Don’t Consume Poison Found In Some Foods

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Allah says:

و لا تقتلوا أنفسكم إنَّ اللهَ كان بكم رحيمًا

…And do not kill yourselves, surely Allah is Ever Merciful with you.” [An-Nisaa: 29]

Imam Ash-Shawkaani states, while commenting on this verse: “O Muslims some among you should not kill others among you, unless it is for a reason firmly established in the legislation. Or (its intent is) do not kill yourselves by way of perpetrating sins, or the intent of the prohibition relates to an individual literally killing himself. In reality, there is no restriction on anyone applying this verse in coincidence to all of these meanings.

From what alludes to this is Amr ibn-ul-Aas adopting it as proof for not taking a bath with cold water while in a state of major ritual impurity during the battle of Dhaatus-Salaasil, as the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- acknowledged his proof. This (hadith) is found within the musnad of Ahamd, and the sunan of Abu Dawud.” [فتح القدير]

The hadith referenced is as follows:

Amr ibn-ul-Aas said: “I had a wet dream on a cold night during the war expedition of Dhaatus Salaasil, and I feared that if I bathed I would be destroyed (die as a result), thus I made tayammum instead, and prayed fajr. So they (those present) mentioned this to the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- as a result he said, “O Amr did you pray with your comrades while in a state of ritual impurity?” So I informed him of that which prevented me from bathing and subsequently said, indeed I heard that Allah said –And do not kill yourselves, surely Allah is Ever Merciful with you-. The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- laughed and did not say anything (that indicates disapproval).”

In light of this, I advise my brothers and sisters in Islam to be cautious from certain ingredients found in a lot of consumer products that are, in reality, poison and possibly toxic. They are as follows:

1: Trisodium Phosphate

It is an inorganic salt like compound, a chemical, most notably used as paint thinner which is harmful and considered hazardous to the environment. Unfortunately the FDA declared this chemical safe for consumption in very small doses, thus it is found in some cereals (like Cheerios), toothpaste, mouthwash, etc.

2: BHT and BHA

Both are chemically made preservatives that the FDA as once again declared (foolishly) to be safe in small doses. Both are toxic, both are difficult for the liver to metabolizes. The World Health Organization labeled them both as potential carcinogens.

3: Hydrogenated Oils/ Partially Hydrogenated Oils

Another chemical that is one molecule away from being plastic, that contributes to high blood pressure and cholesterol.

4: Annatto

Marketed as a natural food dye alternative to artificial dyes, however research suggests it causes as many adverse intolerance reactions as artificial color additives.

5: Propylene Glycol

A chemical placed in antifreeze, yet found in a lot of sweets here in the US. Banned in Europe as a food additive.

6: Olestra or Olean 

A fat substitute that adds no calories, nor cholesterol. Proven to cause severe side effects like abdominal cramping and loose stool.

7: Azonicarbonamide

A chemical found in varying types of bread like products from bread, hot dog and burger buns, pizza dough, bagels, etc. It is used to bleach flour and is banned in some countries.

8: Potassium Bromate

Linked to thyroid and renal cancer, deemed to be possibly carcinogenic.

9: Brominated Vegetable Oil

Its main ingredient bromine, is poisonous and corrosive, and is linked to numerous major health deficiencies from birth defects, growth problems, organ system damage, etc.

O Muslim avoid these additives. Protect yourself from throwing yourselves into destruction and ruin with your own hands.

Compiled by Najeeb Al Anjelesi 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Nutrition

Definition Of Country (Land) Of Disbelief And Land Of Islam: Sheikh Salih Alish-Sheikh

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

A polytheistic land is a country in which polytheism is manifest and predominant. This definition is what sheikh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim mentioned when questioned about a disbelieving country and what it is. He said a land of disbelief is that which disbelief is apparent and prominent. In light of this, whenever polytheism becomes distinct in a country and its distinction is predominant (it becomes widespread, visible, clearly evident, and prominent) this country is (deemed and) dubbed to be a polytheistic land (or country). This relates to what (normally) transpires therein which is polytheism.

As it relates to the people of the country, this topic is disputed among the people of knowledge. Is consideration in naming a country to be an Islamic country or a country of disbelief (directed to) its people? Ibn Taimiyyah was asked about a country in which rulings of disbelief and Islamic legislation are both visible therein, so he said that this type of country is not deemed (judged) to be neither a land of disbelief nor an Islamic land. On the contrary the Muslim conducts himself therein in accordance with Islam, whereas the disbeliever conducts himself according to disbelief.

Some scholars stated a country in which the call to prayer is evident and heard during the times of prayer is an Islamic country because the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- would say to whoever was with him, while out on a war expedition before invading a town in the morning hours,  wait! If the summons to prayer was made he would not attack, and if it was not heard they would attack.  This is debatable because the Arabs whenever they called to prayer this meant they affirmed and bore witness to the testimony of truth because they knew its intent. They fulfilled the rights of tawheed that comprises the call to prayer. So if they bore witness that there is no deity in truth except Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, and established the call to prayer, this indicated that they had abandoned and distanced themselves from polytheism.

