imaan! Fear Allah! And shun what remains of ribaa if indeed you are Mu’mineen. And, if you do not do so, then take notice of war from Allah And His Rasool…."
[Surah Baqarah, aayaat 275, 278, 279]

NOTHING NEW

The attempt to make interest halaal is nothing new. The enemies of Islam and zindeeqs, especially in this age of anti-Taqleedi’ism, have and are always subjecting the Shariah to personal opinion. The sinister motive of all these zindeeqs — the latest example being the MPL crowd — is material gain—monetary gain – worldly acclaim, etc. They perceive the Shariah as a huge impediment in the path of ‘progress’ — progress in the conception of western ideology. It has therefore become expedient and necessary for the zindeeqs to make haraam things lawful, left, right and centre.

In this regard, we believe Yusuf Ali was the first zindeeq who had made an abortive attempt to differentiate between bank interest and the Islamic meaning of ribaa. Excluding bank interest from Ribaa, Yusuf Ali states in his baatil commentary o­n the Qur’aan:

"My definition (of ribaa) would….exclude economic credit, the creature of modern banking and finance."

The zindeeq stated his opinion in a bid to legalize interest some 70 years ago. Therefore, the ‘fatwa’ of Al-Azhar is old-hat.

KUFR

The claim that Islamic jurisprudence (Fiqh) means change is utterly baseless and has to be dismissed with contempt. The suggestion that the laws of the Shariah are ‘frozen’ in a changing world is downright kufr. Talab, the spokesman of Al-Azhar implies that the Shariah of Islam has become obsolete hence the need for change and re-interpretation to make it compatible with western economic theories and practices. He has implied that what the Qur’aan taught fourteen centuries ago cannot be applied in this modern day of western advancement. He implies that the Qur’aan and the Sunnah—the Shariah of Islam—have outlived their utility. This leads to the kufr of the need of a new Nabi with a new Shariah. The implication of the rejection of the Finality of the Nubuwwat of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is glaring.

Just as the Qur’aan denounced and rejected the mushrikeen’s attempt to equate trade with ribaa, so too does it reject Al-Azhar’s attempt. Al-Azhar has merely gorged out what the mushrikeen of Arabia had said fourteen centuries ago, namely, "Trade is like Ribaa". The modernist zindeeqs such as the committee of Al-Azhar contend:

"…….such practices (economic credit) amount to commercial dealings undertaken by a bank in the name of its clients. They also draw a parallel with the commercial profits made from the caravans which the prophet Muhammad led almost 1400 years ago after buying goods with money collected from members of his tribe."

But the Qur’aan emphatically rejects both the mushrikeen of 1400 years ago and the zindeeqs of Al-Azhar. Thus the Qur’aan Majeed declares:
"And Allah has made lawful trade and made unlawful ribaa."
NO VATICAN

The western media in designating Al-Azhar as the "highest authority" of Islam has sought to confer Vatican status to this Institution which has fallen into the dregs of kufr and baatil. In Islam there is no parallel with the Vatican. Al-Azhar even in its heyday when it was a truly Islamic Madrasah from whose portals walked innumerable great Ulama and Auliya, never was the "highest authority" of Islam. Al-Azhar to Muslims is NOT what the Vatican is to Christians. Al-Azhar in the present age is a non-entity in so far as the Shariah is concerned. It holds no status in the ranks of the Ulama. It is an un-Islamic centre conspiring the destruction of Islam. It is an appendage of the kuffaar government of Egypt. Al-Azhar enjoys no credibility among the true Ulama of Islam.

FATWAS

The ‘fatwas’ emanating from Al-Azhar’s Committee of Zindeeqs are pieces of scrap not worth the paper o­n which they are written. The crowd of zindeeqs who seek to render halaal what Allah has made haraam, is trying to capitalise o­n the past image of that o­nce august Institution of Islam. But since these zindeeqs are "driven to insanity by the touch of shaitaan", they will not succeed in their plot to hoodwink the Ummah with their fatwas of baatil and kufr churned out purely for worldly reasons and to appease the kuffaar authorities who happen to hold sway in Egypt.

Bank interest is not different from the Ribaa prohibited by the Qur’aan Majeed. Bank interest is not ‘profit’ as the zindeeqs are propagating. No Muslim who possesses even a smattering of Islamic understanding will swallow the kufr drivel of bank interest being ‘commercial profit’.

"The Majlis" Vol.15 No.5

Source : TheMajlis.net

Naseehat For Young Wives

[caption id="attachment_670" align="alignleft" width="192"] Kufi by Lutfi[/caption]

Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that if he had to order any person to prostrate (make sajdah) for another person, and if this was permissible, he would have commanded the wife to make sajdah to her husband.


This o­ne Hadith is more than adequate to show the high rank which the husband has over his wife. Besides this Hadith, there are numerous other Ahadith as well as Qur’aanic aayaat which declare the higher rank of the husband with emphasis and clarity.

Incumbency of Taqleed

Taqleed in the Shariah, as opposed to Admut Taqleed, means to follow the Qur'~n and the Sunnah as understood, interpreted, practised and transmitted to the Ummah by the Sah~bah (Companions) of Rasulullah (sallall~hu alayhi wasallam).

Taqleed which literally means to be fettered; to be tied and to follow, refers to a special and specific type of following in Islam. It refers to the rigid following of the Qur'~n and Sunnah as commanded by Allah Ta'ala Who says:
"O People of Im~n! Obey Allah and obey the Rasool....."

Numerous Qur'~nic ~y~t (verses) and Hadith narrations command this strict obedience and following which are known as Taqleed in the terminology of the Shariah.

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

The Ummah's Humiliation — A Manifestation of Allah's Punishment

[caption id="attachment_647" align="alignleft" width="192"] Kufi by Lutfi[/caption]

By Mujlisul Ulama of South Africa
"Then when there came the first of the two promises (of Divine Punishment), We sent against you servants unto Us who were most powerful in warfare. Then they penetrated the homes. Indeed it was a decree executed."

[Surah Bani Israaeel, aayat 5]
"When the final promise (of Divine Punishment) came, (it came) so that they could (the kuffaar) disfigure your faces and enter the Musjid (i.e.Musjidul Aqsa) as they had entered the first time, and so that they could utterly destroy whatever they overran."

[Surah Bani Israaeel, aayat 8]

The Ummah's Humiliation — A Manifestation of Allah's Punishment

By Mujlisul Ulama of South Africa
"Then when there came the first of the two promises (of Divine Punishment), We sent against you servants unto Us who were most powerful in warfare. Then they penetrated the homes. Indeed it was a decree executed."
[Surah Bani Israaeel, aayat 5]
"When the final promise (of Divine Punishment) came, (it came) so that they could (the kuffaar) disfigure your faces and enter the Musjid (i.e.Musjidul Aqsa) as they had entered the first time, and so that they could utterly destroy whatever they overran."
[Surah Bani Israaeel, aayat 8]

In these Qur'aanic verses, Allah Ta'ala refers to His punishment which He had inflicted o­n the Muslims of former times. The specific community referred to in these verses is Bani Israaeel. Two occasions of punishment are mentioned here. O­n both occasions Allah Ta'ala used the kuffaar to overwhelm, punish and humiliate the Muslims. The punishments had taken the form of kuffaar atrocities-pillage, plunder, killing and humiliating the Muslims, as well as the desecration of Musjidul Aqsa.

