Yet another blow to the myth of vestigial organs

Darwinism considers all life on Earth as a productof chance mutations
andnatural selection and, as ana prioricommitment, excludes
intelligent design. In order to argueagainst design, the Darwinist
mind seeks forflaws in the biological systems. From Darwin to Dawkins,
over and over, this dogmatic stance has led the evolutionist to insist
on the existence ofimaginary flaws and"useless" vestigial organsin
living systems. However, over and over, these bold claims by
evolutionists turned out to be manifestations of ignorance.The
allegedly vestigial organs were discovered to be performing very
important functions and the whole "vestigial organ" argument turnedout
to be a fallacy.
The history of science documents a steady reduction in the numberof
the so-called vestigial organs. The allegedly non-functional organs,
one by one, turned out to be organs whose functions had not yet been
discovered. A list ofvestigial organs that wasmade by the German
Anatomist R. Wiedersheim in 1895 included approximately 100
structures, includingthe appendix and the coccyx.As science
progressed, it was discovered that all of theorgans in
Wiedersheim'slist in fact had very important functions. Forinstance,
it was discovered that theappendix, which was supposed to be
a"vestigial organ," was in fact a part of the lymphatic system. A
medical publication notes in 1997 that "otherbodily organs and tissues
- the thymus, liver, spleen, appendix, bone marrow, and small
collections of lymphatic tissue such as the tonsils in the throat and
Peyer'spatch in the small intestine - are also part of the lymphatic
system. They too help the body fight infection." ( 1)
It was also discovered that the tonsils, which were also included in
Wiedersheim's list of vestigial organs, had a significant role in
protecting the throat against infections, particularly until
adolescence. It was found that the coccyx at the lower end of the
vertebral column supports the bones around the pelvis and is the
convergence point of some small muscles and for this reason, it would
not be possible tosit comfortably without a coccyx.
In the years that followed,it was realized that the thymus triggered
the immune system in the human body by activating the T cells, that
the pineal gland was in charge of the secretion of some important
hormones, that the thyroid gland was effective in providing steady
growthin babies and children, and that the pituitary gland controlled
the correct functioning of many hormone glands. All of these were once
considered to be"vestigial organs." Finally, the semi-lunar fold in
the eye, which was referred to as a vestigial organ by Darwin, has
been found in fact to be in charge ofcleansing and lubricating the
eye.
The steady reduction in the list of vestigial organs results from the
fact that this is an argument from ignorance. Some wiser evolutionists
also came to realize this fact. S.R. Scadding, an evolutionist
himself, once wrote in his article"Can vestigial organs constitute
evidence for evolution?" published in the journalEvolutionary Theory:
Since it is not possible tounambiguously identify useless structures,
and since the structure of the argument used is not scientifically
valid,I conclude that "vestigial organs" provide no special evidence
for the theory of evolution. ( 2)
The Leg of the Horse
The latest blow to the myth of vestigial organs comes from a recent
study of the leg of the horse. An article in the 20-27 December 2001
issue of the Nature magazine, entitled"Biomechanics: Damper For Bad
Vibrations", it is noted that "Some musclefibers in the legs of horses
seem to be evolutionary leftovers with no function. But in fact they
may act to absorb damaging vibrations generated in the leg as the
horse runs." The article reads:
Horses and camels have muscles in their legs with tendons more than
600 millimeters long connected to muscle fibers less than 6
millimeters long. Such short muscles can change length only by a few
millimeters as the animal moves, and seemunlikely to be of much use to
large mammals. The tendons function as passive springs, and it has
been assumed that the short muscle fibers are redundant, the remnants
of longer fibers that have lost their function over the course of
evolution. But Wilson and colleagues argue… that these fibers might
protect bones andtendons from potentiallydamaging vibrations….
Their experiments show that short muscle fibers can damp the damaging
vibrations following the impact of a foot on the ground. When the foot
of a running animal hits the ground, the impact sets the leg
vibrating; the frequency of the vibrations is relatively high - for
example, 30-40 Hz in horses - so many cycles of vibration would occur
while the foot was on the ground if there were no damping.
The vibrations might cause damage, because bone and tendon are
susceptible to fatigue failure. Fatigue in bones and tendons is the
accumulation of damageresulting from repeated application of stresses.
Bone fatigue is responsible for the stressfractures suffered by both
human athletes and racehorses, and tendon fatigue may explain at least
some cases of tendonitis. Wilsonet al. suggest thatthe very short
muscle fibers protect both bones and tendons from fatigue damage by
damping out vibrations… ( 3)
In short, a closer look at the anatomy of the horse revealed that, the
structures that had been considered as nonfunctional by evolutionists
have very important functions. In other words, scientific progress
demonstrated that what was considered to be evidence for evolution
isin fact evidence for design.
Evolutionists should takea hint from this fact, if they are willing to
do so.These comments made inNatureseem reasonable:
Wilson et al. have found an important role for a muscle that seemed to
be the relic of a structure that had lost its function in the courseof
evolution. Their work makes us wonder whether other vestiges (such as
the human appendix) are as useless as they seem. ( 4)
This is not surprising.The more we learn about nature, the more we see
the evidence for God's creation. As Michael Behe notes, "theconclusion
of design comes not from that we do not know, but from what we have
learned over the past 50 years." ( 5) And Darwinism turns out to be an
argument from ignorance, or, in other words, an"atheism of the gaps."

