Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘shirk’

FROM DARUL ULOOM DEOBAND

English Translation Edited by: 

Mufti Afzal Hoosen Elias (May Allaah protect him)

Honourable Mufteen, Darul Uloom Deoband

Assalamu Alaykum wa Rahmatullah

My question is that how is Dr. Zakir Naik? Are his beliefs in accordance to those of the Ahl us Sunnah wal Jama’ah? Are his views on Hadith and Tafseer reliable or not? What is his path in Fiqh? Which Imam does he follow? Can we listen to his talks and practice upon them? Please provide a satisfactory answer.

There are many questions regarding Dr. Zakir Naik. This question is also one of these. A detailed answer regarding the beliefs, Fiqhi path and his explanations regarding the Qur’aan and Hadith were requested. Therefore, in the light of his lectures and speeches, a detailed answer is provided.

حامدا ومصليا ومسلما ، الجواب وبالله التوفيق والعصمة

Deviated things like moving away from the correct beliefs, interpolation and made up views regarding the Tafseer of the Qur’aan, awe for scientific research, unity with western thought in opposition to Islaam and turning away from the pious predecessors and the path of the majority of the Ummah in Fiqhi rulings are to be found in the lectures of Dr. Zakir Naik. Also, he is involved in an effort to turn the Muslim Ummah away from following the Mujtahid Imams, making the people renounce the religious institutions and trying to make the people have bad thoughts about the scholars. A few examples of such deviation are presented below:

A few points of Dr. Zakir regarding belief (belief is something very delicate. A slight slip in it could sometimes be a danger for Imaan).
“It is permissible to call unto Allaah with the words Vishnu and Barhma.”
Dr. Zakir says in one programme, “It is permissible to call unto Allaah using the names of the Hindu deities like ‘Vishnu’, meaning Rabb and ‘Barhma’ meaning Creator. This is on condition that a person does not have the belief regarding Vishnu that he has four hands and mounts birds.” [Islaam and Universal Brotherhood p.33 by Dr. Zakir Naik]

It is not permissible to call unto Allaah with these non Arabic words. It is not permissible to call on Him using such names that are not specific for Him. How can it be permissible to call on Allaah with names like Vishnu and Barhma when these are the outstanding signs of the Hindus?

“What is the word of Allaah? It is necessary to take the path of science and technology in order to test it.”
Dr. Zakir said during a programme, “Every man understands that his honourable book can only be the speech of Allaah. If you want to know which book is definitely the speech of Allaah, then the final test is to take the path of modern science and technology. If it is in accordance to modern science, then understand that this is definitely the speech of Allaah I.” [الجواب على ثلاثين جوابا على أن ذاكر الهندي وأصحاب فكره منحرفون ضلالا للشيخ يحى الحجورى]

From this we come to know of Dr. Zakir’s deviated boldness, turning away from the book of Allaah, his astray thought pattern and also his awe for modern science that has reached dangerous boundaries. This is to the degree that he has made scientific research that changes every moment the standard by which to judge the divine books, especially the Noble Qur’aan. The greatest proof of it being the speech of Allaah is its I’jaaz (making helpless). Through it, Allaah I has laid down a challenge in various places (of the Qur’aan).

“Every person has the right to give Fatwa.”
Dr. Zakir states in one place, “It is permissible for any person to give Fatwa because the meaning of Fatwa is to give ones opinion.” [Ibid]

In this statement, Dr. Zakir has referred to such an important task of giving fatwa with such light words like ‘giving an opinion’. According to Allamah Ibn al Qayyim, a Mufti is a translator of Allaah in the explanation of divine law and he is responsible for signing in His place.

لم تصلح مرتبة التبليغ بالرواية والفتيا إلا لمن اتصف بالعلم والصدق…وإذا كان منصب التوقيع عن الملوك بالمحل الذي لا ينكر فضله ولا يجهل قدره…فكيف بمنصب التوقيع عن رب الأرض والسماوات ، فحقيق بمن أقيم في هذا المنصب أن بعد له عدته ويتأهب له أهبته وأن يعلم فدر المقام الذي أقيم فيه . إعلام الموقعين ٩١/١

This is not only regarding himself, but he has permitted it for every person. He has totally cast aside the following verse of the Qur’aan and Hadith of Rasulullaah r,

فاسألوا اهل الذكر إن كنتم لا تعلمون

If you do not know, then ask those of knowledge

من أفتى بغير علم كان إثمه على من أفتاه . أخرجه أبو داؤد في سننه ٣٥٩ رقم ٣٦٥٩٣، باب تفسير القرآن عن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم

He who gives fatwa without authentic knowledge, the sin will be upon the one who gave the fatwa.

His own explanations in the Tafseer of the Qur’aan, i.e. interpolating the meaning
Tafseer of the Qur’aan is very delicate. The Mufassir stipulates the purport of Allaah I, that Allaah has taken this meaning. Therefore, it is very dangerous for an incompetent person to step into this field. It is mentioned in a Hadith,

من قال في القرآن برأيه فأصاب فقد أخطأ. (أخرجه الترمذى رقم ٢٧٧٦)

If a person renders Tafseer from his own intelligence, then even if he reaches the correct meaning, he will still be taken to be someone that has done wrong.

Another narration states,

من قال في القرآن برأيه فليتبوأ مقعده من النار . أخرجه الترمذى ١٩٩/٥ رقم ٢٩٥١

It is for this reason that there are many conditions for a commentator (Mufassir). For example, he should be well aware of all the verses of the Qur’aan, he should have great knowledge of the Ahadith, he should have good knowledge of Arabic and its laws; syntax, morphology and eloquence and clarity etc. As far as Dr. Zakir is concerned, none of the conditions are found in him to the necessary degree, he does not know the laws of Arabic as it ought to be known, he does not have deep knowledge regarding the Ahadith nor does he have great knowledge of eloquence and clarity. (All this will be clarified by means of examples further on). On the other hand, all the causes for falling into deviation are found to a complete degree in Dr. Zakir, e.g. turning away from the Tafseer narrated from Rasulullaah r, the Sahabah y and the Taabi’een, being awed by the thoughts of the era and misunderstanding the subject matter of the Qur’aan etc. Therefore, he has made many verses the practice ground for opposition on the basis of his ignorance. A few examples are presented below,

Dr. Zakir states regarding the Tafseer of the verse, (الرجال قوامون على النساء), “People say that the word ‘Qawwaam’ refers to being a stage higher. However, in reality, the word ‘Qawwaam’ comes from ‘Iqaamah’. The meaning of ‘Iqaamah’ is to stand up. Therefore, the meaning of ‘Iqaamah’ is being upon a higher level in terms of responsibility, not in virtue.” [Lectures of Zaakir Na’ik p.295, Farid Book Depot]
Dr. Zaakir has in support of the western view of equality of the sexes made his own Tafseer and has thereby negated the level of virtue that man has, whereas the great Mufassireen of the Ummah have explained the meaning to be higher in terms of virtue. Consequently, Ibn Kathir writes under the verse (الرجال قوامون على النساء),

أى الرجل قيم على المرأة أى هو رئيسها وكبيرها والحاكم عليها ، مؤدبها إذا اعوجت

The status of a man before his wife is like that of a ruler and leader. At the time of necessity, the husband also teaches his wife honour and respect in an appropriate manner.

Ibn Kathir writes in the Tafseer of (وللرجال عليهن درجة),

وللرجال عليهن درجة أى في الفضيلة في الخلق والمنزلة وطاعة الأمر والإنفاق والقيام بالمصالح والفضل في الدنيا والآخرة . ٦١٠/١

A husband is a level higher than the wife in terms of virtue, status, obedience etc. Also, the Tafseer of Dr. Zakir indeed goes against the Hadith,

لو كنت آمرا أحدا أن يسجد لأحد ، لأمرت النساء أن يسجدن لأزواجهن. أخرجه أبو داؤد

If it was permissible to make Sajdah to anyone but Allaah, I would have commanded the women to prostrate before their husbands. This is because if they were equal in virtue and the husband had no higher status than the wife, then why did Rasulullaah r want to command the women to prostrate – a sign of the greatest honour – before their husbands?

