Miscellaneous Issues Regarding Madrasahs & Ulama

Question:

In some madrasah classes secular school benches have been placed. During the afternoon, i.e. after secular school, the madrasah pupils also sit on these benches with their copies of the Qur’aan Shareef. Since they sit on these benches, their backs are towards the Qur’aan Shareef. Is this system permissible?

Answer:

How can it be permissible when the backs of the pupils are towards the Qur’aan Majeed. This kuffaar system is good for secular education, not for teaching the Qur’aan Shareef. It is highly disrespectful and sacrilegious to sit with one’s back towards the Qur’aan Shareef. The Madrasah authorities and the Ustaadh are failing in their duty. They all are participants in the crime of dishonouring the Qur’aan Shareef. The Qur’aan Shareef will speak on the Day of Qiyaamah against those who had made it an object of insignificance.

Question:

Some Madrasahs insist that the students remove all their hair o­n their heads. Inspite of the permissibility of keeping long hair, why the insistence o­n bald heads?

Answer:

It is not sinful to abstain from a permissible act. The insistence of the Madaaris is motivated by the moral interests of the pupils. Maintenance of moral discipline is among the duties of the Madaaris. The nafs employs a variety of tricks to detract students from Ilm and to cast them into the cauldron of moral turpitude. Students who keep long hair do so, not because they believe that they are emulating the Sunnah. They do so for nafsaani reasons. This deception is not perculiar with students. Even some molvis, especially young molvis, suffer from this disease of nafsaani deception. They deceive others and themselves into believing that they are keeping long hair in emulation of a Sunnat style when in reality they are victims of their nafsaaniyat.

They keep long hair for riya — to show off — to convey to others that they are handsome with their long hair. If their concern was truly the Sunnah, they would have exercised greater care with their trousers. It is observed that those who keep long hair generally wear their trousers o­n or below the ankles. Inspite of the Sunnah’s taleem being the prohibition of wearing the trousers o­n and below the ankles, those who keep long hair ostensibly to conform to the Sunnah, are careless about the way they wear their trousers. They are particular and concerned in observing the permissible act of long hair, but utterly careless and oblivious of the haraam act they perpetrate when wearing their trousers. The manner in which they wear their trousers in flagrant conflict of the Sunnah testifies that their niyyat in keeping long hair is not the Sunnah. It is something else of which they are aware deep in their hearts.

The Qur’aan Majeed says:
“In fact, man is aware of (what goes o­n) in his nafs, even though he puts forth excuses.”

Question:

The newly developed Deobandi-Salafi trend of revisiting many masaail subject to a process which discards the legacy and input of the early Fuqaha, is gaining popularity in some quarters. Do they have any basis for moving in this direction. They incline towards talfeeq. Does the fact that these Ulama have sanads (certificates) somehow legitimise these methods and leanings?

Answer:

In all our Madaaris there is a strong undercurrent of adam-e-taqleed. The disease of abandoning the Taqleed of the Mathaahib is endemic. This disease is not new. It had already set in several decades ago even in Daarul uloom Deoband where some Ustaadhs were followers of Maudoodi. Their sanads do not entitle them to abandon Taqleed or to mellow the rigid stand of our Akaabir on this issue. Liberalism inherited from westernism is the root of this disease.

It is quite simple to understand that the quality of knowledge of present-day Ulama in comparison to the Uloom of the Akaabireen of several decades ago is exceptionally poor and defective. As far as Taqwa is concerned, present-day Ulama are completely bereft in relation to the high standard of Taqwa of our Akaabireen. When the great Ulama and Muqallid Fuqahaa of earlier times were staunch Muqallideen, never adopting talfeeq, how can it then be accepted that the present-day Ulama with all their deficiencies in Ilm and Taqwa, have the right of talfeeq and slackening the ties of Taqleed. The ‘Deobandi-Salafi’ trend described by you is a nafsaani trend. It is the teaching of Iblees. It is shaitaan’s trap to deviate the Ulama from the Path of the Sunnah.

The Muqallid Ulama have no right to look beyond the Rulings and Principles of the Fuqaha and Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen of the Mathaahib. In exceptional cases of difficulty and need, the principles of our Math-hab can be employed to extract a ruling of another Math-hab of the Sunnah. But such cases are rare. But nowadays, quasi molvis who have no proper understanding of even the text books, and who lack in entirety in Taqwa, consider themselves on par with the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen. They consider themselves qualified to deduct and formulate masaa-il and issue fatwa directly from the Qur’aan and Hadith. They are blind and dwell in deception and deviation. Shaitaan has adorned their evil manner and has succeeded in leading them by their noses.

Question:

Is the Ustadh permitted to speak ill of others to his students?

Answer:

The Ustadh (Teacher) in a Madrasah is supposed to be a man of trust. The Talaba (Students) under him are Amaanat. It is the sacred duty of the Ustaadh to fulfil the huqooq (rights) of the Talaba. A primary right of the Talaba is the Islaah of the nafs (moral reformation). It therefore does not befit an Ustaad to engage in any activity or portray any attitude or make any statement which is morally and spiritually detrimental for the Talaba. Nowadays, the Asaatizah are generally of a low moral calibre and bereft of spirituality. The effect of this state is that the Asaatizah introduce nafsaani politics in their relationship with their Students. They will not hesitate to indulge in gheebat about Ulama with whom they are in disagreement. In so doing, they deflect their Students from moral reformation. They also fall in the estimate of such Students who understand that the Asaatiza are guilty of gheebat.

Extraneous issues, especially the fatal poison of gheebat, and that too gheebat of Ulama, should never be discussed with Students. The Asaatizah should acquit themselves with dignity and decorum. If a Student should attempt to discuss the conflicting views of other Ulama, the Asaatizah should immediately reprimand the Student and not entertain him in such a discussion. We have offered this naseehat because many Students from the different Madaaris write to us complaining about the gheebat in which their Ustaadhs indulge.

Question:

Please comment on the female teachers of Hadhrat Ibn Asaakir.

Answer:

Hadhrat Ibn Asaakir (rahmatullah alayh) is among the famous Aimmah (Imaams) of Hadith. Among the teachers of Hadith of this illustrious Muhaddith were more than eighty female narrators of Hadith. Modernists and misguided miscreants, due to their ignorance and corrupt beliefs, usually misinterpret and distort such information to appease the western kuffaar gender equality mob. These noble females who were among the Asaatizah (plural of Ustaaz) of Imaam Ibn Asaakir (rahmatullah alayh) did not acquire their Knowledge of Hadith at some girls madrasah or at a public institution or beyond the confines of their own homes or sitting at the feet of a ghair mahram male teacher or in any way whatsoever which was in conflict with the Qur’aanic and Sunnah concept and spirit of Hijaab and Rasulullah’s designation of woman, viz. , “Woman is Aurah”. “Aurah” is an object of total concealment.

Once Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) asked Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu): “What is best for a woman?” Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) unable to answer, went to his wife, Hadhrat Faatimah (radhiyallahu anha) and posed the same question. With surprising alacrity and spontaneity, this beloved daughter of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) responded: “Neither should she look at men nor men look at her.” After Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) conveyed this response to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), he commented: “Faatimah is a portion of me.” She had understood what the Nabi had understood. No one should labour under a misconception to lull himself into delusion regarding the Deeni Ta’leem of females. There is no place in Islam for girls institutions of any kind whatsoever.

The only institution which Allah Ta’ala recognizes for the female is the Home –the sacred Home where she finds moral, spiritual and physical safety and peace. The female Asaatizah of Imaam Ibn Asaakir (rahmatullah alayh) as well as of some other illustrious Souls of Islam were among the noble Auliya of Allah Ta’ala. They were not women donning pretentious, fake ‘purdah’ abayas of this lewd age. Their purdah was true Purdah which stemmed from the innermost recess of the heart and which conformed in the minutest detail to the Hijaab code ordained by the Qur’aan and Sunnah. Their Purdah was not confined to dress.

Hijaab is an elaborate system of Hayaa (shame), modesty, concealment, silence, and piety which makes her a true “Aurah” in the meaning of Rasulullah’s designation. The female Asaatizah of Imaam Ibn Asaakir (rahmatullah alayh) were not self-asserting ostentatious women wearing jeans, tops, and designer garb under their deceptive abayas which the women of this era believe to be the ‘jilbaab’ which Allah Ta’ala commands in the Qur’aan, and which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) ordered to be so large as to fully conceal two women, and which should be shabby and unattractive. These illustrious Ladies of Hadith did not have legs loosened with the grease of immorality and shamelessness. They were unlike the abaya-wearing pretenders of today whose legs have become so loose that flitting out of the house and jumping behind the steering wheel, and driving off to flaunt themselves in public places have become normal and acceptable attitudes and practices.

The noble and illustrious Ladies who had imparted Ahaadith to Imaam Ibn Asaakir (rahmatullah alayh) and other Shar’i authorities did not drive or ride to the Musaajid, shamelessly, pull up in parking lots, participate in public thikr sessions in public halls and prowl around the street and public venues deceiving themselves that they are ladies of Purdah simply because they are donning fashionable abayas. The noble Ladies of those wonderful times – the Ladies who had imparted the Knowledge of Hadith – were true Auliya who had acquired their Knowledge of the Deen from Mahram Asaatizah (fathers, brothers and the like) and who fully and perfectly remained glued within their homes in perfect harmony with Allah’s command: “And remain glued within your homes, and make not a display (of yourselves) like the exhibitions of jaahiliyyah of former times.” (And the jaahiliyyah of our ‘modern’ times in which abayas, etc. are deceptively used to flaunt and exhibit.)

Question:

Should girls from Deen-conscious homes where due attention is given to Purdah, be sent to a girl’s Madrasah?

Answer:

Parents who are conscious of the Deen and observers of Purdah, who send their daughters to public madrasahs little realize the akhlaaqi (moral) and mental harm they are causing their daughters. It should not be difficult for them to understand the Qur’aanic prohibition stated in aayat: “And (O women) remain inside your homes…” It should not be difficult for Deeni conscious people to understand that Islam has fixed the home as the abode of females and that unnecessary emergence and participation in public activities are negatory to the natural haya (shame) of girls.

Nowadays, the sprouting up of girls madrasahs has exercised a negative and a detrimental effect on the character and thinking of those girls who happen to be from Purdah Nasheen and Deeni homes. Their vital years which should be spent in the constant company and under the watchful eyes of their mothers are being squandered in the unnecessary and defective pursuit of higher academic knowledge which anyhow, almost all girls are unable to achieve correctly.

Instead of them being preoccupied with the home role – the role of mother and wife which Allah Ta’ala has created for them, they are assigned to unnatural institutions which transform them into rigid and frigid robots. In fact, they emerge from these madrasahs barely understanding their future role in life. What is written in the kitaabs, either remains there or has vanished through the other ear. Hardly does the kitaabi knowledge penetrate the heart. This is more so in these times when institutions and the teachers are bereft of Taqwa and Suhbat of Saaliheen.

The girls manage to remember only what their huqooq (rights) are when they will be getting married. But how to manage a home, cope with the husband, in-laws, etc. is foreign to them. They remain blissfully ignorant of practical house and husband care. These responsibilities cannever be imparted to them by the madrasah whose teachers in most cases are young Aalims, wholly inexperienced and lacking in wisdom and piety.

The responsibilities of the home and the way in which to lead a lifetime with a husband can be acquired only under the tution and supervision of the mother in the home environment, not in a cold, inexperienced institution which has no truck with the home which Allah Ta’ala has made the practical madrasah for girls. As a result of the negative effect of girls madrasahs, it is observed that the girls from these institutions are impersonal, lacking in understanding, unscrupulous towards their in-laws, domineering towards their husbands and demanding of their rights even if it leads to the breakdown of the marriage.

They are adept at citing the Akaabireem Ulama when demanding their huqooq, but entirely ignorant about the advices of these selfsame Akaabireen who have emphasized tolerance and patience to the degree where they (wives) should abandon their huqooq in the interest of the happiness of their home. While the Shariat commands husbands to observe the rights of their wives and warns of severe punishment for violation of the huqooq, it also emphasises that wives exercise restraint and display great tolerance. In fact, the Shariah commands them to patiently accept the injustices of their husbands and not to embark on any way which will lead to the breakdown of the marriage.

Usually the very first and immediate demand of girls who acquired their akhlaaq from a madrasah (not from their homes) is immediate separation from the mother-in-law and father-in-law. They are brutally insensitive to the relationship which their husbands have and had since birth with their parents. These insensitive and zaalim (cruel) madrasah girls adamantly demand and expect their husbands to provide an entirely separate house for them and to practically sever their relationship with their parents.

These girls should understand well that they come within the purview of Allah’s Ia’nat for the wedge which they create between their husbands and parents. Marriage does not mean termination of parental relationship. When a boy marries it does not mean that he has to abandon his parents and become aloof from them at the behest of his demanding wife. In fact, his parents have greater huqooq on him than his wife. While his wife has priority in some rights and affairs, her husband still remains the little child to his parents that he was the day he was born.

Intolerance is a salient part of the character of madrasah girls. Their intolerance is justified baselessly by their presentation of the argument of their ‘huqooq’. It appears that their huqooq is the only item of ‘ilm’ which they remember when they leave the Madrasah. The whole of Nabi-e-Kareem’s Uswah-e-Hasanah which they were supposed to have been taught is either forgotten or not explained to them properly. Demanding one’s rights in the way in which these cold Madrasah girls do is not part of Uswah-e-Hasanah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Rather the opposite is part of the Sunnah, viz., that wives tolerate the injustices of their husband and in-laws and supplicate to Allah Ta’ala for a better change.

Parents should have mercy on their daughters and be more concerned of their future lives. Thy should not seek to reduce their duties by assigning their Purdah Nasheen daughters to cold, impersonal instutions which Islam has never encouraged for females. Mothers should teach their daughters their natural roles in the warmth of the home. It is indeed ludicrous to believe that what the mother refuses to teach her daughter, the inexperienced male teacher in an unnatural institution can teach her by making her read some theory. Allah Ta’ala has commanded firstly the mother, then the father to teach and train their daughter. This command is not directed to a ghair mahram teacher generally bereft of wisdom and taqwa. A girl cannever be moulded into the role Allah Ta’ala has determined for her, by a ghair mahram young Maulana who himself is blissfully ignorant of this role. May Allah Ta’ala bestow good hidaayat to parents to understand the ruin they are causing to their Purdah Nasheen daughters by sending them to institutions, which do not form part of our Islamic heritage.

Question:

An 18 year Muslim girl did exceptionally well in her matriculation exam last year. She has now been employed at her Islamic school to teach mathematics to both girls and boys all of whom are baaligh. The explanation given is that even during the time of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) menfolk went to gain knowledge from the respected ladies of the Household of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Please comment.

Answer:

People are really groveling and scraping the very bottom of the barrel of nafsaaniyat and jahaalat when they cite the Sahaabah and the Holy Wives of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) as substantiation for their practices which are stepping stones for zina of different degrees. These people are truly befogged in their minds with the liquor of their nafs to present the Sahaabah and the Holy Wives to back up their haraam practices. The Honourable Ladies of Rasulullah’s House never conducted a girls madrasah or a western secular school which is nowadays dubbed ‘Islamic’ school to deceive parents who have deceived themselves because they simply want to be deceived so that these evil secular schools can have some justification and gain acceptance in the Muslim community. There is absolutely no basis in the Sunnah for these hybrid secular schools and for the haraam zina style teaching by a young girl in a mixed class of baaligh boys and girls. Zina of the eyes, zina of the ears and zina of the minds are being perpetrated every moment in that shaitaani class with so many shayaateen set loose by this haraam system. Those who present fallacious arguments to justify such haraam practices are making a mockery of the Sahaabah and the Holy Wives by citing them as substantiation. They are furthermore, slandering these holy personages by attributing lies to them.

When occasionally the pious Sahaabah and pious Taabieen would visit the elderly and saintly wives of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to gain some knowledge of the DEEN, not worldly knowledge, they would be behind a screen as commanded by the Qur’aan. After gaining the knowledge in a very short time, they would depart probably never to return again. By what stretch of imagination can these juhala equate the haraam school set-up with the method in which the Holy Wives imparted Deeni knowledge on a very very informal basis and observing strict Hijaab. On the contrary, the group of baaligh boys and girls being taught by a young girl constitutes a class of zina. Shayaateen constantly are in their company. Their logic is disgraceful.

 

Question:

My niece and another grade 12 boy who is unrelated to her, are the only two pupils who are studying physical science. The Islamic school has assigned a non-Muslim male tutor to teach them after school hours when no others are around. The question arises, what happens when the Muslim boy happens to be absent and only my niece has to be in the company of the non-Muslim male teacher? The Islamic school says about such events that ‘sacrifices for the sake of the Deen have to be made’. Is it permissible for the Muslim public to support such a school?

Answer:

Supporting such a haraam school is a kabeerah sin. Allah Ta’ala warns in His Qur’aan: “Do not aid one another in sin and transgression.” This school is not an Islamic school. It is aiding and abetting pupils to commit zina. Even if the Muslim boy is present, it remains haraam for the girl to be in the company of either the Muslim boy or the non-Muslim teacher. The brains of those who claim that this haraam zina practice is a ‘sacrifice for the Deen’, must be clogged with spiritual filth and pollution. How can a Muslim ever describe haraam —– a kabeerah sin —as a “sacrifice for the Deen”? It is truly a disgusting state of affairs which exists in these so-called Islamic schools. Truly, the Ummah is engulfed with fitnah on every side. May Allah Ta’ala protect us all from the evil, fitnah, nafsaaniyat and shaitaaniyat of those who are supposed to be the learned ones. Evil originates from them and their own evil will rebound and hem them in.

Question:

Is it appropriate for Huffaaz to recite Qur’an at tremendous speeds during Ramadhan?

Answer:

The quality of Hifz of present-day Huffaaz is truly lamentable. Throughout the country where the Huffaaz recite in Taraaweeh, a sad mockery of the Qur’aan and the Taraaweeh takes place. The recitation of the Huffaaz in general is putrid and spiritually nauseating. It is an insult to the sacred institution of Hifz to describe these Ramdhaan ‘huffaaz’ as Haafizul Qur’aan.. During the daytime, despite spending considerable time revising a couple of rukus’ which will be recited in a couple of raka’ts, their recitation is cluttered with errors of a variety of kinds. The speed with which they recite betrays the great deficiency in their ‘hifz’. The speed furthermore makes a massive mockery of the Ibaadat of Salaat.

While there are exceptions to this abominable state of affairs, they are rare. The majority of the so-called ‘huffaaz’ are not true haafizul Qur’aan. When a student would come to visit Hadhrat Masihullah (rahmatullah alayh) and if in response to his query he said that he was a haafiz, Hadhrat would ask: “A Ramdhaani hafiz or a Haafizul Qur’aan?” A “Ramdhaani hafiz” is the kind of chap who is the Imaam in a couple of raka’ts of Taraaweeh and acquits himself in the manner described above. The entire year he remains oblivious of the Qur’aan Majeed. During Ramadhaan he suffers during the daytime swotting the couple of Rukus he is supposed to recite in Taraaweeh. He is not a true Haafiz. On the other hand, a Haafizul Qur’aan, is a Haafiz who has the Qur’aan Majeed inside his heart, in his mind, and on his Tongue and finger tips. He is a true Guard of the Qur’aanic text.

A Haafiz of the Qur’aan should make it his incumbent duty to recite the entire Qur’aan in his daily Sunnat and Nafl Salaat throughout the year. The Sunnat and Nafl Salaaat attached to the Fardh Salaat, Tahajjud, Ishraaq, Dhuha, Tahyatul Wudhu, Tahyatul Musjid, Awwaabeen, etc. offer him ample opportunity to revise and solidify his Hifz every day of the year. But, the so-called huffaaz, rush through their daily Salaat reciting the short Surahs. In addition to this, the Haafiz should recite at least 10 Juz daily. From the 24 hours he has to devote only about 3 and half hours which he could spread over the entire day and night. If the hafiz does not adopt this or a similar system it is obvious that the Qur’aan Majeed will slip from his memory. Another factor of vital importance is that indulgence in sin and futility adversely affects Hifz. A haafiz who does not inculcate Taqwa will increasingly tend to forget his Hifz. The Qur’aan does not coexist with a heart contaminated with evil. The Qur’aan is pure noor which can coexist only in a heart which glitters with noor.

