Perceived Mistakes Must be Clarified Otherwise It Will Create Enmity (Part 9)

Follow @AhleDhikr

Error-correction has been accomplished either when the one who issued the mistake admits the mistake or approves of the refutation against it. At other times, we may know that a fault has been accepted when a retraction is offered, either in statement or action.

Those who are known to possess knowledge, religious commitment, have respect for the scholars of the Muslims and exemplify honour to them, are also known for their lofty manners when seeking to interject to the mistakes made by scholars. They only seek to bring rectification through the same example that the scholars before have set.

If one reads something that seems to be incorrect, then it is a must that the one who perceives a mistake to research and clarify the meaning of the writer (before making any assumptions). They must place the piece of writing that they perceive a mistake in into context, because if their speech is not placed in a context, then this will only ignite bad thoughts of error towards the writer to which he is innocent of. Having bad thoughts and whatever leads to it has been made Haraam by Allaah and His Messenger and is included in the Statement of Allaah, the Most High:

(وَمَنْ يَكْسِبْ خَطِيئَةً أَوْ إِثْماً ثُمَّ يَرْمِ بِهِ بَرِيئاً فَقَدِ احْتَمَلَ بُهْتَاناً وَإِثْماً مُبِيناً) (النساء:112)

“And whoever earns a fault or a sin and then throws it on to someone innocent, he has indeed burdened himself with falsehood and a manifest sin.” [an-Nisaa 4:112]

Therefore, having bad thoughts about another, especially if there is no basis, then this is something that has been made Haraam by Allaah and His Messenger. Surely, presuming something about another and basing a negative opinion about such a person on this presumption are from the vices which lead to evils and corruption to spread, to which Allaah and His Messenger have clearly made Haraam. In such an instance, the one with the bad thoughts about the other has not only sinned with such a presumption but has combined this sin with other severe sins, which is to attribute a lie and a sin to someone who is innocent of them.

In extension of such evil consequences, the one with these corrupt presumptions will increase in his malevolence; it will lead to an influx of hatred and enmity and a lacking of piety and controlling of ones tongue – all of which leads to one backbiting, slandering and being envious of others in that which Allaah has Blessed them from His Bounties and Favours upon them[1].

---

[1] Backbiting and discord between the Muslims all stems from ones bad thoughts and of others. It is the bad thoughts that one has that leads to one acting in an immoral manner towards others.

Ibn al-Qayyim [may Allaah have Mercy on him] said, “As for having bad thoughts of others, then this is defined as one filling his heart with negative perceptions of others. Consequently, this leads to the person who possess bad thoughts of others to move his tongue and engage in actions in a negative manner based on the false understanding that he has made for himself. He then backbites, spreads tales, insults, seeks faults and create enmity towards his adversary. He creates some to be divided from the rest; some cursing others - leading to a party warning against another. …the victim is then enveloped with harm…and the victim leaves those who defame him having resentment, dis-honesty and enmity towards them.” End quote. [Kitaab ar-Rooh (1/238)] [TN]

Supporting People or Groups Without Restriction

Follow @AhleDhikr

Shaykh al-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah [may Allaah have Mercy on him] said:

Do not support a person without restriction, believing that the truth it always with him except for the Prophet ﷺ.

And support a group without restriction, believing that the truth it always with them except for the Companions [may Allaah be Pleased with them]  

[Minhaaj as-Sunnah (5/262)]

Allah Will Not Change the Situation of a People Until...

Follow @AhleDhikr

Most people talk about how society should change but they don’t pay attention to the change that they themselves should undergo first, despite them being a part of the society they are critcising! “Verily! Allah will not change the good condition of a people as long as they do not change their state of goodness themselves (by committing sins and by being ungrateful and disobedient to Allah)” [13:11]

17/4/1437 - 27/1/2016

(@saudalshureem)

1/27/16, 11:12 ‏يحسن كثير من الناس الحديث عن التغيير في المجتمع،لكنهم لا يحسنون تغيير أنفسهم وهم جزء منه!!. ‏(إن الله لا يغير ما بقوم حتى يغيروا ما بأنفسهم).

Forty Benefits of Supplicating for the Prophet - Following One You Love (Part 5)

Follow @AhleDhikr

33 – It is through increasing in sending the Peace and Blessings of Allaah upon the Prophet that one gains in their love for him. Loving the Prophet is a pillar of Emaan that which Emaan cannot be completed without it. 

The more the Muslim focuses his heart in this supplication and the more he increases in it, the greater attachment he will have for the one who he is supplicating for. His love for the Prophet intensifies and multiplies. He develops a yearning to be like him and to meet him. His heart is then penetrated with love for him. The greater the impact the Prophet has on one’s life, the more complete the heart becomes. The lesser the impact, the weaker the heart gets. 

The zeal the believer has in wanting to see the Prophet is immense, so the with the greater the yearning, the more the believer will follow his teachings, and the more he follows his teachings the greater the praise and remembrance of the Prophet will be on his tongue. All of this depends on the reverence one has for the Prophet in his heart – the greater the love, then the greater the actions and praise on his tongue, the weaker the love then the lesser the actions and praise. This point is quite obvious and this is why the poet said:

I am surprised by those who claim that they remember their loved ones

                       

Does the one who loves another ever forget them?

