Category Archives: Beliefs and Practices

Beliefs and Practices

Marrying The People Of The Book & Consumption Of Animals Slaughtered By Them.

QUESTION:

As Salaam Alaikum,

Dear Mufti,

I will like to get some clarification regarding the people of the book. Are we, as Muslim, allowed to consume their meats? Also, is it permissible for Muslim men to Marry women from the people of the book’.

 

ANSWER:

As Salaam Alaikum,

The meats slaughtered by the People of the Book would only be permissible if they uttered the name of Allah (God) at the time of slaughtering. If this did not take place, then it would not be permissible to eat.

With respect to the verse of the Quran which states:

“And the food of the People of the Book is lawful for you” (Surah Al M’aidah Verse 5), the scholars have stated that the reason for this allowance is that the People of the Book were also ordered to slaughter in the name of Allah (God). Although, many of their teachings were changed, they continued to practise upon this teaching at the time of the Prophet (S.A.S.). As such, since they conformed to the law, which also came in the Holy Quran, the Muslims were allowed to partake of their slaughtered animals. (Tafseer Ibn Katheer Volume 2 Page 436 Dar Al Kitab Al Arabi Beirut 2013)

While writing on this, the great scholar Shaikh Muhammad Idris Al Kandhlawi writes, “The slaughtered meats of the People of the Book (Jews and Christians) are Halal (permissible) for the Muslims when three conditions are fulfilled.The first condition is that the animal is not from among those which have been made Haram for Muslims in the Quran and the Sunnah, like that of the swine etc. The second condition is that at the time of slaughter, the name of Allah (God) must be said. Any other name besides this, must not be uttered. This is in conformity to the original belief of the People of the Book, that it is not permissible to slaughter an animal calling a name besides the name of Allah (God). On account of this original belief, Allah granted permission to the Muslims to eat from the slaughtered meats of the People of the Book on the condition that they call the name of Allah (God), and must not intend to honour and glorify another being.

Ali (R.A.), Abdullah Bin Umar (R.A.), Aisha (R.A.) and other Sahabahs (companions of the Prophet (S.A.S) and Tabi’een have stated that the animals of the People of the Book which are Halal for Muslims are those on which the name of Allah (God) has been recited at the time of slaughter. If the name of the Messiah, Jesus, Isa or Ezra have been uttered, the animals will not be Halal.

Allah has prohibited the Muslims from eating such animals and said, “And do not eat from that which the name of Allah (God) has not been mentioned upon it. Certainly this is transgression.”

‘Allah also stated “Forbidden unto you (for food) are carrion and blood and swine, and that which has been dedicated unto any being other than Allah” (Surah Ma’idah Verse 3).’

‘As such, animals on which the name of Jesus or Ezra have been mentioned while slaughtering will fall into the category of that which has been dedicated unto another being other than Allah and this is Haram.’

‘Thus, only such slaughtered animals (meats) of the People of the Book will be considered as Halal which conforms to the teachings of their original and true religious laws (as given in their Shariah). As for that which they do in accordance to the new beliefs and practices which have been changed from the original laws, these shall not be considered as Halal.’

‘This is the position and the Madhab of Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Abu Yusuf, Imam Muhammad and Imam Zufar (Ahkam Al Quran – Al Jasas). This is the most correct and preferred ruling in this matter.’

‘The third condition for the meat of the People of the Book to be Halal for Muslims is that a Christian or Jew must not be an apostate. That is, the Christian or Jew must not be a person who was once a Muslim and then left Islam to accept Christianity or Judaism. Such a person is considered to be an apostate and not one from the People of the Book. Therefore, if the People of the Book do not mention the name of Allah (God), or they mention the name of Jesus or the Holy Ghost, or they mention the name of ‘the son of God’ while slaughtering, then these animals (meats) will not be permissible for Muslims to consume.’ (Ma’ariful Quran by Shaikh Hafiz Allama Muhammad Idrees Kandhlawi – Maktab Al Maa’rif Sindh Pakistan 1433 AH.)

With respect to the modern day Christians, it is observed that most of them are not aware of their own law which states that they must mention the name of God while slaughtering their animals. Hence, they do not do it. As such, Muslims cannot eat from their meats. Besides this, it is seen that most of them purchase over-the-  counter meats which are slaughtered by all different types of people. They are not normally concerned about who slaughters the animals / poultry or where it comes from. Once it is healthy / okay to consume, they purchase these meats. They are normally not bothered about fulfilling any law whatsoever, which has been given in their scriptures. Therefore, most of them do not follow / adhere to the dictates of their revealed laws of Christianity regarding Halal and Haram. As such, Muslims must not become negligent in this matter and go about consuming the meats of the People of the Book thinking that the name of Allah (God) was mentioned at the time of slaughter.

