“Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled.” (Qur’an 9:29)
﷽
Lezley Hazelton, an admitted ‘Agnostic Jew, gives not only a very insightful understanding of these verses, but it is true to the text and circumstances in which the verses were revealed.
We would recommend watching all her videos on Islam. However, if one wants to get to the subject at hand, you can go to the @6:00 minute mark.
The Bible Commands Christians to Pay Jizyah Tax.
A lot of the fuss that is being made by Islamaphobes, Zionists, and the usual bigots whose hearts drip with hatred towards the faith of Al Islam. May Allah open their hearts and put love and mercy in it towards their fellow man. We are not so much concerned that many of these people (Islamaphobes, Zionists, and bigots) have intense hatred towards Islam. That is to be expected.
So they will mention that the people of the book have to pay a special tax called the Jizyah. Well, hello, people, there are two things certain in this world: “Death and taxes.”
There is a vast body of literature in the Islamic faith tradition concerning Jizyah and how the various legal schools of Islam have dealt with this particular subject. If a person is genuinely interested and searching for the truth concerning this matter, we would invite you to look at the discussions and the views held by the scholars on the matter.
For now, it should suffice every God-fearing Christian that the Bible itself commands that Christians should pay the Jizyah. Enough said!
“ Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except by God’s appointment, and the authorities that exist have been instituted by God. So the person who resists such authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will incur judgment (for rulers cause no fear for good conduct but for bad). Do you desire not to fear authority? Do good and you will receive its commendation, for it is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be in fear, for it does not bear the sword in vain. It is God’s servant to administer retribution on the wrongdoer. Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of the wrath of the authorities but also because of your conscience. For this reason, you also pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants devoted to governing. Pay everyone what is owed: taxes to whom taxes are due, revenue to whom revenue is due, respect to whom respect is due, honor to whom honor is due. “ (Romans 13:1-7)
Abu Bakr (ra) fought against the Muslims who didn’t pay Zakat.
In other words, Zakat is a forced tax collection upon the Muslims as well.
This is just a small glimpse into one of the texts used for Islamic law. This will hopefully give you the readers some insights to explain that things are not as black and white as one might think.
Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz wrote to his governors telling them to relieve any people who paid the jizya from paying the jizya if they became Muslims.
Malik said, “The sunna is that there is no jizya due from women or children of people of the Book and that jizya is only taken from men who have reached puberty. The people of dhimma and the Magians do not have to pay any zakat on their palms or their vines or their crops or their livestock. This is because zakat is imposed on the Muslims to purify them and to be given back to their poor, whereas jizya is imposed on the people of the Book to humble them. As long as they are in the country they have agreed to live in, they do not have to pay anything on their property except the jizya. If, however, they trade in Muslim countries, coming and going in them, a tenth is taken from what they invest in such trade. This is because jizya is only imposed on them on conditions, which they have agreed on, namely that they will remain in their own countries, and that war will be waged for them on any enemy of theirs, and that if they then leave that land to go anywhere else to do business they will have to pay a tenth. Whoever among them does business with the people of Egypt, and then goes to Syria, and then does business with the people of Syria and then goes to Iraq and does business with them and then goes on to Madina, or Yemen, or other similar places, has to pay a tenth.”
“People of the Book and Magians do not have to pay any zakat on any of their property, livestock, produce or crops. The sunna still continues like that. They remain in the deen they were in, and they continue to do what they used to do. If in any one year they frequently come and go in Muslim countries then they have to pay a tenth every time they do so, since that is outside what they have agreed upon, and not one of the conditions stipulated for them. This is what we have seen the people of knowledge of our city doing.”
Source: (Malik MuwattaBook 17, Number 17.24.46)
You have to wonder how the economy of a particular country might improve if the churches were taxed.
This is quite shameful because they are really fleecing the flock. There are many people who are suffering and in debt and these preachers, many of them, are like financial predators. May Allah (swt) protect the people.
“And when they hear what has been revealed to the Messenger, you see their eyes overflowing with tears because of what they have recognized of the truth. They say, “Our Lord, we have believed, so register us among the witnesses.” (Qur’an 5:83)
May Allah guide the Christians and Jews before they enter the hellfire.
“Today those who disbelieve have lost all hope of damaging your faith. So, do not fear them, and fear Me. Today, I have perfected your religion for you, and have completed My blessing upon you, and chosen Islam as a way of life) for you.” (Qur’an 5:3)
﷽
Anyone who says, “There is no Allah but Allah and Muhammed is the Messenger of Allah.” enters Islam. That person is a monotheist. Simple. The Blessed Messenger (saw) never taught that tawhid consists of two parts, one part being tawhid al-rubuiyya and the other tawhid al-uluhiyya.
“When the Prophet sent Mu’adh to Yemen, he said to him, “You are going to a nation from the people of the Scripture, so let the first thing to which you will invite them, be the Tauhid of Allah. If they learn that, tell them that Allah has enjoined on them, five prayers to be offered in one day and one night. And if they pray, tell them that Allah has enjoined on them Zakat of their properties and it is to be taken from the rich among them and given to the poor. And if they agree to that, then take from them Zakat but avoid the best property of the people.”
According to those who are truly ignorant in the religion they believe that the Prophet (saw) should have said to Mu’adh, “call the people to tawhid al-uluhiyya of which they are ignorant, as far as tawhid al-rubiyya they knew it already.”
Allah (swt) in his Book never ordered or even mentioned tawhid al-uluhiyya to anyone! Even in Surah al-Ikhlas which is one equivalent to 1/3 of the entire Qur’an!
If Ibn Taymiyya is to be believed then it means Allah (swt) did not deliver to us the knowledge of tawhid al-uluhiyya since everyone and their father knew about tawhid al-rubiyya.
Authubillah min dhalik! May Allah protect us from that!
Since this doctrine is so central according to certain sects, it means the following verse was not completed:
“Today those who disbelieve have lost all hope of damaging your faith. So, do not fear them, and fear Me. Today, I have perfected your religion for you, and have completed My blessing upon you, and chosen Islam as a way of life) for you.” (Qur’an 5:3)
We had to wait for Ibn Taymiyya who introduced this division in tawhid and this bid’ah in the religion!
So in the view of this sect, the average Muslim (possibly you the reader) your knowledge of tawhid is on the same level of that of idolaters! Authubillah min dhalik!
Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal never said that tawhid consisted of two parts, one being tawhid al-rubiyya and the other tawhid al-uluhiyya.
Imam Ahmad is nowhere recorded to have said, “Whoever does not know tawhid al-uluhiya, his knowledge of tawhid al-rububiyya is not taken into account because the idolaters also had such knowledge.”
Tawhid Al-Hakamiyyah!! Why Should Ibn Taymiyya Have All The Fun?
“They say that there is a Tawheed of Allah’s Lordship, the Tawheed of Allah’s worship, the Tawheed of Allah’s Names and Attributes and the Tawheed Al-Hākimiyyah ―i.e. The Tawheed of Allah’s rule and judgment. This is founded upon the false assumption that the division of Tawheed is a mere matter of terminology, merely tradition and it is not connected to the textual proofs. So, there is no harm, as far as they are concerned, in increasing upon the three categories. They have made the same mistake as many people make, believing that Tawheed is merely an issue of terminology and that the number of categories does not matter. But, in reality, the affair of the division of Tawheed into three categories can only be seen through these categories, and there is no fourth. There is no reduction or increase because anywhere Allah (the Most High) speaks about Himself in the Qur’an, and He explains and clarifies Tawheed, He does so in one of these three categories, and no more.”
“So, it is said to such a person who divides and adds to Tawheed: “This division is not merely invented terminology, rather, this categorisation refers back to the Book and the Sunnah.”
“When the Salaf categorised Tawheed into three categories, they established it from the Book and the Sunnah.”
Well, well, well. we are told that dividing Tawheed into three categories, “is from the Book and the Sunnah” So we have the right to ask where? Where did the Blessed Messenger (saw) teach that tawhid consists of three parts? Or where did He (saw) teach that tawhid consists of two parts, one part being tawhid al-rubuiyya and the other tawhid al-uluhiyya?
Where does the Book of Allah (swt) teach that tawhid is divided into two or three parts? Didn’t the people who advocate Tawhid al Hakimiyyah find that the Blessed Messenger (saw) already divided the tawhid into two or three? Didn’t they find these clear descriptions in the Qur’an? The answer is: They didn’t. Just like Ibn Taymiyya and those who follow him today can’t find the Blessed Messenger (saw) teaching two or three tawhids either! It is Bid’ah! It’s reprehensible innovation in the religion.
