50 Fatawa of Ullama Ahl e Hadith
50 Fatawa of Ullama Ahl e Hadith
The meaning of Tasawwuf
Hafiz AbdulMannan Nurpuri was asked: "What is Lughawi (linguistic) and Istilahi (technical) meaning of Tasawwuf, when did it start and who is its founder, and is it permissible to call oneself Sufi?"
He (rah) replied as in his "Ahkam wa Masail" v 1 p 70: "For this read Allamah Ehsan Ilahi Zaheer Shaheed's book "At-Tasawwuf", AbdurRahman AbduKhaliq book "Al-Fikr Al-Sufi" and Molana AbdurRahman Kailani Sahib’s book on Tasawwuf”
Spiritual emanation from the Prophet (saw) or saints
Hafiz Abdullah Ropuri was asked about spiritual emanations from Prophets and saints after their death, he replied as in his “Fatawa” v 1 p 156:
"Ruhani Faiz as believed by people of innovation that one should seek help from them, this is false. Yes we do not deny meetings in dreams, one can meet the Messenger of Allah saw in a dream and one can also ask Masail. Likewise one can meet Buzurg, but this matter is not ikhtiyari (on own accord), when Allah wants, such happens like in other dreams. And sometimes these can be satanic tricks, hence it is not something totally reliable. And though Shaytan cannot take the form of the Messenger of Allah saw, but if someone is aware of his complete form, then he can distinguish, and if rarely someone knows his form, and he is confident that he is the Messenger of Allah saw, then we can rely on them. But generally those who are such levels (of seeing the Prophet saw), they hide their condition, hence one should not be tricked by general claimants"
Attributes of Allah and Ulluw of Allah
Imam Shawkani wrote in his Risalah "At-Tuhaf fil Irshad ila Madhab As-Salaf":
"The aim here is only to guide the questioner to the Madhab of truth in the attributes and it is to pass them upon their apparent (Zahir) meaning without any Taweel (extrapolation), Tahreef (alteration), burdening, arbitrary meaning, forcing, Tashbeeh (comparing to creation) or Ta'teel (denial)"
He further wrote:
"And likewise they (Salaf) say regarding the topic of Jihah (direction) that the questioner mentioned, and he mentioned some evidences for it (the questioner at beginning of risalah also mentioned Hadith Jariyah), and the evidences about this are lengthy and many in the Kitab and Sunnah, the people of knowledge, especially the Ahlul Hadith, gathered writings that they lengthened with mentions of verses from the Quran and authentic Ahadith. I came across among these upon a large volume composed by the historian of Islam, the Hafiz, Az-Zahabi (rah) and he gathered in it everything that indicates the Jihah in the Kitab and Sunnah and saying of companion"
Authenticity of narration of Umar telling to Sariyah to go to the mountain
In a letter to Shaykh Ghazi Ozair Mubarakpuri dated of 13/5/79, Shaykh Ubaydullah Mubarakupri replied to some questions on Ahadith and among these questions was the authenticity of the narration of Umar ibnul Khattab of Sariyah about the Kashf of Umar, he replied:
"The incident of Hazrat Umar (rad) saying "O Sariyah go to teh mountain" is mentioned in "Tahzeeb Al-Asma wa Lughat" of An-Nawawi v 2 p 10, "Asad Al-Lughah" v 4 p 65 and "Tarikh Khulafa" p 49 by quoting Al-Bayhaqi, Abu Nuayim in "Dalail Nubuwah", Al-Lalikai in "Sarh As-Sunnah"…Ibnul Arabi in "Karamat Al-Awliya" and Al-Khateeb among narrators of Malik and ibn Mardawaiyah with the mentioned chain of narration. Hafiz after mentioning the incident in a concised way in "Al-Isabah" said "Its chain is Hasan" so telling that this incident is not authentic is not correct"
"Makateeb Rehmani" to Shaykh Ameen Athari p 112
What is Ilham?
Hafiz Abdullah Ropuri was asked: what is difference between ilham and istikharah, and are these two Zanni (speculative) or Yaqeeni (certain) evidences, and how is it to put a ruling on someone, whether he is good or evil, based on them.