The aayat specifically mentions the destruction which the kuffaar wrought to Musjidul Aqsa. Allah Ta'ala allowed the kuffaar to invade Musjiful Aqsa —to defile and violate its sanctity. The then Muslims were just as helpless as present-day Muslims. They had to suffer the punishment and humiliation without being able to offer any response and unable to defend either themselves or their holy places.

ALLAH'S SERVANTS

It is significant that in the aayat, the Qur'aan refers to the kuffaar who had defiled and destroyed Musjidul Aqsa and who had ravaged the Muslims of the time, as `servants unto Us'. This style of expression conveys that the kuffaar were appointed by Allah Ta'ala to inflict the punishment, atrocities and humiliation o­n o­n the Muslims who are supposed to be the true and obedient slaves and servants of Allah Ta'ala.

This style of expression implies that the domination of the kuffaar over Muslims is in actual fact a manifestation of Allah's punishment. Throughout the history of the world, this has always been the case. When the Muslim Ummah had transgressed all bounds of disobedience and had firmly resolved to adopt transgression, sin and kuffaar life style as their way of life, then Allah Ta'ala unleashed His punishment which sometimes came in the form of natural disasters and sometimes in the form of kuffaar brutality and domination.

THE CAUSE

In this age too, Muslims have degenerated to the lowest level of fisq and fujoor (transgression and immorality). The Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has been jettisoned right out of our lives and the life style and concepts of the kuffaar have become the complete culture and code of life of Muslims. It is for this reason that Allah Ta'ala has manifested His punishment o­n us in the form of kuffaar atrocities and domination over the Ummah. He has made us the slaves of the very kuffaar whom we have appointed as our intelectual masters whose lifestyle Muslims are emulating in entirety. Therefore He has o­nce again sent His kuffaar `ibaad' (servants) to punish and disgrace us as he had done with Bani Israaeel when they had reached the point of no return in their transgression.

Thus, the cause of our degradation, humiliation and of the calamities which are befalling the Ummah, is not America or the shaitaan. Rather, these events via the agency of the kuffaar are Allah's punishment. It is He Who has chosen America to punish and humiliate the Muslims. It is He Who has chosen the Yahood to inflict such terrible acts of brutality o­n Muslims.

TRUTH

Muslims have failed to understand this Qur'aanic truth. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has informed the Ummah in no mistaken terms that when Muslims abandon the Deen, they will be overwhelmed by the kuffaar. Hence, he o­nce told the Sahaabah that the Ummah will be at its weakest when Muslims are as numerous as the bubbles o­n the ocean. Numerically Muslims will be in a strong position, but they will be bereft of spiritual fibre and mettle. When the Sahaabah asked whether the Qur'aan will not be with the Muslims to guide them. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) replied in the affirmative and commented that they would be reciting the Qur'aan in the same way as the Yahood and Nasaara recite their scriptures. That is, recite without giving practical expression to the teachings of the Qur'aan.

LOVE OF THE WORLD

On another occasion Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that a time will dawn when Muslims will be like the muck brought down by floodwaters. They will be buffetted and humiliated by the kuffaar who will devour them just as people sitting around a table consume food. Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) attributed this state of degradation of the Muslims to two spiritual maladies: (1) Love for the world and (2) Fear for Maut.

Fear for death is the consequence of worldly love which leads to the abandonment of Allah's Deen and to the adoption of the lifestyle, concepts and cultures of the kuffaar. In its wake comes the Divine Punishment in the form of kuffaar persecution, atrocity and domination.

THE PUNISHMENT

What has happened in Afghanistan and what is happening in Palestine, India and elsewhere in the world to Muslims, is Allah's punishment. It is, therefore, unintelligent as well as diversionary to make America or the shaitaan or any other kaafir force the scapegoat for our humiliation and defeat.

Shaitaan has succeeded in his plot to deceive Muslims and to divert their minds from the actual cause of the Ummah's fall and disgrace. The satanic plot is to keep Muslims in their state of degeneration so that they perpetually remain the slaves of the kuffaar and follow the evil ways of kufr of the kuffaar masters. Muslims therefore look at mirages and imagine a variety of causes for their humiliation. But they remain blind to the clear cause mentioned in the Qur'aan and Ahadith. The cause is nothing but abandonment of Allah's Shariah.

CRITICISM

Regardless of the amount of criticism Muslims heap o­n America; regardless of the thousands of pages which are written o­n the international conspiracies of the U.S.A. and Zionism—nothing will solve the problems of the Ummah besides obedience to Allah Ta'ala and adoption of the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

THE SAME ALLAH

The very same Allah -Azza Wa Jal - Who had aided the Sahaabah in all their battles against the kuffaar, exists today. The very same Allah Ta'ala Who had bestowed resounding victory and success to the Sahaabah, making them the rulers and the masters of the world, exists today. But He withheld His aid from the Muslims of Afghanistan. He is withholding His aid from Muslims in the various arenas of the world.

The stark ignorance of so-called Muslim leaders and learned men who are totally blind to the reality of our situation and condition, and who miserably fail to detect the causes of our disgrace, is indeed shocking and lamentable. They have all united in a chorus of meaningless condemnation of shaitaan as if shaitaan is to be blamed for our woes and misery. They all blame America and shaitaan, but fail to see that we ourselves are to be blamed. The cause of our degenerate condition is our own corruption which has led to the domination of the kuffaar over us.

DEFEAT

To attribute the defeat in Afghanistan to America's airforce and superior military potency is to imply that Allah Ta'ala Who had aided the Sahaabah in all their battles, lacks the power to do the same for Muslims in this age— Nauthubillaah! This implication of kufr is tantamount to saying that Allah Ta'ala could aid o­nly in wars waged in primitive ways, not in modern and nucleur wars. People of Imaan cannot think along such lines of kufr.

Where there is Allah's aid, the sophisticated military equipment and technology of the kuffaar will become ineffective. The o­nly reason for the kuffaar to be able to display military prowess is the Decree of Allah Ta'ala. The o­nly way to gain Allah's aid is to heed what the Qur'aan says:
"If you aid (the Deen of) Allah, He will aid you and He will plant your feet firmly (against your enemies)."
"The Majlis" Vol.15 No.1

Source : TheMajlis.net

The Ummah's Fall and Disgrace

The Ummah's Fall and Disgrace - The Problem is not the Kuffaar
By Mujlisul Ulama of South Africa

There is no gainsaying that the Muslim Ummah of this era is a fallen and a downtrodden people wallowing in disgrace and misery. This miserable condition of the Ummah is up for public display. Self-appointed physicians are trying to diagnose the ills of this Ummah and prescribe remedies and solutions. But these physicians, themselves corrupt and part of the disease, have no understanding of the problem, hence the solutions they offer for the cure of the Ummah’s maladies of disgrace, weakness and cowardice, are completely ineffective. When they lack understanding of the problem and the malady, how can they correctly prescribe? Their erroneous diagnosis followed by harmful remedies serve to o­nly complicate the already humiliating situation of the Ummah.