“Dr. Zakir, a question, “It is stated in the Qur’aan that the sex of the child in the womb of the mother is known only by Allaah, but science has now developed to quite an extent and we can specify this easily though ultra sonography. Is this verse of the Qur’aan not in contradiction with medical science?” He replies, “It is correct that it is mentioned in various translations and commentaries of this verse that only Allaah I knows the sex of the child that is in the womb of the mother.  However, study the Arabic verse and you will see that an Arabic word equivalent to the English word ‘sex’ was not used. In reality, whatever the Qur’aan says, it is what is in the womb? The knowledge of this lies only with Allaah I. Many Mufassireen have misunderstood and have taken the meaning to be that only Allaah knows the sex of the child that lies in the womb of the mother. This in incorrect. This verse does not indicate the sex of the foetus, but it indicates to the nature of the child in the womb. Will it be a cause of mercy or punishment for its parents?…[40 Objections on Islaam p.130 of Dr. Zaakir Naik, Areeb Publications, Dehli]
In this answer, Dr. Zaakir has been awed by scientific research and in order to save himself from the apparent objection, he has put the Tafseer narrated by the Sahabah and Taabi’een behind his back and has rejected a known meaning. He has criticised and said that many great Mufassireen are wrong. The meaning explained by Dr. Zaakir is the meaning of ‘Maa’ Mawsool. Many Mufassireen have mentioned this as a possibility under the first meaning. However, it is not correct to reject the second meaning. This is a clear proof that Dr. Zaakir does not ponder deeply and turns away from the statements of the Sahabah and Taabi’een. This is because the meaning that Dr. Zaakir has negated, another verse of Surah Ra’d points to it. The verse is,

الله يعلم ما تحمل كل انثى وما تغيض الأرحام وما تزداد. الرعد ٨

Allaah knows what every female bears and the shortages and excesses in the womb

This meaning is also narrated from the famous Tabi’i and Mufassir, Imam Qataadah þ. He says,

فلا يعلم ما في الأرحام أذكر أم أنثى الخ

Only Allaah has perfect knowledge of whether the foetus is a male or a female

Similarly, Ibn Kathir þ has mentioned this in his Tafseer vol.6 p.355, ‘Allamah Nasafi þ has written in Tafseer Madaarik vol.3 p.116 and Imam Shaukaani has written in Fath ul Qadeer vol.5 p.498. However, Dr. Zaakir has classified the meaning mentioned by these great Mufassirreen as wrong. He takes his meaning to be indisputable and is adamant upon it.

The correct answer:

The objective of the verse is to prove knowledge of the unseen for Allaah and ‘Ilm Ghayb in reality refers to that definite knowledge that is attained directly without any apparent cause and without any tools. The knowledge attained through tools and instruments by doctors is not definite knowledge, nor is it attained without instruments. It is Zanni (unclear) and is attained through instruments. Therefore, the Zanni knowledge attained through ultra sonography does not raise an objection on the Qur’aanic verse.

Dr. Zaakir states regarding the verse,
يا ايها النبى إذا جائك المؤمنت يبايعنك على ان لا يشركن بالله شيئا. الممتحنة ١٢

“Here, the word ‘Bay’ah’ is used. The word ‘Bay’ah’ will include the purport of election in our times. This is because Rasulullaah r was the Rasul of Allaah and the head of the government. The meaning of ‘Bay’ah’ was to accept him as the leader of the government. Islaam gave women the right to vote in that time.” [The rights of women in Islaam p.50, Dr. Zaakir Naik]

Here also, Dr. Zaakir makes an incorrect assertion. He wants to prove the right of women to vote by stating that the women taking ‘Bay’ah’ to Rasulullaah r is the ancient form of voting in today’s democratic system of election. This is the case when the people who know the reality of democracy (majority wins), they can understand clearly that this explanation of Dr. Zaakir is totally against what happens and it is wasting his intelligence in the Tafseer of the Qur’aan. This is because in accordance to the modern day democratic system, every person has the choice to choose the president. If someone does not gain the majority vote, then he cannot become the president. If taking Bay’ah was in reality getting votes, then did the Sahaabiyaat have the choice to reject the leadership of Rasulullaah r?

In the famous objection, based upon misunderstanding, raised upon the verse of Surah Maryam (يا أخت هارون ما كان أبوك امرأ سوء وما كانت أمك بغيا . مريم ٢٨) that Hadhrat Maryam radhiyallaahu anha was not the sister of Hadhrat Haaroon u, and there was a difference of a thousand years between them, Dr. Zaakir says, “The Christian missionaries say that Rasulullaah r did not know the difference between the mother of Hadhrat ‘Isa u, Maryam, and the sister of Haaroon, Maryam, whereas the meaning of the Arabic word ‘Ukht’ is children also. That is why the people said to Maryam that O children of Haaroon. In reality, it refers to the children of Hadhrat Haaroon u.” [40 Objections on Islaam, Dr. Zaakir Naik]
This is based on the ignorance of Dr. Zaakir regarding Ahadith and lexicography. In refutation of this research, the Hadith of Muslim is sufficient. It is stated in Sahih Muslim,

عن المغيرة بن شعبة قال : لما قدمت نجران سألونى ، فقالوا : إنكم تقرأون يا أخت هارون وموسى قبل عيسى بكذا وكذا ، فلما قدمت على رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم سألته عمن ذلك فقال : إنهم كان يسمون بأنبيائهم والصالحين قبلهم . مسلم ١٧١/٦ دار الجيل بيروت رقم ٥٧٢١

Rasulullaah r clarified this verse 1400 years ago. The summary of it is that Hadhrat Maryam – the mother of Hadhrat ‘Isa u was not the sister of Hadhrat Haaroon u, brother of Hadhrat Moosa u, but the brother of the mother of Hadhrat ‘Isa u was also named Haaroon and these people used to keep their names after their Ambiyaa and pious luminaries. From this we learn that this is not a new objection, nor is there a need to fabricate an answer to it.

How ignorant is Dr. Zaakir of Ahaadith that instead of trying to reach the reality of the Ahadith and Tafseer, he fabricates interpretations.

Dr. Zaakir states regarding the verse (والأرض بعد ذلك دحها), “The Arabic word used here for egg is “Dahaaha”. This refers to an ostrich egg. The egg of an ostrich has a similar shape with that of the earth. Therefore, the Qur’aan clarifies with total correctness the shape of the earth. When the Qur’aan was revealed, the thought was that the earth is flat.” [Lectures of Dr. Zaakir Naik, Qur’aan and Modern Science p.73, 74]
Here, Dr. Zaakir has been overawed by scientific viewpoints. He also makes up his own explanation for the verse by making wrong deductions in researching the shape of the earth. This is on account of not understanding the subject matter of the Qur’aan (detailing Tauheed and Risaalat and everything else about the nature of things comes in between). Therefore, the word “Dahawa” in Arabic refers to spreading out and expanse. In accordance to this, the translation and Tafseer of “Dahaaha” is the spreading out of the earth and the creation of all the things in it. [see Tafseer Ibn Kathir] this word and its root does not give the meaning of egg.

Ignorance of the Ahadith
Due to his ignorance of the treasure of Ahadith, Dr. Zaakir mentioned many rulings that are against authentic Ahadith. Also, in how many places where there are a number of Ahadith, he says that there is no proof for it. Hereunder, examples of the ignorance of Dr. Zaakir or his wilful turning a blind eye to the Ahadith are presented,

Permissibility for women reciting the Qur’aan while in Haydh
On one programme, Dr. Zaakir says regarding a woman while she is in Haydh, “There is permission for Salaat in the Qur’aan and Hadith but it is not mentioned in any Hadith that she cannot recite the Qur’aan.”

This is despite the fact that there is a clear Hadith in Tirmizi, (لا تقرأ الحائض ولا الجنب شيئا من القرآن) “A woman in Janaabat and Haydh cannot recite the Qur’aan.”

Think that in the presence of clear authentic Ahadith, Dr. Zaakir has made claims and has rejected them.

The Ahnaaf do not have proof to show that flowing blood breaks Wudhoo’
While discussing in a lecture whether Wudhoo’ breaks or not by blood, Dr. Zaakir says, “Some ‘Ulema’, especially the Hanafi Fiqh think that Wudhoo’ breaks by blood flowing. If blood flows while in Salaat, what should a person do? The answer to this question is a detailed Fatwa (of the Ahnaaf). Regarding this, there is no proof in support of this view point.” [The reality of Zaakir Naik p.214, Maktabah Madinah Deoband]

At this point, Dr. Zaakir has levelled an accusation against the ‘Ulema’ regarding Hanafi Fiqh that they say that Wudhoo’ breaks by blood flowing, whereas there are many Ahadith narrated in this regard. In addition, the practice of the Sahabah y also remained upon this. Study the following narrations,

أخرج البخاري عن عائشة رضي الله عنها قالت : جائت فاطمة بنت أبي حبيش إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقالت : يا رسول الله! إني امرأة أستحاض فلا أطهر ، أفأدع الصلاة؟ قال : لا ، إنما ذلك عرق وليست بالحيضة ، فإذا أقبلت الحيضة فدعى الصلاة وإذا أدبرت فاغسلي عنك الدم قال هشام : قال أبي ثم توضئي لكل صلاة حتى يجيئ ذلك الوقت.

إذا رعف أحدكم في صلاتة فلينصرف فليغسل عنه الدم ثم ليعد وضوءه ويستقبل صلاته أخرجه الدار قطني.

If someone has a nosebleed while in Salaat, he should wash the blood and repeat his Wudhoo’.

عن زيد بن ثابت رضي الله عنه الوضوء من كل دم سائل . أخرجه ابن عدي في الكامل (نصب الراية للإمام الزيلعي ٣٧⁄١

Wudhoo’ becomes compulsory by flowing blood.

Despite these and other narrations, Dr. Zaakir did not show his ignorance and claimed Ijtihaad saying that there is no proof to show that flowing blood breaks the Wudhoo’.

It is not permissible to differentiate between the Salaat of men and women
In another place, Dr. Zaakir states regarding the difference between the Salaat of men and women, “There is no authentic, established Hadith in which there is a command for women to perform Salaat in a way separate from that of men. Instead of this, there is a narration of Sahih Bukhari, Hadhrat Umm e Dardaa’ narrates that there is a command for women to sit in ‘At Tahiyyaat’ like men.”

Here, Dr. Zaakir has said two completely wrong things.

