Fath al-Majeed: Chapter: What has Come about Seeking Rain through the Constellation or the Stars

Follow @AhleDhikr

It says in Kitaab at-Tawheed by al-Allaamah Shaykh al-Islaam Muhammad ibn ‘Abdul-Wahaab [May Allaah have Mercy on him and purify his soul]:

Title: What has Come about Seeking Rain through the Constellation or the Stars

On the authority of Zayd ibn Khaalid al-Juhanee [May Allaah be Pleased with him] who said: “The Messenger of Allaah [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] led us in praying Fajr at al-Hudaybiyah, following rainfall during the night. When he had finished praying, he turned to the people and said, ‘Do you know what your Lord has said?’ They said, ‘Allaah and His Messenger know best.’ He said, ‘This morning one of My slaves became a believer in Me and one became a disbeliever. As for the one who said, “We have been given rain by virtue of Allaah and His mercy,” he is a believer in Me and a disbeliever in the stars. But as for the one who said, “We have been given rain by such and such a star,” he is a disbeliever in Me and a believer in the stars.’” So the one who attributes rain to the stars is saying that the stars caused the rain.

[Narrated by al-Bukhaaree (801) and Muslim (104)]

It says in Fath al-Majeed by Shaykh ‘Abdur-Rahmaan bin Hasan aal ash-Shaykh [May Allaah have Mercy on him] in explanation:

If a person believers that the rain comes from a certain star or constellation (and they have the ability to make it rain and not Allaah), then this is disbelief or Shirk in the Lordship of Allaah. This person is a Mushrik and a Kaafir. However, if one doesn’t believe that the rain came from a star or a constellation (but believes that the rain comes from Allaah but the star or the constellation is the cause), then this person is not a disbeliever or a Mushrik but has fallen into minor Shirk (a very severe and major sin). This is because this person attributes rain to the stars or the constellation as being a cause but maintains that the One Who Controls the rain is Allaah, therefore it rains from His Mercy and Bounty.

This Hadeeth is proof that it is not permissible to attribute whatever is solely for Allaah to other than Allaah, even if one is using it as a metaphor. It is not permissible to attribute cause to other than Allaah for these act nor is it permissible to seek protection in them (because this solely for Allaah Alone as well).

Once one realizes that attributing rain to other than Allaah is false then one must also belie the one who predicts rain, because rain may come or it may not as this person is merely making a prediction. However it is Allaah Who is the Cause of bringing the rain at a particular time. It comes with the Will of Allaah, by His Mercy, Wisdom and Bounty. So whoever believes that there is a cause other than Allaah, then this is false and corrupt.

As a result, even mere wording which may dictate such a meaning is not permissible to use.

Those who say that it rained from the Mercy and the Wisdom of Allaah and His Bounty, then this person is affirming (Tawheed via) some of the Attributes of Allaah.

Ahl as-Sunnah affirm that Allaah has Names and Attributes and whatever He Affirms for Himself or His Messenger, must be affirmed and attributed to His Essence. For example, He is Alive, He is all-Knowing, He does Actions and has Attributes. For Example, He has the name ar-Rahmaan (the all-Merciful and Compassionate) and He Acts by being Merciful. All of what can be affirmed for Him returns to His Essence and it is not permissible to say that the Mercy of Allaah is separate to Him, for example. This is how the groups of deviation deviated.

Also in this Hadeeth there is proof that the Favours of Allaah must be attributed to Allaah Alone and not to any other than Him. Therefore, He is the Only One that must be Praised (by saying al-Humdulillah we are praising Him in giving thanks).  This is the situation of those who have at-Tawheed. Because of this, some of the scholars even forbade using mere wording which could be interpreted that the speaker is attributing favours to other than Allaah, this is in order to prevent all vices that lead to Kufr (disbelief/ingratitude). Allaah, the Most High, says:

“They recognise the Grace of Allah, yet they deny it (by worshipping others besides Allah) and most of them are disbelievers (deny the Prophethood of Muhammad  ).” [an-Nahl 16:83]

Imaam al-Qurtubee [May Allaah have Mercy on him] explained the Hadeeth and he said:

The pre-Islaamic Arabs used to believe that if a particular star rose from the east and a separate star had set in the west, this would mean that the rain and wind was about to come. So some of them attributed the rain and wind (being provided by the) the stars, whilst others attributed rain and wind to the eastern and western directions. This is what is being addressed in the Hadeeth. So the Sharee’ah has prohibited using such wording so that it doesn’t settle in the beliefs of a person. End quote.