Meaning, it is surprising that one claims to love another yet needs reminding to follow and remember them.

In fact the more someone loves something the more they would want to follow them. Whoever claims to love but contradicts their example then they are actually stating that they refuse to follow them. And as the saying goes, “Whoever loves something, then they will be constantly talking about that thing.”

So with these examples, we can apply them to what requires out utmost love.

As the poet said:

           

            If you were to split my heart open you would find

                                   

That my love for Tawheed of Allaah would be at separate to the love of the creation

This is the heart of the believer: Tawheed in Allaah and the mentioning of the Messenger are engraved in the heart of the believer, nothing can cause them to erode.

The more you talk about something, the more you will gain love of it. Forgetting the thing you claim you love will inevitably lead to one losing their love for it or at least causing weakness in it.

Allaah, the Glorified and the Exalted, is the One who deserves this love and remembrance the most, and the most deserved of complete reverence within the heart of the slave.

Rather, the kind of Shirk that can never be forgiven is the type of Shirk in which a person shares their love of Allaah to the creation, and shares their reverence to Him with the creation.

Allaah, the Most High, Says:

وَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنْ يَتَّخِذُ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ أَنْدَادًا يُحِبُّونَهُمْ كَحُبِّ اللَّهِ ۖ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَشَدُّ حُبًّا 

“And of mankind are some who take (for worship) others besides Allah as rivals (to Allah). They love them as they love Allah. But those who believe, love Allah more (than anything else). ” [al-Baqarah 2:165]

Here, Allaah, the Glorified and the Exalted, Informs us that the Mushirk (the one who does Shirk) competes their love of Allaah with their love for the creation. However, the believer is the one who is exceeds in his love for Allaah.

The people of the fire will say:

تَاللَّهِ إِنْ كُنَّا لَفِي ضَلَالٍ مُبِينٍ [97] إِذْ نُسَوِّيكُمْ بِرَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ

“By Allah, we were truly in a manifest error. When We held you (false gods) as equals (in worship) with the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists)” [ash-Shura’aa 26:97-98]

In this Aayah, the people of the fire are regretful because they created equals to Allaah in their love for their false gods, and this is something well-known, because no person who practices Shirk can ever claim that their idols or deities are exactly the same as the Lord of the Creation in relation to His Names, Attributes, Actions, His Power in Creating, Maintaining the Heavens and the Earth and in the of man. Rather this Aayah indicates that they will be casted into the fire because of creating equals to Allaah in their love.

Even more misguided than them are those equal the whole of creation to Allaah, claiming that Allaah is omnipresent in everything (like the belief of the Jahmees, some Matrudis and the extreme Soofees). They make his presence within the creation as an attribute of completeness, whilst at the same time as a deficiency for Him (by mixing Him within the creation).

So if Allaah has chastised those who equate partners to Him in love alone via their idols, then how severe is the sin for those who believe that Allaah and the creation are intertwined into one existence (like the Soofee belief that their scholars reach when attaining a certain degree of piety)?

The point is that the more one remembers or makes Dhikr of something then this is a cause for one to increase in their love for the thing they constantly remember. Allaah, the Most High, is the One Who is most deserved of this – our love, reverence and our worship to Him. So remembering Him aplenty will be extremely beneficial for the slave. His enemy (Iblees) is hunting for this connection to be removed. For this reason, Allaah, the Most High, has Ordered His Slaves to Remember Him much and reciting the Quraan, as these are sources of their success. Allaah, the Most High, 
Says:

“And remember Allah much, that you may be successful” [al-Jumu’ah 62:10]

And Allaah, the Most High, Says:

“O you who believe! Remember Allah with much remembrance.” [Al-Ahzaab 33:41]

And Allaah, the Most High, Says:

“And the men and the women who remember Allah much with their hearts 
and tongues” [al-Ahzaab 33:35]

And Allaah, the Most High, Says:

“O you who believe! Let not your properties or your children divert you from the remembrance of Allah. And whosoever does that, then they are the losers.” [Al-Munaafiqoon 63:9]

And Allaah, the Most High, Says:

“Therefore remember Me (by praying, glorifying, etc.). I will remember you, and be grateful to Me (for My countless Favours on you) and never be ungrateful to Me.” [al-Baqarah 2:152]

The Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] said, “The Mufaridoon have proceeded.” They asked, “Who are the Mufaridoon?” He replied, “Those who remember Allaah much.” [Reported by Muslim (2676)]

It is also reported that Mu’aadh bin Jabal [may Allaah be Pleased with him] said, “There is no action that the Son of Aadam that can be more of a saviour for him from the fire than the remembrance of Allaah.” [Reported by at-Tirmidhee (1/95), Ibn Abee Shaybah (10/300) and at-Tabaraanee (352)]

Remembering the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] is a consequence of remembering Allaah much.

The point is to reinforce the fact that the more one remembers something the more love they have for them. Remembering or Dhikr in one’s heart is like water the ground that reaps harvest. Even stronger, it is like the water that the fish needs to survive.