Allah says:

فإن تابوا و أقاموا الصلاة وءاتَوُا الزكاة فإخوانكم في الدين

“If they repent, perform the prayer, and pay the annual charity, then they are consequently your brothers in faith.”  [At-Taubah: 11]

“If they repent” from polytheism “perform the prayer, and pay the annual charity, then they are consequently your brothers in faith.” This is on account that the Arabs knew the meaning of tawheed, thus if they entered into Islam and bore witness to the two testimonies, this implied that they acted in accordance with it. As for in this day and time there are an abundant of Muslims that say there is no deity in truth except Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, however they do not truly know its intent, nor act in accordance to it. On the contrary you find polytheism being commonly practiced among them.

For this reason we say that this definition -a Muslim land or country is that wherein the adhan is manifest- in this day and time is not correct, and the evidence is its original affair, that being that the Arab would abandon and distance themselves from polytheism and its people. They would (willingly) uphold and implement monotheism, in contradiction to the people of this time period.

Therefore, the first definition concerning the titling of a country is more correct. It does not necessitate, regardless if it’s dubbed a polytheistic or Islamic country, that the ruling is based on the individuals residing therein. In contrast, we say that the ruling is based on what is predominate, and or by the manifestation of polytheism and disbelief, and whoever is therein is interacted with accordingly, especially in this era. This is due to the fact that the appearance of polytheism and disbelief in many countries does not occur by choice of the people of that land. Perhaps it is due to being overwhelmed, either by way of the Sufi paths or by way of the government, just as is well known and witnessed.

Hence we say that dubbing a country is restricted to what I clarified previously, as for its citizens then there conditions may differ.

Translated by Abu Abdil Waahid Najeeb Ibn Yusuf Al Anjelesi.

Source: شرح ثلاثة الأصول 

 

Comments Off on Definition Of Country (Land) Of Disbelief And Land Of Islam: Sheikh Salih Alish-Sheikh

Filed under Contemporary Issues

The Woman’s Prayer Who Returns To A State Of Purity After Menstruation Or Post Natal Bleeding: Sheikh Salih Al Fawzan

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

When a menstruating woman or one with post natal bleeding returns to a state of purity before the setting of the sun, she is obliged to pray both dhuhr and asr of that day. Whoever returns to a state of purity before the appearance of the dawn, she is obliged to pray maghrib and ishaa of that night. This is because the time for the second prayer is the time for the first prayer (as well) when in a circumstance that necessitates an excuse (for the abandonment of the prayer).

Sheikh-ul-Islam Ibn Taimiyyah said: “The majority of the scholars state this, like Maalik, Ash-Shaafi’ee, and Ahmad. Whenever a menstruating woman regains purity at the last part of the day, she prays both dhuhr and asr. If she regains purity at the last end of the night she prays maghrib and ishaa, just as it was conveyed from Abdur Rahman ibn Auf, Abu Huraira, and Ibn Abbas. This is because the time between these two prayers are shared when in a circumstance that necessitates an excuse. Thus if she regains purity in the last part of the day the time for dhuhr still remains, hence she prays dhuhr before asr. If she regains purity at the end of the night the time for maghrib still remains in a circumstance that necessitates an excuse. Hence she prays maghrib before ishaa.”  

Translated by Abu Abdil Waahid Najeeb Ibn Yusuf Al Anjelesi

Source: الملخص الفقهي

Leave a Comment

Filed under Prayer

Bombarding The Critic Possessing Blameworthy Egotism, With An Analysis On What He Directed Of Vicious Criticism

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Allah the Sublime and Exalted says:

و الذِينَ يُؤذُون المؤمنين و المؤمناتِ بغيرِ ما اكتسبوا فقدِ احْتَمَلُوا بهتاناً و إثمًا مبينًا

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

Ibn Kathir said: “Meaning; attributing to them that which they are free of, they neither enact nor do such. “..they surely bear (the crime of) slander and a clear sin” and this is a tremendous slander to report or convey something about a believing man and woman that which they do not do, from the perspective of fault and disparagement. And who is more plentiful  in entering this threat than the disbelievers in Allah and His Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam-, then the Shiite those who disparage the companions and find fault in them with that which Allah has freed them of, likewise they describe them with that which is opposite to what Allah has informed us of concerning them.”

This despicable characteristic is that which one does not expect to find in a salafi, let alone a student of knowledge who is known to frequent the circles of knowledge. As the scholars constantly warn against repugnant behavior, blameworthy statements and actions, and going beyond bounds with respect to the honor of another. As this is something firmly established in the prophetic traditions, as the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said, “whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day let him speak good or keep quiet.”

In light of this, it is very unfortunate to find that a student has criticized me with statements that one would expect to be uttered by an ignoramus or brazen enemy of the dawah. As my critic said about me “he’s all over youtube” referring to the audio and video lectures and sermons uploaded to youtube. My critic used this as his bases to substantiate 3 vicious accusations.

  1. I’m seeking leadership.
  2. I have a lack of ikhlaas.
  3. I’m putting myself forward. As it was conveyed to me that he said “why is he putting himself forward?”

Unfortunately my critic, by way of his reason and the conclusion he has drawn, has consequently opposed truth and guidance from that which has been learned and taught by our scholars. Thus it is not befitting for any salafi to fall into such, let alone a student of knowledge. As a result I intend, by Allah’s permission, to clarify in detail the opposition that my critic has fallen into, hoping that it be a source of benefit for all that it reaches. May Allah bless us with steadfastness upon the Sunnah, and protect us from transgressing His set boundaries.

