For children, - Importance of Salah in Islam: Salah (Salat, Namaz)(Prayer according to Islam)

Share

Allah (SWT) has said in the Noble Qur'an: "I have not created the jinn and humankind for any other purpose except that they should worship Me." (Noble Qur'an 51:56)
It is clear from the above verse of Noble Qur'an that the purpose of our birth and of our life is no other than that of the worship of Allah (SWT). There are many acts of worship (Ibadah, Ibadat) in Islam, and Salah is one of the most important obligatory acts.
Salah (Salat, Namaz) is the ritual prayer practiced by Muslims in supplication to Allah (SWT). The term is commonly used to refer to the five daily prayers, which are compulsory upon all mature Muslims. Salah (Salat, Namaz) is considered the most important act of worship (Ibadah, Ibadat) in Islam and its importance is such that under very few circumstances it can be omitted.
Salah (Salat, Namaz) strengthens the foundations of our faith. It prepares a person to live the life of goodness and obedience to Allah (SWT), and it builds courage and determination. Every time we perform Salah, we renew our commitments to Allah (SWT) and we rid ourselves from worldly pressures five times a day.
According to a Hadith a companion of Holy Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) came to him one day and asked him "What is the thing that Allah (SWT) loves most?" Holy Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) replied "The thing that Allah (SWT) loves most is when his people pray Salah on time."
Salah (Salat, Namaz) is a practical sign of obedience to the commands of Allah (SWT). Its importance has been emphasized about 500 times in the Noble Qur'an.
Once Holy Prophet Mohammad (pbuh)shook a dry branch of a tree so that all of the leaves of the branch fell off than the Holy Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) said "The sins of those who pray Salah, drop off as the leaves of this branch fell off."
Before Salah, we make Wudu. Wudu (Ablution) is a unique way of cleansing certain parts of our body so we are clean before bowing down to the one who created us, who created the universe the one and only Allah (SWT).
The Holy Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) once asked his companions "Tell me if there was a river at the door step of one of you in which you washed five times a day would any of your dirt remain?" When Holy Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) received the reply that none of it would remain he then said "That is like the five times Salah, with which Allah (SWT) wipes out sin.
The last thing that Holy Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) emphasized at his deathbed was Salah. He also said the first thing we will have to answer about on the day of judgement is Salah.
While in Salah one communicates with Allah (SWT) and experiences his presence. That's why a Hadith says: Salah is the Meraj of a Momin(Namaz is called as Meraj-ul-Momineen).
The Holy Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) also said "The key to Heaven is Salah. The key to Salah is Purification."
"Namaz is a pillar of Religion. If Namaz is accepted all other deeds are accepted. If Namaz is rejected then all other Deeds are rejected." (Holy Prophet Mohammad (pbuh))

Share

Fathwa, - Distribution of a father's property between sons and daughters while the father is still alive

Share

Question
dear brother the situation of the family has become very complicated, it is difficult to take a decision regarding how the property should be distributed. however to make the problem easy let me put it in a few questions: the property is still not divided, it has to go to five children. two sons and three daughters. 1. one brother died by accident recently. 2. another brother's family has got destroyed by family problems. The wife having relation with other man and sons beating with iron rods mercilessly to the father absolutely to cause pain and damage. he has no security to life due to his children and his inability to face the problems. he has lost his health, very weak, and fragile he is 60 years, his physical stature is such that he can be blown away with the wind. the wife and sons have robbed away all the money from him, taken away all the property which he has made, he is houseless although he has made two houses. she has already spent lot of money to make this man financally strong. suppose the property goes to my brother he is not able to safeguard nor he can enjoy. How should my father distribute the property. AsimaNusrath Associate Professor, Chairman Department of Studies in Geography, Manasagangotri,University of Mysore, Mysore 570006 Office : 0821 2419694 Mob : 09986 525716 home: 0821 2495716
Answer
All perfect praise be to Allaah, The Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah, and that Muhammad, is His slave and messenger.
It appears from the question that the father is still alive. If this is the case, then the matter depends on your father in dividing this money as he is its owner. Thus, if he wishes to divide it on his children as a gift and as a way of making them appropriate it while he is in good health, then this is permissible. However, if he wishes to divide it on them as inheritance, then this is not valid as he is still alive and a living person is not inherited.
In case he divides it as a gift, then the juristsdiffered in opinion whether or not he is obliged to divide it equally and justly between them; the most preponderant opinion is that he is obliged to do so. Moreover, they also differed in the matter of dividing it equally between them, the majority of the jurists are of the view that he should give the male the same share as the female, and this is the preponderant opinion. However, some juristsare of the view that he should give the male twice the share of the female like their share in the inheritance.
As regards his dead son, it is not valid to gift him because a dead person does not own. Nonetheless, your father may gift his grandchildren some of this money as a way of consoling them especially if they are needy; in which case, he should help them.
With regard to the son whom you mentioned in the question and whom you described to be unwell and weak, then if he is conscious, his share should be given to him, and he may be advised to keep his money with whomever can save it for him.
Concerning his wife, if what you mentioned about her is true that she has an affectionate relationship with another man, and that she stole the money of her husband, then it is an obligation to advise her and frighten her of Allaah and remind her to repent from this illicit and forbidden relationship especially if she is still in the bond of marriage with him; in which case, she is very sinful. She should be reminded to repent from being unjust to her husband and that she is obliged to give back the money to her husband unless he forgives her.
For more benefit, please refer to Fataawa 81356and 86527.
As regards the children, if you mean that they beat their father and they harm him, and this is really true, then this is very strange and it is a real tribulation. How could they do so while their father was the reason of their existence in this life? How could they do so while Allaah The Almighty joined His Rights with the rights of the father? How could they do so while Allaah The Almighty made it an obligation to be kind and dutiful to him )the father( and He forbade saying even an 'Uff' )a word of disrespect( to him? There is no doubt that this is a great evil and it is considered as them cutting ties with him.
For more benefit on being kind and dutiful to the parents and the prohibition of cutting ties with them, please refer to Fataawa 87019and 87856.
In any case, these children must be advised to fear Allaah The Almighty with regard to their father, and repent to Allaah The Almighty before they regret when it would be too late to regret. Indeed, in case of a person who cuts ties with his parents, Allaah The Almighty may speed up his punishment in this worldly life along with the punishment that awaits him in the Hereafter. The Prophetsaid: “There are two doors whose punishment are speeded up in this worldly life: injustice andcutting ties with the parents.” ]Al-Haakim, Al-Albaani: Sound[
On the other hand, if that man is weak and he cannot protect himself, it is an obligation on whoever is able to protect him and defend him, to do so. The Prophetsaid: “Support your brother regardless of whether he is the oppressor or the oppressed.” A man ]a Companion[ said, “O, Prophet of Allaah: we understand that we should support him if he is oppressed, but how should we support him if he is an oppressor?” Thereupon, the Prophetsaid: “By preventing him from oppressing others, and this is supporting him.” ]Al-Bukhaari and Muslim[Al-Khaadimisaid in his book Bareeqah Mahmoodiyyah, “Supporting the oppressed is a communal obligation if this can be done.”
Allaah Knows best.