Question:

Is it proper for a girls madrasah ustaadh to advise his girl pupils on marriage choices? Some of the girls insist that they need their ustaadh’s permission to get married.

Answer:

It is evil for the ustaadh to become involved with his girl pupils in this manner. He should not advise them in such matters. Their parents are sufficient. The girls do not need the ustaadh’s permission for marriage.This type of ustaadh is guilty of moral turpitude.

Q. Girls at a madrasah cheat during the exams. As a result of such cheating they
get highest marks. This is unfair to the other girls who have to work hard to gain marks. Some of these girls have completed their aalimah courses and are teaching at madrasahs. This has been going on for years and is causing resentment amongst the honest and hardworking girls who keep quiet for fear of being victimized. Your comments please.
 

Cheating is in fact encouraged and allowed by the ‘authorities’ of the madrasahs in order to display a high rate of ‘success’. On the basis of falsehood such impressions are created. The Deen is no longer being taught for the Pleasure of Allah Ta’ala. Almost all those connected with the Madaaris nowadays are mercenaries. The ‘hard-working’ and ‘honest’ girls’ need not feel any resentment if they understand why they are pursuing Deeni Ilm. The maqsad of searching for Islamic knowledge is amal or to practice the Deen correctly to gain thawaab and Allah’s Pleasure. Therefore, if some girls have dubious and dishonest intentions which constrain them to behave dishonestly and cheat, the others should feel no resentment. The maqsad of Ilm is not to attain high marks in an exam and to show off. Deeni Ilm is not worldly or secular education. The goals of the two types of education are divergent and poles apart. While the goal of secular education is the stomach, the goal of Deeni Ilm is the Rooh. Hence, if the niyyat is sincere, then there is no need to think and react like those who destroy their Akhlaaq and Imaan in secular institutions.

Q. Jalsahs and public programmes of the Deobandi Maulanas in our time are increasingly assuming the form and style of the jalsahs and programmes of the Bareilli group. Naats, nazams, group thikr, feasting and the like are common to the gatherings of both groups. The only difference is that the Bareillis have their compulsory meelaad accompanying every function. What is happening to the Ulama of Deoband? 

Normal decadence is setting in. The further one journeys from the source of light, the darker it becomes. Regrettably, the same fate which overtook the Bareilis, is now gradually being adopted by even our Ulama. The liberalism, bid’ah and haraam activities of the Ahl-e-Bid’ah and the modernists are settling over our learned men, our Madaaris and khaanqahs. The Janaazah of Haqq is in the process of being carted away from our Institutions which were at one time the bastions of Haqq and the Beacons of Divine Light. The very same fate which has destroyed and obliterated Jamiah Azhar of Cairo and other great Islamic institutions of learning in Arabia and Central Asia, is now gripping almost all our Deeni institutions, not only here in South Africa, but in India and Pakistan as well. The Uloom of the Deen is no longer being imparted nor pursued for the sake of Allah Ta’ala and the Aakhirah. It is being pursued for mercenary and nafsaani motives, hence today Tasawwuf means halqah thikr, khatm-e-khaajgaan, jalsahs, singing songs (nazams) and poetry. And, knowledge at the Madaaris is being pursued for name, fame, and earning a livelihood. Qiyaamah cannot be too far away.

Q. Commenting on the Madrasah system, Judge Navsa of the Appeal Court, said: “The youth find this unnecessary schooling a waste of time….We ourselves should start soul searching. Islam is at its Golden Age.” Please comment.

There is not much to comment on what the poor judge who is a layman —a non-entity in the Shariah—had said. If a learned man had made such kufr statements, the need for commenting would have arisen. But, the community abounds with modernist laymen who lack the ability to distinguish between left and right, light and darkness in matters of Shar’i import. There is, therefore, no danger of the Muslim public following the stupidities which the modernists trumpet. Even an ignorant Muslim will not be misled by the bunkum which Islamically unqualified men blurt out even if they are judges, scientists, advocates, etc., etc. If we have to squander the treasure of time to comment on the nonsense, ilhaad and baatil of every layman who tramps the streets, we shall be deprived from constructive Deeni engagement. It is best to smile off the stupidities which the aged judge has sung without understanding.

 

Q. If the Madrasah teacher closes the class a few days earlier than the official closing date, is he entitled to full pay?

No, he is not entitled to full pay. The committee in charge should deduct from his wages.

 

Q. In the Hadith books we read that the Sahaabah would often ask Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam): “What is the best deed?” He would give different answers to different people. What would be the ‘best deed’ in our time?

Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “He who clings to my Sunnat at the time of the corruption of my Ummat, will receive the reward of a 100 shuhada (martyrs).” This reward applies to even a Mustahab act which the Ummat has abandoned. From this could be gauged the significance and immense thawaab of reviving and adhering to a Waajib command which the Ummat has abandoned. The most neglected, in fact totally abandoned command of Allah Ta’ala in our age is Amr Bi l Ma’roof , Nahy Ani l Munkar (Commanding righteousness and prohibiting evil and sin).

While Ulama do generally speak about virtuous deeds which do not ruffle anyone’s feathers, they have totally abandoned the dimension of Nahy Anil Munkar (Prohibiting evil and sin) because they are anxious to be in the good books of the people of the world either because they hanker after their wealth or they desire jah –name, fame and position in society. This one capital crime and vile misdeed of the Ulama has transformed them into ulama-e-soo’—evil ulama about whom Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Verily, I fear for my Ummah the Aimmah-e-Mudhilleen (the learned ones—the imaams, sheikhs, duktoors, muftis and molvis).”

In our time there is no amal superior to Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil Munkar. It is infinitely superior to even Jihad. This is Rasulullah’s Fatwa. Citing this sacred Fatwa, Imaam Ghazaali (rahmatullah alayh), in his Ihya Uloomuddin, records that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Allah Ta’ala said: O mankind! Before making dua, command righteousness and prohibit evil otherwise your supplication (dua) will not be accepted.” Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) added: ‘Compared to Jihad, good deeds are like a puff of breath in a deep ocean. And all good deeds together with Jihad in the Path of Allah are nothing but a puff of breath in the deep ocean in comparison with Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil munkar.”

Now you know what the best deed in this age is.

 

Q. Most Ulama today refrain from speaking straight and bringing to light the
wrongs and sins people commit flagrantly. They claim that hikmat nowadays dictates this policy of silence. Is their argument valid?

For such Ulama who practise Kitmaanul Haqq (Concealment of the Truth) on the basis of their wretched, convoluted. Nafsaani policy of fallacious ‘hikmat’, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), presented the following reply : “Allah will ask His servant: ‘Who prevented you from Nahy Anil Munkar when you saw a person indulging in evil?’ Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: ‘If Allah would have instilled in him the ability to reply, he (the servant) would have replied: ‘O Rabb! I had hope in You, and I feared men.”

Thus, to save their skins on the Day of Qiyaamah when these dubious and confounded policies of ‘hikmat’ will evaporate into nothingness, these Ulama should at least be honest with themselves and refrain from nafsaani justification of their gross dereliction of their Waajib obligation. The lesser of the two evils confronting them is to maintain silence, to abandon the ‘hikmat’ argument and to seal their lips when other Ulama proclaim the Haqq. If they do not desist, they may find themselves making tawaaf of their extracted intestines in Jahannum. May Allah Ta’ala save us all from such disgraceful chastisement. Aameen.

 

Question:

Some Madrasah ustaadhs use sjamboks and canes on children. Is this permissible?

Answer:

It is not permissible. Ustaadhs should desist from such zulm (cruelty).

 

Question:

Some Ulama say that all kuffaar sports are haraam. But even Daarul Ulooms encourage participation in such sports and have organized sporting activities on the Madaaris premises. Please comment.

Answer:

This is a lamentable situation. When the Madaaris have also deviated and gone astray, what type of Ulama will be produced? The Madaaris should reflect and take stock. They should consult their conscience and try to fathom if the kuffaar sports they are allowing the Talaba to participate in is compatible with Ilm-e-Wahi (the Qur’aan and Hadith —Fiqah and Tafseer) which they are imparting. The late Hadhrat Maulana Abdul Haq Omarjee (rahmatullah alayh), who was one of South Africa’s most senior Ulama-e-Haq, narrated his own story to us. He said that during his student days at Daarul Uloom Deoband, he had participated with the local students in a game of cricket. While he was playing cricket, his Ustaadh, Hadhrat Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani (rahmatullah alayh) appeared on the scene and commented: “You and the game of the enemies of Islam.” So saying, he left. Maulana Omarjee Saheb said that from that day onwards he never again participated in any kuffaar sports. Our Shaikh and Ustaadh, Hadhrat Maulana Masihullah (rahmatullah alayh), during the very last days of his final illness before Maut, addressed some South African students and very strongly criticized cricket and kuffaar sports in general. He asked them if their maqsad (purpose) for having come to Jalalabad was to play cricket. No matter what arguments are presented to justify these kuffaar sports, the sincere Ulama and Asaatizah should look deep down into their hearts and they will not fail to hear the following voice of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) cautioning them: “Sin is what agitates your conscience.” Hidaayat comes only from Allah Azza Wa Jal.

 

Question:

At Muslim schools or Madrasahs teachers are required by the managements to teach Muslim children to sing the anthem. They have to be trained to observe all etiquettes attendant to the anthem. What does the Shariah of Islam rule in this matter?

Answer:

The anthem of any country, be it a Muslim country, is among the shi-aar of non-Muslims. (Shi-aar refer to the outstanding public practices which advertise a culture, cult or way of a community or nation). Adopting the shi-aar of non-Muslims is among the Kabaa-ir (major sins), and in some cases shirk, e.g. standing in honour of a flag or when singing the anthem. For these reasons it is not permissible to teach the anthem to Muslim children nor to sing it nor to stand in honour when it is sung. Since these acts are in conflict with Islam, it is incumbent to abstain.

It is not permissible for teachers to obey such instructions of the school managements nor is it permissible for Muslim pupils to obey their teachers who instruct them in these haraam practices. It is infinitely better for the concerned Muslim teacher to opt for resignation or dismissal rather than teaching Muslim children to commit acts which are in flagrant violation of the Deen. And, likewise it is infinitely better for Muslim pupils to opt for expulsion rather than to prostrate in obedience to commands of kufr and haraam issued by miscreant teachers who do not believe in the Razzaaqiyat (Providence) of Allah Ta’ala. If a teacher believes that Allah Ta’ala is the Sole Raaziq (Provider) then he/she will resign without hesitation. It is not possible for a Muslim with a healthy Imaan to submit to the haraam dictates of a fussaaq management.

 

Question:

Is it not disrespectful for Muslims to refuse to stand when the national anthem is being sung? By refusing to participate in singing the anthem and standing, will we not be guilty of antagonizing the non-Muslim majority?

Answer:

The Muslim’s first consideration should be the Pleasure and Displeasure of Allah Ta’ala. We as the slaves of Allah Ta’ala should not do anything which antagonizes Allah Azza Wa Jal. Refusal to stand when the anthem is sung is not motivated by any attitude of disrespect. In fact the act of not standing is not an act of disrespect in Islamic culture. We do not stand when a song is sung in praise of Allah, The Creator. We do not stand when the Holy Scripture of Islam, the Qur’aan Majeed, is recited. Our refusal to stand when songs praising Allah Ta’ala are sung or when the Qur’aan is recited cannot be construed as being motivated by disrespect for Allah and the Qur’aan.

It is sheer narrow mindedness and bigotry for non-Muslims to become antagonized and misconstrue our refusal to stand. It is improper for them to interpret our actions motivated by our religious beliefs to be calculated acts of disrespect for any of their symbols. Different cultures have their own norms and ways. It is in conflict with the constitutional principle of religious freedom to impose the beliefs or norms of o­ne cultural group o­n another cultural or religious group. As long as Muslims are not treacherous towards the state, the authorities have no reason for any antagonism based o­n our observance of our religious demand of abstaining from standing when the anthem is sung.

Muslims abhor many acts of the non-Muslim government. Among these are abortion, homosexuality, the doctrine of equality of sexes, homosexual ‘marriages’, acceptance of illegitimacy, etc., etc. By voicing abhorrence for these cultural aberrations and acts of immorality, Muslims are merely following their religious tenets and claiming their constitutional right of freedom of thought and speech, if these values do have true worth in the eyes of the state. If the state upholds a concept of shirk such as the standing practice, Muslims may not be considered to be disrespectful for dissociating themselves from such practices.

THE ANTHEM AND DUA
In Islam there are two forms of Dua, Qur’aanic and Masnoon. Such Duas have a greater significance over the other form of duas which are personal expressions in any language and manner. The greater ibaadat aspect of Qur’aanic and Masnoon Duas is apparent from the fact that during Salaat, Dua is restricted to o­nly the first form. If dua in the second form is made during Salaat, it will invalidate Salaat. The misguided individuals who are responsible for rendering the anthem into Arabic have perpetrated the shaitaani act of misleading ignorant Muslims into believing that the anthem is a Qur’aanic or a Masnoon Dua. While today

Muslims who are aware of the reality cannot be befooled by this stunt of the translators, there does exist the distinct danger of children growing up with this bid’ah prayer of the non-Muslims presented in Qur’aanic and Masnoon colour and flavour, believing that in reality it is such a dua. The anthem is a non-Muslim prayer, hence it may not be incorporated into the prayers and ibaadat of Muslims even if it does not contain any reference to shirk and kufr. The Arabic rendition of the anthem is haraam. It is a greater sin to recite it in Arabic than in any other language. Singing the anthem in its original language, in general, and in dua form in Arabic in particular, is haraam and borders of kufr.

 

Q. I am a student at a Darul Uloom and am presently suffering tremendous mental agony. It has come as a shock to many of us at the Madrasah that for years we have been eating haraam chickens supplied by a Muslim who has even signed a confession that he had been supplying haraam chickens. I have always tried my utmost to abstain from even mushtabah food, but now that it has been confirmed that we had been consuming haraam chickens for years, I am feeling nauseous, mentally, physically and spiritually. It is a very traumatic experience. I can’t imagine the harm that has been caused to our Imaan by  eating haraam for several years. Please offer some advice.

A. Your contention that you had ‘always tried your utmost to abstain from even mushtabah (doubtful) food’, is baseless. You languished in self-deception. If you had truly been concerned about abstention from even mushtabah food, you would not have fallen in shaitaan’s trap of devouring the haraam, rotten, diseased car r ion chickens . Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that when a person indulges in mushtabah, he will ultimately become ensnared in haraam. This is precisely what has happened to the Ulama and the Talaba at the Darul Uloom. You have no excuse to mitigate the evil of the carrion consumption. You are supposed to be a Taalib-e-Ilm in the quest of Ilm-e-Wahi. Do you understand what this means? No, you don’t. If you did, you would never have devoured the haraam carrion with which you all had nourished and contaminated your bodies and souls for several years. What type of Talaba (Students of Deeni Knowledge) are you fellows? What type of Asaatizah do you have? Years of devouring carrion chickens went by undetected! This is a sign of Allah’s Displeasure with you all. There are no factors to mitigate the villainy which all of you – Talaba and Asaatizah — had committed with your devouring of the haraam carrion chickens. For years the controversy surrounding these rotten, diseased broiler chickens pumped with poisonous chemicals, even pork substances, and the 100% haraam system of killing have been intense. The wide and intense publicity which the chicken carrion industry received is not a secret. Every Muslim is fully aware of the controversy and the claims made by the Ulama-e-Haqq – those Ulama who are not paid by anyone to make pronouncements. True and honest Ulama have sustained the controversy and have always kept in the full glare of public knowledge. Despite this intense publicity, you deemed it appropriate to gratify the inordinate gluttony of your nafs with the haraam carrion. The Talaba strut about the Darul Uloom holding big kitaabs in their hands – Bukkhaari Shareef, Muslim Shareef, Abu Daawood, Nisaai, Ibn Majah, Tirmizi, Qur’aan Tafaaseer, Kutub of Fiqah, etc. You are supposed to mount the pedestal of Waraathat-e-Nubuwwat. You are supposed to eliminate Akhlaaq-e-Razeelah and adorn yourself with Akhlaaq-e-Hameedah. You are supposed to become paragons of virtue and Taqwa. But you devoured carrion chickens for years! When even one musthabah date destroys weeks of the ibaadat of even Auliya, what do you expect is the consequence of devouring haraam carrion chickens for years? Ulama and Talaba are incumbently required to abstain from consuming even confirmed halaal meat obtained from animals which were no faced towards the Qiblah at the time of Thabah, or from animals which were subjected to kuffaar cruelty during the killing process. The Ulama and Talaba who are supposed to be the representatives of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) are supposed to cultivate Taqwa and Wara’. But you talaba of this era consume freely mushtabah and haraam, and you hit and kick balls like the kuffaar, and you imitate baboons with your antics when you chase after balls. Do you expect to even cultivate the fragrance of Ilm in yourselves? Never will you acquire anything of the Noor of Ilm. In fact, you will forever remain an alien to this Noor-e-Ilm as long as Taqwa remains an alien concept to you. Taqwa is nowadays mocked at by the Ulama and Asaatizah of the Madaaris. They have become the helpers of shaitaan and among the vilest specimens of creation with their halaalization of haraam – not only haraam carrion meat and chickens, but with a range of other haraam practices. The Deen has in our era slid within the scope of the Hadith: “Verily, the Deen started off ghareeb (forlorn), and soon will it return to being ghareeb as it was in the beginning. Therefore congratulations to the Ghuraba.” Those who endeavour to live a life of Taqwa in this age are the Ghuraba who are mocked at by the carrion consuming ‘ulama’ who legalize rijs, fisq and fujoor. The Ulama, Talaba and Asaatizah nowadays have become slaves of passion, slaves, of the stomach and slaves of money, hence they are unable to distinguish between right and left, light and darkness, Haqq and baatil. The ingestion of haraam carrion and indulgence in fisq and fujoor have completely extinguished the glitter of Imaan in their hearts and have blocked the entry of Noor-e-Ilm into their heart. Ilm is a Noor from Allah Ta’ala in the heart of the Mu’min. But this Noor cannot subsist in a substratum darkened with mushtabah, haraam, laghw and la’b. If the haraam which is devoured is carrion broiler chickens and meat halaalized by the carrion purveyors such as SANHA, MJC, NIHT, ICSA, etc., then the spiritual damage is multiplied manifold. The moral and spiritual damage the haraam rotten meat and chickens cause is worse than the non-halaalized mushtabah processed foods manufactured by the kuffaar. The word of non-Muslim manufacturers is more reliable than the assurances and approval of these miserable carrion halaalizing bodies. It will indeed take a long time to cleanse your physical and spiritual systems of the poisons of the carrion chickens which you had consumed. Your entire body and soul have become filthied, polluted and contaminated with the haraam carrion chickens. The process of purification and detoxification while time-consuming will, Insha’Allah, purify you if you adopt stringent methods of Taqwa. Taubah and total abstention from mushtabah and all meat and chickens killed commercially even if the killer is a Muslim, and abstention from all futility are essential requisites for all Muslims in general, and in particular for the Talaba. If the system of killing chickens and animals is not 100% Islamic, then don’t touch such meat with a barge pole. There are numerous varieties of halaal food. There is no incumbent need to consume the carrion chickens and the dead meat which the commercial butcheries sell. The Ulama and the Talaba are the first persons who are supposed to strive diligently and zealously to uphold every detail of Allah’s Shariah. All those who had devoured the carrion chickens for years don’t have the haziest idea of the meaning of Ilm-e-Deen. It is precisely for this reason that they churn out corrupt carrion fatwas to halaalize carrion, riba, fisq

 

Q. Please comment on the increasingly common occurrence of Asaatizah in Madrasahs committing gheebat in the presence of their students.