He replied (Fatawa v 1 p 156): "What is known from Istikharah, if it is in state of wakefulness, then it is Ilham, and Ilham of other than Prophets are zanni evidences, and Shaytan can play a role in it, and if it is against the Shariah, it will not be reliable. And the ruling of someone being evil will be according to the level of Ilham, if it comes from Kamil buzurg, it will be more reliable, else just normal”
CHAPTER ON SUNNAH AND INNOVATION
Ruling on Sufi Bayah
Hafiz Thanaullah Madni wrote in his Fatawa v 1 p 775-776:
"I have not declared absolute Bayah as an innovation, rather (what I declared as innovations is) the Peeri Muridi one and the Hizbi Asrari one that is practiced nowadays. It has no existence in the Sharee'ah. As for the Bayah given to Nabi Akram (saw) and his Qaim Maqam Khaleefah after him, this is truth, and for example nowadays the Bayah to the Saudi ruler is possible, as there is Nifaz of Shareeat there in some manners. When King Abdul Aziz was king in Jazeerah Al-Arab, many scholars of India of this time gave Bayah to him. This is clearly mentioned in Saudi history. As for the Bay'ah of Shah Ismaeel to sayid Ahmad Shaheed, this was as Bayah to the ruler. History is witness on its apparent manifestation and there is no possibility to doubt it, though some who claim to act upon Hadith became Mutasahil on Bayah such as Peeri Muridi, but presenting this as evidence is not correct…"
Zikr of the heart
Hafiz Abdullah Ghazipuri was asked as in his Fatawa p 46 about Zikr of the heart, a Sufi innovative Talqeen (instruction):
"The Sufis instruct their Murids to think about Allah and recite "Allah Allah" (in the heart) without moving the lips, by this way the heart becomes a Zakir (remembering Allah) and this has been experienced. What is the ruling of such in the Sharee'ah?
Answer: The manner described in the question, to my knowledge this is not an Islamic way, rather it is taken form other communities as clearly mentioned in the book "Bustan Al-Mazahib". Such instruction is not taught in any verse or Hadith. Allah (Ta'ala) knows best, written by Muhammad Abdullah, Zul Hijjah 1326.”
Meaning of Hadith of protecting innovator in Madeenah
Shaykh Safiur Rahman Mubarakuri explanation of Hadith in Sahih Muslim, Kitab Al-Hajj about meaning of protecting innovators or criminals in Madeenah.
Hadith 3323: Asim said: "I said to Anas ibn Malik: "Did the Messenger of Allah (saw) declare Al-Madinah sacred?" He said: "Yes what is between such and such and such and such. And whoever introduces any Hadath in it- He said: "Then he said to me: "It is a serious matter: "Whoever introduces any Hadath in it, upon him be the curse of Allah, the Angels and all the people and on the day of Resurrection Allah will not accept from him any Sarf nor Adl" Ibn Anas said: "Or (anyone) who grants refuge to a Muhdith"
Shaykh Safiur Rahman Mubarakpuri explains this Hadith in his "Minnat Al-Mun'im" v 2 p 351:
"Whoever introduces (in it)" meaning manifests "Hadath" with 2 Fathah, meaning an evil or an innovation, whether this evil is from habit or custom, such as Fitnah, dissension, crime or from the point of view of Shar', such as innovations and immoralities…
"Or (anyone) who grants refuge to a Muhdith" meaning joins an innovator or criminal and protects him, and strengthens him and GIVES SANCTUARY TO HIM FROM HIS OPPONENT and he INTERFERES BETWEEN HIM AND THE ONE WHO WANTS TO MAKE REPRISAL AGAINST HIM, and this when read "Muhdithan" with a Kasrah on the Dal.
And it was also read with a Fathah on the Dal, and it is the matter innovated itself, so the meaning would be protection in it (innovation), satisfaction of it and being patient upon it, verily when he is SATISFIED with his innovation, and APPROVES HIS AUTHOR UPON IT and does not reprimand it (innovation), he has protected it (innovation)"
Gathering people to read the Qur’an
Sh Ubaydullah Mubarakpuri wrote in his Fatawa v 1 p 458 when asked about gathering people to read Quran before burying dead.