Share

Fathwa, - Husband is required to spend on wife and children and the wife hasthe right to live in separate house

Share

Question
Assalamualaikum...I am married for the past 10 months...alhumdulillah my husband so far is co operative...i used to work as a teacher but now tat i m 8 months pregnant,he has asked me to take leave.i m in my mom s place till the delivery cuz my mom in law said the first baby delivery charges shd be borne by my dad..ens to whatever she says...she wanted to have a ritual during the seventh month,which i refused n she dint speak to me for a week bcoz of the refusal...now tat i m here at my mom s place..all the expenses out there are borne by my husband)he n his younger bro earn in tat house,dad in law is retired,there are two more younger teenage broz n a married sis wit husband)they ve a house of their own, he earns a handsome salary,still they prefer staying here( n two kids(cuz the younger bro is getting married,he needs to save his salary for his wedding ..Before when i used to work,my salary would also go in the family expenses..now tat i ve taken leave,i don contribute...and wen i m here my husband doesnt gimme a sngle penny for my medicine or doc visits..and now they re indirectly pointing out expensive huge hospitals to have me deliver over there... my question is.... 1.is he right in spending all of his salary on his family? 2.am i right in asking my father to bear my delivery expenses )he has no prob whatsoever,but still..(? 3.do i not have the right to save at least something from my own salary? I am really tensed on these matters cuz whatever my husband earns,goes in the family expenses,when he has a bank loan to repay..no one is bothered about that,if i remind him about it ,i am asked to get it from my father...very very disturbed....kindly help me...in the light of Quran and Sunnah.. jazakallah khair....
Answer
All perfect praise be to Allaah, The Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah, and that Muhammad, is His slave and messenger.
The husband is Islamically required to spend on his wife and his children and the wife is not obliged to spend on herself or her husband let alone spending on the family of her husband. If the husband carries out his obligation towards his wife and children, it becomes permissible for him to spend on his family or on other people as this is an act of goodness and kindness. However, it is not permissible for him to be negligent on the rights of his wife. It is confirmed that‘Abdullaah ibn ‘Umarnarrated that the Prophetsaid: “It is enough a sin for a person not to provide means of sustenance to those whom he is obliged to support.” ]Abu Daawood[
Besides, whatever money the wife earns, it is her own money; she may spend of it if she so wishes and she may save it if she so wishes.
For more benefit, please refer to Fataawa 85012and 31645.
Nonetheless, you should not ask your parents to spend on you and this is not an Islamic obligation on him. Moreover, according to the preponderant view of the juriststhe expenses of delivery ]giving birth[ are an obligation on the husband as we clarified in Fatwa 165373.
Finally, it should be noted that the wife has the right to be in a separate house and she is not obliged to live with the relatives of her husband unless there in space in the house in a way that the husband allocates a portion of the house that has separate amenities for his wife.
Allaah Knows best.

Share

Fathwa, - How to deal with short-tempered husband and how the children have to act

Share

Question
Assalaamu Alaikum My mother has been married to my father for 20 years and during these years, my father hardly took up a job. He wants to do business and had tried so many times and has failed for some reason. My mother has brought me and my younger brother up. My father never took responsibility of finances or education of his family upon himself. He also get very agressive with my mother and keeps cursing her mother for every small mistake that anyone in our family commits. My mother has taken this for 20 years and now, she is tired and doesn't know what to do. She tries to be a good muslim and wife and she tries to have patience. My father is also very agressive with my brother and me, and he even hit us many times, even for no apparent reason. He yells at my brother, who is 12 and he threatens him and my brother feels very hurt and he is innocent. He feels scared to do anything because no matter what he does, my father beats him or yells at him. My father is short-tempered and has threatened us many times. I no longer feel safe in my house and my mother is on the verge of breaking down. She is also considering divorce. My father prays salat and fasts but he is very short-tempered and behaves very badly with his family. Please advice. Jazak Allah Khair
Answer
All perfect praise be to Allaah, The Lord of the Worlds. I testify that there is none worthy of worship except Allaah, and that Muhammadis His slave and Messenger.
If your father is as you have mentioned in the question, then he is definitely in the wrong. Even so, one of the means of being kind and dutiful to him is to advise him in a soft and gentle manner hoping that Allaah The Almighty will rectify him.
First of all, you should seek the help of Allaah The Almighty and then the help of whomever you think may influence him, like your relatives or any other person. For more benefit on how to advise a father who gets angry very easily, please refer to Fatwa 23587.
Also, we advise you and your brothers to be patient with him and not misbehave towards him, because if you do so, your action will be considered as severing ties with him. Indeed, it is not permissible for a child to mistreat his father even if the latter mistreats him.
Among the means of being kind and dutiful to the mother is to be nice to her, stand by her side, and remind her to be patient; for more benefit on the excellence of patience, please refer to Fataawa 85445and 83577.
Besides, you should cooperate with your mother in any way that could be a reason for rectifying your father. However, if she is harmed by staying with him, then she has the right to ask him for divorce. Nevertheless, if she can be patient, then she should do so and this is better because divorce may not always be the best solution.
For more benefit on the stand of the children towards their disputing parents, please refer to Fatwa 97282.
Finally, it should be noted that the father is obliged to bear the expenses of his wife and his children and this is an Islamic principle. Thus, if the father is negligent in this regard, then he is sinful and this is forbidden. The Prophetsaid: “It is enough of a sin for a person not to provide means of sustenance to those whom he is obliged to support.” ]Ahmad and Muslim[
Allaah Knows best.

Share

Hajj & Umrah, - Mistakes inTalbiyah

Share

AbandoningTalbiyah ]1[or repeating it in a low voice.
This is against theSunnah)tradition(. TheSunnah, however, is that men should repeatTalbiyahin a high voice while women should do that in a low voice. In aHadeeth)narration(, the Prophet,, said:"Jibreel )Gabriel( came to me and commanded me to order my Companions to raise their voices in Talbiyah."]Abu Daawood[
·Some say,"O Allaah I want ‘Umrah or Hajj"and this is incorrect. What is correct, however, is to say, "Labbayka Hajjan wa ‘Umrah)O Allaah, I answer Your call to performHajjand‘Umrah(" if he performs theQiraan Hajj ]2[; or"Labbayka ‘Umrah)O Allaah, I answer Your call to perform‘Umrah(" if he performs theTamattu‘ Hajj ]3[or the‘Umrahonly; or "Labbayka Hajj)O Allaah, I answer Your call to performHajj(" if he performs theIfraad Hajj ]4[.
·Some pilgrims do not reflect on the meaning ofTalbiyah, which implies response and surrender to the command of Allaah The Almighty as well as obedience to Him with love and fear. Consequently, it is obligatory to reflect on the meanings of these words so that they come from the heart.
]1[- Saying:"Labbayka Allaahumma labbayk. Labbayka laa shareeka laka labbayk. Innalhamda wan-n‘imata laka walmulk, laa shareek lak."
]2[- This is where a pilgrim assumesIhraamfor both‘UmrahandHajj, or he assumesIhraamfirst for‘Umrah, then makes his intention forHajjbefore hisTawaafforHajj. The obligations on one performingIfraadare the same as those on one performingQiraan, except that the latter must slaughter whereas the former is not obligated to do so.
]3[- This is where a pilgrim assumesIhraamfor both‘UmrahandHajj, or he assumesIhraamfirst for‘Umrah, then makes his intention forHajjbefore hisTawaafforHajj.The obligations on one performingIfraadare the same as those on one performingQiraan, except that the latter must slaughter whereas the former is not obligated to do so.
]4[- This is where a pilgrim assumesIhraamforHajjonly. When he reaches Makkah, he performsTawaaffor his arrival andSa'yfor Hajj. He does not shave or clip his hair as he does not disengage fromIhraam. Instead, he remains inIhraamuntil after he stones theJamratul–'Aqabahon 'Eed day. It is permissible for him to postpone hisSa'yforHajjuntil after hisTawaafforHajj)i.e. Tawaaf (.

