Please login for Bookmark , Comment or Highlight ...
Your Questions Answered
Queries
(Answered under the supervision of the Editor)
Status of a Verdict against the Holy Qur’an
Question: My question is two-fold. The first is: Can a verdict (Fatwa) contradict the Qur’an and still be valid? The second is: Is there some kind of central authority within Islam that ‘authorizes’ a Fatwa?
Answer: My response to your first question is in the negative. A Fatwa or religious verdict should neither contradict the Holy Qur’an nor the Sunnah (established practices) of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (sws). These are the two fundamental sources of Islam from where we derive the religious instructions for the adherents of the Islamic faith. Muslims have been directed to turn to the Holy Qur’an and the Sunnah in all matters of disagreement. The Holy Qur’an reads:
If you disagree among yourselves in any matter refer it to God and the Prophet if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. This is better and more seemly as regards the consequences. (4:59)
Thus, matters which have directly been decided by Allah and His Prophet (sws) should be explained and presented exactly as they are. For instance, Allah has forbidden the believers to eat pork. So, no Muslim scholar, however great he may be, can change this decree of Allah. However, matters which have not been directly addressed by these two sources are available for Muslim scholarship to deliberate in the light of ‘the spirit of other Islamic directives’ and the innate guidance of man regarding good and evil. The decision in such matters should not also go against the explicit directives of Islam. For instance, Islam lays the basis of the society on the institution of family. It wants that the new generation should come into this world through the relationship of a wedded couple. Therefore, the idea of a surrogate mother, which though has not been addressed by these sources directly, is totally against the spirit of Islamic directives and hence stands rejected. However, if a wife and husband themselves take some medicine or undergo a medical treatment to have children or specifically have either sons or daughters, this cannot be objected to since the whole thing is within the ordained limits of family institution. In short, matters which have been dealt with by the fundamental sources of Islam should never be changed and presented as such. For other issues, however, the spirit of Islamic directives and morality should be observed and sustained while reaching a decision.
Unlike Orthodox Christianity, Islam does not have any Pope or a central authority. As explained earlier, the central authority is the Holy Qur’an and the Holy Prophet (sws)—after his death, obviously, his established practices. Islam declares that only the Messengers of Allah are innocent. No other person is infallible in the sight of Islam; they all stand on equal grounds. It is true that those people who spend their lives in understanding religion develop a good sense of Allah’s decrees but their opinions should also be weighed in the scales of sense and reason. No Muslim is supposed to follow blindly any person other than the Messengers of Allah. From common Muslims to scholars, every person is a common human being and therefore his opinion shall be weighed in the scales of sense and reason by referring to the fundamental sources of Islam.
Leaving Hands at Ease during the Qiyam
Question: Can you please send me a breakdown on the Prophet’s (sws) mode of Wudu (ablution) and Salah (the prayer). You see I studied under scholars who are of the Malikite school of thought. I want to make sure I am worshipping my Creator rightly.
Answer: I really appreciate your concern and carefulness regarding as important a matter as worshipping the Lord. I will definitely address your question and try to present before you our point of view along with arguments thereon. As far as my knowledge goes of the Malikite fiqh (jurisprudence) and other fiqh of Sunni scholars, I do not find any difference of opinion on the method of performing ablution. However, the adherents of Malikite fiqh contend that one should not hold one’s hand when standing before the Almighty in Qiyam (standing posture during the prayer). This is the only point of difference where we need to ascertain the right standing of the Companions (rta) of the Prophet (sws) and the Muslim generations of later ages.
Before we begin our debate on this point, it needs to be clarified that any method of worshipping the Lord of which a person is intellectually convinced under the light of his innate as well as divine guidance will stand accepted with the Lord. This means that you should not keep worrying whether your prayers will be accepted by the Lord while you are intellectually convinced that the right way of offering the prayers is yours. Allah of course does know what is in the hearts; and your sincerity of heart will bring reward to you in the Hereafter.