The fact that they used to attribute the rain or the wind to directions or aspects of the creation, seems to suggest that they didn’t actually believe that the creation had the power to make it rain, as Allaah the Most High, says;

“If you were to ask them: "Who sends down water (rain) from the sky, and gives life therewith to the earth after its death?" They will surely reply: "Allah." Say: "All the praises and thanks be to Allah!" Nay! Most of them have no sense.” [al-Ankaboot 29:63]

So this Aayah is proof that they didn’t deny the fact that Allaah Alone had the power to make it rain, however their false beliefs in which they were rebuked for was that they believed that the creation (such as stars and constellation) were the cause of the rain. This is what al-Qurtubee explained above.

Ibn ‘Abbaas [May Allaah be Pleased with him] said about the Aayaat:

“75. So I swear by Mawaqi (setting or the mansions, etc.) of the stars (they traverse).

76. And verily, that is indeed a great oath, if you but know.

77. That (this) is indeed an honourable recital (the Noble Qur'an).

78. In a Book well-guarded (with Allah in the heaven i.e. Al-Lauh Al-Mahfuz).

79. Which (that Book with Allah) none can touch but the purified (i.e. the angels).

80. A Revelation (this Qur'an) from the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists).

81. Is it such a talk (this Qur'an) that you (disbelievers) deny?

82. And instead (of thanking Allah) for the provision He gives you, on the contrary, you deny Him (by disbelief)!” [al-Waaqi’ah 56:75-82]

That some people believed that the rain came because of such and such a star, and that it sets in the west. So these Aayaat were revealed because it rained and some people were saying such things, so the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] said, “Some people have become thankful and others ungrateful. Those who are grateful said, ‘It has rained by the Mercy and Bounty of Allaah’ whilst those who were ungrateful said, ‘such and such star has fallen in the west’.”

Nullifiers of Wiping Over the Khuff (or Shoes and Socks)

Follow @AhleDhikr

It says in Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (Summarised from 39/280-282):

Issue: Nullifiers of Wiping Over the Khuff (or Shoes and Socks):

Whatever normally nullifies the Wudhoo.

The obligation of making Ghusl: such as after intercourse, the end of menses or post-natal bleeding.

Taking off most of the socks or one of them.

This is because the majority of the scholars have stated that wiping replaces washing, so if the foot is left without washing or wiping then the Wudhoo is not complete.

The Hanbalees are the view that if the foot is taken out of the footwear or most of the foot then he must perform Wudhoo again from the beginning (i.e. washing).

The ending of the time period, one day and one night for the resident and three days and three nights for the travelller (once this expire he must perform Wudhoo again). Once this time expires he must wash his foot (i.e. make Wudhoo again).

The Hanafees and the Shaafi’ees were of the view that when the time for wiping expires he is only required to remove his socks and wash his feet (without needing to renew ones Wudhoo).

The Hanablees are of the view that the whole Wudhoo from the beginning needs to be repeated, including re-washing his feet.

If both or one of your feet leave (most) the sock, then one must wash both feet again.

The Hanafees viewed that the measurement of three toes is the guideline, so if the measurement of more than three toes is exposed then the footwear must be removed and the foot washed again.

The Maalikees dictated exposure to mean a third of the foot or more, and this is the opinion of the majority.

The Hanbalees were of the view that the footwear must totally be removed for the washing to be repeated.

If water seeps into your footwear and both feet or most of both feet are wetted by it, it is better to remove the footwear and re-wash your feet.

The Hanafees were of the view that it is Waajib to remove the footwear and re-wash both feet.

The Maalikees and the Shaafi’ees viewed that the Wudhoo and wiping is still valid and one doesn’t need to re-wash as it is not a nullifier of Wudhoo or wiping.