الحكم على النَّاسِ بما ظَهَرَ لنا من أعمالهم و نَدَعُ السرائر إلى الله 

The ruling upon the people is based on what is made apparent to us from their actions, and we leave what they conceal inwardly to Allah

Umar Ibn Al Khattaab said, “Verily people were taken to account based on revelation during the lifetime of Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam-, but revelation is now cut off, so now we hold you all to account based on what is apparent to us of your actions. So whoever displays good then we trust him and allow him to come close, and there is nothing upon us, as it relates to what he conceals inwardly. Allah will bring him to account regarding that. And whoever displays evil (outwardly) we do not trust nor believe him, even if he says that his intent is good.” Collected by Al Bukhari. 

The meaning of the second khaleefah’s statement is very explicit and self explanatory. It teaches us that the apparent actions of an individual, whether they be praiseworthy or blameworthy, is what is judged and purity or corruption of intent is not for us to determine. For this reason when Abdullah Jibreen attempted to defend Hasan Al Banna (founder of the Ikhwaanul Muslimeen movement) by alleging that he was one with pure intentions in pleasing Allah (a mukhlis); sheikh Ahmad An Najmi responded by saying “as for him being a mukhlis no one knows this except Allah, as ikhlaas is a hidden matter that no one knows except Allah.”(1) The sheikh was not concerned with Al Banna’s intent, on the contrary he judged him based on the apparent blameworthiness of his actions.

This understanding of Umar and the scholars of Sunnah after him is firmly established and supported by the text of the Quran and Sunnah, and with Allah’s aid I’d like to present some of these textual evidence.

Allah says: 

ثُمَّ قفَّينا على ءاثارهم برُسُلنا و قفَّينا بعيسى ابنِ مريمَ و ءاتيناه الإنجيلَ و جعلنا في قلوب الذين اتَّبعوه رأفةً و رحمةً و رهبانية ابتدعوها ما كتبناها عليهم إلا ابْتغاءَ رضوان الله فما رعوها حقَّ رعايتها

Then We sent after them our messengers, and We sent Esa son of Maryam, and We gave him the Injeel. And We placed in the hearts of those who followed him compassion and mercy. (However) the monasticism which they invented, We did not prescribe for them, they (implemented it) seeking Allah’s pleasure but did not observe it with proper observance…” [Al Hadeed: 27]

Ibn Kathir said: “And His statement -they (implemented it) seeking Allah’s pleasure- has two interpretations. The first is that they intended by way of it obtaining Allah’s pleasure. Saeed ibn Jubair and Qataadah both stated this. The other interpretation is We did not prescribe this for them We only prescribed seeking Allah’s pleasure.”

Based on the first interpretation we see clearly their intent, however the actions they put forth were not legislated by Allah, on the contrary it was that which they obliged upon themselves, thus the criticism is based on the apparent of what they did. And this is the condition of the people of innovation. As they labor hard by putting forth acts of worship that they devote to Allah, however the actions they put forth, despite their intent, are judged to be misguidance. This reality is illustrated in Allah’s Book.

قُلْ هل ننبّئُكم بالأخسرين أعمالاً – الذين ضلّ سعيهم في الحياة الدنيا و هم يَحسبون أنَّهم يُحسنون صنعًا

Say: Shall We not inform you about the greatest losers with respect to actions? Those whose efforts are wasted in this worldly life while they thought that they were achieving good by their actions.” [Al-Kahf: 103-104]

For this reason Imaam Sufyaan Ath-Thawri said: “Innovation is more beloved to iblees than sins, due to innovation not being repented from, in contradiction to sins wherein repentance is sought.” [التحفة العراقية في الأعمال القلبية]

In addition there are examples of this tremendous principle found in the Sunnah.

1: The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said: “I have been commanded to fight the people until they bear witness that there is no deity in truth except Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah, establish the prayer, and pay the zakah. If they do this, their blood and wealth are protected except with regards to the right of Islam, and their reckoning is with Allah.” Collected by both Al Bukhari and Muslim upon the authority of Ibn Umar.

Ibn Rajab said while explaining the statement –and their reckoning is with Allah-: “This was used as a proof by those who hold the opinion concerning accepting the repentance of the zindeeq, who is the hypocrite, when he outwardly displays the returning to Islam. They do not view the killing of him by merely the appearance of his hypocrisy, just as the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- interacted with the hypocrites and conducted himself with them according to the rulings applied publicly to Muslims, even though he knew about the hypocrisy of some of them inwardly.” [جامع العلوم و الحكم]

Sheikh Saalih Alish-Sheikh said: “That is due to what came first from whoever publicly utters the testimony, performs the prayer, and pays the zakah. Thus we say that we accept the apparent of him and entrust his intentions to Allah, similar to the hypocrites’ circumstance. Indeed we know the hypocrites are disbelievers, however their blood and wealth are protected on account of what they make visible (of obedience to Allah and submission to His legislation), yet their reckoning is with Allah.” [شرح الأربعين النووية]  

2: Usamah Ibn Zaid said: “Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- sent us to Al Huraqah of Juhainah. We attacked them in the morning hours and defeated them. Meanwhile me and a man from the Ansar (pursued and) caught a man among them, when we approached him he said ‘there is no deity in truth except Allah’. (At that point) the Ansari spared him, whereas I struck him with my spear consequently killing him. When we returned news of this incident had already reached the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam. So he said to me, “O Usamah! Did you kill him after he said: There is no deity in truth except Allah?” I replied, “O Messenger of Allah! He only did that as a means of shelter.” He said, “Did you kill him after he said: There is no deity in truth except Allah? He did not cease repeating this to me until I wished that I had not accepted Islam before that day.”