There is no Hadith showing the difference in Salaat between men and women
Rasulullaah r commanded that women should sit like men
By saying the first statement, Dr. Zaakir has denied all the Ahadith in which there is an explanation of the difference in Salaat between that of men and women. A few narrations are presented below:

أخرج البخاري عن النبي عليه السلام أنه قال يا أيها الناس! ما لكم حين نابكم شيئ في الصلاة ، أخذتم في التصفيق ، إنما التصفيق للنساء. ١٧٤⁄١ رقم ٦٨٤

عن وائل بن حجر قال لي رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يا وائل بن حجر! إذا صليت فاجعل يديك حذاء أذنيك والمرأة تجعل يديها حذاء ثدييها. المعجم الكبير للطبراني

عن يزيد بن أبي حبيب أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم مر على امرأتين تصليان فقال : إذا سجدتما فضما بعض اللحم إلى الأرض ، فإن المرأة ليست في ذلك كالرجل . أخرجه أبو داؤد مرسلا والبيهقي موصولا

سئل ابن عمر كيف كن النساء يصلين على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال : كن يتربعن ثم أمرن أن يتحفزن . جامع المسانيد والسنن

These narrations state the differences in the performance of Salaat between men and women. There are other Ahadith besides them. The detailed books on this subject can be studied. Regarding the second thing where in Bukhari, there is a command of Rasulullaah r for women to sit like men, it is an incorrect attribution. The narration of Hadhrat Umm e Dardaa that Dr. Zaakir is giving, the words are as follows,

وكانت ام الدرداء تجلس في صلاتها جلسة الرجل وكانت فقيهة . بخاري ١١٤⁄١

There is no mention of the action or speech of Rasulullaah r in it, but it is the action of a Sahabiyyah. By mentioning it, Imam Bukhari þ has indicated that she was a jurist. She used to do it out of her own Ijtihaad. In addition, Imam Bukhari þ mentioned in Ta’leeqan, without a chain of narration.

Running away from following the Mujtahid Imams and turning away from the path of following the majority in Fiqhi rulings.
In the light of his speeches and lectures, Dr. Zaakir does not seem to be a follower of any Imam, in fact, he is entrapped by permissibility, love of new things, being a Ghayr Muqallid and being without a Mazhab. Not only does Dr. Zaakir not follow a specific Imam, but he teaches the sincere masses to leave Taqlid. He links the rulings he explains to himself whether it be from any Imam or any view or deduction. Sometimes he adopts the nature of a Mujtahid and explains rulings, whereas in the narration of rulings, he should take the name of the Imam who deduced the ruling so that the listeners do not have the misunderstanding that this ruling is proven only from the Qur’aan and Sunnah. Besides this, there are other things practiced by people, whether proven from the Qur’aan and Hadith or from the view of the Mujtahid Imams, which are incorrect. From the following examples, this will be understood clearly.

It is permissible to touch the Qur’aan without Wudhoo’
In one place, Dr. Zaakir says, “There should be permission to touch the Qur’aan without Wudhoo’…”

This statement of Dr. Zaakir is against the verse (لا يمسه إلا المطهرون) and also against the Mujtahideen.

The Khutbah of Jumu’ah should not be in Arabic, but in the local language
In one place, regarding the Jumu’ah Khutbah, Dr. Zaakir states, “I understand that in our country, importance should be given to delivering the Jumu’ah Khutbah in the local and mother languages…”

This is despite the fact that from the time of Rasulullaah r until today – through the generations -, the Jumu’ah Khutbah was delivered in Arabic. Today, Dr. Zaakir claims that the Khutbah should be delivered in the local language so that people understand, whereas this expediency (the understanding of those who do not speak Arabic) was also present in the time of Rasulullaah r.  However, Rasulullaah r always delivered the Khutbah in Arabic. He did not command that the Khutbah be delivered in another language, nor did he command that it be translated later on. Similarly, the Sahabah, Taabi’een, Tab ut Taabi’een and those after them went out of Arabia to foreign lands. They spread Islaam in the East and West but they always gave the Khutbah in Arabic, whereas those people were in need of spreading Deen to a greater level than what the people are in need of today. Some Sahabah and Taabi’een knew foreign languages very well yet they delivered the Khutbah in Arabic. The summary of this is that the practice of the Khulafaa’ e Raashideen and the Taabi’een and their adherence to it, as well as the continuous practice of the entire Ummah is clear proof that it is necessary to deliver the Khutbah in Arabic. This is to such an extent that Imam Maalik þ says that it is necessary for the Khutbah to be in Arabic in order for the Jumu’ah to be correct, even though the entire gathering may be foreigners and no one knows Arabic. If there is no one in the gathering that can speak Arabic, then it becomes compulsory upon them to perform Zuhr Salaat, Jumu’ah falls away.

ولو كان الجماعة عجما لا يعرفون العربية ، فلو كان ليس فيهم من يحسن الإتيان بالخطبة عربية لم يلزمهم جمعة . حاشية الدسوقي على الشرح الكبير ٣٧٨⁄١ نقلا عن المقالات الفقهية

Shah Waliyullaah Muhaddith Dehlawi þ says, “It is necessary for the Khutbah to be delivered in Arabic for it was the continuous practice of all the Muslims, in the East and the West.” [Musaffa Sharh Muwatta p.152, Farooq-Dehli]

One Talaaq should take effect from three Talaaqs
Dr. Zaakir says, “There are many conditions for three Talaaqs. It is impossible for all of them to be found. There are 300 Fatwas present from Saudia. Therefore Talaaq is one, in accordance to modern conditions, it should be one.” [Lectures of Zaakir Naik from the reality of Zaakir Naik p.331]

He says this despite all the Sahabah, Taabi’een, the four Mujtahid Imams, majority of the Ummah and all the reliable ‘Ulema’ of Saudia today state that 3 Talaaqs will take effect when a person issues 3 Talaaqs in one sitting, not one. There is no difference of opinion held by any reliable scholar in this ruling, except Ibn Taymiyyah and his student Ibn al Qayyim. However, in opposition to the entire Ummah (including the great Taabi’een and the 4 Imams – Abu Hanifah þ, Shafi’i þ, Maalik þand Ahmad bin Hanbal þ) the opinion of these two can never be followed. By explaining such a ruling in opposition to such a unanimous ruling he is misleading the Ummah. This ruling of 3 Talaaqs taking effect by uttering 3 is proven from the verse of the Qur’aan, countless Ahadith and the practice of the Sahabah y clearly. Study a few Ahadith,

وقال الليث عن نافع كان ابن عمر إذا سئل عمن طلق ثلاثا قال لو طلقت مرة أو مرتين (لكان لك الرجعة) فإن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أمرني بهذا (أى بالمراجعة) فإن طلقها ثلاثا حرمت حتى تنكح زوجا غيره . بخاري ٧٩٢⁄٢ و ٨٠٣⁄٢

Hadhrat Naafi’ says that when a Fatwa was asked of Hadhrat Abdullaah bin Umar t regarding a person who gave 3 Talaaqs. He said, “If you gave one or two (then you could have retracted) because Rasulullaah r gave me the command to retract and if you gave 3 Talaaqs, then the woman becomes forbidden until she marries another man.”

عن مجاهد قال كنت عند ابن عباس فجاءه رجل فقال : إنه طلق امرأته ثلاثا ، قال : فسكت حتى طننت أنه رادها إليه ، ثم قال : ينطلق أحدكم فيركب الحموقة ثم يقول يا ابن عباس فإن الله عزوجل قال (ومن يتق الله يجعل له مخرجا) عصيت ربك وبانت منك امرأتك . أخرجه أبو داؤد ٢٩٩⁄١ باب في الطلاق على الهزل ، رقم ١٨٧٨

Mujaahid says that I was by Ibn ‘Abbaas t. A person came and said that he gave his wife 3 Talaaqs. He says that Ibn ‘Abbaas t remained silent. I understood that he will return his wife (he will give the command to retract), but he said, “Some of you do foolish things and sit (give 3 Talaaqs), then scream Ibn ‘Abbaas! Ibn‘Abbaas! Listen, Allaah says, ‘He who fears Allaah, Allaah will make a path out for him.’ You disobeyed your Rabb (by giving 3 Talaaqs), therefore your wife has been separated from you.”

وعن مالك بلغه : أن رجلا قال لعبد الله بن عباس : إني طلقت امرأتي تطليقة ، فما ذا ترى على ؟ فقال ابن عباس : طلقت منك بثلاث ، وسبع وتسعون اتخذت بها آيات الله هزوا . أخرجه الأمام مالك ١٩٩

A narration has reached Imam Maalik þ that a person asked Abdullaah bin ‘Abbaas t that I have given my wife 100 Talaaqs. What do you say regarding it? Ibn ‘Abbaas t replied, “3 of these Talaaqs take effect upon your wife and by 97 you have played with the verses of Allaah.”

عن مالك بلغه : أن رجلا جاء إلى عبد الله ابن مسعود فقال : إني طلقت امرأتي ثمانى تطليقات ، قال ابن مسعود ، فماذا قيل لك؟ قال : قيل لي : إنها قد بانت مني ، فقال ابن مسعود صدقوا . الحديث . الموطا للإمام مالك ١٩٩

A narration reached Imam Maalik þ that a person came to Abdullaah bin Mas’ood t and said, “I gave my wife 8 Talaaqs.” Hadhrat Ibn Mas’ood t asked about what did the people do to you? He replied that my wife has been separated. Hadhrat Ibn Mas’ood t said, “They spoke the truth, i.e. 3 Talaaqs took effect.”