A. GHEEBAH or speaking ill of a person in his absence even if be the truth, is worse than committing zina (adultery) according to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). This ‘zina’ is aggravated when an Ustaadh during dars (teaching in class) commits gheebat of other Ulama with whom he does not agree. Although the Ustaadh is aware that Allah Ta’ala states in the Qur’aan about gheebah: “Do not commit gheebah of one other. What, do any of you love to devour the flesh of a dead brother? (Most certainly) you will abhor it.”, he succumbs to his nafs and becomes oblivious of this dire warning. The Ustaadh who speaks ill of other Ulama whilst teaching students should take cognizance of the following facts: _ He is guilty of aggravated gheebah _ He commits khiyaanat (abuse of trust), for he steals the Madrasah time. He is paid a salary for the time he teaches. It is haraam for him to abuse the time with haraam gheebah or even with permissible personal needs. _ He pollutes the moral character of his students, for he instils in them the insignificance of the major sin of gheebah. _ His superior status as an Ustaadh is diminished in the minds of intelligent students. These students understand the error and peevishness of the Ustaadh. In consequence, the awe which a student should have for his Ustaadh is evaporated automatically. Students and even mureeds write to us regarding such demeanours committed by their Ustaadhs and Shaikhs respectively. Even the sheikh whose talks are supposed to be calculated solely for the moral reformation of his mureeds indulges in gheebah of Ulama with whom he is in disagreement. The talks and advices of such Asaatizah and Mashaaikh whose image is sullied by their own indulgence in gheebah, are involuntarily rebuffed by the hearts of their students and mureeds.

 

Q. I am attending an Arabic language class where the teacher is a female. Is it permissible for males to be taught by females? There is no separating screen.

A. It is not permissible for you to learn from a female teacher. This relationship is fraught with moral danger. Search for a male teacher.

 

Q. A non-Muslim has been appointed principal of an Islamic school. Is this permissible?

A. It is never permissible to appoint a non-Muslim to be a principal/head of an Islamic educational or any other Islamic institution. When Hadhrat Abu Musa Ash’ari (radhiyallahu anhu) had appointed a Christian to be his book-keeper, Hadhrat Uma r (radhiyallahu anhu) became extremely annoyed. He ordered the immediate dismissal of the bookkeeper. In substantiation of his instruction he cited the Qur’aanic verse: “O People of Imaan, do not take the Yahood and Nasaara as friends besides the Mu’mineen…..” There are many verses in the Qur’aan Majeed in which Allah Ta’ala prohibits Muslims from making nonbelievers their confidants. Besides this, it is Islamic common sense that it is not permissible to entrust Muslim children to a non-Muslim who wallows in the state of janaabat 24 hours of the day – physical janaabat and spiritual janaabat (i.e. kufr). It is not permissible to appoint even a faasiq Muslim to be the principal of an Islamic educational institution. The suhbat (companionship) of the non-Muslim and of a faasiq Muslim will most definitely exercise its detrimental influence on the Muslim subordinates. It is not permissible to voluntarily subject and subordinate Muslims to non-Muslims and fussaaq. It is for this very reason that the decree of a kaafir judge over Muslims is not valid according to the Shariah.

 

Q. What is a Darul Uloom student supposed to do if during lessons his Ustaadh speaks ill about other Ulama with whom he does not agree? We are told that according to the Hadith that those who even sit to listen to gheebat are equal in the sin of making gheebat. I am in a dilemma in this regard.

A. As a student maintain silence and abhor the gheebat in your heart. If you are able to speak politely to the Ustaadh, then in privacy offer the Ustaadh naseehat. Remind him that his talk in your understanding is gheebat. If he becomes annoyed, maintain silence, apologize and leave his presence with humility. Never be disrespectful to your Ustaadh even if he is flagrantly in error. At most a student has the right to respectfully remind the Ustaadh of his error.

 

Q. A student who has just graduated was given a gift of money. What should he do with the money?

A. He student should immediately return the money to the person. It is demeaning and in conflict with the attribute of Deeni Ilm for the graduating student to accept the money.

 

Q. The Islamic school plans to change the system of teaching the Qur’aan Shareef from the floor to desks in the same style as secular education is imparted. Is this permissible?

A. The school may not be described as an ‘Islamic’ school. It is a non-Muslim secular school. It is not permissible to change to the kuffaar desk system for Qur’aan ta’leem and tilaawat. In these so-called ‘Islamic’ schools, pupils sit at desks with their backs towards the Qur’aan Majeed. The Qur’aan is treated in exactly the same way as the other school books. The desks are not facing one another. They are lined up, with a pupil with his Qur’aan facing the back of the pupil sitting in front of him. Such disrespect for the Kalaam of Allah Azza Wa Jal is blasphemous

 

Q. Some enlightened scholars say that Aishah (radhiyallahu anha) had taught the seven Fuqaha of Madina. On this basis they say that it is permissible for females to teach males. Please comment.

A. These modernist ‘enlightened scholars’ take things out of context, then add their own interpretations to justify their modernist deviated practices. When it is said, for example, ‘Aishah (radhiyallahu anha) taught the first seven Fuqaha of Madina’, it creates in the mind of the audience the absolutely false idea that Hadhrat Aishah (radhiyallahu anha) had operated a systematic madrasah where males and females would attend and where she would daily impart lessons in academic style. This idea is the furthest from the truth. Aishah (radhiyallahu anha) never taught the seven Fuqaha of Madina nor anyone else in the conventional style of teaching. What used to occur in that era was that people would come from far and wide to the Sahaabah to seek guidance and to hear from them the Ahaadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). They would come individually to the homes of the Sahaabah, and this included Hadhrat Aishah and the other Wives of Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). From behind a screen in her hut she would narrate to them what she heard and saw from Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). After hearing the Hadith, they departed. They did not camp there to attend daily classes, etc. Her hut, style and methodology were bereft of the zina paraphernalia which accompany the ‘educational’ institutions of this age. This was the system of spreading knowledge in the early stages of Islam. For example, Imaam Bukhaari had more than a thousand Hadith teachers (Asaatizah). This does not mean that he sat in their company and acquired knowledge systematically on a daily basis. What happened was that if someone narrated to him a Hadith, then the narrator was automatically regarded as a teacher although Imaam Bukhaari may have met him only once in his lifetime for a few minutes. The same stupid and misleading impression is created by deviate modernists when they say women participated in Jihad during the time of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). We have explained this in some detail in our booklet, The Ladies Tabligh Jamaat

 

Q. Please comment on the Ulama-e-soo’ and give some guidelines on how we can identify them.

A. Hadhrat Bish Al-Haafi (rahmatullah alayh) admonishing the Ulama, said: “The Ulama used to be characterized with three lofty attributes – a true tongue, halaal and wholesome food and profound zuhd (renunciation/abstinence/purified from worldly love). But today, I do not see in any (of the Ulama) even one of these attributes. How is it possible for these (Ulama-e-Soo’) to claim Ilm (Knowledge of the Deen for themselves) while they plunge into the world with mutual envy (being envious of one another), and while they revile and slander their contemporaries by the rulers solely because they fear that these rulers will incline to other Ulama besides them with their haraam (wealth) and worldly possessions. Woe unto you, O Ulama -e-Soo’! You are supposed to be the Heirs of the Ambiya. You have inherited the Knowledge (of Nubuwwat), but you have deviated from amal (practising in accordance with this Knowledge). You have made your Knowledge a profession by means of which you earn your living. Do you not fear that you will be among the first to roast in the Fire?” COMMENT: According to the Hadith, the worst among people are those who earn their living with the Knowledge of the Deen. Salaries paid to Deeni Ustaadhs, Muftis, Qaadhis and all personnel who have devoted their time to the service of the Deen are excluded from this stricture and warning. The condemnation here is applicable to the ulama-e-soo’ who have made the  Deen and their knowledge a subterfuge, a screen and a mask of deception to siphon money from the public. This category of Ulama-e-Soo’ includes the newspaper vendors whose motive is nothing but money. They utilize a smattering of Deeni material to beguile the public and to trick them into believing that they are rendering Deeni service. Also included in this category of vile ulama are those who gratify their immoral bestial dictates by organizing socalled charity dinners where lewd men and women assemble for merrymaking. The radio molvis, the inter-faith molvis, the molvis who run to governmental authorities (CCMA) to suck haraam money from Musjid and Madrasah committees, sheikhs who conduct supposedly moral reformation (tazkiyatun nafs) classes in lieu of fees, the ‘halaal’ certificate vendors, those who devour riba (‘royalties’) from non- Muslim meat-houses for certifying their haraam products to enable exporting to Muslim countries, and others of this type of breed of miscreant ‘learned’ men. Hadhrat Aamir Bin Shurahbeel As-Sha’bi (rahmatullah alayh) said: “At one time we found that Ilm was acquired only by men of intelligence and abstinence (free of worldly love). But today Ilm is acquired by those who lack intelligence and abstinence.’ Once someone addressed him: ‘O Faqeeh!’ He responded: ‘I am not a Faqeeh nor an Aalim. Verily, we merely listen to Hadith and narrate it to you as we have heard it. A Faqeeh is he who flees from the prohibitions of Allah Azza Wa Jal, and an Aalim is He who fears Allah regarding the Unseen (transcendental revealed truths).” Al-Aarif Billah Ibn Ubaad (rahmatullah alayh) said: “Verily, most of those who search for Knowledge are deceits and proudful because when they pursue, for example, Fiqh which is the Knowledge closest to the goal (of Allah’s Pleasure) without prior correction of their intentions and motives by means of Tasawwuf (Moral Reformation), then with such Knowledge they follow their vain desires in obedience to their personal opinions. This method (of pursuing Knowledge) is play and amusement (i.e. a mockery). (About such persons, the Qur’aan says): “And leave those who take their Deen for play and amusement while this worldly life has deceived them.” Verily, he in whom there is a grain of kibr (pride) and hubb -e-jah (love for fame), and the desire for leadership, is not among those who should be approached (for guidance). He is among the friends of Shaitaan, the chief of dhalaal (deviation), hence he is totally blind and deviated.

 

Q. Some Ulama at our Madrasah say that the term ‘haraam’ may be used only if something is proven by Daleel Qat’i. Therefore, smoking, prawns, etc., may not be described ‘haraam’. Words such as Makrooh should be used. Is this correct?

A. No, it is not correct. It is indeed surprising that Ulama at a Madrasah are saying that the word ‘haraam’ can be used only in relation to Daleel Qat’i. It is clear that they do not understand the kutub of Fiqh nor Dalaail. The kutub are replete with the word ‘haraam’ used for such prohibitions which are not substantiated by Dalaail Qat’i.

 

Q. The Hadith Ustadh at our Madrasah while explaining the chapter on food and eating mentioned that eating from tables is permissible, and that we should only lift our feet up. He added that in eating from tables there is no tashabbuh bil kuffaar. Eating on the floor is love for the Sunnah, he said. Therefore, sitting at tables to eat is “only” leaving out a Sunnah, and that is the “only sin”, but it is fi nafsihi jaaiz (permissible) to eat from tables while sitting on chairs. I am confused. How can a person be sinful if an act is permissible? Please comment.

A. The definition of Ilm is: “Ilm is a Noor from Allah in the heart of the Mu’min.” It is quite obvious that this Ustaadh lacks fahm and the Noor of Ilm, hence he gorged out his rubbish. The drivel he spoke about the act being ‘only Sunnah’ is Istikhfaaf with the Sunnah. Such Istikhfaaf is kufr. The attitude of viewing any ta’leem of the Sunnah or Shariah as insignificant is kufr. The Ustadh spoke kufr drivel. He lacks insight. It is clear that he does not understand the masaa-il of the Deen, hence he spoke so much drivel about tables and chairs. If he had indeed said so, then he must examine his Imaan. Eating from tables is a western custom. It is most certainly Tashabbuh Bil Kuffaar (emulating the kuffaar). The Ustaadh has demeaned his own intelligence with his incongruent drivel of the act being permissible despite it also being sinful. Since his opinion is baatil, he failed to even understand his confusion and selfcontradiction. What products can be expected to emerge from the portals of the Madaaris when such deviates teach Hadith? The obligation of the Ustaadh is to strengthen the bond of the students with the Deen. It is his Waajib duty to inculcate in their hearts the importance of the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). This Ustaadhs’ fi nafsihi’ argument betrays his jahaalat. With such corrupt arguments, the entire edifice of the Sunnah and Shariah can be demolished. That was precisely what the Yahood and Nasaara did to the Shariats of Nabi Musa (alayhis salaam) and Nabi Isa (alayhis salaam). Insha’Allah, the same fate will not overtake the Shariah of Muhammadur Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).

 

Q. Please comment on the growing number of ‘Islamic’ scholars who are clamouring for the re-interpretation of the Shari’ah.

A. Hadhrat Abdullah Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) narrated the following Hadith: “There will dawn an age over people when they will gather in their Musaajid and perform Salaat whilst not a single one will be a Mu’min.” How is it possible for all the musallis in the Musaajid to be kuffaar – not Muslims despite attending Jamaa’t Salaat in the Musjids? Regardless of the paradoxical appearance of this scenario, Rasulullah’s predictions are the divine Truth. In fact, this particular prediction is the situation which is unfolding currently in the Ummah all over the world. ‘Muslims’ – those who were born Muslims – jettison and destroy their Imaan without even realizing the awful calamity of kufr which befalls them as a consequence of their ideas, interpretations and beliefs of kufr. Such professed Muslims are of the Zindeeq category of kuffaar. A Zindeeq is a kaafir who neither understands his kufr nor acknowledges that he has become a kaafir. When a Muslim rejects any established belief, teaching or practice of the 1400 year Shariah of Islam by way of interpretation, he loses his Imaan. Even without flagrant renouncement of Islam, he becomes a kaaifr and this type of renegade is termed Zindeeq. The Hadith narrated by Hadhrat Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) refers to this category. All the musallis will be kaafir of the Zindeeq order without realizing that their Imaan has been eliminated. ‘Muslims’ are advocating and promoting a deluge of kufr in a variety of forms. The objective of these kufr forms and reforms is the ultimate elimination of the 14 century old Shariat of Islam. While it is not possible for the Zindeeqs to achieve this nefarious goal since Allah Azza Wa Jal has declared the assurance of protecting the purity and originality of this Deen, nevertheless, the contest between Haqq and baatil will continue in this dunya which has in fact been created for the fight between Truth and falsehood. Among the propagations which transform Muslims into Zindeeqs are MPL kufr, regulation of polygamy, destruction of Hijaab, immoral ‘emancipation’ of women, assigning ‘equal’ status to females, condemning Qur’aanic commands such as chastisement of wives by husbands, tampering with the Shariah’s laws of inheritance, the call to open up the Musaajid for women, giving women the right of talaaq using the subterfuge of ‘khula’, etc., etc. These are merely by way of sample. There are numerous issues of kufr which the misguided juhala advocate. Every Tom, Dick, Harry, Jane and Jenny who lack expertise in even the masaa-il of Tahaarat and Salaat, and who is totally ignorant of Aqaa-id and the other Departments of the Shariah, considers himself/ herself competent to gnaw and nibble at the masaa-il of the Shariah. In fact, morons sporting secular qualifications engage in the ultimate kufr of digging up the foundations of Islam in preparation for a new, U.S.A. brand of a ‘shariah’ which could be slipped into the Ummah in the name of Islam. Thus, there are calls by munaafiqeen parading as Muslims for re-interpretation of the Qur’aan and Sunnah. Some brazenly call for an alternative ‘shariah’. Re-interpretation of Islam or a new ‘shariah’ implies denial of the Finality of Nubuwwat and the Finality and Perfection of Islam, both concepts expressly declared by the Qur’aan. The effect of the finality of Nubuwwat and the perfection of Islam is the immutability of the Shariah which is cast in an unalterable mould – in the Tablet of Noor which is guarded in Looh-e- Mahfooz in the seventh Heaven. Re-interpretation and the call for an alternative ‘shariah’ presuppose the denial of the finality of Nubuwwah and the perfection of the Deen. Both these imperative doctrines are stated in the following Qur’aanic verses: “This day have I (Allah) perfected for you your Deen, and completed for you My Favour, and chosen for you Islam as Deen.” — Al-Maaidah, aayat 3 “Muhammad is not the father of any of the males among you. But he is the Rasool of Allah, and the Khaatam of the Ambiya.” — Al-Ahzaab, aayat 40 Khaataam means Seal. There is a gigantic difference between the desert life of 1400 years ago and the life of the present space and technological era. But, Allah’s wisdom demanded the termination of the long Chain of Nubuwwat whose links are the 124,000 Ambiya from the time of Nabi Aadam (alayhis salaam). Since the inception of Nubuwwat, there was a continuous process of evolution of the Divine Law. Laws were amended, abrogated and substituted with new laws. With every new Nabi, came some change in the Shariah. But, this process ended 14 centuries ago in the Camel Age. Only a devil will suggest that Allah Ta’ala was unaware of the vast changes which would overtake and totally change life from its simple, primitive, desert form into what it is today. Allah Ta’ala is the All- Knowing Khaaliq. Despite the mind boggling changes which life would undergo from the inception of Islam in the desert era, Allah Ta’ala terminated Nubuwwat and finalized the Shariah. This Divine Decision is the strongest and clearest evidence for the immutability of the fourteen century Shariah which has an inherent mechanism to encompass all developing situations until the Day of Qiyaamah. Therefore, those vile miscreants advocating ideas of kufr, should understand that this Shariah of Islam cannot change. It shall not change. It shall remain immutable, and Allah Ta’ala has created Guards – the Ulama-e-Haqq – to protect His Shariah until the Day of Qiyaamah. We assure the agents of shaitaan, the glut of Zindeeqs of this age, that they will not succeed in their vile mission to displace this Deen. “Among people are those who dispute in (the Laws of) Allah without any knowledge, without any guidance and without a radiant Kitaab (A divine law which directs to Noor). He (this type of miscreant) turns away (with pride) to mislead (others) from the Path of Allah. For him on earth is disgrace, and We shall cause him to taste the Fire of the Blaze (Jahannum) on the Day of Qiyaamah.” (Al-Hajj, aayat 8) This is the fate awaiting these Zindeeqs who call for the re-interpretation of the Qur’aan and Sunnah, and for an alternative ‘shariah’. Their disputes are nothing but ghutha — rubbish, flotsam, nafsaani muck, and the coprolillic effluent disgorged by deranged intellect suffering under the la’nat of Allah Azza Wa Jal Who says in His Qur’aan: “He guides whomever He wishes, and He misleads whomever He wishes.”

 

QUESTION: Whom should we Hanafis follow when there is a conflict of opinion among our Ulama? For example Mufti Taqi Uthmaani says that Islamic banking, digital pictures, etc. are permissible whereas the Mujlisul Ulama refutes this view. So how does a layman make a choice?

