ummtaalib

Forgetfulness the people of the dunya Imaam al-Ghazzaali رحمه الله writes, "Know that in their forgetfulness the people of the dunya are like a group of people sailing upon a ship. When they come to an island, and disembark to relieve themselves, the captain warns them against returning late, and instructs them to remain only so long as is necessary, lest he raise the anchor and set sail without them. Heeding this, some of them hurry back quickly, and hence find themselves able to sit in the best and most spacious parts of the ship. The others, however, behave in different ways. Some become entranced by gazing at the island's flowers and rippling streams, and its gems and precious metals, and the suddenly come to, and hasten back to the ship, and although they find spaces which are inferior to those occupied by those who preceded them, they are still safe. Others are so preoccupied by the flowers that they cannot bring themselves to leave them, so they pick and carry as many as they can. When they reach the ship they find only narrow, uncomfortable places, and are made still less comfortable by the fact that they cannot bring themselves to throw out what they have brought with them, although the flowers fade and dry soon enough. When the wind gets up, they are forced to throw their dry flowers overboard, and escape just with their own lives. Others, however, have penetrated the jungles and forgotten the captain's advice, so that when they hear his final call to depart, they rush back only to find that the ship has sailed without them, and they remain marooned with what they had collected, until they all perish. Still others are so obsessed with gathering good things that they are deaf even to the captain's cry. Of these, some are eaten by wild beasts, or are poisoned by snakes, while others wander aimlessly until they die of hunger. This class resembles the people who live for the world, who are preoccupied with its mortal pleasures, and live in heedlessness of their future. How repulsive is the man who claims to be intelligent and full of insight, and yet is deluded by gems, silver and gold, and by flowers and fruits, nothing of which will accompany him to his destination!" [selections from Fath al-Bari] muftisays.com

What to do with ‘Hearsay’? The other side of the story A woman once brought a claim against another woman before Qadi Shurayh (rahimahullah). After some time, she began to cry bitterly. Those who were present were convinced that the woman was wronged. Qadi Shurayh replied: “Indeed even the brothers of Yusuf (‘alaihis salam) cried by their father.” i.e, Despite their sobbing, they were still guilty. (Kitabul Adhkiya, pg.63) Moral Therefore, no matter how convincing one side of the story seems, one is still duty bound to hear the other side before drawing a conclusion. The act of passing judgement on mere assumption is quite common and certainly very destructive. The consequences are also far reaching, long lasting and in some cases: regretful. This is the message in the verse: “O you who believe! If a sinful person brings a report to you, then verify its authenticity before you harm a people unknowingly and then become remorseful over what you did” One is often face with these kind of situations where one is made to hear one side of the story only. Due to the fatal consequences of this, the Shari’ah cautions us to remain calm, and to verify that piece of information. Haste generally leads to bitterness and remorse. Carefully read the words of the above verse again: …then verify its authenticity before you harm a people unknowingly and then become remorseful over what you did There are several kinds of such situations, like hearing one side of the story regarding one’s spouse, business partner or colleague. It could even be a general piece of information which has no direct link to any particular individual. Many of the emails, sms’, broadcast messages and social media posts that are freely shared fall under this category. Many of these messages sometimes contain false information or baseless claims about Islam. Such misinformation causes unnecessary confusion. The correct procedure in all of the above is to avoid what does not concern us and to avoid implicating somebody on mere hearsay! Failing in this will result in back-biting, gossip, unnecessary ill feelings and spitefulness etc. Innocent people become victims of ‘information oppression.’ One should avoid being an instigator, or even succumbing to instigation. Most importantly, if it doesn’t concern you, ignore it. Rasulullah (sallallahu’alayhi wasallam) said: “Shunning what doesn’t concern a person is a sign of the beauty of his faith.” (Sunan Tirmidhi, hadith: 2317-2318) Think before you… Before sharing such hearsay, one should think to himself: what would’ve been my response if that misinformation was concerning me or my close family? Ponder over the drastic effect of the touch of a button, where hundreds of people may be misinformed. How will we make up for this? One will be the cause for all of those with whom he shared that ‘wrong/unverified information’ getting involved in gossip, backbiting and many other sins… Even if that allegation was true, it could lead to backbiting and carrying of tales, both of which are haram. What to do? Faqih Abul Layth Samarqandi (rahimahullah) has offered the following beautiful suggestions: “If anyone brings a bad report to you concerning somebody else, do the following 6 things: Don’t believe him, for those who carry tales are usually liars. Stop him from relaying such allegations. You are duty bound to stop the wrong. (Nahy ‘anil munkar) Detest this act from the depth of your heart. Don’t entertain evil thoughts about the third person (the one against whom the allegations were made) Don’t probe in the matter. Don’t share that information with others. (Tambihul Ghafilin, pg.131) Avoiding the above Islamic guidelines on hearsay, has led to too many unsavoury endings… May Allah Ta’ala guide us all. Ameen. al-miftah

Question and Answer: Q. what is the ruling reguarding offering food to visitors during the first 3 days after the funeral?nb,some visitors are from out of town and some from the area,that have come to read Quran.is it permissable to offer them food or even a drink (Query published as received) A. The practice of providing meals at the funeral home for those who attend the funeral is permissible on condition that the expenses are not born by the estate of the deceased nor is any heir or relative coerced into providing the meals. If someone willingly takes the responsibility of providing meals without any coercion for those attending the funeral, there will be no sin in this. The actual Sunnah is to provide meals for the bereaved family and not the other way around as practiced today. In many instances, it has been discovered that money from the estate of the deceased had been utilized to feed those attending the funeral without the consent of all heirs. This is Haraam and constitutes usurpation of the wealth of the heirs. And Allah Knows Best Mufti Suhail Tarmahomed Fatwa Department Jamiatul Ulama (KZN) Council of Muslim Theologians 223 Alpine Road, Overport, Durban

Wearing Perfume for Your Husband It is reported that ‘Umar b. Al-Khattāb came out one Eid. Passing by a group of women, he could smell the scent of perfume from one of them. He asked, “Who is the one wearing this scent? By Allāh, if I knew who she was, I would do such-and-such (punish her). A women is only to wear perfume for her husband, and if she goes out, she wears her older (scruffier) clothes or the older clothes of her servant.” And so it was rumored amongst the women that the woman [who was wearing perfume in public] got up from that gathering having soiled herself (out of fear). Ibn Abī Shaybah, Al-Musannaf article 6387.

Istikhara & Salatul Haajah

Amr-bil-Maroof By Khalid Baig It is the most common activity in all social settings. Sometimes it is explicit: we argue for or against something. At others it is implicit: we show interest or lack of interest. More often than we realize we are engaged in persuading others or are being persuaded by them about big and small things in life. It is a very powerful force also. That is why marketers yearn for word of mouth publicity and powerful media machines long for becoming the talk of the town. Concerned with good as it is, Islam gives this tremendous social force a purpose. It must be used for promoting good, truth and justice and checking evil and injustice. That is the essence of amr-bil-maroof-wa-nahi-anil-munkar. And Qur'an declares it as the defining mission for this ummah: "You are the best community that has been raised for mankind. You enjoin good and forbid evil and you believe in Allah." [Aal-e-Imran, 3:110]. At another place Qur'an declares promoting good as an attribute of believers and promoting evil as an attribute of hypocrites: "The believers, men and women, are protectors of each other: they enjoin what is right and forbid what is evil."[Tauba, 9:71] On the other hand, "The hypocrites, both men and women, proceed one from another. They enjoin the wrong and forbid the right..."[Tauba, 9:67] The implications are clear. It is not that a believer will never commit a mistake or be involved in evil. Only that he will never insist on it, justify it, or promote it. He may fail to do some required good. But he will never be a force opposing it. In the Islamic society sin is a private weakness, not a public cause. It is for this reason that repentance for a public sin must also be made in public while we must repent privately for our private sins. A public sin may have encouraged others to do the same. A public repentance will counter that. Still in this life there will always be tendencies to deviate from the Straight Path. And in the institution of amr-bil-maroof, the Community of Believers has a built-in self- correcting mechanism. Consider cruise control in an automobile. Once turned on, it keeps monitoring the car speed and pulling it towards the set point. It does not mean absence of tendency to deviate from the desired speed, only an effective mechanism for monitoring and countering it. What cruise control does for car speed, amr-bil-maroof does for the direction of the society. This mechanism works at two levels. At one level it is the responsibility of every member of the society. When we see a wrong we should correct it. A very famous hadith declares it as an issue of faith. "Whoever amongst you sees an evil should change it with his hand. If he is unable to do that then with his tongue. If he is unable to do that, then with his heart, and that is the weakest level of Iman." [Muslim] So if a person does not even feel bad about an evil, he has no faith whatsoever. Similarly we are encouraged to promote good. One hadith promises that a person who persuades another one to do some good deed will get the same reward as the person he persuaded. At this level the responsibility of every member of the society is for his or her own sphere of influence: family, friends, colleagues, neighbors. When taken together these spheres would encompass the entire society. At a higher level this is a specialized task. A full time job for a qualified group to always monitor the direction of the society and fight deviations at a collective level. "Let there arise out of you a group inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right, and forbidding what is wrong. They are the ones to attain success."[Aal-e-Imran, 3:104] This is the responsibility of the experts, the scholars, those qualified to lead the entire community. Can we imagine what the ummah would look like had we followed this one teaching seriously? For today we seem to be doing exactly the opposite. There are Muslim women who have been pressured out of observing hijab by friends and relatives. Men and women have been enticed into riba transactions. All innovations (bid'at) and false social practices continue under social pressures. Bribery, backbiting, corruption, indecency, and dishonesty flourish under social approval. It is frightening to see how our real life matches the description given for the hypocrites. For we are warned that if we persuade others to commit a wrong we'll add to our burden of sins by the same amount. It is one thing to commit a wrong out of weakness. It is totally different to advocate the wrong and willingly multiply our burden of sins. At the collective level also, especially in the Muslim communities in the West, one can see a tendency to avoid raising voice against prevalent and accepted ills. It is far easier to give a pep talk about the virtues of Islam at the Friday Khutbah. At other places one may even hear advocacy of wrong in the name of ijtehad. Of course for today's secular world amr-bil-maroof is an alien concept. This world is driven by interests not principles. It professes belief in some moral values -- like freedom-- to be interpreted in the light of perceived interests. Thus defense of a person's obscene attacks on Islam becomes a virtue. Yet it finds nothing wrong in curbing the freedom of those who may challenge its ideas, whether in Algeria or Egypt, in Kashmir or Palestine, because that threatens its interests. No one should be surprised at such contradictions when interests override relative moral values. Yet we see a growing attitude in the Muslims in the West under the influence of this slogan of freedom. It effectively says: "This is my life, leave me alone." But we must remember that the Islamic society is the only society with a declared mission of promoting good and forbidding evil. Its definition of good and evil is not subject to the whims and desires of every generation or the perceived interests of a nation-state either. They are permanent concepts as defined in its unalterable sources: Qur'an and Sunnah. In a world of moral relativism these permanent values are the hope for the whole mankind. To keep these alive in the society we need the institution of amr-bil-maroof.