Creation in the Quran

Religion has taught the truth of creation, which all people can
grasp through reason and personal observation, since the creation
of first human being. All divine religions have taught that God
created the universe by commanding "Be!" and that its flawless
functioning is proof of His great power of creation. Many verses in
the Qur'an also reveal this truth. For example, God reveals how He
miraculously created the universe from nothing: " The Originator of
the heavens and Earth. When He decides on something, He just says
to it, 'Be!' and it is " (Surat al-Baqara, 117).
We are also told in the Qur'an:
He created the heavens and Earth with truth. The day He says "Be!" it
is. His speech is Truth. The Kingdom will be His on the Day the
Trumpet is blown, the Knower of the Unseen and the Visible. He is
the All-Wise, the All-Aware. (Surat al-An'am, 73)
We all know that present day science demonstrates the invalidity of
the materialist-evolutionist claim and confirms the fact of
creation. Contrary to the claims of the theory of evolution, all the
proofs of creation that surround us show that chance had no role in
the universe's coming into existence. Every detail that emerges as
we observe the sky, Earth, and all living things is intended as
evidence of God's great power and wisdom.
God Created the Universe from Nothing
God creates everything, in the form and at the time that He chooses,
without the use of any model and out of nothing. Since He is
exalted above any defect and is rich beyond any need. He has no need
of any cause, vehicle, or stages for His creation. Nobody should be
deceived by the fact that everything is linked to given causes and
natural laws. God is beyond all these causes and laws, since He
created them.
God, the Lord of the Earth and the Heavens, can also do away with
these causes if He so wills. For instance, He can create people who
do not need oxygen to survive, and therefore do not need any lungs.
Given this, why would He "need" to perfect the lung by making it
evolve over time or through any other mechanism? It is therefore
completely wrong for people to think of God's greatness and might
as being limited to their own feelings and reason. We can have
knowledge only to the extent that He permits.
God can use particular stages in His creation if He so wills. For
example, He produces a plant from a seed or a human being from the
coming together of a sperm and an egg cell. Yet these stages have
nothing to do with evolution and have no room for chance or
coincidence. Every stage in the emergence of a plant, or the turning
of a single cell into a human being "in the best of forms," happens
thanks to the perfect systems created by God's infinite might.
God willed and created the Earth and the Heavens, all that lies
between, and all living and non-living things. This is very easy for
Him, as indicated in the Qur'an:
He created the heavens and Earth with truth. The day He says "Be!" it
is. His speech is Truth... (Surat al-An'am, 73)
Our Word to a thing when We will it is just to say to it "Be!" and
it is. (Surat an-Nahl, 40)
He gives life and causes to die. When He decides on something, He
just says to it, "Be!" and it is. (Surah Ghafir, 68)
Creation is very easy for God. As revealed in these verses, God says
to a thing "Be!," thereby willing it to be so. God reveals in many
verses that He created the universe and living things in perfect
form. It is a grave mistake for believers to adhere to forced
explanations in the face of this evident truth and to make such
specious claims that God employed evolution to create and used
mutation, natural selection, and transitional stages between apes
and humans. It is quite wrong to put forward such accounts, for
which there is no evidence in either the Qur'an or science, in the
hope of being accepted by evolutionists.
God makes all the laws in the universe and gives them the form He
chooses, brings about what He wills and when He wills it, permeates
everything in the Earth and the Heavens, and rules everything with
His power. Yet some people do not fully comprehend His might and thus
judge Him based upon their own limited powers.
God reveals their existence in the Qur'an:
They do not measure God with His true measure when they say: "God
would not send down anything to a mere human being."... (Surat
al-An'am, 91)
They do not measure God with His true measure. God is All-Strong,
Almighty. (Surat al-Hajj, 74)
They do not measure God with His true measure. The whole Earth will
be a mere handful for Him on the Day of Resurrection the heavens
folded up in His right hand. Glory be to Him! He is exalted above
the partners they ascribe! (Surataz-Zumar, 67)
Contrary to what those who believe in evolutionary creation
suggest, God did not first create apes and then cause them to evolve
into humans through flawed transitional forms with missing organs.
Rather, as the Qur'an reveals, God created man in the most perfect
manner:
We created man in the finest mold. (Surat at-Tin, 4)
He created the heavens and Earth with truth and formed you, giving
you the best of forms. And He is your final destination. (Surat
at-Taghabun, 3)
These verses are some of the proofs that God created man in perfect
form, in other words, the form that he has now.
Of course, man also has several incapacities and weaknesses, all of
which remind him of his poverty before our Lord. Deformities and
disabilities are the results of a purposeful creation, for they
serve as reminders for those who see them and as a test for those
who carry them. They are not imperfections caused by evolutionary
process as falsely claimed by the evolutionists.
In the Qur'an, God describes how easy creation is for Him:
Does He Who created the heavens and Earth not have the power to
create the same again? Yes indeed! He is the Creator, the
All-Knowing. (Surah Ya Sin, 81)
Your creation and resurrection is only like that of a single self.
God is All-Hearing, All-Seeing. (Surah Luqman, 28)

Muslims in India

Overall, the Muslims of India make up 13.4 percent of the country's
population of over one billion. Islam isIndia's largest minority
religion.
India's Muslim communities tend to be more urban than rural. Inmany
towns and cities in northernIndia, Muslims are one-third or more of
the population. The largest concentrations of Muslims live in the
states of Bihar,West Bengal, and Uttar Pradesh. According to the
country's 2001 census there is 138.188.240 Muslims inIndia.
India's Muslims have played a historic role in shaping Indian society,
particularly in the medieval period in the areas of architecture,
calligraphy, miniature paintings, handicrafts, handloom, poetry,
literature in mystic humanism, culinary arts and sartorial fashions.
Not only does the Taj Mahal, the most famous symbol of India,
commemorate the love for a Muslim queen, but the very name India is an
Anglicized version of the Arabic name Hind which Muslim scholars
started using for the area beyond Sindh )roughly the east of Pakistan
today(.
InIndiathe biggest Indian minority is a victim of deprivation. Whether
it is legislative assemblies educational institutions, government
jobs, the problem of security in case of riots, representation in
political organizations, posts in policy planning and decision-making
groups or other pressure groups there is acute shortage of Muslim
representation everywhere, resulting in constant social tension and
problems in governance.
Some challenges the Indian Muslims face:
1. Communal riots againstMuslims are among the biggest tragedies of
this independent, secular democracy. Wherever Muslims have acquired a
relatively better economic position, these riots send them back to the
starting point. There have been 249 riots per year according to Indian
government statistics. Senior Indian journalist, Khuswant Singh notes
that in all communal violence that has taken place in India since
Independence in the 1940s, over 75 per cent ofthe causalities - in
terms of lives and property destroyed - were Muslim.
2. The second important problem is the state of present textbooks in
the Indian education system which have become very aggressive in
teaching Hinduism. This hits Muslims' faith, culture, civilization,
language and way of life. The educational syllabi have prescribed
course books in all states, which are replete with matters pertaining
to the faiths of the majority community, mythologicaland other stories
of Hindu gods and goddesses against the principles prescribed in the
Constitution. Obviously all these things are negations of Islamic
beliefs and teachings, especially about the Oneness of God Almighty.
Hence there is no doubt that these things are causing great concern to
the Muslims.
The rewriting of history is done in a way that continues to fuel the
non-secular, chauvinistic Hindu perspectives, causing the new
generation of Indians to shape their behavior towards minorities in a
very hostile way.
3. The economic problem:More than fifty percent Muslims are leading a
lifebelow the poverty line ascompared to thirty-five percent of Hindus
who live below the poverty line. Because of a generalenvironment of
hostility against Muslims, decent employment in the private sector is
becoming increasingly difficult for Muslims, while in the public
sectorthere is no encouragement for Muslims either. The future of
Muslim professionals and its working class, traders etchas been very
greatly affected.
Today very few Muslims are found in governmentjobs. A recent survey
shows that there are onlyeight Muslim police chiefsinIndia's 591
districts. That is .01% as compared to 12% of the Muslim population
inIndia. The situation of other departments is also worsening day by
day.
4. Education: The active discrimination Muslims face in the private
and public sector of the job market, has forced them to pay less
attention to school education which, inIndia, is connected with the
job market. In the educational field therefore, Muslims are very
backwards.
5. Urdu language. Another major problem of Muslims of India is thatof
the Urdu language. The Urdu language was born as a result of the
interaction and cohesion of different languages, nations, cultures and
civilizations and is a mixture of some old languages like Sanskrit,
Arabic, Persian, Turkish etc. Urdu is almost a deadlanguage now as far
as the medium of instruction is concerned. It is not tolerated even in
the primary and secondary stages of education.
The Muslims of India are very vulnerable in a country which describes
itself as the world's"largest secular democracy". Muslims today remain
poorer, lesseducated and less empowered inIndia.

