Comparitive Fiqh

Sister Umm Muhammad wrote in a comment in one of the posts:

Bismillaah.Peace be upon Prophet Muhammad.
As-Salaamu ‘alaykum all.
A request/suggestion:
I’d appreciate if you could research the technicalities behind the whole “not supporting filth with your person” issue during salah. Alot of sisters pick up their children when they pray, but I refrain from doing so because of the almost constant najasah (my kid’s under 2 yrs).

Bismillah, Alhamdulillah:

Dear Sister Umm Muhammad & all others who face this predicament,

I have searched for this issue in the works of jurisprudence and I feel that I am able to quote for you the statements of the Shafi’i scholars, as well as their argument for the permissibility of holding a child during Salah.

The following hadith is what brings forth this discussion:

Continued

 

Compiled by Abul Layth 

There is disagreement regarding the permissibility of marrying a woman from the people of the Book. The following research is a collection of quotes and opinions ranging from permissibility to Makruh to Haraam.

Allah, the exalted, says in the Qur’an:

وَلا تَنْكِحُوا الْمُشْرِكَاتِ حَتَّى يُؤْمِنَّ

“And do not marry pagan women (Mushrikaat) until they believe.” [2:221]

This is a general verse declaring that the pagan women are forbidden to marry Muslim men, and vice versa. However, there is a specific (khaas) verse wherein Allah ta’alaa states,

الْيَوْمَ أُحِلَّ لَكُمُ الطَّيِّبَاتُ وَطَعَامُ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ حِلٌّ لَكُمْ وَطَعَامُكُمْ حِلٌّ لَهُمْ وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ مِنْ قَبْلِكُمْ إِذَا آتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُن

“This day [all] good foods have been made lawful, and the food of those who were given the Scripture is lawful for you and your food is lawful for them. And [lawful in marriage are] chaste women from among the believers and chaste women from among those who were given the Scripture before you…” [5:5]

Continued

Imam An-Nawawi states that it is loved that one visit the graves of the Muslims especially the people who were known for of spiritual virtue (fadl) and goodness (khayr). He states that one should recite much Qur’an as well as perform ritual dhikr. He also states that du’aa (supplication) should be made for the people of the grave one is visiting, the rest of those around him, and of the Muslims. In fact he wrote an entire chapter regarding the different words and actions one should say or perform at the grave.¹

Continued

Footnotes (Click ↩ at the end of the note to Go Back to Original Place in the article) :

1. See Al-Adhkaar page 235 Editor: Suba’y Hamza Haakimi [↩]

Research Compiled by Abul Layth

The Shafi’i jurist and judge, Qadhi Safadi stated regarding this issue,

“They all agree that touching the genitals with something other than the hand does not break wudu’. They disagree about touching the penis with the hand. Abu Hanifah says that it absolutely does not break wudu’ however you do it. Ash-Shafi’i and Mālik say that Wudu’ is broken by touching skin to skin with the front of the hand but not the back. The well-known position of Ahmad is that either the front or back of the hand breaks it. They agree that someone who touches his testicles, even without a covering, does not have to do wudu’. They disagree about touching the opening of the anus. Abu Hanifah and Mālik say that touching it does not break wudu’. Ash-Shafi’i and Ahmad say that it does. There is, however, one position from ash-Shafi’i and one transmission from Ahmad that it does not break wudu’.¹

Continued

Footnotes (Click ↩ at the end of the note to Go Back to Original Place in the article) :

1. The Mercy in the Difference of the Four Sunni Schools by Qadi Safadi, Trans. By Aisha Bewley. Published by Dar-Al-Taqwa 2004 [↩]

 By Abul Layth

 Disclaimer: I take full responsibility for anything uttered within this post. Shaykh Nuh Keller speaks only for himself, and I do not speak for Him. What I have quoted here comes directly from his tongue and I have included at the end of the article the audio file for those interested in listening. Please do not misconstrue my words as his. Far better and wiser is he than I, and I do not want anyone saying that Shaykh Nuh attacked the Muraabitoon etc. I am responding to their mistakes, and Shaykh Nuh is not. Thanks…