By Saliha Nakito When I returned to Islam, the religion of our inborn nature, a fierce debate raged about girls observing the hijab at schools in France. (Hijab means veil, not scarf. Hijab literally means screen, curtain, partition and concealment. As a verb, it means to conceal oneself or hide from the view. In Islamic Shari’ah, the word means to cover, conceal or hide oneself from the view of ghair-mahram.) It still does. The majority, it seemed, thought that wearing the head-scarf was contrary to the principle that public schools supported by the State should be neutral with regard to religion. Even as a non-Muslim, I could not understand why there was such a fuss over such a small thing as a scarf on a Muslim student’s head. Muslims contributed a proportionate amount of tax to the state funds. In my opinion, schools could respect religious beliefs and practices of students as long as they did not disrupt the school routine, nor pose a threat to discipline. However, the French faced, apparently, increasing unemployment and they felt insecure about the immigration of Arab workers. The sight of the hijab in their towns and schools aggravated such insecurity. More and more young people in Arab countries were (and are) wearing the hijab, despite the expectations of many Arabs and non-Arabs alike that it would disappear as Western secularism took root in Arab societies. Such a revival of Islamic practices is often regarded as an attempt by Muslims to restore their pride and identity; both undermined by colonialism. In Japan, it may be seen and understood as conservative traditionalism, or the result of anti-Western feeling, something which the Japanese themselves experienced following the first contact with Western culture during the Meiji era; they too reacted against a non-traditional lifestyle and Western dress. There is a tendency for people to be conservative in their ways and to react against anything new and unfamiliar without taking the time to see if it is good or bad. The feeling still persists amongst non-Muslims that Muslim women wear the hijab simply because they are slaves to tradition, so much so that it is seen as a symbol of oppression. Women’s liberation and independence is, so they believe, impossible unless they first remove the hijab. Such naivete is shared by “Muslims” with little or no knowledge of Islam. Being so used to secularism and religious eclecticism, pick and mix, they are unable to comprehend that Islam is universal and eternal. This apart, women all over the world, non-Arabs are embracing Islam and wearing the hijab as a religious requirement, not a misdirected sense of “tradition”. I am but one example of such women. My hijab is not a part of my racial or traditional identity; it has no social or political significance; it is, purely and simply, my religious identity. For non-Muslims, the hijab not only covers a woman’s hair, but also hides something, leaving than no access. They are being excluded from something which they have taken for granted in secular society. I have worn the hijab since embracing Islam in Paris. The exact form of the hijab varies according to the country one is in, or the degree of the individual’s religious awareness. In France, I wore a simple scarf which matched my dress and perched lightly on my head so that it was almost fashionable! Now, in Saudi Arabia, I wear an all-covering black cape; not even my eyes are visible. Thus, I have experienced the hijab from its simplest to its most complete form. What does the hijab mean to me? Although there have been many books and articles about the hijab, they always tend to be written from an outsider’s point of view; I hope this will allow me to explain what I can observe from the inside, so to speak. When I decided to declare my Islam, I did not think whether I could pray five times a day or wear the hijab. Maybe I was scared that if I had given it serious thought I would have reached a negative conclusion, and that would affect my decision to become a Muslim. Until I visited the main mosque in Paris I had nothing to do with Islam; neither the prayers nor the hijab were familiar to me. In fact, both were unimaginable but my desire to be a Muslim was too strong (Alhamdulillah) for me to be overly concerned with what awaited me on the “other side” of my conversion. The benefits of observing hijab became clear to me following a lecture at the mosque when I kept my scarf on even after leaving the building. The lecture had filled me with such a previously unknown spiritual satisfaction that I simply did not want to remove it. Because of the cold weather, I did not attract too much attention but I did feel different, somehow purified and protected; I felt as if I was in Allah’s I company. As a foreigner in Paris, I sometimes felt uneasy about being stared at by men. In my hijab all I went unnoticed, protected from impolite stares. My hijab made me happy; it was both a sign of my obedience to Allah I and a manifestation of my faith. I did not need to utter beliefs, the hijab stated them clearly for all to see, especially fellow Muslims, and thus it helped to strengthen the bonds of sisterhood in Islam. Wearing the hijab soon became spontaneous, albeit purely voluntary. No human being could force me to wear it; if they had, perhaps I would have rebelled and rejected it. However, the first Islamic book I read used very moderate language in this respect, saying that “Allah recommends it (the hijab) strongly” and since Islam (as the word itself indicates) means we are to obey Allah’s I will; I accomplished my Islamic duties willingly and without difficulty, Alhamdulillah. The hijab reminds people who see it that Allah I exist, and it serves as a constant reminder to me that I should conduct myself as a Muslim. Just as police officers are more professionally aware while in uniform, so I had a stronger sense of being a Muslim wearing my hijab. Two weeks after my return to Islam, I went back to Japan for a family wedding and took the decision not to return to my studies in France; French literature had lost its appeal and the desire to study Arabic had replaced it. As a new Muslim with very little knowledge of Islam it was a big test for me to live in a small town in Japan completely isolated from Muslims. However, this isolation intensified my Islamic consciousness, and I knew that I was not alone as Allah I was with me. I had to abandon many of my clothes and with some help from a friend who knew dress-making, I made some trousers; similar to Pakistani dress. I was not bothered by the strange looks the people gave me! After six months in Japan, my desire to study Arabic grew so much that I decided to go to Cairo, where I knew someone. None of my host family there spoke English (or Japanese) and the lady who took my hand to lead me into the house was covered from head to toe in black. Even her face was covered; although this is now familiar to me here in Riyadh. I remember being surprised at the time, recalling an incident in France when I had seen such dress and thought, “there is a woman enslaved by Arabic tradition, unaware of real Islam,” (which I believed, taught that covering the face was not a necessity but an ethnic tradition). I wanted to tell the lady in Cairo that she was exaggerating her dress, that it was unnatural and abnormal. Instead, I was told that my self-made dress was not suitable to go out in, something I disagreed with since I understood that it satisfied the requirements for a Muslimah. So I bought some cloth and made a long dress, called khimar, which covered the loins and the arms completely. I was even ready to cover my face, something most of the sisters with whom I became acquainted did. They were, though, a small minority in Cairo. Generally-speaking, young Egyptians, more or less fully Westernized, kept their distance from women wearing khimar and called them “the sisters”. Men treated us with respect and special politeness. Women wearing a khimar shared a sisterhood which lived up to the Prophet’s (Sallallahu`alaihi wasallam) saying that “a Muslim gives his salaam to the person he crosses in the street, whether he knows him or not”. The sisters were, it is probably true to say, more conscious of their faith than those who wear scarves for the sake of custom, rather than for the sake of Allah I. Before becoming a Muslimah, my preference was for active pants-style clothes, not the more feminine skirt, but the long dress I wore in Cairo pleased me; I felt elegant and more relaxed. In the Western sense, black is a favorite color for evening wear as it accentuates the beauty of the wearer. My new sisters were truly beautiful in their black khimar, and a light akin to saintliness shone from their faces. Indeed, they are not unlike Roman Catholic nuns, something I noticed particularly when I had occasion to visit Paris soon after arriving in Saudi Arabia. I was in the same Metro carriage as a nun and I smiled at our similarity of dress. Hers was the symbol of her devotion to God, as is that of a Muslimah. I often wonder why people say nothing about the veil of the Catholic nun but criticize vehemently the veil of a Muslimah, regarding it as a symbol of “terrorism” and “oppression”. I did not mind abandoning colorful clothes in favor of black; in fact, I had always had a sense of longing for the religious lifestyle of a nun even before becoming a Muslimah! Nevertheless, I balked at the suggestion that I should wear my khimar back in Japan. I was angry at the sister’s lack of understanding: Islam commands us to cover our bodies, and as long as this is done, one may dress as desired. Every society has its own fashions and such long black clothes in Japan could make people think I am crazy, and reject Islam even before I could explain its teachings. Our argument revolved around this aspect. After another six months in Cairo, however, I was so accustomed to my long dress that I started to think that I would wear it on my return to Japan. My concession was that I had some dresses made in light colors, and some white khimars, in the belief that they would be less shocking in Japan than the black variety. I was right. The Japanese reacted rather well to my white khimars, and they seemed to be able to guess that I was of a religious persuasion. I heard one girl telling her friend that I was a Buddhist nun; how similar a Muslimah, a buddhist nun and a Christian nun are! Once, on a train, the elderly man next to me asked why I was dressed in such unusual fashion. When I explained that I was a Muslimah and that Islam commands women to cover their bodies so as not to trouble men who are weak and unable to resist temptation, he seemed impressed. When he left the train he thanked me and said that he would have liked more time to speak to me about Islam. In this instance, the hijab prompted a discussion on Islam with a Japanese man who would not normally be accustomed to talking about religion. As in Cairo, the hijab acted as a means of identification between Muslims; I found myself on the way to a study circle wondering if I was on the right route when I saw a group of sisters wearing the hijab. We greeted each other with salaam and went on to the meeting together. My father was worried when I went out in long sleeves and a head-cover even in the hottest weather, but I found that my hijab protected me from the sun. Indeed, it was I who also felt uneasy looking at my younger sister’s legs while she wore short pants. I have often been embarrassed, even before declaring Islam, by the sight of a woman’s bosoms and hips clearly outlined by tight, thin clothing. I felt as if l was seeing something secret. If such a sight embarrasses me, one of the same sexes it is not difficult to imagine the effect on men. In Islam, men and women are commanded to dress modestly and not be naked in public, even in all male or all female situations. It is clear that what is acceptable to be bared in society varies according to societal or individual understanding. For example, in Japan fifty years ago it was considered vulgar to swim in a swimming suit but now bikinis are the norm. But in Islam we have no such problems; Allah I has defined what may and may not be hared, and we follow. The way people walk around half naked (or almost so), excreting or making love in public, robs them of the sense of shame and reduces them to the status of animals. In Japan, women only wear makeup when they go out and have little regard for how they look at home. In Islam, a wife will try to look beautiful for her husband and her husband will try to look good for his wife. There is modesty even between husband and wife and this embellishes the relationship. Muslims are accused of being over-sensitive about the human body but the degree of sexual harassment which occurs these days justifies modest dress. Just as a short skirt can send the signal that the wearer is available to men, so the hijab signals, loud and clear: “I am forbidden for you”. The Holy Prophet (Sallallahu`alaihi wasallam)once asked his daughter Fatima radhiallahu anhaa, “What is the best for a woman?” And she replied: “Not to see men and not to be seen by them”. The Holy Prophet (Sallallahu`alaihi wasallam) was pleased and said: “You are truly my daughter”. This shows that it is preferable for a woman to stay at home and avoid contact with male strangers as much as possible. Observing the hijab, when one goes outside, has the same effect. Having married, I left Japan for Saudi Arabia, where it is customary for the women to cover their face outdoors. I was impatient to try the niqab (face cover), and curious to know how it felt. Of course, non-Muslim women generally wear a black cloak, rather non-chalantly thrown over their shoulders but do not cover their faces. Non-Saudi Muslim women also often keep their faces uncovered. Once accustomed to, the niqab is certainly not inconvenient. In fact, I felt like the owner of a secret masterpiece, a treasure which you can neither know about, nor see. Whereas non-Muslims may think they are life imitating caricatures when they see Muslim couples walk in the streets, the oppressed, and the oppressor, the possessed, and the possessor, the reality is that the women feel like queens being led by servants. My first niqab left my eyes uncovered. But in winter I wore a fine eye covering as well. All the feelings of un-ease when a man’s eyes met mine disappeared; as with sun glasses, the visual intrusion of strangers was prevented. It is an error of judgment to think that a Muslim woman covers herself because she is a private possession of her husband. In fact, she preserves her dignity and refuses to be possessed by strangers. It is non-Muslim and “liberated” Muslim women who are to be pitied for displaying their private self for all to see. Observing the hijab from outside, it is impossible to see what it hides. The gap, between being outside and looking in, and being inside and looking out, explains in part the void in the understanding of Islam. An outsider may see Islam as restricting Muslims. Inside, however, there is peace, freedom, and joy, which those who experience it have never known before. Practicing Muslims, whether those born in Muslim families or those returned to Islam, choose Islam rather than the illusory freedom of secular life. If it oppresses women, why are so many well-educated young women in Europe, America, Japan, Australia, indeed all over the world, abandoning “liberty” and “independence” and embracing Islam? A person blinded by prejudice may not see it, but a woman in hijab is as brightly beautiful as an angel, full of self-confidence, serenity, and dignity. No signs of oppression scar her face. “For indeed it is not the eyes that grow blind, but it is the hearts within the bosoms, that grow blind,” says the Qur’an (Al-Hajj 22:46). How else can we explain the great gap in understanding between us and such people? islameasy.org (published with permissions from Al-Madinah magazine, Vol 04 Issue 04)