A dialogue with Satan

Deep at night, I had this dialogue with Satan. Shortly, I heard the
Fajr)dawn( prayer call. I wanted to go to the mosque.
He said: "The night is stilllong, so take a nap."
I said: "I'm afraid I'll missmy obligatory prayer!"
He said: "There is much time to go "
I said: "I'm afraid I'll misspraying in congregation."
He said: "Don't be too harsh on yourself in worship."
Then, I didn't wake up until the sun had already risen.
He whispered to me again saying: "Don't feel sorry for what you have
missed. The day is still fullof many other chances."
As soon as I started mentioning Allaah, he brought to my mind all
kinds of thoughts.
I said: "You are diverting me from making Du'aa)supplication(."
He said: "Just delay it until the night." Shortly, Iintended to repent.
He said: "Enjoy your young age before it comes to an end"!
I said: "I'm too afraid of death."
He said: "But your life willnot end now."
I started to memorize Quran
He said: "Entertain yourself with songs."
I said: "But it's an unlawful thing to do."
He said: "Scholars differed on that matter
I said: "The evidences from the Prophet's sayings ])([ are with me"
He said: "But you know their sources are weak!"
A beautiful lady passed by, so I lowered my gaze.
He said: "What's wrong? It's just a gaze"!
I said: "A gaze puts me in a dangerous place."
He said: "It's lawful to contemplate in grace."
I went to the Ka'bah)Sacred Mosque in Makkah(. There he was with me on the way.
He said: "What's the reason behind this trip?"
I said: "To make 'Umrah)minor Hajj(."
He said: "You have risked dangers )on your travel( to do this 'Umrah.
Don't you know that good deeds have plenty of other doors?!!"
I said: "But my life needs a change for the better"
He said: "Don't you know that you can't enterParadisethrough your deeds?
I went to give advice to people.
He said: "Don't put yourself in an embarrassing situation.
I said: "But, my only aim is to benefit others."
He said: "That's a trap of self-admiration, and it is indeed the head
of corruption."
I said: "Tell me your opinion about some people."
He said: "I can answer you of the private, as well as the general."
I said: "Ahmad Ibn Hanbal?"
He said: "His calling to follow Quran and Sunnah)Prophet's Tradition(
was killing me."
I said: "Ibn Taymiyyah?"
He said: "His words hit myhead like a daily beating."
I said: "Al-Bukhaari?"
He said: "I can even burn my house with his book."
I said: "Al-Hajjaaj )a tyrant ruler(?"
He said: "I wish 1000 of men are like him. His wayis cure and
happiness to my colleagues of devils."
I said: "Pharaoh?"
He said: "Oh, to him victory and support we owe."
I said: "Saladin, the Hero of the battle of "Hitteen"?"
He said: "Let us not talk of him…he brought humiliation to my sons,
and buried our heads in mud."
I said: "Mohammad Ibn Abdul Wahhaab?"
He said: "His messages were like the heavenly fiery stars that were
burning my heart"
I said: "Abu Jahl?"
He said: "The best kinshipand brothers we are."
I said: "Abu Lahab?"
He said: "We are togetherin every step forever."
I said: "Lenin?"
He said: "Bounded by me,with Stalin on fire."
I said: "Nude Magazines?"
He said: "Are my holy books."
I said: "Satellites?"
He said: "Make people diabolical."
I said: "Coffee Shops and internet cafes?"
He said: "Welcome everyone who is divertedfrom Allaah and the right way."
I said: "What is your Athkaar )supplication(?"
He said: "Songs."
I said: "What is your job?"
He said: " False Hopes."
I said: "What do you think about the markets?"
He said: "Clubs where my friends meet."
I said: "How do you misguide people?"
He said: "By desires, doubts, distracting amusements, hopes and songs."
I said: "How do you misguide women?"
He said: "I tempt them towards showing off their beauty, and favoring
the prohibited over the lawful.
I said: "How do you misguide the scholars?"
He said: "By paving the way for them to admiration and showing off,
and by planting envy and pride in their hearts."
I said: "How do you misguide people as general?"
He said: "Through back-biting, tale-fabrication, wasting their times
in things of no value and in useless cheap conversations."
I said: "How do you misguide merchants?"
He said: "By tempting them to deal with bribery, making them hate
paying charity and by making spendthriftness beloved."
I said: "How do you misguide young people?"
He said: "By making themfall in the trap of love, reckless in
following Allaah's orders and committing the prohibited."
I said: "What do you think of Abu Nawwas )a poet who used to celebrate
alcohol and wantonness(?"
He said: "Such a respectful character. His poems really inspired me."
I said: "And "modernity"?"
He said: "The inheritors of our Satanic knowledge."
I said: "Secularity?"
He said: "That's my belief,and its believers are the cheating
magicians and creators of false hopes. We all bear same names."
I said: "What do you think of those people who call to the Word of Allaah?"
He said: "They are torturing me! They inflict a lot of pain and misery
on me. They made me an old man with gray hair! They destroy all what I
build! They make noise when I speak, read whenI sing, and seek refuge
from me when I show up."
I said: "What do you say about newspapers?"
He said: "Means for wasting people's time, especially that of the
elite, and means for stealing money."
I said: "What did you do with the crow?"
He said: "I made him kill his brother and bury him under earth till he
disappeared."
I said: "What did you do with Qaaroon )Korah(?"
He said: "I whispered to him: You son of the old man. Save the
treasuries to win. You are one of the greatest men."
I said: "What did you say to Pharaoh?"
He said: "I told him: You are the greatest one in the palace. To win
say: "Isn't it me who possess the power overEgypt?""
I said: "What did you say to the one who drinks wine?"
He said: "I told him you should drink this grape's juice. It is the
answer to all your problems. It wipes out your troubles. And don't
worry, you know the way to repentance and its doors are always open
for you."
I said: "What kills you?"
He said: "Reading the verses of "Al-Kursy" )the Footstool( ]Quran
2:255[. It prevents me from breathing and makes me feel I'm in an
eternal prison, in a night full of misery."
I said: "Who are the most beloved people to you?"
He said: "Singers, poets that aim at misguiding people, sin-doers, and
every cunning person who goes astray."
I said: "Who is the most hateful person to you?"
He said: "Mosque-goers, everyone who kneels andprostrates to Allaah,
every pious and sincere worshipper, and every fighter in the cause of
Allaah."
I said: "I hereby seek refuge in Allaah from you."
The moment I said so, he disappeared as though melting into the sand -
and this is the liar's end.