How to Wipe Over the Khuff (or Shoes and Socks): When the Majority of the Foot is Wiped Over

Follow @AhleDhikr

It says in Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (Summarised from 39/279-280):

Issue: How to Wipe Over the Khuff (or Shoes and Socks):

The Hanafees were of the view that the measurement of three fingers must be wiped over. They must be wiped over once (not thrice). One starts at the bottom of his toes and carries on wiping until he reaches his leg (ankle). One must place his right hand on his right foot and left hand on his left foot and wipe them both simultaneously. It is better to space out his fingers so that the water can spread over his foot.

The Maalikees were of the view that the whole foot must be wiped, what is above and below it. Besides this, the description is the same as above.

The Shaafi’ees gave the same description as the Hanafees however they stated that the measurement is left up to what is customary. So what is considered as wiping within the customs is sufficient.

The Hanbalees had the same description as well, however they considered wiping as being acceptable when the majority of the foot is wiped over. 

Conditions for Wiping Over the Khuff (or Shoes and Socks)

Follow @AhleDhikr

It says in Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (Summarised from 39/273-279):

Issue: Conditions for Wiping Over the Khuff (or Shoes and Socks):

-The majority are of the opinion that it is not permissible for a person to wipe over his socks if he is in the state of Janaabah (ritual impurity that requires Ghusl).

-It is permitted to wipe if one has minor impurity that only requires Wudhoo for the impurity to be lifted. This is the view of the majority.

-One must have washed (both) their feet before wearing the socks, wearing them whilst in a state of purity because of the Hadeeth, “Leave them (the socks) on, because I wore them in the state of purity.”

Connected to this condition the scholars differed; The majority, except ash-Shaafi’ee, were of the opinion that one must wash his feet before putting on his socks in order for the wiping over them to be valid. As for ash-Shaafi’ee, he was of the opinion that the feet may be washed or one may lift the state of impurity from himself by doing at-Tayammum, on the condition that he was unable to find water.

The majority, except the Hanafees, were of the opinion that one must wash both of his feet in order to put the socks on; both feet must be washed and then the socks worn for them to be valid for wiping. As for the Hanafees, they were of the opinion that one may wash his foot and put on a sock and wash the other foot and put on the other sock. This branches off from the opinion they held that Wudhoo doesn’t need to be done in order. So if one was to wash his feet and then wipe his head, this Wudhoo would be correct with the Hanafees but not with the majority.

-That the sock (s) (or shoes) must be pure in and of themselves. It is not permissible to wipe over clothing that is impure, such as pigskin before it has been tanned, this is the opinion of the Hanafee and the Shaafi’ees. The Maalikees and the Hanbalees were of the view that even tanning doesn’t lift the impurity of impure leather, this is because whatever is impure remains impure and prohibited.

-The sock(s) (or shoes) must completely cover ones foot, the area that they would normally wash. Therefore, it is not permissible to wipe over socks that are below the ankles.

-One is able to walk in them (regardless of material):

The Hanafees were of the view that walking a distance of a Farsakh (approximately 5 KM) and another view of the Hanafee Madhab is that one should be able to walk the distance in which one will be considered as a traveller (approximately 86 KM with most of the Hanafees). As a result, the Hanafees are of the view that anything too thin can’t be wiped over and likewise, one can’t wipe over footwear that is made from wood or glass or iron (hypothetically), because one is not able to walk in this type of footwear. Added to this they opined that footwear that doesn’t cling to the foot cannot be wiped over.

The Maalikees were of the view that the footwear that is customarily used to walk in is acceptable to wipe over, otherwise it is not allowed. It is also not allowed to wipe over footwear that doesn’t cling to the foot.

The Shaafi’ees were of the view that wiping over socks that one can walk the distance of being able to go out to the toilet and return (those days they used to go away from the people to a designated place to relieve themselves). Also, if the footwear can be worn for the time period in which a person can wipe over them, (i.e. one can fulfill the objective; either a day or three days for the traveller) then this is permissible for one to wipe over. Furthermore, the material can be from leather or other than that.

