Archive for December, 2007

In a hadith found in the Sahih of Imam Al-Bukhari we find a hadith in the Book of Tafsir (commentary) under the chapter of Surat Muhammad, the first hadith that reads:

‏حَدَّثَنَا ‏ ‏خَالِدُ بْنُ مَخْلَدٍ ‏ ‏حَدَّثَنَا ‏ ‏سُلَيْمَانُ ‏ ‏قَالَ حَدَّثَنِي ‏ ‏مُعَاوِيَةُ بْنُ أَبِي مُزَرِّدٍ ‏ ‏عَنْ ‏ ‏سَعِيدِ بْنِ يَسَارٍ ‏ ‏عَنْ ‏ ‏أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ ‏ ‏رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُ ‏‏عَنْ النَّبِيِّ ‏ ‏صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ‏ ‏قَالَ خَلَقَ اللَّهُ الْخَلْقَ فَلَمَّا فَرَغَ مِنْهُ قَامَتْ الرَّحِمُ فَأَخَذَتْ بِحَقْوِ الرَّحْمَنِ فَقَالَ لَهُ ‏ ‏مَهْ ‏ ‏قَالَتْ هَذَا مَقَامُ الْعَائِذِ بِكَ مِنْ ‏ ‏الْقَطِيعَةِ ‏ ‏قَالَ ‏ ‏أَلَا تَرْضَيْنَ أَنْ أَصِلَ مَنْ ‏ ‏وَصَلَكِ ‏ ‏وَأَقْطَعَ مَنْ قَطَعَكِ قَالَتْ بَلَى يَا رَبِّ قَالَ فَذَاكِ قَالَ ‏ ‏أَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ ‏ ‏اقْرَءُوا إِنْ شِئْتُمْ

‏فَهَلْ عَسَيْتُمْ إِنْ تَوَلَّيْتُمْ أَنْ تُفْسِدُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَتُقَطِّعُوا أَرْحَامَكُمْ ‏

Translation:

Narrated from Abu Hurayrah that the Prophet (’alayhis salaam) said, “Allah created the creation and upon finishing, the Rahim (womb) got up and took hold of the loins of Ar-Rahman (i.e. The Merciful - Allah). Allah said to it, ‘What is wrong?’ The womb said, ‘I seek refuge with you from Al-Qatee’ah (i.e. the one who severs the ties of the family). Allah said, ‘Would you be pleased if I bestow my favors on him who keeps your ties, and withhold My favors from he who severs your ties? The womb responded, ‘Certainly Oh Lord!’ Allah said, “That is granted!” Abu Hurayrah said, ‘If you want you can recite [the verse] ‘Would you then if given authority, do mischief in the land and cut the ties of kinship (arhaamukum)?’ [47:22]

Continued

Recently, a Muslim brother who goes by the name “Marc” wrote a disgruntled comment to my harsh critique of the westerner Eteraz. I have, for sometime now, wanted to get a message out. I wasn’t really sure of how I could solidify my thesis, but thanks to this response from the disgruntled brother, I have been given the chance to elaborate as well as get the message that has lingered deep in my mind, for what seems to be ages, out to those readers of Seekingilm.com. Let me first say that what I am about to say is perfectly observable to you all, if you only open your hearts and minds to see. Secondly, I do not know Marc or Eteraz personally, and I am certain if I met them I would treat them the same as any person I meet, kindly. I have no PERSONAL hard feelings toward any of these two individuals. However, I do have baraa’ for Eteraz and his allied cronies. I also disagree, respectively, with Marc as well. I will not, however, be going into a tit-for-tat with either of them. What I intend to do here is to expound on a much greater worry than what Marc tries to forward in his post. It is a worry that haunts this Ummah, and was foretold by prophecy by the wise tongue of our beloved Sayyid Rasulullah (’alayhis salaam).

Continued

 He begins in a milieu of religiosity. Seemingly safe, his fortress being the athaan, the companionship of men seeking Allah’s pleasure, the humility and kindness. He earns his degree and seeks more. Discontent, his nafs yearns for ‘the streets paved with gold’. The illusions of the mundane fill his heart, calling him to the lands of greed and oppression. He decides to go to the western university, a ticket to ‘success’, so it seems. Schooling is truly what he is about to receive.