Associating partners withAllaah )Shirk( -I

First: Major Shik
One of the most important things Muslimsmust know and pay attention to
is the issue of Shirk )Associating partners with Allaah in worship(,
its seriousness and its different types, sothat our Tawheed )belief in
the Oneness of Allaah( and our Islam may be complete, and our faith
may be sound.
The word Shirk in Arabic means taking a partner, i.e., regarding
someone as the partner of another. It is used in Arabic when one
wishes to express that he regards two people as equal in status; or
that two people are involved in it.
In terms of Sharee'ha or Islamic terminology, Shirk means ascribing a
partner or rival to Allaah in Lordship)Ruboobiyyah(,
worship)Uloohiyyah( or in His Names and Attributes.
A rival is a peer or counterpart. Hence Allaahforbids setting up
rivals with Him and He condemns those who take them )rivals( as
godsinstead of or besides Allaah in many verses of the Quran. Allaah
Says)what means(:"Then do not set up rivals to Allaah )in worship(
while you know )that He Alone has the right to be worshipped(."]Quran
2:222[
And )what means(:"And they set up rivals to Allaah, to mislead
)people( from His path! Say )O Muhammad, to the polytheists(: 'Enjoy
)your brief life(! But certainly, your destination is the
Fire!'"]Quran14:30[
Prophet Muhammad sallallaahu alahyi wa sallam said: "Whoever dies
claiming that Allaah has a rival, will enter Hell." ]Al-Bukhaari[
The types of Shirk:
The texts of the Quran and Sunnah )narrations of the Prophets
sallallaahu alahyi wa sallam( indicate that Shirk sometimes puts a
person beyond the pale of Islam and sometimes does not. Hence, the
scholars divided Shirk into two types: major Shirk and minor Shirk.
Following is a brief description of each type:
1 – Major Shirk
This means ascribing to someone other than Allaah something that
belongs only to Allaah, such as Lordship)Ruboobiyyah(,
Worship)Uloohiyyah( and the Divine Names or Attributes )Al-Asmaa'
Was-Sifaat(.
This kind of Shirk may sometimes be outwardly, such as the Shirk of
thosewho worship idols and graves, or the dead or even living people.
Other times, it may be hidden, such as those who put their trust in
other than Allaah, or the Shirk of thehypocrites. For even though
their )hypocrites'( Shirk puts them beyond the pale of Islam and means
that they will abide forever in Hell, it isa hidden Shirk, because
they make an outward display of Islam and conceal their disbelief and
Shirk, so they are inwardly Polytheists but not outwardly.
Shirk in the form of beliefs, such as:
- The belief that there is someone else who creates, gives life and
death, reigns or controls the affairs of the universe along with
Allaah.
- The belief that there is someone else who must be obeyed absolutely
besides Allaah.
- Associating others with Allaah in love and veneration, by loving a
created being as loving Allaah. This is the kind of Shirk that Allaah
does notforgive, and it is the Shirk about which Allaah Says )what
means(:
"And of mankind are some who take )for worship( others besides Allaah
as rivals. They love them asthey love Allaah."]Quran 2:165[
- The belief that there arethose who know the Unseen that only Allaah
Knows. This is very common among some of the deviant sects.
- The belief that there is someone who bestows mercy in a manner that
isbefitting only for Allaah, so he shows mercy as Allaah does and
forgives sins and overlooks the bad deeds of his 'worshippers'.
Shirk in the form of words:
Such as those who supplicate to someone other than Allaah, or seekhis
help or seek refuge with him with regard to matters over which no one
has control except Allaah, whether the person called upon is a
Prophet, a Wali)righteous person(, an angel or a jinn, or some other
created being. This is a kind of major Shirk which puts one beyond the
pale of Islam.
Also, those who make funof religion or who liken Allaah to His
creation, or say that there is another creator, provider or controller
besides Allaah are included in this type of Shirk. All of these fall
under major Shirk and are grave sins that are not forgiven.
Shirk in the form of actions:
Such as one who sacrifices, prays or prostrates to something other
than Allaah, or whopromulgates laws to replace the rulings of Allaah
and makes such laws the reference whichpeople are obliged to refer to
for judgement; or one who supports the disbelievers and helps them
against the believers, and other acts that go against the basic
meaning of faith and put the one who does them beyond the pale of
Islam.