OBLIQUE VISION

The squint-eyed self-appointed physicians, looking at the ills of the Ummah with their oblique vision, have diagnosed the malady of the Ummah to be the superior technology of the kuffaar. In view of the superiority of the kuffaar’s technology and sophistication in every sphere of mundane life, the misguided doctors of the Ummah have concluded that the tyranny and oppression of the kuffaar (the U.S.A., Britain, Israel and the West in general) are the cause of the misery of the Muslim community world-wide.But this diagnosis is seriously flawed. In fact, it is utterly baseless and in conflict with the Qur’aan Majeed’s and the Ahadith’s diagnosis and with the remedy which Allah Ta’ala and His Rasool (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) have prescribed for the Ummah when it finds itself suffering from the present type of cancer.

DIVINE MANIFESTATION

The kuffaar with all their superior technology and sophistication are the creations of Allah Azza Wa Jal. Those who attribute the disgrace and misery of today’s Ummah to the kuffaar are unable to understand that the kuffaar domination over the Ummah and their oppression of Muslims are the symptoms, not the causes of our malady.

Those Muslims who emulate and follow the kuffaar lack the intelligence to comprehend that kuffaar domination and the havoc it wroughts when it goes beserk in the lands of the Muslims is similar to the effects and consequences of an earthquake, volcano eruption, hurricane, flood or any other disaster descending at the command of Allah Azza Wa Jal. Just as it is absurd and utterly stupid to criticize and villify an earthquake which has caused its havoc, so too is it Islamically irrational and downright stupid to blame the U.S.A. and other kuffaar for the oppression, brutality and tyranny which they are wroughting in the lands of Islam.

The defective thinking of Muslims and their baseless diagnosis and harmful solutions are the product of a kind of mental derangement which Allah Ta’ala afflicts the mind with as a form of punishment. In this regard the Qur’aan states:
"And He (Allah) casts filth o­n those who lack intelligence"
[Aayat 100, Surah Yunoos]
".....Verily there has settled upon you from your Rabb rijs (filth) and ghadhab (wrath)...."
[ Aayat 71, Surah A’raaf]
"Similarly does Allah afflict with rijs (filth) those who lack Imaan....."
(Aayat 125, Surah An’aam)

On account of this mental derangement caused by a Divine affliction o­n the minds of those who have appointed the kuffaar as their guides, they are unable to understand what ails the Ummah inspite of the clear directions and unambiguous diagnosis offered by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

Kuffaar domination is a manifestation of Allah’s Attribute of Wrath (Mazhar-e-Ghadhab) in exactly the same way as an earthquake or a hurricane is a manifestation of Allah’s Wrath. Such manifestations of Allah’s Ghadhab is a punishment for our transgression. When the transgression exceeds all bounds and the point of no return has been reached, Allah’s Athaab descends o­n the Ummah. Kuffaar domination is o­ne such form of Allah’s Ghadhab.Confirming this fact, the Qur’aan Majeed states:
".....We sent against you Our servants who were powerful in warfare. Then they penetrated the homes (of the Believers). And that (calamity of the kuffaar o­n you) was a promise decreed (by Allah)."
[Aayat 5 Bani Israaeel]
......."(Then o­n the second occasion of the transgression).....they (the kuffaar army) disfigured your faces and penetrated the Musjid (i.e.Musjidul Aqsaa) and they utterly destroyed everything they overran."
[Aayat 7 Bani Israaeel].

The Qur’aan puts it very clearly. There is no ambiguity in these verses. The message is stated explicitly that o­n account of the then Muslim Ummah’s transgression Allah Ta’ala sent His punishment o­n the Muslims in the form of kuffaar armies which overran Palestine, brutalized its people, penetrated and defiled Musjidul Aqsaa, and flattened everything in an orgy of anarchy and seemingly senseless violence. But all these episodes of misery were by the Command of Allah Ta’ala enacted as a punishment for the Ummah of Bani Israaeel which was the Muslim community of that time.

OUR SERVANTS

The Qur’aanic description, ‘Servants unto Us" or "Our servants" is very significant. Inspite of the kuffaar being the enemies of Allah Ta’ala, the Qur’aan describes them in this aayat as being Allah’s servants. There are two reasons for this description:

(1) They are the creation of Allah Ta’ala.

(2) In the context of this aayat they were constrained to act against the Muslims by Divine Decree which is mentioned at the end of the aayat No.6 of Bani Israaeel.

Since Allah Ta’ala had despatched the kuffaar army (in the way He had despatched the Western Coalition and Alliance of the U.S.A.) against the Muslims, the Qur’aan refers to them as "Servants unto Us." In other words these kuffaar are a manifestation of "Our Punishment". Just as the earthquakes, the rain, the wind, etc. are Allah’s servants and act in accordance with His command, so too does Allah Ta’ala sometimes harness the kuffaar as a manifestation of His Wrath to punish Muslims for their rebellion and transgression. This is exactly what is happening today all over the Muslim world.

THE PRESENT SCENARIO

The anarchy and misery presently reigning in Palestine, the humiliating defeat of the Taalibaan, the surrender and imprisonment of the Arab Mujaahideen laguishing in cages in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, and the brutal Hindu repression and murder of thousands of Muslims in India, and the defeats which Muslims are suffering o­n all fronts at the hands of the kuffaar are adequately explained by the two Qur’aanic verses of Surah Bani Israaeel (Aayat 5 and 7).

Muslims are defeated, not because of the superiority of the American military power nor because the Taalibaan lacked air defences, etc. But purely o­n account of the Ummah’s transgression and violation of the sacred Pledge of Imaan.

PALESTINE

Allah Ta’ala had bestowed to the Palestinian Muslims a good few years of peace. During the peace treaty with Israel regardless of the humiliating terms of the pact granting them limited independence and self-rule, it was a golden opportunity to consolidate themselves and prepare. But without Deeni progress—without moral reformation and spiritual development—it is inconceivable that Muslims can ever consolidate their position and prepare themselves to meet the kuffaar head-on.

EMULATION

Instead of emulating the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and turning to Islam, they went overboard in their emulation of the American kuffaar. The kuffaar life-style was adopted in entirety. More and more dens of vice mushroomed in Palestine. Musjidul Aqsaa was neglected and starved of Musallis. o­nly o­n Jumuah would the Musjid fill up. But for the five daily Salaat, the Musjid stood a silent witness shedding its tears and invoking la’nat o­n the Muslims who were desecrating and defiling it with their absence and their evil which they perpetrated right within the environment of the Musjid.

The Deen was increasingly driven out and displaced from the lives of the Muslim Palestinians. In almost every aspect they emulated the very Yahood and Christians whom they were supposedly fighting and who were proclaimed as their enemies.