Share

Hajj & Umrah, - Mistakes on the Dayof ‘Arafah

Share

Observing fast of the day of‘Arafah)the 9th day ofThul-Hijjah( by some pilgrims.
This is a mistake. TheSunnah)tradition(, however, is that the pilgrim should not be fasting on that day to be more active and stronger to make supplications andAthkaar)remembering and mentioning Allaah The Almighty(.
·Leaving‘Arafahbefore sunset.
This is prohibited and contradicts theSunnahof the Prophet,. Moreover, leaving‘Arafahbefore sunset is the deed of the people of the pre-Islamic era.
·Some pilgrims stay out of the boundaries of‘Arafahand remain in their places until sunset. This is a grave mistake because such people do not fulfill the ‘Arafah.

Share

Hajj & Umrah, - Mistakes inSlaughtering the Sacrificial Animal

Share

Giving the value of the sacrificial animal as charity instead of slaughtering it. This does not free one from liability.
Slaughtering the sacrificial animal before the day of‘Eed. It is obligatory to slaughter at the prescribed fixed time which is the day of‘Eed.
Throwing the sacrificial animal after slaughtering it and this implies wasting the blessing of Allaah The Almighty. Rather, the pilgrim is required to present that animal to the poor and the needy. The pilgrim is permitted to eat from his sacrificial animal if he wills.
Slaughtering a defective, lame or one-eyed animal. TheHajjsacrificial animal is similar to theUdh-hiyah)the‘Eedsacrifice for those who are not pilgrims( and the same conditions must be fulfilled. Freedom of defects is one of these conditions.
Slaughtering the sacrificial animal outside the sacred precincts of Makkah. Rather, one is required to slaughter within the boundaries of these precincts.

Share

Darwinism, - The invalidity of the famous Darwinist claim that ''useful mutations do exist.''

Share

The false idea that useful mutations exist is a classic Darwinist claim. Although the whole scientific world knows, with absolute scientific evidence, that mutations have a destructive or fatal effect, this claim is still persistently made, out of a fear of humiliation. Because Darwinism is a theory that depends totally on mutations. All Darwinists know that if the destructive effect were to be mentioned just once, that would spell the end of Darwinism. It is for that reason they try to give the impression, citing invalid and utterly pitiful examples, that mutations can be beneficial. But this is a complete deception.
As we have set out many times before, mutations have a net harmful effect, with only 1% being neutral, though the latest scientific research has shown that even these can produce long-term damage in the organism. [1] The net harmful effect of mutations is not a psychological defense mechanism, but an explicit truth revealed by science.
If Darwinists object to this, then they are directly flying in the face of science. Because this is not a matter of opinion, but an absolute scientific fact.
It is impossible for mutations to bestow any useful characteristic. Under normal conditions, everything in a living body exhibits complete regularity, order and symmetry. In addition, these systems co-exist with the most delicate balances and exhibit a glorious complexity right down to the finest detail. Mutations are random interventions, such as with radiation, and mean breakages, impairments and dislocations. They INEVITABLY DAMAGE these extraordinarily complex systems, with their regularity, symmetry and order. It is illogical and a violation of science to maintain anything else.
The results at Chernobyl, Nagasaki and Hiroshima were all the results of mutations. Under the effect of mutations, organisms with regular structures either died or suffered severe damage, and this harmful effect even manifested itself in subsequent generations.
Darwinists generally cite various examples of immunity in order to try to corroborate their claims that “beneficial mutations do exist.” But these examples all consist of a variation or impairment in bacteria or immune cells.
Sometimes, a dislocation in a single DNA nucleotide, or base, can bestow immunity to an antibiotic on a micro- organism. But although this may be useful to the micro-organism, IT IS NOT A BENEFICIAL MUTATION. Because the mutation in question has actually harmed the micro-organism. The ribosome sequence belonging to the micro-organism has been impaired, and it prevents the antibiotic binding to the organism by damaging the lock and key harmony. In other words, rather than there being any novelty in the micro- organism, we are looking at a loss of information.
Mutations are literally like firing at a regular structure with a machine gun. Opening fire on a healthy structure will entirely do away with that structure. The fact that one bullet has no effect or destroys an existing infection in the body changes nothing. The organism will already have been killed by the other 99 bullets hitting it.
The example that Darwinists cite with such examples is like a bullet healing the body by destroying a single infection. The organism is devastated by mutations, but Darwinists concentrate on the one that heals this infection.
Since the subject of mutations constitutes one of the most damaging points for Darwinists they engage in demagoguery by depicting minor instances of variation or the effects examined above as major evidence. The fact is, however, that the adherents of evolution, who maintain that all living things acquired their present symmetrical and complex structures by way of evolution, have to be able to cite examples of mutations that take place one after the other and are all beneficial, and that also bestow new information on the organism.
What is more, Darwinists also have to provide evidence for the scenario of one living thing’s physiology turning into that of another life form through mutation at the macro level. BUT THEY CANNOT EVEN CONTEMPLATE PRODUCING SUCH EVIDENCE. Because as they know full well, mutations destroy and ruin and occasionally entirely destroy the organism concerned.
It addition, we need to make the following point very clear: mutations can never bestow any new data on an organism that is not already in its genome. That is impossible. The examples alleged to have “added new information” are all misleading. No new genetic information is ever added. All that happens is that information already existing in a living thing’s genes starts to be used by becoming more visible as a result of variations.
Breaks and dislocations in the bases that make up DNA CAN NEVER PRODUCE NEW INFORMATION. They do not equate to information that did not already exist being bestowed on a living thing. Darwinists are without doubt well aware of this. But they insist on depicting dislocations in genetic bases as new data. This is an example of Darwinist demagoguery.