He replied: it is not correct to gather people to recite Quran close to dead before burial or at graves after burying him. This was was not known at time of An Hazrat saw, Sahabah Kiram, Tabiin Izam and Atba Tabiin. Gathering people to read Quran for Ethal e Sawab has also been declared Makruh and Bidah by Shafii and Hanafi scholars
Molvi Abdul Haq Sahib Muhadith Dehlawi wrote: (Persian words but ending says: is majmu bidat ust, meaning this gathering is bidah) (Madarij Nubuwah)
Shaykh Ali Mutaqi Hindi, author of Kanz Umal wrote: Gathering people for reciting Quran on dead in particularising the graveyard, the mosque or house is a condemned innovation"
Al Majd (Fayrozabadi Shafii) wrote in Safar Saaadah p 47: "He saw would recite during ziyarat different invocations like invocations he would recite in funeral prayers, and his habit would be to do condolences to family of dead, and it was not habit to gather for dead, to recite Quran for him, to complete it at his grave nor in another place, this gathering is a bidah makroohah"
The parents of the Prophet (saw)
Hafiz Thanaullah Madni was asked whether it is true that the parents of the Prophet (saw) were given back life to say the Shahadah and then their souls were taken again, he replied in vol 1 p 435 of His Fatawa:
"Allamah Suyuti mentioned such narrations in his book "Masalik Al-Hunafa" but they are extremely weak rather fabricated, As-Suyuti tried with all means to justify their Eman but Allamah Mulla Ali Qari Hanafi wrote a risalah contrary to him entitled "I'tiqad Ashab Abi Haneefah fi Abaway Rasool (saw)", and this matter is explained in "Fiqh Al-Akbar" and this is the truth"
Taweez with Quran only or Dua
Hafiz Thanaullah Madni wrote in his Fatawa v 1 p 580:
"The son of Imam Ahmad said that his father would write Taweez for the sick people, he would also write Ta'weez for his family and close people. and it is narrated that for those who strugled for children, ibn Abbas would write taweez on silver dishes or delicate things (Masail Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal 3/1345)
For the details of Ta'weez from Ibn Abbas, see Musannaf ibn Abi Shaybah 8/27.
Though writing a Taweez with Quranic verses or established invocations is permissible but according to me the Rajih and Muhaqaq saying is that we should avoid Ta'weez absolutely. We should only do Ruqiyah according to established manner, and I have detailed these matters few months ago in "Al-Itisam" magazine"
Reading Quran and sending reward of it to dead
Shaykh Badiudin Shah Rashidi quoted in his epistle "Quraan Khwanee" eng tran p 28:
"And Allamah Ar-Rasheed Ridha writes (Tafsir Al-Manaar v 8 p 249): "From what we have explained, the practice of reciting the Quraan and the Adhkaar and delegating its reward to the dead, and hiring those who recite for a fee and spending the trust (wealth of the one who had died for it), then all of this is a bid'ah"
Shaykh Nasirudin Albani also praised Shaykh Rashid Ridha's reply to Hafiz ibnul Qayim on this topic. Shaykh Albani wrote p 221 of Ahkam Al-Janaiz:
"Shaykh Izz ibn AbdiSalam wrote in his “Fatawa” (2/24): “Whoever does an act of obedience to Allah (Ta’ala) then gifts its rewards to a living or dead, the reward will not be translafered to him as “Laysa lil Insan ila ma Sa’a”, so if he started an action of obedience intending to benefit the dead, it will not reach him, except for what the Law exempted such as Sadaqah, fasting and Hajj”
What Ibn Katheer narrated from Ash-Shafi’i (rah) is the saying of most of scholars and a group of Hanafiyah as quoted by Az-Zabeedi in “Sharh Al-Ihya” (10/369)
Third: If this analogy was correct, then its consequent meaning would be the recommendation of gifting the reward to the dead, and if it was such the Salaf would have done it, as they are more desirous of reward than us without doubt, and they didn’t do such as preceded in the speech of ibn Katheer, so this indicates that the mentioned analogy (Qiyas) is not correct, and this is what is intended, indeed Shaykhul islam ibn Taymiyah (rah) in “Al-Ikhtiyarat Imiyah” p 54:
“It was not the habit of the Salaf when they prayed voluntarily prayers or fasted voluntarily or did Hajj voluntarily or read the Quran to send the reward to the dead Muslims, and it is not correct to turn away from the way of the Salaf, as it is better and more complete”
And the Shaykh (Ibn Taymiyah) has another speech in this topic in which he opposed what he quoted above from the Salaf, and he opted that the dead benefits from all forms of worships of others! Ibn Al-Qayim choose this opinion and supported it in his book “Ar-Rooh” which arguments who do not rise above the analogy whose falsehood has preceded above, and this is contrary to what we are familiar with him (rah) about abandoning Tawasu in analogy in matters of worship purely (Al-Umur At-Ta’abbudiyah Al-Mahdah) especially in matters from him in which he contradicts what were upon the Salaf.