As I pointed out earlier, the adherents of the Malikite fiqh maintain that one should not hold one’s hands while standing before the Almighty during the prayer. We however have problem ascribing this standing to the pioneer of this fiqh, Imam Malik. The statement which is quoted in this regard from Imam Malik becomes questionable when it is read in the context of other reports and facts. This statement is quoted in al-Mudawwanah al-Kubra:
And about placing one’s right hand over the left during Prayers, Malik said: ‘I am not aware of this practice in the obligatory prayers’. Malik detested this practice [in obligatory prayers], but considered it acceptable in supererogatory prayers, to support oneself, when the standing posture (Qiyam) can be quite prolonged.1
This is the statement from which is construed Imam Malik’s point of view regarding leaving hands at ease when being in the obligatory prayers; and in supererogatory prayers it is however allowable to support oneself by holding hands in case of a prolonged Qiyam. Although this statement is clear and it would have been decisive in ascertaining the viewpoint of Imam Malik regarding leaving one’s hand at ease when offering the prayer, yet we have some other information which presents quite a different picture as regards Imam Malik’s views. We have some reports recorded in the Hadith collection of the Imam, which supports the opinion of the mainstream Muslims in this regard. I quote:
‘Abd al-Karim al-Basarisays that amongst the sayings of the Prophet (sws) was: ‘If you do not have shame in your heart, then you do whatever you may feel like doing and that he [ie., the Prophet (sws)] put one hand over the other during the prayer, he would put his right hand over his left. (Mu’atta: No. 377)
Sahal Ibn Sa‘adsays that people used to prescribe upon others to put their right hands on their left elbows during prayers. Abu Hazim [who reports from Sahal Ibn Sa‘ad] says: I am sure that this was ascribed to the Prophet (sws). (Mu’atta: No. 378)
The very existence of these reports in the Hadith collection of the Imam without any objection note thereon shows that he held them to be true in this regard. The least we can however establish from these reports is that he had an idea of this practice. Keeping the purport of these reports in mind, one can hardly understand why the Imam said:
And about placing one’s right hand over the left during Prayers, Malik said: ‘I am not aware of this practice in the obligatory prayers’.
So much so that he is reported to have shown great disapproval of this practice in the obligatory prayers.
Moiz Amjad, Editor, www.understanding-islam.com,while answering a similar question, has pointed out another fact which carries due consideration. He says:
Another important factor which renders Imam Malik’s opinion cited in al-Mudawwanah al-Kubra quite questionable is the fact that the people of Madinah, whose actions form one of the primary basis of the juristic opinions of Imam Malik are generally reported to have offered their prayers with their hands folded in front of them while in the standing posture.
Finally, in his notes on al-Mudawwanah al-Kubra, Ibn Rushd writes:
With reference to the statement ‘putting the right hand over the left...’, Ashhab has said that there is no harm in doing so whether in obligatory prayers or in supererogatory prayers due to the Hadith cited in this regard and also due to the fact that standing with one’s hands folded in front is the posture of servitude and subservience in front of one’s Lord... In Matraf’s and Ibn Majishun’s ‘Al-Wadihah’, there is a third saying ascribed to Imam Malik in this regard according to which it is held that the Imam preferred to fold one’s hands, over not doing so.2
I therefore believe that the right approach in this regard is to follow the practice prevalent among the majority of the Muslims. These Muslims of course have received this practice as an established form of offering the prayer from the preceding generations—a form which is not based on the statement of one scholar. This suggestion is reinforced in the context where we are not able to even substantiate the authenticity of what is described as Imam Malik’s view.
Nevertheless, I would again say that it is actually a matter of personal judgment. If my explanation does not convince you, there is nothing to worry about. Your prayers will be accepted by the Lord as long as you worship him in accordance with what you have derived from the practices of the Muslims and use your intellectual faculty regarding points of differences among the Muslim jurists.