However, in the case of Tawhid al-Hakimiyya we can understand why some people who call themselves Salafi distance themselves from it. It has little to do with evidence and truth and more to do with $$$ We get our answer here:
“They are mistaken in adding a fourth category and in saying that there are more than three categories of Tawheed. They have innovated into the Religion with intentions to raise the people against their Rulers with this slogan of Tawheed Al-Hākimiyyah.”
Why are they mistaken in adding a fourth category? On what consistent basis can they not add a fourth category when you people have added three categories? I am only allowed to quote excerpts and not the full article but take a look at the list of scholars that are said to refute Tawheed Al-Hakimiyyah.
The truth of the matter is all those who say that tawhid is divided into tawhid al-uluhiyya, tawhid al-rubiyya and tawhid al-hakimiyya are upon bid’ah (innovation). That’s a consistent position.
However, if I was on a government payroll of course I would be told to preach against tawhid al-hakimiyyah.
Which this idea of theirs that one can never go against the government is absolutely refuted in our article here:
“By which Allah guides those who pursue His pleasure to the ways of peace and brings them out from darkness into the light, by His permission, and guides them to a straight path.”(Qur’an 5:16)
﷽
F1 Racing, Tourism, WWE Wrestling… the Middle East had a new Sheriff in town.
Abu Dhabi opens its first ever brewery. Where U.A.E goes Saudi usually follows.
“Never did We send a Messenger or a Prophet before you but that when he recited Satan would make insinuations about the revelations But Allah abrogates whatever insinuations Satan may make, and then He confirms and establishes His Revelations. Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.” (Qur’an 22:52)
“They will ask you about intoxicants (khamri) and games of chance. Say: “In both, there is great evil as well as some benefit for man; but the evil which they cause is greater than the benefit which they bring.” And they will ask you as to what they should spend Say: “Whatever you can spare.” In this way, Allah makes clear unto you His messages, so that you might reflect.” (Qur’an 2:219)
“Oh, you who have attained to faith! Intoxicants (khamru), and games of chance, and idolatrous practices, and the divining of the future are but a loathsome evil of Satan’s doing:’ shun it, (fa-ij’tanibuhu) then so that you might attain to a happy state!” (Qur’an 5:90)
What does Allah (swt) tell us about Satan?
“Eat what Allah has provided for you and do not follow the footsteps of Satan. Indeed, he is to you a clear enemy.” (Qur’an 6:142)
Would you even sip from a cup from someone who was unto you a clear and open enemy? Think about it.
“By means of intoxicants (khamri) and games of chance, Satan seeks only to sow enmity and hatred among you, and to turn you away from the remembrance of God and from prayer. Will you not, then, desist?’ “(Qur’an 5:91)
The terms khamri, khamru also find another form here:
“And tell the believing women to reduce [some] of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which [necessarily] appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their head-covers (bikhumurihinna) over their chests and not expose their adornment.” (Qur’an 24:31)
From the trilateral root khā mīm rā the word khamar means to cloud, obfuscate, conceal or cover.
Allah (swt) tells us about Khamar in verse 5:90 above to shun it (fa-ij-tanibuhu)
Let’s TAKE A LOOK AT THE TERM ‘IJTANIBU’
“And We certainly sent into every nation a messenger, saying, “Worship Allah and avoid (wa-ij’tanibu) Taghut.” And among them were those whom Allah guided, and among them were those upon whom error was deservedly]decreed. So proceed through the earth and observe how was the end of the deniers.” (Qur’an 16:36)
Comment: Now would anyone say that oppression in small quantities is good? Can I oppress my neighbor, fellow believer, fellow human being, wife, husband, parents, children just as long as it’s a little oppression and I don’t full-on oppress?
“That has been commanded, and whoever honors the sacred ordinances of Allah – it is best for him in the sight of his Lord. And permitted to you are the grazing livestock, except what is recited to you. So avoid (fa-ij’tanibu) the uncleanliness of idols and avoid (wa-ij’tanibu) a false statement.” (Qur’an 22:30)
Comment: Now is anyone going to say that it is ok to dabble with the uncleanliness of idols just a bit? Is anyone really going to say that it’s o.k to partake in false statements here and there just don’t make it a habit?
“And mention, when Ibrahim said, “My Lord, make this city secure and keep me and my sons away from (wa-uj-nub’ni) worshiping idols.” (Qur’an 14:35)
Comment: Now is anyone going to say that worshiping idols in small quantities or a bit is fine? It means to be careful when indulging in such things? Of course not!
Just as strong as the term ‘Haram’ the term ‘Ijtanibu’ is to avoid, shun, decline, reject, repudiate.
The other ayat that people will often use to say that alcohol was prohibited gradually or that you can drink as long as you don’t come to pray drunk is the following verse:”O you who believe, do not approach prayer with a confused mind (Sakara) until you can understand all that you say. Nor in a state of ceremonial impurity, until after washing your entire body. If you are ill, or on a journey, or one of you comes from offices of nature, or you have been intimate with your woman, and you find no water, then take for yourselves earth, and rub your faces and hands with it, for Allah removes sins and forgives again and again.” (Qur’an 4:43)
*Note* This is taken from: (A.L Bilal Muhammed et al 2018) translation of the Qur’an in English which is the most sensible translation of the entire list here: https://www.islamawakened.com/quran/4/43/default.htm
Honestly, these other translations when it comes to this verse are horrible. Don’t approach the prayer drunk or intoxicated so the unassuming English reader will think this relates to alcohol and it doesn’t!
The word ‘Khamar’ is not where in the Arabic text. The term used in the Arabic text is Sakara, which can mean intoxicating drinks like in the following text.
“And from the fruit of the date-palm and the grape-vine, you derive both intoxicants (sakaran) and wholesome provision. There is certainly a Sign in that for people who use their intellect.”(Quran 16:67)
However, the term Sakara refers to a confused and befuddled mind, be that from alcohol or not. Notice the text continues ‘until you can understand what you say‘.
So the text in 4:43 in no way is a proof text to advocate minimal drinking of alcohol or drinking in between prayers. It does not even address the issue of alcohol as it addresses being in a conscious and aware and sober state when approaching the prayers regardless if the cause is alcohol or not.
Finally for those who say well Allah (swt) is going to allow us to drink wine in heaven so how can Satan’s handiwork get into heaven?
“A cup shall be made to go round them from water running out of springs, White, delicious to the drinkers, Neither will these (drinks) cause any ruinous effect, nor they be deprived of intellectual faculties thereby.” (Qur’an 37:45-47)
Allah (swt) has told us that this drink will be pure not causing fatigue, or deprivation of mental faculties and thus it will not be like the drinks we find on Earth.
Mantiq-Logic. It is amazing that Muslims think that they are able to go from ritual impurity to ritual impurity and yet do not believe that Allah (swt) can make something that is impure into something that is pure.
So now we come to the fatwa of the Shaykh of the Salafiyah, Shaykh Saleh Al Uthaymeen.
What is the ruling on drinking beer, noting that there are two kinds of beer – one with an alcoholic content and one with no alcoholic content? Is that regarded as an intoxicant?.
Answer:
“Praise be to Allah. It is essential to differentiate between the two kinds of beer” -Shaykh Saleh Al Uthaymeen
“The first is the intoxicating beer that is sold in some countries. This beer is khamr (an intoxicant) and it is haram to sell it, buy it and drink it. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Every intoxicant is khamr and every intoxicant is haram.” Narrated by Muslim, 2003.”-Shaykh Saleh Al Uthaymeen
“It is haram to drink a lot or a little of it, even a single drop, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Whatever intoxicates in large quantities, a little of it is haram.” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 1865; classed as sahih by al-Albaani in Sahih al-Tirmidhi.”-Shaykh Saleh Al Uthaymeen
“The second type is the beer that is not intoxicating, either because it is completely free of alcohol, or because it contains a minuscule amount of alcohol that does reach the level of causing intoxication no matter how much a person drinks of it. The scholars have ruled that this is permissible.”-Shaykh Saleh Al Uthaymeen
Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said:
“The beer that is on sale in our marketplaces [in Saudi Arabia] is all halal, because it has been inspected by the officials and is completely free of alcohol. The basic principle concerning all kinds of food, drink and clothing is that they are permissible until and unless proof is established that they are haram. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“It is He Who created for you all that is on the earth.”
(Qur’an 2:29)
So if anyone says, this drink is haram, or this food is haram, or this garment is haram, say to him, Bring your proof. If he brings proof then we should do whatever is indicated by the proof. If he does not bring proof, then his words are to be rejected because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“It is He Who created for you all that is on the earth.”
(Qur’an 2:29)
Everything in this world Allah has created for us. This general meaning is confirmed by the word jamee’an (translated here as “all”). And Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“while He has explained to you in detail what is forbidden to you.”