Dought and clear, - Marrying a Christian woman without a wali (guardian) or witnesses

I wanted to take a second wife, and because it is difficult to
convince my first wife and my community about this wish, and to avoid
breaking up my marriage and causing trouble to my family from my first
wife, I could find no solution more suitable then marrying a Christian
woman who I had got to know in a foreign country. My marriage to her
was done as follows:I informed her of my wish to marry her, and she
agreed to be my wife. But she did not have any guardian, because her
father is Christian and would never accept her marrying a Muslim, and
he does not care about her anyway. So she gaveherself to me in
marriage without a wali(guardian), and I followed the view that it is
permissible for a previously married woman to give herself in
marriage. Because wemet in a foreign country, where I do not know
anyone who could witness the marriage, I followed theview that the
testimony of two witnesses to the marriage can be replaced by an
announcement, becausethe purpose served is the same. So I contactedtwo
sincere friends by phone and informed them of this marriage, so that
announcement of the marriage could be done, and I informedothers after
that. I also gave her a mahr (dowry) and informed her that this mahr
is her right as a wife. The mahr was in the form ofa gold ring. I told
her that this marriage was witnessed by Allah and that she was like a
wife to me, and she had to be sincere to me as a wife and not commit
any sin. She agreed to marriage on the basis ofthese conditions, and
we got married and lived as husband and wife. Nevertheless I fear
Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, and I am afraid that
everything I have done may be invalid and subject to the ruling on
zina (adultery or fornication). Recently I have been faced with some
problems in my work and with my first wife, and I am afraid that Allah
is punishing me. Yet I do not think there is anything wrongwith my
second marriage; she is Christian and has sacrificed a great deal. She
has given up many of the rights that she has over me, and she
understands my situation. She agreed to be my wife and she obeys me in
what I haveasked of her. I hope thatthere is nothing wrong with this
second marriage of mine, even though I know that it goes against the
conditions of marriage on which there is scholarly consensus, but I
followed the opinions of respectable scholars. What is your opinion?
Praise be to Allah.
Firstly:
It is not permissible for aMuslim to follow whatever he wants of
opinions, even if they were stated by some of the scholars, because by
doing that he is following his whims anddesires and is not following
the laws of Allah.
Rather what he must do – if he is able to – is to follow the most
correct opinion which is supported by shar'i evidence. If he is not
able to weigh up which of the opinions is most correct, then he should
ask someone whose knowledge and religiouscommitment he trusts, and
follow the advice hegives him.
Secondly:
For marriage to be valid,it is stipulated that the wali (guardian) of
the woman be present, and it is not permissible for the woman to do
the marriage contract for herself, because the Prophet (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him) said: "There is no (valid) marriage except
with a wali." Narrated by Abu Dawood, 2085; classed as saheeh by
al-Albaani inIrwa' al-Ghaleel, 1839. And he (blessings and peace of
Allah be upon him) also said: "Any woman who gets married without the
permission of her wali, her marriage is invalid, her marriage is
invalid, her marriage is invalid." Narrated by Ahmad, 24417; Abu
Dawood, 2083; at-Tirmidhi, 1102; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani
inSaheeh Abi Dawood.
In that regard it makes no difference whether the woman is a virgin or
previously married.
Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
One of the conditions of the marriage contract being valid is that it
should be done by the wali (guardian), whether the woman is a virgin
or previously married, because the Prophet (blessings and peace of
Allah be upon him) said: "There is no (valid) marriage except with a
wali." End quote.
Majmoo' Fataawa Ibn Baaz, 21/39
If her father did not agree to this marriage because he did not
wanther to marry a Muslim, then guardianship passes to the next
closestof her guardians, such asher brother, then her paternal uncle.
If all of them refuse, the head ofthe Islamic Centre in her city can
give her in marriage; if that is not applicable, then the imam of the
Jaami' mosque may do that.
The majority of scholars are of the view that the marriage contract is
not valid except in the presence of two witnesses to the marriage
contract, because the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him) said: "There is no (valid) marriage except in the presence of the
wali andtwo witnesses of good character." Narrated by al-Bayhaqi,
14086; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani inSaheeh al-Jaami', 13515.
Some of the scholars stipulated that the marriage must be announced
publicly in order for it to be valid. According to these scholars, the
announcement must come before consummation of the marriage. Telling
two men about it does not constitute a public announcement.
Based on that, the marriage contract that you did is not valid, and
you should not be intimate with her until after a new marriage
contract which is done correctly, in accordance with the conditions
stipulated in sharee'ah.
The scholars of the Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas was asked
about a Muslim who marries a Christian woman without the permission of
her guardian. They replied:
The marriage contract is not valid unless it is done in the presence
of the wali and two witnesses of good character. It is not permissible
for the woman to do the marriage contract for herself, because the
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: "There is no
(valid) marriage except in the presence of the wali and two witnesses
of good character." And he (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)
said: "A woman cannot give another woman in marriage, and a woman
cannot give herself in marriage." Based on that, the marriage contract
mentioned in the question is not valid,and it must be done again with
the wali of the woman.
A kitaabi (i.e., Jewish or Christian) woman may be given in marriage
by her father. If he is not present or he is present but refuses, the
closest of her male relatives on her father's side may give her in
marriage. If they are not present, or they are present but refuse, the
Muslim qaadi (judge) may give her in marriage; if there is no Muslim
qaadi, then the head of the local Islamic centre may give her in
marriage, because the shar'i evidence from the Qur'an and Sunnah
indicates that. End quote.
Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa'imah, 18/180-181
Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibraaheem (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked
about a man who married an Australian Christian girl in London, and
the wife gave herself in marriage without the presence of a wali.
There was no mention of the value of the mahr (dowry) in the marriage
contract, and itwas not attended by anywitnesses apart from a Muslim
man and a Christian woman who was the mother of the bride. In the
wedding party there were some Christian girls and friends of the
bride, along with the Christian registrar. Four years later, the wife
became Muslim and she has two children from him. She isasking about
the validityof her marriage contract; if it is not valid,then how can
it be madevalid?
He replied: With regard to the marriage contract that you describe, it
is not valid, because the wali and two witnesses were not present. The
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: "There is no
marriage except in the presence of the wali andtwo witnesses of good
character." With regard to not stating the mahr in the marriage
contract,that does not affect anything.
The way to correct it is to bring her wali to the registrar to do the
marriage contract for her to the husband mentioned, after obtaining
her approval and consent. This should also be attended by two
witnesses of good character. If she does not have a wali, then herwali
is the shar'i judge; she should give him permission to do her marriage
contract. Thereis no sin on them for what has passed, and their
children are legitimate and it is correct to call them aftertheir
father, if they believed that the marriage contract was valid, because
this comesunder the heading of a marriage that was thought to be
legitimate. End quote
Fataawa wa Rasaa'il Muhammad ibn Ibraaheem, 10/68
And Allah knows best.