حدثنا على بن محمد بن عبيد الحافظ نا محمد بن شاذان الحوهرى نا معلى بن منصور نا شعيب بن رزيق أن عطاء الخراسانى حدثهم عن الحسن قال نا عبد الله بن عمر أنه طلق امرأته تطليقة وهى حائض ثم أراد أن يتبعها بتطليقتين أخريين عند القرأين فبلغ ذلك رشول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فقال يا ابن عمر ما هكذا أمرك الله إنك قد أخطأت السنة . والسنة أن تستقبل الطهر فيطلق لكل قرء قال فأمرنى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فراجعتها ثم قال إذا هى طهرت فطلق عند ذلك أو أمسك فقلت يا رسول الله أرأيت لو أنى طلقتها ثلثا أكان يحل لي أن أراجعها قال لا ، كانت تبين منك وتكون معصية. سنن الدار قطنى ٤٣٨/٢ زاد المعاد ٢٥٧/٢ مصنف ابن أبي شيبة بحواله عينى شرح كنز  ١٤١ سنن الدار قطنى ٣١/٤ مطبوعه قاهرة

Hadhrat Hasan explains that Hadhrat Ibn Umar t explained to us that he gave his wife one divorce while she was in haydh. He then intended to give her the remaining two while she was pure. Rasulullaah r was informed of this and said, “O Ibn Umar! Allaah has not commanded you to do like this. You have gone against the path of Sunnah (by giving Talaaq while your wife is in Haydh). The Sunnah way is that you wait for the time of purity and one Talaaq should be given in every clean period. After this, Rasulullaah r gave me the order to retract. Consequently, I did so. He then said that when she becomes pure you have a choice whether to give her Talaaq or to keep her. Hadhrat Ibn Umar t says that I asked Rasulullaah r that O Rasul of Allaah, if I gave three Talaaqs, then would it have been permissible for me to retract ? Rasulullaah r said, “No. in this case, your wife has been separated from you and this action of your’s (giving three Talaaqs at once) is a sin.”

You have seen from the above mentioned Ahadith that three Talaaqs make the ruling of three take effect. There are many narrations that show that three Talaaqs refer to three, not one.

Note: Dr. Zaakir gave reference of 300 Saudi scholars in his lecture. He then presented his own opinion. However, he did not mention which scholars they were when the reliable Mufteen of Saudi Arabia gave Fatwa from their research that three Talaaqs refer to three. The decision was passed as follows,

بعد الاطلاع على البحث المقدم من الأمانة العامة لهيئة كبار العلماء والمعد من قبل لحنة الدائمة للبحوث والإفتاء في موضوع “الطلاق الثلاث بلفظ واحد” وبعد دراسة المسئلة وتداول الرأي واستعراض الأقوال التى قيلت فيها ومناقشة ما على كل قول من إيراد توصل المجلس بأكثريته إلى اختيار القول بوقوع الطلاق الثلاث بلفظ ثلاثا…الخ (مجلة التحوث الإسلامية المجلد الأول ، العدد الثالث سنة ١٣٩٧)

In one programme Dr. Zaakir gave the following counsel, “Muslims should adopt such a way that will allow Eid to be one throughout the world.”
This opinion of Dr. Zaakir goes against the Hadith (صوموا لرؤيته وأفطروا لرؤيته), i.e. fast upon sighting the moon and make Iftaar upon sighting the moon and it goes against sound intellect as well. This is because a single Eid is based upon taking Eid to be a festival or a national celebration or communal occasion. This is a very wrong notion because our Eidayn, Ramadhaan and Muharram are not some festivals, but all of them are worship. Also, every country’s times are different according to their horizon. When we perform Asr in India, it is morning in Washington. When we are performing Zuhr in India, Maghrib has been completed in London. It also happens that in one country it is Friday and in another country it is still Thursday, while in a third country Saturday has started. How can it be envisaged to have Eid on one day throughout the world?

In summary, in the light of these points we learn that Dr. Zaakir Naik has moved away from the Ahl us Sunnah wal Jama’ah in many rulings regarding belief, in the explanation of the Qur’aan and Hadith, he leaves out lexical meanings and the Tafseer narrated from the pious predecessors and takes help from his twisted intellect. He has fallen prey to interpolating the meanings. In addition to this, despite not having deep knowledge of religious sciences and ignorance of the objective of the Shari’ah, he does not follow a specific Imam. In fact, he goes the other way and criticises the Mujtahid Imams. Therefore, his talks are not worthy of consideration. It is very harmful to watch his programmes, listen to his speeches and to  practice upon them without research. It is definitely not the work of any person to do research. Therefore, the general Muslims should stay away from his programmes. Also, every Muslim should remember that the matter of Deen is something felt. Man hears talks of Deen and practices only to find salvation in the Aakhirat. They should not practice just upon new research, quick answers-vast amounts of references and by apparently seeing his acceptance amongst people. In fact, it is necessary upon man to think that what standing this person has in religious sciences. From which teachers did he acquire knowledge? In what environment did he grow up? How are his ways, dressing and countenance. Does he mix with the other ‘Ulema’ and pious luminaries? Also, what do the scholars and Mashayikh of his time say about him? Similarly, it should also be seen whether those who take effect from him and those around him, how much awareness they have of Deen and reliable people that serve Deen are how many? If he has a number of reliable people around him, then it is necessary to know from them how he is. Why are they close to him? It should not be that they show themselves close to him because of misunderstanding, ignorance or because of some expediency. The crux of this is that if after research, a person gets contentment, then only his talks will be accepted to be reliable and worthy of practicing upon, otherwise there is safety for a person’s faith by staying away from him.

The famous Taabi’i, Muhammad Bin Seereen þ says, (إن هذا العلم دين فانظروا عمن تأخذون دينكم) i.e. in order to listen and learn Deen, it is necessary to ponder deeply as from which people is knowledge being taken and being learnt. May Allaah I bless every person with the ability to tread the straight path. Ameen.

Zayn ul Islaam Qaasimi Ilaah Aabaadi

Deputy Mufti, Dar ul Ifta, Dar ul Uloom Deoband

20.03.1432, 24.02.2011

The Answer is correct

Habib ur Rahman

Mahmud Hasan Bulandshahri

Waqar Ali

Fakhr ul Islaam

Read Full Post »

THE KUFR AND SHIRK OF IBN TAIMIYYAH

 

INTRODUCTION

Among the vilest of Ibn Taimiyyah’s beliefs is his hypothesis  of the universe being eternal. By eternity is meant existing independently without having been created. It is a never-ending existence. It has neither a beginning nor an ending. The eternity of the universe is the belief of the Greek philosophers. When Ibn Taimiyyah dabbled with philosophy he lost the path of Islam. He deviated into the  kufr of the Greek philosophers. Their ‘rational’ arguments exercised a profound impact on him. He thus conjectured the belief: hawaaditu la awwala laha, that is, temporal things (things which come into existence from non-existence) have no beginning since they are always preceded by another temporal entity ad infinitum. 

   Although the coprocreep Salafis of our age are desperately labouring to clear Ibn Taimiyyah of this kufr, they fail miserably in the task for the simple reason that in at least seven of his books, Ibn Taimiyyah has explicitly propounded his theory of the eternity of the universe. Ibn Taimiyyah’s theory of kufr has attained the rank of Tawaatur  in Ulama circles. The belated attempts to exonerate Ibn Taimiyyah from his kufr belief must be dismissed with contempt. The evidence to confirm his belief is overwhelming. Al-Baani, the devoted muqallid of Ibn Taimiyyah is the seal  of confirmation. No one can honestly deny the attribution of the kufr concept to Ibn Taimiyyah, when Al-Baani himself conforms it.

We are not the first to refute this kufr of Ibn Taimiyah. Great Ulama of the past have thoroughly debunked the kufr and shirk which Ibn Taimiyyah had promoted with his satanic  hypothesis of the universe  being eternal in species. The coprocreep Salafis stupidly  and monotonously  moan that the great Ulama of the past did not understand the statements of  Ibn Taimiyyah. These stupid coprocreeps labour under the misapprehension that everyone shares in their stupidity. Their contention is ludicrous. They are capable of fabricating  statements of exoneration which they will attribute to Ibn Taimiyyah, but they will not be able to deny what Ibn Taimiyyah propounded in his seven kutub which are published and available. That Ibn Taimiyyah had in fact propounded the theory of the eternity of the universe, is undeniable. The denial of the Salafis is of no consequence and is dismissed with contempt.

This short treatise is based on  the Refutation of Ibn Taimiyyah’s kufr beliefs authored by Shaikh Abdullah Al-Harari. Extracts from his kitaab, Al-Maqaalaatus Sunniyyah fi Kashfi Dhalaali Ahmad Bin Taimiyyah, are presented in paraphrased  form for better comprehension of an English-reading public.

Mujlisul Ulama of S.A.

Jamaadil Ula 1434

March 2013

Read Full Post »

 

http://www.central-mosque.com/index.php/Refutations/false-allegations-against-deobandi-ulama.html

Responses to baseless and unfounded accusations hurled at Ulamah of Deoband!