(Qura’n 6:119)
“So if something is haram, there should be a clear and detailed indication that it is haram. If there is no such proof then it is not haram. The beer that is to be found in our markets here in the Land of the Two Holy Sanctuaries (Saudi Arabia) is all halal and there is no doubt concerning that in shaAllaah.”-Shaykh Saleh Al Uthaymeen
“We do not think that any alcoholic content in a thing makes it haram, rather if something contains a percentage of alcohol which will make a person intoxicated if he drinks it, then it is haram. But if the amount is minuscule and does not have any effect, then it is halal.”-Shaykh Saleh Al Uthaymeen
“Some people think that the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), “Whatever intoxicates in large quantities, a little of it is haram”, meaning that if a small percentage of an intoxicant is mixed with a large amount of a substance that is not intoxicating, then it is haram. This is a misunderstanding of the hadith. “Whatever intoxicates in large quantities, a little of it is haram” means that if a lot of something will cause intoxication, and a little of it will not cause intoxication, then a lot or a little are both haram, because you may drink a little that does not cause intoxication, then you may be tempted to drink more and become intoxicated. But if something is mixed with alcohol but the alcohol is a small amount and does not have any effect, then it is halal and does not come under the ruling of this hadith.” -Shaykh Saleh Al Uthaymeen
Al-Baab al-Maftooh, 3/381-382.
COMMENTS
Where to begin?
Let us take a first look at the absolute abuse of the following verse:
“It is He Who created for you all that is on earth.” (Qur’an 2:29)
It is true that Allah (swt) is the creator of everything on this Earth. No one disputes this. However, the assumption that everything on the Earth is permissible is certainly mistaken.
“So consume of the lawful and good food which Allah has provided for you, and thank the bounty of your Lord if it is Him you serve.” (Qur’an 16:67)
Allah (swt) has made plutonium and uranium and yet I do not think the desire of Allah (swt) is for us to make weapons-grade materials and kill each other with them!
The reasoning of Shaykh Uthaymeen and those like him is evidently flawed.
Shaykh Uthaymeen says,
“So if anyone says, this drink is haram, or this food is haram, or this garment is haram, say to him, Bring your proof. If he brings proof, then we should do whatever is indicated by the proof. If he does not bring proof, then his words are to be rejected,……”
Well, we have done exactly that. This whole article was about giving the proofs of why it is forbidden to be shunned, a handiwork of Satan, and any sane person would not receive a drink from one who is an open enemy to them.
Now let us juxtapose three texts together that Shaykh Uthaymeen uses and see if it makes any sense.
The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Every intoxicant is khamr and every intoxicant is haram.” Narrated by Muslim, 2003.
Shaykh Uthameen says,
Some people think that the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), “Whatever intoxicates in large quantities, a little of it is haram”, meaning that if a small percentage of an intoxicant is mixed with a large amount of a substance that is not intoxicating, then it is haraam. This is a misunderstanding of the hadith.
Yet didn’t Shaykh Uthaymeen just quote a hadith that said every intoxicant is kharm and every intoxicant is haram? Yet here we have Shaykh Uthaymeen saying, a small percentage of an intoxicant is fine??
That is a flat contradiction!
Not only that but Shaykh Uthaymeen says,
“Whatever intoxicates in large quantities, a little of it is haram” means that if a lot of something will cause intoxication, and a little of it will not cause intoxication, then a lot or a little are both haram, because you may drink a little that does not cause intoxication, then you may be tempted to drink more and become intoxicated.”
So here Shaykh Uthaymeen seems to have his wits about him. Here he is acknowledging the problem of saying it only contains a bit of intoxication because the person will end up drinking more and becoming intoxicated. This looks like the light is on upstairs. He has finally come to his senses!
Yet he finishes with saying,
” But if something is mixed with alcohol but the alcohol is a small amount and does not have any effect, then it is halal and does not come under the ruling of this hadith. “
What on Earth is going on! How does that not lead to the problem he mentioned in the paragraph just above the sentence? How does this not lead to someone drinking a small amount of another small amount and another small amount and another small amount?
Who or what determines what this ‘small amount‘ is? Who or determines the effects it will have on various weight classes, men, women, children?
Yet low and behold this so-called ‘non-alcohol‘ and so-called ‘low-level alcohol‘ is gaining ground in Saudi Arabia. Yes, that is correct, Saudi Arabia!
The truth of the matter is that psychologically this need or desire to drink alcohol or even ‘halal beer’ comes from an inferiority complex. The need to fit in and the desire to be accepted by western businessmen, the socially upward, etc…
Allah (swt) knows best!
We even have a video of Shaykh Saleh al Uthaymeen mentioning the drinking of alcoholic beverages with 1,2, and even 3% alcohol!!
Saleh al Uthaymeen was asked about beers. He said all the beers are halal in Saudi Arabia, then he continues to discuss the beers with alcohol content. He says even though if a beer has an alcohol content of about 1,2 or 3% it is still Halal.
Some people have misunderstood the hadith “Whatever intoxicates in larger quantities is also haram in smaller quantities”.
That if a smaller amount is mixed then it is haram as well, this is a wrong understanding.
Rather the correct understanding is if a larger quantity intoxicates and the smaller quantity doesn’t intoxicate then both quantities are haram, Why?
Because if a person takes a smaller quantity then his conscience asks for more and then he consumes a larger quantity thus becomes intoxicated.
However, if the amount of alcohol is smaller, then it is fine to drink it, as it is Halal.
Heineken has 3.2% alcohol content!!!
I have seen with my own eyes in Singapore in a place called Little India that our brothers from Bangladesh have begun picking up drinking.
They can get unruly and get into fights. In Algeria, alcohol consumption has picked up, which has led to domestic abuse and an increase in divorce cases.
Alcohol was the weapon of the colonizer against the Aboriginal people of Australia and against the Native people of North America.
These tailor-made fatwas are there for the benefit of the ruling elite and excuses for those who wish to satisfy their nafs! Can you imagine giving dawah at Hide Park while holding a can of 3% Heineken? Imagine going to a lecture on Islam and you have your beverage of choice, your 3% alcohol just sipping away on it during the conference!
Imagine breaking your fast with Heineken!
The unfortunate thing is, that it is actually Western nations and people that are slowing down their alcohol consumption whereas apparently Muslims and Muslim countries are slowly and steadily increasing their alcohol consumption!
May Allah (swt) protect the Ummah of the Blessed Messenger (saw). May Allah (swt) forgive the Ummah. It is my hope that the Muslim ummah will drop the scholars that call to fitna darkness and haram and follow those scholars that call them to peace, light and the permissible.
The following article has some excellent advice for Shaykh Saleh Al Uthaymeen.
Whether other drugs are taken around the same time
The amount consumed
The strength of the drink
Is there a safe alcohol limit?
Alcohol is a drug and, at the risk of being labeled a wowser, there is no safe level of drug use. The use of any drug, legal or illegal, always carries some risk. Due to the radically different ways that alcohol can affect people, there can be no one-size-fits-all safety rule for everyone. While there will always be some risk to general health and social well-being from consuming alcohol, there are ways to minimize the risks of alcohol-related harm.
So when Shaykh Saleh Al Uthayeem made such a fatwa did he consider.
size, weight, health, prescription drugs, amount consumed?No, he wrote a blank check by playing with what he felt were ambiguities in the sacred law!
Yet, when you look at the Qur’an carefully there are no ambiguities about this!
Dear brothers and sisters, the colonial powers introduced alcohol to the proud and noble Aborigines and Native American people before they worked their evil on them.
I leave you with the words of Allah (swt).
“Oh, you who have attained to faith! Intoxicants (khamru), and games of chance, and idolatrous practices, and the divining of the future are but a loathsome evil of Satan’s doing:’ shun it, (fa-ij’tanibuhu) then so that you might attain to a happy state!”(Qur’an 5:90)
“Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best. Indeed, your Lord is most knowing of who has strayed from His way, and He is most knowing of who is rightly guided.”(Qur’an 16:125)
﷽
Saudi Dr. Saad Al-Humid flees from debate with Shaykh Saeed Al-Qanoubi and his evasion of contact with Shaykh Dr.Khaled Abdali on the issue of the creation of the Qur’an.
Honorable Shaykh Saeed bin Mabrouk Al-Qanoubi is one of the contemporary Omani scholars specializing in the sciences of hadith. He is called by Omanis the Imam of the Sunnah and the Fundamentals, and they consider him their reference in the sciences of the Prophetic Sunnah.
Saad Al-Hamid is a professor of Hadith sciences at the Imam Muhammed bin Saud University in Medina (May Allah honor her). However, he appeared in a T.V episode with a stray Egyptian brother and hurled insult after insult and lied about Al-Ibadiyah.