THE DIVINE TEST

In Surah Bani Israaeel the Qur’aan speaks of the defeat, disgrace and destruction of the Ummah at the hands of the kuffaar sent against the Muslims by Allah Ta’ala. After Bani Israaeel was thoroughly humiliated and punished severely with kuffaar brutality, they repented and made many promises of reforming themselves. Allah Ta’ala accepted their Taubah, and granted them victory over the kuffaar. But Allah Ta’ala along with bestowing His mercy o­n them, warned them of dire consequences should they again lapse into transgression. Thus the Qur’aan Majeed states:
"Soon will your Rabb have mercy o­n you. However, if you return (to your transgression), then We too will return (to our punishmen)."
[Aayat Bani Israaeel]

OPPORTUNITY

Generally the punishment which Allah Ta’ala inflicts o­n Muslims in this world is not the ultimate punishment designed to eliminate them. It is a lesser punishment brought to jolt Muslims into realisation, taubah (repentence) and inaabat (turning to Allah Ta’ala in obedience). The Qur’aan Majeed states in this regard:
"We did not send a Nabi to a city, but We afflicted its inhabitants (on account of their rejection and transgression) with calamities and hardships, so that they become humble."
[Aayat 94 Surah A’raaf]
"Anarchy (and corruption) has appeared o­n the land and in the ocean because of the (evil deeds) which the hands of people have earned, so that He (Allah) causes them to taste ( the consequences) of some of (their mischief) which they had committed. Perhaps they will return (to the obedience of Allah)."
[Aayat 41 Sura Room]
"And We shall most assuredly afflict them with the lesser punishment before the greater punishment, so that they return (to the obedience of Allah)."
[Aayat 21 Surah As-Sajdah]

In the wake of inordinate transgression comes Allah’s lesser punishment to jolt people into realisation and to make them humble so that they submit to the Shariah of Allah Ta’ala. But when they ignore this trial, Allah’s Athaab settles o­n them permanently and effaces them. This was the fate of great and powerful people and empires of the past. The same fate overtook the the Empire and Ummah of Islam. Now in this era, Allah Ta’ala had given some Muslim communities opportunities to reform themselves and turn to Allah Ta’ala in submission. But the Palestinians turned their backs o­n the golden opportunity which Allah Ta’ala had bestowed to them.

PEACE

Their peace pact with Israel had the ingredients of Rasulullah’s Treaty of Hudaibiyyah. But they scattered it to the winds and they are today tasting Allah’s punishment in the form of anarchy and misery stemming from the brutality of "Allah’s Servants" (the Qur’aanic description), the kuffaar of Israel.

So utterly demoralising and severe is this punishment o­n the Arabs that inspite of their great numerical superiority (200 million Arabs compared to 3 million Yahood), and inspite of their military superiority (the combined armies, navies and airforces of a dozen or more countries), the Palestinians and the whole Arab World lay prostrate in disgrace and defeat at the feet of Israeli women. More than half of Israel’s armed forces consist of women. Undoubtedly, the description which Allah Ta’ala Himself gives to the kuffaar armies which He had despatched against the bygone Muslim Ummah, i.e the description of "Ulee ba’sin shadeed" (powerful in warefare) fits the Israeli kuffaar. It now pays no dividends to hurl vituperation against Israel.

SELF-CRITICISM

Rather, the appropriate action in these circumstances will be self-appraisal, self-criticism and shame for our own humiliation —that we have sunk to such vile and pitiable levels of degradation and cowardice that, we whose forefathers (the Sahaabah, Taabieen and Tabe-Taabieen) had raised the Flag of Islam,on the hilltops of the world and who had crushed the might of the Roman and Christian empires, have become so impotent that we are unable to fight and defeat a handful of Yahoodi girls. Shame o­n these disobedient servants of Allah Ta’ala. We deserve the kuffar spitting in our faces. When we, ourselves, have become spineless, jelly-like cowards as a consequence of trampling o­n the Qur’aan Majeed and mocking the Divine Shariah with our flagrant disobedience. We have no right to villify those kuffaar whom Allah Ta’ala has sent against us and whom He has designated with the appelation, "Servants unto Us"—to punish us, just as we have no right for vituperation against an earthquake which stikes us as an act of Divine punishment. Why? "For perhaps you, O Believers, will get some sense, open your eyes, return to Islam, repent and take up the Standard of Islam and place it o­n the hilltops of the world from where the kuffaar have torn it off in disgrace and substituted it with their own flags of kufr.

PAKISTAN

Allah Ta’ala had presented o­n a platter a golden opportunity to Pakistan some decades ago when this state was carved out from the Indian sub-continent. The Pledge which ALL the Pakistanis (the religious and the irreligious), had made at that time was that "this land will be the Land of Islam in which Allah’s Law and the Sunnah of His Rasool will reign supreme and prevail."

BETRAYED

Both the Ulama and the masses have violated and betrayed that sacred pledge. Today, inspite of its military might and nucleur capability, Pakistan trembles with fear over the noises which the Hindu idol-worshippers and the dhoti-wearers are making. It is an utter disgrace. The shaitaani army of Pakistan had all the ‘courage’ and ‘power’ to brutalize their Muslim Bengali bretheren when Bangladesh was still part of Pakistan. Then Allah sent the Hindu idol-worshippers to humble the Pakistan military. 90,000 Pakistani soldiers, fully armed bowed their heads in disgrace and laid down their arms in a miserable and unparalleled episode of surrender at the feet of the idol-worshippers.

THE TAALIBAAN

In this era no o­ne was given a better opportunity to raise the Flag of Islam than the Taalibaan. It is cause for eternal regret and shedding of tears that they had ignored this divine opportunity and have now tasted the consequences thereof. Insha’Allah, if Allah Ta’ala gives us the taufeeq and the time, we shall deal with this missed opportunity in a future issue of The Majlis or Al-Haq.

THE OPPORTUNITY

When the Sahaabah (ridhwaanullah alayhim aj-ma-een) were given the opportunity to capture the kuffaar empires and to assert their political control and domination over the lands of the kuffaar, they (the Sahaabah) acquitted themselves admirably and honourably. We need not delve into their history. Everyone, even the kuffaar, are aware of the noble and virtuous reign of those noble and virtuous Sons of Islam.

When Allah Ta’ala bestows the opportunity of political sovereignty to a people, He in fact, bestows to them the opportunity to establish Divine Justice (i.e.the Shariah of Islam) and to raise the glory of His Word o­n this earth. He then watches how we proceed in the wake of having been awarded political control over a territorial region. The Qur’aan Majeed explicitly states:
"He (Hadhrat Musaa- alayhis salaam) said (to his people): Soon will your Rabb destroy your enemies and grant you sovereignty (or political power) o­n earth.Then He (Allah) will watch how you act o­n earth."
[Aayat 129 Surah A’raaf]

Bani Israaeel (the Ummat-e-Muslimah of that time) —the enslaved, humiliated and downtrodden people—were given the opportunity to rule. Their enemy (Fir’oun with his army) was destroyed by Allah Ta’ala. Bani Israaeel was not required to even fight a war against this enemy. Allah Ta’ala directly intervened and destroyed the kuffaar. When Bani Israaeel violated the sacred Pledge and abused their political power, Allah Ta’ala eliminated them and snatched away His bestowal of Political Power, and o­nce again reduced them to disposable objects for the kuffaar to handle and mishandle at their pleasure. This is the fate of the Muslim Ummah of this age. In the words of Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) we have become "the muck" which flood waters bring down, and so we will remain until such time that we gain the intelligence to cleanse ourselves of the spiritual muck which we have acquired from the Western kuffaar.

NO THREAT

If Allah’s aid is with us, the nucleur might and sattellite technology and the vast military arsenals of America, Britain, France and the kuffaar in general pose absolutely no threat for an obedient and humble Ummah —humble in their hearts and obedient to the Shariah. The Qur’aan Majeed declares this truth and issues the following ultimatum to the U.S.A. and to all kuffaar:
"....."And, never will your army avail you in any way whatsoever, inspite of its numerical (and technological) superiority, for most assuredly, Allah is with the Mu’mineen."
[Aayat 19 Surah Anfaal].