Dought and clear, - Water spilling onto one’s clothes and body from a vessel that had been licked by a dog

I have a friend who putsa bowl of water in the shop so that the dog
candrink from it. One time, after the dog had drunk, this vessel was
tipped over and the water came out of it, and I was afraid that it had
got onto my clothesor my body, because it contained the saliva of the
dog that had drunk from it.
What should I do if this water touches my clothes or my body? Should I
wash the place it gets onto seven times?
Praise be to Allah.
Firstly:
The scholars (may Allah have mercy on them) differed concerning the
najaasah (impurity) of dogs and there are several opinions.
It says inal-Mawsoo'ah al-Fiqhiyyah(40/79):
The fuqaha' differed concerning dogs with regard to whether they are
pure or impure.
The Shaafa'is and Hanbalis are of the view that dogs are impure in and
of themselves.
The Hanafis are of the view that dogs are not impure in and of
themselves, rather their leftover (food or water) and wetness are
impure.
The Maalikis are of the view that dogs are pure in and of themselves,
because they say that the basic principle concerning all things is
that they are pure, and all living beings, even dogs, are pure, and so
are their sweat, tears, mucus and saliva.
They also said: The fuqaha' differed concerning the impurity of a
vessel that has been licked by a dog. The majority of fuqaha' are of
the view that if a dog licks a vessel, it makes it impure.
The Maalikis and some ofthe Hanafis are of the view that the licking
of adog does not make the vessel impure. End quote.
Ibn 'Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) attributed the viewthat
dogs are impure to the majority of the scholars among the Sahaabah and
Taabi'een.
He said (may Allah have mercy on him): The scholars differed with
regard to acting upon the apparent meaning of this hadeeth [about the
licking of a dog, as we shall see below], and they also differed about
what we shall mention, by Allah's leave. Most of the scholars among
the Sahaabah and Taabi'een, and those who came after them of the
fuqaha' of the Muslims, said that a vessel should be washed seven
times with water if it is licked by a dog.
End quote fromat-Tamheed, 18/269
He also said (may Allah have mercy on him): The fuqaha' also differed
concerning the leftover (food or water) of a dog or any water or food
licked by a dog. The view of Maalik, which is the final view of his
madhhab, is that the leftovers of a dog are taahir (pure) and a vessel
licked by a dog should be washed seven times on the basis that it is
mustahabb to do so, but not obligatory.
Abu Haneefah and his companions, ath-Thawri and al-Layth ibn Sa'd said
that the leftovers of a dog are najis (impure),and they did not
specify a number of times for washing (the vessel). They said: Rather
he should wash it until he thinks it most likely that the impurity has
been removed, whether that is one time or more.
Al-Awzaa'i said that the leftovers of the dog in the vessel are najis
(impure), but inal-Mustaqni'it says that they are not impure.
Thegarment should be washed if the dog's saliva gets on it, and the
meat of game (caught bythe dog) should be washed to remove the dog's
saliva.
Ash-Shaafa'i, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh, Abu 'Ubayd, Abu
Thawr and at-Tabarisaid: The leftovers of a dog are najis (impure) and
the vessel should be washed seven times, the first of which should be
with dust or soil. This is the view of the majority of the
literalists.
Dawood said: The leftovers of a dog are taahir (pure) and the vessel
should be washed seven times, as an obligation, if the dog licked the
vessel. Regardless of whether the vessel contained water or something
other than water, it is taahir (pure), but one should wash the vessel
seven times. However, one may do wudoo' with the water that was
licked, and the food and drink that were licked may be consumed.
Abu 'Umar said: Those (scholars) who were of the view that dogs are
not najis (impure) say that their leftovers are taahir (pure) but the
vessel should be washed seven times if the dog licked it. In their
opinionthis is so as to follow the instructions in the hadeeth to wash
that which remains pure, andit is limited to this case. Those who are
of the view that dogs are najis (impure) and that their leftovers are
najis, and also said that the vessel must be washed seven times if the
dog licks it, say that the hadeeth specifies seven times to purify
this impurity, which is different from other types of impurity.
Ash-Shaafa'i and his companions said that dogs and pigs are najis
(impure) whether alive or dead, and there is nothing among living
beings that is najis apartfrom these two. He said: All parts of the
dog (are impure), by analogy with its tongue…
End quote fromat-Tamheed(18/269)
The correct scholarly view is that all parts of the dog are najis,
including its saliva and hair, because the Prophet (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him) said: "The way to purify the vessel of one
of you, if a dog licks it, isto wash it seven times, the first of
which should be with dust (or soil)." Narrated by Muslim.
Al-Khattaabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:What we learn from
this hadeeth is that dogs are najis (impure) in and of themselves; if
they were not najis, he would not have instructed us to purify the
vessel if it is licked by a dog. Purification is basically prescribed
to remove major or minor ritual impurity (ghusl and wudoo') or wash
off impure substances. The rulings on ritual impurity cannot apply
tovessels, thus it is known that the aim here is to remove an impure
substance. Once it is proven that the dog's tongue, with which it
drinks the water, is najis (impure) and it is obligatory to purify the
water from that, it is known that all the parts (of the dog) are
impure, like its tongue. So if any part of its body touches one, it
must be purified. It also clearly shows that purification cannot be
done with less than seven washings, and that rubbing it once with dust
or soil is obligatory.
It is obvious that the reason for using dust is to achieve a thorough
purification. This highlights the high degree of the dog's impurity.
Therefore, other means of purification, such as potash and the like
[used as cleansing substances], that are very effective in
purification, may also beused in place of dust or soil.
End quote fromMa'aalimas-Sunan(1/93)
As-San'aani (may Allah have mercy on him) said:This hadeeth points to
several rulings:
Firstly, the dog's mouth is najis, because of the instruction to wash
anything that the dog licks and pour away the water. He said "The
purification of the vesselof one of you", because there is no washing
except in the case of ritual impurity or contamination with an impure
substance. There is no ritual impurity in this case, therefore whatis
meant is contamination with an impure substance. Pouring it away is
wasting the water; If thewater was taahir (pure), he would not have
instructed them to wasteit, because he had forbidden them to
wastewater. This clearly indicates that the dog's mouth is najis
(impure), and the rest of the dog's body is deemed to be the same, by
analogy. That is because if it is proven that the dog's saliva is
najis, and its saliva is part of its mouth, as it is the sweat of its
mouth, then its mouth is najis, because sweat is part of what comes
from the body, so the rest of its body is thesame… End quote fromSubul
as-Salaam(1/22).
Based on that, if the dogputs its tongue or its foot or any other part
of its body in the water, the water becomes najis (impure); hence the
water must be poured away and the vessel must be washed.
Thirdly:
If the water that was licked by the dog spills onto your clothes or
your body, and you are certain or think it most likely that it got
onto your clothes or your body, then you have to wash the place
affected by the impurity seven times, one of which should be with dust
or soil, or whatever may take its place of cleansing substances such
as soap, because dust may be harmful. Butif you think it most
likelythat the water did not reach your clothes or your body, then you
do not have to do anything,because the basic principle is that things
are taahir (pure), but in this case there is some doubt concerning
najaasah (impurity).
Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
With regard to lapping up (water), saliva comes out of the dog when it
does this. If the dog's saliva gets onto one's clothes or anything
else, then they should be washed seven times. But we do not say that
one of them should be with dust or soil, because thatmight be harmful.
Rather we say that instead of dust one should use soap or something
similar to remove the impurity, and that, with the seven washings, is
sufficient.
End quote fromLiqa' al-Baab al-Maftooh, no. 49
Note: it is not permissible to keep dogsexcept for a need such as
guarding or hunting. If a person keeps a dog for any other purpose, he
is sinning and every day one or two qiraats of hasanaat (good deeds)
will be detracted from his reward. And Allah knows best.