Remembering of Allaah is of types:

           

-Learning and remembering His Names, Attributes and Actions and Praising Him for them.

            -Glorifying Him (saying Subhaanallah), Praising Him (saying Alhumdulilah), Extoling His Greatness (saying Allaahu Akbar), proclaiming His Oneness (saying La ilaha ila Allaah) and this is what is commonly known as Dhikr today.

            -Dhikr or remembrance of Allaah in His Rulings, His Commands and His Prohibitions and this form of Dhikr is only for the learned. Rather, the learned are the only ones of the Ummah which engage in all three types of Dhikr mentioned above.

From the greatest forms of Dhikr is the remember Allaah with His Own Words – the Quraan.

Allaah, the Most High, Says:

“"But whosoever turns away from My Reminder (i.e. neither believes in this Qur'an nor acts on its orders, etc.) verily, for him is a life of hardship, and We shall raise him up blind on the Day of Resurrection."” [Taa-Haa 20:124]

This Aayah refers to the Quraan that was revealed to His Messenger.

And He, the Most High, also Said:

“Those who believe (in the Oneness of Allah - Islamic Monotheism), and whose hearts find rest in the remembrance of Allah, Verily, in the remembrance of Allah do hearts find rest.” [ar-Ra’d 13:28]

This Aayah refers supplication, seeking forgiveness and humility to Him.

So this summarises the five types of Dhikr.

[Jalaa’ al-Afhaam Fee Fadl as-Salaat wa as-Salaam ‘ala Muhammad Khayr al-Anaam (Pg. 515 - 527)]

Chapter: Nullifiers of Wudhoo - Touching the Private Parts (Part 4)

Follow @AhleDhikr

4 – Touching the private parts (TN: for whom we are allowed to touch the private parts of – i.e. oneself, spouse, one’s own children, washing the deceased through a barrier etc.) nullifies the Wudhoo. Uthaymeen explains that there is a difference of opinion on this issue:

-Some of the scholars stated that it must be skin for skin in order for the Wudhoo to be invalidated. This is because (مس) or touching cannot be affirmed through a barrier.

-Others stated it must be the palm that touches the private part. So if one touches his private part with his thigh or his elbow, then the Wudhoo is not invalidated. They use the Hadeeth, “If one touches his private parts without there being a barrier than the Wudhoo has become obligatory” [reported by Ahmad (2/333), Ibn Hibban (1118), ad-Daaraqutnee (1-147) and al-Bayhaqee (2-131) from Aboo Hurayrah]

-Others said it breaks Wudhoo in all cases (the Hanbalees). Their evidences are as follows:

- The Hadeeth of Busrah bint Safwaan, “Whoever touches his private parts then they must make Wudhoo.” [Aboo Dawood (181), at-Tirmidhee (82), an-Nasaa’ee (163) and Ibn Maajah (489)]

- The Hadeeth of Aboo Hurayrah, “If one of you touches his private parts with his hands, without a barrier, then they must perform Wudhoo” [Ibn Hibban (246)]

- By touching the private parts one may stir desire or extract something impure -thus carrying the same reasoning for sleep being a nullifier of Wudhoo.

-Others said that touching the private part doesn’t nullify the Wudhoo. Their evidences are as follows:

- The Hadeeth of Talq bin ‘Alee where the Prophet was asked about touching the private parts to which he replied, “It is merely a part of your body.” [Reported by Aboo Dawood (182), an-Nasaa’ee (165), at-Tirmidhee (85) and Ibn Maajah (483)]

- The origin of purification is that it remains except with proof that it has been nullified.

- There is a third opinion which states that Wudhoo is nullified if one touches his private parts if the touching is done with desire (the majority). If there is no desire, then the Wudhoo has not been nullified. This view reconciles all the evidences presented above, and this is what must be done so as to not neglect some Hadeeth whilst acting upon others. Additional proofs:

-The saying of the Prophet, “It is merely a part of your body” shows that touching any part of your body doesn’t nullify the Wudhoo, except if there is desire.

- As  for the argument that one may not know what exits if he touches his private part, then if we attach the ruling of touching to desires then this is more appropriate. Thus we are saying if you touch your private parts then the Wudhoo is not broken, but if it is coupled with desires then there is a chance that something has exited.

-Others from the scholars have stated that touching the private parts never invalidates the Wudhoo, even if desires are present, rather the Ahadeeth express a recommendation to repeat Wudhoo and not a nullifier of it. There evidences are as follows:

-You Hanbalees claim that touching women without desires doesn’t nullify the Wudhoo but here you are saying that touching your private parts with desires does nullify your Wudhoo. This seems to be a contradiction.

-The Hadeeth of Busrah is an obligation and the Hadeeth of Talq negates Wudhoo, so combining them together shows that the command has been lessened to mean recommended (Mustahab).

-The correct opinion is the opinion of the Hanafees and Ibn Taymiyyah, is that touching the private parts never invalidates the Wudhoo even if one touches it with desire. Rather, it is Mustahab to do Wudhoo again in all cases. His evidences:

                - The Ahaadeeth can be combined to this interpretation.