The Hanbalees were of the view that footwear that one can wipe over can be made from any material, leather or wood or any other material. However, this is on the condition that one is able to walk in them and that they stick to his feet.

-The socks must be free from major tears and holes.

The Hanafees and the Maalikees were of the view that minor tears or holes are acceptable for wiping over. What is considered as minor is the measurement of three or four fingers or the a third of the foot.

The Shaafi’ees and the Hanbalees are the view that it is not permissible to wipe over the Khuff even if there is a small tear or whole. This is because it ceases to be a covering over the foot, therefore it is a must that the whole foot must be covered.

-The material of the footwear doesn’t need to be made from leather.

The Maalikees were of the view that wiping can only be done over leather footwear that is stitched. Wiping over normal socks or any other material that is unstitched is not acceptable with them.

The majority of the scholars (Hanafees, Shaafi’ees and the Hanbalees) were of the view that footwear that can be wiped over can be made from leather or any other material. The only condition they placed over its material is that the sock must not leak water onto the foot once wiped.

-If one wears another sock over the sock he is already wearing, then he must have worn the second pair in the state of purity for them to be acceptable to be wiped over.

The Hanafees and the Maalikees placed conditions on a second pair worn over the first pair: 1) one must be able to walk in the second pair and 2) that one wears the second pair in the state of purity.

The Shaafi’ees placed four conditions: 1) that they be walkable, 2) they don’t seep water unless on intends to wipe over the first pair, 3) that they both be wiped over (i.e. one isn’t shorter than the other) and 4) that wiping over one covers the second.

The Hanbalees stated that as long as the second pair covers the first, then one is allowed to wipe over them. This means that both feet must be covered with the same pair and that one foot is not left bear. Likewise, they placed the same conditions that applied to the first pear to the second, so they must cover the foot and one must wear them in the state of purity.

-It is not a condition that the sock must conceal what is under the foot.

The Hanafees opined that the sock must not leak water onto the foot or whatever is worn below the sock.

The Maalikees insisted that the sock must be made out of leather for it to be acceptable to wipe over.

The Hanblees viewed that the sock can be made out of any material as long as the skin colour below cannot be seen.

Wisdom and Duration for Wiping Over Shoes/Socks

Follow @AhleDhikr

It says in Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (39/272):

Issue: The Wisdom of Wiping Over the Socks (and Shoes)

The wisdom behind it is to cause ease and to remove harm from those who fear difficulty by taking off their socks for the purpose of washing, especially during the colder days in winter. Also, whilst one is travelling whilst one may be busied due to his travels (so it is prescribed here also).

It says in Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (Summarised from 39/272-273):

Issue: The Period for Wiping is a Day and a Night For the Resident and Three Days and Nights Whilst One is Travelling

The scholars differed on the time period of wiping. There are two views:

The view of the majority (which is the correct view), the Hanafees, Shaafi’ees and the Hanbalees were of the view that one is allowed to wipe over his Khuff (or normal shoes and socks according to the correct opinion from these Madhabs) for the period of a day and a night, whilst one is resident and three days and nights whilst one is travelling. This is what has been narrated from the Hadeeth of ‘Alee bin Abee Taalib [May Allaah be Pleased with him].

The Hanafees opined that this Rukhsah (concession) is for those who travel for both matters that are permissible or sinful.

The Shaafi’ees and the Hanbalees were of the view that those who are travelling for the purpose of committing a sin then it is not permissible for them to accept this Rukhsah (this is the correct view).

The second view is of the Maalikees who were of the view that wiping over the Khuff whether one is resident or travelling, whether one is sinning or not. The duration of wiping for them is unrestricted, meaning as long as one doesn’t remove his socks then he doesn’t need to wash. Despite this, it is recommended to remove the socks and wash his feet at least once a week if he hasn’t washed his feet within this period. This is added to the time when one washes his feet prior to putting on his socks (thus washing is twice a week, minimum).

Milad an-Nabi: The Love for Allaah and His Messenger

Follow @AhleDhikr Shaykh Saaleh bin Fawzaan bin Abdullah al-Fawzaan [May Allaah Preserve him] was asked:

Question: Could you clarify on how we can gain the love of Allaah, the Glorified and the Most High, and the love of the Messenger [May the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] and the ways we can reap its rewards? 