Imam An Nawawi said, while explaining an addition to this narration in another chain of transmission: The Prophet’s -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- statement –Did you not break through (his chest) to (reach) his heart in order to know if it said it or not!?– The doer in his statement –it said it or not– is the heart. The meaning is that you are only burdened with the apparent action and whatever the tongue utters. As for the heart there is no path for ascertaining awareness of what is in it.” [شرح صحيح مسلم]

Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Saalih Al Uthaymin said: “Whoever displays good publicly, then we embrace him based on what he displayed publicly, even if he hides evil (intent). Whoever displays evil, we adopt a position with him based on his evil even if he conceals a pure intent, due to us not being burdened with anything except the apparent. This is Allah’s favor upon us that we do not judge except with what is apparent, because judging what is hidden is from the most difficult matters, and Allah does not burden a soul except with that which it can bear. 

Therefore whoever manifests good we interact with him based on the good he manifests to us. Likewise whoever manifests evil we interact with him based on the evil he manifests to us, and we have no responsibility concerning his intent. As the intent is entrusted to the Lord of all that exist, He who knows what the souls of men whisper.” [شرح رياض الصالحين]  

Hence the evidence concerning this subject, and the statements of the scholars are in abundance. In light of this, I find it baffling that a student would make statements of this nature that totally contradict this principle and its multitude of proofs. Especially since the apparent of my actions are considered to be praiseworthy in our religion. Dawah is a praiseworthy action that necessitates supporting the one who undertakes this task, it does not necessitate the type of foolishness emanated from my critic. Allah says:

و من أحسن قولاً ممن دعا إلى الله و عمل صالحًا و قال إنني من المسلمين

“And who is better in speech than he who calls (invites people) to Allah, does righteous deeds, and says: “Indeed I am from the Muslims!” [Al-Fussilat: 33]

Imam Ash-Shawkani said: “Meaning, he calls them to the tawheed of Allah and His obedience. Al-Hasan said: He is a believer who responded to Allah’s invitation, and he calls the people to that with which he responded to Allah as it pertains to obeying Him.” [فتح القدير]

Thus the question posed to my critic is; is this standard of yours applied to all involved in dawah, or is it specific to me?

There are numerous brothers involved in dawah by way of classes and lecture series whose lectures are recorded and circulated through various forums on social media. I witnessed, while in Los Angeles, our brother Fareed Abdullah allow his lectures to be recorded. I witnessed, while visiting Pittsburgh, our brother Moosa Richardson carrying a recorder shaped like a microphone which he used to record his khutbah and classes. I witnessed our brother Abu Abdis Salaam Al Juyaani record not only himself but our brother Abu Yususf Khaleefah at a lecture series that took place in Atlanta a few years back. And there are numerous brothers that do or allow this to be done. In fact our scholars conduct classes, lectures, and participate in seminars and allow their talks to be recorded.

So are we to draw the same conclusion as my critic and say none of the aforementioned are sincere? Or are we to say that all of them, in reality, are seeking leadership? Or are we to judge the action based on the apparent, that being the giving of dawah and the utilization of whatever means available to spread that dawah in an attempt to guide as many people as possible? Anyone with a sound intellect knows the correct answers to these questions, as the standard of my critic wouldn’t deem anyone involved in dawah to be a mukhlis, regardless if it’s a scholar or student of knowledge.  

Another question; what traits have you seen in me to validate the claim of seeking leadership?

Ibn Abdil Barr transmits a statement of Fudayl ibn Iyyaad where he said: “There is no one that loves leadership except that he envies (others), maltreats (others), trails after the faults of people, and he hates that anyone is mentioned with good.” [جامع بيان العلم و فضله]

In addition the people of knowledge have mentioned a number of characteristics that indicate love of leadership, status, and fame from them are:

Compromising the truth to the extent that one calls to falsehood while being fully aware that it is falsehood.
Sheikh Rabee stated: “Indeed some people desire superiority (elevated status) and corruption, but Allah has made paradise for he who does not desire superiority throughout the land nor corruption and the good end is for the pious. Loving fame and superiority is a rampant disease present today in an abundance of groups and parties due to the fact that these groups, and their direction (in which they steer themselves), if the proofs were established against their misguidance and deviance, they would not retract from their falsehood. They are the most similar of people to whom Allah addresses:

و لو أنَّنَا نزّلْنا إليهم الملائكة و كلَّمهم الموتى و حشرنا عليهم كلَّ شيءٍ قبلاً ما كانوا ليُؤمنوا
“And if We had sent down to them angels, and the dead spoke to them, and if We had gathered all things in front of them they would not have believed…” [Al-An’am: 111]

و لئن أتَيتَ الذين أُوتوا الكتابَ بكلِّ آيةٍ ما تبعوا قِبْلتك

“And if you had come to those that received the scripture with every sign they would not follow your prayer direction…” [Al Baqarah: 145]
The people of the book with them was rebelliousness, pride, envy, self aggrandizement, and the loving of corruption throughout the earth, they placed these things between themselves and Allah’s invitation.