- The evidences which say we should perform Wudhoo again mean that it is better in order to be on the safe, not proving obligation or nullification of Wudhoo.

- The Hadeeth of Talq came before the Hadeeth of Busrah, and was acted on for a large period of time without there being any retraction.

- Also, the Hadeeth of Talq shows the reason for the ruling, so as long as the reason is described then the ruling must be connected to it.

- Some scholars stated that if two narrations or opinions of the Companions contradict each other, then sometimes we take the opinion of the one who came later as his opinion or narration is closer to when Islaam was completed. However this rule can’t always be applied in this way, because what this implies is that the first ruling has been abrogated by the latter, but as long as reconciliation is possible then this is a must.

Uthaymeen summarises this ruling:

-If a person touches his private parts then it is Mustahab for him to preform Wudhoo and it is not a nullifier of the Wudhoo. This is irrespective of whether he touched it with desire or without desire. Those who stipulate desire have a very strong reasoning also, so I say it is better to act upon this opinion.

-Uthaymeen adds that the ruling in this issue is connected to the private part and not the organs around it, so if one touches his private parts from the front or the back, then this is what is being discussed here.

-Uthaymeen also points out that genitals which have been amputated are not included in the ruling either.

-Uthaymeen also adds that the ruling doesn’t include hermaphrodites as they have no clear gender. So if one touches them from the front or the back, the Wudhoo is not invalidated.

-The Hanbalees stated that if one touches the genitals of a hermaphrodite with desire, then the Wudhoo is broken, but if it is touched without desire then the Wudhoo is correct.

-They also stated that if one touches both the front and the back of a hermaphrodite then the Wudhoo is also broken.

-The only exception is if one touches the private part of a hermaphrodite but they have two gender organs but one is dormant. If one touches the dormant one then the Wudhoo is not broken.

Chapter: Nullifiers of Wudhoo - Sleep and Unconsciousness (Part 3)

Follow @AhleDhikr

3 - Losing one’s senses nullifies the Wudhoo. Uthaymeen explains that this is of two types:

a)      Completely losing one’s senses, such a person suffering from insanity or mental illnesses. In this case the person loses his Wudhoo.

b)      Temporary unconsciousness, such as sleep or fainting. In this instance the scholars differed:

- Some said all forms of sleep, heavy or light, nullifies the Wudhoo. This is based on the Hadeeth of Safwaan [may Allaah be Pleased with him] in which urine, faeces and sleep were all mentioned together as being nullifies of Wudhoo.

- Some said sleep never nullifies the Wudhoo because of the Hadeeth of Anas [may Allaah be Pleased with him] in which the Companions were described as waiting for the Prophet to lead the Ishaa prayer and some of them were described as being in slumber and in some narrations describing them as laying down (reported by al-Bazzar no.175). Despite this, they didn’t repeat their Wudhoo before praying.

- The Hanbalees were of the opinion that deep sleep does nullifies the Wudhoo. However they made a distinction between the state of the person, standing, sitting or laying down. They stated that if a person falls into a deep sleep, then his Wudhoo is nuliified, irrespective of his position. However, if he falls into slight sleep, then this also nullifies the Wudhoo unless if he was standing or sitting.

- Ibn Taymiyyah was of the opinion that sleep is in relation to ones senses. Therefore, if he sleeps and he loses his senses, even just slightly, then his Wudhoo is nullified. This is the correct opinion as it combines all the evidences.

Chapter: Nullifiers of Wudhoo - Blood, Vomit and Puss (Part 2)

Follow @AhleDhikr

2-Anything other than urine and defecation that exits the body also nullifies. Uthaymeen explains that this of two types, that which is Taahir and that which is deemed as being Najis.

A-As for which is Taahir, such as sweat or tears, then this doesn’t nullify the Wudhoo.

B-As for what is deemed as being Najis like vomit, blood or anything other than that comes out of the two passages then this nullifies the Wudhoo if it is a lot. A small amount is overlooked. Their evidences are from the following:

-The Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] once vomited and he performed Wudhoo.

-Food that has changed within the body takes the same ruling as urine or faeces but their exists are different. So in the case of vomit, as the exit is not from the two passages, its ruling of impurity is lessened – thus if there is a lot then it nullifies Wudhoo by vomiting a little doesn’t.

Another opinion, which is the view of the Shafi’ees and another view from Imaam Ahmad, also the favoured view of Ibn Taymiyyah is that nothing invalidates the Wudhoo except what comes of the two passages. Their evidences:

                -There is no proof for things exiting the body as being a nullifiers of Wudhoo.

-Purification is based on evidences, and nothing can invalidate purification except with evidences.

In response to the evidences quoted by those who say it does nullify:

                -A mere action of the Prophet doesn’t necessarily mean that it invalidates the Wudhoo.              

-Also, there is an instance where the Prophet made Hijaamah and he didn’t repeat his Wudhoo [reported by ad-Daraqutnee (1/157) and al-Bayhaqee (1/141) and classed as weak by Ibn Hajar in al-Talkhees (no. 152)], thus proof that blood and vomit and the likes (anything other than the two passages) doesn’t invalidate Wudhoo.