Nahi Anil Munkar and Amar Bil Maroof in Tablighi Jamaat with hikmat The difference between ' Amr Bil Maroof Wa'Nahy Anil Munkar' & 'Dawah-e-Tabligh' People enquired of Maulana Muhammad Makki if there is any difference between 'Amr Bil Maruf Wa'Nahy Anil Munkar' and Tabligh (Dawah). Which one of the three are the current activities of the Tablighi Jamaat adhering to? In answer to this question, Maulana replied:- For Amr Bil Maroof (Enjoining Good) there is a need for Salahiyyat (Competence) and for Nahy Anil Munkar there is a need within the Ummah for Istidaad (Willingness and inclination). Until and unless the attributes of Salahiyyat and Istidaad are not developed, a great multitude of this Ummah will mock and belittle the divine laws of Shariah the moment the mission of Amr Bil Maruf Wa'Nahy Anil Munkar is implemented and the Fatawas (religious verdicts) of permissible and impermissible are passed. And naturally, if a person commits a sin whilst considering it to be a sin, it won't be as great an offence as it would be in the case of mocking and belittling the most seemingly trivial law of Shariah. The gravity of such an offence can be gauged from the fact that ridiculing the most seemingly insignificant law of shariah render's one as a disbeliever. Hence, if Amr Bil Maroof Wa'Nahy Anil Munkar are propagated without the Salahiyyat and Istidaad of the Ummah, there is a fear of the Ummah landing itself in Kufr as a consequence to the mocking and belittling of the laws of Shariah. Similarly, Tabligh is the name awarded to the propagation of Islam. Today our own condition is such that we lack the attributes of Salaah and Falaah ( piety and spiritual prosperity) without which Tabligh is not possible. When non-muslims witness the deeds and words of this Ummah, they find them to be in total conflict with the teachings of Shariah. How can our Shariah have an impact on others when the Ummah itself is devoid of the laws of Islam. Hence prior to Tabligh amongst non-muslims, the Ummah is compelled to develop the attributes of Salaah and Falaah to a degree of excellence. The current efforts amongst the Ummah itself with the label of Tabligh are all being implemented to promote activities of Dawah. And this activity in turn will lead to the Salahiyyat of Amr Bil Maroof and the Istidaad of Nahy Anil Munkar. Owing to this Dawah mission (Tablighi Jamaat) an awareness and a spirit of Deen (faith) will be created in the Ummah and this is the activity which in turn will bring about piety and spiritual prosperity. As a consequence to piety and spiritual prosperity, Tabligh will advance steadily whilst complying with the principles and rules of conduct. So, in brief, the medium of Dawah (Tabligh) is employed today to engender the attributes of salahiyyat and Istidaad and to develop an awarenes and quest together with piety and spiritual prosperity without which the activities of Amr Bil Maroof and Nahy Anil Munkar cannot be instituted. Hence our current endeavour is a Dawah. " The endeavour of Tabligh is an endeavour of Dawah and Ijaabah (invitation and compliance).

Question Assalam O Alaikum Firstly If in a muslim society Allahs orders are disobeyed and haram things are made halal. In a muslim country Sharab is there interest is allowed officially and sex stations are there. Then as a true believer is this not our responsibility to stop these things and stop it with power?. I don’t know why Ulemas do not recommend this. These acts are against teachings of Quran Isn’t it kufr. Secondly If the ruler of a country is Illegal i.e, he has taken the leadership by force and all the above mentioned facts are also present and happening under his leadership and the Islamic situation is going worst with the passing time. Then what a true believer should do? Because the leadership is Ilegal he should oppose it and fight against it or he should sit down putting his one hand on the other….. Please give the answers in the light of Quran and Ahadith. I think on my knowledge it is allowed to fight against the traitors of Allah and to fight against these Fahashees. In hadees it is there to fight for Kalima , for superemacy of Allahs deen. In Quran it is there that …..Inil Hukmu Ila Lilah…. There is no order but of Allah…. Answer In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful Assalaamu `alaykum waRahmatullahi Wabarakatoh There are three aspects to your query 1) Nahi Anil Munkar 2) Muslim country 3) Responsibility of the Ulama At the outset, you should understand that it is the duty of every believer to carry out Nahi anil Munkar (stop others from evil). This is not the responsibility of a few individuals but the entire Ummah of our Nabi (صلى الله عليه وسلم). Allah states “You (Ummah of Muhammed) are the best of nations taken out for the benefit of mankind, you command with good and forbid from evil” (Surah Al-Imran Verse 10). Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said “Whoever sees any evil he should stop it with his hands and if he cannot stop it with his hands he should stop it (evil) with his tongue and if not with his tongue he should do so with his heart” (Sahih Muslim Page 80). A person will be required to carry out Nahi anil Munkar according to his capacity and authority. For example a Qaadhi (judge) may do Nahi anil Munkar with force. A layman may carry out Nahi anil Munkar verbally by encouraging a person to refrain from Haraam. In some instances one cannot do Nahi Anil Munkar physically nor verbally, in this instance one should ponder over ways in trying to correct the wrong. It is therefore incorrect to state that Nahi anil Munkar can only be done with force or power. Secondly, since we do not live in Islamic countries, we may only adopt the second two options of Nahi anil Munkar as explained in the Hadith quoted above. At most we may encourage a person doing wrong to stop and refrain from evil. However, we cannot physically compel him to stop. It is the system of Allah that whoever endeavours to do Nahi anil Munkar to be with abuse and criticism. Every Nabi of Allah was persecuted for this very reason. However, one should not become despondent and remain steadfast. It is not a requirement for Nahi anil Munkar that the leadership must be involved. As individuals whatever is within your control you should and thereafter leave the result to Allah. Allah states “Allah does not burden you with that which is beyond you”. Thirdly, you state that you do not know why the Ulama do not recommend this? It is of vital importance that you maintain Adab and respect for every Alim. It is seriously dangerous to pick out on Ulama and criticize them. They are the custodians of the Shariah and the heirs of Ambiyaa. It is irrelevant whether your point is correct or not. The mere fact that he has carried the knowledge of Prophet hood in his bosom, he/they have to be respected and revered. If you have some concerns you must raise in a very respectable and humble way and not make sweeping comments about their work. Nevertheless, your claim of the Ulama not recommending Nahi anil Munkar is completely erroneous. It seems that you do not have much contact with the true Ulama who have made their life ambition Amr Bil Maroof and Nahi anil Munkar. There are multitudes of Ulama who have stood up to this responsibility and have managed with the permission of Allah to correct many wrongs of the society and country. One example is that of the Tabligh Jamaat. Their objective is to go from person to person to encourage the people to do good and refrain from evil. These Fahaashies will only mend their habits if they are encouraged constantly with wisdom and diplomacy. We observe that the trend nowadays is to set up huge seminars and conferences on how to change or reform the society. Statistics prove that very little is achieved from these gatherings. One will only be successful if he implements and adopts the methodology of Rasulullah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) in trying to reform the society and/or country. And Allah knows best Wassalam Muhammed Zakariyya Desai, Checked and Approved by: Mufti Ebrahim Desai Darul Iftaa, Madrassah In'aamiyyah askimam

Commanding the Good When I Don’t Do it? Answered by Shaykh Abu Usamah Question: The issue of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil. There are certain things I do which can be deemed as Islamic and other things which can be deemed as haram. I am of the opinion therefore, that I can only really advice people on issues which I know I am doing good in, therefore I only advice people in certain things in terms of prayer, and establishing prayer or not drinking or zina. But there are other things which I almost feel hypocritical in talking about and when I try and give advice they look at me like I am in no position to do so. But that being said, if I have not yet perfected certain social issues like talking to women, listening to music (or at least so called haram music) am I even in the position to do so? many people would look at me and quite simply say ‘who’s he to give me advice’? Answer: al-Salam alaykum 1. The same question was asked by a Sahabi to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) who replied that he should continue commanding the good and forbidding the evil even though he doesn’t practise it himself. There are 2 issues here: i. the responsibility of doing the good / refraining from the evil ii. the responsibility of commanding the good and forbidding the evil Neglecting the first does not excuse one from the second. Rather it is hoped that fulfilling the second responsibility will cause the person to fulfill the first. Walaikum assalam, Abu Usama Qibla.com