فائن لم يستجيبوا لك فاعْلم أنَّما يتَّبعون أهواءهم و من أضل ممنِ اتَّبع هواه بغير هُدى من الله

“If they do not respond to you, then know that they only follow their desires. And who is more astray than he who follows his desires without guidance from Allah…” [Al-Qasas: 50]
By Allah we have written to plenty who we thought would accept the truth. We established the proofs and evidence, us and others besides us, but we did not see anything except fallacy, obstinacy, haughtiness, self aggrandizement, perseverance in extolling the most astray of Allah’s creation, and perseverance in the belittling of the people of truth along with oppression and transgression against them.” [فتاوى فضيلة الشيخ العلامة ربيع بن هادي عمير المدخلي]

Interacts with people arrogantly, displaying repugnant and snobbish behavior with them due to looking down upon them.
Sheikh Muhammad ibn Saalih Al Uthaymin said: “Arrogance (الكِبْر) is haughtiness and a person believing about himself that he is magnificent. Also (he believes) that he is above the people, and that he possesses some virtue over them.
Self amazement (الإعجاب) is a person looking at his own works and being amazed by them, he regards it as great and abundant.
Self amazement is in action while arrogance pertains to the self both are blameworthy creations. Arrogance has two types; arrogance with respect to the truth, and arrogance with respect to the creation. The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- made this clear in his statement “arrogance is being discontent with the truth and looking down at people.” So being discontent with the truth is to reject and shun it, and to not accept it. Looking down at the people is to have a low opinion of and disrespect for them. Also to not view the people as anything, but views himself above them.” [شرح رياض الصالحين]

Literally requesting or asking to be put in a position of leadership.
Abu Musa said: I enter upon the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- along with two men from my people. One of them said, “O Messenger of Allah, give us governorship.” The second said the exact thing, so the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said: “We do not give authority to whomever asks for it, nor to he who aspires after it.” Collected by Al Bukhari and Muslim.

Belittling the accomplishments of others.

Sheikh-ul-Islaam Ibn Taimiyyah said: “The blameworthy differing of two parties, its cause, at times results from corruption of intent, due to what is within the soul from transgression, envy, desiring superiority throughout the land and similar to that. Hence he loves, as a result of what is within, to censure the speech of others, their actions (and whatsoever is accomplished by their actions), and gaining prominence in order to be distinguished from him. In another manner, he loves the statement of whoever agrees with him pertaining to lineage, thought (ideology), country, friendship, and whatever is similar to that due to its outcome of obtaining distinction and leadership. And how abundant this is within the descendants of Adam, this is (without doubt) oppression.” [اقتضاء الصراط المستقيم]  

Seeking nearness to people of status, virtue, and authority and avoiding those with lesser class and or status.

 In light of this no criticism of this sort should be accepted from anyone, regardless of their status, unless it is backed by factual observations to support the conclusion drawn. No one is free from following the guidelines and protocols found in our dawah, I emphasize ‘no one’ thus when a criticism against another comes (from a student) devoid of any proof it should be dismissed and the critic should be reminded to fear Allah. As Ibn Abbas said: “There is no one except that some of his speech is taken and some are abandoned except the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam.” Collected by At-Tabaraani [المعجم الكبير]. This was also stated by Mujaahid and most notably by Imam Malik.

Furthermore, what is it that would lead a person to criticize another in this manner for merely being involved in dawah? What causes him to have discontent for the caller for merely conducting classes, being consistent therein, and seeing the people accept his dawah? What causes him to view the actions of the caller as insignificant to the point he gives no support to the caller even if it be by speaking good of him based on the apparent of his actions? How is it that one that calls to Tawheed and the Sunnah, and warns against what contradicts it (in his specific locality) be maltreated in this manner?

What is feared for such an individual (the critic) is that he may have fallen into that of which he accuses his brother. Thus I advise my critic and those like him to fear Allah, the only reason why a Muslim puts forth a criticism against another is for Allah’s sake, being in accordance with His command, and seeking His reward. Whatever contradicts that is a source of failure and a means of separation between two brothers. Anas Ibn Malik narrated the statement of Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam-: “No two individuals love each other for Allah’s sake, then (suddenly) there’s a split between them except that it’s due to a sin one committed (against the other).” [الأداب المفرد] 

  My critic’s statement: “Why is he putting himself forward?”

Here my critic sarcastically criticized my conducting classes. The question has negative connotations that illustration the shamelessness of the critic by putting forth this criticism while he knows nothing of the condition of the people to whom I teach. The people in this community are plagued with ignorance, to the extent that the community would give juice as zakat-ul- fitr. There are errors in the etiquette and dress code concerning the prayer with both men and women that, in some cases, can affect the validity of the act, and other errors of this nature. So if this is the case with these issues, one can imagine the errors with respect to the fundamentals of the religion.

The rampant ignorance in this community has been witnessed by our brothers Abdur Rahman Al Afriki, Abu Yusuf Khaleefah, and Abu Muhammad Al Jamaiki, as all three have visited in order to help the situation here. So despite my critic’s preference in having me do nothing, I would ask how I correlate his feelings with the following guidance found in the Quran and Sunnah?

إنّ الذين يُكْتمون ما أنْزلْنا من البيِّناتِ و الهدى من بعد ما بينّاه للناس في الكتاب أُولائك يَلْعنهم الله و يلعنهم اللاعنون

“Indeed those that conceal what We have sent down from clarity and guidance, after We made it clear for the people, they are those whom Allah curse and are cursed by those who curse.” [Al Baqarah: 159]

In addition, we have the statement of Abu Huraira who said: “If it were not for two verses in Allah’s book I would not have narrated from him (the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam) anything ever.” He then quoted verses 174 and 175 of Al Baqarah.