Indeed Allamah Sayid Muhammad Rashid Ridha summarized his speech (ie Hafiz ibn Qayim) in "Tafsir Al-Manar" (8/254-272) and refuted it in an Ilmi and strong refutation, whoever wants to extend on the topic can refer to it." End of Shaykh Albani’s quote.
The ruling on kissing hands of pious and scholars
Imam Bukhari mentioned in Adab Al-Mufrad (Eng Tran by Dakwah corner, by Abu Nassir Ibrahim AbdurRauf with commentaries based on different scholars):
"AbdurRahman ibn razin said: "We passed by Ar-Rabdha and were told "There is Salma Al-Akwa". We went and greeted him. Then he held out his hands and said, "With these two hands I offered allegience to the Prophet (saw)" he held out his palm as massive as the palm of a camel, and we rose and kissed it" (sound chain)
Commentary: Explaining similar narrations, Imam Albanee explained, "As for kissing the hand, there are many narrations which all point to its establishment from the Prophet (saw) and the pious predecessors. Thus, it is our opinion that it is permissible to kiss the hand of a scholar of the following conditions are met:
1) It should not be made a custom such that the scholar becomes used to stretching out his hands to his students and the students also get used to seeking blessings through that. This is because although the Prophet's hands was kissed, it was rare, and whatever is like that should not be taken as continuous practice as is known from the fundamentals of Islamic jurisprudence.
2) That is should not lead to the scholar being arrogant towards others, feeling self-important as is the case with some Shaykhs today.
3) That it should not lead to suspending well-known Sunnah such as the handshake which is approved from his actions and statements, and which brings about the falling-off of the sins, it is not allowed to cancel it because of an act which is to say the most, only permissible"
See Sharh Saheeh Adab Al-Mufrad 3/117 (of sh Husayn Awaaisha) End of quote from Eng Adab Mufrad.
Shaykhul Islam ibn Taymiyah said as in Mukhtasar Fatawa ibn Taymiyah p 563-564 compiled by Shaykh Badrudin Muhammad ibn Ali Hanbali Ba'li, and collected in "the essentials pearls and gems of ibn Taymiyyah" by Shaykh Muhammad Arifi, Darussalam p 347:
"With regards to kissing the hand, they ie the Sahabah, did not do it except rarely. When they came to the Prophet (saw) in the year of Mut'ah (on their rteurn from the battle of Mut'ah) they kissed his hand and said: we are the ones who fled. he said: "Rather you are the one who attacked"
(Shaykh Arifi wrote in footnotes :Abu Dawood, its isnaad is Da'eef, it includes Zayd ibn Abi Ziyaad Al-Hashimi, their free slave from Kufah, who is da'eef (weak). Al-Hafiz said ion Al-Taqreeb: He is Da'eef, he grew old and changed, and he was a Shi'i)
(ibn Taymiyah continues): Abu Ubaydah kissed the hand of Omar (Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf, 6/198). Most of the fuqaha, Ahmad and others granted a concession allowing that to the one who does it for religious reasons, not for the purpose of venerating someone because of his worldly position. Others regarded it as makrooh such as Maalik and others. Sulaymaan ibn Harb said: "It is the lesser prostration"
CHAPTER TAQLEED AND ITTIBA
Difference between Taqleed and Ittiba
Imam Shawkani wrote in "Sayl Al-Jarar" p 103-104:
"If he intends Ijma of Sahabah, then they did not hear of Taqleed, so what about saying about its permissibility. An likewise the Tabiis did not hear about Taqlid and it did not appear among them, rather they would suffice at time of Sahabah and Tabiis to ask the scholar among them regarding the topic that would present to them, and he (the scholar) WOULD NARRATE A TEXT FROM THE BOOK OR THE SUNNAH, and this is not Taqleed in anything, rather it is from the chapter of seeking the Hukm of Allah on the topic and asking about the religious evidences"
Do Ahl e Hadith give preference to Ijtihad of Muhadithin over Fuqaha?