Dought and clear, - Ordaining the end of life according to Ahl as-Sunnah and the Mu‘tazilah

I have a small question that has to do with death. I have heard from
many people that each person dies at the specific time previously
ordained for him by Allah. This means that Allah has ordained a
specific time for the death of each individual, at which the angels
take his soul. Does this mean that every time a person dies, the time
has come for him to depart this world and this is the time which Allah
had previously ordained for him, even if he was killed or died as a
result of an accident? I am very confused about thismatter; can you
please explain it?
Praise be to Allah.
Allah, may He be exalted,created all people and decreed for them the
specific time at which their lives would come to an end. Allah, may He
be exalted, has informedthe angel who comes to the foetus in his
mother's womb with thedecree of how long his life will last. Then when
the time for their lives toend comes – whether they die naturally or
as aresult of illness or they are killed or die in an accident – it
cannot be brought forward or put back from the ordained time. By means
of this divine decree which does not change, people's attachment to
anything other than Allah in hopes of increasing or decreasingthat
lifespan is cut off. The one who takes goodcare of his health is not
the one who causes his lifespan to be lengthy; rather Allah, may He be
exalted, has decreed that for him. The one who kills a person has not
taken anything away from the lifespan of the one who was slain; rather
Allah, may He be exalted, decreed that from eternity, and the killer
will be broughtto account for his transgression of the limits set by
sharee'ah if he killed unlawfully.
The Mu'tazilah – who areone of the misguided groups – said that if a
person was not killed and did not die of sickness, he would live a
longer life! This is false and there is no evidencefor it in the
Qur'an or Sunnah, and it is not the opinion of any of Ahl as-Sunnah;
rather Allah has decreed the lifespan for each one of His creation and
He has decreed the means by which their lives will end. There is only
one lifespan (for each individual); it is known to Allah, may He be
exalted, and He has informed His angels of it whom He commanded
towrite the lifespan of each individual when heis in his mother's
womb.
Shaykh Ibn Abi'l-'Izz al-Hanafi (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, has decreed the lifespan of
all creatures so that when the appointed time comes, it will not
bedelayed or brought forward at all. Allah, mayHe be exalted, says
(interpretation of the meaning):
"when their term is reached, neither can they delay it nor can they
advance it an hour (or a moment)"
[al-A'raaf 7:34; an-Nahl 16:61]
"And no person can ever die except by Allah's Leave and at an appointed term"
[Aal 'Imraan 3:145].
InSaheeh Muslimit is narrated that 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ood (may Allah be
pleased with him) said: Umm Habeebah, the wife of the Prophet
(blessings and peace of Allah be upon him and may Allah be pleased
with her) said: O Allah, allow me to enjoy the company of my husband
the Messenger of Allah, my father Abu Sufyaan and my brother
Mu'aawiyah. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)
said: "You have asked Allah concerning lifespans that are already set,
days the number of which is already predetermined, and provisions that
are already ordained. Nothing will ever be brought forward before its
time and nothing will ever be delayed from its time. If you had asked
Allah to grant you refugefrom punishment in the Fire and punishment in
the grave, that would have been better."
The one who is killed has died at his appointed time. Allah, may He be
exalted, knewand decreed and ordained that one person would die
because of sickness, another would die because of being killed,
another would die as a result of the collapse of awall or building,
anotherwould die by burning or by drowning, or other causes. Allah,
may He be glorified, created life and death and He created the causes
of lifeand death.
But according to the Mu'tazilah, the one who is killed had his
lifespan cut short, and if he had not been killed he wouldhave lived
until his appointed time! So he had two lifespans. But this is a false
notion, because it is not befitting to suggest that Allah, may He be
exalted,ordained for him a time knowing that he would not live until
that time, or that He ordained two times for him, like one who is
ignorant and does not know what willhappen.
The reason why it is obligatory to carry out retaliatory punishment
(qisaas) and hold the killer accountable is because he has committed a
forbidden action and done something haraam that is the means of ending
a life.
Therefore we may understand the words ofthe Prophet (blessings and
peace of Allah be upon him), "Upholding ties of kinship increases the
length of one's lifespan," as meaning that it is a means of living a
long life, and that Allah has decreed that this person would uphold
ties of kinship, and because of that he would live for this length of
time; were it not for that reason he would not live for that length of
time, but He decreed and ordained this cause and effect. By the same
token, He decreed that another person would sever ties of kinship and
would live until such-and-such a time, as we said with regard to
killing or otherwise.
End quote fromSharh al-'Aqeedah at-Tahhaawiyyah, p. 100, 101
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him)
said,commenting on the verse"and then has decreed a stated term (for
you to die). And there is with Him another determined term (for you to
be resurrected)" [al-An'aam 6:2]: With regard to the time when it is
ordainedthat an individual shoulddie, this is known to the angels who
write down the individual's provision, lifespan, deeds and whether he
isdoomed to Hell or destined for Paradise, as it says inas-Saheehayn,
where it is narrated that Ibn Mas'ood (may Allah be pleased with him)
said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon
him) – who is the most truthful one – told us: "The creation of any
oneof you is put together in his mother's womb for forty days as
anutfah(sperm drop); then he becomes a 'alaqah(a piece of thick
coagulated blood) for a similar period; then he becomes like a chewed
piece of flesh (mudghah) for a similar period., then the angel is sent
to him and is instructed to write down four things. It is said: Write
down his provision, his lifespan, his deeds and whether he is doomed
(to Hell) orblessed (destined for Paradise). Then the soul is breathed
into him." This lifespan is the appointed time of death which Allah
may make known to whomever He wills among His slaves. With regard to
the other"determined term", i.e., the resurrection, no one knows it
except Him.
End quote fromMajmoo' al-Fataawa, 14/489
He (may Allah have mercy on him) was also asked about the one who is
killed: Did he die at his appointed time or did the killer cut his
life short?
He replied:
The one who is killed is like anyone else among the dead; no one dies
before his appointed time and the appointed time is not delayed for
anyone. Rather all animals and trees have their appointed lifespan and
appointed time of death which cannot be brought forward or put back.
The appointed time of a thing is the end of its life; its life is the
period of time for which it will remain and its appointed time is the
end of its life. It is proven inSaheeh Muslimand elsewhere that the
Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: "Allah
decidedthe decrees of creation fifty thousand years before He created
the heavens and the earth. And His Throne was above the water." And it
is proven inSaheeh al-Bukhaarithat the Prophet (blessings and peace of
Allah be upon him) said: "There was Allah and there was nothing before
Him, andHis Throne was above the water. He wrote all things in the
Book and He created the heavens and the Earth." According to another
version: "… Then He created the heavens andthe Earth." And Allah, may
He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):"when their term
is reached, neither can they delay it nor can they advance it an hour
(or a moment)" [al-A'raaf7:34]. Allah knew what would be before it
came into existence, and He decreed that. He knows that a person will
die of a stomach disease or of pleurisy, or will die as a result of a
wall or building collapsing, or by drowning or other causes, and that
anotherperson will die as a result of being killed, either by poison
or by the sword or by stoning or by other means. The fact that Allah
knows that and has decreed it, indeed the fact that He willed all
things and created all things, does not prevent praising (someone for
doing good deeds) or blaming (someone for doing bad deeds), rewarding
or punishing. Rather if the one who killed a person did so as
commanded byAllah and His Messenger – as in the case of the mujaahid
who strives in jihad for the sake of Allah – Allah will reward him for
that. But if he kills a person whom Allah and His Messenger forbade
him to kill – as in the case of bandits and aggressors – Allah will
punish him for that. And if he kills a person ina manner that is
permissible – as in the case of qisaas or retaliatory punishment –he
will neither be rewarded nor punished, unless he had a good or bad
intention in either case.
There are two types of appointed times (of death); that which is
absolute and is known to Allah, and that which is conditional. Thus we
may understand what is meant by the words of the Prophet (blessings
and peace of Allah be upon him) – "Whoever would like his provision to
be expanded and his lifespan increased, let him uphold ties of
kinship." Allah commanded the angel towrite down a lifespan for him
and said: "If he upholds ties of kinship, then increase it by
such-and-such," but the angel does not know whether it will be
increased or not. However, Allah knows what the outcome will be, and
when that appointed time comes it will neither be brought forward not
put back.
If the slain person had not been killed, some of the Qadaris (those
who deny the divine decree) said that he would have lived! And some of
those who deny cause and effect said that he wouldstill have died. But
both of them are wrong, for Allah knew that he would die by being
killed. If (hypothetically speaking) He decreed something other than
what He knew would happen, this would be a decree for something that
would not happen; if it were to happen, how could it happen? This is
something that some people may or maynot know. If we assume that Allah
knew that he was not going to be killed (at that particular time), in
that case either He decreed that he is stillgoing to die at that
particular time, or He decreed that he would live until some other
time. To be certain of one of these two scenarios, which then does not
happen, is ignorance. This is like one who says, "If he does not eat
what is decreed for him of provision, either he will die or be given
some other provision"; and it is like one who says, "If this man did
not impregnate this woman,would she be barren or would some other man
impregnate her?" or, "If he did not cultivate this land, would someone
else cultivate it or wouldit remain barren, with nothing planted in
it?" or "If the one who learned the Qur'an from this man did not learn
it from him, would he have learned from someone else or not learned at
all?" And there are many similar examples.
End quote fromMajmoo' al-Fataawa, 8/516-518
And Allah knows best.