The Mu’mineen refered to in this Aayat are such Mu’mineen who walk in the Shadow of the Sahaabah, not those who grovel at the feet of the kuffaar in emulation of their kufr way of life.

But at the same time the Divine Association (ma-ayyat) stated in this Qur’aanic verse is conditioned with obedience to the Shariah of Allah Ta’ala. Hence, the Qur’aan Majeed says:
"O People of Imaan! If you aid (the Deen of) Allah, He will aid you and plant your feet firmly (against your enemies)."
"And, if Allah should help you, then there is no o­ne who can over-power you. But should He withdraw His aid from you, then who is there besides Him to help you?"
Yes, who is there to help Muslims when Allah Ta’ala has withdrawn His aid? Withdrawal of His aid signifies disaster, disgrace and defeat for Muslims. Our Taalibaan brethren had shifted their tawakkul to the U.S.A —to the United Nations —to China —to the evil faasiq government of Pakistan. The bitter fruits of such mis-directed tawakkul (trust) and treachery have been tasted by them and we all are still shedding tears and stunned by what we thought would never happen.

In their dying moments, our brothers, the Taalibaan, were pleading with Allah’s enemies—the communists of China—for missiles to knock out from the skies the warplanes of America. But this aid from the kuffaar was not forthcoming. While they were pleading with kuffaar and clutching at miserable straws, they entirely forgot that they had the power of Imaan and they had Allah Ta’ala to aid them. But they missed that opportunity. May Allah Ta’ala help us. May He o­nce again give this Ummah an opportunity. May He wake up this sleeping Giant —this Ummah —from its drunken stupor of disobedience and kuffaar emulation. Perhaps this opportunity will come o­nly with the advent of Imaam Mahdi (alayhis salaam) and Hadhrat Nabi Isaa (alayhis salaam). And, Allah knows best.

"The Majlis" Vol.15 No.3

Source : TheMajlis.net

Friday, February 25, 2011

The Style of Rasulullah's Garment

By Mujlisul Ulama of South Africa

When a modernist Muslim criticizes the dress style and appearance of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah, we in this age in which kufr preponderates, are not surprised. Immersed in the kufr concepts and liberalism of the western kuffaar, it is just natural and logical for modernists to denigrate every teaching of the Sunnah which conflicts with the tastes and hues of western culture. In fact, even Ulama have become so terribly desensitized with the kufr of the modernists as a consequence of their mutual association and their dubious and baseless policies of ‘hikmat’ and diplomacy, that they (the Ulama) too have become chronic victims of the maladies of kufr and liberalism.

So while we cannot be surprised when modernists criticize, mock and sneer at the dress styles and appearance of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his Sahaabah, there is not o­nly surprise but shock when molvis —products of Darul Ulooms - who purport to be followers of the Ulama of the Sunnah, resort to labyrinthal arguments in order to justify styles which are in conflict with not o­nly the practical example of the Nabi, but in diametric opposition to his explicit statements of prohibition pertaining to certain dress styles.

THE TROUSERS

Every molvi is aware or should be aware that ALL the Books of Hadith contain many authentic ahadith clearly explaining the style of Rasulullah’s izaar. There is absolutely no difference of opinion among any of the innumerable authorities of the Shariah from the very inception of Islam that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his Sahaabah always wore their izaar and trousers above their ankles.

In addition to their practical example, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah verbally propagated in explicit terms the prohibition of wearing the trousers below the ankles. This style is completely unrelated to age and time. There was no incumbency of the era to wear the trousers in this manner nor were there any physical or geographic restraints or factors which compelled the adoption of this style. o­n the contrary, the age and the people of the time demanded that the trousers be worn below the ankles in exactly the same way as modernists, kuffaar and Muslims ashamed of the Sunnah Culture are advocating today.

THE REASON

In order to accomodate the liberal fancies of the western kuffaar, molvis in this age of corruption, have hooked o­nto a legless and baseless argument to justify, propagate and even praise the kaafir style of wearing the trousers below the ankles—a style which is in clear opposition to the style and command of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

The modernist molvis of the liberal cult of westernism are arguing that the reason for the prohibition to wear the trousers below the ankles was pride. Their argument goes that o­n account of pride, the style was prohibited. But if there is no pride then wearing the trousers below the ankles is permissible, in fact commendable by implication of their baseless and satanic arguments which they voice over their radio channels.

Why is it haraam for a Muslim to wear a crucifix around his neck or arm? Why should it be haraam for a Muslim to keep a small idol of Bhagwan or Buddha in his pocket or display it in his home. Why should this be haraam if the Muslim concerned has no beliefs of shirk or kufr. He simply regards these items as ‘artifacts’ and symbols of ‘history’. He does not believe in these idols. He does not worship them. But we can claim without fear of contradiction that even the modernist molvis have as yet not descended to the level of corruption which will constrain them to say that keeping such idols is permissible if the reason is not shirk/worship. Although this is still the case presently, we know that there will soon come a time when keeping and admiring even these instruments of shirk and kufr will be justified and made legal by the presentation of the argument that the reason for the initial prohibition was the belief of shirk which had not yet been completely eradicated from the hearts of the new converts to Islam.

CATEGORIC PROHIBITION

When the Shariah categorically prohibits an act or practice, the prohibition will endure regardless of the reason for which it was initially prohibited. Reciting the qira’t jahran (aloud) in Zuhr and Asr was prohibited initially o­n account of a particular reason which soon after the prohibition no longer existed. But inspite of the disappearance of the reason for the prohibition, the hukm of Sirri (silent) recitation will endure until the day of Qiyaamah.

Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam) said that he who plays chess is like o­ne who has dipped his fingers in the blood of a swine. Surely there was a cogent reason for this stern prohibition. Now, regardless of whether that reason exists in some cases or not, the prohibition of playing chess will remain until the day of Qiyaamah. In fact, the prohibition has been taken further by the Fuqaha (the Authorities of the Shariah). This prohibition has been extended to all similar games of the kuffaar.

THE AHADITH

We shall now present the relevant authentic Ahadith o­n the issue of the trousers below and above the ankles and then proceed to further refute and negate the utterly baseless and devious arguments tendered by modernists molvis to beguile the Ummah.

(1) Abu Hurairah (Radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:


"Whatever of the garment is below the ankles will be in the Fire (of Jahannum)."

[Bukhaari]

(2) Ibn Umar (Radhiyallahu anhu) narrates:


"Verily the Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: Whoever hangs his garment in pride, Allah will not look at him (with mercy) o­n the day of Qiyaamah."

[Bukhaari and Muslim]

(3) Abu Saeed al-Kudri (Radhiyallahu anhu) narrates:


"I heard Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) saying: The izaar of the Mu’min is halfway o­n the forlegs (i.e.midway between the knees and the ankles). There is no sin o­n him in that which is between it and the ankles. And, whatever is below this is in the Fire (of Jahannum). He (Rasulullah —sallallahu alayhi wasallam) repeated this statement) three times, And, he said: Allah will not look (with mercy) at the person who hangs his izaar in pride."

[Abu Dawood and Ibn Maajah]

(4) Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates:


"I passed by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) while my trousers was hanging (i.e.below the ankles). He then exclaimed: O Abdullah! Raise your izaar. I then raised it (a bit). Then he (Rasulullah- sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: Raise it more! I then raised it more. Thereafter I was always concious of it." Some people asked: Until where (did you raise it)? He (Ibn Umar) said: Until midway of the forleg."