Hafiz Abdullah Muhadith Ropuri was asked: Ahle Hadith despite not doing Taqleed, why they favour the Tahqiqat of Muhadithin, Imam Bukhari, Imam Muslim and others over the Tahqiqat of four Aimah Kiram, is this not Taqlid?
Mujtahidul Asr, Hafiz Ropuri replied in his “Fatawa Ahle Hadith v 2 p 736”: “Ahle Hadith do not give precedence to the Ijtihad of Bukhari and Muslim over the Ijtihad of four Aimah Kiram, rather they follow the evidence. For instance on 3 divorces in one sitting, many Ahle Hadith are against view of Bukhari and others, this is why we clarified this topic in Hashiyah of “Tarif Ahle Sunnat” p 87 that we do not favour Ijtihadat of authors Sihhah Sittah over Ijtahadat Aimah"
Using 3 tissues instead of 3 stones for Istijmar
Imam Shawkani wrote in "As-Sayl Al-Jarrar" v 1 p 202 (ed Subhi Hallaq):
"The meaning for which the order of istijmar occur is to terminate the effects of impurity and removing its essence by using what the Legislator ordered, and what the Legislator forbade to use for Istijmar (dung and bone) will not be sufficient and whatever is not forbidden, if it is not forbidden and there is no harm in using it, it is sufficient"
Is Tasmiyah (mentioning name of Allah) an obligation before Wudhu?
Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan wrote in “Rawdatu Nadiyah”: “And the reason for declaring Tasmiyah as an obligation os the Hadith of Abu Hurayrah (rad): “There is no Salah for the one who has no Wudhu and there is no Wudhu for the one who does not mention the name of Allah before it”, narrated by Ahmad (rah), and Abu Dawood (rah), and ibn Majah (rah) and At-Tirmizi (rah), and by Daraqutni (rah) in “Al-Ilal” and by Al-Hakim (rah) and by Al-Bayhaqi (rah) and there is nothing in its Isnad which drops from level of taking it into account”
It has another way from his Hadith from Daraqutni (rah) and Al-Bayhaqi, and Ahmad and ibn Majah narrated similalrly from the Hadith of Sa’eed ibn Mu’az (rad) and from Hadith of Abu Sa’eed (rad).
Others narrated similarly from Hadith of Aishah (rad), and Sahl ibn Sa’d (rad), Abu Sabrah (rad), and Umm Sabrah (rad), and Ali (rad) and Anas (rad).
There is no doubt that all of them strengthen each other for taking it as an evidence….There is no need to go into detail in Takhrij and the speech upon them is known, and this Hadith negates Wudhu for the one who does not mention the name of Allah, and this indicates conditionality which necessiactes the absence of Wudhu with its absence, more than mere obligation, as this is minimum of what it indicates” (meaning it is not only obligatory but also a condition)”
Note: Shaykh Ali Hassan Halabi wrote in footnotes to “Rawdatu Nadiyah”: “Our brother the noble Shaykh Abu Ishaq Al-Huweini gathered all the ways (of this Hadith) in a Juzz entitled “Kashf Al-Makhbu bi Thuboot At-Tasmiyah indal Wudhu)
Also version of Tirmidhi “There is no wudoo’ for the one who does not mention the name of Allaah” has been classed as hasan by Shaykh Albani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.