Honorable Shaykh Saeed Al-Qanoubi stands upon what is the truth and the firm position. But those misguided people are not able to confront him.
We are posting this video to show the Muslims the reality and the truth. May Allah (swt) protect us from being perverts and those who treat lying like a minor thing.
Noble Shaykh Khalid Al Abdali (h)has an excellent 10-part series in Arabic on the Qur’an being created. Huge thanks to Brother Ahmad Abu Azzan for this!
Just as their premier scholar, Ibn Baz, refused to debate our Shaykh, the honorable Ahmed bin Hamad Al-Khalili (h). So his followers follow him in escaping from the people of truth and straightness. You can see that here:
“Travel through the land and observe how He began creation. Then Allah will produce the final creation. Indeed Allah, over all things, is competent.” (Qur’an 29:20)
﷽
Our colleague recounts their encounter with Shi’i
Now when I say, “My experience with the Shi’i”, I should clarify that by that I mean the 12er Shi’i. The bulk of my experience has been with them.
When I was studying at Zaytuna before it became Zaytuna college, a fellow student and I named Wasif and I went for an afternoon stroll. I recall how he was telling me, “C’mon brother, just one more burger before we walk the straight and narrow.” He had a love for American burgers and was bound and determined to have just one more before going completely halal.
The time for Maghrib came upon us and there was a mosque on the side of a street. We walked in, and it was certainly a 12er Shi’a Mosque. You can see pictures of various Imams on the wall. We did not hesitate to join the congregation for the Maghrib prayer. I only noted to myself afterward that it was interesting that the whole prayer was out loud. Of course, when we went back to Zaytuna, the brothers were sharing their day-to-day things, and the subject came up. One brother approached Wasif and I said, “You prayed behind the Shi’i. Your prayer may not be valid. You better go and talk to Shaykh Mohamed Yaqubi.”
Well, low and behold, we were advised to do our prayer over again. I cannot speak for Wasif, but I didn’t take the advice. I saw no valid reason to. They prayed and I prayed. My prayer is not for them or their school. It is for Allah (swt).
Then there was the time I went for the ATMT (Awareness Through Mosque Tour) training course in Manama, Bahrain. Very beautiful team, great host, and amazing instructors! Unfortunately, during my first Friday prayer there, after everyone does there two nawafil many gather in small groups to simply chit-chat. So, one of the people with us nearby was talking about how “The Shi’i are spreading like cock roaches”. I was really disgusted by the fact that he would like this about other Muslims, and in the mosque no less! So I told him, “We should not talk about other Muslims like this.”
On another occasion, we (the trainees) were going on a guided tour of museums. A Mualif (convert) sister, who came from either the Czech Republic or Hungary was talking to a very stout Arab man. As we were walking they were discussing the current(then) volatile situation in Iraq. I made the comment that, “Sunni and Shi’i Muslims should unite.” To which he quipped: “Who said they are Muslims?” I responded, “What do you mean?” He replied, “The Shi’i who said they are Muslims?” I responded, “Our scholars (Sunni) say they are deviant, but Muslims nonetheless.” At that time I was still following the Maliki School.
The adhaan had sounded. Frustrated with what I had just heard, I stormed off from the group and happened upon a local mosque just a few blocks away. I sat in the front row waiting for the Imam to come forward. The congregants of the Mosque seemed primarily Indo-Pakistani from what I could tell. One brother said the Iqama and an elderly man was pushing me to lead the salaah! I looked around and was wondering if the actual Imam would come forward, and they kept pushing me to lead the prayer. Well, I did just that. Let me tell you it is a huge thing to lead the prayer. It was like a huge weight to lead the congregational prayer. My respect to every Imam of every Masjid on the planet. You can really feel the weight of doing something that one would think is a simple task. After the salaah, I made du’a, did more rakats and left.
Later, that robust Arab brother came up to me during dinner and apologized to me. That took me by surprise because, to be honest, he did not strike me as the type of person who would do that. I later found out from some organizers of ATMT that this brother’s family was killed by a Shi’i death squad in Iraq. May Allah (swt) soften his heart and grant him ease.
Let me tell you, you need to choose your words very carefully when traversing this Earth. Once, in what I thought was a casual conversation, when talking about the region (I being from the States), I called the waters around Bahrain, the “Persian Gulf”. Boy! That’s a blunder! “It is the Arabian Sea!” One man interrupted. I responded with, “Why not call it the sea of Islam, or the Gulf of Allah?”
I remember not far from the hotel we were staying I went out one evening to do dhikr by the “Gulf of Allah” all the while staring off into the direction of Iraq. The cool breeze of the water filled the surrounding air. It was surreal because just a few hundred kilometers was the closest I ever was physically to a war zone. I reflected on the events of the day and made du’a that Allah (swt) would fill the region with peace.
Another encounter was with when I was in Singapore. A brother I met at the Sultan Masjid. Brother Ali Al Ausi, a very kind and jovial brother. I do not want to take from his good deeds by publicly stating the many good things he has done, but Al hamdulillah I saw first hand how he was there to help those in need (fisabilillah). We were roommates for a while, and sometimes I would lead the salaah and other times he would. l was sometimes amused by his method of salah because he would wear jeans that have loops (where the belt goes through) and he would put his thumbs there and hang them during the prayer. Quite cavalier I thought to myself! Haha.
He told about his family leaving Najaf and going to Russia and from there eventually settling in the United Kingdom. His father worked in pizza shops until he became a manager and worked very hard to put his family on a proper footing.
He also told me about his doubts concerning Shi’sm and that he agreed Muslims should be Qur’an centric. He told me about how Shi’i get worked up in the Mosque during sermons on Karbala and that they would want to go out and beat up the first Sunni they saw. By Allah, these are his words, not mine.
Interestingly enough, for those of you who remember the man in Iraq who took off his shoe and threw it at president George Bush Jr, well, that man (the man who threw the shoe) was going to marry his daughter to my friend Ali. They met in Damascus, Syria, and once Ali confided in her that he didn’t believe in some of the stuff about Shi’ism, she stormed off saying, “I would rather marry a Sunni than you!”
He also divulged to me about some rather wealthy Shi’a Arabs that would practice Muta with some of the poorer Arab women in Egypt, and he was rather disgusted by it all. I recall how he remarked, “If everyone is doing Muta, then who will get married?”
I just wanted to say that this book was given to me by my good friend Dr. Ali Al-Ausi, upon my request. He informed his mother that he had a friend wanting to know more about the 12er jurisprudence. The book is still in my collection. Brother Ali is one of the kindest, honest, generous, and most truthful Muslims I have ever met.
My meeting with the respected, Ali Larijani (The Former Speaker of the Parliament of Iran). This was an occasion at the Sultan Mosque in Singapore when his delegation came to Singapore. I was actually scheduled to give a talk to him and his delegation and there was a change of plans. I prepared before he came by trying to find out about his background. I saw that he studied Philosophy and particularly liked the philosopher Immanuel Kant.
His entourage created quite a shock at the Mosque because the ladies who were with them prayed in the main prayer hall (where the men usually pray). I was amused by it all. Nonetheless, after the prayer, I approached Ali Larijani, who had two bodyguards and one cleric with him. I greeted him, “Assalamu alaikum warahmutallahi wabaraktuh.” He replied the same. I then told him, “I am from America and I wish for peace between us and Iran.” He replied, “That they too wish for peace.” I then asked him what his favourite quote from Kant was. I could tell by his reaction. He was surprised. He responded with Kant quoting the golden rule: “Do not do that to others that you would not like them to do to you.”
Now that is the sum total of my personal experience and interaction with Shi’i or anything in relation to them in my lifetime. If you think, based upon what I shared above, that I hate Shi’i, that is really up to you.
That being said, when it comes to what I encounter online, via various social media platforms and what have you, I have found Shi’a (12er,especially) to be very dishonest, disingenuous and not very forward.
The one thing I do admire about Salafis, Sunnis of all stripes, even those who follow the Hafs Qur’an only religion. Ahmadiyyah etc. is there willingness to be forthright.
Their willingness to say, “I am such and such and this is where I stand.” With the Shi’i, I don’t get this. What I find is they often join groups posing that they are part of this or that and keeping quiet about being Shi’a.
Look! If we were in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon or other places where sectarianism is highly charged and a person’s life is in danger, I would get it. However, this skulking around various platforms pretending to be Hanafi, or Quranist. Anything else is simply just cowardly. It truly is.
All these people saying Ya Ali, Ya Ali Madad. How they would have loved to be at Karbala, or have lifted their sword for Ali. Look, mate, you cannot even be honest enough with yourself to say what you are openly.
And honestly, what I do see on YouTube, of the interactions of 12ers and Zaydi’s with Sunnis, is that the Shi’a end up getting intellectually owned, time and again.