Answer: Loving Allaah, the Glorified and Exalted, is from the greatest acts of worship of the heart. It is from the greatest acts of the worship that your heart can do. Allaah, the Most High, says; "But those who believe, love Allah more (than anything else)" [Al-Baqarah 2:165]

And the Prophet [May the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] said, "You will not believe until nothing is more beloved to you than Allaah and His Messenger and that you love another only for the sake of Allaah." [Muslim (43)]

Therefore, Loving Allaah is from the foundations of worship and it is not permissible to ultimately love other than Allaah, the Glorified and Exalted, for the sake of worshipping, submitting and total surrender. This is a sole right for Allaah, the Glorified and Exalted. Likewise, the love of the Messenger [May the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] is to follow him because of your love of Allaah, the Glorified and Exalted. Likewise, loving righteous people and the believers is also because of this. This is the meaning of the term, 'loving for the sake of Allaah, the Glorified and Exalted'. Thus all of this follows on from the love of Allaah, the Glorified and Exalted, and this is an act of worship in the heart. 

From the things that strengthen and articulate this for you is to thank Allaah, the Glorified and Exalted, for the favours upon you and to ponder on the signs of Allaah, the Most High, as these are causes for us to increase in our love for Allah, the Glorified and Exalted. If you have good given to you and are given from His favours, and from the best of this is to have good health, ample provision and security, then this will affect the love you have for Allaah, the Glorified and Exalted. End Quote.
http://www.alfawzan.af.org.sa/node/13636

'Umar ibn al-Khattab [May Allaah be Pleased with him] said, "Oh Messenger of Allaah! After myself, I love you more than anything."

The Messenger of Allaah [May Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] said, "By the One Whose Hands is my soul, until you love me more than yourself."

So 'Umar ibn al-Khattab [May Allaah be Pleased with him] said, "Now, by Allaah, I love you more than I love myself."

The Messenger of Allaah [May Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] replied, "Now, Oh 'Umar!" [Bukhaaree (6257)]

Imaam Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaanee [May Allaah have Mercy on him] said:

Al-Khattaabee said, "A person loving himself is imprinted in himself as for loving others, then we love others out of choice or for a reason. So the Prophet [May the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] intended the type of love that we have a choice in. 

So I say: Therefore, at first, 'Umar attested to having the love of oneself, the imprinted one. However, after the evidence was presented to him by the [May Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] he loved him more than he loved himself because the reasoning was made clear; not loving him more than oneself could leave to destruction in the Dunya and the Akhira. Therefore, he told him you have a choice and once he chose, he replied by saying, 'Now, Oh 'Umar' meaning now you have understood and attested to what is obligatory for you to have."

[Fath al-Baaree (11/528)]

Loving of the Shariah

"But those who disbelieve (in the Oneness of Allah Islamic Monotheism), for them is destruction, and (Allah) will make their deeds vain. That is because they hate that which Allah has sent down (this Qur'an and Islamic laws, etc.), so He has made their deeds fruitless." [Muhammad 47: 8-9]

Ibn Katheer says in his Tafseer about this Ayah:

"Meaning they don’t want it and they don’t love it." 

[Tafseer Quran al-'Atheem 7/308]

The Prophet [May the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] said, "My relaxation has been made in Salaah." 

[Narrated by Nasaaee (3939) from the hadeeth of Anas ibn Maalik (May Allaah be Pleased with him). It was classified Saheeh by Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Baaree (3/15) and (11/345) al-Haakim (2/174) and adh-Dhahabee agreed with him]

Shaykh Saaleh bin Fawzaan bin Abdullah al-Fawzaan [May Allaah Preserve him] said:

It is obligatory upon the person that he doesn’t obey anything before the obedience to the Prophet [May the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him]. So if the Prophet [May the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] commanded us with something and your parents or anyone else commanded us something that contradicted the command of the Prophet [May the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] then it would be obligatory for you not to disobey the command of the Prophet [May the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him]. This is a sign that you love the Prophet [May the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him], that you don’t give anyone priority or precedence over him and that you don’t obey anyone before you obey him, you don’t practice anything that he hasn’t legislated by innovating in the religion. 