He also narrated the statement of Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam: “There is no man that memorizes knowledge then conceals it except that he will be brought on the Day of Resurrection bridled by reins from the fire.” Collected by Ibn Maajah.

Imam Ash-Shawkani said: His statement -“Indeed those that conceal”– to the end of the verse, therein is notification that whoever conceals such is cursed. The scholars differed as it relates to its intent. Thus it is said that it refers to the Jewish rabbis and the Christian priests who concealed the affair of Muhammad -sallahu alayhi wa sallam. Likewise it is said that it refers to all who conceal the truth and abandon clarifying whatsoever Allah has made binding to be clarified. And that is the more sound position, because the consideration is in the generality of the speech and not the specific reason (for which it was revealed), as is established in the fundamental principles (of tafsir).

So assuming that the descending of the verse was due to what occurred from the Jews and Christians with regards to concealing the truth, that does not negate the including within this verse of everyone that conceals the truth.” [فتح القدير]

Furthermore we have our Messenger’s -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- statement: “Convey from me even if it be one verse, narrate from the descendants of Israel as there is no harm (in doing such), and whoever lies on me intentionally let him be settled in his seat from the fire.” Collected by Al Bukhari.

Sheikh Al Uthaymin said: “Convey to the people what I say and do. Moreover (convey) all of his sunnah. “Convey from me even if it be one verse” from Allah’s book, and the “even if” here is for minimization. It means that no one should say that I can’t convey unless I am a major scholar, no! A person only conveys, even if it’s a verse, with the condition that he has knowledge of it, and that (he knows) it is the speech of the Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam.” [شرح رياض الصالحين]   

In summary, there is no relevant correlation between my critic’s speech and these prophetic directives, in fact the previously mentioned evidence illustrates the fact that my critic’s speech is wallowed in ignorance, stupidity, and narrow mindedness to say the least.

My Advice

I advise my critic (and whomsoever falls into the same foolishness as him) to have taqwa of Allah, and to be conscious of Allah before uttering statements of this nature against anyone. Consultation and direction was sought from sheikh Rabee concerning differing that occurs among the salafis, in order to do away with these types of conflicts, the sheikh started his response by saying: “This emanates from a weakness in taqwa, steadfastness, and being upright. If there was steadfastness and uprightness upon the true command of Allah you would not find these sorts of things. This is nothing more than personal issues..” [من الشريط: النصائح و التوجيهات تعين على الثبات]  

So fear Allah, and seek refuge with Him from being overtaken by the whispers of shaytan, for indeed it is the shaytan that loves discord between brothers. The Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said: “Surely the shaytan has fallen into despair, regarding those devoted to prayer, worshiping him in the Arabian Peninsula, however (he strives for) discord between you.” Collected by Muslim.

Fear oppressing your brothers, Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said: “Fear oppression for indeed oppression is darkness on the day of resurrection.(2) Likewise he said: “Fear the invocation of the oppressed, for indeed there is no veil between it and Allah.(3) He also said “The bankrupt person from my nation will come on the day of resurrection with prayers, fasting, and charity, along with that he shall come with having insulted this person, accusing this person, misappropriating the wealth of this person, spilling the blood of this person, and striking this person. Thus this one and that one will be given from his good deeds. If his good deeds become depleted before the completion of what is upon him, then their (those oppressed by him) sins will be taken and hurled upon him, then he will be flung into the fire.” Collected by Muslim.

I remind my critic about the sanctity of the Muslim, as Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- said: “Prohibited upon the Muslim is the blood, wealth, and honor of another Muslim.(4) He also said during the Hajj: “Indeed your blood and honor are forbidden, like this day of yours, in this month of yours, in this land of yours…” Collected by Al Bukhari and Muslim.

Ahlus Sunnah are the foremost among the Muslims in implementation of these prophetic directives, thus it is hoped that my critic (and whomsoever falls into the same foolishness as him) strongly reflect and ponder on these statements of our Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa sallam- in order to protect themselves from falling into opposition to his guidance in this regard, and with Allah is success.

Written by Abu Abdil Waahid Najeeb Ibn Yusuf Al Anjelesi.


 

1: رد الجواب على من طلب مني عدم طبع الكتاب

2: Sahih Muslim 2578 and 2579

3: Sahih Al Bukhari 1395 and 1458. Sahih Muslim 19

4: Sahih Muslim 2564

  

Leave a Comment

Filed under Contemporary Issues

Father Orders Son To Divorce His Wife: Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Saalih Al Uthaymin

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Ibn Umar said; I was married to a woman that I loved, however Umar hated her, so he said to me “divorce her!” But I refused. Consequently he went to the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- and mentioned this to him. As a result the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- said (to me) “Divorce her!” Collected by Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi.

Abud-Dardaa said that a man came to him and said; indeed I have a woman that my mother commands me to divorce. So Abud-Dardaa said, I heard Allah’s Messenger say: “The parent is the middle door to paradise, so whoever wills may neglect that door or protect it.” Collected by Tirmidhi.

Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Saalih Al Uthaymin stated while commenting on these two narrations; then he (Imaam An-Nawawi) mentions the narration of Abdullah Ibn Umar where he had a woman that he loved, yet his father order him to divorce her, but he refused to do such because he loved her. So Umar mentioned that to the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- and he subsequently commanded Ibn Umar to divorce her.