Share

Darwinism, -

Share

Darwinists admit that the fossils portrayed supposed transitional forms are eventually taken back and removed from the literature, but they justify this by claiming that “a better one has been found.” The fossils brought to public view to great Darwinist fanfare in the last few years in particular show how comic this evolutionist claim really is .
- The evolution deception involves a process that has constantly been repeated in its 150-year history. First, a fossil is produced. An amazing scenario is dreamed up on the basis of that fossil, which is then claimed to be the ancestor of man. This is all set out with much decorative scientific terminology and illustrations in the Darwinist press. Finally, it transpires that the fossil actually comes from an orangutan or a pig, at which IT IS HASTILY REMOVED FROM THE MUSEUM THAT HAS BEEN EXHIBITING IT.
- Piltdown Man, made by adding an orangutan jaw to a human skull, and Nebraska Man, depicted living in wild surroundings together with his family on the basis of a single pig tooth, are the best known examples of this. Darwinists have had to retract all their countless such claims regarding fictitious ancestors. A huge number of supposed “ancestors” have had to be removed from the scientific literature.
- ALL OF THE SKULLS so far acclaimed as ancestors of man by Darwinists have transpired to belong wither to an extinct type of orangutan or else to a human race. The reason why none of the fossils in question can be brought up any more is that they have all turned out to be invalid.
- Unable to bear this major defeat, Darwinists claim that the fossils in question have been removed from the literature because “a better one has been found.” But these fossils they describe as “better” are made up of such infamous examples of fraud as Ida, Ardi and Australopithecus sediba that have also been retracted soon after.
- Ida, a lemur fossil heralded as the ancestor of man, was a fraud on the same sort of scale as Piltdown Man. All the fuss made about Ida, which even embarrassed some Darwinists, quickly turned into a profound silence and Darwinist publications soon had to admit that the fossil was nothing more than a lemur. Darwinists had no qualms about admitting the embarrassment they felt at all the fuss over Ida in their own Darwinist scientific journals. (You can find more detailed information on the subject from here .)
- Ardi, the next to be brought up, was also subjected to Darwinist speculation and an obvious monkey fossil was made to walk upright using computer software. Following that latest embarrassment, Darwinists again had to retract their claims. (See here for more detail)
- Darwinists next produced a little finger fossil and shamelessly used this in reconstructions of a “third species.” This strange-looking human figure, illustrated in full, appeared under captions suggesting it would “rewrite the history of man,” just as in the case of Nebraska Man, the product of a single tooth. The only evidence, however, is a little finger fossil belonging to a human race. (See here for more detail)
- The Australopithecus sediba deception , the latest in the line, will go down in history as one of the worst embarrassments for Darwinists. This fraud, that even the eminent evolutionist Carl Zimmer greeted with suspicion, saying, “Not another Ida?” against inflicted terrible humiliation on Darwinists. (See here for more detail)
- That is the humiliating picture painted by Darwinists in recent years. It is clear therefore, just how invalid the claim that “the others have been removed because better transitional forms have been found” really is.
- Darwinists are in a hopeless position. They are in a defeatist state of mind because no transitional forms have been found. So they engage in demagoguery and make illogical claims in order to avoid the truth revealed by science that is so troubling to them. But that demagoguery has now become too ludicrous to deceive anyone any more. Even world-renowned Darwinists are ashamed of it.
- The fact that Darwinists now have to accept – and that the whole world already knows – is that not a single transitional fossil exists. So long as they refuse to admit that, they will have to keep making nonsensical claims to keep their ideology propped up and will keep on being humiliated.

Share

General Articles, - The invalidity of the claim that ''transitional forms do not mean deformed living things''

Share

After the fact that 99% of mutations are harmful, one of the most difficult and problematic subjects for Darwinists is the total absence of the fictitious fossils known as transitional forms.
Darwinists have sought to explain the absence of transitional forms in other ways, in order to neutralize this fact that is so embarrassing for them, and say instead that “transitional fossils are different to what you imagine.”
First and foremost, this needs to be made crystal clear: the concept of the “transitional form” is one produced by Darwinists themselves. It was Darwinists who came up with the idea that countless transitional forms must have resulted from unsuccessful mutations between two life forms, and that the majority of these fictitious life forms would have been eliminated while only a very few survived. According to this tale, there must have been a time when a fish would supposedly grow feet or when reptiles’ arms would be wings. But this mythical period DOES NOT EXIST in the fossil record.
There is therefore no question of “a concept that we think of as transitional forms.” All descriptions of the entities referred to as transitional forms come from Darwinists. For years, paleontologists have sought but failed to find the transitional form described by Darwin himself. According to that description, transitional forms are DEFORMED AND MONSTROUS living things. It is impossible, according to that description, for them to be anything else.
Were the theory of evolution true, there is no doubt that traces of these fictitious intermediate periods should be found in the fossil record. Fish spending millions of years as its fins supposedly turned into legs, as evolutionists maintain, should exist in this alleged “intermediate state” in the fossil record.
And that is not all. Bearing that 99% of mutations are harmful, there should also be many more examples of all the failed stages pertinent to a life form. There should be millions or even billions of odd-looking life forms that emerged as a result of failed mutations everywhere on Earth.
Bearing in mind that mutations are blind and random processes and are inevitably harmful, then, no matter how unwilling Darwinists may be to admit the fact, all these supposedly successful or supposedly unsuccessful transitional forms would all have been deformed and twisted, with legs coming out of ears, half-fins and half-legs, with three ears instead of two...
Yet not one such deformed living things, nor any transitional form of the kind imagined by evolutionists, has ever been found among the more than 300 million fossils that have so far been unearthed. Indeed, what troubles Darwinists most is that all fossils are completely regularly, symmetrical and fully formed; in other words, that FOSSILS REFUTE EVOLUTION.
As readers will recall, Darwin’s greatest worry was that transitional forms would not be “IN A STATE OF CONFUSION” and that everything in nature HAS A PERFECT REGULARITY AND SYMMETRY:
HY, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, DO WE NOT EVERYWHERE SEE INNUMERABLE TRANSITIONAL FORMS? WHY IS NOT ALL NATURE IN CONFUSION INSTEAD OF THE SPECIES BEING, AS WE SEE THEM, WELL DEFINED? . . 1
MUTATIONS DO NOT PRODUCE SYMMETRY.. THEY KNOW NOTHING OF HARMONY, ORDER OR THE GOLDEN MEAN. THEY DO NOT CALCULATE WHAT WILL BENEFIT A LIVING THING. Mutations are unconscious processes. They cannot lead to two symmetrical eyes and ears, symmetrical heart valves or two legs of the same length.
That is why one Turkish Darwinist, well aware of this fact and that transitional fossils do not exist, despairingly DESCRIBED HIMSELF AS A TRANSITIONAL FORM on a television program.
This is really a desperate state of affairs for Darwinists. Darwinists have no hesitations over rejecting the scientific facts and humiliating themselves for the sake of their ideology.
People need to be reminded that demagoguery no longer has any effect on people, since it has become a laughing stock. Darwin’s nightmare has come true, the fossil record refutes evolution.