Guiding One’s Family Towards the Good: Advice & Tips SeekersGuidance Answered by Sidi Abdullah Anik Misra Question: I am an American-Muslim and have been Muslim all my life. My practice of Islam has been up and down throughout the years. My offences have been not acquriing Islamic knowledge, not praying, breaking fast, not dressing modestly etc. Since college I have been trying to improve my Islam by listening to scholars, watching less tv, praying consistently and making up fasts, etc. But unfortunately my family has not grown with me. My dad loves music, my sister don’t cover properly my niece watches tv and wants to be an actress an singer. I feel like I am doing the bare minumum to improve my Islam and am no where near perfect but what about my family? What can I do for them? And how can I correct them when I did many of the same things myself in recent history or still slip on these things myself? Answer: Wa alaikum as salaam, Thank you for your question. One of the most beautiful things to hear about is a Muslim who, through the confusions and tests of life, slightly goes off track, then realizes her mistake and is guided back to Allah Most High. It is indeed a great mercy from Allah Most High because He could have left us to spiral downward had He wanted; instead though, He wrapped us in His divine concern, lifted us up, and mended our broken souls. This shows us that He is lovingly watching over us even while we are heedless, and He is ready to forgive us, if only we sincerely return to Him. It is true that you should advise your family to the best, and your concern is commendable. However, the conditions to enjoining good and forbidding evil as a duty are: 1. that one has sound knowledge of what they are exhorting to, 2. that your advice will not cause a greater harm, such as a person becoming stubborn and spurning the religion altogether and 3. that you feel reasonably sure they will heed your advice at that time. This requires a lot of wisdom and patience as well, since people do not like to be “preached” to. [bajuri, Sharh Jawhara] Remember to be gradual and gentle with your family members, as you said you were just doing the same thing some time ago. The same way you would not like harsh or pushy advice, don’t be the one to do it. It’s ok that you’re still struggling; your advice will then go to help you and them- but only when they are ready to hear it. Tread carefully but surely, for you walk on people’s feelings; even the most disobedient of Muslims is a person of Paradise insha Allah and thus worthy of immense respect. Try to encourage the hearts towards Allah Most High first and give people hope to establish a relationship with Him. This bond, then prayer, will wean them [and us all!] off of their bad habits. When they are ready to cut things out of their lives, it will become apparent, perhaps without your even saying anything further. Judge and take account of yourself according to the standards of the Sacred Law, but look to others with the greater reality in mind- that they are simply playing out what Allah has destined for them, till and if He chooses to guide them back to Him. Perhaps Allah Most High has in store for them such a returning and repentance, that they become the most pleasing of people to Him. And make dua’ for them. Addressing my own self first, Wasallam, Abdullah Anik Misra Checked & Approved by Faraz Rabbani

The Criteria of Enjoining Good and Forbidding Evil Seekersguidance.org Answered by Shaykh Faraz A. Khan Question: When should one be vague to avoid disputes (when one disagrees with the other person, but doesn’t say something negative in response) versus not supporting or even correcting incorrect Islamic beliefs. How does one know to choose one over the other? Answer: Assalamu alaikum warahmatullah, I pray this finds you in the best of health states. This returns to the issue of enjoining the good and forbidding evil, which is a communal obligation (fard kifaya) and an essential duty in Islam. Based on the criteria outlined below, if the conditions of enjoining the good and forbidding evil are met, one must do so. Otherwise, one can be vague so as to avoid disputation of no benefit. The Obligation and Importance Allah Most High states, “And let there be amongst you a group inviting to virtue, commanding the good and forbidding evil—those indeed are the successful ones” (3:104). And our Master Hudhayfa (Allah be pleased with him) relates that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “By the One in Whose hand is my soul, you must certainly command the good and forbid evil, or else a punishment from Him would soon be sent upon you, after which you would call upon Him yet your supplication (dua) would not be answered.” [Tirmidhi] Other narrations state that the punishment for abandoning this obligation is sweeping and general, afflicting both the righteous and the corrupt. Ibn Allan comments that the punishment can manifest as “the tyranny of leaders, the dominion of enemies, and other forms of tribulation.” [Dalil al-Falihin Sharh Riyad al-Salihin] Ya Latif – how unfortunately accurate for our times! And the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) swore by Allah when conveying this, and said that supplication itself is unanswered until the community returns to enjoining the good. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) also described that when the people of knowledge in previous communities stopped condemning the evils of their societies and kept on socializing with evildoers despite the wrongs, Allah turned the hearts of the community against one another and cursed them upon the tongue of their prophets (peace and blessings be upon them). [Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi] And to get annoyed when corrected is itself a major sin. Our Master Ibn Masud (Allah be pleased with him) said, “Verily among the greatest of sins in the sight of Allah is for a person to be told, ‘Fear Allah,’ to which he responds, ‘Mind your own business!’” [sunan Nasa'i] Conditions of Incumbency While it is a communal obligation, commanding the good and forbidding evil is incumbent only if the following conditions are met: (1) Sound knowledge and understanding of the issue one is exhorting to. Scholars mention that anyone who takes up this obligation must know the different schools of thought on the issue at hand, such that his enjoining and forbidding only takes place with evils that are evil by scholarly consensus. This relates to clear matters that are generally known by the Muslims. With respect to matters on which there is scholarly disagreement, although they cannot be forbidden per se, one can still offer counsel and advice (nasiha), which is often needed as certain positions are not appropriate or applicable in all circumstances. (2) Gentleness and wisdom in one’s enjoining or forbidding. The sunna is to exhort in a manner that is general and discreet, so as to protect the feelings of the other party as much as possible. My teacher, for example, told me that if I am ever in a situation where someone else falls into backbiting, I should simply say, “Allah has prohibited us from backbiting.” If, however, one crosses the limits or is excessive in their condemnation, the good they perform is less than their own evil. (3) Clemency and steadfastness in the face of any difficulty one may encounter. (4) That one feels reasonably sure that the other party will take heed and listen. That is, a condition of incumbency is that benefit is likely or expected. This condition (reasonable surety of benefit) is the opinion of Imam Bajuri, Imam Qarafi, Imam Haskafi, Allama Ibn Abidin and others. Otherwise if one does not think they will listen, enjoining the good is recommended if there is a chance of benefit yet one is unsure. If benefit is unlikely, enjoining the good is permissible yet possibly disliked. And if one is certain that there would be no benefit, enjoining the good could be impermissible, as it might entail frivolous and useless speech and might worsen the situation (see condition 5 below). The upshot is that one must consider the likely benefit of one’s exhortation, and if benefit is unlikely, then silence might prove more beneficial. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day should say the good or remain silent.” [bukhari and Muslim] If one does not enjoin the good or forbid evil, then one must try to change the subject so as to end the unlawful talk; if this is not possible, one must get up and leave. (5) That one’s advice not lead to greater harm or worsen the situation, such as leading to more sin, more unlawful talk, or the other party’s outright disdain for the religion. In such cases it would be better — or at times obligatory — to remain silent, so as to choose the less harmful of two matters. Of course, one must still hate the wrong in one’s heart. (6) Sound intention, which is to desire nothing except that the word of Allah Most High reign supreme. This is essential and often neglected, as many people exhort others in religious matters for the sake of their own egos or out of animosity towards the other party. One’s motivation to correct others should also be out of sincere love and care for one’s brethren. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) taught us that the basis of the entire religion is sincere and genuine concern for others (al-Din al-nasiha), and he also said, “None of you truly believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself.” [bukhari, Muslim] In fact, in his renowned hadith collection Riyad al-Salihin, Imam Nawawi placed the chapter on “Enjoining the Good and Forbidding Evil” immediately after the chapter on “Sincere and Genuine Concern”. As Imam Nahlawi states, “To conclude, there is a major catastrophe that one must be careful to avoid, namely: for the person of knowledge, when enjoining something, to perceive his own dignity due to his knowledge, and the other’s lowliness due to their ignorance. If this is one’s motivation, then this evil is itself much more vile than the evil he is forbidding. Truly, no one is safe from the plotting of Satan except one to whom Allah shows his own faults, and whose insight Allah opens by the light of true guidance.” [Nahlawi, Durar Mubaha; Khadimi, Nabulsi/Birgivi, Shuruh al-Tariqa al-Muhammadiyya; Bajuri, Tuhfat al-Murid Sharh Jawharat al-Tawhid; Ibn Abidin/Haskafi, Radd al-Muhtar ala Durr al-Mukhtar] And Allah knows best. wassalam Faraz A. Khan Checked & Approved by Faraz Rabbani

Conditions to enjoining good and forbidding evil as a duty are:

The Prophet sallallaahu 'alahi wasallam said, “By the One in Whose hand is my soul, you must certainly command the good and forbid evil, or else a punishment from Him would soon be sent upon you, after which you would call upon Him yet your supplication (dua) would not be answered.” [Tirmidhi] The Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wasallam also described that when the people of knowledge in previous communities stopped condemning the evils of their societies and kept on socializing with evildoers despite the wrongs, Allah turned the hearts of the community against one another and cursed them upon the tongue of their prophets (peace and blessings be upon them). [Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi] The Prophet sallallaahu `alayhi wa sallam said, “Whoever sees something evil should change it with his hand. If he cannot, then with his tongue; and if he cannot do even that, then in his heart. That is the weakest degree of faith.” [Muslim] On the authority of Ibn Mas`ud that the Prophet (sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam) said, “There was not a single Prophet among those who were sent before me who did not have apostles and companions and followed his Sunna and obeyed his commands. But afterwards other generations came whose words belied their deeds, and whose deeds were not in accordance with what they commanded others to do. Whoever struggles against them with his hand is a believer. Whoever struggles against them with his tongue is a believer. And whoever struggles against them with his heart is a believer. But when none of these things are done, then not a single mustard’s seed weight of faith is present.” [Muslim]

Enjoining Good & Forbidding Evil "You are the best community that has been raised for mankind. You enjoin good and forbid evil and you believe in Allah." [Aal-e-Imran, 3:110]. "The believers, men and women, are protectors of each other: they enjoin what is right and forbid what is evil." [Tauba, 9:71]