Wiping over socks
Hafiz Thanaullah Madni wrote in his “Jaaizatul Ahwazi” regarding wiping over socks:
"And this (Hadith) contains evidence of permissibility to wipe over socks absolutely whether thick or thin, as there is no evidence to forbid to other than thick even if some jurists conditioned it with it without any evidence. Allamah Jamaludin Qasimi has a writing specific on this topic entitled "Al Mash alal Jawrabayn" and it is very beneficial, curing sick and giving water to thirsty, you should refer to it, like our shaykh Albani has good researches on this topic….
This (Hadith) has been declared authentic by many other muhadiths (than imam Tirmizi) and it is the truth, even if some weakened it, and they have no hujjah with them except to say that what is well know from Mughirah is wiping over khufayn, and this is not a defect, as people narrated from Mughirah Ahadith regarding wiping in wudhu, some narrated wiping over khufayn, some wiping over turban and some narrated wiping over socks, and there is no contradiction between them as they are different Ahadith for different events and Mughirah accompanied the Prophet saw for around 5 years, so it is reasonable that he witnessed from the Prophet saw different events in wudhu and narrated them, so some narrators heard some parts and others something else. And this is clearly apparent"
Is removing impurity a condition for Salah?
Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan on purity of cloths and place is not a condition of the prayer, though an obligation. He wrote in Rawdah An-Nadiyah: "The majority of the scholars are of the opinion that it is obligatory to purify three things: the body, the clothes and the place of prayer. Some are of the opinion that it is a condition for the soundness of prayer, and other say it is just a Sunnah. The truth of the matter is that it is obligatory. Whoever intentionally prays with impurities on his clothing has left one of the obligation (of the prayer), but the prayer is still valid" (as quoted Fiqh As-Sunnah sh S Sabiq, translated by sh J Zarabozo)
Is covering Awrah a condition for Salah?
Allamah Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan on covering Awrah for men is an obligation but not a condition for prayer, he wrote in "Rawdatu Nadiyah" which is an explanation of Imam Shawkani's "Durar Bahiyah", after mentioning all Ahadith ordering to cover shoulders in prayers and others:
"But there is nothing in them that can make it a condition as affirmed by a group of writers, and the Hadith of Khimar (Allah does not accept the prayer of a woman which reached puberty without a Khimar) then taking it as an evidence for making it a condition, then it is particular to women.
And you came to know in what has preceded that the thing whose absence necessitate the absence of prayer,meaning making it void, this is the condition or the pillar (rukn) not the Wajib (what is obligatory), and the one who claims that the one who prays while something from his awrah becomes apparent or he prays with clothes which have impurity, then his prayer becomes void (Batil), then evidence is sought from him, and the mere orders to cover and to purify (clothes from impurities) do not benefit (to prove it is a condition), the utmost it can prove is that such is obligatory"
Note: covering the Awrah is also not a condition for Malikis as told in Bidayatul Mujtahid.
Is taking a Sutrah obligatory or recommended?
Hafiz AbdulMannan Nurpuri was asked whether Sutrah was obligatory or recommended and he replied as in his “Ahkam wa Masail” v 2 p 174:
“'Abdullah ibn 'Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them both, said: "I was riding a she-donkey and had at that time I attained puberty. The Prophet [saw] was leading [the people] in prayer at Mina without a barrier in front of him. So I passed in front of a part of a row [of congregants] and left the animal to graze. I joined a row and no one objected to this" (Bukhari, Kitab Salah, Bab Sutratul Imam Sutrah man Khalfihi)
We know from This Hadith that Sutrah is recommended” (End of Fatwa of Hafiz Abdul Mannan Nurpuri)
Seeking refuge (Ta’awuz) in each Rakah.
Bayhaqi said 2/36: Shafii said: It has been said that he should say it when he starts every Rakah before Ummul Quran and this is Hasan.
Bayhaqi said: it is narrated from ibn Sireen that he would do istiaza in every Rakah.