Share

Welcome to Islam, - Freedom in Islam and in democracy

Share

nations have called for, spoken about in length, and desired fervently in their hearts more than freedom. People have delivered speeches about it, written books on the subject, composed newspaper columns in support of it, and have raised banners calling for it; they have made it an objective for which all other matters could be sacrificed. On many occasions, people have keenly called for it while being unaware of what they wished to get from it.
This has remained the case until it became the means by which politicians achieved their political aims and personal interests, and used their apparent pursuit of it to attract people’s attention and gain their support. In many cases, this claimed pursuit of freedom has become a means and a justification to destroy any real freedom and wage wars against many nations.
It was made to sound as if democracy is the way to achieve such freedom, because democracy is founded upon freedom; thus the proponents of this ideology have made having a democratic system mandatory for achieving freedom; they argue that one leads to the other, and must exist in order for the other to do so; therefore, one who loves freedom must call for democracy and love it, and vice versa.Such people also claim that, consequently, whoever hates democracy and is an enemy of it is also an enemy of freedom.
The questions that arise here are: does democracy )as practiced by the Western nations( truly achieve the freedom that mankind desires and requires? Does it even raise the level of freedom that people enjoy? What is the type of freedom that democracy achieves for nations, and where are its boundaries? Is an American or a European truly free? Are the lives that they live in their nations ones of freedom, or even partly so? Does Islam oppose the principle of freedom or does it approve of it and call for it? If Islam does approve of it, then how does it deal with it and expect people to practice it, and what are the permissible types of freedom within Islamic boundaries? Also, is freedom in Islam the same as that in democracy, or are they different? Which one of the two 'freedoms' is more realistic and coincides with the sought freedom, the one in Islam or the one in democracy?
All these questions and many others force one to compare between freedom as Islam presents it and calls for it - how it was practiced under Islamic rule for fourteen hundred years and is still being practiced today, and how freedom is practiced in democratic systems, and how contemporary countries and nations apply it.
This comparison must be made in order to see which of the two is more beneficial, more realistic, more honest and closer to the truth.
The limited human mind is what defined freedom in democracy and decided what is good and what is bad in it according to what its desires and lusts imposed, which entails that freedom in democracy becomes limited at times and broadens at others, depending on what the decision makers feel is beneficial at the time.
This means that the nations who practice such systems become experimental laboratories and are in a state constant flux regarding what is allowed and what is not.
In Islam on the other hand, freedom is clearly defined and its limits and boundaries have been set by Allaah alone, who is the infallible Creator of all mankind Whose Qualities are perfect and beyond defect, weakness or incapability. He is All-Knowing of the condition of His creation and Knows best what their requirements are and what suits them.
Thus, freedom in Islam has a distinct feature, which is stability - what was permissible in Islam fourteen hundred years ago remains so until the Day of Resurrection.
In Islam, every person knows what he can and cannot do as well as the areas in which there is room for manoeuvre, according to what Allaah has permitted. Furthermore, freedom in Islam is underpinned by ultimate justice and authority because it comes from Allaah, contrary to that defined by democracy, which is man-made and therefore fallible and subject to shortcomings and injustice. In democracy, the limits of freedom move within the circle that has been defined by human legislators.
In democracy, freedom is opposed to and conflicts with whatever is defined as evil by human legislators, which, due to their limited knowledge and abilities, entails the inclusion of much evil in the circle of what is good and allowable. It also implies that much good will be included in the circle of the evil and forbidden.
Under democracy, many evil things have been made permissible based on its definition of freedom, but were later found to be immoral and oppressive, which caused them to then be prohibited. Likewise, many matters that were later found to be beneficial were initially prohibited, and this constant fluctuation causes the concept of freedom in democracy to be undermined and belittled.
Conversely, in Islam, freedom is opposed to and conflicts with whatever Allaah has defined as evil due to His comprehensive Knowledge and infallibility. Allaah has only permitted what is good and beneficial for mankind and has prohibited only that which is evil and dispraised. Consequently, the range of freedom in Islam is only from what is good to what is praiseworthy.
Freedom in democracy only serves to enslave people to one another - people who should in reality be slaves to Allaah only; it causes people to be under the control of others who may be lower in status than themselves; those who are in control are the ones who set their rules and forbid and allow them whatever they wish – all that those who are under such control can do is to submit and obey. What type of freedom is this which entails enslavement to other humans?
In Islam, freedom frees man from enslavement to other humans to the comprehensive enslavement to Allaah Alone. One might argue that both are forms of enslavement, so what is the difference?
- Allaah is the Creator; He provides for man, facilitated the universe for him and guided him to the right path; therefore, Allaah alone has the right to be worshipped and man should be grateful to Him and obey His commandments. Worshipping the Creator gives the slave might, honour and dignity, while on the other hand, being enslaved by other humans who are weak and incapable is a form of oppression and punishment.
- Man was created with the natural disposition of being a slave, so if he is not a slave to Allaah, then he will certainly become a slave to another human, and this is a false state of affairs, regardless of the form it takes and the status of the human who he is enslaved to.
- Worshipping Allaah represents the ultimate freedom because it frees one from being enslaved to other false gods. In democracy, freedom places man under varied types of pressures and external strains that make him lose a great portion of his freedom of thinking and choice.
Examples of these pressures are the media; the pressure of fulfilling his lusts using different means to do so; the pressure of earning provisions, which is one of the greatest that people face; the pressure that politicians and religious leaders place upon people, and how some of these people fabricate and alter facts; the pressure of intoxicants and drugs, which are now widespread; and the latest pressure, which is the threat to anyone who refuses to give in to the instructions that have been set to deal with the phenomenon of 'terrorism,' which is a powerful means of placing great pressure upon people.
These types of pressure deprive man from a great deal of the freedom of choice, freedom of thinking and freedom of adopting opinions that he would have taken if these pressures did not exist. These pressures deprive man from his freedom, despite the claim of some who live under such a system to be free.
The contemporary tyrants do not need to exert much effort to accomplish what they wish from other nations; all they have to do is apply some of these pressures for a short period, and sure enough, other nations usually surrender to their requests. These pressures are referred in the Quran.
Allaah Says )what means(:“Those who were oppressed will say to those who were arrogant: 'Rather, ]it was your[ conspiracy of night and day when you were ordering us to disbelieve in Allaah and attribute to Him equals.' But they will ]all[ confide regret when they see the punishment; and We will put shackles on the necks of those who disbelieved. Will they be recompensed except for what they used to do?”]Quran 34: 33[ They plot continuously, day and night, in a way that prevents one from having an opportunity to pause and think correctly in order to be guided to a sound decision.
In Islam, man is freed from all external pressures and effects that may limit or even deprive him from his freedom of choice and decision. Islaam frees man from all such pressures.
In democracy, freedom exposes man to all evils, corruption, and everything else that would ruin his good morals and pure nature; it causes him to become inclined towards aggression and abnormality. Its similitude is like that of a person driving a car without brakes who is also negligent of other drivers and pedestrians, therefore, he would slam into others and cause many accidents.
On the other hand, in Islam, freedom is a cause for one to adopt the finest and most courteous morals and behaviour, it does not allow one to transgress in any way and preserves man’s health, faith and thinking; its similitude is like that of one who drives a car with excellent brakes and who stops where he is supposed to and drives only when it is safe to do so.
Freedom in democracy appears as if it is a gift that man gives to another fellow human, and it is as if he has the right to give him as much of it as he desires and whenever it suits him. In Islam however, it is a right that Allaah has granted to His slaves, and no human has the right to deprive others from it except for a reason that is legislated by Allaah.
The words of‘Umar,may Allaah be pleased with him, clearly reflect this when he said: “Who gave you the right to enslave others when they were born free?”
This is freedom in democracy and in Islam, so which is worthier for the title?
Allaah Says )what means(:“…And remain on a right course as you are commanded and do not follow their inclinations]Quran 26:15[