[Ai'aanah al-Mustafeed bi Sharh Kitaab at-Tawheed (2/41-43)]

Follow @AhleDhikr

The Origin of Celebrating the Prophet's Birthday

المورد في عمل المولد

By

الإمام أبو حفص تاج الدين الفاكهاني

Imaam Aboo Hafs Taaj ad-Deen al-Faakihaanee

[d. 734 AH]

[May Allaah have Mercy on him]

All Praise is due to Allaah, who Guided us to follow the Leader of the Prophets, He Helped us with His Guidance to be steadfast on His Religion and He made it easy for us to be upon the path of the righteousSalaf until our hearts were filled with light, the knowledge of the Shariahand the evidence promoting the clear truth. He purified us from being unclean and being polluted with innovations in the religion.

I Praise Him for favouring us with the certain truth. I thank Him for aiding us to hold onto the firm rope. I bear witness that there is no God worthy of worship except Allaah, with no partner and that Muhammad is His Slave and Messenger, the leader of the earlier ones and the latter ones, May the Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him, his family, his companions, his pure wives and the believers. Peace and Blessings upon him until the Last Day. 

To Begin:

I am constantly asked in our blessed gatherings about some people who take the month of Rabee al-Awwal as a special month and they do this on a particular day calling it Mawlid, some of these questions are as follows;

Is there precedence or a foundation in our Shariah for this?

Or is it an innovation that has been introduced into the religion?

We are hoping for a clear answer on this subject.

So I Say, with the strength from Allaah: 

I don’t know any precedence or foundation in Mawlid from the Kitaaband the Sunnah. It has not been narrated from any of the scholars of Islaam either, those who have a status in this religion. These are the scholars who stuck to the narrations of those who came before them, thus this action is an innovation. It has been introduced by those who are upon falsehood. They follow their desires, eat and drink and waste their time.

The proof to refute them is that we are bound by the Ahkam al-Khams[These are the five rulings within our Shariah, Fard, Sunnah, Mubaah, Makrooh and Haraam], so we say;

Either this act is Fard [obligatory] or Sunnah [recommended] or Mubaah [permissible] or Makrooh [disliked] or Haraam [prohibited].

This act is not Waajib and the scholars have consensus on this and it is not Sunnan either. This is because in reality an act that is Sunnah for us to follow within the Shariah, is something that we won't get punished if we leave it and something we will be rewarded for if we perform it. Therefore regarding this act, we have no permission from the Shariah to do this, nor from the Companions [May Allaah be Pleased with them all] nor Tabieen [May Allaah have Mercy on them all] nor from the firmly grounded scholars, as we know, thus this is my answer regarding this issue in front of Allaah, the Most High, if I am asked about this issue.

It is still not permissible even if we say it is Mubaah because it is innovated into the religion, thus it can't be something Mubaah for us to do, with the consensus of the Muslims [as it is connected to matters of religious affairs not our worldly affairs].   

Therefore, all that remains is for us to say that it is either Makrooh or Haraam. This needs a further detailed discussion. We can split this discussion into two parts which are based on two topics;

Firstly, if a person acts upon Mawlid, with his efforts, his wealth, his family and his companions we say this is not permissible. For example, if one calls people to gather on this day to eat together, even if he doesn’t condone any acts of disobedience to Allaah (such as singing or dancing etc.) then we will still describe this as being an innovation, a disliked and disgusting one. A person who obeys Allaah will never do such a thing, those who have knowledge of Islaam, its favoured scholars, those who preserve their time and benefit wherever they are.

Secondly, celebrating the Mawlid forces people to contribute in this crime as he takes special care in partaking, until one gives from the best of his wealth and he goes out of his way to help. However, he is being harmed and his heart will be pained once he realises that he has been wronged and oppressed (as he is seeking to please the people and is cooperating in doing this sin). The scholars [May Allaah have Mercy on them all] have a saying; ‘If you take the wealth of someone using modesty then it is like you have taken his wealth with a sword.’ This is especially the case if this taking of wealth is added by the fact that stomachs will be full of desires based upon falsehood. This includes beating of drums by young girls. Men gather with beardless youths or young girls dancing and women gather to sing on this occasion. These gatherings at times can be mixed between the genders and at times they can be conducted with a large audience. These gatherings sometimes have people dancing in groups and all of this are the various types of idle forgetfulness of the Feared Day. 