The false propaganda against and blatant fabrications about our highly acclaimed and respected Ulama of Deoband by the ignorant must be refuted at all costs. Numerous pamphlets and booklets have been written distorting the truth about and writings of our distinguished Ulama.

Among the most common pamphlets displayed is “Tabliqism – one way ticket to Hell”. “Are these Islamic Beliefs”: in one column is the ‘Deobandi Tabliqi Beliefs’ and next to it is the ‘Islamic beliefs’. However, answers to the allegations have been given in various publications.

Therefore, this publication will attempt to print all the false allegations and the correct views.

]b]The False Allegation

Rashid Ahmed Gangohi, a founder of Deobandi Movement has the following beliefs:
1 The Almighty Allah can speak a lie. (Fataawa Rashidiyya part 1 pg. 20)
2 Allah has already spoken a lie (Taqseedul Qadeer pg. 79).

The Truth
The view of Hadhrat Moulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi Saheb is that Allah is far above and pure from being attributed with falsehood. There is no blemish of falsehood in His words at all for Allah says, ‘Who is more truthful than Allah in speech.’ He who believes that Allah speaks a lie is an accursed outright Kaafir and opposed to the Qurãn and Sunnah. (Fataawa Rashidiyya part 1 pg. 3)

Clarification (I)

Fataawa Rashidiyya pg. 84: ‘From servant Rashid Ahmed Gangohi, after Salaam Masnoon, you have inquired concerning the Masalah ‘Imkaane Kizb’ (possibility of falsehood). But ‘Imkaane Kizb’ in the sense that Allah Taãla has the power to act contrary to what He has ordered, but will not to do with His Free Will, is the belief of this servant. The Qurãn Shareef and the Sahih Ahaadith bear testimony to this belief, and this is the belief of all the Ulama of the Ummah too. For example, Firáwn is promised to be thrown into Hell, but Allah Taãla has the power to enter him into paradise, although He will never give him paradise. And this is the
Masalah under discussion at the moment. This is the belief of all my friends. The enemies must have related it differently. Referring to this Power and the non-occurrence of it is termed ‘Imkaane Zaati’ and ‘Mumtana bi Ghayr’ Was salaam Rashid Ahmad Gangohi.

Look, how they lay waiting with vicious, malicious attempts to defame this noble personality. If it is not slander then what is it?

To distort the above mentioned Masalah and refer it to Hadhrat Moulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi Saheb is totally evil and wrong. It is a slander and slander is worse than back-biting.

Clarification (II)

Fataawa Rashidiyya pg. 90: ‘That person who believes or utters with the tongue concerning Allah Taãla that “He spoke a lie”, is positively a Kaafir, an accursed and opposed to the Qurãn, Hadith and the unanimity of the Ummah. He is definitely not a Mu’min. Taãlallaahu ammaa yaqoolu dhaalimoona oluwwan kabeeraa. (Allah is far above from what the transgressors are saying).’

The misrepresenter, besides being involved with misrepresentation, has earned the wrath of Allah. Let the Hadith of the Master of the Green Dome once again ring in his ears. ‘A person does not target another with impiety or a person does not target another with Kufr, but it returns to the former if the latter is not guilty of it.’ (Bukhari)

Taqdeesul Qadeer is not compiled by the Ulama of Deoband. In fact there is no such Kitaab by this name.

False Allegation

The Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) is not the only Rahmatullil Aalameen. (Fataawa Rashidiyya part 2 pg. 19)

The Truth

The view of Hadhrat Moulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi is that: ”One should know that the attribute of being Omnipresent is the quality of Allah Taãla alone, like All-Knowing, Creator of the Skies and Earths and so forth. Therefore to attribute this quality of being Omnipresent to someone else, though it be a ‘Nabi’, ‘Wali’, or Saint, is to ascribe Partners to Allah in His Qualities, which is termed as ‘Shirk-fis-Sifaat.”

Clarification

The word ‘Rahmatullil Aalameen’ is not a characteristic only of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam). In fact other Awliyaa, Ambiyaa and Ulamaa-e-Rabbaniyyeena are also a means of mercy unto the world, although Rasululla (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) is the highest of them all. Therefore, if it is used for others with ‘Taaweel’ (by elucidation) it is permissible.’
(Fataawa Rashidiyya pg. 96/97)

False Allegation

To lecture on or discuss the Shahaadat of Hadhrat Imaam Hussayn (Radhiallaahu Ánhu) is Haraam even if the stories are true. (Fataawa Rashidiyya part 3 pg. 113)
Clarification The incident of the martyrdom of Hadhrat Hussayn (Radhiallaahu Ánhu) who sacrificed his life for the sake of Truth, is surely very important. But the method adopted, like beating the chest, tearing the garment, pulling the hair, slapping the face, shouting slogans of ‘Yaa Hussayn, Yaa Hussayn’ and taking out processions to parade in the streets, is what Hadhrat Moulana has stopped and said is Haraam.’

The reason for stopping this is that Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) has forbidden the slapping of faces and the tearing of garments.
Therefore to lecture on or discuss the Shahaadat of Hadhrat Hussayn in the abovementioned fashion, with that type of pomp and show, is forbidden in the light of the Hadith. (Fataawa Rashidiyya pg. 104/105)

False Allegation

In the month of Muharram, providing free water and feeding people with milk or Sharbat is Haraam. (Fataawa Rashidiyya part 3 pg. 113)

Clarification

To feed the poor and needy and to distribute water free to quench their thirst as ‘Isaale Sawaab’ is no sin. Neither did Moulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi nor anyone else say it is Haraam.

The Barelvis belief is this, that on the plains of Karbala the martyrs sacrificed their life in thirst. Therefore, the water that is given here as a drink, reaches them.
It is common sense, that this water does not reach them, nor are they in need of it. They are in Jannat. If the whole idea is to convey the reward (Isaale Sawaab), the whole year is available for that. No question arises then whether to make ‘Isaale Sawaab’ or not. The practice mentioned above similitudes the practices of the Rawaafidh; therefore it is Haraam.’ (Fataawa Rashidiyya pg. 147/148)

False Allegation

Ashraf Ali Thanvi, a founder member of Deoband says: ‘The Holy Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) has an education like that of children, lunatics and animals of every category.’ (Hifzul Imaan pg. 7)

The Truth

The view of Hadhrat Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi is that: Hadhrat Moulana was asked, ‘Did you in Hifzul Imaan or any other book write anything directly or indirectly comparing the education of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) to that of children, lunatics and animals? If not then what is your ruling regarding a person who holds such a belief?’ In reply to that Moulana states, ‘Let alone writing such falsehood and filth, my heart had never even perceived such falsehood and verily if anyone holds such a belief he is out of the fold of Islam.’ (Faisal-e-Khusoomat pg. 21)

Clarification

Hadhrat Hakimul Ummah, Moulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (author of the famous ‘Bahishti Zewar’) did not write the abovementioned statement in Hifzul Imaan. Nor is it his belief. It is a slander on the said Moulana. In fact Hadhrat Moulana has stated clearly in ‘Hifzul Imaan’ that, ‘Knowledge with regard to the Excellence of Prophethood has been bestowed totally upon Rasul (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) (Hifzul Imaan pg. 12)

False Allegation

Prophets are not free from sins. (Tasfiyatul Aqaaid pg. 24 – Cassim Nanotwi, a founder of Deoband)

Clarification

The topic under discussion in ‘Tasfiyatul Aqaaid’ was this: It was mentioned in the Hadith, in Shaf’at that on the plain of resurrection people will gather with great fear, perturbed and disturbed. They will go to Hadhrat Aadam (Álayhis salaam) and request him to intercede on their behalf in front of Allah Taãla. Hadhrat Aadam (Álayhis salaam) will refuse and say that it is beyond his influence, because of the incident that he ate from the tree of Jannah which was forbidden to him. Hadhrat Aadam (Álayhis salaam) will say, ‘Today Allah’s wrath is so great
that His anger was never great before and will never be so great after’ (though Allah Taãla has forgiven him). He will advise them to go to Hadhrat Nuh (Álayhis salaam). In this way people will flock to the other Ambiyaa (Álayhimus salaam). Each one will be fearful and reluctant, for some reason or the other to intercede on behalf of man. At the end when the people will come to Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam), Rasul (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) will say, ‘Very well, I will intercede on your behalf. I will take permission from my Sustainer and He will grant me that permission.’

Hadhrat Moulana wrote that, which was mentioned in the Hadith and not that, ‘Prophets (Álayhimus salaam) are not free from sins,’ as mentioned in the said leaflet.

False Allegation

Shaytaan has more education than our Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam). (Barahine Qatia pg. 51 – Khalil Ahmad Ambhetwi)

The Truth

We strongly believe and openly claim that Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) was given more knowledge than the entire creation of Allah and it is our belief that whosoever says that anyone has more knowledge than Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) then such a person is a Kaafir. Our great Úlama have already given a Fatwa of Kufr upon a person who says Shaytaan has more knowledge than Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) then how could I ever have written such a thing. (Al Muhnad Allal Mufannad Q&A 18-19)

Clarification

It is totally incorrect. This sentence is not written anywhere in ‘Baraahine Qaati’ah’, that ‘Shaytaan has more knowledge than Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam).’