Share

Welcome to Islam, - The light of the truth andthe fire of misconception

Share

world. We encounter waves upon waves of darkness. One who searches for the truth will struggle to see it, except for he upon whom Allaah bestows His mercy and guides to it.
There are a multitude of television channels that people are exposed to today, to the extent that the average university graduate watches six hundred )600( hours of television annually. Eighty percent )80%( of teenagers consider television as their main source of information, to say nothing of the effects of the internet. This is how great the effect of this device is on them, to the point that one of those surveyed stated that he flips between fifty two )52( television channels daily.
Add to this other means, whether, text, audio or video, that influence people's minds, and we come to realise that there is an immense negative effect.
It is a common tool that has always been used by the enemies of Islam. They do not touch upon any aspect of our religion except that they arouse misconceptions regarding it, and this represents a round in the battle between the followers of the truth and the followers of falsehood.
Man’s natural disposition is to follow Islam as Allaah Says )what means(:“So direct your face ]i.e., self[ toward the religion, inclining to truth. ]Adhere to[ the Fitrah ]i.e., natural disposition[ of Allaah upon which He has created ]all[ people…”]Quran 30: 30[ This is what the enemies of Islam have launched a war against, in an attempt to divert people from our religion. In a Sacred Hadeeth, the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam narrated that Allaah Says:“Ihave created people upon natural disposition )Islam(, but the devils then divert them from their religion and deem lawful for them what I have prohibited and command them to associate with Me that for which I have not sent down authority.”
The situation has stemmed into people being divided into two groups: those who believe and those who disbelieve. This is the wisdom of Allaah, as He Says )what means(:“And if your Lord had willed, He could have made mankind one community; but they will not cease to differ.”]Quran 11: 118[ A group of people will go to Hell and a group will go to Paradise. This is based on His ultimate wisdom. Hell will be filled, as Allaah Says )what means(:“…And the word of your Lord is to be fulfilled that: 'I will surely fill Hell with jinn and men all together.'”]Quran 11: 119[ Allaah has addressed both Hell and Paradise and informed them that He will admit into each enough inhabitants to fill them.
Allaah has distinguished the people of the truth from those of falsehood saying )what means(:“Not equal are the blind and the seeing. Nor are the darkness and the light. Nor are the shade and the heat. And not equal are the living and the dead. Indeed, Allaah causes to hear whom he wills, but you cannot make hear those in the graves. You ]O Muhammad[ are not but a warner.”]Quran 35: 19-23[
This propagation of misconceptions through satellite television channels, radio stations, magazines and newspapers is such a dangerous development that it could lead to mass confusion and disorder; it may thereby kill people’s hearts so that they may no longer possess the ability to distinguish the truth.
It is the will of Allaah that he established proof against mankind by revealing His books and sending His messengers, the Quran being the last and final proof against His creation. Allaah Says )what means(:“And thus We have revealed to you an inspiration of Our command ]i.e., the Quran[. You did not know what is the Book or ]what is[ faith, but We have made it a light by which We guide whom We will of Our slaves...”]Quran 26: 52[
It is the light of guidance and the rescue for those who are exposed to such misconceptions. Allaah Says )what means(:“Allaah is the Light ]i.e., the source and bestower of light and enlightenment[ of the heavens and the earth. The example of His light ]i.e., guidance[ is like a niche within which is a lamp. The lamp is within glass, the glass as if it were a pearly ]white[ star lit from ]the oil of[ a blessed olive tree, neither of the east nor of the west, whose oil would almost glow even if untouched by fire…”]Quran 24: 35[
These misconceptions and falsehoods which the disbelievers propagate are described by Allaah as )what means(:“But the disbelievers – their deeds are like a mirage in a lowland which a thirsty one thinks is water until, when he comes to it, he finds it nothing but finds Allaah before him, and He will pay him in full his due; and Allaah is Swift in Account. Or ]they are[ like darknesses within a deep sea which is covered by waves, upon which are waves, over which are clouds – darknesses, some of them upon others. When one puts out his hand ]therein[, he can hardly see it. And for he for whom Allaah has not granted light – for him there is no light.”]Quran 24: 39-40[
Some people are deafened to hearing the truth and blinded from seeing it, they can never be guided to it. There are, however, others for whom Allaah opened their hearts and guided to the truth; these people acknowledged and accepted this and are alert to what Allaah has revealed. Such people can clearly see the truth and easily recognise it, and this is the light that Allaah addressed in the abovementioned )thirty-fifth( verse of chapter An-Noor.
Imaam Ibn Al-Qayyim, may Allaah have mercy upon him, stated: “Belief is complete light, and produces light, and the abode of this light is the slave's heart and soul; disbelief is utter darkness and leads to darkness, the place of which is also in the heart and soul… When one whose heart is filled with light reads the Quran, he feels as if its meanings were written in his heart.”
One of the ways of Allaah is His decree that conflict would always exist between the followers of the truth and those of falsehood, as He Says )what means(:“…And if it were not for Allaah checking ]some[ people by means of others, the earth would have been corrupted…”]Quran 2: 251[ This is something that is continuous, but the final victory and good end will be in favour of the believers, as Allaah Says )what means(:“Allaah has written ]i.e., decreed[: 'I will surely overcome, I and My messengers' …”]Quran 58: 21[
Allaah willing, nobody can mislead with a misconception one whose heart is pure and upon the sound nature on which he was created. When a misconception presents itself to a believer whose heart is filled with light that he derives from the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of the Messenger sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam, such a believer will strike truth upon the falsehood and it destroys it, causing it to vanish.
True happiness and guidance lies in following the way of the Messenger sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam, and real misery is the fruit of differing from his way. Imaam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allaah have mercy upon him, said: “The message )of Muhammad sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam( is light and life for the universe, and is the way to its reformation. If life and light are missing, life becomes dark and cursed, except for the parts of it on which the message was revealed. Likewise is the case for the slave: unless the light of the message has risen in his heart and has affected him, he will live in darkness until death.”
The door of misconception was closed during the time of the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam, and during the caliphate of Abu Bakr, may Allaah be pleased with him, but it was burst open by the assassination of ‘Umar, may Allaah be pleased with him. It was then that religious innovations began to appear, and the companions of the Messenger sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam who had remained resisted them resiliently. Things have continued to deteriorate from that time until misconceptions have prevailed.
Allaah with His comprehensive Knowledge knew that such misconceptions would appear, which is why He has instilled refutations for them in the Quran. For example, a man once approached one of the Companions, may Allaah be pleased with him, holding a bone of a dead person and then crushed it in front of him, asking: “Can your Lord revive this after what I have just done to it?” Allaah then revealed the following verses )which mean(:“Does man not consider that We created him from a ]mere[ sperm-drop – then at once he is a clear adversary. And he presents for Us an example and forgets his ]own[ creation. He says: 'Who will give life to bones while they are disintegrated?' Say: 'He will give them life who produced them the first time; and He is, of all creation, Knowing.'”]Quran 36: 77-79[
Also, the disbelievers claimed that the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam was receiving and relating the Quran from a non-Arab carpenter in Makkah, so Allaah revealed the following verse )which means(:“And We certainly know that they say: 'It is only a human being who teaches him ]i.e., the Prophet sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam[.' The tongue of the one they refer to is foreign, and this ]recitation, i.e., Quran[ is in a clear Arabic language.”]Quran 16: 103[
The enemies of Islam have not left a single field except that they have aroused misconceptions regarding it, even when it comes to Allaah, an example of which is the claim of the Christians that Allaah is one of three )i.e., the concept of trinity(.
An important contemporary example of mass misconception is globalisation, and this is something that we must all combat. Under the pretext of this, everything is allowed, including television channels that propagate Christianity and attack Islam, the Quran and the Messenger sallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam, and some of these attacks are claimed, deceitfully of course, to be based on authentic prophetic narrations from Al-Bukhaari. People therefore watch this and complain of thereby becoming confused.
It is important, therefore, that a Muslim distances himself from misconceptions and refuses to expose himself to them; he must leave the matter of refuting misconceptions and debating with those who propagate them to the scholars. How can a Muslim who believes in Allaah and the Last Day attend gatherings or locations in which misconceptions are discussed and expose his eyes to the prohibited matters that occur in them and then complain of being confused? When one watches any of the multitudes of satellite television channels that propagate misconception, he is committing a prohibition, because Allaah Says )what means(:“And when you see those who engage in ]offensive[ discourse concerning Our verses, then turn away from them until they enter into another conversation. And if Satan should cause you to forget, then do not remain after the reminder with the wrongdoing people.”]Quran 6: 68[
Imaam Ash-Shawkaani, may Allaah have mercy upon him, said: “This verse includes a stern reminder to those who undermine sitting with innovators who play with the words found in the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah and who distort the correct usage of words. The very least that one is required to do regarding such people is to abandon sitting with them, which is an effortless action.”
We have seen some of these cursed gatherings, refuted falsehood and supported the truth on many occasions to the best of our ability, but even those who are well founded upon knowledge have problems when they sit with the people who propagate such filth. Therefore, if a common man allows such people to talk and sits and listens to them, he will certainly become confused.