Likewise, when women gather on this day, they raise their voices in rhythm and they sing choruses of Nasheeds. This all contradicts and displays absentmindedness of the rulings of recitation of the Quraan orDhikr and it also goes against what is customary for our gatherings. They are ignorant of the statement of Allaah, the Most High;

"Verily, your Lord is Ever Watchful (over them)." [Surah al-Fajr 89: 14]

The ruling of it being forbidden doesn’t change for different people, so if a person is rich and is pious it will still be prohibited for him, as these are cause for ones heart to die and it doesn’t free a person from sinning or disobeying Allaah. However, some increase in these activities because they think they are doing acts of worship, they don’t think they are doing anything disliked not forbidden

To Allaah we belong and to him we shall return. Islam began as something strange and it shall return how it began. And by Allah, how good a man our Shaykh is, Shaykh al-Qushayree [better known as Ibn Daqeeq al-'Eid (d.702)], May Allaah have Mercy on him, who said (in poetry);

To know the Munkar and to do good in our days is difficult,

All of the people of knowledge are suppressed,

The people of ignorance are raised,

They misguide the people from the truth,

They deviate from the truth and they have became dominant,

They prevail over the truth in large numbers,

So I said to the pious, those who have Taqwa and knowledge,

When they are felling suppressed and full of sorrow,

Do not disregard your state as you have been given status and honour in times of strangeness.

And Imaam Aboo ‘Amr ibn Alaa [d. 154 AH], May Allaah have mercy on him, did well when he said;

The people will not cease to be upon good as long as they are surprised by the things that surprise.

And Allaah Knows Best

The Date of Milaad an-Nabee is Unproven and Not Possible if Hajj al-Widaa’ Fell on a Friday

Follow @AhleDhikr

The scholars are agreed that the he [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be Upon him] was born in Rabee’ al-Awwal, this matter is agreed upon however they differed on the date. The majority said he was born on the 12^th, born and passing away on the same day which was a Monday (as was narrated in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree, 1387) [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be Upon him]. Others disagreed and held the opinion it was later in the month, and there is a considerable number of scholars who argued this view as well.

As-Suhaaylee also found discrepancies with the view that he [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be Upon him] passed away on 12^th Rabee’ al-Awwal. He argued that it was impossible that 12^th Rabee’ al-Awwal was a Monday. This is because the Day of ‘Arafah was on a Friday (as was narrated in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree, 8709) so this meant that Dhu al-Hijjah began on a Thursday. So if we count the days of the month then we will not find 12^th Rabee’ al-Awwal landing on a Monday, it would be impossible. If we counted Dhu al-Hijjah, Muharam and Safar as being 30 days each then 12^th Rabee’ al-Awwal would not fall on a Monday (TN: and we know for certain that he died on a Monday, this is uncontested because of the narration in as-Saheeh). Even if were to count some of the months as being 29 and others being 30 days, it will still not consolidate Monday being 12^th Rabee’ al-Awwal. 

Had Dhu al-Hijjah began on a Friday it would then be possible for 12^th Rabee’ al-Awwal to fall on a Monday (TN: Again, the fact that Dhul al-Hijjah in that year started on a Thursday is uncontested because of the narration in as-Saheeh).

In fact it was this very discrepancy, the author of the book at-Tawfeeqaat al-Ilhaamiyyah Fee Muqaaranah al-Tawaareekh al-Hijriyyah bi as-Sineen al-Ifranjiyyah (TN: a book that documents all the main events in Islamic history, correlating Hijri dates with the Gregorian calendar), was troubled by the conflicting dates, a book authored in 1311AH where he researched and studied Islamic events from the beginning of the Islamic calendar until 1500 (Gregorian), the authors name was Muhammad Mukhtaar Baasha from Egypt.