ANSWER: If two medical doctors or two lawyers give conflicting opinions on the same issues, who will you follow? How will you decide whom to follow? Use the same criterion in the event of conflicting opinions of the Ulama. In the Qur’aan Majeed, Allah Ta’ala reprimanding the masses (the laymen) of Bani Israaeel, states: “They take their Ulama and their Mashaaikh as gods besides Allaah.” Now why does Allah Ta’ala criticize and reprimand the ordinary people for following the rulings of their learned men when it is incumbent for the laity to follow the rulings and guidance of the Ulama? In reality, the ordinary people who love to follow their nafs, and the easy way, do understand what is Haqq and Baatil. Thus, they quickly follow such rulings which satisfy their nafsaani desires whilst deep down in their hearts they know that they are following baatil. For such miscreants and slaves of the nafs, the Qur’aan Majeed says: “In fact, man has awareness of his nafs even though he puts forth excuses (to justify his haraam, nafsaaniyat and shaitaaniyat).”. Allah Ta’ala has bestowed to insaan a treasure called Aql (Intelligence) which the Mu’min is required to utilize constructively with ikhlaas (sincerity). Then he will arrive at the correct opinion, and follow what is the Haqq. The Shariah also emphasizes abstention from doubtful issues. The Deen also instructs us to choose the option in which there is i h t i y a a t ( c a u t io n ) . Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Shun that which plunges you into for that which does not cast you into doubt.” Two glasses of water are placed in front of you, and it is said that one glass contains pure water while the other glass of water contains a few drops of urine or a drop of a lethal poison, but it is not known which glass of water is pure and which one is the contaminated one. In this situation of conflict, which glass will you opt for? If someone, regardless of his elevated status, suggests that you opt for any one of the glasses, or take the one on your left or on your right, etc., will you take the chance? We are certain that you will shun both and opt for caution. Now when one Aalim says that ‘this meat is haraam carrion’, and the other one says that it is ‘halaal’, why should you dither and be in doubt as to the option you should adopt? In Deeni or spiritual matters, people throw caution aside and blindly follow their bestial nafs presenting the hollow pretext that a certain Aalim says that it is permissible irrespective of the lasting spiritual damage which consumption and participation in the haraam cause. If one Aalim says that a picture is not a picture, and the other one says that a picture is a picture, then you the layman, is required to use the Aql bestowed to you by Allah Ta’ala so that you do not come under the scope of the above mentioned Qur’aanic aayat of Divine Reprimand. You are not expected to debase your Aql by enslaving it to your carnal instincts. Your intelligence will be sufficient to convince you that the one who says that a digital picture is not a picture resorts to skulduggery and propagates what his nafs orders him, not what his Aql demands. Similarly, if one Aalim says that the so-called ‘dividends’ of a so-called ‘Islamic’ bank are riba, and another Aalim says that it is not riba, then even the layman whose brains are not welded to stupidity, will understand that it is in his best Deeni interests and for his Aakhirah to abstain from such a dangerous sin as riba. The principle of Ihtiyaat (Caution) and abstention from doubt should be adopted in every conflict, namely, adopt caution and for practical purposes act on Ihtiyaat and abstain from doubt, and utilize your Aql. You will then be on Rectitude, and there will remain no doubt in you as to what and who is the Haqq.

 

Q. Are the books , Fataawa Rahimiyyah and Heavenly Ornaments by Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi reliable?

A. Fataawa Rahimiyyah is a reliable book. The author of Fataawa Rahimiyyah was an uprighteous Aalim of the Haqq. However, there are about two or three issues in the book with which we differ. One is the Mufti’s view on copyright. According to him it is permissible to register copyright. The other is his view on shrimps which he says are permissible. Both these views are erroneous. Besides these two errors, the book is very beneficial. The book, Heavenly Ornaments is highly placed and extremely helpful for the laymen although the translations are generally poor.

 

Q. The Majlis said that kissing the hands of a Shaikh is improper. However, there are several Hadith narrations which prove that Sahaabah did kiss the hand of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Imaam Nawawi and other Fuqaha have also said that it is permissible.

A. Brother, the fatal mistake which you and numerous people in this age commit is to subject the Ahaadith to personal opinion. There exists the severe disease of laymen digging out narrations from the kutub and when they become confused because the masaa-il of the Shariah appear to be in apparent conflict with some narrations, they subject the Ahaadith to their personal opinion. For such persons, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) warned that their abode will be the Fire of Jahannum. You have cited some Ahaadith pertaining to kissing of hands, and you mentioned the opinion of Allaamah Aabid Sindhi (rahmatullah alayh) while you are perhaps unaware of the clear ruling of Imaam Abu Hanifah, Imaam Muhammad and countless Fuqaha of the Hanafi Math-hab. They all were fully aware of the narrations which you have cited. But despite these narrations, they ruled the impermissibility of kissing hands. While you have mentioned the narrations pertaining to kissing of hands, you either are unaware or you have forgotten or you intentionally chose to ignore the following Hadith and similar others: “Hadhrat Anas (radhiyallahu anhu) narrated that a man said to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam): “O Rasulullah! “Someone from amongst us meets his brother or his friend. May he bow for him?’ Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “NO!” The man said: “May he embrace and kiss him?” Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “NO!” The man said: “May he hold his hand and make musaafahah?” Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Yes!” — (Tirmizi) In Bahrur Raa-iq appears the following explanation: “In Jaamius Sagheer it is stated: ‘It is Makrooh for a man to kiss a man or his hand or to embrace him.’ Tahaawi narrated that this is according to Imaam Abu Hanifah and Imaam Muhammad (rahmatullah alayhima). Imaam Abu Yusuf (rahmatullah alayh) said: ‘There is nothing wrong with kissing and embracing……………………. The daleel of Imaam Abu Hanifah and Imaam Muhammad (rahmatullah alyhima) is the Hadith of Anas (radhiyallahu anhu), and it is also narrated that the Nabi (alayhis salaatu was salaam) forbade from mukaa-ma-ah, i.e. kissing. And the Ahaadith which have been narrated in conflict of this (prohibition) are Mansookh (abrogated) …………….Sarakhsi and some of the Muta-akh-khireen have granted concession to kiss the hand of a pious Aalim and Zaahid for the sake of barkat.” From the aforegoing you will understand that there is difference of opinion on this issue in the same way as there is difference of opinion on numerous masaa-il of the Mathaahib. Our Akaabireen follow the ruling of Imaam Abu Hanifah and Imaam Muhammad (rahmatullah alayhima) in the mas’alah. Other senior Ulama and Mashaaikh follow the other view of permissibility. So while we adhere to Imaam Abu Hanifah’s ruling and discourage kissing the hands of even Ulama and Mashaaikh, due to the difference of the Akaabireen, we do not apply vehemence to our discouragement. However, in this age, it is best to abstain from kissing the hands of even a Shaikh/Aalim because there no longer is true Taqwa. The Shaikhs of this age are generally bogus, ignorant or bid’atis. They are ignorant in even the rudiments of Tasawwuf. Their primary concentration is on singing and poetry, especially poetry sung by their mureeds to extol their own hallucinated greatness, piety and virtues. They swoon, get deceptively transported into nafsaani ecstasy and shed crocodile tears to impress the audience. People are insincere. They do things for riya, and this practice of kissing the hands entails bowing (making ruku’) which according to the Shariah is in the category of Sajdah, has become a custom devoid of reality and humility. It is an external show and a hollow custom devoid of sincerity and true respect in the heart. Furthermore, the spiritual guides are not of that calibre of piety to warrant such veneration. And, Allah knows best.

 

Q UESTION: The latest fad in the Musjids is so-called nasheed artists demonstrating their talents. The Ulama who organize these poetry and singing programs mention that it is one of the Sunnah practices to recite poetry. They quote Hadhrat Hassaan Bin Thaabit (radhiyallahu anhu) who had recited poetry for Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Further, mureeds sing in praise of their sheikh, extolling his virtues and greatness while all and sundry emit queer noises sounding like ‘oohs and aahs’ The latest in the Musjids now are good sound systems for the naa’t (poetry) singers. The trend nowadays is like the devil singers of the west. Mikes are placed facing the crowd to pep the singer and the audience on the receivers in the ladies venue or at home. Please comment on this state of affairs.

A NSWER: This trend in emulation of the ‘devils of the west’ come within the scope of the Hadith: “It is better that your stomach be filled with pus than with poetry.” There is no justification for this latest evil trend of singing poetry in the Musaajid despite the fact that some Sahaabah would recite poetry which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had condoned. The Ahadith and the Qur’aanic verses which condemn poetry are applicable to the new, satanic practice which some of the Ulama-e-Soo’ have innovated and with which they pollute the sanctity of the Musaajid. The Musaajid have been constructed and dedicated for the ibaadat of Allah Ta’ala. It is haraam to convert a Musjid into a venue for stupid, indolent, misguided singers who follow in the footsteps of the devil singers of the west. The Sahaabah did not make a profession or a vocation (mashghalah) of poetry. They did not organize poetry and singing sessions. There were no stupid poetry/singing sessions ever organized in either the Musaajid or elsewhere from the era of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to our age. It is only now that evil ulama, slaves of their bestial nafs, have initiated this satanic profession. It is tantamount to kufr to cite Hadhrat Hassan’s poetry as a daleel for the evil which these miscreant molvis are perpetrating in the Musaajid. Reciting even the Qur’aan Majeed aloud in the Musjid is not permissible. Converting the Musjid into the likes of a dancehall or concert-hall where singing, poetry and evil are committed, with sound systems and silly ‘oohs and aahs’ emanating from stupid people overcome with nafsaaniyat, is an act of capital shaitaaniyat. The holy atmosphere of the Musjid is totally ruined and defiled by the devil singers, the sound systems and the silly ‘oohs and aahs’ emanating from the stomachs filled with a substance ‘worse than pus’, for the Hadith informs us that ‘pus is better than poetry’. Regardless of the ‘good’ content matter of the song/poem, indulgence in poetry/singing is haraam. The occasional, unofficial and spontaneous recitation of good poetry is excluded from the prohibition. But the shaitaaniyat which is nowadays enacted in the Musaajid is haraam. The sheikhs who get transported into nafsaani ecstasy by the stupid praises which their stupid mureeds sing, should go to some Muhaqqiq sheikh for Islaah of their nafs. Their shows of ecstasy are specious. These ‘shaikhs’ who love aggrandizement and praises, have not even perceived the fragrance of Tasawwuf. They do not have the faintest idea of the meaning of Tasawwuf and of its objectives, hence they squander their time and ruin the morals of their ‘mureeds’ with singing and poetry. And, tomorrow will follow dancing – the so-called dervish dances which transport the stupid actors into Jahannum via their vehicle of nafsaani ‘ecstasy’. The contention that poetry is Sunnah, and that too in an organized manner right inside the Musjid, is not only a despicable lie, but a lie blasphemed in the name of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). About such deliberate and despicable lies, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “He who speaks a lie on me (i.e. saying something is Sunnah when it is not), should prepare his abode in the Fire (of Jahannum).” The vile molvi who made this slanderous claim has implied that this ‘sunnah’ was dead right from the time of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), and had remained dead for fourteen centuries, and it is only now in this belated era in close proximity to Qiyaamah that some miserable molvi has unearthed this ‘sunnah of singing and poetry’ from some buried archives of Satanism. Is there a single instance in the entire history of Islam from Rasulullah’s age down the long corridor of Islam’s fourteen centuries, that any of the Sahaabah and the Ulama-e-Haqq had organized sessions of poetry and singing in the Musjid? Did they ever invite Muslims to come to the Musjid to participate in poetry and singing? The Qur’aan Majeed said: “The la’nat of Allah is on the liars.’ And, the lie uttered in the name of the Deen is an aggravated sin of terrible proportions. It is haraam to pollute the Musaajid with performances in emulation of the devils of the west. It is haraam to sit in the Musjid to listen to the hypocritical poetry and singing. The Musaajid are Allah’s Houses exclusively for His ibaadat.

 

Q. Please advise on the qualities a Haafiz of the Qur’aan should inculcate within himself.

A. Hadhrat Abdul lah Ibn Mas’ood (radhiyallahu anhu), one of the most senior among the Sahaabah proffered the following advice and admonition to the Haafiz of the Qur’aan: “When the people enjoy themselves with food and drink, the Haafiz should be fasting. When they are laughing, the Haafiz should be in contemplation. When they dispute, he should be silent. When they manifest pride, he should be humble. The Haafiz of the Qur’aan should be a person who is one who cries and who is always grieving and tolerant. He should not be a person of ill conduct. He should not be ghaafil (oblivious) nor rowdy nor of harsh disposition nor one who is arrogant.”

 

Q. Is Khatm-e-Qur’aan jalsah Sunnat?

A. There is no practice of Khatm-e-Qur’aan jalsah in Islam. All such jalsahs are innovations. There is neither origin nor sanction in the Sunnah for these jalsahs. Qur’aan, just as all other acts of Nafl (optional) ibaadat should be recited in the privacy of the home by the individual. It is not permissible to use the Qur’aan for a merry-making function as is the case with all these jalsahs.

 

Q. I teach little children Deenyaat. I write Allah’s Name and Qur’aanic verses with chalk on the board. When I erase what is written, the chalk-dust obviously falls on to the ground. This agitates my conscience. Please advise.

A. Don’t write the Names of Allah Ta’ala and Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) on the board with chalk. When these Names are erased, the dust will scatter on the ground. This is highly disrespectful. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that sin agitates the conscience.

 

Q. Many Ulema have objected to the practice of fasting on the 15th of Sha’baan and observing the Night as an auspicious occasion. They aver that there is no proof for claiming that these practices are Sunnah. They say that the Akaabireen used to study in Madrasahs where Hadith is taught only until the Mishkaat level, and their gaze was not on the sanads of the Ahaadith. The hadith they say is so weak that it may not be presented for even virtues (faadhaa-il). Some say that it is bid’ah to fast on the 15th Sha’baan because of the Waajib attitude of some people. Also some senior Ulama of our time say that it is bid’ah to fast on this day. Please dispel my doubts with a detailed explanation.

A. The scope of these columns precludes a detailed response. If you want a detailed explanation, provide your postal address. We shall forward our booklet explaining the Sunnah position of the 15th Day and Night of Sha’baan. Only moron molvis will venture the stupid idea that the Akaabireen’s Hadith knowledge is limited to Mishkaat. They are either genuine morons who are shockingly ignorant of the curriculum of the kutub of our Madaaris or they are deliberately misleading people with blatant lies. The Akaabireen of Deoband in this era (i.e. the era of our immediate Akaabireen who have all departed from this dunya) were the greatest authorities of Hadith, Fiqh, Tafseer and every branch of Islamic Knowledge. Thus, those who have made the stupid claim are genuine morons. Alternatively they are deceits and intellectual thugs who feast on falsehood. Whilst some Ulama proclaim the practice bid’ah, numerous of the Akaabireen aver that it is Sunnah. We are not the muqallideen of those Ulama who contend that the 15th Sha’baan is bid’ah. They too are muqallideen who have become mesmerized with the false illusion of them being ‘mujtahids’, hence they dabble in Hadith in a way to bring about abrogation of Sunnah practices which are authenticated by centuries of practice of the Akaabir Ulama who were all vehemently opposing bid’ah. These tin -topped or plastic ‘mujtahids’ of this age have neither the ability nor the licence to resort to Ahaadith for formulation of masaa-il of the Shariah. They are muqallids and are therefore obliged to remain Blind muqallideen. Don’t be bamboozled by isolated views propounded by a couple of Ulama, even if they sport an alignment with the Ulama of Deoband. Their contention regarding ‘waajib attitude’ is baseless. None of the Akaabireen had ever emphasized this practice. In fact when we were still studying at Madrasah under Hadhrat Masihullah (rahmatullah alayh), we did not even realize that it was the 15th Sha’baan. The realization would dawn when Hadhrat would proceed to the Qabrustaan during the night time. The Ulama who are making a stupid issue of this Practice should rather divert their gaze and efforts towards the hardcore bid’ah, fisq and fujoor in which both the masses and molvis of this age are indulging. Their tongues are silent and they behave like dumb morons with regard to all the evil surrounding us. But they are stupidly vociferous against the People of Haqq and the Akaabireen in condemning the legitimate 15th Sha’baan practices. They don’t speak against the halaalization of carrion and riba by haraam ‘halaal’ certificate manufacturing entities and mercenary ‘shariah boards’ whose function is to advertise the capitalist riba system. But they have long tongues which wag like the tails of dogs when critizing the Akaabireen.

 

Q. Please comment on the new fad of girls’ jalsahs.

A. A new craze of jahl in the community is the new bid’ah of immoral girls jalsahs which madrasahs and schools organize. The participating girls sing songs (nazams) and give speeches of riya.. The public is invited to waste time observing and listening to this fitnah. Regarding this trend of fitnah, the following question and answer appear in Fataawa Mahmoodiyah, authored by Hadhrat Mufti Mahmoodul Hasan (rahmatullah alayh): QUESTION “There are Deeni madaaris in our city, Malegoan (in India). Qur’aan recitation, etc. are being taught to the girls. At the end of the year a special jalsah (function) is organized  with full purdah arrangement. The purpose is to create Deeni enthusiasm in girls and women. At the jalsah girls, using loudspeakers, deliver speeches, (sing) nazams, etc. Furthermore, girls from different madrasahs congregate and Qur’aan Qiraa’t competiions take place. Prizes are awarded. Men also attend these functions. They listen to the speeches (and songs) of the young girls. Most of the participating girls and females are baaligh (adults). Is this kind of jalsah permissible according to the Shariah?” (After mentioning some super- ficial ‘benefits’ of such jalsahs, Hadhrat Mufti Mahmoodul Hasam – rahmatullah alayh – states: ANSWER “….But along with this, there is fitnah, especially when even males are invited. They too listen to the speeches over the loudspeakers and derive pleasure therefrom. The girls also sing the nazams with their melodious voices. The congregating of women by itself is a specific fitnah. For this reason there is no permission for women to attend even family functions (e.g. walimahs). If the husband permits (his wife to participate), he too will be apprehended (by Allah Ta’ala). From a variety of sources we gain the knowledge of fitnah. Letters pour in with questions (pertaining to this type of fitnah). If the girls are small, there is no fitnah (See comment be- low). However, the issue of big girls is different. They should not be educated in this manner nor should they give speeches. It is mentioned in Shaami, Vol. 2, page 665: “A woman should be prohibited from visiting strangers, from iyaadat (attending the home of a mayyit to condole) and from walimah. If he (the husband) permits her, both are sinners. (She should be prohib- ited) even if the walimah is held at the place of her mah- rams because of the congrega- tion (of all and sundry). There- fore such gatherings are nor- mally not without fasaad (immoral mischief).” OUR COMMENT This type of jalsah is not permissible for even little girls. Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thaanvi (rahmatullah alayh) has emphasized that when a girl is seven years old, she should observe purdah for family mahrams, and when she is six years old, then for non-family mahrams. The fitnah, fisq and fujoor of the age demand total prohibition. All female jalsahs are haraam. Only those devoid of intelligence and foresight see goodness in these functions of fitnah.

 

Q. I have read in the kitaab, Qudoori, that women need not cover their faces. Wearing niqaab is not compulsory since the face of a woman is not satr. Please comment.

A. Despite what you have read in Qudoori, it is Waajib for women to conceal their faces in public. Your knowledge in this regard is defective. To understand the kutub of the Fuqaha, textual know-how is not sufficient. Something else called Noor-e- Fahm and Baseerat which are the effects of Taqwa are imperative for proper understanding of the kutub. There are many kuffaar who can read and translate the Arabic Hadith, Tafseer and Fiqh kutub better than you and us. But they remain kuffaar. So you remain stupid on account of the lack of Noor-e-Ilm. Thus, you look with squint eyes at the pages of Qudoori, hence your corrupt conclusion.