Taqlid & the falsification of Islamic History Article by: Mufti Mohammed Sajaad 24 Ramadan 14 24 September 2008 Taqlid means following the legal opinions of a scholar without gaining knowledge of the detailed evidences for those opinions. A person is compelled to do this as he is not able to encompass the evidences to assert his own view on any particular detailed issue related to the Deen. This reliance upon a group of highly trained individuals is seen in every aspect of human life from when we wish to build an extension to our homes to when we wish to cure ourselves; we unquestioningly defer to the experts. The sick person never tries to diagnose himself, let alone be bold enough to prescribe using his own knowledge, the course of medicine he needs to take. Rather he sits humbly and accepts everything his doctor tells him and prescribes him. It would seem, Islam alone has been singled out as being that one thing that any person not only may exercise his mental abilities (however deficient they are) to determine its detailed teachings, but moreover it is said to be his duty. It is an undisputed fact that Taqlid existed from the very beginning of Islam, as that is the normative procedure for learning. The Companions and Successors (Tabieen) of other Companions were compelled to do Taqlid of their seniors, those of the Companions and Successors who were not scholars, simply took the Deen from those who were scholars. Their basis for their doing Taqlid, apart from the obvious reason mentioned above, was the evidences that made it an obligation for them. Allah (SWT) said in the Holy Qur’an: Ask the people of Remembrance if you know not (Sura al-Anbiya:7) Elsewhere in the Holy Qur’an Allah (SWT) commanded the believers thus: Obey Allah, the Messenger and those authorities amongst you Ibn Abbas (R.A.), Mujahid, and many authorities in Tafsir (Exegesis of the Holy Qur’an) stated “Those authorities amongst you” are the Islamic Jurists, see Tafsir Tabari and Al-Tafsir al-Kabir of Imam Fakhr al-Din al-Razi. Amongst the many hadith that prove Taqlid is a hadith recorded in Sunnan Abu Daud, in which the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Verily the cure to not knowing is asking.” Taqlid in the age of the Sahabah There are many examples in the hadith books where we find the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings upon him) doing Taqlid of other more learned Companions. [1] Abu Ayub al-Ansari (R.A.) was once on his way to Hajj and lost his camels he brought to be sacrificed (and by which a person comes out of Ihram). On the day of sacrifice he came to Umar and asked him what to do? Umar (R.A.) told him to do as those who perform Umrah do (that is to shave or cut their hair), and you will be out of Ihram. Then in the next year do Hajj and make the sacrifice. Note, here neither did Abu Ayub (R.A.) ask for proof nor was it given, a clear example of Taqlid (Muwatta Imam Malik). [2] Once Umar (R.A.) saw Talha (R.A.) wearing a coloured piece of cloth while he was in the state of Ihram (So long as the cloth is not scented such coloured sheets would be permitted for Ihram). Umar (R.A.) asked him the reason for wearing such sheets. Talha (R.A.) replied that the cloth was from a material which had not been scented. Umar (R.A.) said: “You are people who are followed by others. If an unknowing person saw this cloth, he would think Talha wore this cloth in Ihram (thus he would assume scented cloth is permitted). Refrain from using coloured sheets.” (Muwatta) This shows, that there is nothing essentially wrong with following scholars without evidence, rather it was always one of the ways the masses learnt their Deen as is shown by Umar’s (R.A.) statement. [3] One of the most obvious examples of Taqlid was that of when the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings upon him) sent Muadh Ibn Jabal (R.A.) to Yemen as a teacher. Whilst in Yemen the people, took exclusively what he taught them as Deen, in old and new issues, which is but Taqlid. For example, he was asked concerning a man who had been survived by daughter and a sister only, how would his inheritance be distributed amongst them. He ruled that they should receive half each and he did this as a Mufti and without mentioning the proof for his view to the people for his opinion. (Sahih al-Bukhari). [4] We also find a clear example of Sahabah doing Taqlid Shakhsi (specific Taqlid). It is narrated in Sahih al-Bukhari from Ikrimah (R.A.) that the people of Medina asked Ibn Abbas (R.A.) concerning a woman who did Tawaf and then experienced her menstrual cycle (i.e. despite having Tawaf al-Wida upon her, is she permitted to return home or should she wait till her period passes?). Ibn Abbas (R.A.) replied: “She may return.” The people said: “We will not accept your opinion over the opinion of Zayd (Ibn Thabit).” (Sahih al-Bukhari). Two things become abundantly clear from this incident. The first is that the Medinans did Specific Taqlid (Taqlid Shakhsi) of Zayd Ibn Thabit (R.A.), and consequently they would not accept the opinions of another scholar from the Sahabah. Secondly, Ibn Abbas (R.A.) himself never blamed them for following his opinions exclusively. It would be fair to say that up to the second century, two kinds of Taqlid were common in the Ummah, the non-specific kind (Taqlid ghayr Shakhsi) and specific Taqlid (Taqlid Shakhsi). Most muslims, when wanting to know Islam’s ruling on an issue, would simply go to any scholar in the community who they considered an authority. But examples can be found, such as those mentioned above, where Muslims also did specific Taqlid of a particular Companion or Successor exclusively. Thus we learn from this that there is nothing essentially blameworthy with someone being a Hanafi or Maliki, for there were people who were Masudis (followers of the opinions of Ibn Masud), Muadhis, Abbasis, etc. only they did not go by those names. One of the factors in the consolidation of Taqlid Shakhsi and the phasing out of the other kind of Taqlid was the emergence of four scholars who gained such recognition for their learning and piety that students and even other scholars flocked around them. All four were blessed with long lives such that they could encompass each and every chapter of legal rulings and importantly were undisputed Mujtahids. A mujtahid is a master scholar who has reached the highest and most difficult level of Ijtihad (Independent juridical reasoning). There are many kinds of lesser scholars; however the one who is permitted to exercise his Ijtihad in elaborating rulings is one who has spent many years acquiring the skills, primary religious sciences and auxiliary sciences enabling him to soundly interpret the Holy Texts and thus deserving of being considered an authority in the important matters of the Deen. Briefly, this entails Deep knowledge of the Arabic language; grammar, semantics and rhetoric. Intimate knowledge of the Holy Qur’an, its well established Tafsir, verses that are abrogated and the occasions of revelation. Knowledge of the Hadith; having obtained the narrations from their narrators, to also know the state of the chain and its narrators. In this regard it was the view of Imam Ahmad that a person cannot be considered a Mujtahid until he has not memorised three hundred thousand hadith. The students of these four Imams further elaborated their legal opinions, their principles (the tools of interpretation), and most importantly preserved them and then transmitted the scholar’s school (Madhab) to the next generation. These four scholars were: Imam Abu Hanifa (R.A.) - 80-150 A.H. Imam Malik Ibn Anas (R.A.) - 93-179 A.H. Imam Muhammad Ibn Idris al-Shafi (R.A.) - 150-204 A.H. Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (R.A.) - 164-241 A.H. If we take a snapshot of the Ummah by the end of the second century, we see Taqlid was of other than the above four sunni scholars and these four Imams. With time, the majority of people ended up doing Taqlid of these four schools. By virtue of them being fully formed, propagated, and codified, more and more scholars received training in these codified school. The Ummah’s convergence upon the acceptance of these four schools was coincidental, and not divinely revealed. Having said this, the mercy that lay in the converging on the four for the Ummah is not hidden, and hence it was seen as divine intervention to ensure the preservation of the Deen, as Allah (SWT) had promised: Indeed We who have revealed the Remembrance and it is for Us to preserve it (sura Al-Hijr:9) This is not to say there have only ever been four scholars in the Ummah who had reached the high rank of Ijtihad. There were several others, but their schools did not receive that same kind of attention that these four Imams received, thus it is not actually possible to do Taqlid of them. They may have had a thriving circle of students once, but they, for whatever reason, did not fully document, codify or transmit the school. One may find some of their legal opinions have been persevered, but that is not sufficient to consider that school fit for Taqlid. Just to give one glaring danger inherent in permitting this, leaving aside the fact there are but a handful of their legal opinions that have come down to us, it is not known if that particular opinion was the final opinion of that scholar, or did he change his view in later life. For that would require commentaries written by his students, as well as a strong transmission of all his opinions. This problem is carefully taken care of in the four established schools. Thus the four schools became to represent de facto Sunni Islam. Anyone who wished to seriously study Islamic law, as a beginner, was compelled, by virtue of the schools’ undisputed academic prowess and chapter by chapter preservation, to align themselves with one of them. It is for this reason that we have another inexplicable fact that non-Muqallids (those who deny Taqlid and consider it unlawful) try to avoid. That is the fact that the vast majority of sunni scholastic geniuses followed one of the four schools. For example ,the following is just a selection of unquestionable authorities in our Deen who were known to have adhered to one Madhab from the four: Imam Abu Isa al-Tirmidhi (Shafi) Imam Abu Jafar al-Tahavi (Hanafi) Imam Fakr al-Din al-Razi (Shafi) Imam Ibn abd al-Bar (Maliki) Imam Abu Zakariyya al-Nawawi (Shafi) Imam Abu Bakr Jassas (Hanafi) Imam Ibn al-Hummam (Hanafi) Imam Abu Ishaq al-Shatibi (Maliki) Imam Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani (Shafi) Imam Abu al-Abbas al-Qurtubi (Maliki) Imam Badr al-Din al-Ayni (Hanafi) Imam Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (Shafi) Certainly, there is a difference in the way the scholar follows (does Taqlid) of a school and how others do it. A true well-grounded scholar in the Islamic sciences can also and did look at the evidences and if he believed that other than what the school teaches was the true position then he would leave the school on that issue. For the masses however, this is beyond their capabilities usually and nor is it required of each believer to become an Alim or Mujtahid as that would have demanded for everyone to leave devotion to other important academic areas such as medicine, engineering etc, seeking a livelihood, but our merciful divine Shariah inherently does not demand of us things that are impossible, as Allah (SWT) says: Allah does not burden a person with more than he can bear (sura Al-Baqara:286) Hence their duty is to simply follow true scholars as ordered in the verse in Sura Al-Anbiya. It is interesting to note that even though the likes of the scholars mentioned above did have a level of ijtihad, in their views they themselves did not feel themselves able to dispense with Taqlid of one of the four Imams they followed. The hadith collection Al-Jami` of Imam Tirmidhi is a testament to this. If a person, acquainted with the shafi school, goes through this book he will see that the hadith are brought in support of this school, as is plain to see from the chapter headings and Imam Tirmidhi’s commentary. In the second century there was a kind of consensus of the scholars that it was the interest of the Deen that for the layman, Taqlid be only done of the four schools. Having said this, a person was not restricted in who he asked for legal opinions from the four codified schools. This kind of non-specific Taqlid is known as “Taqlid ghayr Shaksi.” Because of the general greater religiosity in those first generations a person would, even though he was not restricted by the scholars in whose Taqlid he did, seek out the most pious scholar and even if he ever gained more than one opinion, he would incline to side of precaution in the opinion he chose, and the threat of following desires was little. Taqlid ghayr Shakhsi to Taqlid Shakhsi The further we get away in time from the best of generations, in particular after the second century, as impiety and following desires become more common, the scholars become more unequivocal of the obligatoriness of following only one school for every Muslim. The historical facts make this abundantly clear and anyone who contends otherwise is frankly out of touch with the reality. He is neither aware of the countless illustrious jurists who have stated this view, he seems oblivious of the state of the people of that time let alone his own time. Thus the fact is that by the end of the second century, and also the end of the best of generations, there was shift in the attitude of the masses and personal desires started becoming prominent in the opinions being followed. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) himself had forewarned of this when he said, “then falsehood (kadhib) would become widespread.” It was then the scholars unanimously agreed, that no longer will people be able to have the option to hand pick opinions, rather they must follow one school only whichever that maybe from the four. Imam Shah Waliullah, states: After the second century adherence to specific schools appeared amongst the Muslims…. And this was the obligation at that time see Al-Insaf fi Bayan Asbab al-Ikhtilaf, p.70. Shaikh Wahbah al-Zuhaili in Al-Fiqh al-Islami wa adillatuh, vol.1 p.94, however has stated that the position of the majority of scholars was that only Taqlid of any scholar is wajib (Taqlid ghayr Shakhsi), and only a few scholars held Taqlid to be wajib of a specific school (Taqlid Shakhsi). This claim however not only conflicts with the patent need of the Deen and Ummah that lye in making Taqlid Shakhsi Wajib, it is also not corroborated by the facts, the most incontrovertible of which is the great number of jurists who stated this very view as we will be recorded below. On the other hand, Shaikh Wahbah supported his view by citing only two or three authors, which it is hard to see how constitute a majority? To be sure the claim is an error, the argument presented by Shaikh Wahbah, that underlies this view, we see is also clearly flawed. The reasoning he gives for why specific Taqlid (Taqlid Shakhsi) cannot be wajib, in his own words is: Allah only obligated following the scholars without specification of one and not another, He said: "Ask the people of Remembrance if you do not know" (Sura Anbiya:7) (Op.Cit). The reality however is that in this verse Allah (SWT) made generic Taqlid obligatory or Taqlid in general (Jins of Taqlid or Mutlaq Taqlid). Now Taqlid in this general sense has under it two, call them, constituents or kinds or sub-categories (Anwa` or Afrad): Taqlid ghayr Shakhsi (non-specific Taqlid of any scholar) Taqlid Shakhsi (specific Taqlid of a particular scholar) Thus it becomes apparent that Taqlid itself is an obligation (wajib), with all the kinds of Taqlid that come under it logically taking that ruling, as they are but kinds of the same thing. Though indeed there is a choice, in acting upon the Deen, which of the two kinds one practices. Just as if a mother ordered her son to buy her “fruit,” under this general term (Mutlaq) would come many kinds of fruits, for example apple, orange, pear etc. It would be true to say that the obligation applied to all these fruits, that there is a choice in which fruit he chooses is another issue. What matters is that he chooses any fruit, and whichever fruit the son chooses he’ll have fulfilled his duty. But what cannot be said is that to buy apples on the one hand is obligatory, but as for oranges, that is just permissible (and to say unlawful is just absurd). To take another example, this time from the Deen, if someone broke an oath he would have to give the atonement (Kafaarah). The atonement for breaking an oath is Fard (Obligatory), however under this generic/general term or Mutlaq are three constituents/kinds (afrad): (1) Feeding the poor, (2) Clothing the poor, (3) Freeing a slave. Each one will take the ruling of the atonement, namely Fard, and what is Mubah or permissible is the choosing one any one of these three. Thus the upshot of this discussion is that the verse in Sura Anbiya actually made both kinds of Taqlid wajib, and by an individual doing either one of the two, he would have fulfilled the obligation upon him. It was for this reason we find examples of both kinds of Taqlid being practised by the first generations as recorded above. As for why the scholars prohibited the option of Taqlid Ghayr Shakhsi, it was due to a change in the condition of the people, the juristic basis for which we will speak more on later. The Majority of Ulema on Taqlid Shakhsi In this section of the essay my primary concern was to bring such quotes from undisputed experts of the Deen showing Taqlid Shakhsi as an obligation had become the common view amongst scholars throughout most of Islamic History. Having said this, I have also taken the opportunity to add some other quotations, not specifically on Taqlid Shakhsi, in order to refute two other views being promoted today, which though marginal, their fallacy and heretical nature require exposing. The first view is that Taqlid, whatever kind it is, is unlawful and that rather it is the duty of every Muslim to derive for himself all the detailed rulings from the Holy Qur’an and Sunna. This view is held by groups known as the “Ahle-hadith” or “Salafis.” One of the reasons, they succeed in getting people to believe such baseless and outlandish claims is they falsely give the impression this is also the view of most of the great Islamic scholars in the past. The actual position of the classical scholars of Islam, as proven by the quotes below, however is very different to this. Furthermore, it is quite startling that a scholar who they themselves rely upon greatly, namely the late Shaikh Salih bin Uthaymin, has stated unequivocally the non-scholar must do Taqlid of the scholars in his Al-Usul min `ilm al-Usul. In his recorded lectures of the same text he says that for the average Muslim to try to delve into the Holy Qur’an and Sunna in order to deduct rulings is like a person who has not learnt swimming to swim in a sea. It will only lead to his destruction. His is the final quote in the selection. The second view is less