“Indeed, the religion in the sight of Allah is Islam. And those who were given the Scripture did not differ except after knowledge had come to them – out of jealous animosity between themselves. And whoever disbelieves in the verses of Allah , then indeed, Allah is swift in account.” (Qur’an 3:19)
﷽
May Allah (swt) reward our brother who has done an excellent service in provided a translation to those seeking the truth in the English language. May Allah (swt) continue to bless and reward our noble Shaykh, and illustrious scholar, Abdullah bin Saeed Al Ma’mari (May Allah benefit us from him.)
“And whoever desires other than Islam as religion – never will it be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers.” (Qur’an 3:85)
“And whoever denies the faith – his work has become worthless, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers.” (Qur’an 5:5)
“But for those who deny the Truth, their deeds are like a mirage in the desert, which the thirsty supposes to be water until he comes to it only to find that it was nothing; he found instead that Allah was with Him and He paid his account in full. Allah is swift in settling the account. Or its similitude is that of depths of darkness upon an abysmal sea, covered by a billow, above which is a billow, above which is cloud, creating darkness piled one upon another; when he puts forth his hand, he would scarcely see it. He to whom Allah assigns no light, he will have no light. (Qur’an 29:39-40)
“And We will regard what they have done of deeds and make them as dust dispersed. (Qur’an 25:23)
“And it was already revealed to you and to those before you that if you should associate anything with Allah , your work would surely become worthless, and you would surely be among the losers.” (Qur’an 39:65)
As for the evidences that those rely upon, the followers of Perennialism, the religion of Humanism and the like:
“Indeed, those who believed and those who were Jews or Christians or Sabeans [before Prophet Muhammed] – those [among them] who believed in Allah and the Last Day and did righteousness – will have their reward with their Lord, and no fear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve.” (Qur’an 2:62)
“Indeed, those who have believed [in Prophet Muhammed] and those [before Him] who were Jews or Sabeans or Christians – those [among them] who believed in Allah and the Last Day and did righteousness – no fear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve.” (Qur’an 5:69)
It is important to understand that Islam has manifested through the previous Prophets/Messengers.
So this is why it is important to understand the word ‘Muslim’ as-a state of being.
So the verses above are in reference to those Christians, Sabeans and Jews who believed and died as Muslims will have no fear nor shall they grieve.
“And the same did Ibrahim enjoin on his sons and (so did) Yaqoub. O, my sons! surely Allah has chosen for you (this) faith, therefore die not unless you are Muslims (muslimuna). (Qur’an 2:132)
“O you who believe! be careful of (your duty to) Allah with the care which is due to Him, and do not die unless you are Muslims.” (Qur’an 3:102)
“And if only the People of the Scripture had believed and feared Allah, We would have removed from them their misdeeds and admitted them to Gardens of Pleasure. “ (Qur’an 5:65)
“Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the Scripture and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the worst of creatures.” (Qur’an 98:6)
It is narrated on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Blessed Messenger of Allah (saw) said:
By Him in Whose hand is the life of Muhammed, he who amongst the community of Jews or Christians hears about me, but does not affirm his belief in that with which I have been sent and dies in this state (of disbelief), he shall be but one of the denizens of Hell-Fire.
“There is nothing like Him: He is the All Hearing, the All Seeing.” (Qur’an 42:11)
“Do you say things regarding Allah that you do not know?” (Qur’an 7:28)
﷽
There are those who make it a point of aqidah/imam a creedal position to assert that Allah (swt) has two hands, and both of these hands are right hands and one of these right hands is a left hand.
We must accept this “without asking how“. Then they also turn around and say, “but the meaning is known.“
Interestingly this issue is not about denying/affirming any attribute of Allah (swt). Nor is about the way of the Salaaf. It is a simply a matter of does the Arabic language have idioms and expressions?
Apparently some people in the Muslim community simply do not get this! Kindly read the four articles linked at the end.
Thus, they will go on an inquisition and label as deviants anyone who does not hold to the idea that Allah (swt) has two hands, both of those hands are right hands and one of those right hands is a left hand.
The Salafi Aqidah Check List:
1. Two hands
2. Both his hands are right hands.
3. One of those right hands is a left hand.
4. He has two additional hands (we do not talk about). Which makes four but we affirm two.
That is correct you heard them. Allah (swt) has “two right hands“
I came across a Hadith of Sahih Muslim which states:
“Abdullah b. ‘Umar reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) saying: Allah, the Exalted and Glorious, would fold the Heavens on the Day of Judgment and then He would place them on His right hand and say: I am the Lord; where are the haughty and where are the proud (today)? He would fold the’ earth (placing it) on the left hand and say: I am the Lord; where are the haughty and where are the proud (today)?
The God of the Bible has hands (plural).
“The sea is his, for he made it, and his hands formed the dry land.” (Psalm 95:5)
“So I reflected on all this and concluded that the righteous and the wise and what they do are in God’s hands, but no one knows whether love or hate awaits them.” (Ecclesiastes 9:1 )
The God of the Bible has a right hand and Jesus is sitting next to it.
“He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.” (Hebrews 1:3)
The God of the Bible has a right hand and Jesus is standing next to it.
“But Stephen, full of the Holy Spirit, looked up to heaven and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God. “Look,” he said, “I see heaven open and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God.” (Acts 7:55-56)
*NOTE* NO WHERE DOES THE BIBLE SAY GOD HAS A LEFT HAND!
Thus it can be deduced that the God of the Bible has two right hands (if not more right hands).
Now you can clearly see from the above text that many Salafi preachers have asserted that Allah (swt) has two hands and that “both his hands are right hands.” They get that from the above hadith!
Mudraj – interpolated: an addition by a reporter to the text of the hadith being narrated. It even tells you in the hadith itself! Muhammad (one of the narrators said in his Hadith: “And both of His hands are right hands.”
How does one not see that?!
This cannot be said to be attributed to the Blessed Messenger (saw). This is the statement of the sub-narrator.
These people in their guilty conscious did not want people to think Allah (swt) has a left hand. Which also shows they are involved in dhan (speculation) about Allah (swt). They did not just let the words pass they had to make bold assertions without proof!
Some of the claimants to the Salaaf who hold these positions will expose themselves by blatantly comparing Allah (swt) to the creation by saying something along the following:
“You see akhi All of Allah’s attributes (hands, shin, face ect) can be described as right. Right here means blessed (تَيَمُّن). As Muslims we know the right is preferred and more virtuous than the left. For example the verse in the Qur’an that says:
“So those on the Right Hand (i.e. those who will be given their Records in their right hands) – how (fortunate) will be those on the Right Hand! (As a respect for them, because they will enter Paradise).” (Qur’an 56:8)
Or for example:
“And those on the Left Hand (i.e. those who will be given their Record in their left hands) – how (unfortunate) will be those on the Left Hand! (As a disgrace for them, because they will enter Hell).”(Qur’an 56:9)
This is Tamthil clear as day. Let us say for the sake of discussion that Allah (swt) does indeed have a left hand as the hadith Sahih Muslim clearly says he does above. Why would any attribute of Allah (swt) not be blessed? That is a bizarre thought.
Then, the person commits a clear act of Tamthil (likening Allah (swt) to the creation) by negating a left hand for Allah (swt)!! They do this by comparing/contrasting the unfortunate news of people receiving their records in their left hands and right hands on the day of judgement. But these are actual hands of people!
This claimant to Salafiyah has committed a clear act of Tamthil.
Is negating what clearly says he has: “a left hand” according to the sahih hadith.
Making claims that an attribute of Allah (swt) would not be blessed?!
ALLAH (SWT) ACTUALLY HAS FOUR HANDS, TWO HANDS, BOTH OF WHICH ARE RIGHT HANDS EXCEPT ONE OF THOSE RIGHT HANDS IS A LEFT HAND!
“And He (is) the One Who sends the winds (of glad news between the two hands of his Mercy, until, when they have carried clouds ”(Qur’an 7:57)
Allah sends winds like herald of glad news, between the two hands of his Mercy.
Now his Mercy has two hands?
So those who believe in literal translations tell us that Allah (swt) has two right hands, and he has an attribute of Mercy and this attribute has two hands. Are they also right hands? Does Allah (swt) now have a total of four hands?
Please see for yourself at Islam Awakened the literal translation that the Salafi do not use.
Thank you gentleman for some honest translations. So now not only does Allah (swt) have two hands, and both of his hands are right hands and one of those right hands is a left hand, but his attribute of mercy also has two hands.
One of their scholars likened Allah (swt) to the moon!
Let us get something out of the way from the very beginning. There is not a single narration from the Blessed Messenger (saw) where when he speaks of Allah’s “hands” where the Blessed Messenger (saw), says, “In a way that befits his majesty” or “unlike his creation.”