Sh Albani said in Tammam Minnah p 176: We favour to legislation of istiazah in every Rakah because of the generality of His speech: "When you recite the Quran, seek refuge in Allah" and this is most correct opinion in Shafii Mazhab, and ibn Hazm favoured it in Muhalla and he replied to Hadith narrated by Abu Hurayrah "lam yaskut" (he did not pause in second rakah) to mean like the habitual pause of the first Rakah"
Nawawi said in Majmu 3/326: The most Sahih in our Mazhab is istihabab meaning of Taawuz in every Rakah and this is saying of ibn Sireen.
Cf Fatawa Deen e Khalis v 4 p 111 iz sh Ameenullah Peshawri, who preferred opinion of majority and Imam Shawkani that Taawuz in first Rakah only.
Hafiz Abdul Mannan Nurpuri was asked whether one should recite Taawuz at beginning of each Rakah as is view of sh Nasirudin Albani.
He replied: The generality of the verse :"When you recite the Quran, seek refuge by Allah from Shaytan ar Rajeem" supports the view of Shaykh Albani"
Obligation of sending Salah upon the Prophet (saw) in Tashahhud:
It is a condition for Tashahhud for Imam Shafii, whoeover leaves it on purpose and forgetfulness, his prayer is void.
Allamah ibn Rushd said, eng tran v 1 p 143: "Al-Shafi'i stipulated that blessings upon the Prophet (God's peace and blessings be upon him) as a condition of Tashahhud, saying that it is an obligation because of the world of the Exalted "Lo, Allah and His angels shower blessings on the Prophet. O ye who believe! Ask blessings on him and salute him with a worthy salutation" ( Quran 33 :56) He maintained that this salutation is the salutation in prayer."
Allamah Ahmad Shakir wrote in his footnotes on "Rawdat An-Nadiyah", as quoted in "Ta'liqat Radiyah ala rawdah An-Nadiyah" of sh Ali Hasan Halabi, v 1 p 272 about the opinion of Imam Shafi'i:
"This is the truth as Allah indeed ordered Salah upon the Prophet (saw) in His saying: "Ya Ayuha lazina Amanu Saloo aleyhi wa Salimoo Taslima", and the Companions asked about the Salah they were obligated to recite upon him? So he taught them the wording of Salah known with its differences in narrations. They understood thus from the verse that the order of sending Salah upon him is only after Tashahhud, and the Messenger of Allah (saw) agreed upon this, and they perserved upon this action, and the revelation was descending among them, and we received this by Tawatur Amali from them. So their question and his Bayan to them, and their perseverance upon what they were ordered was a Tafsir of the order mentioned in the Quran, and it is among greatest evidences of it being an obligation"
The obligation of seeking refuge from four things in Tashahhud
Allamah Ibn Rushd wrote v 1 p 144 : "A group of Zahirites said that it is obligatory for the worshipper reciting tashahhud to seek refuge from the four things described in a tradition, the torment of the grave, the torment of Hell, the trial (fitna) of teh Antichrist, and the trial of life and death"
Imam Shawkani wrote in Durar Bahiyah: "The obligation of seeking refuge from the four"
Allamah Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan wrote in "Rawdah Nadiyah Sharh Durar Bahiyah": "It has been narrated what shows the obligation of seeking refuge from the four, as narrated by Muslim and others…"
So the opinion of Imam Shawkani and Allamah Nawab is that such is an obligation, same as the view of Zahiriyah, and this was also chosen by Allamah Albani as he wrote in "Sifah Salah Nabi Saw", eng tr p 86: "The obligation to seek refuge from four things before supplicating"
Combining Zuhr with Asr and Maghrib with Isha while resident:
Shaykh Ahmad Muhammad Shakir wrote in his notes on Timrizi about combining prayers in presence and the narration of ibn Abbas:
"And the text of the speech fo Al-Khattabi in Al-Ma'alim is: "This Hadith, most of the Jurists did not say according to it, and its Isnad is Jayid, except for what what they spoke in it about the case of Habib, and ibn Munzir would say according to it (Hadith) and narrated it from more than one among Ashabul Hadith. I heard Abu Qaffal quoting it from Abu Ishaq Al-Marwazi (that he would agree on combining in presence). Ibn Munzir said: "There is no meaning to interpret the matter on excuse among excuses, as Ibn Abbas informed about the 'Ilah (reason behind the ruling) and it is his saying: "He wanted not to create hardships for his Ummah" and it is narrated from ibn Sireen that he would not see any problem in combining between prayers (Zuhr with Asr and Maghrib with Isha) if there is a need or something, as long as one does not make it an habit"
(Shaykh Ahmad Shakir:) and this is what is correctly taken from the Hadith. As for interpreting it with illness or excuse or OTHERS, it is assuming without evidence, and there is in taking it removal of many hardships from people whose works or a dominant situation constrain them to combine between the prayers, and they would consider themselves sinners from it and make it difficult for themselves, and there is in it an ease for them and help for them on obedience, as long as they don't make it as a habit, as said by Ibn Sireen"
Do passing women, black dogs or donkeys break the prayer?