He states in his book;

The 10^th AH was the year of the final Hajj of the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be Upon him]. If we say that the month of Dhu al-Hijjah began on a Friday then it is possible that 12^th Rabee’ al-Awwal fell on a Monday, however is it possible that Dhu al-Hijjah began on a Friday? If we say the month of Dhu al-Hijjah began on a Friday then that would mean that the Day of ‘Arafah would fall on a Saturday, and this is contradicts the narrations in as-Saheeh, and the scholars are agreed that the Day of ‘Arafah fell on a Friday. End Quote.

However, some scholars have tried to reconcile and say that Friday was the Day of ‘Arafah for the people of Makkah but the beginning of the month in Makkah differed to the beginning of the month in Madeenah and this how the majority of the scholars have defended their position, holding the view that the death of the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be Upon him] was on 12^th Rabee al-Awwal.

Others from the scholars held the view that he [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be Upon him] died on 2^nd of Rabee’ al-Awwal which would have been a Monday.

Whatever the case, there is a difference of opinion between the scholars in regards to the date of the Prophet’s [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be Upon him] birth and death although it is known that he [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be Upon him] was born and he died on a Monday, as he said [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be Upon him], “That was the day I was born on (i.e. Monday).” [Narrated Muslim (1162)]

Some of the commentators stated that he [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be Upon him] was born on the 8^th of Rabee’ al-Awwal as it can be statistically proven.

As for celebrating the birthday of the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be Upon him] then this is an innovation, especially based on the fact that there is no concrete evidence to specify this date so how can they depend on this date? Even if we were to assume that he [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be Upon him] was born on 12^th Rabee al-Awwal then having this day as an ‘Eid, and using this day to get closer to Allaah, the Exalted and the Glorified, has no proof in the Sharee’ah.

[Sharh Al-Fiyyah al-‘Iraaqee Fee Uloom al-Hadeeth by Shaykh Abdul-Kareem bin Abdullah al-Khudayr (May Allaah Preserve him), Tape 56; 15-20 minutes]

Winter: Wiping Over the Khuff (Leather Socks).

Follow @AhleDhikr

It says in Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (39/269-271):

Issue: Wiping over the Khuff (leather) Socks.

Wiping over the Khuff is affirmed in the Sharee’ah by the way of the Prophetic Sunnah.

It is has been narrated that ‘Alee bin Abee Taalib [May Allaah be Pleased with him] said, “Had this religion been based on opinions and intellect (solely) then one would wipe under the Khuff rather than on top of it. However, I saw the Messenger of Allaah [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] wipe over his Khuff.” 

It is also narrated that Jareer bin ‘Abdullah al-Bajalee [May Allaah be Pleased with him] went to the toilet and then performed Wudhoo and then wiped over his Khuff. It was said to him, “Is this your practice?” He replied, “Yes, I saw the Messenger of Allaah [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] go the toilet and then perform Wudhoo and wipe over his Khuff.”

Jareer became Muslim after the revelation of the Aayah which commands washing of the feet (thus proving its legislation):

“and (wash) your feet up to ankles” [Maaidah 5:6]

It is also narrated that the wiping over the Khuff has been narrated from more than eighty companions [May Allaah be Pleased with him] and from them are then ten that were promised Jannah (i.e. the best of them).

Issue: Is it Better to Wipe or Wash?

In origin wiping is permitted however washing is preferred by the majority of the scholars.

It is a Rukhsah (consent) given in the Sharee’ah and Allaah, the Glorified, Loves for what His consented to be accepted and acted upon.

Based on this, the Hanbalees opined that it is better to wipe because in this situation both washing and wiping are legislated.

It can be obligatory to wipe if one fears harm from using the water (due to injury or the coldness). It is also obligatory if there is not much time for the time of the Salaah to end and that by washing one may miss the Salaah or make it hard for him to complete it before the time expires. Some also stated that it is also obligatory for one to wipe and not wash if one fears that he will miss the second Rak’ah on the day of Jumu’ah (i.e. he will miss the Jumu’ah prayer and will pray Dhuhr instead).