Dua to heal the afflicted by the Evil eye or other afflictions

Dua to heal the afflicted by the Evil eye or other afflictionsDua No: 358
بِاسْمِ اللهِ أَرْقِيكَ، مِنْ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ يُؤْذِيكَ، مِنْ شَرِّ كُلِّ
نَفْسٍ أَوْ عَيْنِ حَاسِدٍ، اللهُ يَشْفِيكَ بِاسْمِ اللهِ أَرْقِيكَ
Translation
In the Name of Allah. I recite over you [for purpose of healing] from
all that troubles you, and from every harmful mischief and from the
evil of the eyes of an envier. Allah will cure you; and with the Name
of Allah, I recite over you.
Transliteration
Bismil-laahi ar-qeek, min kul-li shai'in yu'dheek, min shar-ri kul-li
naf-sin aw 'ayni kul-li ḥaa-sid, al-laah yash-feek, bismil-laahi
ar-qeek
Sources: Muslim No# 2186 ; At-Tirmidhi No# 972

Dua and remembrance to be said at any time #16

Dua and remembrance tobe said at any time #16Dua No: 350
اللَّهُمَّ احْفَظْنِي بِالْإِسْلَامِقَائِمًا، وَاحْفَظْنِي
بِالْإِسْلَامِ قَاعِدًا، وَاحْفَظْنِي بِالْإِسْلَامِ رَاقِدًا، وَلَا
تُشْمِتْ بِي عَدُوًّا حَاسِدًا،
وَاللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَسْأَلُكَ مِنْ كُلِّ خَيْرٍ خَزَائِنُهُ بِيَدِكَ،
وَأَعُوذُ بِكَ مِنْ كُلِّ شَرٍّ خَزَائِنُهُ بِيَدِكَ
Translation
O Allah! Protect me with Islam when standing, and protect me with
Islam when sitting down, and protect me with Islam when reclining, and
do not make an enemy or envier gloat over me.
O Allah, I ask you for every good whose treasuries are in Your Hand,
and I seek refuge with you from every evil whose treasuries are in
Your Hand.
Transliteration
Allaahummaḥ-fazni bil'islaami qaa'ima, waḥ-fazni bil'islaami qaa‛ida,
waḥ-fazni bil'islaami raa-qida, wa laa tushmit bee ‛adu-wan ḥaasida
wallaahumma in-nee as'aluka min kul-li khai-rin khazaa'inuhu bi-yadik,
wa a‛oodhu bi-ka min kul-li shar-rin khazaa'inuhu bi-yadik
Sources: Al-Hakim No# 1924