This is opinion is the correct one, that anything exiting the body in other than the two passages, doesn’t nullify the Wudhoo.

Chapter: Types of Advice (Part 8)

Follow @AhleDhikr

Those who take upon the task of picking out the mistakes of scholars, due to their sincerity to Allaah and His Messenger (i.e. in supporting the religion) then it is a must that they accompany this intent with praiseworthy manners, respecting and honouring the scholars - just like the scholars of the past mentioned above did when they embarked on a similar mission, and all those who followed them in guidance.

On the other hand, those who wish to respond to the mistakes of the scholars seeking to belittle them, put blame on them and to bring them to culpability in front of others, then people with such intentions  must be met with punishment. So as to place a obstacle between them and their evils and the Haraam corruption they wish to spread[1].

---

[1]  This chapter focuses on the actual physical differences between advising and defaming. Advising is in giving support, so one has respect for the scholars and the rulers, advises them, supplicated for them, taking knowledge from them, going back to them for ones questions especially if the subject matter is of specific importance. This all affirms the persons belief that they are the people of authority over us, thus illustrating his sincerity towards them. However, if ones intent is merely to insult and degrade, exposing their error to the masses and protecting their honour; then as has preceded, this is defamation. 

Treating Scholars as Innovators is Haraam (Part 7)

Follow @AhleDhikr

However, if the intent behind exposing the mistakes of others is to dispraise their honour and to belittle them and their knowledge; seeking to claim that such and such a scholar is actually and ignorant and possesses no understanding and the likes, then this is Haraam. This is irrespective of the scholar being present or such comments made in his absence and is irrespective of the scholar being alive or having passed away.

This second type of intention falls under what Allaah, the Most High, has mentioned in His Book with a stern caution against those who spread backbiting and slander in word and in action. It is also included in the statement of the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] where he said,

“Oh you who have believed on your tongues but have not believed in their hearts! Do not harm the Muslims and do not seek to find mistakes in them! Surely, those who seek to find mistakes in the Muslims, Allaah will expose their own mistakes. He will be exposed even if he is hidden in the most inner-secret place of his house.[1]”

Having correctness in manners are from the teachings of the religious scholars - those taken as an example to follow in their practice.

As for the people of innovation and misguidance, those from them who are falsely perceived as being scholars but in actuality are not people of knowledge, then it is permissible to expose their ignorance and make apparent their faults, with the intention that the masses will be warned against following them. Note, this exposure only applies to the people of innovation and not the mistakes made by an upright scholar, and Allaah Knows Best[2].

---

[1] Reported by at-Tirmidhee (2032) on the authority of ‘Abdallah bin ‘Umar [may Allaah be Pleased with him], Ibn Hibbaan in his Saheeh (5763), al-Munthiree in at-Targheeb at-Tarheeb (3/241) and classed as Saheeh by al-Albaanee in Saheeh at-Tirmidhee.

[2] How beautiful is this explanation?! No matter how virtuous a person may be, everyone is prone to error. As Imaam Maalik [may Allaah have Mercy on him] famously said, “Everyone’s statements are either accepted or rejected except for the person in this grave” – he then pointed at the grave of the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him]. As infallibility belongs only to Allaah and His Messenger, regardless of the status of the one who makes the mistakes, we are all obliged to point out what is correct as long one is pure in his intention. As for those whose intention is only to defame and insult or to expose, then this is not from the way of the scholars, rather such a degree of immaturity is from the people of innovation. Those with such intentions are sinning gravely and the implications of their sin is severe. Applied to them is the statement of the Prophet, “Whoever goes to war with My Friend then I Proclaim war against such a person.” [Reported by al-Bukhaaree (6502)]. Applied to him is the Statement of Allaah, the Most High,

“Woe to every slanderer and backbiter.” [al-Humazah 104:1].

Applied to him is the Statement of Allaah, the Most High,

“A slanderer, going about with calumnies” [al-Qalam 68:11]

So whoever’s intention is to insult and defame the scholars and raise themselves to a platform which the Salaf refused to give themselves, then we remind them of the statement of Ibn ‘Asaakir [may Allaah have Mercy on him], “The (backbitten) skin of the scholar is poison.” In summary, it is a must to correct what is mistaken and make the truth apparent, however this must be done with proper manners and intent; giving the people of knowledge respect, honour, supplicating for them, seeking forgiveness for them and protecting your tongue against them. 

How Will Allaah Hold the Whole of His Creation to Account?

Follow @AhleDhikr

It was said that ‘Alee bin Abee Taalib [may Allaah be Pleased with him] was asked, “How will Allaah hold the whole of His Creation to account despite being so numerous?” 

He replied, “Just as He Provides for each and every one of them despite being so numerous.”

[Reported by al-Maawardee in Adab ad-Dunyaa and ad-Deen (1/23)]

Forty Benefits in Supplicating for Your Prophet ﷺ (Part 4)

Follow @AhleDhikr

31 – It a means in which the life and actions of a person becomes blessed. So this one supplication (i.e. sending peace and blessings of Allaah upon the Prophet) brings about great good, because if one prays for the Prophet and his family to be blessed, then the person supplicating will also receive a portion of that supplication for himself.