Migration in the Name of Allah
Question:I am a native resident of the United States and converted to Islam two years ago after marrying my husband. Not until two years ago, after both the ensuing attack in NYC (where we live) and my marriage did I ever once notice or consider the racist and obvious hypocrisy and oppressive imperialism of my native country/culture and its subjection of itself onto the world. Diligent Islamic and world political self-education through countless books, essays, articles from widely ranging sources, much soul searching, and simple human observance of both the common man’s and our (sadly un-challenged) government’s reactions have led me to think I am truly living a lie on this soil and therefore am on the cusp of making a very significant decision to shun where I have come from and move to an Islamic country – ie. my husband’s country of origin. Admittedly, Morocco, as every country around the world, has its own special problems. That is an entirely separate conversation. My question is whether or not my ‘conscience’ is answering me, genuinely making a suggestion based upon perhaps divine influence through prayer and in them my requests to God to be ‘shown the truth’. I know there is a passage in the Qu’ran which states when an individual’s ability to practice religion is compromised by their environment, if safely feasible, they are then obligated to leave – to remain in or ignore the environment is itself a sin. Some would say I should engage myself wholly in activism to create change (I do participate in my community’s mosque and city demonstrations). Some say, over time, things will change and Muslims will gain a widely accepted foothold in this country based simply upon their consistency as a community and others’ observance of the truly graceful and peaceful nature of the religion. Some have said the US is the only country in which Islam can truly be practiced due to its fundamental ‘democratic’ nature. I say, this is very young country/culture and will learn its future economic and political lessons in a very hard way – which I see less and less the significance of participating in. What would the most learned sheik advise? In the effort to remain ‘clean’, to turn away from this world and its bloated over-stimulation and perpetual sin, what would a truly clear thinking Muslim do?
Answer:A true Muslim should first try to understand the directives of his religion in their proper perspective. Then he should be ready to decide about the situation that faces him. Muslims must be very clear when doing anything in the name of religion. Religion, of course, is not a trivial matter as to be conveniently twisted by everyone to match their own desires; I hope you would agree. Therefore, I really appreciate that you have set out to seek others’ advice on the trouble you must be facing at the moment. This will surely help you arrive at the right decision.
You are right in saying that Islam wants its adherents to migrate to another piece of land if they are obstructed from carrying out the basic obligations of their religion; they are persecuted for acting upon their religion; the environment poses a threat to their Iman (faith). In these situations, they should move to some other place where they can practice their own religion; they are not supposed to let go of the obligatory requirements of their religion by putting up an excuse that they were weak in the region and consequently could not carry out these requirements. The Holy Qur’an says:
As for those whom the angels take [in death] while they wrong themselves, [the angels] will ask: ‘In what were you engaged?’ They will say: ‘We were oppressed in the land’. [The angels] will say: ‘Was not Allah’s earth spacious that you could have migrated therein?’ As for such, their habitation will be hell, an evil journey’s end. (4:97)
It should however be appreciated that such requirements must be of primary importance like offering the prayer and fasting in the month of Ramadan. Muslims should not migrate in the name of religion only be cause they have been obstructed to hold a demonstration to stop war against a Muslim country or to publish and distribute material regarding Jihad et cetera. In these situations, they may migrate to another county of their own accord but they ought not to use the word Islam.
Seen in this perspective, your case needs to be decided by you alone. You need to answer yourself whether the situation is as adverse as to become a threat to your own safety or your Iman. If it is; then you should migrate to whatever peaceful place you can. Allah will help you and your reward with the Lord will be secured.
Did Jesus (sws) speak in Infancy?
Question: I am interested to know your opinion, understanding and explanation of certain verses in the Holy Qur’an which many Muslims seem to believe that the Prophet Jesus (sws) spoke in infancy, as a baby in his cradle. For example:
He shall speak to the people in cradle and in maturity. (5:110)
But she [Mary] pointed to the baby. They said: ‘How can we talk to one who is a child in the cradle?’ He [Jesus] said: ‘I am indeed a servant of Allah; he hath given me revelation and made me a prophet’. (19: 29-33)
Yusuf Ali in his commentary on these verses seems to believe that Jesus (sws) did indeed speak as a baby from his cradle, as some kind of miracle. He points out that the ministry of Jesus (sws) lasted only about 3 years, from 30-33 years of age. And he reminds us of the Gospel of Luke (2:46), which describes Jesus (sws) as disputing with his elders in the Temple at the age of 12, and even earlier as a child, and that he was ‘strong in spirit, filled with wisdom’ (Luke 2:40).