Indicating to this prohibition, the great scholar Qadhi Muhammad Thana’ullah (A.R.) writes, “And the most sound and preferred view is that animals slaughtered by the People of the Book on which the recitation of the name of Allah (God) has been left out intentionally, or they have been slaughtered in a name other than that of Allah (God), are not lawful – when it is certain that the name of Allah (God) was not recited upon them, or a name other than that of Allah was taken, or this becomes the common habit of the People of the Book.” (Tafseer Mazhari Volume 3 page 253 Darul Ishaat Karachi Pakistan 2010).

With respect to marrying a woman from the people of the book (Jew or Christian), the Holy Quran has given an allowance for this and stated “This day (all) good foods have been made lawful, and the food of those who were given the scripture is lawful for you and your foods is lawful for them. And (lawful in marriage are) chaste woman from among the believers and chaste woman from among those who were given the scripture before you, when you have given them their due compensation desiring chastity, not lawful sexual intercourse or taking (secret) lovers. And whoever denies the faith – his work has become worthless, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers.” (Surah Ma’idah verse 5).

While explaining the above, scholars have mentioned that an allowance has been given to marry women of the People of the Book since their religion is based on the concept of the Oneness of Allah and the other beliefs which are given in Islam. Of all the religious paths that are followed, the People of the Book are closest to Islam on account of their fundamental beliefs of Tawheed (Oneness to Allah), Prophethood and the Day of Judgement. Their only difference with Islam is with respect to their non-acceptance of the prophethood of  Prophet Muhammad (S.A.S.). It is thus expected that if a Muslim man gets married to a woman of the ‘people of the Book’, then he will teach her the true and beautiful teachings of Islam which will then bring her to the fold of Islam.

The purpose of this allowance is not to encourage such marriages where Muslim men will forsake Muslim women and go after Christian or Jewish women for marriage. It is only an allowance which has been granted in order to remove difficulties or hardships which may arise at different times and places. A situation may arise where Muslim men (born Muslim or new converts) may find themselves living in a city, country or territory where it is difficult to find Muslim women (living there) to marry. In cases like these, by being allowed to marry Christian / Jewish women, they can save themselves from falling into sin, and still continue to live as Muslims with their families. Thus, in giving such allowances, Allah has made Islam a religion of ease which can be practised at all times and all places.

It must be understood however, that ‘People of the Book’ mentioned in the verse refers to Christians and Jewish women who are chaste and follow their religious teachings of their scriptures. Their beliefs and practices must conform to the laws of their religion and they must not be Christians or Jews in name only, as seen today. Many Christian / Jewish women today do not follow their religious teachings as given in their revealed scriptures and taught by their respective Prophets, Jesus / Moses. In matters of beliefs, they are liberal and at times secular. As for their practices, these are simply based on the culture of the day which lack the moral values expounded in the Gospel and Torah. As stated by Islamic scholars, women of such background are not lawful for Muslim men to marry.

It is an account of such drastic changes which have come about in the teachings and practices of the people of the book, that Companions like Abdullah bin Umar (R.A.) and others held the position that it was not permissible to marry their Christian or Jewish women. When asked about this opinion, Abdullah bin Umar (R.A.) said, ‘Certainly Allah has made the polytheists women Haram for Muslims, and I do not know of any shirk more grave than a woman should say that her Lord and God is Jesus the son of Mary.’ (Ahkam Al Quran by Abu Bakr Al Jasas. Suhail academy Lahore Pakistan.)

Not with standing this view of Abdullah bin Umar (R.A.), the view of the majority of Sahabahs and Tabi’een is that marriage with Christian or Jewish women is lawful as it is mentioned in the Holy Quran. However, one must be careful in entering such marriages since it may be a cause of disruption and disorder in one’s religion, children and family life.

It was on account of the problems which could come about in such marriages that the Khalifah, Umar bin Khatab (R.A.) detested such marriages with the women of the People of the Book, and asked Muslims not to enter such marriages. In fact, it is narrated that when Umar (R.A.) found out that the companion Huzaifah (R.A.) got married to a Jewish woman, he wrote a letter to him asking him to divorce her. Huzaifah wrote to him saying, ‘O Commander of the faithful! Is she unlawful for me?’ Umar (R.A.) responded by saying, ‘I am not saying that she in unlawful, but women from these people do not generally have chastity. Therefore, I fear lest immodesty finds entry into your homes through this channel.’ (Ahkam Al Quran – Jasas – Maariful Quran Volume 3, page 81 Farid Book Depot).