Share

Dought & clear, - Should he fast on the fifteenth of Sha’baan even if the hadeeth is da'eef?

Share

Is it permissible, even after finding out that a hadeeth is da’eef (weak), to follow it, by way of doing righteous deeds? The hadeeth says: “When it is halfway through Sha’baan, spend that night in prayer and fast on that day.” The fast is observed as a voluntary act of devotion to Allaah, as is spending that night in prayer (qiyaam al-layl).
Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly:
What is narrated concerning the virtue of praying, fasting and worshipping on the fifteenth of Sha’baan (al-nusf min Sha’baan) does not come under the heading of da’eef (weak), rather it comes under the heading of mawdoo’ (fabricated) and baatil (false). So it is not permissible to follow it or to act upon it, whether that is in doing righteous deeds or otherwise.
A number of scholars ruled that the reports concerning that were false, such as Ibn al-Jawzi in his bookal-Mawdoo’aat, 2/440-445; Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah inal-Manaar al-Muneef, no. 174- 177; Abu Shaamah al-Shaafa’i inal-Baa’ith ‘ala Inkaar al-Bida’ wa’l-Hawaadith, 124-137; al-‘Iraaqi inTakhreej Ihyaa’ ‘Uloom il-Deen, no. 582. Shaykh al-Islam [Ibn Taymiyah] narrated that there was consensus on the fact that they are false, inMajmoo’ al-Fataawa, 28/138.
Shaykh Ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) said inHukm al-Ihtifaal bi Laylat al-Nusf min Sha’baan(Ruling on celebrating the fifteenth of Sha’baan):
Celebrating the night of the fifteenth of Sha’baan (Laylat al-Nusf min Sha’baan) by praying etc, or singling out this day for fasting, is a reprehensible bid’ah (innovation) according to the majority of scholars, and there is no basis for this in sharee’ah.
And he (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
There is no saheeh hadeeth concerning the night of the fifteenth of Sha’baan (Laylat al-Nusf min Sha’baan). All the ahaadeeth that have been narrated concerning that are mawdoo’ (fabricated) and da’eef (weak), and have no basis. There is nothing special about this night, and no recitation of Qur’aan or prayer, whether alone or in congregation, is specified for this night. What some of the scholars have said about it being special is a weak opinion. It is not permissible to single it out for any special actions. This is the correct view. And Allaah is the Source of strength.
Fataawa Islamiyyah, 4/511.
See also question no. 8907.
Secondly:
Even if we assume that the hadeeth is da’eef (weak) and not mawdoo’ (fabricated), the correct scholarly view is that weak ahaadeeth should not be followed at all, even if they speak of righteous deeds or of targheeb and tarheeb (promises and warnings). The saheeh reports are sufficient and the Muslim has no need to follow the da’eef reports. Nothing is known in Islam to suggest that this night or day is special, either from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or from his companions.
The scholar Ahmad Shaakir said: There is no difference between rulings or righteous deeds; we do not take any of them from da’eef reports, rather no one hast he right to use any report as evidence unless it is proven to be soundly narrated from the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in a saheeh or hasan hadeeth.
Al-Baa’ith al-Hatheeth, 1/278.
For more information, see:al-Qawl al-Muneef fi Hukm al-‘Aml bi’l-Hadeeth al-Da’eef.
And Allaah knows best.