I believe that the generally accepted view among most Muslims is that Jesus (sws) did actually speak in infancy, as a baby. But I know there are some Muslims who do not believe that these verses actually suggest this, and who do not believe that Jesus (sws) actually spoke while he was still a little baby in his cradle. Is it possible to understand these verses to mean that Jesus (sws) spoke/preached as a child (from age 12, as the Bible suggests) rather than as an infant or baby? We know that he already was uniquely blessed with great wisdom and mind for knowledge. Would this understanding be equally acceptable and in keeping with the verse of the Qur’an which says ‘he shall speak to the people in infancy and in maturity? I am very interested to know your understanding and interpretation of these verses. And whether you believe Jesus (sws) actually ‘spoke’ as a baby or rather as a slightly older child?
Answer:Of course, Jesus (sws) did speak to people when he was an infant. There is no reason to deny what the Holy Qur’an so clearly maintains. A twelve year old boy cannot be referred to as one who is in a cradle. The miracle that the Holy Qur’an seems to assert is in fact that Jesus (sws) spoke to people when he was an infant. A person may offer many reasons for a twelve year old boy to be shrewd and witty but he will be at a loss to explain how an infant uttered such clear words with such conviction as the Prophet Jesus (sws) did. This miracle can only be understood and appreciated by those who have faith and are blessed with wisdom.
You have rightly said that Jesus (sws) came to rescue his mother. Allah commanded Mary (sws) to be mute and observe fast and refer to the child when she would be questioned. She did the same. On seeing this, the people mocked her saying how a child would bear witness to Mary’s chastity. But the Prophet Jesus (sws) spoke right after his mother pointed to him. Do you think this incident could have happened when Jesus (sws) was a twelve year old kid? Well, in that case, people would have expressed no surprise because all twelve years old can speak fluently. The Holy Qur’an records:
Then she pointed to him. They said: How can we talk to one who is an infant in the cradle!? (19: 29)
As for the age of the Prophet Jesus (sws), there seems to be a consensus that he was almost thirty three years old when he died. The words of the Holy Qur’an however draw a different picture. The Book of Allah uses the word ‘Kahal’, which means middle aged. Obviously, use of this word compels us to think that he must have been from forty to fifty years old. The Bible also hints toward this probability. It says:
You are not yet fifty years old, the Jews said to him, and you have seen Abraham!. (John: 8: 57)
The expression, you are not yet fifty years old, shows that it must have been addressed to Jesus (sws) when he was near fifty. This expression in the perspective of the word ‘Kahal’ does give us a clue as to the age of the Prophet Jesus (sws). Therefore, it can safely be concluded that the ministry of Jesus (sws) was not just three years as from thirty to thirty three years.
Temporary Displeasure of the Husband for Da‘wah
Question: My friend’s husband shows annoyance at her when she goes out for Da‘wah activities, but this reaction doesn’t lead to any chaos or bigger problems in the home environment. So how important is a mere temporary displeasure and just a few taunting sentences which she tolerates with patience and carries on?
Answer:I think she can decide best what is appropriate for her while giving due weight to the harmony that should be maintained between a wife and her husband. If she believes that her decisions would not disturb the atmosphere of trust and faith, she is perfectly allowed to do what she wishes to.
However, I personally feel that sometimes things keep boiling up within a person till such time he/she can no longer bottle them up. Then small exchanges of some disapproving sentences take the form of full-blown disagreement which leads the victims to excessiveness. I mean what your friend wishes to do is not a program of one or two days. Is it? She wants to continue it. That ultimately means that her husband will continue to observe that his wife is constantly disobeying him— according to his viewpoint. I fear that these small taunting sentences then may turn into complete disapproval which obviously can affect their relationship.
What I do not understand is her hurry to do everything her way: she should first convince her husband regarding the importance of learning and teaching Islam. In the life of a couple, there come many occasions when no request is put down. I advise her to wait for that moment and, as it comes, place her request before her husband, which I believe he would never put down. I am asserting all this because the process of learning and teaching Islam requires peace of mind. This is indeed the toughest path to tread, you would agree. Let her settle down the matter with her husband happily and peacefully. Then the world would be open to her to work with utmost peace of mind.