It is also narrated that Umar (R.A.) wrote another letter to Huzaifah (R.A.) saying, ‘I hereby put you on oath that you would, before you put down this letter from your hands, divorce and release her, because I fear other Muslims start following you and begin choosing women from amongst the People of the Book because of their beauty (bypassing Muslim women in the process). What greater trial there could be for Muslim women.’ (Kitabul  Athaar – Ma’ariful Quran Volume 3 page 81 – Farid book depot).

A similar event also occurred with two other companions who got married to women from the People of the Book. When Umar (R.A.) heard about this, he became very angry and displeased with them for what they did. Upon this, the companions divorced these women. (Fathul  Qadeer – Ibn Al Humam – Tafseer Mazhari Volume 3 Page 255 Darul Ishaat Karachi 2010).

The action of Umar (R.A.) was on account of the harms and problems which could possibly come about in such marriages. It is for this reason that although scholars have stated that such marriages are lawful, they have unanimously agreed that it is Makrooh (reprehensible). (Tafseer Mazhari Volume 3 page 255.)

Scholars have further explained this matter and stated that the allowance to marry a Christian woman is only given when she does not say that Jesus is God. If she has the belief in the divinity of Jesus, marriage with her will not be permissible. (Mustasfa). It is further written by the scholars that if Christians say that Jesus is God, then it will not be permissible to eat their slaughtered meats, and it will not be Halal to marry their women, since they will be considered polytheists (Musrik). Scholars have held this as their official verdict (Fatawa). (Tafseer Mazhari Volume 3 page 256.)

Having given varying opinions on this issue (of marriage with Christian / Jewish women), the great Mufasir, Qadhi Muhammad Thana’ullah (A.R) writes. ‘It is abundantly clear from the verse of Quran that the phrase ‘People of the Book’, refers to those who are believers in Tawheed (Oneness of Allah) and not those who associate partners with Allah (Mushrik). The reason for this is that Allah has clearly prohibited marriage with polytheist women by saying ‘do not marry the polytheist women until they believe’, and there is no difference between the shirk committed by an idolater and the shirk committed by a Christian (who joins partners with Allah and says that Jesus is God / Lord or the son of God and then worships Jesus instead of Allah.) (Tafseer Mazhari Volume 3 page 256, Darul Ishaat 2010).

The above statement makes it clear that marriage with Christian women will only be allowed when they believe in Allah (God) as the only One God, and do not associate partners with Him. Those who believe in Trinity and believe that Jesus is the son of Allah or a reincarnation of Allah, are not from among those who believe in Tawheed (Oneness of Allah), and as such, marriage will not be permissible with them.

Besides the above explanation, it is important for Muslims of today to recognise the great harms and dangers that come about on account of contracting a marriage with a modern Christian woman who holds on to the beliefs of Trinity and divinity of Jesus.

When a Muslim man marries a Christian woman, then he has no choice except to compromise in his religion and beliefs. As a Muslim who firmly believes in One God, Allah, he must now allow his wife to commit shirk with Allah. When he worships the True One God, he must allow his wife to worship a human being, Jesus.

His entire life will be filled with compromising his true beliefs and practises as a follower of the only true religion. Besides this, when it comes to children, then he, as a Muslim father, has to compromise further, in order to maintain peace and goodness with his Christian wife. He has to allow his children to go to church and learn the beliefs and practices of Christianity. It is to be noted that children are normally closer to their mother and are attached to her. Without being influenced, the children will naturally adopt the ways and practices of the Christian mother. This mean, that the children of a Muslim man may grow up to be Christians, instead of Muslims.

These, and many other harms are witnessed in many mixed marriages of this type. As such, while some Muslim men may be inclined to go in this direction, They must give careful thought and consideration to who are truly ‘the people of the book’. As mentioned by the Islamic scholars, a Christian woman who believes in the Trinity, and worships Jesus as a god, is a Mushrik who is committing shirk with Allah.

And Allah Knows best

Mufti Waseem Khan

19/10/2017

Can a baby shower be done?

السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته

What’s the Maslah on baby Showers?

Wa Alaikum Assalaam,

In reality, a ‘baby shower’ is the term given for an occasion where ladies come together to meet the expectant mother and bring along gifts for the newborn or the mother. In essence, there is nothing wrong with this as long as it is free from Un Islamic practices and behavior, and it is not done for the sake of following the customs of the unbelievers.