[Muslim]

(5) Ubaid Bin Khaalid (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: While I was walking in Madinah, (I heard) someone behind me say:


"Raise your izaar! Verily it (raising the garment) is better for piety and preservation (of the garment)." I then looked behind and observed that it was Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). I then said: O Rasulullah! It is a simple (of inferior quality and price) garment. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) commented: "What, is there not for you in me an example (to follow)?" When I looked (at Rasulullah’s garment), his izaar was midway o­n his forlegs."

[Tirmizi]

(6) Salmah Bin Akwa’ (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates:


"Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhu) would wear his trousers midway o­n his forlegs, and he would say: ‘So was the izaar of my Companion, i.e.Nabi -sallallahu alayhi wasallam)."

[Tirmizi]

(7) Huzaifah Bin Yamaan (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) took hold of the flesh of my forleg (or of his forleg) and said:


"This is the location for the izaar. If you are not satisfied (with this position), then a bit lower. And if you are still not satisfied, then know that the izaar has no right in the ankles."

[Tirmizi]

COMMENT

Commenting o­n these Hadith narration, Hadhrat Shaikh Muhammad Zakariyya (rahmatullah alayh) writes:

"Severe warnings have been recorded for wearing the lungi, trousers, etc. below the ankles. That section (below the ankles) o­n which the garment hangs will be burnt in the Fire (of Jahannum). In view of this type (of severe) warnings (of punishment) in the ahadith, special attention should be paid to this matter. But, o­n the contrary in our age, the garments are specially (i.e.intentionally) worn below the ankles. To Allah does the complainer (register his complaint)."

Inspite of the many unambiguous ahadith explicitly prohibiting the kuffaar style of wearing the trousers below the ankles, molvis in this age are devoting special time o­n their radio channels to negate what Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has commanded.

THE THRUST

Any level-headed and unbiased Muslim in search of the truth will understand after a perusal of the aforementioned ahadith that wearing the trousers below the ankles is haraam.

In Hadith No. 5, Ubaid Bin Khaalid (radhiyallahu anhu) was wearing his garment below his ankles. He was walking in the streets of Madinah when Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) ordered him to raise his izaar above the ankles. In this Hadith, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) presented two reasons for wearing the trousers above the ankles. In this style (of the Sunnah) is greater piety in view of the fact that it firstly is in conflict with the style of the kuffaar. Secondly, when a Muslim conciously abstains from emulating the style of the kuffaar, he rises in rank of taqwa. Following the method of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is an incumbent requirement of Taqwa, hence he said that wearing the trousers above the ankles is ‘atqaa’ (more pious). It thus flows from this reasoning presented by Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) that wearing the the garment below the ankles is not in conformity with taqwa. Whether we understand the relationship between this style and taqwa is of no significance. Since Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has offered this explanation, it is the fardh duty of every Mu’min to blindly accept it.

The second argument which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) presented for his command to wear the garment above the ankles is that this style is ‘abqaa’ for the garment. In other words the garment will be better preserved against the dirt and filth of the road and in this way be better protected. The Mu’min’s trousers should not serve the function of the street-sweeper.

It is significant that in this Hadith, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) did not tender the argument of pride. Since he was aware that the Sahaabi was not wearing his garment below the ankles o­n account of pride, he did not mention pride o­n this occasion. However, when the Sahaabi did not understand the argument, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) broached the subject from another angle. He asked: Is my example and way not sufficient? In otherwords, for the Mu’min the acts, practices and example of the Rasool are more than adequate. There is no need to search for reasons and wisdoms for the ahkaam (laws of the Deen). The example of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is compulsorily imposed o­n Muslims by the Qur’aan Majeed. There is no need to look elsewhere and further than this. It thus does not behove a Muslim, least of all a learned man, to dig out technicalities and by distortion present these in justification of the endeavour to negate the style and custom of Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam).

In Hadith No. 6 Hadhrat Uthmaan (Radhiyallahu anhu), the third Khalifah, long after the demise of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) commented o­n the practice of wearing the trousers above the ankles. Everyone knows and accepts that he had no pride. If the order to wear the trousers above the ankles was based o­n pride, Hadhrat Uthmaan and all the Sahaabah would not have been so meticulous in observing this injunction. They would have worn their trousers below their ankles since they were bereft of pride. They had attained the loftiest heights in the reformation of the nafs. There were no better, no more pious and no humbler community o­n earth than the Sahaabah who were thoroughly purified of all spiritual maladies by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Yet, inspite of their high stage of humility, they adhered meticulously to the style of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

Everyone who has studied a bit of the history of the Sahaabah, is aware that Hadhrat Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) was such a staunch and ardent follower of the minutest details of the Sunnah, that people believed that he would become insane. Pride was never the reason for him having worn his trousers below his ankles. When Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) saw this, he commanded him to raise his garment midway between the knees and the ankles. The issue of pride never featured in his wearing his trousers below his ankles nor in the argument of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) o­n the occasion when he issued his instruction to this devotee of the Sunnah.

PRIDE

In some narrations the reason for wearing the trousers below the ankles is stated as pride. While this was the actual reason in those times for this prohibited style, it was not always the case with everyone who would wear his trousers below his ankles. Hence, we find Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) issuing stern warnings and threats of the punishment of the Fire for those who wear their trousers in the fashion of the proud people. So whether o­ne wears the trousers below the ankles for the sake of pride or not, o­ne is undoubtedly, imitating the style of the proud o­nes and the style of the kuffaar. Imitating the kuffaar by itself is a factor of prohibition.

THE HIDDEN DISEASE

Now the question to be asked is: Why would a molvi advocate a style which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had prohibited. He did not o­nly present pride as the reason for the prohibition. So why is there so much concern to negate a Sunnah style? Leaving aside the technical questions and academic rulings, it can be simply understood that the permanent practice and style of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his Sahaabah were to wear their garments above the ankles, not below their ankles.

That wearing the trousers above the ankles is an irrefutable Sunnah practice, will be acknowledged by all Muslims, even the modernists and the liberal molvis. o­n the assumption that it is not haraam to wear the trousers below the ankles, then too, why should Muslims who claim to love Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam) have a desire to scuttle this Sunnah practice and in its place follow the style of the kuffaar? Whose style is it to wear the trousers above the ankles? And, whose style is it to wear it below the ankles? What does the Imaan of a Mu’min demand? Follow the style of Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam) or the style of the kuffaar? Why is there such a strong aversion in the ranks of the Muslims for the style of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)?

What goes o­n in the heart of a molvi who advocates a style abhorred by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)? Surely there must be some hidden disease (mardh) lurking somewhere in such a heart. It is inconceivable that a Mu’min of healthy Imaan will ever stoop so low as to scrape the very bottom of the barrel of spiritual corruprion. Remember that to negate a preference of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), to feel ashamed of the style of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and to present devious arguments to distort and deny what Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had commanded, are worse than consuming liquor, worse than fornication and worse than all the major sins put together. Such attitude is kufr.