 

Q. Please comment on the recent trend of Deobandi Ulama running seerah programmes during Rabiul Awwal.

A. Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (rahmatullah alayh) said that Bid’ah is not confined to meelaad, qiyaam, urs and similar practices in which the Ahl-e-Barelwi sect notoriously specializes. Bid’ah exists even in the ranks of our Ulama of Deoband, and this Bid’ah is on the rise. Bid’ah is proportionately incremental to the decrease of the quality of Ilm and Taqwa. Whilst the Janaazah of Taqwa has long ago departed from the ranks of the molvis who align themselves with Deoband, the Janaazah of even Zaahiri Ilm (textual/book knowledge) is on its way to the Qabrustaan. It is precisely on account of the demise of Taqwa and Ilm, that the new brand of ‘deobandi’ molvies are groping in darkness, searching for ways out from the tunnel of darkness. Since they lack the necessary Ilm and Taqwa to combat the deluge of Bid’ah and Baatil in which the community is submerged, they are now blindly emulating the ways of the Qabar Pujaaris. It is the long-standing Bid’ah practice of the Barelwi Qabar Pujaaris (graveworshippers) to conduct a flurry of ‘seerah’ and moulood programmes specially in the month of Rabiul Awwal. Molvis aligned to Deoband are now jumping onto this Bid’ati wagon. Bereft of sound Ilm which is an imperative requisite for combating Bid’ah and Baatil, they have clambered on board the Bid’ati wagon, hence they too are now introducing the Rabiul Awwal bid’ah in their ranks. Bid’ah is the product primarily of jahaalat (ignorance). Ignorance is zulmat (darkness), and zulmat can be dispelled with only Ilm (sound knowledge of the Deen adorned with Noor), for Ilm is Noor (spiritual Light). The Bid’ah of the Bareilwis cannot be combated and extinguished by introducing Bid’ah or by adopting their methods. The New Brand Ulama of Deoband, i.e. those who are not of the Barelwi sect and who proclaim to be followers of the Akaabir Ulama of Deoband, but who are not genuine followers of the Akaabireen, have strayed from Siraatul Mustaqeen. The vile process of halaalization of haraam, bid’ah, fisq and fujoor is now a deepseated disease in the molvis of our jamaat. There is no resemblance between them and the Akaabir Ulama of Deoband. There is a difference of heaven and earth between the two groups. Their self-professed alignment with the Ulama of Deoband is a deceptive canard, They befool themselves and beguile others who cherish respect and honour for the illustrious Akaabireen of Deoband. Their ‘seerah’ jalsahs are either manifestations of their nafs craving for cheap publicity, or the effect of wayward jahaalat which is an attribute of such knowledge whose objective is the dunya. They manipulate knowledge for worldly and nafsaani motives. They are signs of Qiyaamah. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) commenting on the Signs of Qiyaamah, mentioned that “The dunya will be pursued with the amal (deed) of the Aakhirah.” In other words, under guise of ibaadat, the ‘learned’ men will seek worldly, nafsaani and monetary goals. It is not permissible to organize ‘seerah’ jalsahs in Rabiul Awwal nor is it permissible to participate in such gatherings of Bid’ah.

 

Q. The latest practice which has developed by Deobandi Ulama is to conduct ‘seerah’ jalsas/programmes in the month of Rabiul Awwal. The Bareilwis also have similar programmes in Rabiul Awwal. Are these seerah jalsahs permissible in Rabiul Awwal?

Q The seerah programmes which socalled Deobandis are conducting in emulation of the Bareilwis are just as bid’ah as the programmes of the Bareilwis. These pseudo Deobandis are lacking in true Ilm and Taqwa, and they crave for the limelight, hence they are following in the footsteps of the Qabar Pujaaris. Many acts of bid’ah have crept into the ranks of molvis who align themselves with Deoband in these days.

 

Question:

“Recently our Musjid was host to a Nazam Jalsah which was held inside the Musjid. It was dubbed as the first such jalsah in Mpumulanga. I enumerate a few concerns. Please enlighten me on the Shariah perspective. i. One of the singers of the nasheeds (songs) sang a nasheed praising Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). His presentation was rap music style with action. His attire was contrary to the Sunnah ii. The other presenter, who is a qualified Molvi and Qaari, when reciting a nazam praising Allah Ta’ala, would gesticulate with his hands (up and down) requesting louder chorus from the musallees). iii. Our local Imaam was the MC of that hosted event. He had hired a non-Muslim sound system company to enhance and increase the sound. We do have a sound system in our Musjid, and also qualified Muslims who have sufficient knowledge of controlling the sound system. But the Imaam had allowed a non-Muslim in the state of najaasat and janaabat to control the sound system inside the main Musjid area. As far as I know even a Muslim is not allowed inside the Musjid without wudhu, never mind the state of janaabat, The non-Muslim operator was in the Musjid for about six hours. The sound system which was hired is used and hired to many non-Muslim and government functions where alcohol, etc.is served. iv. Our local Imaam announced in the Musjid that CDs of the nazam artists/ singers were available for sale. Is it not so that business transactions, promotions or even announcements of lost items in the Musjid are not permissible? Many members of our community are unhappy about this event. Kindly enlighten us of the Shariah’s ruling.

ANSWER

According to the Hadith, a time will dawn when the Imaam (leader, ruler) of the Muslims will commit zina in broad daylight with a woman right on the mimbar of the Jaami’ Musjid in Damascus in full view of the audience (the musallees) in the Musjid. It is quite logical that prior to this ultimate enactment of Shaitaan, there will be a prelude of shaitaani events of this nature leading up to the major act of zina in the Musjid by the ruler. It appears that in South Africa, the devil whom you have dubbed the ‘imaam’ of the Musjid, has initiated the process of preparation for zina in the Musjid. Ultimate acts of immorality and horror do not occur suddenlt and overnight. People are first desensitized by shaitaan with lesser acts of immorality. By degrees they become accustomed to greater acts of immorality until zina in the Musjid and zina on public roads become the norm. Shaitaan is a cunning master and teacher. He has initiated the process of incremental immorality and obscenity with songs about Allah Ta’ala and Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Tomorrow when the Imaan has become thoroughly corrupt and desensitized to evil, songs of prostitutes will become acceptable. In the beginning shaitaan lightly holds the victims finger. Gradually his grips increases until the time arrives when he finally swallows his prey. This satanic imaam is the agent of Iblees or he could be shaitaan in human form. Every act which you have described is the perpetration of shaitaan who has succeeded in enrolling the imaam, the Musjid’s trustees and the audience (the musallees) to support the event of immorality and to participate therein. The fact that this imaam had no care for even the sanctity of the Musjid nor was he concerned with the non -Muslim junubi polluting the Musjid for hours, nor did he suffer a twinge of conscience for all his haraam clowning acts, indicates that Allah’s la’nat (curse) has transmogrified his brains. This mal-oon so-called imaam has plainly advertised the divine curse which has settled on him. One does not require an excess of intelligence to understand that the vile ‘nazam jalsah’- concert held in the Musjid is HARAAM. All the antics, acts and even the very singing of the nazams in the Musjid in the manner described in your letter are HARAAM. It is worse than the act of adultery committed by a man in privacy because the adulterer is smitten afterwards by remorse, regret, and he hastens to Taubah while the devil ‘imaam’ promotes his Satanism under the guise of the Deen. There is no need to comment much on the ingredients of the immoral function. The concert was HARAAM from A to Z. The faasiq imaam should be kicked out from the imamate position. It is not permissible to have such a faasiq-faajir to be the Imaam of the Musjid. The trustees of the Musjid are equally liable and blameworthy for allowing the HARAAM concert to be conducted in the Musjid. The imaam and all of those who condoned this HARAAM function are tinders of Jahannum.

 

Q. Please comment on those taking Zakaat funds to pay the salaries of Madrasah staff and building work.

A. The avenue for expending Zakaat funds is the Fuqara and Masaakeen (the poor and destitute). Some molvies resort to a heelah (stratagem) which they apply to Zakaat funds to enable them to utilize the Zakaat in buildings and for paying the salaries of the Ustaads. They effect the heelah by giving the money to a poor student with the condition that he should ‘donate’ it to the Madrasah. The Molvi Saahib feels very pleased with himself for having so ‘adroitly’ effected the stratagem. He believes that the Zakaat has also been discharged, and the funds could now be used for construction work and for salaries. Remember! that this heelah (stratagem) is pure drivel. While the people of knowledge (the Ulama) do not indulge in the sins committed by the masses, they commit sins under the guise of Knowledge. The sin of the molvi is also a sin. This type of heelah effected to Zakaat funds is totally nonsensical. Nothing is achieved by this stratagem. The funds remain Zakaat. This is not Tamleek. It is a concoction. What, do they intend to also deceive Allah Ta’ala? Allah Ta’ala is well aware of the condition of the hearts. Not an atom remains concealed from Him. As long as the one who receives the money does not genuinely believe that he has been made the owner (and that if he wishes, he may keep the funds for himself), Tamleek has not been effected. Some people utilize Zakaat funds unscrupulously as if they are the owners of the wealth. It is imperative to exercise great restraint in this regard. If they reflect in what they are perpetrating, they will realize their error. The Fuqaha have clarified that it is not permissible to adorn the Musjid with Waqf funds which may be used for solidifying the structure (and for essentials of the Musjid).

 

Q. Please give some advice to students of knowledge.

A. THE VERY FIRST fundamental requisite for a Student pursuing the Knowledge of the Qur’aan is sincerity of intention. His niyyat should not be contaminated with any worldly or nafsaani motive. The one and only niyyat should be to gain knowledge for the pleasure of Allah Ta’ala – to enable you to discharge Ibaadat and Taa-at in the correct manner. There should be no other niyyat. Students are beguiled by the nafs and shaitaan with snares adorned with Deeni hues, e.g. the purpose of pursuing Deeni knowledge is tableegh, delivering lectures, becoming imams, rendering other forms of Deeni service. All such issues are distractions and deceptions which contaminate the niyyat. The second vital requisite for the acquisition of the Noor of Ilm is consumption of halaal, tayyib morsels of food. This is of imperative importance. Its significance is so decisive on moral reformation and spiritual elevation that Allah Ta’ala commands the Ambiya: “O Rusul (Messengers)! Eat tayyibaat and practise deeds of virtue.” A’maal-e-Saalihah are dependent on the ingestion of halaal, tayyib food. Tayyibaat refers to such foods which are pure and clean in every way, both physically and spiritually. This aayat informs us that all Ambiya had been commanded to observe two acts in particular: (1) To eat Tayyib food, and (2) to practise deeds of virtue. The Ambiya (alayhimus salaam) being Ma’soom (sinless). Zuhd (abstinence and renunciation of the dunya) is an integral constituent of their moral character. Nevertheless, Allah Ta’ala commands them to exercise exceptional care regarding the morsels they consume. When this command has been given to such holy personalities who are meticulous in observing the rules of the Shariah in every aspect and detail of life, then to a far greater degree will it be applicable to others who are drowned in the worldly cesspool of filth and pollution. The illustrious Muffassireen mention that the reason for combining these two acts (Tayyib food and virtuous deeds) in this aayat is the decisive effect which tayyib food exercises on A’maal-e-Saalihah. In this age, neither students nor the Ulama have a proper understanding of halaal tayyib food and of its vital importance for the develop- ment of Roohaaniyat and Baseerat. The  consumption of mushtabah and even physically contaminated food exercises a detrimental effect on the spiritual heart even if such food is halaal. Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thaanvi (rahmatullah alayh) narrated the following very interesting episode which is full of ibrat for the Students of the Deen, as well as for the Ulama who fail to understand the importance of abstaining from mushtabah food. A man admitted his son to a Daarul Uloom in India. Both the father and the son enjoyed a high degree of Taqwa. After some time the father came to visit his son at the Madrasah. The son was attending classes. While the father waited in his son’s room he noticed that the roti (bread) was commercial bread. In other words, the roti was bought from some shop. The father was highly agitated. When his son arrived, he made Salaam, but the father did not respond to his Salaam. Expressing considerable annoyance, he demanded to know why his son was eating bread obtained from the shops. The son explained that it was not his roti. The bread belonged to another student who also shares the room with him. Not satisfied with the explanation the father said: “Why do you live with such a student who eats just anything?” So saying, the father expressing his grief, left without speaking with his son or greeting him. This was the degree of Taqwa of a man of genuine Taqwa. He left no stone unturned to inculcate the same degree of Taqwa in his son. Explaining the rationale of this episode, Hadhrat Thanvi (rahmatullah alayh) said that items displayed in public attract the gazes of numerous people. Many poor and destitute people who are unable to buy the roti simply stare at it. Such stares of desire (Nathr) spiritually contaminates the food. When a pious person consumes such spiritually contaminated food, his roohaaniyat will be adversely effected. It is accepted that nowadays such a lofty degree of Taqwa may be impossible for almost all students. The purpose of mentioning this episode is to convey an idea of the meaning of abstaining from spiritual pollution. In these times, students should at least totally abstain from the haraam carrion chickens, carrion meat (the halaalized pork and carrion meat products), chocolates, sweets, commercially prepared biscuits, soft drinks and processed foods containing a million chemical ingredients camouflaged with deceptive E numbers. Furthermore, they should not eat like gluttons – three meals a day. Animals too do not degenerate to such levels of gluttony as human beings of this age. An excess of even halaal tayyib food is harmful for both the physical body and the soul. Hadhrat Sahl Bin Abdullah (rahmatullah alayh) said: “When Allah created the dunya, He instilled in satiation (i.e. in a full stomach) ma’siyat (sin) and jahl (ignorance), and He created in hunger Ilm (Knowledge) and Hikmat (Wisdom).” Hadhrat Zunnoon Misri (rahmatullah alayh) said: “Hikmat does not reside in a stomach filled with food because eating in abundance causes hardness and darkness in the heart. The consequence of this is deficiency in ibaadat and increase in ghaflat. With hunger one reaches Hikmat. Hunger creates pleasure in ibaadat and is extremely beneficial for illuminating the hearts so that (true) Uloom is acquired.” Students and Ulama should ponder and reflect on their bestial state in which they are fully under the domination of the nafs. There is no Ilm without spiritual fibre (roohaaniyat).

 

Q. I have recently taken up an imamate position. When I speak on any topic which for some people is ‘controversial’, they say I am causing fitnah and dissension. If we don’t explain the Sunnah, how will people come to know of their errors and the bid’ah they commit?

A The favourite argument the mushrikeen of Arabia had against Rasulullah’s (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) Da’wat of Islam was that he was causing ‘fitnah’ and dividing the community – father against son, wife against husband, and so on. To conceal their weaknesses and to pursue the dunya, the ulama of our times are undermining the Deen. Our duty is to propagate the Haqq. The end result is Allah’s decree. The Ambiya (alayhimus salaam), all of them, proclaimed: “And on us is only to deliver the clear message.” The ulama presenting these devious arguments have fallen in the snare of shaitaan. Such traps are called Talbees- e-Iblees, and the Qur’aan refers to these deceptive arguments as ‘zukhrufal qawl” (adorned statements). When one succumbs to one haraam act, the avenue opens up for the next haraam act. In this way fisq, fujoor and baatil incrementally consume the Ummah until a stage is reached when there will be nothing of the Deen left as there remains nothing of the Shariats of Nabi Musa (alayhis salaam) and Nabi Isa (alayhis salaam). However, it is most fortunate for us that this fate will not overtake the Shariah of Islam despite the inroads of corruption being made by the people of baatil and the ulama-e-soo’. Allah Ta’ala Himself has assumed the responsibility of protecting Islam. We are the small cogs in this Divine Machinery to guard the Deen.

 

Q. Recently an Ulema organization issued a poster announcing that a prominent naa’t singer would be singing naa’ts at a public hall. The programme was advertised specially for ladies. The Imaams of the various Musjids displayed the poster on their respective Musjid notice boards. Is it permissible for a male singer from behind a screen to sing for a female audience? Is it proper for Ulama who are Warathatul Ambiya to organize such functions? Please comment on this programme.

A. It is haraam for a male singer to sing to even males, and it is haraam for even a female singer to sing to a female audience. To a greater degree will the prohibition apply if he sings for females. The Fuqaha have ruled that men should not say even ‘Assalamu Alaikum’ to females and vice versa. And, if a male greets a woman, she should not respond. When it is prohibited for women to attend the Musjid for Salaat, how can it ever be permissible for them to attend a public hall for listening to the haraam singing by a faasiq male? The faasiq, vile male singer, we are told, had egged on the women to sway to his immoral tunes. The Imaams, the ulama-e-soo’ (evil molvis) and all who participated in organizing the fisq singing in the public hall are fussaaq. These miserable molvis have no respect for the ahkaam of the Shariah. Their concern is only to satisfy the lustful dictates of the nafs. May Allah Ta’ala save this Ummah from the vile clutches of the ulama-e-soo’. These ulama-e-soo’ are not Warathatul Ambiya. They have become warathatush shaitaan (the heirs and representatives of the devil). There is no group which has harmed the Ummah more than the ulamae- soo’. They have become the commanders of munkar (evil) having assumed the function of Amr bil Munkar instead of Amr Bil Ma’roof.

 

Q. Is congregational loud Thikr permissible in the Musjid? The reason I ask is because I am an ex-‘Barelwi’ who has “converted” to Deobandi teachings but now I see Deobandi Musjids doing the same things that Barelwi Musjids are doing. Last night I went to a lecture programme in Durban. I was shocked to see the first half of the program being taken up by congregational loud recitation of 40 Durood and Thikr. Now I am confused.

A. Whilst you are an ‘ex-Barelwi’, the crowd who had participated in the innovated (bid’ah) ritual in the Musjid is ex-Deobandi. Those who participate in such innovations are inclining towards Barelwi’ism. The time will dawn soon when these so-called ‘Deobandi’ bid’atis and the Barelwi Bid’atis will be one single soul in two bodies. They have no resemblance with Deoband or the Ulama of Deoband. They have lost the Path – the Path of the Sunnah – which the Ulama of Deoband had always defended and guarded. A bid’ah remains bid’ah and impermissible whether practised by Barelwis or Deobandis. By having converted to Deobandi teachings, you have adopted the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) which was the mission of the Ulama of Deoband. Whilst you have entered the Path of the Sunnah, the Bid’atis whom you have seen in the Musjid have entered into the Path of Bid’ah.

 

Q. I am sending you an article on the permissibility of loud Thikr written by a student of a Darul Uloom. He cites many proofs for the permissibility of loud thikr. He even claims that Hadhrat Maulana Thanvi had also practised congregational loud thikr. What is your response?

A. We have answered the Thikr issue from all angles in our detailed book, Thikrullah in the Mirror of the Sunnah. Our kitaab is an adequate response for the incongruities and mixed-up ‘proofs’ of the student. Hadhrat Thanvi (rahmatullah alayh) did not advocate nor participate in loud congregational Thikr in the manner in which today’s deviates are perpetrating and baselessly claiming. Hadhrat Masihullah (rahmatullah alayh), our Shailkh and Ustaadh, was an ardent devotee of Hadhrat Thaanvi (rahmatullah alayh). In all the years we were with him, not once did he advocate such forms of Thikr, nor ever participate in it. Furthermore, at no stage did we claim that loud thikr is not permissible. But, our critics behave like morons. They are too stupid to understand what they are reading, yet they are supposed to be molvis and muftis. If we say that it is haraam to recite the Qur’aan in the toilet, they slander with their claim that we are saying that it is haraam to recite the Qur’aan. They acquit themselves with typical Barelwi Qabar-Pujaari mentality. Insha’Allah, when time and life permits, and if Allah Ta’ala bestows to us the taufeeq, we shall publish a rebuttal of the half-baked ‘proofs’ of the halfbaked student.

 

Q. Is it permissible to pay a fee to listen to a Deeni lecture?

A. It is haraam to charge a fee and to pay a fee for listening to a Deeni bayaan/lecture. Hence, even if a person is not a formal student at a Madrasah, he may not be prevented from sitting to listen to lessons.

 

Q. What are Fisq and Fujoor?

A. Fisq refers to acts which are in flagrant and open violation of the Shariah, e.g. shaving the beard, wearing the trousers below the ankles, viewing television, abstaining from Jamaat Salaat, etc. Fujoor means immoral deeds, e.g. fornication, mingling with females, consuming liquor, indulging in music, etc.

 

Q. In one of your articles you mention: “Makruh does not mean permissible. Regardless of the category of Makruh, it does not mean permissible even if it happens to be Makruh Tanzihi. In fact, constancy in the commission of Makruh Tanzihi transforms the act into Makruh Tahreemi which is a punishable offence in the same way as haraam. ……I would be most grateful if you could give some sayings of the classical Fuqaha which categorically confirm what you have said. I have asked a few ulama and they do not seem to be aware of this fact. Secondly, some of the Shafi ‘ i ulama cite the mu’tamad opinion of their Madhab that trimming the beard is Makruh Tanzihi. They also state, perhaps rightly so, that Hanafi, Maaliki and Hanbali ulama should not interpret their madhab for them.