That is an open challenge. For the person who can bring that I will shutdown this website!
I challenge any of those people who make such a disclaimer statement after mentioning “hands”, “foot”, “eyes”, “shin” “leg” “foot” or “side” to show this!
The fact that such people have to put a disclaimer after such a statement is an innovation!
“They have not appraised Allah with true appraisal, while the earth entirely will be within His grip on the Day of Resurrection, and the heavens will be folded in His right hand. Exalted is He and high above what they associate with Him.”(Qur’an 39:67)
“Allah said, “O Iblis, what prevented you from prostrating to that which I created with My hands? Were you arrogant then, or were you already among the haughty?” (Qur’an 38:75)
Some of these people have tried to argue that this word translated as “hands” must be understood as “hands” as something special concerning the creation of Adam. However, this is refuted by the following text of the Qur’an:
“Do they not see that We have created for them from what Our hands have made, grazing livestock, and then they are their owners?”(Qur’an 36:71)
Are we to say that cattle have an advantage or distinction over other animals because they were created by the “hands” of Allah (swt)?
“And the sky we built it with hands.” (Qur’an 51:47)
Look at the following three Saudi English translations of the Qur’an translate the above text!!
“And the heaven We constructed with strength, and indeed, We are its expander.”(Qur’an 51:47 Sahih International)
“With power did we Construct heaven. Truly, We can extend the vastness of space thereof.” (Qur’an 51:47 Muhsin Khan & Muhammed Al Hilali)
“With power and skill did We construct the Firmament: for it is We Who create the vastness of pace.” (Qur’an 51:47 Yusuf Ali Saudi 1985)
The hands of Allah (swt) tied up?
“And the Jews say, ‘The hand of Allah is tied up.’ Chained are their hands, and cursed are they for what they say. Rather, both His Hands are extended, HE spends however He Wills.” (Qur’an 5:64)
It is obvious, to begin with, that this very verse is allegorical. The Jews are not literally saying that Allah’s hand is “tied up”. Rather they are claiming that Allah (swt) is not bestowing upon them what they feel he should bestow. What this verse means is that both the power and generosity of Allah (swt) is on full display.
“Indeed, those who pledge allegiance to you, they are actually pledging allegiance to Allah. The hand (yadu) of Allah is over their hands (aydihim). So he who breaks his word only breaks it to the detriment of himself. And he who fulfills that which he has promised Allah – He will give him a great reward.” (Qur’an 48:10)
This is a metaphorical usage of the word hand that is allowed within the context of the Qur’an itself. Will it be said that people who have no hands or people who are amputees could never make such a pledge?
The word that is used for hand (yadu) the singular noun is also used for the plural noun (aydihim) above. The apparent understanding of the text, is that Allah (swt) has a hand and people have hands. Yet the following verse should make the matter more clear.
“Oh Prophet, say to whoever is in your hands (aydikum) of the captives, “If Allah knows any good in your hearts, He will give you something better than what was taken from you, and He will forgive you, and Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 8:70)
Are we supposed to imagine that the Blessed Prophet (saw) was a giant with little tiny people in his hands!?!
“Moreover, whatever strikes you of disaster – it is for what your hands have earned, but He pardons much.” (Qur’an 42:30)
Are we to understand from the above verse that as long as we do evil with our tongues, eyes, feet that disaster will not befall us? As far as those who do not have physical hands does this verse still apply to them?
“And remember Our servants Ibrahim and Ishaq and Yaqoub, men who possessed hands (l-aydi) and vision.” (Qur’an 38:45)
l-aydi is a plural noun literally it would be hands.
Here the word hands literally does mean power. Look how virtually everyone under the sun translates this!
“That Allah may repay the truthful for their truthfulness.” (Qur’an 33:24)
﷽
مہمان: ہم نے آپ کے پیچھے نماز پڑھی اور آپ نے ہمارے پیچھے نماز پڑھی۔
شیخ احمد: "ملت اسلامیہ ایک امت ہے"
یہ ہمارا نقطہ نظر ہے اور ہم اس کی پیروی کرتے ہیں یہ ہمارے نبی، برگزیدہ، ان پر رحمتیں نازل فرمائے اور جس پر صحابہ کرام اور تابعین نے الحمد للہ رب العالمین کی پیروی کی۔ , #عمان کی برکت کے لیے خدا اپنے محترم شیخ، عالم کی حفاظت فرمائے۔
@AhmedHalKhalili
Mufti Tariq Masood gives a talk about the Ibadi school in Oman. Especially interesting is the comment section of other Muslims/Non Muslims who have lived in Oman and have been among the Ahl Haqq Wal Istiqamah.
There is great affinity of the Deobandi for the ‘Ulemah of Ahl Haqq Wal Istiqamah.
Since I have traveled with the tablighi jamaat, and have gone out on khuruj (with has the same etymological root as Kharijite), I guess that makes me and my brothers from the Tabligh, Khariji in that sense! HAHAHA!
Some little light humor is in order from time to time.
Any ways may Allah (swt) bless and guide Mufti Tariq Masood.
Our noble Shaykh, Ahmad bin Hamad al-Khalili, the grand mufti of Oman congratulated the Taliban on their takeover of Afghanistan.
“And say to the believing women that they are lower their gaze and guard their sexual organs; and that they are not to display their ornaments except for what appears thereof. And let them draw their head coverings (bikhumurihinna) over their bosoms.” (Qur’an 24:31)
“O Prophet! Say to your wives, your daughters, and the women of the believers that they are to cast their over-garments (jalābībihinna) over them. That is more convenient, that they be recognized, so that they won’t be molested.” (Qur’an 33:59)
﷽
“And say to the believing women that they are lower their gaze and guard their sexual organs; and that they are not to display their ornaments except for what appears thereof. And let them draw their head coverings (bikhumurihinna) over their bosoms.” (Qur’an 24:31)
Quite often some would point to the fact that the word ḥijāb (حجاب) is not used in Qur’an 24:31 in connection to the head scarf. Thus this lead them to the mistaken notion that woman are not commanded to cover thier hair.
The Qur’ān itself uses the word khimār (خمار) in Sūrah an-Nūr 24:31, where women are instructed to draw their khimār over their bosoms. In classical Arabic, khimār means a cloth or covering that drapes from the head, often covering the hair and neck.
The word ḥijāb (حجاب), on the other hand, literally means a barrier, partition, or veil. In the Qur’ān, it is used in this more general sense (e.g., 33:53, 42:51), not specifically for a head covering. Over time, however, Muslim societies began to use hijab as a broader term for modest dress, especially the headscarf.
“Verily, such (behaviour) annoys the Prophet, and he is shy of (asking) you (to go), but Allah is not shy of (telling you) the truth. And when you ask (his wives) for anything you want, ask them from behind a screen (ḥijābin), that is purer for your hearts and for their hearts.”
“It is not fitting for a man that Allah should speak to him except by inspiration, or from behind a veil(ḥijābin), or by the sending of a messenger to reveal, with Allah’s permission, what Allah wills: for He is Most High, Most Wise.” (Qu’ran 42:51)
There is a hijab between Allah and the creation. The black cloth that is put over the Kaaba in Mecca is a hijab. Men wear a hijab.
Most countries today have a hijab that is enforceable by law.
In most countries, public nudity is an offense that can garner either a fine or jail time. Hudud means: boundaries, limits or restrictions. What those boundaries and limits are can differ from country to country.
There are only a few remote places in the world where there are tribes in which full nudity takes place.
Even countries that allow full nudity at what are known as nudist colonies or nudist resorts these are select places. If you go outside those areas nude, you can and will be either fined or jailed.
That which the Muslim covers herself with is the Khimār.
So, technically:
Khimār = the headscarf covering the hair, neck, and often the shoulders.
Hijab = the general concept of modesty and barrier; in modern usage, often synonymous with headscarf.
Another mistake today is that people believe that wearing a khimar is enough. In the context of the verse, women are, by default, wearing khimar. They are being instructed to pull it down over their bosoms. Both men and women are expected to dress modestly. It is quite possible to find a woman who is not wearing a headscarf dressing more modestly than a woman who, for example, wears a headscarf and tight fitted jeans.
We believe that the Blessed Messenger (saw) explained the Qur’an to his people.
“And obey Allah and obey the Messenger. But if you turn away, then Our Messenger is responsible only for conveying the message clearly. (Qur’an 64:12)
The Muslim woman wearing the Khimār may vary according to custom and culture. Yet this is a transmitted practices that has reached us from the Blessed Prophet (saw).
It has reached us as Muslims across the sectarian divide that a Muslim woman covers all but the hands and face.