heretical and dangerous for at least it acknowledges the sacred Deen cannot be left in the hands of absolute infants in terms of Islamic learning. The holders of this view say it is permitted to follow any scholar, even if he be from other than the four schools. But of course the main intent behind the following texts is to show that the view of the vast majority of the Scholars of Ahl al-Sunna, was and is that Taqlid Shakhsi in particular is wajib. The scholars we mention are such authorities in the Sacred Knowledge of the Deen, that it is not unreasonable to assume that this ruling, that Taqlid shakhsi is obligatory, was also the view of their many eminent teachers, students and the whole school they belonged to. Imam Ibn al-Hummam, author of many unique works in Jurisprudence and Doctrine records the view of the Hanafi scholars on Taqlid of a single Mujtahid in the commentary of Hidayah Fath al-Qadir: (As for the layman) it is obligatory for him (Al-wajib alayh) to do Taqlid of a single Mujtahid….The jurists have stated that the one who switches from one Madhab to another by his Ijtihad and evidence is sinful deserving of being punished. Thus one who does so without Ijtihad and evidence is even more deserving. (vol.6 p.360) Imam Nawawi writes in Al-Majmu` Sharh Al-Muhadhdhab: The second view is it is obligatory (yalzimuhu) for him to follow one particular school, and that was the definitive position according to Imam Abul-Hassan (the father of Imam al-Haramayn Al-Juwayni). And this applies to everyone who has not reached the rank of Ijtihad of the jurists and scholars of other disciplines. The reasoning for this ruling is that if it was permitted to follow any school one wished it would lead to hand-picking the dispensations of the schools, following one’s desires. He would be choosing between Halal and Haram, and obligatory and permissible. Ultimately that would lead to relinquishing oneself from the burden of responsibility. This is not the same as during the first generations, for the schools that were sufficient in terms of their rulings for newer issues, were neither codified or did they became popular. Thus on this basis it is obligatory for a person to strive in choosing a Madhab which alone he follows. (Vol.1 p.93) Imam Sharani, an undisputed authority in the Shafi school writes in Al-Mizan al-Kubra: …You (O student) have no excuse left for not doing Taqlid of any Madhab you wish from the schools of the four Imams, for they are all paths to Heaven…. (p.55 vol.1) Shaikh Salih al-Sunusi writes in Fath al-`Alee al-Malik fil-Fatwa `ala Madhab al-Imam Malik: As for the scholar who has not reached the level of Ijtihad and the non-scholar, they must do Taqlid of the Mujtahid….And the most correct view is that it is obligatory (wajib) to adhere to a particular school from the four schools… (Section on Usul al-Fiqh p.40-41) In Tuhfa al-Muhtaj fi Sharh al-Minhaj, Shaikh al-Islam Ahmad Ibn Hajr al-Haytami writes: The claim the layman has no Madhab is proscribed, rather it is necessary (yalzamuhu) for him to do Taqlid of a recognised school. (As for the claim: scholars did not obligate following one school), that was before the codification of the schools and their establishment. (Vol.12 p.491-Kitab al-Zakah) In the famous 12 volume Maliki compendium of Fataawa, Al-Mi`yar al-Mu`rib an Fataawa ahl al-Ifriqiyya wa al-Andalus wa al-Maghrib, Imam Ahmad al-Wanshirisi records the Fatwa on Taqlid: It is not permitted (laa yajoozu) for the follower of a scholar to choose the most pleasing to him of the schools and one that agrees the most with him. It is his duty to do Taqlid of the Imam whose school he believes to be right in comparison to the other schools. (vol.11 p.163-164) The great authority in Usul Imam Aamidi writes in Al-Ihkam fi Usul al-Ahkam: The layman and anyone who is not capable of Ijtihad, even if he has acquired mastery of some of the disciplines (Ulum) related to Ijtihad, is obligated (yalzimuh) with following the positions of the Mujtahid Imams and taking his juristic opinions and this is the view of the experts from the scholars of the principles (Al-Muhaqqiqin minnal-Usulyyin). It was the Mutazila of Baghdad who prohibited that except if the soundness of his Ijtihad becomes clear to him. (vol.4 p.278) Imam Zahid al-Kawthari, Hanafi jurist and senior juridical advisor to the last Shaikh al-Islam of the Ottoman Empire, wrote in a impassioned article against the growing modern trend of non-Madhabism, entitled Al-Laa Madhabiyya Qantara al-Laa Deeniyya (“Non-Madhabism is a bridge to Non-religion”): Those who call the masses to throwing away adhering to a madhab from the Madhabs of the followed Imams, whose lives we briefly mentioned in what has passed, will be of two groups; those who consider that all the derived opinions of the Mujtahid are right, such that it is permitted for the layman to follow any opinion of any Mujtahid, not restricting himself to the opinions of a single Mujtahid whom he selects to be followed, such thinking belongs to the Mutazila. The (second group) are the Sufis who consider the Mujtahids to be all right in the sense that they seek out the hardest opinions from their positions without confining themselves to following one Mujtahid. (Published in Maqalaat al-Kawthari, p.224-225) Imam Al-Jalaal Shams al-Din al-Muhalli writes in the commentary of the Shafi text Jam` al-Jawami,`: And the soundest position (wal-Asahh) is that it is obligatory (yajibu) for the non-scholar/layman and other than him of those who have not reached the rank of Ijtihad, adherence of one particular school from the Madhabs of the Mujtahid Imams (iltizam Madhab Muayyan min madaahib al-Mujtahideen) that he beliefs to be preferable to another school or equal to it. (Kitab al-Ijtihad, p.93) Imam Rashid Ahmad Gangohi, the Faqih of the 19th Century, writes in Fataawa Rashidyya: When the corruption that comes from non-specific Taqlid is obvious, and no one will deny this provided he is fair, then when specific Taqlid is termed obligatory for other than itself (Wajib li-ghayrihi), and non-specific Taqld is termed unlawful, this will not be by mere opinion, rather it is by the command of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), for he commanded that removing corruption is an obligation upon every individual. (p.205) Imam Abd al-Hay al-Lakhnawi writes in his Majmuat al-Fataawa, after mentioning the various views of the scholars on Taqlid: On this subject the soundest view is that the laypeople will be prevented from such (choosing) of different opinions, especially the people of this time, for whom there is no cure but the following of a particular Madhab. If these people were allowed to choose between their Madhab and another, it would give rise to great tribulations. (vol.3 p.195) Imam Rajab al-Hanbali writes in his book: “Refutation of anyone who follows other than the four schools”: …that is the Mujtahid, assuming his existence, his duty (Farduhu) is to follow what becomes apparent to him of the Truth. As for the non-Mujtahid his duty is Taqlid (p.6) In the well known Maliki text Maraqi al-Saud, it is stated: (Taqlid) is necessary (yalzimu) for other than the one who has achieved the rank of absolute ijtihad. Even if he is limited (mujtahid) who is unable (to perform absolute Ijtihad). (Point 957, p.39) He writes further on: “Every school from the schools of the (four) Mujtahids is a means that reaches one to Paradise.” In one of the most authoritative juristic commentaries of the Holy Qur’an, Al-Jami` li-ahkam al-Qar’an, by the scholar Imam Qurtubi, commenting on verse 7 in Sura Anbiya, he writes: The scholars did not disagree that it is obligatory for the non-scholars (al-`Aamah) to do Taqlid of their scholars and they are meant in the verse: Ask the people of Remembrance if you do not know. And the scholars by consensus (Ajma`oo) stated it is necessary (laa budda) for he who is unable to see to do Taqlid of someone else who will tell him of the direction of the Qiblah, if it becomes difficult for him. Similarly, one who does no possess knowledge or insight of what the Deen teaches, then it is necessary (laa budda) for him to do Taqlid of that scholar who does. (p.181 vol.11) The internationally renowned scholar Mufti Taqi Uthmani writes in his commentary on the Book: Al-Misbah fi Rasm al-Mufti wa Manaahij al-Ifta: The sound view, and upon which are the majority of the scholars, is that it is obligatory (Yajibu) for all those who have not reached the rank of Ijtihad to adhere to a particular school from the four well known, codified and definitively transmitted schools. This is in order to regulate a person’s actions and control his worldly dealings in a way that protects from confusion, errors and fulfils the compelling need. (vol.1, pp 251-252) Shaikh Salih bin al-Uthaymin writes in his book Al-Usul min `ilm al-Usul in the chapter on Taqlid: Taqlid takes place in two places; the first is that the person doing Taqlid be a layman, incapable of discerning the ruling by himself, so his duty (Farduhu) is to do Taqlid due to the statement of Allah (SWT): “Ask the people of Remembrance if you know not (Sura al-Nahl:43). (p.68) Shaikh al-Uthaymin also outlines in the chapter preceding this one what is needed for a person to be fit to deduce rulings from the Sacred texts, in other words the Pre-requisites of Ijtihad. He records six conditions, the first of which is the condition of encompassing all the verses and ahadith on the subject. This would, at the very first hurdle, lose most of us who have not learnt, let alone mastered, the Arabic language. Translations can never convey the linguistic intricacies, rhetorical devices and semantic nuances of the original Arabic, and furthermore a vast number of the hadith have yet to be translated into English. Juristic basis for Taqlid Shaksi alone being obligatory It is important to elaborate in detail what led to the change in ruling from permissibility to asking any of the scholars of the four schools to following one school from the four exclusively? As already stated both kinds of Taqlid (non-specific of the four and specific) were obligatory for the layman. However the option was open to him of following one school, as some did, and if he was not particularly discerning as the average lay person is, he simply asked any scholar he considered to be a reliable scholar regardless of his school. The first kind of Taqlid however produced a danger which with the passing of time became more and more real. Namely, people would “shop” for opinions. They would ask different scholars and often would follow a scholar merely due to ease in that view and it according with his whim. The early blessed generations were largely saved from this. In fact all Muslim scholars by consensus consider it absolutely for forbidden for a person to want to do something and then look for justification through texts and opinions of the scholars. The Holy Qur’an itself condemns those who act in this way when it says: Have you seen he who takes his desire as his god. (Al-Jaathiyah:23) The great jurist of the Hanafi school, Imam Ibn Aabideen records the following eye-opening incident that shows us the gravity of this problem. There was a student of Imam Abu Hanifa who once approached the Ashab al-Hadith (those who clam to only follow hadith), for the hand of his daughter in marriage. The father in law to be refused, and said he would only marry her to him if he started raising his hands (raf` al-yadayn) in Salah, reciting behind the Imam and pronouncing the Ameen loudly. The student agreed and consequently was wed to his wife. When the hanafi jurist Abu Bakr al-Jawzajani was informed of this he replied: “As for the nikah it is sound, but I fear that he (the student) may have left the Deen because he left what he believed to be the truth for his personal desire.” Imam Shatibi amongst other jurists has explained the danger in leaving Fiqh unregulated further, saying; ultimately the very purpose of the Shariah which is Takleef, or charging people with duties and responsibilities and taking them away from merely following their desires, with all the corruption and harm this brings, would become defunct as lay people sought refuge in the weak opinions of inferior scholars or from within the other three schools. Thus to prevent the doors of irreligion from opening the scholars concurred that it was now obligatory to follow one school whichever that be from those that had been thoroughly debated by the geniuses of the Ummah, documented and transmitted. There is no doubt that such lofty credentials belonged exclusively to the four schools. It was only due to the dangers mentioned earlier that lay in allowing Taqlid ghar Shakhsi (non-specific Taqlid) that the scholars declared it unlawful. What was the legal evidence or basis by which they effectively declared something unlawful which was clearly permissible previously? The jurists appreciate well that rulings change with time and there are many examples in the Shariah where something at one time was permitted, is made unlawful and vice versa in consideration of other greater principles of the Deen. Selling arms in an Islamic State is something permitted, however jurists declared selling arms unlawful at a time of civil war, as killing the life of a believer is from the gravest of sins whichever side he may be on. Another example is, the action of Uthman (R.A.) in standardising the recitation of the Holy Qur’an. The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings upon him, prayed to Allah (SWT) for the Holy Qur’an to be revealed in seven independent dialects of the Arabs, so that it would be easy for them to recite. During the life of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) the various Arabs would recite it according to one of these dialects. Soon after the death of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) Islam had spread across to persia, asia and africa. With the spread of Islam also meant the new Muslims of these non-Arab lands would be learning and reciting the Book of Allah. It was at this time, during the Khilafah of the Khalif Uthman, that the existence of several dialects became a cause for confusion for these new Muslims. What had initially been for the purpose of facilitation and ease was becoming, in this new context, a means of difficulty and confusion. Thus Uthman (R.A.) declared the writing down, reciting and instruction of six dialects of the Holy Qur’an as unlawful and this was done in the presence of companions who concurred with him. Hence what was once permitted was made unlawful. Similarly, when the jurists saw, with the variety of opinions existent in the community and the threat of following desires and irreligion, they made Taqlid of only the four schools obligatory. Then as moral uprightness became less and less amongst the masses and the tendency to follow one’s desires in legal opinions increased, the ruling was given that Taqlid of only one school is permitted for the layman. This ruling was given on the basis of preventing the evil of following desires from coming into being, technically termed “Blocking the means” and in order to preserve the obligation of the duties and responsibilities believers have been charged with. Some may bring a criticism here that, other jurists do not accept the juristic principle of blocking the means. The truth however is that all jurists have acknowledged this principle, even if they have done so using other names for it. Imam Shatibi in his Muwafaqat, vol. 4 p.66 quotes Imam Qarafi as saying that there is Ijma (Mujma` alayh) of the scholars on its acceptance. Imam Abu Zahra, in his Usul al-Fiqh, p.253, has confirmed it to be the view of all four schools. The reason for its general acceptance is that it is in reality a law based on common sense of looking to the end result of an action. If something is evil or unlawful then it is nonsensical to think there is nothing wrong with the presence of those things that directly lead to that evil. In fact, we see it in action in our daily lives, in every aspect of life. If we prevent our children from going out alone, though they may not understand this, it is not because stepping outside is in itself forbidden, rather it is due to the threat of being abducted etc. It is logical and obvious that things that lead to an unlawful also be forbidden. Man-made laws are incapable of acknowledging this truth such that even though studies prove pornography leads to rape and other sexual offences, they do not even make a feeble attempt to curb it. The Divine law of Allah Almighty and Wise could never be so deficient and for which reason we see that many of the laws of the Islamic State are based upon it. Another juristic principle similar to the “blocking the mean” principle, is the principle of “Acquiring of the means” by which an obligation can only be fulfilled. Usul books speak of this as Muqadimat al-wajib wajib or maa laa yutimmu al-wajib illa bihi fa huwa wajib. In this case some act needs to come into existence due to the command of Allah (SWT), however to achieve that act sometimes another thing maybe required, thus in order to fulfil the order the other thing will also become obligatory even when it has not been explicitly commanded by the Lawgiver. An example of the latter principle (of acquiring the means) is the order in the Holy Qur’an to give Zakah. Now it is obvious a person will only be able to carry out this command properly, if he has the detailed knowledge of Zakah rules, what is Nisab, on what things must Zakah be given, what makes a person illegible to give Zakah and so on. Thus, though there is no text specifically making study of the rules of Zakah wajib, based on this juristic principle, it would be said that it is wajib for a Muslim to learn the fiqh of Zakah and even to attend a Zakah course teaching such a course, being held at a particular Institute in his locality. Thus the unlawful consequence of people following their desires, a thing forbidden clearly in the Holy Qur’an, establishes the unlawfulness of unrestricted Taqlid or Taqlid ghayr shakhsi. Similarly, the obligation to preserve the Shariah from distortion and corruption, establishes the obligation of adherence to Taqlid Shakhsi. Furthermore, one will note, whereas in the case of other issues, their rulings are established by one of either of these two usuli principles, the necessity of Taqlid Shakshi is established by both principles. There are other issues related to this topic deserving discussion, but are beyond the scope of the article, such as what are the conditions under which a Madhab is left and answering the evidences usually quoted against Taqlid. For these and other topics works that can be consulted are: Jawahir al-Fiqh by Mufti Muhammad Shafi, vol.1; Qawaid fi Ulum al-Fiqh by Shaikh Habib Ahmad al-Kairawani (punlished as an introduction to Imam Zafar Ahmad Uthmani’s Iila al-Sunnan); Al-Kalam al-Mufid fi Ithbat al-Taqlid by Maulana Muhammad Sarfraz Khan Safdar; The legal Status of following a Madhab by Mufti Taqi Uthmani; Al-Laa Madhabiyya Akhtar Bida`h tuhaddi al-Shariat al-Islamiyya by Shaikh Ramadan al-Buti.