Moulana Khalil Ahmad (RA) was asked whether he wrote such a statement or not? He replied, ‘I did not write such a statement anywhere. It is an open slander on me. On the day of Qiyaamat account will be taken with Ahmad Raza Khan.’

False Allegation

To read Alhamdu Fateha before eating food is Bidat (Fataawa Rashidiyya part 2 pg. 150)

Clarification

In order to establish anything in Islam, it is necessary that it be verified in the light of the Shariáh. Unless it is not proven by the Shariáh, it cannot be regarded as Deen. Yes, one may call it a matter of convenience. For example, the use of an electric fan, motor vehicle, etc. The moment a person wants to make it part and parcel of Deen, immediately it will need verification from the Shariáh, whether it be Meelaad, Fateha, Giyaarwi, Urs, Dua-e-Thani, Dua immediately after Janaaza prayer or any other ritual for that matter. And on failing to be verified, it will be regarded as Bidat – innovation. The wickedness of being involved in Bidat is
that the Sunnats are automatically left out. As darkness spreads, light vanishes.
To read Al-Hamd, Fateha before eating food is not verified and proven in the Shariáh, therefore, it is a Bidat.

Regarding Bidat, Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) has decreed:
1. “He who innovates something in this matter of ours that is not of it will have it rejected.”(Bukhari)
2. “Beware of newly-invented matters! For every invented matter is an innovation and every innovation is leading astray and every leading astray is in Hell-Fire.” (Abu Dawud; Tirmidhi)
The ‘Masnoon’ Duas read by Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) before meals and after meals, should surely be read. Hadhrat Moulana Rashid Ahmed Gangohi (RA) did not stop anyone from this.

False Allegation

We cannot make Nikah with any person who takes part in Urs, etc. (Fataawa Rashidiya part 2 pg. 142)

The Truth

Moulana Rashid Ahmed says in Fataawa Rashidiya, “Taking part in Urs is not an act of Kufr therefore Nikah with a person who takes part in Urs is valid.”

Clarification

Those who go to the Urs and make Sajdah (prostrate) to the graves, pray for boon or ask for a favour from the inmates of the graves, and make Tawaaf of the graves; to solemnise marriages with them will inculcate these Shirk practices in them and others as well. Therefore, unless they don’t make Tawbah and refrain from such Shirk practices, Nikah is not allowed until then.

False Allegation

Giyaarwi Shareef is Haraam and Kufr, even if Qur’an is read. (Fataawa Rashidiyya part 1 pg.95)

Clarification

Anything in the name of ‘Ghayrullah’ (someone other than Allah), whether it be Giyarwi Shareef’ or ‘Baarwi’, is Haraam. This Masalah is found in Shaami, Tahtaawi, Bahrur Raaiq and in many other Kitaabs.

On the other hand, Esaale Sawaab is permissible. No one prohibited Esaale Sawaab provided it is done without specifications of time, place and invitation. But look at the beliefs of these people. They have this belief that the distribution of sustenance is entrusted to Peerane Peer (RA). If the Giyaarwi is held back, he will stop the food.

False Allegation

It is Sawaab to eat crows (Fataawa Rashidiyya part 2 pg. 130)

Clarification:

Crows are of three types: The first type is that which feeds only on grain. It is exactly like a wild pigeon. It is Halaal according to all Jurists. The second type is that which only feeds on excreta, and prey on other animals. It is exactly like a vulture. It is Haraam according to all Jurists. The third type is that which feeds on grain, eats excreta and it catches and eats mice as well. It is like an uncaged fowl, which feeds on grain, worms and even on mice. Hadhrat Moulana wrote concerning this third type of crow that it is not Haraam. This Masalah of the crow is found in Hidaaya, Durre Mukhtaar, Fataawa Aalamghiri, as well as the other
‘Kitaabs’ of Fiqh (Jurisprudence).

Therefore, should anyone not eat a crow or a fowl for the rest of his life, there is no criticism and blame on him according to the Shariáh. Yes, if he takes it to be Haraam then he will be answerable. Thus whosoever takes it to beHaraam, in order to correct his belief it is a ‘Sawaab’ and reward to eat it.’ (Fataawa Rashidiyya pg. 492 Rahimia print)

False Allegation

Almighty Allah Taãla is not always ‘all knowing’. He finds out whenever necessary.
(Taqwiyatul Eemaan pg. 26).

Clarification

This is an open Calumny and a False Accusation. This sentence is not written at all in Tawiyatul Eemaan’ that ‘Allah Taãla is not always “all knowing”. He finds out when necessary.

False Allegation

The Prophet (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) will die and become sand one day. (Taqwiyatul Imaan pg. 69)

The Truth

The view of Hadhrat Moulana Rashid Ahmed Saheb is that: The meaning of the (phrase) ‘to lie on sand’ has two meanings. The one is to become soil, the other is the body touches the sand. The latter meaning is meant, and the
Moulana (author of Taqwiyatul Imaan) also believes that the bodies of the Anbiyaa
(Álayhimus salaam) do not turn to dust. Because a deceased is buried in a grave and he is surrounded with soil all over, his body together with the ‘Kafn’ touches the sand beneath him is called ‘Mitti me milnaa’ – to lie on sand. Hence, there is no point of objection. (Fataawa Rashidiyya pg.s 83/84)

Clarification

In Taqwiyatul Imaan, a Hadith is mentioned in which a Sahaabi (Radhiallaahu Ánhu) told Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) that the people of other places bow out of respect to their Rulers; whereas Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) is more worthy of being bowed to. At this, Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) said, ‘Look if you happen to pass by my grave, will you bow to it?’ The Sahaabi (Radhiallaahu Ánhu) said ‘No, I will not do so.’ On this, Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) said, ‘So do not bow to me …’ (A Sajdah Taazimi is also forbidden).

Commentary: ‘I will also die one day and lie on sand (buried); therefore am I worthy to be prostated to?’ This phrase ‘Mitti me milne waalaa hoo – I will lie on sand’ (meaning to be buried one day), became the bone of contention for the Barelvis.

False Allegation

To think of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) in Salaat is worse than thinking of cows and donkeys. (Siraate Mustaqeem pg. 150)

Clarification

The abovementioned statement is not found anywhere in ‘Siraate Mustaqeem’ that, ‘To think of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) in Salaat is worse than thinking of cows and donkeys.’

That which was written in ‘Sarfe Himmat’. This is terminology used by the Sufis in Tasawwuf (the spiritual field). ‘Sarfe Himmat’ in ‘Tasawwuf’ means that a person’s meditation over a thing becomes so overpowering and predominant that no other thoughts penetrate into the mind and soul. Like a mirror, if a person does not want any person’s reflection to come into it, he covers it with a black cloth and thus no reflection will appear. To contemplate over a figure so that no other thing is contemplated is called ‘Sarfe Himmat’.

This has been forbidden in Salaat, that besides Allah, ‘Sarfe Himmat’ should not be done towards anyone. Salaat should purely and solely be for Allah alone. If ‘Sarfe Himmat’ is done towards Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam), then the entire Salaat and Ibaadat will be for him.

On the other hand, if any thoughts of cows, donkeys, business, etc. come to mind, or a person gets drowned in these thoughts whilst in Salaat, it is regrettable. There is no fear of it being worshipped. In fact the person regrets that in the course of an esteem Ibaadat like Salaat, he should have such thoughts, Astaghfirullah.

The Kitaab, ‘Siraate Mustaqeem’ is based on ‘Tasawwuf’. The objector is not versed in Tasawwuf’. Therefore, he has translated ‘Sarfe Himmat’ to mean a mere thought.

What comes to mind is this; that the Objector presents a picture of a Grade One child, learning to read and write ABC and wishing to interpret the writings of Shakespeare.

Moreover, it is stated in the Hadith that Salaat should be performed with full attention.

Therefore, when the name of Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) is recited in
‘Tashahhud’ the thought of the Rasul (Sallallaahu Álayhi Wasallam) will come and should come. The Salaat will not be rendered incorrect and this is not unlawful at all. The respected Moulana did not stop anyone from this.

Read Full Post »

Email: muftis@themajlis.net

 

25  Zil Hajj 1433 – 10 November 2012

 

UNHOLY DESTRUCTION BY THE SAUDIS

 

Q. The Saudis plan to build over the Mubaarak Grave of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) with the excuse that the Musjid requires additional space.  Why don’t they demolish the Zionist hotel establishment that they have allowed into Madinah Munawwarah? The Muslim Ummah remains silent. How can we defend the honour of brother Muslims when we are unable to unite to defend the honour of Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). It is the responsibility of the Ummah to react and protest the destruction of Islam’s holy relics by the Saudi government.

A. We have  highlighted  in The Majlis, a number of times the Saudi destruction of the holy relics of Islam. Over the years we have vigourously criticized the vandalization of Islam’s holy relics by the Saudi king. Many others too have protested. But, needless to say, all protests fall on deaf years.

The Saudis are U.S. puppets and  they allow the Hajj because of commercial objectives.  If it was not for  its commercial value, the Saudis would have banned even the Hajj. They have already destroyed  more than 90% of all the relics of Islam.  They are now plotting to  eliminate the last of these sacred remnants.

Why would they ever dream of demolition the Zionist and other kuffaar establishments in the Holy Lands? The Saudis dance  to the  pipe-tune of the Zionists and the U.S. It is the writ of the U.S. which determines the direction of the Saudi monarch.