One of the things that I know hinders many from accepting traditionalism, is the lack of traditionalism that comes from its claimants. When I was a pseudo-salafi and would read things like the statement you are about to read, I would say to myself, “See! These evil ‘sufis’ have abandoned the shari’ah!” Now that I have seen with my own eyes the respect the true Sūfīs / Murīds have for sacred law and learning, the love and staunch defense they exert for it, the adherence to its perfect commands, I know now that every preconceived notion I had was a mistake. If one sincerely looks to the Shaykhs of the noble Sufis, they find Imams of Islam, ascetics striving to be in the divine presence, completely immersed in the reflection of their Lord. They find men such as Ibn ‘Atā’illah Iskandarī, the great Mālikī Shādhilī whose words still illuminate the hearts of those seeking Allah. They find men such as Imām An-Nawawī whose karamāt (charismatic acts) exceed what is known by his students. The greatest of all karamāt ascribed to him is that in nearly every Muslim’s home we find Riyādh-us-Sālihīn. Even the enemies of tasawwuf / Ihsān admit that they must “overlook” the “deviances” of this noble Shaykh of Islām and the Muslims. They are forced to swallow the fact that this Imām was erudite and a pillar for this Ummah. I say these words only because I understand the confusion some of the seekers face when reading blatant misinformation. I write this article only to clear the name of this noble science of Islām, tasawwuf, from the blunders of those who ascribe themselves to it.

Continued

Years ago I was told by some pseudo-Salafis that it was a bida’ah to wipe one’s face with hands after du’aa. For years I wondered, looked over, and pondered this issue. On Islam-qa’s website, they state regarding this act:

 لا يشرع وضع اليدين على الوجه لا بعد الانتهاء من الصلاة ، ولا بعد الانتهاء من الدعاء ، وخير الهدي هدي نبينا محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم ، وكان إذا سلَّم استغفر ثلاثاً ، ولم يمسح وجهه بيديه لا بعد السلام ولا بعد الدعاء .

Their translation: “It is not prescribed to place the hands over the face after finishing prayer or after finishing du’aa’. The best of guidance is the guidance of our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). When he said the salaam (at the end of prayer) he would pray for forgiveness three times, but he did not wipe his face with his hands after saying the salaam or after saying du’aa’.”

Continued

Islām has made the life of women and children inviolable in times of war. This research paper will collect the evidences from the main sources of Islamic Law (shari’ah) and present them in an objective manner. The goal is to prove to the Muslim, as well as the non-Muslim, that the traditional Islamic view on this issue is one of proscription, not permissibility.

Allah, the exalted, says in the Qur’an:

وَقَاتِلُواْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللّهِ الَّذِينَ يُقَاتِلُونَكُمْ وَلاَ تَعْتَدُواْ إِنَّ اللّهَ لاَ يُحِبِّ الْمُعْتَدِينَ

 

“Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.”

The phrase “wa lā ta’tadū” translated above as ‘but do not transgress limits’, has been interpreted by the earliest Muslim jurists to mean ‘do not kill women and children’ etc.

Continued

The following narrations are proofs for the permissibility of using the Masbahah:
 

 First Proof:

“From Sa’ad ibn Abi Waqqās that he entered with the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) upon a woman and between her hands was Nawā (seeds, pebbles) or Hasā (stones or pebbles) that she was [counting] tasbīh with…”

This hadīth is reported by Imām At-Tirmithī who said, “Hasan Gharīb from the hadīth of Sa’ad”. It is also reported by Imām Abu Dāwūd in his Sunan, Imām An Nasā’ī, Ibn Hibbān, and Imām Al Hākim in his Mustadarak who said. “Its isnād is Sahīh, and [they i.e. Bukhārī and Muslim] did not report it” and Imām Adh-Dhahabi agreed with him.
Continued

compiled by Abul-Layth Ibn ‘Ata

In Al-Ihkām, Imām Al-Āmidī states that to the Shāfi’ī’s fardh and wājib are identical categories, whereas the Hanafī’s maintain that they are different. [See Al-Ihkām 1:139]

A famous story occurs in the Al-Badā’i` As-Sanā’i` fit-tartīb ash-sharā’i` as well as Muhammad ibn Muhammad Murtadhā Az-Zabīdī’s, “Tāj”,

“Yūsuf ibn Khālid As-Simtī told Abū Hanifah that he was a kāfir for saying witr was wājib, thinking by that he meant it was the same as fardh. Abu Hanīfah stated, “You can’t scare me with your takfīr, since I know that the difference between Fardh and Wājib is like the difference between the heavens and the earth (al farq bayn al wājib wal-fardh ka farq mā bayn as-samā’ wal-ardh).”