32 - Sending Peace and Blessings of Allaah upon the Prophet is a cause for the one who sends it to receive the Mercy of Allaah.

Chapter: Nullifiers of Wudhoo - The Two Passages (Part 1)

Follow @AhleDhikr

-The difference between Wudhoo and Wadhoo:

Wudhoo is the action of washing.

Wadhoo is the water one uses to wash with.

Similar to Suhoor and Sahoor:

Suhoor is the action of eating.

Sahoor is the food one is eating.

-Nullifiers are sometimes agreed upon by the scholars and sometimes the scholars differed on them, however in matters where the scholars differed one must seek the correct opinion based on the evidences.

The nullifiers:

1-Whatever comes out the two passages. ‘Uthaymeen explains that this includes solids, liquids and gas based on the Aayah, “any of you comes from answering the call of nature” [5:6] and the Hadeeth of Safwaan [may Allaah be Pleased with him] where the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] described the nullifiers of Wudhoo as being “Urine, defecation and sleep”. In the Hadeeth of Aboo Hurayrah [may Allaah be Pleased with him] he also described as passing wind as a nullifier. The scholars are agreed on wind from the back passage, however they differed on wind from the front passage (for women mainly):

-The Hanbalees said this nullifies the Wudhoo based on the generality of the evidences above.

-Others said it doesn’t nullify the Wudhoo because there is no specific evidence to suggest it being a nullifier. This is the opinion that ‘Uthaymeen seems to favour because it is just air and not a product of any impurities.

-Uthaymeen adds that anything that comes out of a man’s penis is also a nullifier, even it is be stones like the person who suffers from kidney stones. It nullifies because of the generality of the evidences above however it is not impure as there is no evidence to suggest it being impure. The evidences have described that impurities that come out of the penis are only – urine, Madhiy, Wadhiy and blood.

-If urine or defection is extracted from any other part of the body, then this nullifies the Wudhoo also. ‘Uthaymeen explains that this is only the case if the food or drink has digested, however if it has not, then it is closer in its resemblance to vomit. This is the differentiation given by Ibn ‘Aqeel (an authority in the Hanbalee Madhab) and is a good opinion. So if it resembles vomit, then it doesn’t nullify the Wudhoo but if it has digested then it is closer to being defection and nullifies the Wudhoo once it leaves the body. This is in regards to urine and defection, but what about wind? Some illnesses mean that the passing of wind is not through the conventional ways and can leave the body via a different route:

-The Hanablees say that wind passing through any other exit does not nullify the Wudhoo even if the smell is very bad.

-Others said it does nullify the Wudhoo because the ruling is the same even if it via a different exit. This is the opinion that Uthaymeen seems to favour.          

-There being no difference between a little and a lot, all of it nullifies the Wudhoo. ‘Uthaymeen explains that the view of the Madhab is that urine or defection that exits the body from conventional or unconventional ways are all nullifiers. Others said that whatever is little is overlooked, however one must pay caution to opening the doors of Waswasa. So we say whatever is deemed by the customs as being a little, then this is the benchmark and doesn’t nullify the Wudhoo if it leaves the body in an unconventional way.

To be continued. 

Jarh and Pointing Out Mistakes is Only Done by the People of Knowledge (Part 6)

Follow @AhleDhikr

If one comes across a mistake that a scholar has made, and he has the ability and the appropriate mannerisms and knowledge to tackle the issue, then there is no blame on this person for clarifying the mistake. This person should not be rebuked for clarifying the truth, even if he is wrong in his interjection (because the person is being judged by his intent to explain the truth).

It is has been narrated from some of the Salaf that if they received information but it had no basis to it, they would respond and refute it immediately. At times they would even issue harsh statements like, “This person has lied.” We also have the statement of the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] where he said, “Aboo as-Sanaabil has lied.” He said this after Aboo as-Saanbil issued a Fatwaa that the pregnant wife of her deceased husband must expiate her ‘Iddah period (a bereavement period after the death of her husband) of four months at ten days once she has delivered her child[1].

It has also been narrated from many of the pious scholars that they reprimanded weak statements and opinions, despite these opinions being the opinions of other notable scholars. Some of them even refuted the other in a harsh and stern manner, as Imaam Ahmad did whilst extensively rebuking Aboo Thawr and others who issued weak statements during his time. All of this quite common from the actions and statements of some of the scholars.

In regards to their intention, then the reason for scholars rebuking the weak opinion of others is obscure, as the intentions of humans is hidden from us. Those with the intention to clarify mistakes so that the general folk will not be deceived, and have the intent to make the truth clear and apparent, is an action which is undoubtedly praiseworthy and virtuous in its reward. This type of intent is included in one being sincere to Allaah, His Messenger, the scholars of al-Islaam and their general folk.

Their virtue is upheld irrespective of the importance of the mistake, big or small, because by taking this noble action they are treading the path laid for us by the scholars of old.