Masjid Al-Mustarah, a witness to history Place where the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) rested and prayed after he returned from the Battle of Uhud. Saturday, 02 August 2014 MADINAH — Masjid Al-Mustarah, located 2.5 kilometers northwest of the Prophet's Mosque, has acquired its name because the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) rested and prayed at this place after he returned from the Battle of Uhud. Mustarah in Arabic means to take rest. Whenever the Prophet visited the graves of the martyrs of Uhud, he rested at the place. It is also called Bani Haritha Mosque because it is located among houses belonging to the tribe. The mosque was built during the times of the Prophet and Madinah historians say the Prophet prayed in the mosque. The mosque is located to left of the road leading to Uhud Mountain and is about half a meter above ground. Due its historical significance, the mosque was renovated and expanded during the Saudi era. The mosque is rectangular in shape and occupies a 491-square-meter area and is distinguishable by its beautiful dome and minaret. The mosque has entrances from the east, west and north. Historian Ahmad Murshed said the mosque is located among the homes of Bani Haritha. A Turkish castle that stood west of the mosque was removed in 1995. http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index...20140802213307

"The likeness of the believer who reads the Qur'an is like that of citron; its taste is delicious and its scent is pleasant. And the likeness of the believer who does not read the Qur'an is like that of a date; its taste is delicious, yet it has no scent. And the likeness of a hypocrite who reads the Qur'an is like that of a basil; its scent is pleasant, yet its taste is bitter. And the likeness of a hypocrite that does not read the Qur'an is like that of a colocynth; its taste is bitter and it has no scent." [Al-Bukhari and Muslim]