A. We are inundated with work and lack the time for searching the kutub. We suggest that you browse through the kutub to ascertain the correctness or assumed ‘incorrectness’ of our averments, then either confirm or refute our contention. If you are able to produce dalaa-il to substantiate the assumed ‘incorrectness’ of our statement, then, Insha’Allah, we shall respond. The Shafi’ Ulama who claim that trimming the beard which has not reached a fist-length is Makruh Tanzihi, should prepare an Ilmi (academic) discussion with all their dalaa-il (Shar’i arguments) to substantiate their view. Insha’Allah, we shall then embark on a thorough refutation of their baatil view. In this era of the preponderance of Ulama-e-Soo’ who trifle with the Shariah and view the Mathaahib with disdain, we shall most certainly explain the other Math-habs to establish the Haqq. When the followers of the Shaafi’ Math-hab in this country are fed baatil and ghutha by the Shaafi’ so -called ulama, then it devolves on us as a Waajib obligation to take up the reins and apprize them of the Haqq stated in their Math-hab. In the era if which we live, it is not permissible to refer the masses to the wolves and shayaateen masquerading as ulama.

 

Q. Explain what is the meaning of major and minor sins? Which sins are major and minor?

A. The classification of sins into major and minor is a mere technical issue. Literally, all sins are major and serious. A person who commits a sin thinking lightly of it because of its ‘minor’ (sagheerah) classification, has in fact thought lightly of Allah Ta’ala. Hadhrat Aishah (radhiyallahu anha) narrating a Hadith said: “Beware of thinking lightly of sins.” A sin is classified ‘minor’ in relation to another sin. A sin being minor does not mean that it is insignificant. Sometimes the punishment for even a ‘minor’ sin is severer than that of a technically ‘major’ sin. The sin of verbally abusing a Muslim is ‘minor’ in relation to the sin of physically hitting a Muslim. The sin of consuming liquor is ‘minor’ in relation to committing murder. But by itself it is a major sin, and so too is abusing a Muslim a major sin. Looking at a woman with lust is a ‘minor’ sin in relation to committing fornication. But by itself it is a major sin. And why will it not be a major sin of an exceptional degree when Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “He who looks with lust at the beauty of a woman will have (hot) iron rods inserted into his eyes on the Day of Qiyaamah.” So while this grave sin may be technically classified as ‘sagheerah’ (minor), the severity of the punishment is adequate to dispel any idea of insignificance. Most people have misunderstood the meaning of minor and major sins. They have understood from this classification that to commit ‘minor’ sins is not a serious offence. This is a dangerous misinterpretation which can even extinguish Imaan. The one who has authority over others should counsel and admonish his subordinates for every sin whether it is classified as major or minor. View all sins alike, namely, all sins are major literally speaking, and warrants Allah’s Wrath and Punishment.

 

Q. A Maulana says that muqallideen in this age should go to the Hadith for an answer when there is ikhtilaaf among the Fuqaha. Is this valid?

A. The contention that the muqallideen in this age should go to the Hadith when there is Ikhtilaaf (difference of opinion) among the Fuqaha is evidence for the shallowness of the knowledge of the one who makes such a preposterous claim. The Maulana should go back to Madrasah and begin his darsiyaat all over. When he is capable of gorging out such drivel, it is of no benefit to discuss with him at an academic level. It is a sheer waste of time.

 

Q. An Aalim may have been a ‘bid’ati’, but he dies a good death or people in their dream see him in a very good status. Are these not signs of his truth?

A. Always bear in mind that the criterion to follow is the Shariah, not the dreams of people regardless of how beautiful the dreams may be and no matter who sees the dreams and whom they see in their dreams nor be deceived by the good Maut a person has. Allah Ta’ala has different relationships with people. But we cannot fathom Allah’s wisdom. Our obligation is to follow the Shariah, not dreams and signs. Dreams have interpretations. Sometimes people misinterpret their dreams and take wrong meanings. If a dream is in conflict with the Shariah, it shall be set aside. A dream may not be cited as proof for an act which is in conflict with the Shariah.

 

Q. What does it mean to do Ibadaat for the Dunya?

A. “On the Day of Qiyaamah there will be people who will have marks on their foreheads (as a result of Sujood in abundance). They will be those who had spent the nights in Tahajjud Salaat. Night and day they had devoted to Ibaadat. However, the Malaaikah will be hauling them in to Jahannum.” The companions of Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) who were with him on this occasion, asked in surprise: “What is the reason for this?” Hadhrat Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) replied: “Whilst they were engaged in their effort (of ibaadat), their Maqsood (Objective) was not Allah Ta’ala. They performed their acts of ibaadat to satisfy their own desires, hence it will be proclaimed: “Today, all of you enter into Jahannum! You have no relationship with Me (i.e. Allah Azza Wa Jal).” This Hadith has full applicability in the present age in which the dunya is being pursued with deeds supposed to be for the Aakhirah. Among the signs of Qiyaamah, it is mentioned in the Hadith that people will pursue worldly objectives with deeds of the Aakhirah (i.e. with ibaadat and Deeni activities) which will be utilized as a smokescreen for despicable nafsaani motives. All the so-called ‘deeni’ functions of merrymaking, the ‘thikr’ and sing-song (na’t) sessions, the public thikr halqas and even madaaris are of this category of deeds which are perpetrated to deceive the ignorant masses for the acquisition of nafsaani and worldly designs and objectives.

 

Q. What is the meaning of Taqwa?

A. In this era of jahaalat, fisq and fujoor, Taqwa has become a strange or an alien concept to even the Ulama who spend their years teaching Qur’aan Tafseer, Hadith and Fiqah. Once Hadhrat Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) asked Hadhrat Ubayy Bin Ka’b (radhiyallahu anhu) to explain the meaning of Taqwa. Hadhrat Ka’b (radhiyallahu anhu) said: “O Ameerul Mu’mineen! Did you ever pass through an alleyway strewn with thorns? Hadhrat Umar: “Many a time.” Hadhrat Ka’b: “How did you react?” Hadhrat Umar: “I tightened my garment and walked with extreme care to avoid the thorns.” Hadhrat Ka’b: “That is the meaning of Taqwa. This world is an abode of thorns. It is filled with the thorns of sins. You should therefore pilot your way through this abode of thorns with exceptional care to save your garments and yourself being caught in the thorns of sins. This is the meaning of Taqwa and it is the most valuable capital.”

 

Q. Please could you give a couple of examples of Taqwa in practice, from the Salaf.

A. Hadhrat Allaamah Ibn Seereen (rahmatullah alayh) – died 110 hijri- was one of the greatest among the Muhadditheen. He was an outstanding Faqeeh and in the science of dream-interpretation he was an expert. Once, he acquired a loan of 40,000 dirhams to conduct some trade. The oil which he purchased with the money was filled in leather bags. In one of the oil containers a dead rat was found. Hadhrat Ibn Seeraan (rahmatullah alayh) commented: “It is possible that this rat had died in the tank from which the oil was filled into the leather containers..” He therefore decided that all the oil was najis (impure), and had it thrown away. Since he was unable to pay his debt, he was imprisoned and he languished there for a considerable time. Although in terms of the Shariah he was required to discard only the one bag of oil in which the rat was found, his lofty status of Taqwa constrained him to dump all the oil because of the possibility that the rat could have been in the tank from which the bags were filled. The guard at the jail advised Hadhrat Seereen to spend the nights at his home, and return in the morning. Hadhrat Seereen said: “By Allah, I shall not aid you by betraying the Sultan.” His Taqwa was of such a lofty standard that Allah Ta’ala had bestowed to him the ability to act with Taqwa even in dreams. Hishaam Bin Hassaan narrated that Allaamah Ibn Seereen said: “If I see a ghair mahram female even in a dream, I turn away my gaze.” Ibn Seereen (rahmatullah alayh) was a Taa-biee. However, senior Sahaabah had the greatest regard for him. Hadhrat Anas Bin Maalik (radhiyallahu anhu), a very senior Sahaabi and a close confidante of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) was the Ustaadh of Hadhrat Ibn Seereen (rahmatullah alayh). During his last illness, Hadhrat Anas Bin Maalik (radhiyallahu anhu) had directed that when he dies, Hadhrat Ibn Seereen should give him ghusl and perform his Janaazah Salaat. It so happened that when Hadhrat Anas (radhiyallahu anhu) died, Ibn Seereen was still in jail. The ruler permitted him to attend to the ghusl and Janaazah Salaat of Hadhrat Anas (radhiyallahu anhu). After attending to these duties, Ibn Seereen (rahmatullah alayh) returned straight to prison without even meeting any members of his family.

Once freshly-baked bread was presented to Imaam Ahmad Bin Hambal (rahmatullah alayh) by a servant. When Imaam Ahmad asked about the bread, he was informed that the bread had been baked in the home of his son, Abdullah. Abdullah was an Aalim of Taqwa. Despite the piety of his son, Imaam Ahmad refused the bread and instructed that it should be removed from his presence. The reason for this attitude was that his son, Shaikh Abdullah, used to accept gifts from the Khalifah of the time, and Imaam Ahmad believed that the wealth of the Khalifah was contaminated. On one occasion he had severed all relationship for a full month with his two sons and paternal uncle because they had accepted gifts from the Khalifah. On another occasion when bread was presented to him, Imaam Ahmad enquired about the origin of the bread. The cook said: “I used your flour and obtained the yeast from your son, Abdullah.” Imaam Ahmad refused to eat of the bread since he believed that it had become Mushtabah (Doubtful). The cook asked if he should give the bread to a faqeer (beggar). Imaam Ahmad said that he may do so on condition that he informs the faqeer that the flour was Ahmad’s and the yeast was from Abdullah. For  an entire month no faqeer came to the door. The cook informed Imaam Ahmad that the bread was no longer fit for human consumption. Imaam Ahmad instructed him to throw the bread in the river.

 

Q. In the notes of the kitaab, As-Siraaji it is mentioned that Imaam Maalik (rahmatullah alayh) was in the womb of his mother for two or three years. Please comment.

A. The text in the notes in As-Siraajee does not state that Imaam Maalik (rahmatullah alayh) was in the womb of his mother for 2 to 3 years. No where in this Kitaab is this mentioned. What is mentioned is that according to the three Math-habs (Maaliki, Shaafi’ and Hambali), the maximum period of gestation is four years. The maximum period according to the Hanafi Math-hab is two years.

 

Q. It appears that some of the Ahaadith on which the Fuqaha base the masaa-il are dhaeef (weak) according to the later Muhadditheen. What is the explanation for this?

A. The Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen/Fuqaha are not subservient to the Muhadditheen. They are not bound by the rules of the later Muhadditheen. Every Hadith which constitutes a Mustadal (Basis for the formulation of a mas’alah/hukm) enjoys the highest category of authenticity regardless of the classification of the later Muhadditheen whose function was not formulation of masaa-il. The later Muhadditheen’s function was to categorize Hadith narrations in terms of the standards which they had formulated. Their function was not to test the mustadallaat of the Fuqaha. The Muhadditheen in practical life followed the Fuqaha. Thus, even if a Mustadal of the Imaam of the Math-hab is ‘weak’ in terms of the criterion of the Muhaddith, he (the Muhaddith) continued following the Imaam of his Math-hab. He did not cancel the mas’alah which stemmed from the Mustadal of his Imaam despite the ‘weak’ classification of the Hadith which constitutes the Mustadal. A Hadith could have been of the highest category of authenticity when it reached the Mujtahid Imaam, but the isnaad became weak a century later when it reached the Muhaddith.

 

Q. Is an act which is described Makrooh Tanzeehi permissible? Is it correct to say that Makrooh Tanzeehi is ‘Jaa-is ma-al Karaahat?

A. A Makrooh Tanzeehi act is never permissible. Persistence transforms Makrooh Tanzeehi into Makrooh Tahreemi. Makrooh Tanzeehi is not Jaaiz ma-al Karaahat. (a permissible which which is Makrooh). The latter is a different category. Jaaiz Ma-al Karaahat are ‘haraam’ and Makrooh Tahreemi’ acts which become temporarily permissible whilst retaining the attribute of karaahat, e.g. identification photographs, tadaawi bil haraam (medication with haraam substances), consuming haraam food because of lack of halaal food, which situation will lead to death, paying licence fees and paying government tax. The principle underlying this class of acts is duress and compulsion. When one is compelled to commit a haraam act it becomes jaaiz ma-al karaahat.

 

Q. Is Makrooh Tanzeehi the same as Khilaaf-e-Aula?

A. Makrooh Tanzeehi is not Khilaafe-Aula. While the former leads to sin, not so the latter. Khilaaf-e-Aula is not sinful nor does it lead to sin with israar (persistence). Examples of Khilaaf-e-Aula acts not rendered in the best form. Some examples are: • Engaging in worldly acts before performing Ishraaq Namaaz • Conversation whilst walking to the Musjid for performing Salaat • Filling the stomach with food. This excludes overeating which is sinful. • Performing Hajj (the five days) in a vehicle instead of walking to Arafaat when one has the strength and ability to walk. • Performing less than 8 raka’ts Tahajjud Namaaz. Performing Tahyatul Musjid after having sat down. There are innumerable such acts which are permissible, not Makrooh Tanzeehi, but having lesser thawaab than doing it the Aula way. Makrooh Tanzeehi becomes sinful if one intentionally persists in acting in conflict with the Sunnah practices which are not of the Muakkad class, e.g. entering the Musjid with the left leg, putting first the left foot in the shoe, unnecessarily sitting crosslegged when eating, reciting the Ruku’ and the Sajdah Tasbeeh twice or once instead of thrice, etc.

 

Q. Please mention some examples to show the meaning of ghairat.

A. Ghairat (shame, honour and modesty) is an attribute which Islam stresses much. Once in the court of Qaadhi Musa Bin Ishaaq, a lady covered with her burqah claimed that her husband was indebted to her for 500 gold coins which were for her mahr. The husband contested her claim. The Wakeel (lawyer/representative) of the lady produced two witnesses to testify as is required by the Shariah to prove a claim which is denied. Before testifying the witness requested that the lady removes her niqaab because he could not testify without recognizing her. It is permissible according to the Shariah for women to reveal their faces in the presence of the Qaadhi who hears their cases. When the lady stood up and was about to open her niqaab, the ghairat of her husband could not tolerate another man looking at his wife. He therefore said: “I testify that I do owe my wife the 500 Ashrafis (gold coins) she is claiming. My wife should never expose her face to a stranger.” The impact of the husband’s honour constrained the wife to say: “I have waived the entire debt from my husband.” The Qaadhi ordered that this episode be recorded as a lesson for posterity. (Shu’bul Imaan of Imaam Baihqi) Begum Zaib Baanoo, the wife of Sultan Aurangzeb (Aalamghir), had developed a lump on her breast. The English doctor, Martin proposed that a female relative of his could attend to the Queen. His relative was also a doctor. The Queen agreed on condition that the English lady doctor is not a consumer of liquor. However, it was established that the lady doctor was a drinker of alcohol as are all western non-Muslims. The Queen refusing to be treated by the English lady commented: “A faasiqah may not touch my body.” The Queen chose sickness, but for a faasiqah to touch her was intolerable. She remained without being cured and died two years later.

 

Q. What is bid’ah hasanah (beautiful innovation)?

A. All bid’ah is Sayyiah (evil). There is nothing but zulmat (darkness) in all bid’ah. Any innovation which is in conflict with the Sunnah or changes a Sunnah or displaces a Sunnah is evil and haraam regardless of how ‘beautiful’ the trap may appear. Bid’ah demolishes the Deen.

 

Q. Please comment on the prevalent tendency within the Ulama to compromise with baatil in the name of ‘hikmat’.

A. A disease which has beset the Ulama of the age is compromise with baatil. A variety of baatil excuses is proffered for justifying this compromise. The following episode narrated by Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi (rahmatullah alayh) should be sufficient lesson for the compromisers. When Sultan Mahmud Ghaznawi conquered India, he set about to demolish the Hindu mandir (temple) in Somnath. All the idols in the mandir were smashed. When the biggest idol was about to be smashed, the idol-worshippers passionately pleaded for their idol to be spared. They promised to give in exchange the weight of the idol in gold if it was not smashed. Sultan Mahmud consulted with his advisors. All of them were of the opinion that since the country was conquered and the idols smashed, it would not really matter if the one idol is spared. The huge amount of gold could be put to constructive use. Sayyid Salaar Mas’ood Ghaazi who was also present said: ‘This is tantamount to selling idols. Hitherto Muslim kings were idolbreakers, now they will be labelled idol-sellers. Although this comment appealed to the Sultan, he still entertained a degree of doubt. That afternoon during his nap, he dreamt that he was on the Plains of Qiyaamah. An Angel leading him (the Sultan) to Jahannum was saying: ‘He is a idol-seller’. Another Angel responded: ‘No, he is an idolbreaker. Take him to Jannat.’ Suddenly the Sultan’s eyes opened. Immediately he issued the command for the big idol to be smashed. When the idol was smashed, its inside was found to be filled with precious stones the value of which exceeded the value of the gold which the idolaters had offered. Sultan Mahmud profusely expressed his gratitude (shukr) to Allah Ta’ala Who had guided him to smash the idol and at the same time bestowed such a huge treasure to him.” Compromise with baatil is not permissible. The duty of the Ulama is to proclaim the Haqq and not to adulterate it with baatil. The argument of hikmat’ to justify compromise with baatil is a despicable canard.

Once while in Persia, Hardhat Huzaifah Bin Yamaan (radhiyallahu anhu) along with some other Muslims, was invited by the rulers for a meal. Whilst eating, a morsel of food fell from his hand on to the ground. He picked up the morsel, dusted it and began eating it. A companion whispered to him that the rulers regard such a practice to be uncultured. Hadhrat Huzaifah (radhiyallahu anhu) commented aloud: “Should I abandon the Sunnah of my Beloved (i.e. Rasulullah – sallallahu alayhi wasallam) for the sake of these morons?” He had observed Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) picking up a fallen morsel and eating it. Confound the ‘culture’ and cult of the morons! The one in whose heart is embedded the love of Allah Ta’ala and Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) do not understand the policy of dubious diplomacy and ‘culture’. In terms of the understanding of the molvis and sheikhs of our era, Hadhrat Huzaifah (radhiyallahu anhu) ‘should’ have acquitted himself with diplomacy and not revile the non-Muslim rulers by labelling them ‘morons’ (humakaa’). Whilst the flotsam of today who abandon the Sunnah and the Shariah, are lost in their policies of compromise, dubious diplomacy, interfaith and ‘hikmat’, the men in whose hearts has settled the flame of Divine Love speak and react in terms of: Love for the sake of Allah, and animosity for the sake of Allah.”

 

Q. Some Ulama cite Ahadith to prove that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) raised his hands whilst making Dua in the Qabrustaan. Many of the senior Ulama also say that it is Mustahab. Why does The Majlis contend that it is bid’ah?

A. When even a Sunnat becomes elevated and regarded to be necessary, it becomes bid’ah. When people are criticized for abstaining from aadaab and Mustahabbaat, then it becomes necessary to outlaw the act. This is a principle of which all Ulama should be aware. Despite the fatwas you have mentioned, our senior Ulama never raised their hands in the Qabrustaan. Hadhrat Thaanvi (rahmatullah alayh) discouraged it. In Imdaadul Ahkaam it is explicitly negated. When we returned to South Africa after completing our studies in India, the practice of raising hands in the Qabrustaan was regarded compulsory and all the juhala (ignoramuses) and bid’atis (innovators) adhered to this as well as other bid’ah practices in the Qabrustan. To combat bid’ah, we adopted the practice of our Akaabireen who were all aware of the Ahaadith which you have mentioned. However, others who returned to South Africa after completing their studies, discarded the practice of the Akaabireen and adopted the practice of the juhala and bid’atis, not because of the Hadith and the Fatwas. In fact most of them are unaware of the fatwas and the relevant Ahaadith on this issue. They succumbed to the pressure of the juhala and bid’atis. Now they seek to justify their taqleed of the juhala with the fatwas. They are like some of the Muslim louts who keep long, ugly hair in emulation of their western kuffaar counterparts (louts and hooligans), then justify such ugly hair style with the Ahaadith mentioning the long hair of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah. Nowadays these morons and louts wear what they call ‘bermuda’ pants. When they are admonished for performing Salaat in such clothes of the devil, they retort that according to the Hadith the trousers should be well above the ankles (nisf-e-saaqain). Refuting these louts and these hand-raising molvis, the Qur’aan Majeed states: “In fact, man has insight (i.e. he is well aware) over his nafs although he puts forth excuses.”