Also another narration wherein a woman commands her son to divorce his wife, therein the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- makes clear that maintaining family ties or dutifulness to the parents is a means to enter Paradise. This is by signifying that, if he obeys his mother by divorcing his wife, that is a cause for him to enter Paradise.

However it’s not obligatory to obey every father that orders his son to divorce his wife. A man said to Imaam Ahmad; my father told me to divorce my wife, but I love her. He replied; then do not divorce her. The man said in response; did not the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- command Ibn Umar to divorce his wife on account of Umar ordering him (his son) with such? Imaam Ahmad said; is your father Umar? As Umar, as we know with certain knowledge, that he would never order Abdullah to divorce his wife unless it was due to an Islamic legislative motive, and perhaps Ibn Umar is unaware of such motive.

This is because it is impossible for Umar to have commanded his son with divorcing his wife in order to cause a separation between him and her without a legislative reason, this is very unlikely. On account of this, if your father or mother orders you to divorce your spouse and you love her, and do not find a legislative reference for such, then do not divorce her. As this is from the particular needs in which no one can interfere in as it relates to a man and his wife.

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi

Source: شرح رياض الصالحين   

 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Divorce

Are The Signs Of The Hour Deemed To Be Prohibited Things: Sheikh Rabee Ibn Haadi

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Q: Is everything that the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- mentioned to be from the signs of the hour something blameworthy or prohibited? Like the constructing of tall buildings?

A: We are unable to declare it prohibited -may Allah bless you- however the most appropriate and pious thing for the believer is to live a life within the boundaries of sufficiency with regards to his home, clothes, food, and drink. When Allah gives him wealth he should spend it, due to (he quotes a statement of the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa salaam) “the affluent will be the least on the day of resurrection except those who distribute it like this and like that (to their right, left, and behind as the narration illustrates).” Just as the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- mentioned.

The Exalted says:

و الذين يَكْنِزُون الذَّهب و الفِضَّة و لا يُنْفقُون في سبيل الله فبَشِّرْهم بعذاب أليم

“ِAnd those who amass gold and silver and do not spend it in Allah’s path, announce to them a severe torment.” [At-Taubah: 34]

So if one does not pay zakah, does not maintain family ties, nor does he give due rights as it relates to this wealth, then he is a sinner severely sinning. On the contrary if he pays zakah and builds himself a home, it is not correct to say it (his home) is prohibited. However what is more appropriate and pious is to not construct it high (towering), as competing in worldly affairs may eventually lead to arrogance. So what will result from the constructing of lofty buildings out of arrogance, which one will be taken to account over, -may Allah bless you- except that he regarding himself will become insolent with the people and deem himself above them. Hence if the structure is built in order to boast, he consequently is sinning.

To elaborate; a man buys a horse preparing its utilization in the path of Allah, he is rewarded. Another man buys a horse for his service and as a benefit for him and to, and to lend it out to people, this one is covered (on the Day of Resurrection). Whereas another man buys a horse for boastfulness and pride, such an individual has sinned.

And that’s the case with buildings. If he builds a home to shelter him, this is allowed, but if he builds it for boastfulness and pride he has sinned as a result of what he has accomplished for himself of arrogance and not merely the building itself.

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi

Source: فتاوى فضيلة الشيخ العلامة ربيع بن هادي عمير المدخلي  

Leave a Comment

Filed under Halal And Haram

What Is Zakat-ul-Fitr: Sheikh Muhammad Ibn Saalih Al Uthaymin

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

The sheikh was asked about zakat-ul-fitr, so he responded by saying:

Zakat-ul-Fitr is 3 liters of food (1) distributed at the end of Ramadan. The reason for doing so is to display thankfulness for Allah’s favor upon the servant due to the fast breaking of Ramadan and its completion, as a result it was named Zakat-ul-Fitr or sadaqat-ul-fitr. When the sun sets (ushering in) the night of Eid (2) it (Zakat-ul-Fitr) becomes obligatory. If a man has a child after the setting of the sun on the night of Eid, it is not binding upon him zakat-ul-fitr on his behalf (3), it is only recommended. And if a man dies before the setting of the sun on the night of Eid it is not obligatory upon him its distribution, this is because he died before the presence of the reason for its obligation.   

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi

Source: فتاوى في أحكام الزكاة


1: Zakat-ul-Fitr was legislated as foodstuff, not money nor juice.

Abdullah Ibn Umar said; Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- made binding zakat-ul-fitr, as a sa’a (3 liters) of dates, or 3 liters of barely upon the servant and freed, the male and female, the young and old from the Muslims. He ordered that it be distributed before the people exit for the (eid) prayer. Collected by Al Bukhari and Muslim.   

Abu Saeed Al Khudri said; during the life of Allah’s Messenger we distributed on the day the fast was broken 3 liters of food. Collect by Al Bukhari.

One of the strangest things that I’ve seen since being in the south is the Muslims year after year stating that apple and grape juice are Zakat-ul-Fitr items. This is incorrect as Zakat-ul-Fitr items are foodstuff and not drink. 

2: The night comes before the day and not vice versa as is commonly practiced here in the west. So on the 29th day of Ramadan the moon will be sought in order to ascertain if we’re going into the 1st night of shawwal (the night of Eid) or completing 30 days of Ramadan.