As such, if the expectant mother invites sisters to come together at her place, and they bring gifts for the newborn and spend time with the mother, it will be permissible with the above conditions.

And Allah Knows Best.

Mufti Waseem Khan.

24/04/17

Fatwa concerning the Ahmadiyyah

Salaam, I am a revert to Islam.  Can you give me some clarity on Ahmadiyya.  I am a Sunni Muslim.  I’m learning more about the different sect in Islam.  And I’m a bit confused because one of my friends who are Ahmadiyya told me that Jesus and prophet Muhammed saw, prophesized about Mirza Ghulam being a leader.  Can you tell me if this was mentioned anywhere.  I believe in the Qur’an and Sunnah.  I’ve learned so much from yourself and your tv programs.  Presently I don’t go to mosque cause the ones close to me are Ahmadiyya. So I will be grateful if you help me understand thank you.

Wa Alaikum Assalaam,

According to all Scholars of Ahl Sunnah Wal Jammah (Sunni Muslims) in the world, the Ahmadiiyahs and Qadiyanis are not considered to be Muslims. They are out for the pale of Islam. From the time Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian started to make certain claims, all the Scholars living at that time until today have condemned him, and his claims were totally against the clear cut teachings of the Holy Quran and the Sunnah of the Prophet (S.A.S). His claims are absurd and insane, and no one from among the Sunni Scholars has accepted him or his followers to be Muslims.

In fact, the official Supreme Court ruling in Pakistan and the Middle East countries have ruled that they are not Muslims. Prophet Muhammad (S.A.S) and Prophet Jesus (A.S) never prophesied or said anything about Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Instead, the Prophet (S.A.S) warned us in a tradition that 30 imposters and liars will come on the earth, all of whom will claim to be prophets. At the end of the tradition he said, ‘But behold! I am the last and final prophet, the seal of all prophets, and there shall be no prophet after me.’

This is another Fatwa given in this regard.

Question: Dear Mufti,
Assalamu Alaikuim
On Thursday 30th October, 2014, The Ahmadiyya Anjuman Isha’at-i-islam incorporated of Trinidad and Tobago published an article in the Trinidad and Tobago Guardian daily newspaper on page A28.  It was always my belief that they rejected our beloved Rasool (peace be upon him) as the last and final messenger thus making them non-Muslims. Now I saw in that article, that they uphold that Allah is the one god for all Humankind and that Muhammad( peace be upon him) is his last messenger and that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad simply fulfill different roles. How do we view this group/sect in Islam now?

Answer: Assalamu Alaikum,

The Ahamdis are in reality the Qadianis, and even though they may make the claim that they believe in the finality of the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w), they firmly believe in Mirza Ghulam as a Prophet and the promised Messiah. These are from the claims of Mirza Ghulam himself, and the Ahmadis hold on these claims.

The following gives an idea of the claim of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad which the Ahmadis believe in:

In one passage, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad wrote: ‘I declare on oath, in the name of Allah in whose hands is my soul, that he has sent me and has named me a Prophet’ (Supplement to Haqiqatul Wahy Pg. 68 Qadian 1934 – Qadianis on Trial. Mufti Taqi Usmani Pg.22).

While explaining such claims that are made by the Ahmadis, the great scholar, Mufti TaqiUsmani has written: ‘ In the beginning, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani himself held the belief that anyone claiming prophet hood after the Holy Prophet (s.a.w) was a Kaafir. His earlier writings contain his indictments of apostasy against such claimants. The Ahmadis sometimes quote these early writings in order to misguide the Muslims, but the Mirza has made it quite clear in his subsequent writings that he has risen to that highest sanctified position of prophet hood by making a gradual progress from being a Renovator, Muhaddath (one with whom Allah speaks), the promised Messiah, and the promised Mahdi.

We shall quote here his exact words affirming his gradual progress to his claim of prophethood. The following account is given to understand his view point more clearly.