Share

Dought & clear, - Celebrating a child’s first fast

Share

In my country, the family celebrates the first day that their son or daughter fasts, by making food on that occasion and inviting the family to come and eat at the time of iftaar (breaking the fast). This event is called a “celebration of the first fast.” I would like to know the following:
1. What is the Islamic ruling on celebrating this event; is it permissible to attend if I am invited, and to eat this food?
2. What is your view on parties to celebrate the iftaar by inviting the people to come and have iftaar in a particular place?
3. In most of the mosques, the Qur’an is completed on the night of the twenty-seventh and sweets are handed out in the mosque; what is the Islamic ruling on that?
May Allah reward you with good for your efforts for His sake.
Praise be to Allah.
Firstly:
There is nothing wrong, in sha Allah, with the family celebrating the first time a boy or girl fasts, so long as it is limited to this occasion only, and will not become something that is repeated. There is nothing wrong with expressing happiness when the child reaches the age to observe this act of worship, or to encourage him and help him understand that this is an important event in his life. It is also a blessing for which thanks should be given to Allah. Some of the scholars regard it as mustahabb to make food for every happy occasion, and they specifically mentioned making food when a child completes the Qur’an.
See the answer to question no. 89705
Secondly:
If the reason for meeting to have iftaar is to spread love and harmony among those who gather, especially if they are relatives or if they are in a foreign land, and to encourage them to uphold ties with one another and show compassion towards one another, and to strengthen the bonds between Muslim families and their children, or that is done to help feed people and give iftaar to those who are fasting, and other valid purposes, then there is nothing wrong with it. In fact it is something praiseworthy that should be encouraged according to the purpose for which it is done, so long as it is not regarded as a Sunnah and is not taken by the participants as a regular “eid” other than the Eids prescribed in Islam, such that they gather on a particular day or in a particular manner, thinking that doing so has a particular virtue in Islamic terms.
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked:
I announce in one of the mosques that there will be an iftaar for everyone who wants to fast every Thursday. What is the ruling on that?
He replied: There is nothing wrong with making this announcement, because it is an announcement that is calling to good and the aim of it is not to buy or sell. What is haraam is to make announcements having to do with buying and selling, or renting and hiring, which are purposes for which the mosques were not built. As for calling people to good, feeding people and giving charity, there is nothing wrong with that.
With regard to its nature, and whether it is a gathering to perform a kind of worship, in fact they did not announce a communal fast; rather they announced iftaar only, so there is nothing wrong with that. And Allah knows best. End quote.
Thirdly:
The night of the twenty seventh of Ramadan is one of the odd-numbered nights among the last ten, on which Laylat al-Qadr may occur, according to the saheeh report narrated from the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). But Laylat al-Qadr is not necessarily on this particular night according to the correct view; rather it may be on this night or on some other of the last ten nights, although this night is the most likely of those nights.
Based on that, it is not correct to be certain that it is always Laylat al-Qadr or to believe that. But if a person increases his prayers or strives harder in that, on the basis that it is the most likely of the last ten nights, there is nothing wrong with that, in sha Allah. As for singling it out for completing the Qur’an on that night, that is something that should not be done, lest it be believed for certain that it is Laylat al-Qadr. We know of no basis for doing that from the practice of the early generations.
With regard to distributing sweets on that night, we do not know of any basis for that. It seems that this is a kind of taking that night as an Eid. It is not prescribed to single out that night for that purpose; rather it is not prescribed to do that deliberately on that night or any of the other nights on the basis of its virtue. However, if the purpose of giving out these sweets is to be kind to small children and do something nice for them, it should not be done only on that night; rather if it is done every time there is a need for it, that is Islamically acceptable.
And Allah knows best.

Share

Dought & clear, - Ruling on one who misinterprets the attributes of Allah, may He be exalted

Share

I want to ask about the one who denies the attributes of Allah: is he a Muslim or not? Such as the one who says that what is meant by the “hand of Allah” is the power of Allah, and they misinterpret other attributes of Allah. Is it the case that these people who deny the divine attributes are not of Ahl as-Sunnah, or are they beyond the pale of Islam altogether?
Praise be to Allah.
Firstly:
The teaching of Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa‘ah with regard to the Tawheed (Oneness) of the Divine names and attributes is that they believe in what it says in the Book of Allah, may He be glorified and exalted, and in that which is proven from the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), without any misinterpretation(interpreting them in a way other than they appear to mean) or likening Him to His creation, and without distorting the meaning or denying the Divine names and attributes. So they ascribe to Allah, may He be exalted, that which He has ascribed to Himself and that which His Messenger (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) has ascribed to Him.
Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
Ahl as-Sunnah unanimously agreed on affirming and believing in all the divine attributes mentioned in the Qur’an and Sunnah, and understanding them in a true sense (as they appear to be), not as being metaphorical. But they do not discuss how any of them are. As for the innovators, Jahamis and Mu‘tazilah, and the Khaarijis, all of them deny them and do not understand any of them in a true sense (as they appear to be).
End quote fromat-Tamheed, 7/145
Secondly:
The one who denies the names and attributes of Allah altogether and does not ascribe them to Allah, may He be exalted, as is the case with the baatinis (esoteric sects) and the extreme Jahamis, is a kaafir who is beyond the pale of Islam, disbelieves in the Qur’an and Sunnah, and goes against the consensus (ijmaa‘) of the ummah.
The same applies to anyone who denies any of the names or attributes of Allah that Allah, may He be exalted, has affirmed in His Book; he is a disbeliever, because what is implied by his denial is that he rejects the Qur’an.
With regard to the one who misinterprets any of the attributes of Allah and distorts its meaning, such as those who misinterpret the attribute of the hand as referring to His power, and they say that istiwa’ (rising over the Throne) means taking control of it, and so on, he is mistaken in interpreting it in a manner other than the apparent meaning, and he is an innovator in so far as what he believes is contrary to the Sunnah, and he has strayed from the path of Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa‘ah. But he is not a disbeliever just because of this misinterpretation, and he may be excused for his efforts to understand, depending on his level of knowledge and faith. Rather the measuring stick in that regard is the extent to which he sought to learn what the Messenger (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) taught and the extent of his keenness to follow him.
Ibn Baaz (may Allah have mercy on him) said:
It is not permissible to misinterpret the divine attributes or to understand them in any way other than their apparent meaning in a manner that is befitting to Allah, or to say that knowledge of what is meant belongs only to Allah. Rather all of that comes under the heading of the beliefs of the innovators. As for Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa‘ah, they do not misinterpret the verses and hadeeths that speak of the divine attributes, and they do not understand them in a way other than the apparent meaning, and they do not say that knowledge of what is meant belongs only to Allah. Rather they believe that every meaning (of these attributes) that may be indicated is true in a manner that is befitting to Allah, may He be exalted, without likening Him to His creation.
End quote fromMajmoo‘ Fataawa Ibn Baaz, 2/106-107
He was also asked (may Allah have mercy on him):
Are the Ash‘aris among Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa‘ah or not? Do we regard them as being fellow Sunnis or as being disbelievers?
He replied:
The Ash‘aris are among Ahl as-Sunnah with regard to most matters, but they are not among them with regard to interpretation of the divine attributes, but they are not disbelievers either. Rather among them are some leading scholars and good people, but they erred in their interpretation of some of the divine attributes.
They differed from Ahl as-Sunnah in some issues, such as the interpretation of most of the divine attributes, in which they were mistaken. The view of Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa‘ah is to accept the verses and hadeeths that speak of the divine attributes as they came, without interpreting them (in a way other than the apparent meaning), denying them, distorting the meaning or likening Allah to His creation.
End quote fromMajmoo‘ Fataawa Ibn Baaz, 28/256
Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ar-Raajihi was asked:
If it is proven that the Ash‘aris have misinterpreted one of the divine attributes, are they to be regarded as disbelievers?
He replied: No, the one who misinterprets and misunderstands some (of the divine attributes) is not to be regarded as a disbeliever; the one who denies one of the names of Allah becomes a disbeliever. Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):“while they disbelieve in the Most Beneficent (Allah)” [ar-Ra ‘d13:30]. If he denies one of the names or attributes of Allah without misinterpreting it, then he becomes a disbeliever. And Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):“The Most Beneficent (Allah) Istawa (rose over) the (Mighty) Throne (in a manner that suits His Majesty)” [Ta-Ha 20:5]. If he denies this verse, he becomes a disbeliever, but if he misinterprets it as referring to taking control, then in that case he is confused, therefore we cannot say that he is a disbeliever. End quote.
www.ar.islam way.net
For information on the conditions of labelling a specific individual as a disbeliever, please see the answer to question no. 107105
Thirdly:
The Khaarijis are one of the misguided sects who have gone beyond the pale of Islam. And Allah knows best.

Share