Ibn ‘Abbaas [may Allaah be Pleased with him] had opinions which were odd, but despite his status, there were scholars lesser in virtues that came after him clarified the correct position in matters that Ibn ‘Abbaas issued strange verdicts upon. Examples of this include the permissible of Mut’ah (temporary marriages)[2] and issues connected to inheritance (al-‘Umareeyatayn)[3].

Likewise, there were scholars who rejected the opinions of Sa’eed bin Musayyab where he stated that a person may re-marry a woman he has divorced three times with a new marriage contract without her having to re-marry someone else beforehand[4], and there are other examples in which his verdicts contradicted what is clear in the Sunnah.

Hasan al-Basree was of the opinion that there is no Ihdaad[5] for the widow, ‘Ataa held the opinion that ‘exposing the private parts[6]’ was permissible and there are many odd opinions narrated from Taawoos too.

Despite all of these examples, the scholars are in consensus that the scholars mentioned here and other than them are rightly-guided and hold expertise, and that there exists great love and praise for them from our part.

Fault can never be attached to the one who points out the mistake of another with this noble objective, nor can they be deemed as being disrespectful to them.

The books authored by the scholars of the Muslims, from the time of the Salaf and those who came after them are filled with such examples. There are many examples in the books of Imaam ash-Shafi’ee, Ishaaq bin Raahooyah, Aboo ‘Ubayd, Aboo Thawr and the scholars of Fiqh and Hadeeth that came after them. These are just a few examples but further examples are far more extensive.

---

[1] Reported by Ahmad in his Musnad (6/136), al-Bayhaqee in as-Sunnan al-Kubraa (10/210), al-Haythamee in Majma’ az-Zawaa’id (5/6) and classed as authentic by al-Albaanee in Silsilah as-Saheehah (7/811).

[2] It is reported in Saheeh al-Bukhaaree (5116) that Aboo Jamrah said that someone asked Ibn ‘Abbaas [may Allaah be Pleased with him] on the ruling of temporary marriages in times of dire need, such as when one has strong desire…Ibn ‘Abbaas [may Allaah be Pleased with him] said, “Yes, it is permissible.”

Imaam al-Baghawee [may Allaah have Mercy on him] said:

The scholars are agreed that temporary marriages are not permitted, and it is as if there is consensus between the Muslims on this ruling. It is narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas permitted temporary marriages for those who were in dire need, such as those who are away from their homes for a long period of time, however, his final opinion was that it is prohibited, and he changed his opinion once the Ahaadeeth prohibiting it reached him. End quote. [Sharh as-Sunnah (9/100)]

[3] This is where a person dies leaving behind a mother, a father and a spouse. The majority opined that the mother will receive the remaining sixth if the deceased was a female (half to the husband, a third to the father and a sixth to the mother) or the remaining third if the deceased was a male (a quarter to the wife, a third to the mother and the remaining going to the father). This was the opinion of ‘Umar al-Khattaab and was named after him after he deduced this ruling. It was also the opinion of ‘Uthmaan bin ‘Affaan, Zayd bin Thaabit, Ibn Mas’ood and a view narrated from ‘Alee bin Abee Taalib. It is also narrated to be the opinion of Hasan al-Basree, ath-Thawree, Maalik, Shafi’ee and the People of Opinion [the Hanafees] [may Allaah be Pleased with them all]. Ibn ‘Abbaas [may Allaah be Pleased with them] disagreed with them and dictated that a third of the wealth is always given to the mother because the Aayaat of inheritance state that the mother’s share is a third if the deceased dies without leaving behind any children or siblings. [See: al-Mughnee (6/172) of Ibn Qudaamah]

[4] Allaaah, the Most High, says: “And if he has divorced her (the third time), then she is not lawful unto him thereafter until she has married another husband. Then, if the other husband divorces her, it is no sin on both of them that they reunite, provided they feel that they can keep the limits ordained by Allah. These are the limits of Allah, which He makes plain for the people who have knowledge.” [al-Baqarah 2:230]

[5] On the authority of Umm Attiyyah [may Allaah be Pleased with her] that the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] said, “It is not permitted to mourn the deceased for more than three days except for the wife. Her mourning period is four months and ten days in which she is not allowed to wear dyed (adorned) clothes but wear that which is not beautified. She is not to apply Kohl (or make-up) nor perfume.” [Reported by al-Bukhaaree (5342) and Muslim (938)]. Ibn Qudaamah said, “There is no difference of opinion (except what is narrated by Hasan) that the widow must perform the mourning period (Ilhaad).”

[6] I asked the Shaykh Saaleh bin Muhammad al-Luhaydaan [may Allaah Preserve him] for the meaning of this issue to which he replied, “It is to give out a concubine one possesses to another so that she may be enjoyed and then returned to the owner once he has finished. This is undoubtedly Haraam and not the correct opinion.” [12/4/1436 – 1/2/2015]

Jarh and Pointing Mistakes is Done by Those Who Are Sincere (Part 5)

Follow @AhleDhikr

Whoever is blessed with such characteristics then it is not prohibited for such a person to point out the mistakes of others. Rather, it is binding upon them to point out the mistake of the one who has erred, whether they are alive or not. This is the approach adopted by many of the scholars of al-Islaam; those who are known for their uprightness and service to the religion, those from the generation of the Salaf as well as those who came after them. Moreover, none of them rejected to their mistakes being rectified or an attempt being made to do so, even if they did not agree their interjection.