 

Q. A senior Mufti says that prawns/shrimps can not be labelled haraam because there is no Qat’i Daleel to substantiate the prohibition. At most it will be Makrooh Tahrimi. Please comment.

(1) Makrooh Tahrimi is also called haraam. If the honourable Mufti does not know this fact, then ask him to check the kutub of the Fuqaha and he will find innumerable prohibitions for which there is no Qat’i Daleel, but which the Fuqaha proclaimed Haraam. This is such a simple issue that it will be a waste of time for us to cite examples. The honourable senior Mufti will have access to the kutub. He only needs to expand his mutaa-la -ah (research) a bit. For Hanafis, prawns, shrimps, lobsters, crayfish and all sea animals besides fish are Haraam.

 

Q. Is it necessary to prohibit Makrooh Tahrimi acts in the same way as Haraam acts are prohibited? The Mufti Sahib says that there is a big difference.

A. By virtue of both categories of misdeeds producing the same consequence, viz., the punishment of the Fire of Jahannum, it is necessary to prohibit Makruh Tahrimi just as one would prohibit Haraam. The Mufti Sahib is way off the track for regarding Makrooh Tahrimi to be insignificant. And, how  can one view MakroohTahrimi lighter than Haraam when the consequences of both acts are the Fire of Jahannum?

 

Question:

I have adopted the Maaliki Math-hab. However, I cannot find any literature on the Maaliki Math-hab. Could you send me some basic books on this Math-hab to enable me to follow the Sunnah correctly?

Answer:

There is a great dearth, in fact almost total unavailibility of Islamic liteature in English in terms of the Maaliki Math-hab. There are also no Maaliki Ulama versed in English of whom we are aware and to whom we could refer you to. In the circumstances, your adoption of the Maaliki Math-hab is pointless. You are unable to practice the Deen correctly without knowledge. Our advice is that you adopt the Hanafi Mah-hab. An abundant of literature in English is available according to the Hanafi Math-hab.

 

Many Ulama nowadays say that abstention from Mushtabah (doubtful) food and things does not apply to the masses. They say that such abstention should not be propagated in this day. Please comment?

“Ulama” who themselves devour haraam and mushtabah and whose brains have suffered spiritual tremors of derangement as a consequence of their indulgence in things and practices which are loathful in the Shariah, lack understanding of Islam’s conception of Mushtabah and its harms and dangers. To follow the misguidance of such deviated ‘ulama’ is to expose one’s Imaan to corruption.

 

Question:

In view of the free indulgence in haraam, some people claim that there is no longer the need to abstain from mushtabah (doubtful) things. Is this view correct?

Answer:

This view is baseless. If people freely indulge in consuming poison and killing themselves, it does not follow that others should relax their guard and consume just any filth and contamination. Mushtabah is spiritual contamination. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has commanded abstention from mushtabah. In every age, from the time of the Sahaabah right down to this age, all Mashaaikh emphasised the absolute importance of refraining from indulgence in mushtabah. Indulgence in mushtabah is the stepping stone for indulgence in haraam.

 

In the Hadith books we read that the Sahaabah would often ask Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam): “What is the best deed?” He would give different answers to different people. What would be the ‘best deed’ in our time?

Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “He who clings to my Sunnat at the time of the corruption of my Ummat, will receive the reward of a 100 shuhada (martyrs).” This reward applies to even a Mustahab act which the Ummat has abandoned. From this could be gauged the significance and immense thawaab of reviving and adhering to a Waajib command which the Ummat has abandoned. The most neglected, in fact totally abandoned command of Allah Ta’ala in our age is Amr Bi l Ma’roof , Nahy Ani l Munkar (Commanding righteousness and prohibiting evil and sin).

While Ulama do generally speak about virtuous deeds which do not ruffle anyone’s feathers, they have totally abandoned the dimension of Nahy Anil Munkar (Prohibiting evil and sin) because they are anxious to be in the good books of the people of the world either because they hanker after their wealth or they desire jah –name, fame and position in society. This one capital crime and vile misdeed of the Ulama has transformed them into ulama-e-soo’—evil ulama about whom Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Verily, I fear for my Ummah the Aimmah-e-Mudhilleen (the learned ones—the imaams, sheikhs, duktoors, muftis and molvis).”

In our time there is no amal superior to Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil Munkar. It is infinitely superior to even Jihad. This is Rasulullah’s Fatwa. Citing this sacred Fatwa, Imaam Ghazaali (rahmatullah alayh), in his Ihya Uloomuddin, records that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Allah Ta’ala said: O mankind! Before making dua, command righteousness and prohibit evil otherwise your supplication (dua) will not be accepted.” Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) added: ‘Compared to Jihad, good deeds are like a puff of breath in a deep ocean. And all good deeds together with Jihad in the Path of Allah are nothing but a puff of breath in the deep ocean in comparison with Amr Bil Ma’roof Nahy Anil munkar.”

Now you know what the best deed in this age is.

 

Q. You as a Mufti should educate the Muslim community without using derogatory words. I don’t agree with your attitude. Did any of our Akaabir condemn people like you do?

A. At times it becomes necessary to expose the rot and the danger of the Ulama-e-Soo’ – they who have betrayed Islam and who are misleading the masses into Jahannum with their evil and their mutilation of the Shariah. You should not look at the ‘derogatory’ words. You should be more concerned with the villainy, evil, deception and shaitaaniyat which these shayaateen in human form are perpetrating. The ‘derogatory’ words in relation to the vile misdeeds of fisq, fujoor and even kufr emanating from the evil ulama are extremely mild and correctly portray the evil of the deceits and dacoits who rob Muslims of their Imaan and Akhlaaq. As for your query regarding our Akaabir using so-called ‘derogatory’ terms to lambast the evil characters such as the munaafiqeen and mulhideen who mislead the ignorant masses, here follows a sample of the appellations with which Hadhrat Maulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) lambasted the likes of MPL molvis who seek to outlaw and/or circumscribe polygamy which Allah Ta’ala has made halaal. Issuing his Fatwa of condemnation with the appropriate appellations and ‘derogatory’ terms, Hadhrat Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) said:

“The person who finds fault with any hukm of Allah Ta’ala or with any practice of the Sunnat of the Rasool (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) or views it with derision in any way whatsoever or he rebukes a person who practices it (polygamy), he is without any doubt maloon (accursed) and a kaafir. He is an opponent (enemy) of Allah Ta’ala. He is a Jahannami and a Murtad… Such a shaqi (miserable and unfortunate creature) and mal-oon regards his customary kufr to be better than the hukm of Allah Ta’ala. To sever all relationship with such a person is in fact true Deen. It is never permissible to maintain family ties with such a person. On the contrary one should sever relationship and regard him to be the most despicable person (mabghood—one on whom Allah’s wrath has settled) in the creation of Allah Ta’ala. Become his enemy. Never perform his Janaazah Salaat because he is a kaafir. Thus does it appear in the kutub of Hadith, Fiqah and Aqaa-id.” (Fataawa Rashidiyyah, page 74).

Concurring with this Fatwa, Mufti Jamaaluddin Dehlawi (rahmatyllah alayh) said: “There is no doubt in the correctness of this fatwa. In fact whoever conceals this mas’alah (pertaining to polygamy) or with his silence he refrains from publicizing it, he too according to the Hadith is a dumb shaitaan. Whoever supports such a person (who derides polygamy) even my means of signs (i.e. not explicitly) will be cast upside down into Jahannum as is mentioned in the Hadith.” (Fataawa Rashidiyya, page 75) Nineteen other senior Muftis concurred with this fatwa and appended their signatures. In these appropriate ‘derogatory’ terms  there is a sombre message for the MPL molvis. They should understand that if they are not already destined for upside down treatment in Jahannum for their shaitaani efforts to mutilate and mutate the Laws of Allah Ta’ala with their haraam MPL bill of kufr, then at least they are hovering on the brink of Jahannum with their kufr. Brother, you should divert your attention from our ‘derogatory’ words to the zinacondom halaalizing molvis of the NNB Jamiat and the sheikhs of the MJC. These vile specimens of ulama-e-soo’ who have degenerated to lower levels of villainy than even the Ulama-e-Soo’ of Bani Israaeel, have come out in full support of the greatest Zina event in history – an event which boasts 100,000 prostitutes and a billion zina devices (condoms) among the wide range of acts of immorality, sin and transgression. Direct your Naseehat to them – to those who are destroying the Ummah and leading the ignorant Muslims directly to Jahannum.

 

Q. I don’t think that the public should be blamed if they copy the Ulema, e.g. drinking coke, eating doubtful things, carrion chickens, etc., etc. Is there any harm when they follow the Ulema?

A. The public is not as dumb as you portray. They will go to Jahannum with the ulama-e-soo’ they had copied and followed, and in Jahannum according to the Qur’aan Majeed, they will blame one another for their predicament. Allah Ta’ala holds the public responsible for their perpetration of haraam, fisq and fujoor. The argument which you have presented will hold no water and will not mitigate the public’s plight in Qiyaamah. Categorically rejecting your argument, the Qur’aan Majeed states: “They (the public of Bani Israaeel) take their Ulama and their Mashaaikh as gods besides Allah…” This aayat is a severe rebuke and a warning for the public to beware of following the ulama-e-soo’. Allah Ta’ala has endowed every Mu’min sufficient intelligence to be able to distinguish between truth and falsehood, vice and virtue. Haraam and doubtful issues are not intricate, academic masaa-il which require only expert brains for comprehension. These are not juridical issues which need intellectual expertise for understanding. Reflect on the Qur’aanic aayat. Why did Allah Ta’ala castigate the Bani Israaeel public for following the baatil of their ulama-e-soo’? The public is extremely shrewd, like foxes. They are adept in the art of constructing smokescreens for their nafsaani indulgence. While they do not follow even the ulama-e soo’, they will quickly cite these ulama to justify their indulgence in haraam and perpetration of fisq and fujoor.

 

Question:

What is a Sufi?

Answer:

The most comprehensive and appealing definition of a Sufi was furnished by the author of AL-YAWAAQEET. He defines a Sufi as “Aalim Ba Amal” or a practicing Alim.

 

Question:

Salafi’ism condemns and rejects Bai’ah (allegiance) to a spiritual Shaikh as a disgraceful bid’ah although it is generally accepted as an Islamic norm. What is the correct view?

Answer:

The practice of spiritual Bai’ah (or Bay’t) to a spiritual Shaikh is as old as Islam. Salafi’ism is a modern mutant on the Body of Islam. Its a deviated sect which has strayed from Siraatul Mustaqeem. Its claims are bunkum. For more light on this topic read books such as Shariat & Tasawwuf by Hadhrat Maulana Masihullah Khaan (rahmatullah alayh). Books on the subject have also bee written by other Ulama and Mashaaikh and are available in English.

 

Question:

Some Ulama say that Tasawwuf was invented 2 or 3 three centuries after Hijrat. Is this true?

Answer:

Is it 2 or 3 centuries? If they are in a quandary regarding this— if they do not know whether it is 2 or 3 centuries, then they testify to their own ignorance. They are truly ignorant because Tasawwuf is based on the Qur’aan and Sunnah in exactly the same way that Fiqh is structured on the Qur’aan and Sunnah.

These people have not understood Tasawwuf, hence they blurt out drivel. To them Tasawwuf means wazifahs, some spiritual exercises, jumping, singing and going into states of ecstacy. Well, this is not Tasawwuf. Tasawwuf is self-reformation. It is the process of adorning the heart with the attributes of virtue and stripping it of all evil qualities. This is a Fardh command of the Qur’aan and Sunnah.

Q. Nowadays lots of tariqas do loud thikr in jamaah. They do some spiritual exercises (tawajjuh) where murids writhe and shake. Is this valid in Islam?

A. The type of loud thikr and spiritual exercises you have mentioned are bid’ah. Stay far from such tariqahs. Most of these tariqas, especially in Turkey, West Africa, North Africa, Syria, etc. are sects of Satanism dubbed sufi’ism. They have drifted very far from the Path of Islam.

 

Q. Are there any reliable Sufi Tariqas today?

A. In the present age it is best and safest to refrain from joining any Tasawwuf Tariqah. Follow a Math-hab, study the writings of the Auliya and consult with an Aalim any issue which you do not understand.

 

Q. Could you direct me to a Shaikh-e-Kaamil of Tasawwuf?

A. Nowadays there is an extreme dearth of true Shaikhs of Tasawwuf. Islaah of the nafs is always Waajib. If one is unable to find a true Shaikh, then read the books of the Auliya. Their stories, advices and admonition will go a long way to reform a person. For this very purpose, the Qur’aan Majeed states: “(O Muhammad! Narrate to them the stories (of the Ambiya and Auliya of bygone times) so that they reflect (and gain lesson).”

 

Q. The parents want their son to relocate and come to live with them in another city. However, the son’s sheikh instructed him (the son) to remain since he has to engage in Thikr and be in the suhbat (company) of the sheikh. What is the son supposed to do in this dilemma? This sheikh does not observe hijaab. He shakes hands with females, and becomes involved in other acts which are not permissible in the Shariah.

A. The sheikh who advised his mureed to violate the wish of his parents on a lawful matter is indeed unaware of the masaa-il of the Shariah. It appears to be a jaahil. The rights of parents have priority over the rights the sheikh. First comes the right of parents, then the right of one’s Deeni Ustaad, then the right of the Shaikh. The sheikh has no right of insisting that his mureed obeys him instead of his parents. It is Waajib on the son to relocate and live with his parents. From the description of the ‘shaikh’ you have given it is clear that he is not a genuine Shaikh. On the contrary he is a highway robber – a robber of Imaan and Akhlaaq. It is haraam to become a mureed of such a dacoit. The ‘suhbat’ of this impostor sheikh is dangerous. It is necessary for the mureed to politely end his relationship with this sheikh. If the brother disobeys his parents on this issue and obeys the haraam order of his miscreant sheikh, he will be guilty of a grievous sin – the sin of disobedience to parents.

 

Q. How can I recognize if a person is a true sheikh whom I could accept as my spiritual guide (murshid)? What should I look for?

A. The first and foremost sign you have to look at in a man who is a Khalifah of a Shaikh, is his life style. If he is in conflict with the Shariah, stay far, very far away from him regardless of whose khalifah he may be. The criterion is the Shariah and the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The standard is not knowledge and ostensible piety. There is no piety in disobedience to the Shariah. Even if a ‘shaikh’ transforms stones into gold, flies in the air, walks on the water, cures the sick and displays numerous ‘miracles’, never follow him if his lifestyle is in conflict with the Shariah.

 

Q. The Majlis said that kissing the hands of a Shaikh is improper. However, there are several Hadith narrations which prove that Sahaabah did kiss the hand of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Imaam Nawawi and other Fuqaha have also said that it is permissible.

A. Brother, the fatal mistake which you and numerous people in this age commit is to subject the Ahaadith to personal opinion. There exists the severe disease of laymen digging out narrations from the kutub and when they become confused because the masaa-il of the Shariah appear to be in apparent conflict with some narrations, they subject the Ahaadith to their personal opinion. For such persons, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) warned that their abode will be the Fire of Jahannum. You have cited some Ahaadith pertaining to kissing of hands, and you mentioned the opinion of Allaamah Aabid Sindhi (rahmatullah alayh) while you are perhaps unaware of the clear ruling of Imaam Abu Hanifah, Imaam Muhammad and countless Fuqaha of the Hanafi Math-hab. They all were fully aware of the narrations which you have cited. But despite these narrations, they ruled the impermissibility of kissing hands. While you have mentioned the narrations pertaining to kissing of hands, you either are unaware or you have forgotten or you intentionally chose to ignore the following Hadith and similar others: “Hadhrat Anas (radhiyallahu anhu) narrated that a man said to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam): “O Rasulullah! “Someone from amongst us meets his brother or his friend. May he bow for him?’ Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “NO!” The man said: “May he embrace and kiss him?” Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “NO!” The man said: “May he hold his hand and make musaafahah?” Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Yes!” — (Tirmizi) In Bahrur Raa-iq appears the following explanation: “In Jaamius Sagheer it is stated: ‘It is Makrooh for a man to kiss a man or his hand or to embrace him.’ Tahaawi narrated that this is according to Imaam Abu Hanifah and Imaam Muhammad (rahmatullah alayhima). Imaam Abu Yusuf (rahmatullah alayh) said: ‘There is nothing wrong with kissing and embracing……………………. The daleel of Imaam Abu Hanifah and Imaam Muhammad (rahmatullah alyhima) is the Hadith of Anas (radhiyallahu anhu), and it is also narrated that the Nabi (alayhis salaatu was salaam) forbade from mukaa-ma-ah, i.e. kissing. And the Ahaadith which have been narrated in conflict of this (prohibition) are Mansookh (abrogated) …………….Sarakhsi and some of the Muta-akh-khireen have granted concession to kiss the hand of a pious Aalim and Zaahid for the sake of barkat.” From the aforegoing you will understand that there is difference of opinion on this issue in the same way as there is difference of opinion on numerous masaa-il of the Mathaahib. Our Akaabireen follow the ruling of Imaam Abu Hanifah and Imaam Muhammad (rahmatullah alayhima) in the mas’alah. Other senior Ulama and Mashaaikh follow the other view of permissibility. So while we adhere to Imaam Abu Hanifah’s ruling and discourage kissing the hands of even Ulama and Mashaaikh, due to the difference of the Akaabireen, we do not apply vehemence to our discouragement. However, in this age, it is best to abstain from kissing the hands of even a Shaikh/Aalim because there no longer is true Taqwa. The Shaikhs of this age are generally bogus, ignorant or bid’atis. They are ignorant in even the rudiments of Tasawwuf. Their primary concentration is on singing and poetry, especially poetry sung by their mureeds to extol their own hallucinated greatness, piety and virtues. They swoon, get deceptively transported into nafsaani ecstasy and shed crocodile tears to impress the audience. People are insincere. They do things for riya, and this practice of kissing the hands entails bowing (making ruku’) which according to the Shariah is in the category of Sajdah, has become a custom devoid of reality and humility. It is an external show and a hollow custom devoid of sincerity and true respect in the heart. Furthermore, the spiritual guides are not of that calibre of piety to warrant such veneration. And, Allah knows best.

 

Q UESTION: The latest fad in the Musjids is so-called nasheed artists demonstrating their talents. The Ulama who organize these poetry and singing programs mention that it is one of the Sunnah practices to recite poetry. They quote Hadhrat Hassaan Bin Thaabit (radhiyallahu anhu) who had recited poetry for Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Further, mureeds sing in praise of their sheikh, extolling his virtues and greatness while all and sundry emit queer noises sounding like ‘oohs and aahs’ The latest in the Musjids now are good sound systems for the naa’t (poetry) singers. The trend nowadays is like the devil singers of the west. Mikes are placed facing the crowd to pep the singer and the audience on the receivers in the ladies venue or at home. Please comment on this state of affairs.