When someone drew his attention towards the contradictions found in his statements and asked, why he called himself a ‘non-Prophet’ (Ghairu Nabiyy) in one statement and ‘Greater that the Messiah in all respects’ in another?
Replying to this objection, he wrote in Haqiqatul Wahy: “Try to understand it carefully that this is the same kind of contradiction as found in Buraheen-e-Ahmadia, where I had written that the Messiah, the son of Mary, would descend from the heaven. But later I wrote that the Messiah who was to come was none but me. The reason for this contradiction was that Allah has given me the name ‘Jesus’ in Buraheen-e-Ahmadia and said, ‘Your coming has been foretold by Allah and his Messenger (s.a.w)’. Since a group of Muslims adhered to the belief that the Christ would descend from Heaven and I, too held the same belief. I did not take this revelation at its face value, but I give it the other interpretation and kept my belief like that of other Muslims and published the same in Buraheen-e-Ahmadia. Later, I was showered with divine revelations saying that the Messiah who was promised by Allah was none but me. Hundreds of signs manifested themselves, in this connection. The heaven and the earth bowed to me. Several other glowing signs forced me to belief that I was the “True Messiah”, who was to come in the last millennium. Otherwise my belief was the same as I had described in Buraheen-e-Ahmadia.
Similarly, in the beginning I held the belief that I was not of any worth when compared to Jesus, the son of Mary. As he was a Prophet and very close to Allah, anything which then appeared confirming my superiority over him, I took it to be a sign of partial superiority only. Later on, when constant revelations deluged me, I could not stick to that belief.

I was clearly given the tittle of ‘prophet’ but in such a way that from one angle I was a Prophet, and from another, a flower of the Holy Prophet. I have as firm a faith in this divine revelation as I have belief in all revelations of Allah, which have come before me. I am only a follower of the revelation of Allah. Until I was given this knowledge, I kept saying what I said in the beginning. After being enlightened by this knowledge, I said just the opposite.”(Haqiqatul Wahy PG. 149, 150 Qadian 1934).

The above quotations are so clear in their support that no elucidation is needed. Now if on the face of this evidence, anyone quotes the writings of that early period when the Mirza used to deny that he was a Prophet, what other conclusion can be drawn except that it was an exercise in imposture?

It is a fact that the belief which the Mirza held at the time the Mirza breathed his last, was that he was a Prophet. His last letter, which incidentally was published in “Akhbar-e-Am” exactly on the day he died, reads as follows: “I am a Prophet as ordained by Allah. If I deny this, I will be a sinner. When Allah has named me a Prophet, how can I deny being one? I will firmly cling to this belief until I pass away from this world.” (Akhbar-e-Am, 26th May 1908, quoted by Mirza Mehmood in Haqiqat-ul-Nabuwwah, Mubahatha, Rawalpindi Pg. 36).

This letter was written on 23rd of May 1908 (three days before his death) and was published in Akhbar-e-Am on 26th of May the day of his death. (Qadianism On Trial Pgs. 23, 24 and 25 – Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani- Idaratul-Ma’arif Karachi Pakistan).

From this, we can clearly see that the Ahmadis believe that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a Prophet. This means that they support the fact that after the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w), there was another Prophet who was Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian. In this way, they have denied the finality of the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w) which takes a person out of the pale of Islam.

And Allah Knows Best.

Mufti Waseem Khan.

12/11/2014

 

And Allah Knows Best.

Mufti Waseem Khan.

4/4/17.

What are the Arsh and Kursi?

What are the Arsh and Kursi of Allah? How are they different from each other?

Assalaamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah,

The ‘Arsh’ translated as throne literally means an elevated seating structure that kings and emperors use to sit on. With respect to its meaning in the Holy Quran, it is a great structure which Allah has created. As mentioned by Iman Al Qurtubi, ‘The Arsh is the greatest of things that Allah has created.’ (Tafseer AL Qurtubi Vol. 8, Pg. 302-303).

The creation of the throne was not for the purpose of sitting on it. Indeed, Allah is transcendent of occupying a place and time or being similar to his creation. Allah alone knows the reality of the Arsh.

It is also known that the Arsh has posts and that the angels will carry it. In the Quran, Allah says, ‘And the angels will be on it sides, and eight will, that day, bear the throne of your Lord above them.’ (Surah 69, Verse 17).

In a hadith recorded by Imams Bukhari and Muslim, the Prophet (S.A.S) said, ‘Everyone will fall unconscious (on the day of Judgement). I will be the first to regain consciousness, and I will see Moosa (A.S) holding one of the posts (legs) of the Arsh. I wouldn’t know if he will recover before me, or he would be spared on account of his unconsciousness which occurred at Mount Tur?’

The Kursi which literally means ‘a chair’ is another great structure which Allah has created and is different from the Arsh, and is smaller. Like the Arsh, the creation of the Kursi was not was not for the purpose of sitting. Allah is above and beyond sitting and standing and all spatial location and placement.