Continued

Compiled by Abul Layth

Ijmaa’, or scholarly consensus, is a principle of Islamic law. A fundamental proof used in Islamic legal discourse. It is considered a secondary principle because it is based on the primary proofs, the Qur’an and Sunnah. The following is some simple research I have done in support of the usage of Ijma’ as a proof in Islamic legal debate.

Proof from the Qur’an:

وَمَن يُشَاقِقِ الرَّسُولَ مِن بَعْدِ مَا تَبَيَّنَ لَهُ الْهُدَى وَيَتَّبِعْ غَيْرَ سَبِيلِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ نُوَلِّهِ مَا تَوَلَّى وَنُصْلِهِ جَهَنَّمَ وَسَاءتْ مَصِيراً

“And whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has become clear to him and follows other than the way of the believers - We will give him what he has taken and drive him into Hell, and evil it is as a destination.”

Continued

 Alhamdulillah for the depth and breadth of the noble science of hadith. When an issue of scholarly disagreement arises, one can easily look through the works of rijaal to determine what the ijtihaad of the scholars of the salaf was. This specific issue is one that the earliest A’immah disagreed upon. Imam As-Suyuti in Ta’yid al-Haqiqat al-`Aliyya wa- Tashyid al-Tariqat al-Shadhiliyya (”The Support of the Higher Truth and the Strengthening of the Shadhili Path”) and Ithaf al-Firqa bi-Rafwi al-Khirqa (”The Gift to the Group in the Mending of the Cloak”) printed in al-Hawi lil-Fatawi forwarded, with proofs, that Al-Hasan did in fact meet and even hear from Imam ‘Ali. The late Hafith Ahmad al-Ghumari (rahimahullah) in al-Burhan al-Jali fi Intisab al-Sufiyyati ila `Ali (”The Glaring Proof in Verifying the Connection of the Sufis to `Ali”) produced several ahadith and aathaar proving that Al-Hasan did infact hear from Imam ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (alayhis salaam). An example of a well-known report from Al-Hasan from ‘Ali is the hadith of the Nabi (sallallahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) that goes,

 ”The pen is raised from three: from the one asleep until he awakes, from the child until he matures, and from the insane until they are sane.” Though At-Tirmdhi declares this chain “Hasan” he states that it is not known if Al-Hasan heard from ‘Ali or not. Ibn Hajr in his Talkhis calls this hadith “Mursal”, for he maintains that Al-Hasan did not hear from ‘Ali. ((This specific report is found in Ahmad’s Musnad, Tirmidhi’s Sunan, Al-Haakim’s Mustadarak who said ‘Sahih upon the conditions of the Shaykhs’ in the book of Hudud, all from the chain Hammam from Qataadah from Al-Hasan from ‘Ali from the Nabi… ))  

Continued

The following reminder by brnaeem benefited me incredibly, so I feel I need to share with others:

http://brnaeem.blogspot.com/2007/12/test-of-faith.html

Once again sister Amy has provided me with fodder for a blog post.

The good sister is feeling the burden of a downswing in her faith – one which I can relate to all too well - and I felt it to be an opportune time to remind myself and others of a specific form of test which Allah (swt) puts us through.

We all accept that life is a series of challenges as the oft-cited verses from the Quran state:

Do men think that they will be left alone on saying ‘We believe’, and that they will not be tested? We did test those before them, and Allah will certainly know those who are true from those who are false. (29:2-3)

Be sure we shall test you with fear and hunger, some loss in goods or lives or the fruits (of your toil), but give glad tidings to those who patiently persevere. (2:155)

When contemplating these verses, I immediately think of loss of wealth or health. People often talk about being tested with death or terminal illness or the loss of a job or a home.

Continued

It begins as a discussion and quickly turns to an ‘argument’. One nafs slips and calls another a name. The untrained faqir lashes back out of anger. The volcano is steaming, lava bursting forth, rage overwhelms the nafs. I once saw two individuals get in an argument in the masjid. Both calling each other names and screaming at the top of their lungs. One brother becomes so enraged he hits the other brother in his jaw. In response the other brother attacks. He pins the brother to the ground. A blur ensues. Another brother and myself pry the two apart. “What is wrong with you two?” we ask. “Are you out of your minds? This is the Masjid! You are Muslims…” 

Continued

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 [↩]