Muslims of the world fail to protest because their Imaan is dead.  The  unholy destruction plotted  and executed by the Saudi regime does not concern Muslims.

If the Muslims of the world  unite and boycott going to Saudi Arabia for Umrah and  Hajj, the Saudis will then sit up and listen. Only those on whom Hajj is Fardh should go. All others should boycott  Saudi Arabia. Alas! What we are proposing is a cry in the wilderness. Furthermore, we know that it will fall on deaf ears.

In the circumstances we can only do what is within our ability, and that is to speak against the evil and to make dua to Allah Ta’ala to remove this oppressive, faasiq, un-Islamic slave of America from the scene. May Allah Ta’ala supplant the fussaaq, fujjaar and kuffaar rulers and governments of Muslim lands with pious Sultans who will owe allegiance to a central Khalifah, a true Vicegerent of Allah  Azza Wa Jal

OBSCENITY OF THE SAUDI URINALS

 

An irate Brother who performed Hajj this year, writes:

   “The Saudi authorities have installed  standing urinals in Mina and Arafaat. Just imagine the obscene scenes! Men standing like animals with their ihram pulled up and urinating like asses in full view of the public. Even women  pass by and view these horrid scenes of shamelessness being  perpetrated  in the holiest of lands – in Mina and Arafaat. How much worse and how much more shameless will Muslims become?

THE MAJLIS COMMENTS:

Brother, what you have beheld is simply the introductory steps to unimaginable immorality which still has  to be implemented under the aegis of the vile rulers. Destruction of holy relics and substituting the relics with toilets and urinals is the Saudi style of emulating the U.S. kuffaar. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that the time will dawn when Muslims will imitate and ape the Yahood and Nasaara to the extent of crawling behind them into even a ‘lizard’s hole’. If crawling into a lizard’s hole, drinking urine and eating the faeces of swines become honourable and fashionable to the Yahood and Nasaara, the Saudis in particular, and the Muslims of the world in general, will consider the accomplishment of these feats honourable and fashionable. This is the state of the Ummah today.

The public urinals and the lewd males in ‘ihraam’ standing like donkeys relieving themselves in  full view of the public, vividly portray the  filthy, rotten state of fisq and fujoor of the hearts of the rulers and the public.  The Ummah is diseased – absolutely rotten and stinking.

Whilst we lament  these  vile developments, we have to understand that  Rasulullah’s predictions must  come to the fore. We are incrementally observing the materialization of Rasulullah’s predictions. The moral degeneration of Muslims in general, and of  the Arabs in particular,  has not reached its limits at the bottom of the barrel. There is still a long way down the slippery meandering path in the abyss of immorality into which the Ummah is uncontrollably sliding to its destruction. The stage still has to be reached when Arab women will be “gyrating with their buttocks swinging around idols” – Hadith.  Idolatry and immorality  go hand in hand.

There is one consolation in this scenario of filth, immorality, fisq and fujoor   which the Saudi regime is nourishing – that is the collapse and annihilation of the Saudi regime are not in the too distant future. The Whip of Allah Azza Wa Jal will strike suddenly and swiftly and the Saudi regime will be relegated into oblivion in a remote corner of history.

Dua is a very powerful weapon when it rises from the hearts of the righteous ones.  The  kuffaar superpowers will not be able to aid and sustain the Saudi regime when it is time for the decree of Allah’s Athaab. The Qur’aan, warning all these tin-topped  zaalim rulers, says:

“For every nation  there is an appointed time. When its appointed time

                 dawns, neither will it be delayed or advanced by a moment.” 

 

The current orgies of  waste and immorality in which the Saudi regime is lost in a drunken stupor of bestial enjoyment, are simply  in consonance with the  following Qur’aanic aayat:

 ”When We intend to destroy a city (or a community or nation), we command its

          affluent ones (to go wild with their evil and villainy), then they (recklessly)

          indulge in fisq in the city. Then the decree is established over them. We then

          utterly destroy the city (with its inhabitants). “

The wheel of Saudi ruin and destruction is about to make its full turn.

Read Full Post »

Click Here To View This & Other Articles Online!
The Majlis
26 Zil Hajj 1433 – 11 November 2012SAUDI ARABIA AND THE COMMERCIALISATION
OF HAJJ AND UMRAH
THE HARAMAIN SHAREEFAIN BEING TRANSFORMED INTO HOLIDAY RESORTS – SULLIED AND FILTHIED

Q. In Mina and even in Arafaat, western-type urinals have been installed. Males in ihraam stand and urinate most lewdly with part of their aurah exposed. They conduct themselves just like the kuffaar who urinate like animals in the public. Even ladies pass by and view these shameless urinating proceedings. What is happening in even the Holy Places?
A. What is happening there? Kufr is happening. A process of incremental kufrization is subtly and gradually taking place. It is all part of the American-Yahood conspiracy whose chief agent today is the Saudi regime. Shamelessness, immodesty and immorality are fast becoming norms in even the Holy Cities whose spirituality has been completed ruined and extinguished by the Saudi regime. Not only the Saudis are to be blamed for this obscenity. Those animals masquerading as Hujjaaj who utilize these urinals of shaitaan are worse than even the Saudis who have installed these vile American contraptions. Those who use these evil contraptions to advertise their immorality are greater devils than the Saudis who have installed the contraptions.
Q. A large majority of the Hujjaaj make wuqoof outside the boundaries of Muzdalifah. The signboards indicating the boundaries of Muzdalifah are poor and fading, making it difficult for the Hujjaaj to determine the Wuqoof area. What is the consequence of making Wuqoof outside the boundary of Muzdalifah?
A. The onus of ensuring Wuqoof is made in the correct zone is on the Hujjaaj. Whilst the authorities are guilty of gross dereliction of duty for not placing sufficient and proper notices to show the boundaries of Muzdalifah, the Hujjaaj too are guilty of not ensuring that their Wuqoof is done in the proper area. If one is not sure, one has to ask. Those who had not made Wuqoof in Muzdalifah should pay the penalty of a dum – one sheep/goat to be sacrificed in the Haram region.
Q. Dury the days of Hajj, the Imaams in Makkah stand under the mezenah (place of Athaan) during Imaamate whilst thousands of people are standing in front of him. Is their Salaat valid?
A. The Salaat of all those who stand in front of the Imaam is not valid. They have to make Qadha of all the Salaat they had performed in this manner, i.e. standing in front of the Imaam.
Q. Saudi Airlines does not allow people to bring their own Zam Zam water. One has to purchase it from them at the airport for 30 riyals. Is there anything in the Shariah to permit such exploitation of the Hujjaaj?
A. Robbery and exploitation are endemic characteristics of the entire Hajj & Umrah institution. As far as every cog in the Hajj & Umrah machinery is concerned, the objective is only monetary gain by hook or crook, deceit and fraud. Right from the inception of acquiring a Hajj visa through the entire process comprising of airline tickets, hotel accommodation, transport from Jeddah, Mina, Arafaat, Muzdalifah and now even Zam Zam water, Hujjaaj are subjected to fraud, robbery and exploitation. Every entity connected to the commercial Hajj & Umrah cartel sucks the blood of the Hujjaaj. The 30 riyals per can of Zam Zam water which is available free, is indicative of the extreme level of greed in which the Saudi Airlines is grovelling. Compelling the Hujjaaj to buy Zam Zam from them is haraam. Charging 30 riyals is haraam. Refusing to take aboard Zam Zam acquired from other sources is haraam. It is blatant robbery and exploitation. The exploitation begins right at the top – from the king right down to the porters and the taxi drivers. Every link in the Hajj & Umrah racket is a mafioso

Q. The king announced that Masjid Nabawi will be extended and the plans that appeared I the newspapers, etc. show that where the Imaam currently stands will change and Raudhah Mubaarak will be in the middle. Please comment.
A. We have not understood this scenario. Will the Salaat sufoof (rows) be all around the Holy Grave of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)? Will people be facing the Raudhah Mubaarak during Salaat? Or do you mean that the Holy Graves of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu anhu) and Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) will be flattened, demolished and destroyed so that the space today occupied by these Holy Graves will be incorporated into the Musjid. Destroying these Holy Graves will not be surprising and is not unexpected of the present Saudi regime. We require more information on this issue for a better understanding of the contemplated move of the king.
Q. The amount of photography taking place in Musjid Nabawi, Musjidul Haraam and at the Ka’bah is absolutely ludicrous and totally out of control. 
A. The haraam ludicrousness of the haraam photography is ‘totally out of control’ by the design of the Saudi authorities. As far as the king and his cohorts are concerned, Hajj & Umrah is an extremely lucrative commercial enterprise netting the regime billions of riyals annually. Commercialisation requires attraction. The ignorant masses are allowed freedom to perpetrate their haraam misdeeds such as photography to keep them happy. After all, the mafia in charge of this massive Hajj & Umrah monetary enterprise has to show some semblance of gratitude for the billions which all the juhala are spending to enrich it (i.e. the mafia). The ignoramuses are therefore allowed freedom to express their haraam attitudes and misdeeds. It is indeed surprising that there still exists a ban on smoking inside the Musaajid. Perhaps the time is not too distant for this ban to be abolished, and for the demarcation of smoking areas within the Holy precincts of Musjidul Haraam and Musjid Nabawi.
The Saudi regime is allowing all of this haraam activity to take place in the Musaajid since they have isolated Islam from their lives and are gradually and increasingly relegating the Shariah into oblivion. It is not that they are unable to control the haraam photography. It is aversion for the Shariah and the Sunnah which constrains them to behave in this callous manner towards the Deen. The Mataaf area can be full to caopacity. If some stipud, faasiq, faajir state luminary arrives to engage in a mock tawaaf, the Saudi security forces will, within minutes, swiftly clear the enture Mataaf area to allow the buffoon to perform in comfort and at leisure his/her mock rituals. The Haramain Shareefain has been transformed into a haraam tourist resort.
In the final analysis it has to be conceded that the calamity of the Saudi regime simply portrays the rotten condition of the Ummah in general, and of the Hujjaaj in particular.

Read Full Post »

Are Shias Muslim or not?

Question and Answer:
Q. Salaam!As far I know shias are kaafir coz they do shirk,but some people argue that u can’t call them kaafir!Please remove this confusion!What catogry do they fall under?
(Question published as received)
A. Mainstream Shi’ahs hold beliefs that are totally un-Islamic and remove them from the fold of Islam. Although they claim to believe in Allah, they hold the corrupt belief that Ali (Radiyallahu Anhu) should have been the First Khalifa. Some of them even hold the absurd belief that Rasulullah (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) was erroneously granted prophethood and Ali (Radiyallahu Anhu) was more deserving. They also hold the nonsensical belief that Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthmaan and the rest of the Sahabah besides a few (Radiyallahu Anhum Jamee’a) had turned Murtadd (apostates) after the demise of Nabi (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam). From amongst the numerous corrupt beliefs that they hold, a few are:
a) They believe that the Qur’an has been distorted and incomplete and their twelfth Imam who is currently hiding in a cave has the original Qur’an and when the time is right, he will appear with it.
b) They believe in Mut’ah. A form of prostitution where a person marries a woman for a fixed period, e.g., one hour, one day, one week etc. for a sum of money and on the termination of that period, the Nikah terminates. They believe that such a practice holds great virtue.
c) They believe in Taqiyyah and Kitman. i.e., according to them, it is permissible, in fact, virtuous to deceive others that they are proper Muslims by lying to them about their beliefs etc. This is why when Shi’ahs are approached on issues concerning their beliefs, they will lie and pretend that their beliefs conform to the beliefs of Muslims in general. This is considered as “holy deception” by them and Muslims are cautioned to be wary of them.
The above are just a few of their corrupt beliefs and it is evident that people who hold such beliefs are Kaafirs and cannot be regarded as Muslims.
And Allah Knows Best
Mufti Suhail Tarmahomed
Confirmation:
Mufti Ebrahim Desai

Read Full Post »

Email: muftis@themajlis.net

28 Rajab 1433 – 19 June 2012
THE BID’AH OF LAILATUL MI’RAAJ
(Title by The Majlis)
By Mufti Taqi Usmani

Celebration of Lailatul Mi’raj
It is generally believed that the great event of Mi’raj (ascension of the Holy Prophet to the heavens) took place in the night of 27th of Rajab. Therefore, some people celebrate the night as “Lailatul- Mi’raj” (the night of ascension to heavens).
Indeed, the event of mi’raj was one of the most remarkable episodes in the life of our beloved Holy Prophet . He was called by Almighty Allah. He traveled from Makkah to Baitul-Maqdis and from there he ascended the heavens through the miraculous power of Allah. He was honored with a direct contact with his Creator at a place where even the angels had no access. This was the unique honor conferred by Allah to the Holy Prophet alone. It was the climax of the spiritual progress which is not attained by anybody except him. No doubt the night in which he was blessed with this unparalleled honor was one of the greatest nights in the history of this world.
But, Islam has its own principles with regard to the historic and religious events. Its approach about observing festivals and celebrating days and nights is totally different from the approach of other religions. The Holy Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet did not prescribe any festival or any celebration to commemorate an event from the past, however remarkable it might have been. Instead, Islam has prescribed two annual celebrations only. One is Eid-ul-Fitr and the other is Eid ul-Adha. Both of these festivals have been fixed at a date on which the Muslims accomplish a great ‘ibadah (worship) every year. Eid-ul-Fitr has been prescribed after the fasts of Ramadan, while Eid-ul-Adha has been fixed when the Muslims perform the Hajj annually. None of these two eids is designed to commemorate a particular event of the past which has happened in these dates. This approach is indicative of the fact that the real occasion for a happy celebration is the day in which the celebrators themselves have accomplished remarkable work through their own active effort. As for the accomplishments of our ancestors, their commemoration should not be restricted to a particular day or night. Instead, their accomplishments must be remembered every day in the practical life by observing their teachings and following the great examples they have set for us.

Keeping this principle in view, the following points should be remembered with regard to the “Lailatul-mi’raj”:
(1) We cannot say with absolute certainty in which night the great event of mi’raj took place. Although some traditions relate this event to 27th night of the month of Rajab, yet there are other traditions that suggest other dates. Al-Zurqani, the famous biographer of the Holy Prophet has referred to five different views in this respect: Rabi-ul-Awwal, Rabi-u-Thani, Rajab, Ramadan and Shawwal. Later, while discussing different traditions, he has added a sixth opinion, that the mi’raj took place in the month of Zulhijjah.
Allama Abdulhaq Muhaddith Dehlawi, the well-known scholar of the Indian subcontinent, has written a detailed book on the merits of Islamic months. While discussing the ‘Lailatul-mi’raj’ has mentioned that most of the scholars are of the view that the event of mi’raj took place in the month of Ramadan or in Rabi-ul-awwal.

(2) It is also not known in which year the event of Mi’raj took place. The books of history suggest a wide range between the fifth-year and the twelfth year after the Holy Prophet was entrusted with prophethood.
Now, if it is assumed that the event of Mi’raj took place in the fifth year of his prophethood, it will mean that the Holy Prophet remained in this world for eighteen years after this event. Even if it is presumed that the mi’raj took place in the twelfth year of his prophethood, his remaining life-time after this event would be eleven years. Throughout this long period, which may range between eleven years and eighteen years, the Holy Prophet never celebrated the event of mi’raj, nor did he give any instruction about it. No one can prove that the Holy Prophet ever performed some specific modes of worship in a night calling it the ‘Lailatul-mi’raj’ or advised his followers to commemorate the event in a particular manner.

(3) After the demise of the Holy Prophet also, no one of his companions is reported to celebrate this night as a night of special acts of worship. They were the true devotees of the Holy Prophet and had devoted their lives to preserve every minute detail of the sunnah of the Holy Prophet and other Islamic teachings. Still, they did not celebrate the event of mi’raj in a particular night in a particular way.
All these points go a long way to prove that the celebration of the 27th night of Rajab, being the lailatul-mi’raj has no basis in the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet or in the practice of his noble companions. Had it been a commendable practice to celebrate this night, the exact date of this event would have been preserved accurately by the Ummah and the Holy Prophet and his blessed companions would have given specific directions for it.
Therefore, it is not a Sunnah to celebrate the Lailatul-mi’raj’. We cannot declare any practice as a sunnah unless it is established through authentic sources that the Holy Prophet or is noble Companions have recognized it as such, otherwise it may become a bid’ah about which the Holy Prophet has observed in the following words: “Whoever invents something in our religion which is not a part of it, it is to be rejected.”
Being mindful of this serious warning, we should appreciate that the 27th night of the month of Rajab is not like ‘Lailatul-qadr’ or ‘Lailatul-bara’ah’ for which special merits have been mentioned expressly either y the Holy Qur’an or by the Holy Prophet .
However, all the recognized modes of ‘ibadah (worship) like Salat, recitation of the Holy Qur’an, dhikr, etc. are commendable any time, especially in the late hours of night, and obviously the 27th night of Rajab is not an exception. Therefore, if someone performs any recognized ‘ibadah in this night from this point of view nothing can stop him from doing so, and he will be entitled to the thawab (reward allocated for that recognized ‘ibadah insha-Allah.) But it is not permissible to believe that performing ‘ibadah in this night is more meritorious or carries more thawab like ‘Lailatul-qadr’ or ‘Lailatul-bara’ah’, because this belief is not based on any authentic verse or on a sunnah of the Holy Prophet . Similarly, it is not a correct practice to celebrate this night collectively and to invite people to special ritual congregations.

(4) Some people suggest some special modes of worship to be performed in this night. Since no special mode of worship is prescribed by the Shari’ah in this night, these suggestions are devoid of any authority and should not be acted upon.
It is believed by some that the Muslims should keep fast on 27th of Rajab. Although there are some traditions attributing special merits to the fast of this day yet the scholars of hadith have held these traditions as very weak and unauthentic reports which cannot be sufficient to establish a rule of Shari’ah. On the contrary, there is an authentic report that Sayyidna ‘Umar, Radi-Allahu anhu, used to forbid people from fasting on this day, rather to compel them to eat if they had started fasting.
It should be borne in mind here that a “nafl” fast can be observed any day (except the six prohibited days of the year); therefore, fasting on 27th of Rajab is not prohibited in itself. What is prohibited is the belief that fasting on this day is more meritorious than fasting in other normal days. One should not fast in this day with this belief. But if someone fasts therein, believing it to be a normal nafl fast, there is no bar against it.”

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 92 other followers