Imaam Ahmad bin Hanbal [may Allaah have Mercy on him] gives an example of Ishaaq bin Raahooyah. After praising and commending him he said, “Despite his virtues, had he contradicted the texts in any of his opinions then it is the nature of man of that they disagree with one another[1].”

In fact, he used to mention Ishaaq a lot and rely on his opinions, and many others from the scholars of al-Islaam. He would accept their opinions if the evidences they presented were strong and if their opinions or the evidences/understanding they used to gain such an opinion were weak, he would never tarnish them even though he didn’t agree with them. There are many examples of this, and from the best of these is the story that Imaam Ahmad narrated about Haatim al-Asam [may Allaah have mercy on him].

Once a man asked him, "Oh Haatim, you are a non-Arab so your Arabic is not so eloquent, so if a person differs in their opinion with you and often people seek to waver in your opinion, so how are you so overpowering in explaining your point?”

He replied, “By three things; I rejoice when the person who has a different opinion to me is correct, I am disappointed in myself if I make a mistake and lastly, I protect my tongue in talking about the one who differs in my opinion in mentioning him in a bad manner (i.e. all of these are examples in sincerity to the truth).”

Imaam Ahmad said in describing Haatim, “How intelligent was Haatim?[2]”

Based on all of this, refuting, rectifying weak opinions and explaining the truth with clear evidences from the texts of the Sharee’ah is not something prohibited or disliked with the scholars. Rather, it is a recommended action and it and the seeker of good are both commended[3].

Rectifying opinions and clarifying mistakes does not always fall under the prohibited act of backbiting. If a mistake has been made but the one who seeks to rectify the mistake, with the sincere intention to explain the facts and rid the people of mistakes in order for the truth to prevail, then there is no prohibition in this action. Whether the one who initially made the mistake is pleased with the rectification or not, clarifying mistakes is an obligation on the Muslim. The Muslim is someone who loves the truth to become apparent to fellow Muslims, regardless of whether people being pleased with it or not. 

The one with this intention falls under the Hadeeth of being sincere to Allaah, His Book, His Messenger, His Religion, the scholars of the Muslims and their general folk. This is the very essence of the religion as the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] explained[4].[5]

---

[1] Tahtheeb al-Kamaal of al-Mizzee (No. 118).

[2] Tareekh Baghdaad (2/242).

[3] After mentioning the example of ‘Umar al-Khattaab [may Allaah be Pleased with him], the author gives further examples for those who came in generations after him who were also esteemed in their rank. Despite this, they were prone to error but their reference was the Book and the Sunnah, and this is what they supported to propagate. Nobody is perfect and everyone has their opinions and statements either accepted or rejected, because infallibility is only for Allaah and His Messenger. In fact, the statement of Shaafi’ee here exemplifies the level of rejoice he would find when people were guided to the truth, even if it conflicted with the opinion that he held. All of these statements teach us the following points:

-The humility of the scholars that they have in front of Allaah, the Glorified and the Exalted.

-All goodness is in being guided to the truth and following it.

-Knowledge can appear after it was hidden to some of those before them.

-The Muslim loves that his brother is Guided and Assisted by Allaah, the Most High.

This is a summary of the attitude and sound methodology of the Salaf - even if their brother made a mistake, they wished for him to be guided to the truth. If he disagreed with them, then none are free from mistake. They were saddened by mistakes and rejoiced at correctness, but despite this, their tongues would not let them get the better of them. They were happy when their brother is happy and sad with whatever saddens him, because “The believers to one another are like a building which supports each other.” [Reported by al-Bukhaaree (6026) and Muslim (2585)]

Here we have an example in Imaam Ahmad [may Allaah have Mercy on him] who rejoiced when Aboo Haatim was correct exemplifying his level of sincerity to him as a brother. Haatim did not get angry out of jealously towards him, rather he was positive in regards to his opponent.

[4] It is reported in Saheeh Muslim (55) on the authority of Tameem ad-Daaree [may Allaah be Pleased with him] that the Prophet [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] said, “The religion is sincerity, the religion is sincerity, the religion is sincerity.” The Companions asked, “To whom, oh Messenger of Allaah?” He [Peace and Blessings of Allaah be upon him] replied, “To Allaah, His Book, His Messenger, to the scholars and rulers of the Muslims and their general folk.”

[5] This paragraph is extremely important; what he is saying is that explaining the truth, refuting innovations and misunderstanding, was something that the scholars have never opposed; even if it was them at the receiving end! It is a must that we clarify the truth and expose mistakes however this is only the condition that the persons intent is not to defame and insult the one who has made the mistake. So it is upon us to advise the one who has made the mistake and point out his misunderstanding with proper etiquette. If one is to insult the one who made the mistake and spread his faults and defame him in public, this will only be counter-productive. As stated in the Hadeeth of Saheeh Muslim above, it is obligatory for us to explain the truth as this is a form of sincerity to the religion and the Muslims.