That is to say, the Shi’a, the Sunni, and Ibadi have all concurred on this. In fact, the only debate within the community is whether she should cover more than this, meaning — the face veil.
Islam does not oblige a person to wear specific type of clothing as long as it fulfils the purpose of modesty. Rather, this depends on the customs of society, so long as those customs do not contradict the guidelines of Islam.
In a world of nihilism and postmodernism, there can be a lot of pressure upon any faith tradition to amalgamate and transform their faith into something ‘more acceptable’ to an increasingly secularized world.
We feel the issue of women’s Khimār is one such issue. It seems to us that many struggle with this.
Where we feel Muslims do not ponder deeply enough is on the ‘default dress’. When this verse above was being revealed, what was the ‘default dress’ of the people of that time? What was the basic ‘skeleton’ if you will?
This is what has led many who are ignorant of the Arabic language as well as the context of the revelation will leave open the possibility of wearing tight and revealing clothing, or even skirts. It really seems that we could offer a better response than to simply cave in completely to postmodernism. It may be cliché, but a saying comes to mind, ‘If you do not stand for something you will fall for anything.’
There is a real disdain for Muslim women who choose to continue to observe the Khimār as explained by the Blessed Messenger (saw) and preserved in the mass transmitted Sunnah.
Examples where the dress code can be relaxed.
Such elderly women are past the prospect of marriage, there is no blame on them if they lay aside their (outer) garments(thiyābahunna), provided they do not display their beauty/adornment. But it is best for them to modestly refrain: “And God is One Who sees and knows all things” (Qur’an 24:60)
It can be a normal garment and an outer garment. (11:5; 24:58).
In verse Q 24:60, we clearly note that an older woman is permitted to remove this ‘thobe’ without wanton display of her beauty. This cannot refer to her normal garments, as if these were to be removed she would be left exposed.
“The women may relax (their dress code) around their fathers, their sons, their brothers, the sons of their brothers, the sons of their sisters, the other women, and their (female) servants. They shall reverence Allah. Allah witnesses all things.” (Qur’an 33:55)
Remember the five essential objectives of the Sharīʿah (maqāṣid al-sharīʿah). These objectives are:
Protection of religion (ḥifẓ al-dīn)
Protection of life (ḥifẓ al-nafs)
Protection of intellect (ḥifẓ al-ʿaql)
Protection of lineage/progeny (ḥifẓ al-nasl)
Protection of wealth (ḥifẓ al-māl)
“O Prophet! Say to your wives, your daughters, and the women of the believers that they are to cast their over-garments over them. That is more convenient, that they be recognized so that they won’t be molested.” (Qur’an 33:59)
In this case if you stand out in a way that directly identifies you as a Muslim the purpose of this guidance is defeated. You will be recognized and you will be molested. You might even be killed.
There is a principle in Shari’a law
لا ضرر ولا ضرار
“Lā ḍarar wa lā ḍirār” = No harm and no reciprocating harm.
Abu Sa‘īd al-Khudri reported: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “There should be no harm or reciprocal harm. Whoever causes harm, Allah harms him, and whoever makes things difficult, Allah makes things difficult for him.
a) A woman who chooses Islam as her faith. If she outwardly dresses or identifies as a Muslim, she could be assaulted or attacked. She does not wear the Khimār. She can dress modestly and, as Allah (swt) cautions us: Do not transgress the limits. A relaxing of outward garb is not an invitation to abandon modesty altogether. That woman lives as such until she can travel to a place where Muslims are numerous, and she can fulfill the commands.
b) A woman who was born and raised a Muslim. Suddenly there is news that Muslims are getting attacked and killed wherever they are found. This woman also does not need to outwardly identify nor dress as a Muslim until she can reach a place where Muslims are numerous, and she can fulfill the commands.
This was a panel that Allah (swt) graced our brother to do for the Sultan Masjid ‘mini-gallery’ in Singapore. It is the first ‘mini-gallery’ in any masjid anywhere. Al hamdulilah.
We would encourage readers to read this very excellent and brief over view of the topic here:
“Do not mix truth with falsehood and do not deliberately hide the truth.”(Qur’an 2:42)
﷽
What we hear may not necessarily be the truth. Nowadays the anti-Sufi groups, which are at the same time strict followers of Ibn Taimiyya, as well as Sufi groups (namely the Ashari) affiliated with theological schools that Ibn Taymiyya was not affiliated with have both misrepresented and seemingly suppressed the truth about this iconic figure in the history of Islam.
When searching the history of Ibn Taimiyya we find that he himself was not against ‘Sufism’ but he was even adorned with the cloak (khirqa) of shaikhood of the Qadiri Order! Believe it or not, Ibn Taimiyya was himself a Sufi, but he accepted Tasawwuf on the condition that it follows shari’ah, which no Sufi order objects to. In fact in the Hidayua al-Addhkiya ila Tariq al-awliya by A’ynal Din b. Ali Ma’bari a very beautiful description is given to Shari’a (Laws), Tariqah (path), and Haqiqa (Truth.)
He said, “Shari’a is like a boat, Tariqa is like an ocean and Haqiiqah is like the precious pearl. Whoever aspires after the pearl must (definitely) embark on the boat and then divine into the ocean.” Logically nobody reaches the pearl without having to sail into the boat. In this book will you find many more shocking realities about Ibn Taimiyya that contradict the very foundation of the neo-Salafite movements. It will also shed light upon the reason why many Sufi groups affiliated with theological positions that Imam Ahmad, Shaikh Abdul Qadir Al Jilani, and Ibn Taimiyya were not upon may like to cast aspersions upon the shaykh.
In fact, Ibn Taimiyya says: “The miracles of saints are absolutely true and correct, by acceptance of all Muslim scholars. And the Qur’an has pointed to it in different places and the Hadith of the Prophet (s) have mentioned it, and whoever denies the miraculous power of saints are only people who are innovators and their followers.”
IBN TAYMIYYA AND TASAWWUF.
Orientalist, Modern Islamist, and Sufi orders who follow theological schools that Ibn Taimiyya, Imam Ahmad, and Shaikh Abdul Qadir Al Jilani were not upon having contributed to the misrepresentation of Ibn Taymiyya as an enemy of Sufis. This has been propounded even more strongly lately by the scholars of the “neo-Salafi” school, whose followers claim to strictly adhere to Ibn Taymiyya’s teachings, but who in fact have severely deviated from them in this area of understanding.
However, regardless of the desires of one group or another, the facts provide a clarification of reality: that Ibn Taymiyya accepted Tasawwuf on the condition that it follows shari’ah, and that Ibn Taymiyyah himself was not only a Sufi follower but was adorned with the cloak (khirqa) of the shaikhood of the Qadiri Order.
A closer look at the facts:
Ibn Taymiyya’s supposed anti-Sufism sentiment is a clear cut misrepresentation of the truth. To conclude that Ibn Taymiyya opposed Sufism/Tasawwuf as a whole, simply because he considered particular activities or statements by some individuals and groups as unacceptable in shari’ah, is like concluding that he opposed the Science of Fiqh because he criticized the viewpoints and practices of certain fuqaha (jurists). This would be more than exaggeration, it is completely inaccurate.
Ibn Taymiyya received initiation as a Sufi Sheikh. The fact that Ibn Taymiyya himself was Sufi has been conveniently ignored by those who chose to misrepresent him, and with good reason: how could someone say that Ibn Taymiyya opposed Sufism/Tasawwuf and that he was a Sufi/mutassawwif/ in one and the same breath? Hence the corollary statement to Ibn Tamiyya’s alleged anti-Tassawuf stance is that “he could certainly not have been a Sufi,” compounding inaccuracy with speculation.
Clear proof that most of the great ‘ulama and the major figures of the Four Schools of Islam were trained in tassawwuf exists in the specialized biographical books known as “Tabaqat.” Tasawwuf was part and parcel of the complete education of a Muslim scholar, from the beginning of the formation of the Islamic curriculum until the gradual weakening and dismantling of the institutions and figures of Islamic higher education in the twentieth century. This resulted in the replacement of the Islamic ‘ijaza’ system (being “licensed” or receiving permission to teach from one’s own teacher), with the modern doctoral system of degrees, inherited from the West.
Far from denigrating or attacking the Sufi component of the Islamic sciences like some of our contemporaries who claim him as their reference, Ibn Taymiyya, in fact, praised it in his time, endorsed it, participated in it, and achieved its highest formal level, which is to receive the khirqah, the equivalent of the ‘ijaza or permission in Sufi terms, from a Sufi shaikh. The khirqah, representing the cloak of the Prophet (saw), is passed to a student of a Sufi shaikh, only when he is seen to be fit and fully qualified to pass on the teachings he has acquired from his shaikh in turn to students of his own. In this he has simply been one of many among the Hanbali ‘ulama who both educated him or were educated by him, to undergo the expected training and instruction in the various disciplines of Tassawuf appropriate to the scholarly vocation.