1 The Noble Features of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 2 The Seal of Nubuwwah (Prophethood) of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 3 The Mubaarak Hair of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 4 The Combing of The Hair of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 5 The Appearing of the White Hair of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 6 Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam Using a Dye 7 The Kuhl of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 8 The Dressing of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 9 The Khuff (leather socks) of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 10 The Shoes of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 11 The Mubaarak Ring of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 12 Chapter Stating that Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam wore The Ring on his Right hand 13 The Sword of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 14 The Armor of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 15 The Helmet of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 16 The Turban of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 17 The Lungi of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 18 The Walking of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 19 The Qinaa of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 20 The Sitting of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 21 The Pillow of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 22 Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam Leaning on Something other than a Pillow 23 The Description of the Eating of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 24 The Bread of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 25 The Description of the Curry of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 26 Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam Performing Wudu at the Time of Eating 27 The Words That of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam said Before and after Eating 28 The Cup of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 29 The Fruits Eaten by Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 30 The Description of the Things Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam Drank 31 Those Hadith Describing the Manner Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam Drank 32 Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam Useing 'Itr 33 The Speech of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 34 The Laughing of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 35 The Description of the Joking of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 36 The Description of the Saying of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam on Poetry 37 The Story Telling of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam at Night 38 The Sleeping of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 39 The Worship and Devotion of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 40 Salaatut Duha (Chaast Prayers) 41 Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam performing nawaafil at home 42 The fasting of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 43 The recital of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 44 The weeping of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 45 The narrations of The bed of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 46 That which has been narrated on the humbleness of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 47 The noble character and habits of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 48 The Modesty of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 49 The hajaamah (cupping- cautering) of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 50 The living of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 51 The names of Sayyidina Rasullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 52 The noble age of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 53 The death of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 54 The legacy of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam 55 The seeing of Sayyidina Rasullullah Sallallahu ‘Alayhi Wasallam in a dream Credits to source: Inter=Islam

Shamaail Tirmidhi The Virtues and Noble Character of The Prophet Muhammad Classic Book of Hadeeth by Imaam Abi 'Eesaa Muhammad bin 'Eesah bin Sorah At-Tirmidhi R.A.(209-279A.H.) Commentary by Shaykhul-Hadith Maulana Muhammad Zakariyya Muhajir Madni (R.A) Presented in Arabic and English Introduction All paise be to Allah who alone sustains the world. Exalted salaah (blessings) and complete salaam (peace) be on our master Muhammad Sallallahu 'Alayhi Wasallam and his family and companions. The Shamaa-il of Imaam Abu 'Eesa Timidhi has a collection of 397 ahaadith and is divided into 55 chapters on the physical Description and character of our beloved Nabi Sallallahu 'Alayhi Wasallam. It has been printed on numerous occasions and many commentaries have been written on it. The present English translation and commentary is of the Khasaa-il Nabawi Sallallahu 'Alayhi Wasallam by the late Shaykhul Hadith Maulana Muhammad Zakariyya Rahamatullahi 'Alayhi. It will enable a Muslim to achieve a link and connection with the one whom Allah Ta'aala has made as a mercy unto mankind, and most certainly Allah has spoken the truth when He mentions in His Book: "Verily, you (0 Muhammad) are of a very high (noble) character". A Muslim can truly claim his love for Rasulullah Sallallahu 'Alayhi Wasallam, if he attempts to follow the manner and life-style of the messenger of Islam. We are given such an opportunity, after the reading of this book, for it enlightens the reader with the intimate aspect of Rasul Sallallahu Alayhi Wasallam's life. Finally, we ask, Allah Ta'aala to reward us and that He instill within us the distinguished features and august character of this most Noble Messenger, who is the perfect example for Muslims. FCPM Shamaail Tirmidhi available on: Inter-Islam

By Khalid Baig The crowd was growing in size by the minute. They were beating drums, singing, dancing, and shouting in joy. Pagan Makkah was about to kill Khubaib bin Adi Ansari, Radi-Allahu anhu, who had been captured through a sinister and treacherous plot, then sold in the slave market so the buyers could exact their vengeance. It started when some tribesmen from Uthul and Qara went to Madinah and requested the Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, to send some teachers with them who could educate their fellow tribesmen about Islam. The request was granted and about ten Companions were sent with them. When the group reached Raji' two hundred armed men were lying in wait for them. Khubaib and Zaid bin Adathna, Radi-Allahu anhuma, were captured alive, while the others were martyred. Then they were sold in exchange for a hundred heads of camel. Both had fought in the battle of Badr and their swords had killed some pagan soldiers. Now the relatives of those killed in war wanted to get even. Of course, Arab traditions did not allow revenge for war like this. But their opponents were Muslims. Then, as now, the pagan world was ready to violate its own rules and traditions when the victims were Muslims. While facing death, Khubaib, Radi-Allahu anhu, said a poem that has been recorded by history. It includes these lines: "They say if I renounce Islam, my life will be spared. But it is better to die with belief than to live with unbelief." At the last minute, the pagans asked him: "Don't you wish that you were spared and Muhammad (Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam) got this punishment? Would not you like that you were resting comfortably in your home, while he was killed in your place?" From the man who was about to die because he had accepted the Message brought by Muhammad, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, came this reply: "By Allah, I cannot even imagine that a thorn should prick the foot of Muhammad, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, while I rest in my home." Abu Sufyan, an unbeliever at the time, remarked to his associates: "See, the love of the companions for Muhammad (Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam) is unparalleled and unprecedented." At another time, a similar observation was made by another Quraish leader Urwah ibn Mas'ud al Thaqafi. "I have seen Ceasar and Chosroes in their pomp, but never have I seen a man honored, as Muhammad is honored by his comrades." The biographies of the Companions are full of stories that show their extra-ordinary love and devotion for the Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. The Qur'an itself attests to this. "The Prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves." [Al-Ahzab 33:6] It is a statement of fact as well as a command. The following two ahadith, from among the many on the subject, clarify this point further. "None of you can be a believer unless he loves me more than his parents, his children, and all the people." [bukhari and Muslim] "There are three signs that indicate that a person has tasted the sweetness of faith. 1) That he loves Allah and His Prophet more than anything else. 2) He loves everyone solely for the sake of Allah. 3) After accepting Islam he hates going back to unbelief as much as he hates going into the fire." [bukhari and Muslim] It has to be so, because our relationship to the Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, is at the core of our entire religion. He is human, not Divine, but he is our connection to the Deity. He relays to us the Word of Allah and he explains what the Word means. He sets a personal example that we look at not just for admiration but emulation. Our relationship to him is legal as well as personal; moral as well as spiritual; intellectual as well as emotional. Allah chose him to guide us, educate us, inspire us, and purify us --- and we remain indebted forever! This not only establishes a relationship between a believer and the Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, it also establishes the relationship among the believers, making them one unit because of--- in addition to their common faith--- their common love for the Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. Together these facts explain a Muslim's sensitivity to the honor of the Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. To begin with, we must remember that the honor of everyone is important. As the hadith reminds us: "If a believer does not come to the help of another believer whose honor and dignity are under attack, then Allah will also not help him when he is most in need of Allah's help. And a believer who does come to the help of another believer whose honor and dignity are under attack, then Allah will also help him when he is most in need of Allah's help." [Abu Dawood]. If a Muslim is not supposed to be indifferent when the honor of another ordinary Muslim is under attack, how in the world can anyone expect him or her to be indifferent when the honor and dignity of the Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, himself may be under attack? As has been noted by someone else, a civilization in which nothing is sacred may have difficulty in understanding the values of a civilization in which sacred is all that counts. But if it cannot understand the logic, because of its own blinders, it will have to come to terms with the facts on the ground: Muslims treat their Prophet, and all the prophets, with utmost respect and they simply cannot tolerate any willful insult and disrespect. To compromise on this issue would tantamount to compromising one's faith. And no one has a right to demand that. The blasphemy laws in Muslim countries like the one in Pakistan, are not only based on solid and agreed upon juristic grounds, they express a fundamental value of the Muslim civilization. We need not offer any apologies for that just because the forces of profanity seem to be powerful. Some think that the Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, forgave his worst enemies and never took revenge for himself. So any law that prescribed punishment for assaulting the honor of the Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, is clearly against his Sunnah. What the prophetic example teaches is that we should also be willing to forgive those who have committed offenses against us, personally. But we know of Ka'ab bin Ashraf who used to abuse the Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, and instigated others to do so. He ordered Mohammed ibn Salma to execute Ka'ab. (Bukhari) There are not many but history records that whenever anyone tried to abuse the person of the Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, he was meted with the same punishment. As the Persian poet said, "May take liberty with God, Be careful with Muhammad, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam."