Who Has More Right To Name The Child: Sheikh Muhammad Ferkous

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Q: Who has more right with regards to naming the child, the father or mother?

A: There is no differing between the people that the naming of the child is the father’s right and not the mother’s. This is because the child is attributed to him (through lineage), thus he has more right to name him. Likewise, just as it is binding upon him to spend, educate, perform the aqiqah, etc the naming also is for him. As a result the creation, on the day of resurrection, will be summoned by their fathers’ names and not their mothers. One will only be affixed to his mother in terms of when a husband accuses his wife of having a child through adultery (And they both bear witness that the other is lying), fornication, and other situations from the known affairs in Islamic jurisprudence.

Translated by Abu Abdil Waahid Najeeb ibn Yusuf Al Anjelesi
Source: أربعون سؤالاً في أحكام المولود  

Leave a Comment

Filed under Child Matters

Is Naming A Child Restricted To The Seventh Day After Birth: Sheikh Muhammad Ferkous

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Q: Is it permissible to name the newborn on other than the seventh day (after birth), like naming him on the first day?

A: What has preceded within the previous narrations (quoted within the book) is the recommendation for naming the newborn on the seventh day, due to the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- ordering -on the seventh day after its birth- its naming as well as its aqiqah along with the removal of harm (shaving), just as it is reported in the narration of Sumra: “Every newborn is subject to have an aqiqah (on its behalf), sacrifice is performed for him on his seventh day (after birth), he is shaved, and given a name.”

However it is permissible to give him a name at the time of birth due to what is reported in the narration of Abu Musa where he said, “A son of mines was born, so I brought him to the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- and he named him Ibrahim and rubbed the interior of his mouth with a date.” Also in the authentic collection of Muslim, on the authority of Anas, the Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said, “A child of mines was born this night and I named him after my father Ibrahim…” Also the narration of Sahl ibn Sad As-Saa’idi found within the two authentic collections, where he said, “Mundhir ibn Abi Usayd was brought to Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- when he was born and placed on his lap while Abu Usayd sat. The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- was preoccupied with something in front of him, so Abu Usayd told someone to removed his son from the Prophet’s lap. Afterwards the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- asked, “Where is the child?” Abu Usayd replied, “We sent him home O Messenger.” He -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said, “What is his name?” Abu Usayd replied, “His name is so-and-so.” The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said, “No! His name is Mundhir.”

These narrations indicate the allowance as it relates to naming the newborn on the day of its birth, but what is best is to delay it if possible to the seventh day based on it being a verbally expressed sunnah.

Translated by Abu Abdil Wahid Najeeb Al Anjelesi
Source: أربعون سؤالاً في أحكام المولود 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Child Matters

An Adult Having An Aqiqah For Himself: Sheikh Muhammad Ferkous

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Q: Is the aqiqah of an adult for himself (something) proven?

A: It is proven within the Sunnah from two chains of transmission on the authority of Anas ibn Malik that the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- performed an aqiqah for himself after being sent as a prophet. Some of the salaf held this opinion and acted accordingly. Ibn Seereen said, “If I knew that he (his father) did not perform an aqiqah on my behalf I would perform it for myself.”

Al Hasan Al Basri said, “If an aqiqah was not performed for you, then perform it for yourself even if you are a man.”

Moreover, it is recommended that a man performs an aqiqah for himself as a substitute for his father, due to the naseekah (aqiqah) being obligatory on the father, and remains so even after reaching old age if it is easy (for him). If he does not do so, a substitute/replacement for him is allowed, due to this being worship related to wealth in which a substitute (to carry out) is legislated. Worship related to wealth allows substitution therein e.g. zakat, donations, and similar to that from worship.

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi
Source: أربعون سؤالاً في أحكام المولود

Leave a Comment

Filed under Naseekah (Aqiqah)

The Ruling On The Saliva, Drool, And Vomit Of The Infant: Sheikh Muhammad Ferkous

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Q: What’s the ruling on the saliva, drool, and vomit of an infant?

A: The fundamental ruling as it relates to objects/things is (a state of) purity. So the infant’s saliva, drool, and vomit are pure, to be more precise the vomit of humans (man or child) is pure as there is no evidence pointing towards its impurity, nor is there anyone fit to be taken as a proof that has conveyed it being impure, on the contrary it is pure. A baby vomits abundantly, its saliva and drool do not cease to flow onto the one providing care for it. Consequently it is an affair in which adversity prevails (as it relates to the removal of these things). Therefore the legislator has not enacted the washing of clothes as it pertains to that. He has not prevented prayer due to it, nor has He ordered being cautioned from the baby’s saliva.

As for the reported consensus that man’s vomit is impure, it is nothing more than an invalid claim due to the opposition of Ibn Hazm where he explicitly states the purity of man’s vomit. Likewise as Imaam Ash-Shawkani and Siddeeq Hasan Khan both did not count vomit along with impurities, on the contrary they held, to be more probable, the purity of man’s vomit in the unrestricted sense. This is due to the fundamental ruling being purity and there is nothing reported about it except  authentic conveyance (concerning its ruling) that are not contradicted by what equals it or (by what) preceded it.

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi

Source: أربعون سؤالاً في أحكام المولود

Leave a Comment

Filed under Purification

The Ruling Concerning Jamaa’at-ut-Tabligh And Their Dawah: Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Ali Ferkous

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Q: What is the ruling pertaining to Jamaa’at-ud-Dawah and Tabligh within the Islamic countries and non Muslim countries?

A: Jamaa’at-ut-Tabligh was initiated based on a dream that its leader Muhammad Ilyaas had. He alleged that, in the dream, the Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- commissioned him with this important task. Moreover this group is established upon six fundamentals that are based on a secret arrangement (understanding and or viewpoint), that being; everything that is the cause of alienation, splitting, and or differing between two Muslims  -even if it’s the truth- then it is severed and abolished from the methodology of the group. 

This group stands in contradiction towards the truth, (they have) a Sufi methodology and disposition, and with them are numerous mistakes. For additional scrutiny refer to the book entitled “A Severe Statement As It Relates To The Warning From Jamaa’at-ut-Tabligh” by the scholar Hammoud ibn Abdillah At-Tuwaijari, and others besides him who have devoted attention towards investigating the modern day Islamic sects. And I ask Allah to cause us to see the truth and to guide us to the path of guidance.

Translated by Abu Abdil Waahid Najeeb ibn Yusuf Al Anjelesi
Source: مجالس تذكيرية على مسائل منهجية

Leave a Comment

Filed under People Of Innovation

Are The Statements And Actions Of The Salaf Proof? Sheikh Muqbil Ibn Haadi

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Q: Are the statement and actions of the pious predecessors proof?

A: No! They are not a proof Allah -The Glorified and Exalted- says:

اتبعوا ما أُنْزِلَ إليكم من ربكم و لا تتبعوا من دونه أولياء قليلاً ما تذكرون

“Follow what has been revealed to you from your Lord and do not follow awliyaa besides Him. Little do you remember.” [Al-A’raf: 3]

The people, as it pertains to this subject, are between being excessive and (between) negligence, i.e. with regards to the significance of the statements of the salaf. From them you have he who disregards their statements and says, “They are men and we are men!” Correct they are men and we are men, however the difference between us and them is like the difference between the sky and the earth, as we seek assistance in their understanding as it pertains to understanding Allah’s book and the sunnah of Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam.

Az-Zuhri had a companion, both of them would write the narrations of Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- but when they concluded (writing) what reached them from the narrations of Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- he (Az-Zuhri) wrote the statements of the companions, while his companion did not believe it to be knowledge. Thus his companion said, “He (Az-Zuhri) prospered and was successful” or similar (to that) in meaning.

Therefore if there was no benefit in them the scholars would neither have compiled them nor quoted them in their authored works, e.g. Ibn Jarir in his tafsir, Ibn Abi Shaiba in his musannaf, Abdur Razzaq in his musannaf, Al-Baihaqi in his sunan, and in an abundance of sunan and in other than them wherein they (the scholars) quote the statements of the salaf. So it is not said that they (the salaf’s statements) have no value, on the contrary we benefit from their understanding, and it is incumbent that we understand Allah’s book and the sunnah of His Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- according to their understanding.

As for it being a proof then no, Allah -The Glorified and Exalted- says:

و ما اختلفْتم فيه من شيءٍ فحكمه إلى الله

“And in whatsoever you differ, the decision is with Allah..” [Ash-Shura: 10]

And He says:

فئن تنازعتم في شيءٍ فردُّوه إلى الله و الرسول

“So if you differ in any matter, refer it to Allah and the Messenger…” [An-Nisaa: 59]

He says:

وأن هذا صراطي مستقيمًا فاتبعوه 
“And this is my straight path so follow it…” [Al-An’am: 153]

He also says:

وما آتاكم الرسول فخذوه
“Whatsoever the Messenger gives you, take it…” [Al-Hashr: 7]

As for the third category, as we have just mentioned two categories i.e. (one of them being) rejecting the statements of the companions and the taabi’een and saying “They are men and we are men” (said) specifically (by) the takfiris. And the other category that exceed limits with regards to it (the salaf’s statements), to justify (opinions and positions) by usage of it, and to make it a proof, this is a mistake due to that which you’ve heard from evidence.

The third category says, “We seek assistance from Allah -The Glorified and Exalted- then with the understanding of our pious predecessors in understanding the book and the sunnah.”

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi

Source: https://www.sahab.net/forums/index.php?app=forums&module=forums&controller=topic&id=105207 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Dawah

A Knowledge Based Support And Aid, Highlighting The Legitimacy Of The Recent Statements Of Hisham Abouzeid

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Recently our brother Hisham Abouzeid issued a clarification with regards to statements made by Shadeed Muhammad, as usually his clarification received mixed opinions from people whose perception of the original statements of Shadeed differ with regards to meaning. I have seen such opinions and was recently asked a question concerning the issue that I felt would be beneficial in answering due to the sentiment in the question being regurgitated by many in accordance with Shadeed’s thinking. Thus the question is as follows:

Q: Shadeed Muhammad criticized the thinking of many African Americans who believe that only Arabs can be scholars and they reject the fact that African Americans can become scholars too from understanding the psychology of self hate that’s particular to black people in America. How did that transfer into him saying that blacks should only learn Islam from blacks according to Hisham Abouzeid’s interpretation of Shadeed’s speech?

How did Hisham Abouzeid put things in their proper place when he can’t bring one statement of Shadeed that implies that blacks should only learn from blacks and no other group to support his interpretation of Shadeed’s speech?

These questions indicate one of two matters. The first being that the questioner is totally unaware of which statement of Shadeed is being criticized, and if this is not the case then it must be the second matter, that being that the questioner has interpreted Shadeed’s statements incorrectly consequently rejecting the apparent of his statement by placing his own meaning therein. Therefore in confronting this matter it is important for us to understand and know which of Shadeed’s statements were criticized.

Shadeed said, “You know I’m always amazed at how Caucasian converts as well as Arabs who know English how they spend the vast majority of their time in African American communities -and the fact of the matter is that many of them if they were not Muslim you wouldn’t have a damn thing to do with African American communities- you understand what I’m saying? So you find a Caucasian Muslim, this is no disrespect I’m just telling you like it is, you find Muslims who are Caucasian, like I remember in Mecca I went to Moosa Richardson’s house and he was showing me some paper he wrote about the nation of Islam, and I’m like why are you writing a refutation on the Nation Of Islam? Why don’t you write a refutation on white supremacy? You understand what I’m saying?

Why do you become Muslim, become a student of knowledge and you’re attacking issues that exceeds your competency, your ability to deal with? What do you know about black nationalism? What do you know about the Nation Of Islam? Because you went to Google, you read a couple of books, you read a couple of documents, you didn’t talk to anybody that was in the Nation. You ain’t come to African American communities and have discussions, you know, substantial discussions with people who’re apart of the Nation who can give you the inside story, and I mean then, why do you even care enough to write whatever refutation on the nation? Why does that even matter to you? Why is that important to you? Why isn’t police brutality important to you? Why do we have to deal with those things when you’re a Caucasian convert to Islam and you are apart of that culture, you are apart of the 1 percent, you are apart of the dominate culture? You know what I mean? So it always puzzles me.

Esa Abu Esa says interjecting, “I always had that question too” (laughter from the hosts).

Shadeed continues, “You know its just like, why are you even here?”

Esa Abu Esa, “Why are you even here?”

Shadeed, “It’s not to say that -you know- we can’t benefit from an imam or student of knowledge who is Caucasian, but at the same token issues that are relevant to us, that are directly related to us, those are our issues.”

Esa Abu Esa, “Like getting leadership and actually digging yourself into our culture, you shouldn’t do that!”

Shadeed,“Right, exactly…”(1)

This is the speech Hisham criticized in his audio recording. He confronted the foreign concept of Shadeed that only a person of a people is fit to give dawah to that people due to knowing the intricacies of their culture and or customs, otherwise the person is not qualified to do so. In light of this the first question is totally irrelevant to this discussion it being, “Shadeed Muhammad criticized the thinking of many African Americans who believe that only Arabs can be scholars and they reject the fact that African Americans can become scholars too from understanding the psychology of self hate that’s particular to black people in America. How did that transfer into him saying that blacks should only learn Islam from blacks according to Hisham Abouzeid’s interpretation of Shadeed’s speech?”

No where in Hisham’s discussion did the subject of “Black Americans thinking only Arabs can become scholars” ever surface. It wasn’t a point of his from neither close nor far. It wasn’t hinted towards nor alluded to in any point of our brother’s discussion, so how was this overtly erroneous conclusion drawn? Unfortunately this is the result when people allow sinful love for people or concepts to overtake their hearts, it consumes their hearts to the point where the intellect becomes dysfunctional as it relates to simple concepts if it in anyway opposes the person or concept they sinfully love.

Allah says:

أفلم يسيروا في الأرض فتكونَ لهم قلوبٌ يعقلون بها أو ءاذانٌ يسمعون بها فئنها لا تعمى الأبصار ولكن تعمى القلوب التي في الصدور

Have they not traveled throughout the earth, as they do possess hearts by which they comprehend and ears by which they hear? Surely it is not the eyes that have become blind, on the contrary it is the hearts within the chest that grow blind.” [Al-Hajj: 46]

Therefore no effort will be wasted on that question due to its irrelevancy to the discussion. However the second question, I feel, must be addressed i.e., “How did Hisham Abouzeid put things in their proper place when he can’t bring one statement of Shadeed that implies that blacks should only learn from blacks and no other group to support his interpretation of Shadeed’s speech?” Therein is a tremendous slander of our brother Hisham wherein it is said that he can’t bring one statement of Shadeed that points to blacks only learning from blacks. This slander has ramifications in the negative sense against our brother Hisham e.g. the infringing on another Muslim’s honor by way of slander. As it relates to Hisham and his clarification, to allege that it is slander of Shadeed is something far from the truth and is itself slander. Allah says:

والذين يؤذون المؤمنين والمؤمنات بغير ما اكتسبوا فقدِ احتملوا بهتانًا و إثمًا مبينًا

“And those who annoy believing men and women undeservedly, they surely bear (the crime of) slander and a clear sin.” [Al-Ahzaab: 58]

However the reality is opposite to the claim, Hisham criticized clear and unambiguous statements of Shadeed. As such it is incumbent upon the Muslim to understand the statement’s of Shadeed based on the apparent of the meanings and not based on one’s own interpretation that diverts from the actual meaning of the words in which he uttered.

Ibn Qayyim said, “If a speaker’s intent, to the meaning of his speech, becomes apparent, or an intent that opposes the speech does not manifest, it (at this point) is obligatory to ascribe his speech to its obvious meaning.” [إعلام الموقعين عن رب العالمين]

Before continuing, it is important to make clear that the scholars of Islam have categorized speech as it relates to its intent and or meaning, and they are as follows:

  1. As-Sareeh (الصريح) and it is as Imam As Suyuti said, “The verbally expressed subject to a meaning to which there is not understood from it, other than it, under any circumstance.” [الأشباه و النظائر]
    In laymen’s terms it is a statement in which its intent is manifest and obvious.
  2. Al-Wahm (الوهم) It is a less probable meaning that is not considered nor acted upon.
  3. Ath-Thun (الظن) It is a more probable meaning being more obvious than other possibilities due to relied upon evidence. 
  4. Ash-Sheck (الشك) It is when all possibilities are equal in probability, with no possibility outweighing the other.

The previously mentioned terms and their meanings are what is intended in several principles found in qawaaid-ul-fiqh e.g. – لا عبرة بالدلالة في مقابلة التصريحThere is no consideration given to the inferred in face of an explicit statement, orلا عبرة بالتوهمthere is no consideration given to the less probable (from speech or action as it relates to its intent or true reality), and in others with the usage of these terms.  

In light of this, it is of paramount importance to examine and analyse our brother Shadeed’s statements, after all no one is more qualified to speak for Shadeed than Shadeed. He said:
“You know I’m always amazed at how Caucasian converts as well as Arabs who know English how they spend the vast majority of their time in African American communities, and the fact of the matter is that many of them if they were not Muslim you wouldn’t have a damn thing to do with African American communities, you understand what I’m saying?”

Yes we understand exactly what you’re saying. Our brother is stating what he believes to be a matter of fact, however he is not mentioning this from the perspective of it being praiseworthy, on the contrary he’s clearly criticizing it. This is indicated by how he starts his sentence, “You know I’m always amazed at how…” likewise it’s indicated in the portion of his statement, “Many of them if they were not Muslim you wouldn’t have a damn thing to do with African American communities…” But this in no way should be a source of amazement for our brother Shadeed, especially in light of the fact that they are not drawn to the aforementioned communities in order to usurp, undermine, exploit, or fracture them, on the contrary they are drawn to these communities because of faith. Depending on the state and county one lives, African American communities may be the only place wherein a masjid is located. Hence they come to worship alongside those who are worshiping Allah despite the skin color or ethnicity. It is faith that draws them. Allah says:

إنَّما المؤمنون إخوة

“Only the Believers are brothers…” [Al-Hujuraat: 10]

Ibn Kathir said, “The entirety are brothers in the religion.” [تفسير القرآن العظيم]

Sheikh Muhammad ibn Saalih Al Uthaymin said, “And they are brothers in the religion, as brotherhood in the religion is stronger than brotherhood in lineage, rather brotherhood in lineage along with the absence of religion is nothing.” [شرح رياض الصالحين]

Sheikh Abdur Rahman ibn Naasir As-Sa’idi said, “This is a covenant that Allah made among the believers, that being if one finds from any person (whoever he may be) -within the eastern regions of the earth or in the west- belief in Allah, His Angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Last Day then undoubtedly he is a brother to the believers. It’s a brotherhood that makes binding that the believers love for him whatsoever they love for themselves and they hate for him whatsoever they hate for themselves.” [تيسير الكريم الرحمن في تفسير كلام المنان]

Furthermore, in some areas the mixture of ethnicity and people within the masaajid worshiping together causes some non Muslims’ interest to be sparked about Islam. This results from the blatant division found within the Christian community that is based on race and or ethnicity. So, for instance, you’ll find “The Roman Catholic Church” or “The Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church” or “The Greek Orthodox Church” or “The Armenian Apostolic Church” and other examples found among them that is foreign to the blessed and superior legislation of Islam. Shadeed continues:
“So you find a Caucasian Muslim, this is no disrespect I’m just telling you like it is, you find Muslims who are Caucasian…” 
 

The statement, “This is no disrespect I’m just telling you like it is..” also suggests that our brother Shadeed is about to put forth a criticism, but what is he criticizing? What was the subject? The subject was none other than Caucasian converts and Arabs spending vast amounts of time in masaajid where the majority of its worshipers are Black Americans. But is our brother criticizing them for merely spending time in these types of communities? The answer is found within our brother’s statements, he continues:

“Like I remember in Mecca I went to Moosa Richardson’s house and he was showing me some paper he wrote about the nation of Islam, and I’m like why are you writing a refutation on the Nation Of Islam? Why don’t you write a refutation on white supremacy? You understand what I’m saying?”

For those who may be unaware, Moosa Richardson is a White American. So the example that our brother presents indicates that his criticism is not from the perspective of white converts or Arabs merely spending their time worshiping within masaajid wherein the majority of its attendees are Black Americans. On the contrary Moosa is the subject of criticism due to a refutation he wrote against the N.O.I. a black nationalist group in which our brother Shadeed feels as if Moosa is incapable of writing, as is seen from his follow up questions. He continues:

“Why do you become Muslim, become a student of knowledge and you’re attacking issues that exceeds your competency, your ability to deal with? What do you know about black nationalism? What do you know about the Nation Of Islam? Because you went to Google, you read a couple of books, you read a couple of documents, you didn’t talk to anybody that was in the Nation. You ain’t come to African American communities and have discussions, you know, substantial discussions with people who’re apart of the Nation who can give you the inside story, and I mean then, why do you even care enough to write whatever refutation on the nation?”

This line of questioning leads the listener to conclude that the purpose of Shadeed’s criticism is due to him holding the opinion that Moosa, a white convert, has never been to the black community and had any dealings whatsoever with a member from the N.O.I., thus making him unqualified to speak about them in anyway as he is “attacking issues that exceeds your competency, your ability to deal with” and this notion is false. This is what our brother Hisham dealt with in his audio, i.e. the fact that Islam does not make necessary knowledge of the intricacies of one’s culture or customs to be able to guide them to the straight path.

Then our brother Shadeed asked the question, “Why do you even care enough to write whatever refutation on the nation?” The answer is quite simple, because it’s from faith in Islam for him to care about the well being of his brothers and the safeguarding of their hearts from concepts and ideologies that contradict Islam and reach the level of pure disbelief as is found with the N.O.I. The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam said, “None of you believes until he loves for his brother whatsoever he loves for himself.”(2) In light of this should Moosa not want for his brothers awareness of the reality of the N.O.I.’s belief? Should he not want for his brothers awareness as it relates to the Islamic ruling on how to interact with impostors like the nation? The answer is clear, and he does not have to talk to one of them in order to be qualified to refute them, especially considering the fact that their corrupted beliefs are printed within the wants and belief section of their fraudulent newspaper and circulated all throughout the states.

After more questions from our brother Shadeed he eventually asks, “Why are you even here?” He also said, “It’s not to say that -you know- we can’t benefit from an imam or student of knowledge who is Caucasian, but at the same token issues that are relevant to us, that are directly related to us, those are our issues.” By now if one is still confused as to the intent of Shadeed then look towards the co host Esa Abu Esa and what he says thereafter has he acknowledges and confirms for all the intent of Shadeed. He said, “Like getting leadership and actually digging yourself into our culture, you shouldn’t do that!” So white converts, per Esa Abu Esa’s understanding of Shadeed’s statements, should not obtain leadership in Black American Muslim communities. They shouldn’t as he put it, dig into our culture. So what was the response of Shadeed as it relates to negating or affirming the understanding of Esa Abu Esa? He said, “Right, exactly” an affirmation that validates the understanding of Abu Esa consequently confirming the accuracy of his interpretation. 

Therefore the claim that Hisham Abouzeid cannot produce one statement from Shadeed that implies that blacks should only learn from blacks is a blatant lie. Hisham’s criticism was legitimate and to allege otherwise defies logic and common sense. Allah says:

إنَّا جعلْنا على قلوبهم أكِنَّةً أن يفقهوه و في ءَاذانهم وقرًا

“Indeed We have placed veils over their hearts lest they should comprehend it (The Quran), and in their ears deafness…” [Al-Kahf: 57]

I ask Allah that He blesses us with sound repenting hearts that comprehend, and that He protect us from adopting concepts and ideas that will lead to an evil end. 

Likewise I ask Allah to bless our brother Shadeed to not view our brother Hisham’s critique through eyes of scorn or discontent, but with eyes of reflection, and open mindedness to what was said in order for it to be a source of benefit for him, and with Allah is success.

Written by Najeeb ibn Yusuf Al Anjelesi

 


1: Taken from the video entitled “Interview With One Of The Most Controversial Students Of Knowledge In America Shadeed Muhammad”

2: Collected by Al-Bukhari hadith number 13, and by Muslim hadith number 45. 

Below is the audio of Hisham Abouzeid that was the object of criticism by some.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Sincere Advice to the Muslims in General

Sexual Relations With Multiple Wives In One Night: Sheikh Ubayd Al Jaabiri

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Q: Some (authentic) narrations with regards to polygyny have become problematic for us, like when the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- went to each wife’s house (and had sexual relations with each) and took (only) one bath. So is it permissible for a man to have relations with each of his wives, outside of their turn, and without permission from the other?

A: Allah bestowed upon the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- strength that He did not bestow upon anyone else from his nation. The proof for that is when Thabit asked Anas, “Is he able to do so?” or something similar in expression, and Anas replied, “He has been given the strength of 30 men.” This is the first point.

Second; From what I know of the sunnah of the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- he did this for a purpose, that being while departing for the farewell pilgrimage he spent the night at dhul-hulaifah, there he went to each wife, and Allah knows best with regards to the wisdom (for doing so), but I do not know this to be from his habitual routine in every time. Thus what is apparent to me is that a man is not prevented from doing this with his wives if he plans to travel (away from them) for a long duration, and he is able to do this. Subsequently I have found within the sunnah that he -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- did this many times as is clearly recorded of the narration in the annotation beneath it. This is one circumstance.

The second circumstance is if one is a resident (not on a journey) and he doesn’t have to travel unexpectedly, along with having the ability to be frequent (in having sex), he doesn’t abandon the wife with right to that night until she becomes tired (exhausted from repeated sex). So if she becomes exerted, afterwards he can go to another (wife). But as long as she is able, even if he wants to enjoy some of his other women outside of their night, he must seek her permission because she is the possessor of that night and the right belongs to her.

Thus as it pertains to these two circumstances the affair is not devoid (of being apart) of (one) of the following two situations:

The first being that the possessor of the night she is able, so he comes to her (repeatedly for relations) and she is not exerted, this circumstnace he cannot go to another without her permission.

The second being that she is exerted and worn out yet with him is energy and as a result he can suffer if he doesn’t do it, thus he can go to some of his women or all of them if he wills.

Questioner: Without permission?

Sheikh Ubayd: Yes, without permission, but the first circumstance necessitates her permission as she is not tired or worn out plus with her is the ability (to keep going), so he seeks her permission because the night belongs to her. However the second circumstance is that she is exerted and worn out.

Questioner: What if she has an excuse (not to have sex)?

Sheikh Ubayd: Meaning if her menstrual cycle comes or post natal bleeding? He likewise seeks her (the woman who has right to the night despite these circumstances) permission.

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi

Source: التقرير المؤكد بالإجابة على ثلاثين سؤالاً في التعدد 

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Marriage

The Ruling Concerning Polygyny In Islam: Sheikh Ubayd Al Jaabiri

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Q: What is the ruling concerning polygyny in Islam?

Sheikh Ubayd Al Jaabiri: All praises are strictly for Allah, Lord of the existence, and may Allah’s commendations (in lofty gatherings) and peace be upon our prophet Muhammad, his family, and all of his companions.

Now then, undoubtedly it is obligatory upon every male and female Muslim to be pleased with Allah and His Messenger’s judgement. Allah the Exalted says:

وما آتاكم الرسول فخذوه وما نهاكم عنه فانْتهوا

“And whatsoever the messenger gives you take it, and whatsoever he forbids abstain from it.” [Al-Hashr: 7]

And The Exalted says:

وما كان لمؤمن و لا مؤمنةٍ إذا قضى الله و رسوله أمرًا أن يكون لهم الخيرة من أمرهم 

“It is not for a believer male and female to have a choice, if Allah and His messenger have decided a matter…” [Al-Ahzaab: 36]