While speaking about the ‘Kursi’, Allah says, ‘His Kursi extends to the heavens and earth.’ (2:225). It means that His Kursi is so great that it extends to the seven heavens and earth. While speaking about the Kursi, Abdullah Ibn Abbas (R.A) said, ‘The Kursi is the place where the Qadamain (feet) of Allah rests and the Arsh, no one knows its extent except Allah.’ (Tafseer Ibn Katheer, Vol.1, Pg. 548 Dar Al Kitab Al Arabi Beirut 2013).

In a tradition from Abu Dharr Al Ghifari (R.A), he narrates that the Prophet (S.A.S) said, ‘By Him in whose hand is my soul, the seven heavens and seven earths in comparison to the Kursi is nothing but like a ring thrown in a desert, and certainly the hugeness of the Arsh over the Kursi is like the desert over that ring.’ (Tafseer Ibn Katheer Vol.1, Pg. 549, Dar Al Kitab Al Arabi Beirut 2013).

The great exegete As Suddi has stated, ‘The Kursi is in front of the Arsh.’ Scholars have stated that the Kursi is the ‘Footstool’ of Allah.

Therefore, both the Arsh and the Kursi are creations of Allah, and the reality of these are known to Allah alone.

And Allah Knows Best.

Mufti Waseem Khan.

16/03/17.

What is meant by ‘what the right hand possesses’?

Assalaamu alaikum wa rahmatullahi wa barakatu,

 I teach and counsel women and a topic has come up… right hand possessions. One woman’s husband is claiming to have in his words a “malakat”. His claim is that he has been told  that this is correct and permissible since the woman is destitute and has no one to care for her and her child. He had been married to her originally but they divorced and had opted for an “agreement” that that gives the man certain rights and her certain rights that they have decided on. They do not consider themselves married. My question is does anyone know of any scholars of any madhab that have the view that a right had possession is halal, or are you aware of any deviant groups that have this view?

Wa Alaikum Assalaam,

In the Holy Quran, an allowance has been given to have relations with those who are possessed by a man. The term used for this is ‘What the right hands possess (Ma Malakat Aimanukum).’

This term refers to a slave girl who is owned by her master. The master who is the sole owner/possessor of the slave girl is fully in charge of her and is at liberty to keep her as a slave girl or let her be free. As the word states, a slave girl must be a slave which is owned by her master. During the time of slavery, women would have become slaves and were sold and purchased just as men. Also, women who were captives of war during the days of slavery were also held as slaves. In this case, if a man was given a captive woman who was made a bondswoman (in those days), she became a slave girl of her master.

Slavery however, has now been abolished and people being slaves and in bondage has come to an end. The act of buying and selling or trading slaves no longer exists. Although wars are still fought until today, people are no longer taken/held as slaves or considered to be in the ownership/possession of anyone. Instead, they are known to be prisoners of war who are ‘free men’ and ‘free women’, not slaves.

This being the present situation, there is absolutely no allowance/permission for the Muslim man to consider this woman to be ‘what his right hand possess’ or ‘Malakat’. If the woman in question is destitute and has no one to care for her and her child, then she is still a ‘free woman’ and not a slave. Their relationship together without marriage is totally haram and sinful, and sexual activity with each other will be deemed as adultery.

As long as they are not married, they are strangers to each other and will have no rights upon each other. Therefore, the relationship that this man has with this woman is totally un-Islamic and the woman cannot be his ‘Malakat’.

Today, since slavery has been abolished no man can refer to a woman as what ‘his right hands possess’ and then have relations with her.

Regarding such a woman as identified above or any other similar female who is a house maid or servant (in the home) as a ‘Malakat’ (one whom the right hand possess or a slave girl) is totally wrong and against the true teachings of Islam. No one from among the sound Madhahib has given such an opinion, nor has any reliable Scholar of our times has issued such a verdict. Those who uphold this view are misguided in their understanding.

And Allah Knows Best.

Mufti Waseem Khan.

24/02/17.

Can these statements make one a disbeliever?

Is it true the Hanafi school says someone becomes kaafir if they say musayif or musajid meaning small mushaf and small masjid to belittle?

If possible please reference hanafi references JaZakallah khair.

As Salaamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah,

There is no statement in the Hanafi School that states that a person who says such is a kafir.
And Allah knows best
Mufti Waseem Khan
1/2/2017

Was Hussain (R.A) on Haq?

 

QUESTION:

Asalamualaikum,

Hazrat, is true that some Ulama consider Hussain (RA) not to be haq in his rebellion against Yazid? Since other Sahaabahs such as ibn Abbas/Umar/Zubair gave bayah, and warned Hussain (RA) not to go to Kufa, but he insisted.