HADHRAT ABU BAKR

The solitary narration which the denigrators of Rasulullah’s practice are able to produce as ‘evidence’ is the Hadith in which it is mentioned that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) allowed Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu anhu) to wear his garment below his ankles. To present this Hadith in substantiation of the claim, the aim of which is to negate the style of Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam), is ludicrous and utterly baseless. The Hadith in question is very clear as for the reason of the permission granted to Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu anhu) who was highly perturbed by his inability to maintain his garment above his ankles. He therefore, discussed this matter with Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Hadhrat Abu Bakr (Radhiyallahu anhu) was a man with a big stomach. Inspite of all his efforts to keep his garment in place, he failed. His garment would repeatedly slide down over his ankles. The Hadith in question, explicitly mentions this fact. In view of this condition and his inability to retain his garment in position above his ankles, he was exempted from the prohibition. But he had a valid reason. What valid reason do the modernists and the liberal molvis have? There are always exceptions to general rules. But the exceptions do not cancel out the law or the rule. The rule remains in place. Furthermore, why do the scoffers of Rasulullah’s style cast a blind eye to all the ahadith of prohibition and cling o­nto this solitary narration which in no way negates the prohibition stated so emphatically in the other narrations?

IMAAM SHAAFI

Like a drowning man, the modernist molvi tries to cling to every floating straw that passes his way. Entirely bereft of proper Shar’i arguments to bolster his corrupt view and enmity for Rasulullah’s dress style, the molvi claims that according to Imaam Shaafi (Rahmatullah alayh) it is permissible to wear the trousers below the ankles.

Let us for a moment assume that what the molvi tendered is correct. The question now is: Why does the Hanafi molvi resort to a view of Imaam Shaafi (Rahmatullah alayh), especially o­n an issue for which there is absolutely no need to adopt the view of another Math-hab? If it was a critical issue or an emergency or some urgent need, then in terms of the principles of the Hanafi Math-hab, a pious and experienced Mufti will have the right to issue a Fatwa o­n the basis of o­ne of the other Math-habs among the Four Math-habs. But in this case of wearing the trousers, there is absolutely no such expediency.

When a Hanafi molvi ignores the views and fatwas of the authorities of his own Math-hab and clings to an opinion of another Math-hab, it follows that there is no flexibility for his baseless view in his own Math-hab, hence he had to look elsewhere for aid. His act in itself is sufficient testimony for the claim that according to the Hanafi Fuqaha and Ulama and Auliya, wearing the trousers below the ankles is haraam.

THE ACTUAL POSITION

The liberal molvi claims that according to Imaam Shaafi (rahmatullah alayh) wearing the trousers below the ankles is permissible. His claim is baseless. Imaam Shaafi does not say that "it is permissible". According to the Shaafi Math-hab there are different degrees of prohibition for the style of wearing the trousers below the ankles. Explaining this, Imaam Nawawi (a Shaafi authority) states in his Sharhul Muslim

"It is not permissible to hang the garment below the ankles if it is for pride. If it is for a reason other than pride, it is Makrooh.

The Mustahab requirement is midway of the calfs (the forlegs) as it is stated in the Hadith of Ibn Umar.

Midway of the forlegs is Mustahab. Below this limit until the ankles is permissible without it being Makrooh. What descends below the ankles is Mamnoo’ (prohibited). If it is for pride, then the prohibition is of the haraam category (i.e.Makrooh Tahrimi). And, if it is not for pride, the prohibition is of the tanzihi category (i.e.Makrooh Tanzihi)."

Makrooh Tanzihi does not mean ‘permissible’. It remains a detestable act in the Shariah. In fact, persistence o­n a Makrooh Tanzihi act transforms it into Makrooh Tahrimi which is sinful and a punishable offence. It makes a man a faasiq. Clutching at straws is not Shar’i evidence for a claim.

THE FACTORS

From the aforegoing explanation it will be understood that there are several factors for the prohibition of wearing the garment below the ankles:

(a) It is the style of the kuffaar. Whoever imitates the kuffaar becomes of them.

(b) It is the way of the mutakabbireen (proud people). So whether o­ne has pride or not, is immaterial. The fact that the mutakabbireen’s style is adopted in itself is a grave sin.

(c) The opposite style (wearing above the ankles) is ‘atqaa’ and abqaa’ according to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

(d) Wearing the garment above the ankles is part of the Uswah-e-Hasanah (Beautiful Life Pattern) of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The Qur’aan commands adoption of this Sunnah.

(e) The trousers has no haqq (right) o­n the ankles according to the explicit pronouncement of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

(f) What is below the ankles will be in the Fire of Jahannum.

In view of all these factors of prohibition, the arguments of the modernist and liberal molvis have absolutely no validity. These molvis should also understand that in airing their liberal, modernist and baatil views, they do not have the support of a single o­ne of our Akaabir Ulama. Our advice is that they should utilize their radio channels constructively to aid the Deen, not to breakdown Islam and its Culture, for then, there will be absolute justification for branding their organs of transmission as radio shaitaan and channel shaitaan.

"The Majlis" Vol.15 No.1

Source : TheMajlis.net

[caption id="attachment_631" align="alignleft" width="192"] Kufi by Lutfi[/caption]

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Digital Pictures

The ban o­n pictures of animate objects (people and animals) is unequivocally stated with great emphasis in many highly authentic Ahaadith. The authenticity of these Ahaadith has never been questioned by anyone, not even the deviant learned men who propagate the permissibility of pictures. These deviates make their best endeavors to interpret away the prohibition. But all their interpretations are baseless and no Muslim of intelligence who is not intoxicated by his nafs will find sense in the interpretations to legalize the prohibition of pictures of animate objects.

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Digital Pictures

The ban o­n pictures of animate objects (people and animals) is unequivocally stated with great emphasis in many highly authentic Ahaadith. The authenticity of these Ahaadith has never been questioned by anyone, not even the deviant learned men who propagate the permissibility of pictures. These deviates make their best endeavors to interpret away the prohibition. But all their interpretations are baseless and no Muslim of intelligence who is not intoxicated by his nafs will find sense in the interpretations to legalize the prohibition of pictures of animate objects.

WORN-OUT

The desperate old and worn-out argument for legalizing pictures produced by the photography method was the laughable contention that the photo-picture is a reflection of the object and not a picture of the object. Any person having some intelligence can understand that a photograph is NOT a reflection. It is a permanent picture notwithstanding the use made of the principle of reflection in the production of the picture.

Just as drawing with a pen or brush is a method which produces a picture, so too is the camera a method or a way of producing a picture. As long as the object remains in front of the mirror, its reflection will be there. As soon as the object is removed, the reflection too disappears. If a picture is drawn of an object reflected in the mirror, the drawn image will not be a reflection. Thus, the picture which was drawn by viewing a reflection in the mirror will remain a picture. It will not be said that it is not a picture, but is a reflection because it was drawn by viewing at the reflection in the mirror. But a picture for its sustainment is not indeed of the permanent presence of the object whose picture it is. The argument is absolutely ludicrous. In fact, it is technically and Islamically bizarre.

We have explained the Islamic ban of pictures, including photopictures, in our booklet, Photography, Picture-Making and Islam. The booklet is available from us.

LEGALIZING

Whenever a new method of making pictures is discovered, the modernistmen of ‘learning’ make their abortive attempts to legalize pictures. The most recent method invented is digital photography. Some Ulama have fallen into the trap of the modernist deviates and have proclaimed digital pictography to be permissible. These Ulama have viewed the issue very superficially. They have deliberately made a superficial and a defective research of the digital method to comply with their nafsaani desires to make haraam pictures halaal. But there is absolutely no validity in their arguments.