[Tāj 5:66, and Badā’i` - Beirut: Dār Al Kitāb Al-‘Arabi, 1402/1982 print pages 1:271]

Interestingly, however, some Hanafīs (an incredibly small minority) did not make a distinction between the two. Ibn Humām and his commentator Ibn Bādshāh did not make this distinction Tayasīr At-Tahrīr 2:184ff. However, do not forget that Ibn Humām lived in the Shāfi’ī dominated Alexandria, Egypt.

Continued

Authored by: Abul-Layth

Introduction

With the name of Allāh (the exalted) who is the The Most Merciful, The Most Gracious. All Praise and thanks is due to the one who has blessed us with the guidance and light of Islām. We beg His pardon, seek His aid, hope for His eternal mercy, and fear his severe wrath. I ask Allāh to bless his chosen seal of the Prophets, Muhammad (Sallallahu ‘Alayhi wa Sallam).

I will not conceal the real purpose of this research paper and refutation that you are about to read. I am writing this for the sole purpose of squelching the attacks of some of the enemies of Islām, and defending the noble way of life Allāh (the exalted) has guided us to. This research paper is a refutation of a few ignoramus non-Muslims who can think outside of their bigot ‘box’. After hearing a kāfir, enemy of Islām and the Muslims, make the ridiculous claim that Islām permits bestiality, I decided to search for a sound English response I could give him to clarify his vain attempts to diminish the light of Allāh. The results of my search were hopelessly miserable. Not a single academic article on this topic could be found responding to the enemies of our pure law. Thus, I decided to write what you have between your hands now. I will make every effort to be objective and clear in this research paper. I ask Allah to benefit this Ummah and destroy the lies of the liars. Amīn.

There are only two entities that the divine law (shari’ah) allows one to have sexual relations with. They are mentioned in the following verse in the Qur’an,

And those who guard their chastity (lit. private parts). Except from their wives or (the captives and slaves) that their right hands possess, for then, they are free from blame; (Al-Mu’minun 23:5-6)

This āyāh is explicitly stating that one’s “privates (faraj)” can only be used sexually with one’s spouse by marriage or right hand possessions. This infers that bestiality is clearly harām, as an animal is not marriageable.

Continued

compiled by the Forum members of Seekingilm.com

I recently found that the print of Riyādh As-Sālihīn published by Dār-us-Salām, a Riyādh based publisher who promotes the pseudo-salafī propaganda, has mistranslated and mis-commented on a hadīth. This atrocious error is simply unbecoming of academic honesty. In Volume 2 chapter 184, hadīth number 1023 we find the following hadīth,

“Abu Hurayrah (Radhiya Allāhu ‘Anhu) reported: The Messenger of Allāh (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam) said, “Any group of people that assemble in one of the houses of Allāh to study the Qur’ān, tranquility will descend upon them, mercy will engulf them, angels will surround them and Allāh will make mention of them to those in His proximity. [Muslim]”

The commentary by the “Hāfith” Salāhud-Dīn Yusuf states,

“The meaning of the Hadith is that they teach one another by discussing the Quranic sciences, and knowledge the Qur’an contains. This meaning is correct because both these acts are auspicious and are means of gaining the Pleasure of Allah. This Hadith, however, does not tell us in any way that this group of people recite the Qur’an all at once. This is Bid`ah for this was not the practice of the Messenger of Allah (Sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa Sallam).”

The problem with this translation is that they have done the following,

1) Mistranslated
2) Declared that which is Mustahabb (recommended) as proven by this hadīth and other than it, bida’ah (a reprehensible innovated heresy).

Continued