I know many of the narrations regarding Karbala are weak/fabricated, and in particular Yazid, but in your opinion do we consider Hussain on haq, Shaheed, and Yazid is somewhat blameworthy.

 

ANSWER:

Wa Alaikum Assalaam,

الجواب و بالله التوفيق

Husain (R.A), the beloved grandson of the Prophet (S.A.S) was on Haq (the truth) in his refusal to swear allegiance to Yazid.

Husain (R.A) did not take up arms against Yazid nor did he revolt against Yazid. The people in Kufa invited him to come to be their leader and he undertook this journey towards them. On his way, he was stopped and then eventually killed at Karbala.

The issue which came about was that soon after the death of Mu’awiyah (R.A), his son Yazid declared himself Khalifa (Caliph) since he had been nominated a successor to Mu’awiya (R.A) during his life-time. When this happened, he demanded allegiance from Husain (R.A). Seeing that the nomination to Caliphate was contrary to the spirit of the Islamic Constitution, Husain (R.A) was averse to it, and refused to take the oath of allegiance in favour of Yazid.

Knowing the state of the people in Kufa, many companions and members of the household of the Prophet (S.A.S) dissuaded Husain (R.A) from going there. Husain (R.A) however, took a firm decision to undertake his journey and so, he left for Kufa where he eventually met his martyrdom.

And Allah Knows Best.

Mufti Waseem Khan.

20/10/16.

Islamic View on Dinosaurs

Question:

Assalamualaikum,

As far as I’m aware of the Quran or Ahadith don’t mention anything of dinosaurs. What is the Islamic view on them? Does Islam consider that they ever existed? Is it haraam to believe they existed? Please answer the above questions and let me know of any other information concerning Islam and dinosaurs.

Answer:

Wa Alaikum Assalaam,

الجواب و بالله التوفيق

There is no mention in the Holy Quran and Ahadith regarding these creatures. These texts do not confirm the existence of them, nor do they deny their existence?

In the Holy Quran, Allah tells us that ‘He created beasts of all kinds on the earth.’ (Quran Chapter 2 verse 164 & Chapter 31 verse 10).

These being from among the beasts/animals could have existed since the Holy Quran did not mention every animal that was created.

As such, if the existence of the dinosaurs is proven through scientific facts and investigation, and it is well established that such creatures existed, then it will not be Haram to believe that they existed. However, if it is based only on speculation, then one should not put his belief on them.

And Allah Knows Best.

Mufti Waseem Khan.

6/10/16.

Taking opinions from Muftis based on ease/desires

 

Question:

Asalamu Alaikum.

Respected Mufti Saheb, I would like to ask a sensitive question.

Many Ulama from the golden past to the present have proclaimed it is Wajib to follow one of the 4 madhabs. I would like to know how does that apply to following a fatwa/scholar within the same madhab?

For example recently, I’ve had a few scholars who have differed on the following:

–          Roadside assistance for car breaking down, and cover for central heating boilers – some said it is haram because it’s the same as insurance.

–          Whether my employer’s pension is halal or not- they said non-Muslim organisations are untrustworthy, and any contributions made by the employer cannot be considered a gift, but interest.

–          Whether it is permissible to work for a bank – some say it’s main source is interest, so it’s haram while others say it depends where you work in the bank, and if you’re directly involved in transaction including interest.

So, my questions are as follows:

1)      Are the rules just as strict that one must follow one scholar/Mufti like following one madhab?

2)      What are the exceptions, if any?

3)      If, one’s chooses to follow what’s easiest for him, and his family like some of the examples above which, is important for an individual, and his family would he be:

  1. a)Sinful
  2. b)If he is sinful i.e. it’s categorised as following one’s nafs, would the fatwa still be valid? For example if he acted upon the fatwa that his pension will be halal, and ignores the others forbidding/cautioning him then will the pension still remain halal? The angel recording his bad deeds will not document each pound/dollar/rand being earned/spent as haram?

Answer:

Wa Alaikum Assalaam,

الجواب و بالله التوفيق

It is indeed the official verdict of the great, reliable and authoritative Scholars from the very early ages of Islam until today that following one of the 4 Madhab is Wajib. However, this ruling does not apply to following a fatwa of a specific Scholar from the same Madhab.

The Imams of Fiqh were qualified Mujtahids who were experts in all the sciences of Islam. On account of their understanding and sound deductions in different matters, they were attested to as being reliable and authentic Scholars in Fiqh. It is for this reason, the great Scholars of Fiqh, Hadith and Tafseer at their  times and afterwards guided the Ummah to follow one of the Imams of Fiqh.