3: A man gives Zakat-ul-Fitr for himself and his family members under his care to whom which he spends upon. Abdullah Ibn Umar said; Allah’s Messenger -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- ordered the distributing of sadaqat-ul-fitr from the young and old, the freed and the servant, from those under your care (who you’re obliged to spend upon and take care of). Collected by Al Baihaqi and Imaam Ad-Daaruqutni.

for further clarity on the amount of zakat-ul- fitr please visit the following:

Zakaat al-Fitr Measurements: One Saa’ = Three Litres, One Mudd = .75L

Leave a Comment

Filed under Zakatul Fitr

Displeased With Allah’s Decree: Sheikh Rabee Ibn Haadi

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Q: What are the signs that allude to lack of being pleased with the decree?

A: A person knows this about himself. He who is displeased with Allah’s decree is aware of this being within himself. Therefore upon him is to repent to Allah and to struggle with himself until he is pleased with Allah’s decree, or at the very least until he is patient with it. This is because it has two levels.

  • The level pertaining to patience;  and this is an obligatory matter upon every Muslim. If there befalls him something decreed by Allah, a calamity in which Allah preordained, then upon him is patience until he eventually is able surpass this level and succeed to the higher level than this it being (the following).
  • Pleasure pertaining to the decree; and it is a momentous level, so excellent it is, but if not at the very least is for him to be patient.

It is not permissible to be displeased with Allah’s decree, as Allah tests His servants. Thus whoever is pleased, for him is propitiation. Whoever is displeased, for him is displeasure. Thus be cautious from gaining Allah’s displeasure, he should understand clearly that apprehension, dismay, and displeasure for the decree will not benefit him ever! The only thing that will benefit him with Allah is faith in the decree, and patience with regards to what is preordained.

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi

Source:  فتاوى فضيلة الشيخ العلامة ربيع بن هادي المدخلي 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Aqeedah

Allah’s Ascension And His Descending During The Night: Sheikh Rabee Ibn Haadi

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Q: What is well known is that Allah is not incorporated within the creation, so how do we respond to one who says and uses as proof (to substantiate the opposite) Allah’s descent to the lowest heavens?

A: This is the one that says Allah is everywhere. He, fundamentally, does not believe in Allah being elevated (not sitting, nor reclining) over His Throne, due to him stating that Allah is in every place. So in order for him to support his falsehood he interprets the narrations pertaining to descent. The descent is a matter wherein the salaf differed. Did Allah descend (thus leave being above) the Throne? The stronger position with Ahlus Sunnah is that he remains over His Throne, and His descending, the manner of such (how He does it) is incomprehensible. As there is nothing like Allah (to be able to compare His mode or manner of performing an action with), nothing like Himself, His qualities, nor His actions.

So just as we believe in Allah being above His Throne without stating a mode or manner as to how, we also believe in His descent to the lowest heavens without stating a mode or manner as to how. As Allah does what He wills. Surely He descends, and He will come on the Day of Resurrection. Thus He Himself is not like that of His creation, so His descending is not like the descent of His creation. His knowledge is not like that of His creation, His ability is not like that of His creation, He being elevated (above everything including His Throne, as He is not on it but above it) is not like the elevation of His creation, His ascending is not like their ascending, and His descent is not like theirs.

Therefore Ahlus Sunnah say He descends but do not say how. However does it necessitate, by saying He descends, that He moved from being above His Throne to the lowest heavens? Some hold this opinion, however it is less probable. The correct opinion is Allah is over His Throne and He descends as He wants and Wills, as He is able to do anything, and abandoning delving deeply into these affairs is from safety.

Hence the principle with us is that we believe in that which is affirmed from Allah, and the narrations pertaining to descent are (classed as) mutawaatir. Indeed Ibn Taimiyyah explained these matters and rebutted such doubts, and he as it relates to the subject reported the way of the salaf. Thus the subject of descent is like the remainder of the issues pertaining to Allah’s qualities. We believe in the qualities without stating a mode or manner, without striking a resemblance (to them), nor denying them.

Translated by Najeeb Al Anjelesi

Source: فتاوى فضيلة الشيخ العلامة ربيع بن هادي المدخلي 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Aqeedah

Injustice Concerning Division Between Wives: Sheikh Saalih Alish Sheikh

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Division is of two types:

  1. Financial.
  2. Physical.

Physically is to give her a night similar to what is given to her sister wife. To each is due equity (in that regard) and injustice is forbidden. Therefore physical division is obligatory, as the Exalted says:

و لا يَجْرِمنَّكم شنآن قومٍ على ألاَّ تَعْدِلُوا اعْدلُوا هو أقرَبُ للتقوى

…and do not allow enmity towards others cause you to be unjust. Be just! that is closer to piety…”  [Al Maa’idah: 8]

Likewise the narration of Anas where he said: “From the Sunnah is that whenever a man marries a virgin (while being married; meaning he takes a second wife) he spends seven days with her, then he divides (the days between both wives). If he marries a woman who had previously been married, he spends three days with her, then divides.” Collected by Al Bukhari.

Therefore, whoever is inequitable has sinned, due to what Ahmad and the compilers of the sunan reported with an authentic chain of transmission, wherein the Prophet -sallahu alayhi wa salaam- said, “whoever has two wives and he leans towards one over the other, he will come on the Day Of Resurrection and one half of him will be leaning.” Equity in wealth is also obligatory and injustice therein is not permissible.

Translated by Najeeb Ibn Yusuf Al Anjelesi

Source: المنظار في بيان كثير من الأخطاء الشائة 

Leave a Comment

Filed under Marriage