Many well-read specialists of Islam are to this day still surprised to hear that Sufis al-Ansari al-Harawi (d.481 H.) and ‘Abdul Qadir al-Jilanai (d. 561 H) were both very strong Hanblis. When one refers to their biographical notices in Ibn Rajab’s [student of Ibn Qayyim] “Dhail ‘ala Tabaqat al-Hanbabila,” one finds al-Ansari referred to as “as-Sufi” and Jilani referred to a “az-zahid.” Ibn Rajabs use of these terms in close proximity indicates their inter-changeability.
Ibn Rajab’s two-volume biographical work covers a period of three centuries, from the middle of the 5th century Hijri to the middle of the 8th. Identifiable as Sufis are over one-third of all the Hanbalis scholars treated by Ibn Rajab and other sources from the same time period.
The theory, presented by some Orientalists, that Abdul Faraja Ibn al-Jawzi (d. 597 H) and Iban Taymiyya (d.728 H), were antithetical to Tasawwuf does not stand up to scholarly scrutiny. In fact, neither of these Hanbali doctors of law qualifies as in any way antithetical to Tasawwuf.
Let us examine their record.
Ibn al-Jawzi’s work Talbis Iblis is perhaps the most important single factor in keeping alive the notion of this hostility towards Sufism. In reality, this work was not written against Tasawwuf as such at all, nor against Sufis alone. However, it was an indictment of all unorthodox doctrines and practices (according to Sunnis), regardless of their sources, and opposed any which were innovations in the rule of shari’ah-i.e not found in the Qur’an and Sunnah, wherever found in the Islamic community, especially in Ibn al-Jawzi’s time. It was written against specific innovated practices of many groups, including philosophers (mutakallimoon), theologians, traditionalists (‘ulama-al-hadith), jurists (fuqaha), preachers, philologist, poets, and Sufis. It is in no way an indictment of the subjects they studied and taught, but were an indictment of specific introductions of innovation into respective disciplines and fields.
Ibn al-Jawzi has written other works, which are not only in favor of Tasawwuf, but present its greatest figures in the most complimentary light. Two works considered as pillars in the field of Tasssawuf are Safwat as-Safa and Minhaj al Qasidin wa Mufid as-Sadiqin. In addition, full-length biographies in praise of the early Sufis have been penned by Ibn al Jawzi, including Fada’il Hasan al-Basri (The Gracious Character of Hasan al-Basri), and Manaqib Ibrahim bin Adhan, (The Good qualities of Ibrahim bin Adham), Manaqib Bishr al-Hafi, Manaqib Ma’ruf al-Karhkhi, “Manaqib Rabi’a al-Adawiyya,. In sections of his book al-Muntazam many biographical notices may be found in praise of the Mutasawwifeen.
IBN TAYMIYYA’S DONNING OF THE QADIRI CLOAK.
As for Ibn Taymiyya, one would search in vain to find his works the least condemnation of Sufism as a discipline. He opposed the seemingly pantheist description of certain Sufis, known as the “ittihadiyya,” but he showed his great admiration for the works of the Sufis Junayd Baghdadi, Sahl at-Tustari, Bayzaid al-Bistami, Abu Talib al-Makki, al-Qusharyri, Adul Qadir al-Jilani, and Abu Hafs as-Suhrawardi.
At present we are in the position to show that this allegedly great opponent of Sufism was himself a Sufi, who belonged to at least one ‘tariqat’, but especially to that of ‘Abdul Qadir Jilani.
In a manuscript of the Hanbali ‘alim, Shaikh Yusuf bin ‘Abd al-Hadi (d. 909H), entitled Bad’ al-‘ula bi labs al-Khirqa [found in Princeton, Sorbonne, and Damascus, Ibn Taymiyya is found in a Sufi spiritual genealogy with other well-known Hanbali scholars, all except one (Say. Jilani) heretofore unknown as Sufis. The links in this genealogy are, in descending order:
Abdul Qadir Jilani (d. 561 H.)
Abu ‘Umar bin Qudama (d. 607 H.)
Muwaffaq ad-Din bin Qudama (d. 620 H.)
Ibn Abi ‘Umar bin Qudama (d. 682 H.)
Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728 H.)
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 751 H.)
Ibn Rajab (d. 795 H.)
(Both Abu ‘Umar b. Qudama and his brother Muwaffaq received the khirqa directly from Abdul Qadir Jilani himself.) Further corroboration of two links separating him from ‘Abdul Qadir Jilani comes from Ibn Taymiyya himself, as quoted in a manuscript of the work al-Mas’ala at-Tabriziyya (manuscripts, Damascus, 1186 H):
“labistu al-khiraqata mubarakata lish-Shaikh ‘Abdul Qadir wa bayni wa baynahu ‘than” “I wore the blessed Sufi cloak of ‘Abdul Qadir, there being between him and me two.”
Ibn Taymiyya is quoted by Yusuf ibn ‘Abd al-Hadi, affirming his Sufi affiliation in more than one Sufi order:
“Have worn the Sufi cloak [khirqata at-Tasawwuf] of a number of shaikhs belonging to various tariqas [min turuqi jama’atin min ash-shyukhi], among them the Shaikh ‘Abdul Qadir al-Jiliani, whose tariqa is the greatest of the well-known ones.”
Further on he continues: “The greatest tariqa [ajallu-t-turuqi] is that of my master [sayyidi], ‘Abdul Qadir al-Jilani, May Allah have mercy on him.”
[Found in “Al-Hadi” manuscript in Princeton Library, collection folio 154a, 169b, 171b-172a and Damascus University, copy of original Arabic manuscript, 985H.: also mentioned in “at-Taylani”, manuscript Chester Beatty 3296 (*) in Dublin, folio 67a.]
Additional evidence of Ibn Taymiyya’s connection to the Qadiri silsila (lineage) is found in his lengthy commentary of the seminal Sufi work by his grand shaikh, ‘Abdul Qadir Jilani, entitled “Futuh al-Ghaby.” [This is found in a Princeton manuscript, uncatalogued, also in Leipzig University Library, Arabic manuscript #223, and Istanbul University, Turkish translation, “Futuh ulGayb Hakkinda Yorum”]
The essence of this commentary on “Futuh al-Ghaib” is to show that Sufism, when orthodox, is completely in consonance with the Qur’an and sunnah and that the consensus of the community. A Tasawwuf not based on the revealed law is heretical. In his commentary, Ibn Taymiyya upholds ‘ilham’ or Sufi inspiration, as evidence stronger than weak analogy [qiyas], or a weak tradition [hadith], or istis-hab cited by those who are immersed in fiqh, or divergences of the law [khilaf], or the principles and sources of the law [usul-al-fiqh]. HE places inspiration [ilham] on a level of legally valid evidence on which to base a preference for one action against another when all other sources fail.
The perfection of the soul, says Ibn Taymiyya, does not consist in mere knowledge. On the contrary, along with the knowledge concerning Allah, there must necessarily be love [mahabba] of Allah, worship of Allah, and the turning back to Him in repentance. Real tawhid consists in worshiping no one but Allah, and worship calls for perfect love [kamat al-hubb][, perfect veneration [kamal at-ta’zim], perfect hope, fear, reverence, and respect [kamal ar-raja’ wal-khishya wal-ijlal wal-ikram].
Insh’Allah there will be more to come.
There are a number of reasons why many different groups (especially those who want division and discord) among Muslims would keep this information hidden.
#1) Sunni Muslims who belong to Sufi groups and associated with the Ashari theological school don’t want people to know Ibn Taymiyyah who was Athari in his school was a Sufi. This gives the impression that Sufism is a monopoly of those who follow the Maturdidi or Ashari theological position.
#2) Those Sunni Muslims who belong to the theological schools of the Maturdidi and Ashari and also follow Sufi tariqat have high esteem for Sheikh Abdul Qadir Al Jilani (who was Athari in creed) don’t want people to connect the dots. The reason being is it takes the wind out of the sails of those who make takfir upon the Atharis. They dare not do this with Sheikh Abdul Qadir Al Jilani.
#3) Those who say they follow the ‘Salafi Manhaj‘ -they rely heavily upon Ibn Taimiyya and they are harsh in their critique of Sufism and Tassawuf in general. They would not want any of their followers to even get the slightest whiff that Ibn Taimiyya belonged to a Sufi order.
#4) It is a useful tool in the heads of those who have machinations upon Muslim lands and have a vested interest in keeping the divide going among Muslims; especially Sunni Muslims (the largest group).
If you enjoyed this please feel free to read part 2.
Prima Quran 