As for Scholars who have come afterwards, (being close to the times of the Imams of FIqh), although they were great in the sciences of Islam, their expertise could not match the expertise and rank of the Imams of Fiqh. In fact, those Scholars who came afterwards used the theories and principles established by the Imams to guide them in their understanding of Fiqh.

As for those Scholars who came long afterwards, (like our times and before), these Scholars are not Mujtahids and experts in the field of Ijtihad. Whenever there are guiding Usools (principles) of a Madhab regarding an issue, they will use these and arrive at a verdict or opinion. Whenever there are no clear and expressed guidelines in the Madhab regarding new issues, the Scholars will look at these with the understanding they have of the teachings of Islam as given in the books of Fiqh, and arrive at an opinion or verdict. Due to the fact that investigating new/current issues also require the use of human reasoning, the opinions arrived at by the Scholars following the same Madhab may differ.

In such situations, one is free to accept the verdict/opinion of that Mufti/Scholar who is known to be reliable in knowledge; seen to be an expert in the field of Fiqh and accepted to be trustworthy as a Scholar. So, there is no strict rule that one must follow only one specific/particular Mufti. This cannot be compared to the requirement of following only one specific Madhab.

Where there are varying opinions from different Scholars/Muftis of the same Madhab on an issue, one can follow whomsoever he believes to be the most knowledgeable and reliable. However, one must be guided in this by correct understanding and knowledge and the statements of other reliable scholars regarding the acceptance of that particular Mufti/Scholar. In adopting the opinion/verdict of any Mufti/Scholar, one must not be guided by his personal likes, conveniences, and desires (nafs). One must not look for an opinion that suits one’s personal wants.

At all times, one must take an opinion/verdict which is in conformity to the teachings of Islam as expounded by the pious and righteous Scholars of Islam who have been accepted as genuine, reliable and God-fearing Ulamas who possess the knowledge and expertise to issue a fatwa or give an opinion.

If one chooses an opinion only because it is the easiest for him, and did not look to see if it is correct or wrong, then this is not permissible. It will be considered as following one’s Nafs. A person should try to verify from other Scholars whether a certain opinion is acceptable or not.

If a person accepted the opinion/verdict of a Scholar, having placed trust and reliance on his knowledge, then this is not following one’s Nafs, even though the opinion happens to be the easiest for him.

As a general rule, when there is an opinion/verdict regarding a matter which says that it is halal, while experts and reliable Scholars say that it is haram, then to be precautious in your religious affairs, you must adopt the ruling that states that this is haram. You should not take opinions coming from one or two persons. Instead, you should look at what the majority of Scholars state and the evidences that are provided for their statements.

If someone had given a fatwa regarding the permissibility of a matter, while other reliable and authentic Scholars have given the fatwa of its prohibition, and then you had taken the fatwa of the person who said it was halal because it was in accordance to your desires, and you ignored the Fatwa of a number of scholars who stated the thing to be haram after strong proofs were provided for the same, then you are sinful in this matter in doing what you did. If this is the situation with respect to the pension, then you will go with what the majority of authentic Scholars say about it. If they have issued the verdict that it is haram, then you need to accept this fatwa and refrain from using the pension money.

As I stated earlier, those giving fatwa/opinions must first investigate and research the issues before making a pronouncement. Opinions cannot be given based on speculation. It must be based on certainty and firm knowledge about the issues involved. As such, in our times, where many new issues are arising in different fields, it is essential that Muftis/Scholars investigate and achieve proper knowledge regarding any given issue before giving a formal opinion. When reliable such Scholars investigate and issue thoroughly and then give an opinion, it must be accepted. Opinions based on speculation must not be accepted.

And Allah Knows Best.

Mufti Waseem Khan

6/10/16.

 

 

 

Praying behind imam who follows dargah.

Q. Can we pray behind an imam who goes and follows dargah and when is it compulsory to do dua, after farz salah or after sunna salaah?


A. Those who visit the dargah and follow the rituals that take place at these places are engaged in grave sins that are tantamount to shirk. The Beliefs and practices of these people are totally against the teachings of Islam and are in opposition to the established creed of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jamaah.

As such, when you know that the Imam follows the customs and practices of the dargah then you should not perform salaah behind him.

With respect to dua, this is a very great act of worship as mentioned in the Ahadith. However, it has not been made compulsory (farz) at any given time. A person has the option of making dua when he wishes to do so. It can be after the farz salaah or after the sunnah salaah.

And Allah knows best.

Mufti Waseem Khan