And other than that from the explicitly suggestive verses that indicate that it is compulsory for every male and female Muslim the being pleased with whatsoever Allah and His Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- have decided, and to hold the belief that it is good. In that manner the sunnah has brought forth, from the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam-, the inciting of the male and female Muslims to being pleased with whatsoever Muhammad has brought forth, regardless if the judgement is contain within a revealed (sent down by Allah from above the seven heavens) noble verse or within the Prophet’s sunnah. From the widely spread sunnah is that which the two scholars compiled on the authority of Anas, from the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam where he said, “3 things if gathered within one finds the sweetness of faith; that Allah and His Messenger are more beloved to him than anyone besides them…”

The meaning is that you put whatsoever pleases Allah and His Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- before the statements of anyone, as is in the authentic narration, “Whoever is pleased with Allah as his Lord, Islam as his religion, and Muhammad as his messenger has savored the taste of faith.” Thus his statement “And Muhammad as his messenger” this necessitates that one believes in all of what Muhammad -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- brought forth, that it is from Allah, and that it is the truth in which there is no doubt therein.

And what is better than what Ash-Shaafi’ee stated, “I believe in Allah, what has come from Allah, upon Allah’s intent. I believe in Allah’s Messenger, whatever has come from Allah’s Messenger, upon his -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- intent. Indeed the Islamic knowledge based specialist unanimously agree on what we have mentioned, hence it is determined. So undoubtedly polygyny is the foundation (of marriage in Islam), it is explicit within the distinguished revelation. Allah the Exalted says:

فانْكحوا ما طاب لكم من النساء مثنى و ثلاثى و رباع فإن خفتم ألاَّ تعدلوا فواحدةً

“So marry whatever you have a liking for from the women, two, three, or four. But if you fear that you cannot be just then (marry) one…” [An-Nisaa: 3]

The one who examines this valuable verse, made clear to him are two things:

First: That the foundation is polygyny as Allah began with it and encouraged it. Whoever speaks with it being obligatory, then his speech has a bases for consideration because the fundamental ruling regarding a command is obligation.

Second: Contentment with one (wife) for he who fears for himself the absence of justice (between multiple wives).

 

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi

Source: التقرير المؤكد بالإجابة على ثلاثين سؤالاً في التعدد 

   

Leave a Comment

Filed under Marriage

Being In A State Of Ritual Purity Is Recommended When Calling The Adhan: Sheikh Al-Albaani

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

While discussing recommended actions while calling the adhan Sheikh Al-Albaani said, “That one calls to prayer while in a state of purity (wudhu), and the evidence for this is his -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- statement, ‘Indeed I hate to remember Allah unless while in a state of purity‘ or he said, ‘while in purification.
As for the narration, ‘There is no adhan unless one is in a state of purity‘ this is weak, it is not authentic, and Tirmidhi collected it. Thereafter Tirmidhi said, ‘The people of knowledge differ as it pertains to the adhan in other than a state of purity, thus some people of knowledge hate doing so as Ash-Shaafi’ee and Ishaq state. Some of the people of knowledge permit it as Sufyaan Ath-Thawri, Ibn-ul-Mubaarak, and Ahmad speak accordingly.’ “

Sheikh Al-Albaani said in the footnotes to the previous narration collected by Tirmidhi, “It is from the chain of Muawiyah ibn Yahya As-Sudfi from Az-Zuhri from Abu Huraira being raised to him (The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam) Muawiya is weak just as Al-Haafidh stated, and Az-Zuhri didn’t hear anything from Abu Huraira just as Tirmidhi mentions. Then he compiled it with the chain of Yunus (another chain of transmission) from Ibn Shihaab where he said, ‘Abu Huraira said, ‘No one makes the call to prayer except he who is in a state of purification.’ ‘ ” Thereafter he said, ‘This is more sound than the first narration.’ “

I say (Al-Albaani), “It is not valid in regards to being marfoo (having a connected chain towards the Prophet -sllahu alayhi wa sallam), nor in being mawqoof (a connected chain towards a companion) due to the existence of a break in both chains.”

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi

Source: أحكام الأذان والإقامة

   

Leave a Comment

Filed under Adhan And Iqaamah