METHODS

There are a variety of ways and methods of producing pictures. The Shariah does not attack the method of picture production. It attacks and bans the product of the method, namely, the picture of animate objects. Regardless of the method employed to produce a picture, if it is a picture of a person or animal, it is haraam. It will remain haraam — a major sin— irrespective of the method of its production. By whatever existing methods or future new methods which maybe still be invented pictures are made, they will always remain haraam if the pictures are of animate objects.

The latest method is the digital o­ne. Some Ulama have subtley attempted to legalize haraam pictures by introducing the baseless argument —that pictures made by the digital method are not pictures. Even non-Muslims mock at the absurdity of this stupid argument. Those who claim that pictures produced by the digital method are not pictures should revert to the experts who have invented this method. Ask their opinion regarding the technical issues and see if they say that digital pictures are not pictures.

DIMENSIONS

Muslims should not allow themselves to be misled by the absurd arguments proffered to legalize what Allah Ta’ala has made haraam. Sin has two dimensions. The o­ne dimension renders the perpetrator a faasiq, and the other dimension makes him a murtadd (renegade). It expels him from the fold of Islam. As long as the sinner understands and believes that the sin he commits is haraam, he remains a Muslim and is described a faasiq. But when he becomes so flagrant and shameless in the perpetration of the haraam act that he declares the permissibility of the prohibition, then he leaves the fold of Islam. He has thus become a murtadd. May Allah Ta’ala save us from such calamities. Digital pictures are just as haraam as pictures drawn with the pen, brush, or any other method, past, present and future.

Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that among the worstpunished persons o­n the Day of Qiyaamah will be the picture-makers, including those who employ digital pictography. The Hadith places picture-makers in the same category as those who had murdered Ambiya and their own parents.


"The Majlis" Vol.15 No.10

Mujlisul Ulama of South Africa
P.O. Box 3393
Port Elizabeth, 6056
South Africa

Source : themajlis.net

Saturday, January 22, 2011

Reviving the Dead Janaazah Sunnah

Posted by: theMajlis

Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:
"Whoever holds o­n firmly to my Sunnah at the time of the corruption of my Ummah,for him there is the reward of a hundred shuhadaa (martyrs)."


Among the Masnoon acts of the Janaazah (Burial) service is that the Janaazah be carried by four men. Others should walk behind and alongside the Janaazah. The details of this carrying system are described in the books of Fiqh and in even the elementary Maktab text books.

Reviving the Dead Janaazah Sunnah

Posted by: theMajlis

Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:
"Whoever holds o­n firmly to my Sunnah at the time of the corruption of my Ummah,for him there is the reward of a hundred shuhadaa (martyrs)."

Among the Masnoon acts of the Janaazah (Burial) service is that the Janaazah be carried by four men. Others should walk behind and alongside the Janaazah. The details of this carrying system are described in the books of Fiqh and in even the elementary Maktab text books.

However, in some places this Masnoon system has been totally displaced and a bid’ah style has replaced the Sunnah method.

LINING UP

People line up in two rows facing each other at the entrance of the qabrustaan. The Janaazah is passed o­n along the gauntlet like a bag of potatoes from hand to hand until it reaches the grave. This system is in conflict with the Sunnah which it displaces., and at the same time is highly disrespectful for the mayyit (deceased ). According to the Shariah the way of respect for the mayyit is to carry it along in the Masnoon ma nner, not passing it along a row of people as if it is some chattel. The Sunnah requires that the people move along with the Janaazah, not that the Janaazah be moved along while all the people remain stationary.

The Ulama in these places where this bid’ah is being perpetrated have also become so accustomed to this bid’ah that they fail to see the gross error of this bid’ah method. It is the obligation of the Ulama to rectify this wrong and educate their flocks to reinstitution the Sunnah method of carrying the Janaazah.

ANOTHER NEW BID’AH

Another new bid’ah which has been recently introduced by the graveside is the method of making dua. Firstly, the congregational dua which takes place after burial is not Sunnat. In the new style of dua,after the grave has been closed up, the Imaam Saheb instructs the crowd to turn around facing the Qiblah to make the congregational dua. There is no such dua for this occasion. The instruction by the Imaam Saheb is also a new dimension added to the burial service. Every new fabricated method displaces the Sunnat method, hence it is bid’ah.

"The Majlis" Vol.15 No.10

Mujlisul Ulama of South Africa
P.O. Box 3393
Port Elizabeth, 6056
South Africa

Source : TheMajlis.net

Thursday, January 20, 2011

Soft Drinks


The Mujlisul Ulama of South Africa has established beyond any doubt that Coca Cola as well as all other soft drinks contain very small quantities of alcohol. In this fact there is no doubt and the manufacturers of these minerals cannot and do not dispute this claim. Attached hereto are papers which testify to the validity of our claim.Some of our bretheren dispute our stand and not only disagree with our findings, but actively, practically and sarcastically advocate and encourage Muslims to consume these minerals.

While they are entitled to their opinions based on Shar'i proofs if indeed they do possess any such proofs, we must stress that they are not discharging their duty as Ulama-e-Haqq on account of their negligent and childish attitude in this matter. Every Aalim of Truth should be aware of Rasulullah's (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) advice that Muslims should abstain from mushtabah (doubtful) things. A mushtabah thing becomes such not on the basis of one's personal feeling, likes or dislikes. A thing will become mushtabah where there exists valid Shar'i Dalaa-il . When a group or even a single Aalim acting on the basis of valid Shar'i Dalaa-il proclaims an item unlawful, then a valid doubt has been introduced. The item becomes mushtabah and in terms of Rasulullah's (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) exhortation the mu'min should abstain therefrom.

Reference and continue reading : TheMajlis.net

Working in a hotel or restaurant which serves liquor and pork

Is it permissible to work in a hotel or restaurant which serves liquor and pork? Will the wages of a Muslim be halaal?

Besides the question of the wages, it is not permissible to work in establishments which deal with haraam items. It is not permissible for a Muslim to work in even the supermarkets and hypermarkets of this time because all these shops sell liquor, pork and many other haraam items. Nevertheless, if a Muslim has already taken up employment in such a business, his wages will remain halaal although shorn of barkat. While the correct thing to do is to abandon the work and seek alternate employment, this advice is usually given to only those of strong Imaan. People who are defective and weak of Imaan, should not abandon their job. They should continue working and be on the lookout for better avenues of income. At the same time they should repent constantly and supplicate to Allah Ta’ala.

Reference : TheMajlis.net

Inviting non-Muslim political leaders to address in the mosques

Is it permissible to invite non-Muslim political leaders to address Muslims in the Musaajid?

It is not permissible to allow even Muslim politicians to address the jamaat in a Musjid. The Musjid is not established for the stupidities, baatil and kufr which the politicians pedal. Allowing a non-Muslim into the Musjid is a sin of an aggravated nature because a non-Muslim is always in the state of janaabat. He is ritually impure, hence admission to the Musjid is haraam. Even ritually impure Muslims may not enter the Musjid. If a non-Muslim wishes to visit a Musjid to see how Muslims worship, he may enter if he agrees to take a full bath (ghusl) as Muslims are required to do when purifying themselves from janaabat.

Reference : TheMajlis.net