A NSWER: This trend in emulation of the ‘devils of the west’ come within the scope of the Hadith: “It is better that your stomach be filled with pus than with poetry.” There is no justification for this latest evil trend of singing poetry in the Musaajid despite the fact that some Sahaabah would recite poetry which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had condoned. The Ahadith and the Qur’aanic verses which condemn poetry are applicable to the new, satanic practice which some of the Ulama-e-Soo’ have innovated and with which they pollute the sanctity of the Musaajid. The Musaajid have been constructed and dedicated for the ibaadat of Allah Ta’ala. It is haraam to convert a Musjid into a venue for stupid, indolent, misguided singers who follow in the footsteps of the devil singers of the west. The Sahaabah did not make a profession or a vocation (mashghalah) of poetry. They did not organize poetry and singing sessions. There were no stupid poetry/singing sessions ever organized in either the Musaajid or elsewhere from the era of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to our age. It is only now that evil ulama, slaves of their bestial nafs, have initiated this satanic profession. It is tantamount to kufr to cite Hadhrat Hassan’s poetry as a daleel for the evil which these miscreant molvis are perpetrating in the Musaajid. Reciting even the Qur’aan Majeed aloud in the Musjid is not permissible. Converting the Musjid into the likes of a dancehall or concert-hall where singing, poetry and evil are committed, with sound systems and silly ‘oohs and aahs’ emanating from stupid people overcome with nafsaaniyat, is an act of capital shaitaaniyat. The holy atmosphere of the Musjid is totally ruined and defiled by the devil singers, the sound systems and the silly ‘oohs and aahs’ emanating from the stomachs filled with a substance ‘worse than pus’, for the Hadith informs us that ‘pus is better than poetry’. Regardless of the ‘good’ content matter of the song/poem, indulgence in poetry/singing is haraam. The occasional, unofficial and spontaneous recitation of good poetry is excluded from the prohibition. But the shaitaaniyat which is nowadays enacted in the Musaajid is haraam. The sheikhs who get transported into nafsaani ecstasy by the stupid praises which their stupid mureeds sing, should go to some Muhaqqiq sheikh for Islaah of their nafs. Their shows of ecstasy are specious. These ‘shaikhs’ who love aggrandizement and praises, have not even perceived the fragrance of Tasawwuf. They do not have the faintest idea of the meaning of Tasawwuf and of its objectives, hence they squander their time and ruin the morals of their ‘mureeds’ with singing and poetry. And, tomorrow will follow dancing – the so-called dervish dances which transport the stupid actors into Jahannum via their vehicle of nafsaani ‘ecstasy’. The contention that poetry is Sunnah, and that too in an organized manner right inside the Musjid, is not only a despicable lie, but a lie blasphemed in the name of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). About such deliberate and despicable lies, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “He who speaks a lie on me (i.e. saying something is Sunnah when it is not), should prepare his abode in the Fire (of Jahannum).” The vile molvi who made this slanderous claim has implied that this ‘sunnah’ was dead right from the time of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), and had remained dead for fourteen centuries, and it is only now in this belated era in close proximity to Qiyaamah that some miserable molvi has unearthed this ‘sunnah of singing and poetry’ from some buried archives of Satanism. Is there a single instance in the entire history of Islam from Rasulullah’s age down the long corridor of Islam’s fourteen centuries, that any of the Sahaabah and the Ulama-e-Haqq had organized sessions of poetry and singing in the Musjid? Did they ever invite Muslims to come to the Musjid to participate in poetry and singing? The Qur’aan Majeed said: “The la’nat of Allah is on the liars.’ And, the lie uttered in the name of the Deen is an aggravated sin of terrible proportions. It is haraam to pollute the Musaajid with performances in emulation of the devils of the west. It is haraam to sit in the Musjid to listen to the hypocritical poetry and singing. The Musaajid are Allah’s Houses exclusively for His ibaadat.

 

Q. Please comment on the origins of music and singing.

A. When Allah Ta’ala cursed and expelled Iblees (the Devil) from the heavens, he supplicated for a number of tools with which to ply his nefarious profession of Satanism on earth in his endeavour to entrap and destroy mankind. Among the things he supplicated for were a muath-thin (announcer) and a qura’aan (scripture). Granting his supplication, Allah Ta’ala informed him that his ‘muaththin’ would be musical instruments, and his ‘qur’aan’ would be poetry and singing. The first being in creation to sing was Iblees. The first person on earth who made musical instruments was Thoebaal. He was from the progeny of Qaabil who had murdered his brother Haabil. Both were the sons of Nabi Aadam (alayhis salaam). Shaikh Nasruddin Muhaqqiq (rahmatullah alayh) said: “When the false sufi sways to and from in his singing, the devil pokes him in his hind with his finger so that he sways swiftly to and  from – right  and left.” (Fatawa Burhaanah) Imaam Ahmad Bin Hambal (rahmatullah alayh) narrated: “Aisha (radhiyallahu anha) once said: ‘Once a female singer came to me and sang a song.’ Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: ‘While this woman was singing, shaitaan was blowing in her nostrils.” It has been revealed (kashf) to some Auliya that shaitaan is always present at gatherings of music and singing. Shaitaan exercises his influence on the singers and dancers. He transports them into states of satanic ecstasy. He dances above their heads and even with them, and keeps them enraptured in his worship. Auliya have even witnessed shaitaan physically lifting some of these people and dance with them. He sometimes lets out a loud scream, and the dancer collapses. In fact, nowadays many of them scream and squeal like insane swines. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “There is not a man who raises his voice with singing, but Allah sends two devils, one on either side of the singer. Both the devils strike their feet (dancing) until the singer ends his singing.” Those who indulge in the satanism of music and singing are pigs figuratively, and a time will dawn when they will become pigs physically. Thus Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “People in my Ummah will consume liquor, giving it some other name. Musical instruments and singing girls will be performing for them. Allah will cause the earth to swallow them, and of them He will transform into apes and pigs.” It is clear from many Ahaadith and the mukaashafaat (revelations) of many Auliya that shaitaan is always present at music sessions and shows. He regulates the proceedings and casts his spell on the participants and the audience. Shaitaan deceives and ensnares stupid Muslims into his den of satanism with even nazams and zain bhikha songs. The over-indulgence in nazams and all songs of the character called ‘zain bikha’ are tools of shaitaan, which he employs to destroy Imaan.

 

Question: Please read the attached article on the topic of Wahdatul Wujood and Wahdatush Shuhood written by a very senior Mufti. May I circulate this article?

ANSWER

The article on Wahdatul Wujood should not be circulated. It will only confuse people. These terms do not have literal meanings as is conveyed in the article. It appears that even the honourable Mufti Sahib has not correctly understood the meaning of the terms Wahdatul Wujood and Wahdadush Shuhood. In fact it is not a concept as is being portrayed. All concepts woven around this word are baatil and the products of baseless imagination and corrupt opinion. These figurative terms simply mean extreme divine proximity (Nearness to Allah Ta’ala) which is attained by virtue of Taqwa. The literal meaning of closeness to Allah Ta’ala is stated in the Qur’aan as follows: “Verily, the noblest of you by Allah are the most pious.” This is the actual meaning of Wahdatul Wujood and Wahdatush Shuhood. Some Auliya have expressed this meaning in poetic and figurative forms by using terms such as Wahdatul Wujood and Wahdatush Shuhood. The Mufti Sahib has erred by having understood that the figuritive ‘concept’ which Ibn Arabi and Mujjaddid Alf-e-Thaani had propounded or which others have spun around their figurative statements, differs from the view of the Jamhoor Ulama of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah. These two illustrious Auliya who were also Ulama did not hold a belief in conflict with the belief of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah on the issue of Divine Proximity. They only expressed it is figurative terms such as the term ‘wine’ in Sufi terminology means divine love. The analogy of the mirror and the sun is bound to create confusion and give rise to misconceptions in the minds of modernists, the ignorant and people of weak Imaan. Hadhrat Thanvi (rahmatullah alayh) had explained these terms simply. Sometime ago we did compose an article on this subject. As soon as we can locate it, we shall forward it to you, Insha’Allah. The simplest, easiest and shortest explanation for Wahdatul Wujood and Wahdatush Shuhood which every Muslim can easily comprehend, is stated in the aforementioned Qur’aanic verse. It only means nearness to Allah Ta’ala, and this proximity is in proportion to the degree of Taqwa. The highest  stage of divine proximity produced by the highest degree of Taqwa will be Wahdatul Wujood. Taqwa of a lesser degree produces a lesser status of proximity called Wahdatush Shuhood. This is all what these terms signify. And Allah knows best.

 

Q. Please advise on the importance of keeping the stomach empty.

A. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) advised that the stomach should be filled with one third food, one third liquids and one third should be left empty for air circulation. The extreme weakness of Imaan and excessive greed and gluttony of people have compelled the Auliya (the spiritual physicians of the Ummah) to advise a simpler method. Those who are unable to adopt the austere method of eating exhorted in the Hadith, should at least not overeat. As soon as the stomach is about to be filled, one should exercise restraint and stop eating. Overcome the crave for stuffing down another couple of morsels. The Mashaaikh say: “The stomach is the headquarters of disease, and affection (love) is the root of cure.” A husband displaying love and affection for his sick wife, especially when she is pregnant, goes a long way in the curing process and in the healthy development of the foetus. Most diseases generate from a corrupt stomach. Overindulgence in even halaal tayyib food is extremely harmful physically and spiritually. And, if the food is ‘halaal’ certified carrion, muck and rot, then the destruction is almost irreparable. The effects are disastrous for physical and spiritual health. A non-Muslim medical expert said: “Your body’s worst enemy is your stomach. Suffering from asthma? It’s your stomach. Are you losing your memory? It’s your stomach. Are your arteries diseased? It’s your stomach.” Hadhrat Zunnun Misri (rahmatullah alayh) said: “Hikmah (divine wisdom) does not reside in a person whose stomach is full of food., for verily, much eating hardens and darkens the heart . Lethargy of the limbs develop in the wake of satiation, disinclining one from ibaadat., and it increases ghaflat (obliviousness). With hunger man attains Hikmat which creates delight in ibaadat” Hadhrat Sahl Bin Abdullah (rahmatullah alayh) said: “When Allah Ta’ala created the world, He instilled sin and ignorance in satiation (a full stomach), and Ilm (Deeni knowledge) and Hikmat (spiritual wisdom) in hunger.”

 

Q. Is the Shaazli Sufi Order a valid Tasawwuf tareeqah?

A. The original Shaazli Tareeqah was a valid Path of Tasawwuf. But no longer today. Today it is a ‘tariqah’ of fisq, fujoor and bid’ah. The same applies to the other tariqahs generally. Stay far away from these robbers of Imaan.

 

Q. Please comment on the Tijaani Tariqah.

A. The Tijaani religion of West Africa is a religion of shirk and bid’ah. Some of the kufr of this misguided sect is as follows: (1) Ahmad Tijaani said: “Thus isma has been guaranteed to the prophets and with them the qutbs. The Prophet has not mentioned them (the qutbs) when he said ‘there is no infallibility except for a prophet, because he wanted to keep them concealed since their rank had not been revealed„…. (Jawaahir) The Ijma’ of the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah is that only the Ambiya (alayhimus salaam) are Ma’soom, i.e., they only enjoy the attribute of ismah (sinlessness), not Auliya even if they are qutbs. (2) Hajj Umar al-Futi, the disciple of Ahmad Tijani, says in Rimah of Umar Bin Said: “….that walis never sin, and any breach of the Shariah in which they may become involved is only apparent but not real, and is always designed by the walis themselves to test the faith which their followers have in them.” It is baseless to claim that walis never sin. Walis are not like the Ambiya. (3) “After Ahmad al-Tijani started his order he relinquished his affiliation with the four orders which he had joined, asserting that he did not achieve spiritual realization through the aid of any of the founders of these orders and he owed fealty to none of them.” This is a vile attack against the illustrious Mashaa-ikh of the Four Sufi Orders. A man who has strayed from Siraatul Mustaqeem will find fault with the great Auliya of former times. (4) Ahmad Tijaani produced no Silsilah. Unlike the four Silsilah which all trace their origin to Hadhrat Ali or Hadhrat Abu Bakr, Tijaani claims that his link with Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is direct. He has no Mashaa-ikh before him in his silsilah. Stating this, Jamal Abdun Nasr says: “Contrary to the usual practice among the Sufis, Ahmad Al- Tijani produced no silsila, or perhaps it would be truer to say that he produced a one-link silsila which went directly from him to the Prophet. (Jawahir).” The greatest defect in the claim of wilaayat made by Tijaani is that he has no silsilah. (5) The following statement of Ahmad Tijaani is recorded in Jawahir “None of the men (i.e. Walis) can admit his followers to Paradise without my reckoning or punishment, no matter what sins and acts of disobedience they may have committed, except I alone.” In this statement Tijaani regards himself as the pivot of Najaat (salvation) whereas this is baseless. The Pivot of Najaat is the Kalimah Shahaadat. Furthermore, no wali can ensure anyone’s admission to Jannat. This is the function of only Allah Ta’ala. Intercession (Shafa’ah) will be with the permission of Allah Ta’ala. No wali and no Nabi has the right to admit anyone into Jannat. (6) Among the beliefs of bid’ah and even shirk of the Tijanis is that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the four Khulafa-e-Raashideen attend their special thikr sessions where their litany, Jawaharatul Kamal is recited. There is absolutely no Shar’i basis for this claim. Furthermore, the logical conclusion of this belief is that if there are 100 groups of Tijanis reciting this thikr in different places at one and the same time, then Rasulullah and the Khulafa are present at all the gatherings at one and the same time. This is the conference of the attribute of omnipresence to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Khulafa. But, only Allah Ta’ala is omnipresent. (7) The Tijanis give greater importance to their prayer than to the Qur’aan Majeed. They claim that their Salatil Faatih, in addition to a long list of outrageously exaggerated benefits is 6,000 more meritorious than reciting the Qur’aan. They also assert that if a person is unable to take wudhu then he may not recite the Jawaharatul Kamal with Tayammum. But, the Shariah allows one to touch and recite the Qur’aan with Tayammum if water is not available. Salaat for Allah Ta’ala can be performed with tayammum, but the prayer of the Tijaanis cannot be recited with tayammum! This is outrageous to say the least. (8) Tijaanis during their wazifah sessions spread a white cloth. The purpose of this is to reserve the place for Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the four Khalifas who, they believe, attend their sessions. This is utterly baseless. While this sect masquerades as an authentic Sufi Tareeqah, in reality it is a baatil sect which has no link with the Mashaaikh of Tasawwuf. The Tijaani religion was established relatively recently, in the year 1815, less than 2 centuries ago by its founder, Ahmad Tijaani who had claimed that he had acquired the Tijaani Faith directly from Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). He has no Silsilah (Chain) such as the other authentic Sufi Silsilahs who all link up to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) via the Sahaabah. That the Tijaani religion came into existence 12 centuries after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) should be ample evidence for its falsehood. This sect subscribe to beliefs and practices of kufr and shirk. Salaat behind them is not valid.

 

Q. Is the Naqshabandiyyah an authentic Sufi Order?

A. Nowadays, the Naqshabandis are people of evil bid’ah. At one stage it was an authentic Sufi Order. Great Auliya of Islam belonged to the Naqshabandi Silsilah. Most of the Sufi sects have in this age deteriorated and are practising bid’ah and shirk.

 

Q. A sheikh of Tasawwuf claims that the bodies of Shaikh Zakariyya’s mureeds do not decompose in the grave. Is this correct? On what Shar’i basis does he make this claim?

A. This claim has no Shar’i validity. It is not permissible to subscribe to the belief that all the mureeds of a certain Shaikh attain the rank of the Shuhada and that their bodies do not decompose in the grave. Such a belief will be valid only if there exists absolute certitude (Daleel-e-Qat’i) to substantiate it. That the bodies of the Ambiya and Shuhada do not decompose is borne out by such daleel (Qur’aanic aayaat and Ahaadith-e- Mutawaatarah). If via kashf / ilhaam (kinds of inspiration received by the Auliya) or by personal experience, e.g. when a grave was dug up, it was established that the body of a certain mureed did not decompose, then this will be an exceptional case on the basis of which an Aqeedah(Belief) may not be fabricated. Whilst the possibility of a non-Shaheed’s body not decomposing is valid, it is an isolated case on the basis of which the inference made by the Shaikh is baatil. This type of propagation culminates in bid’ah and baseless beliefs with the passage of time. The Qur’aan Majeed states: “Do not commit ghulu’ (excess) in your Deen.” Ghulu’ fid Deen is among the shi-aar (salient features) of the Nasaara, and sects such as the Qabar Puja (graveworshipping) jamaat and the Tijaanis. This type of ghulu’ is setting in among the sheikhs of tasawwuf who are linked to even the senior Ulama of Deoband. There is absolutely no validity in the claim stated in the above question.

 

Q. The same Shaikh (mentioned in the aforementioned question) claimed that whenever Hadhrat Shailkh Zakariyya (rahmatullah alayh) would make dua, the Throne of Allah Ta’ala would shake and his duas would be readily accepted. Is this claim valid?

A. The invalidity of the claim is selfevident. That a Buzrug is Mustajaabud Da’waat (his duas are readily accepted) is not denied. But to advance the claim that whenever the Buzrug makes dua, the Arsh of Allah Ta’ala shudders is utterly baatil. Such a belief may not be entertained for even Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) for the simple reason that Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayi wasallam) had never proffered such a contention. We are of the opinion that if this mureed had made this claim in the presence of Hadhrat Shaikh, he (Hadhrat Zakariyya) would have expelled him from the Khaanqah until such time that his mental disequilibrium has been cured. What is cause for shuddering, is that bid’ah and baatil are being propagated by Ulama of our own School.

 

Q. The members of the sufi tariqahs in Syria and elsewhere in West and North Africa dance to the tune of thikr. They go round and round, hopping and jumping. Is this type of thikr allowed in Islam?

A. The whirling, hopping and dancing of the sufi tariqas in Syria and generally in West and North Africa are acts of haraam bid’ah. They dance, hop and jump because shaitaan tickles and entrances them. They all are under the spell of shaitaan. They whirl and swirl like insane apes.

 

Q. What is tasawwuf and who is a sufi?

A. Hadhrat Shaqeeq Balkhi (rahmatullah alayh) and Hadhrat Ma’roof Karkhi (rahmatullah alayh) were among the great Sufiya of the Tab-e-Taabieen era. They lived more than 12 centuries ago. Once when these two Sufiya met, Hadhrat Shaqeeq Balkhi asked: “What is Tasawwuf according to you?” Hadhrat Ma’roof Karkhi said: “When we are given, we express gratitude (make shukr), and when calamity settles in us, we adopt Sabr.” In other words, Tasawwuf according to him was to express gratitude for the bounties Allah Ta’ala bestows, and to adopt Sabr when Allah Ta’ala imposes trials. Hadhrat Shaqeeq Balkhi commented: “This is like the dogs by us in Balkh.” (Balkh is today in Afghanistan). Dogs are also grateful to their master when he feeds them, and they are patient when food is denied to them. Hadhrat Ma’roof Karkhi asked: “What is Tasawwuf by you?” Hadhrat Shaqeeq Balkhi said: “When bounties are withheld from us, we make shukr, and when bestowed to us, we sacrifice (the bounties).” Once Hadhrat Khafeef (rahmatullah alayh) asked Hadhrat Abu Muhammad Ruwaim (rahmatullah alayh) for some naseehat, Hadhrat Ruwaim said: “The least requirement in this Path (of Tasawwuf) is to sacrifice your Soul. If you are not prepared for this, then do not concern yourself with the pure and priceless issues of this Path.” Ridha (i.e. to be happily pleased at all times with Allah’s decrees) is the lofty demand of Tasawwuf. In this regard Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “It is of the good fortune of the Son of Aadam that he is pleased with whatever Allah has ordained for him.” Hadhrat Junaid Baghdaadi (rahmatullah alayh) describing a Sufi and Tasawwuf said: “Tasawwuf is a combination of ten acts: 1. Reduction in all worldly things which entails abstention from accumulation. 2. Dependence of the heart on Allah Ta’ala regarding asbaab (ways and means of achievement). 3. Enthusiasm for rendering Nafl acts of Ta-aat (Obedience). 4. Sabr when lacking anything of the world and abstention from asking and complaining. 5. Discretion in acceptance when receiving something. The heart should not hanker for grabbing much. 6. Involvement with Allah Ta’ala. In all affairs to turn to Allah Ta’ala and to divert attention from people. 7. Thikr-e-Khafi – Silent Thikr in all forms of Athkaar. 8. Resolute Ikhlaas (sincerity) at the time of waswasah (satanic whispering). 9. Yaqeen (for conviction) at the time of doubt. 10.Attainment of peace and tranquillity with Allah Azza Wa Jal in times of confusion and fear. When all these attributes combine in a person, then he is deserving of the title (Sufi) otherwise he is a liar.”