The Hadith in Muslim, Tirmizi and others telling that women, donkeys and dogs passing in front of someone will break his prayer is abrogated according to Allamah Ahmad Shakir, sh Ataullah Bhunjiyani and Hafiz Thanaullah Madni.
Hafiz Thanaullah Madni wrote in his "Jaizatul Ahwazi" v 1 p 348:
""(His salah) is severed by (passing of) a black dog, a woman, and a donkey", its apparent meaning indicates that the prayer is void by their passing of, and this was chosen by Zahiriyah, and such was said by a group of Companions among whom Abu Hurayrah and Anas, and among Tabi'is Al-Hasan Al-Basri and Abul Ahwas, from the companion of ibn Mas'ood, and among the Imams Ahmad ibn Hanbal. As for the majority of Salaf and Khalaf, they opted for opinion that Prayer is not severed by anything because of the Hadith transmitted with this wording (La Yaqta'u As-Salata Shayun), it is narrated by Abu Dawood, and this Hadith even though it has weakness but it has ways and witnesses strengthening each other, so the meaning of "Severing" in the Hadith of this chapter is Naqs (reduction in reward) not making it void (ibtal) or it means that it turns away the completion of prayer from Khushu and humility, Allah knows best" This has been said by Al-Punjabi
"And the Taweel of the majority is not free of being arbitrary, and some verified that it (Hadith about dog, women and donkeys) is abrogated and this was chosen by our comtempory Allamah Ahmad Muhammad Shakir in his Ta'liq (3/163-166) and Ta'liq of Al-Muhalla (4/14) and this is a Tahqiq correct and accepted, Allah knows best" This has been said in "Taliqat As-Salafiyah" (1/87) (of sh Atatullah Bhujiyani)
And here is some of the Tahqiq of Shaykh Ahmad Shakir: "What is correct and what i am satisfied with and what i chose is that the Ahadith of severing (by passing of women, dogs and donkeys) are abrogated by the Hadith "The Salah is not severed by anything" (La Yaqta'u As-Salata Shayun), it has been narrated by Abu Dawood, and ibn Hazm weakened it in Al-Muhalla (4/13) by saying that Abu Al-Wadak and Mujalid are weak, and Abul Wadak is Jabr ibn Nawf Al-Bakali and he is thiqah, declared thiqah by ibn Ma'een and ibn Hibban, and the saying of Nasai differs about him, once he said: Salih and once: he is not strong. And Mujalid is ibn Sa'id Al-Hamadani Al-Kufi, he has been declared weak by Ahmad and others and Al-Bukhari said: Sadooq and Muslim narrated from him Maqrunan bi ghayrihi (supported by others), and similar to him, their Ahadith are not rejected. And it is also narrated from Abu Umamah in Marfu way narrated by Tabarani in Al-Kabeer, and it is said ib Majma Az-Zawaid: "Its Isnad is Hasan".
Ad-Daraqutni (140-141) and Al-Bayhaqi (2/277-278) narrated from the way of Ibrahim ibn Munqiz Al-Khawlani, that Idris ibn Yahya Abu Amr known as Al-Khowlani narrated to us, from Bakr ibn Mudhar from Sakhr ibn Abdillah ibn Harmalah that he heard Umar ibn Abdil Aziz saying from Anas: The Prophet (saw) once prayed with people and a donkey passed in front of them, so Ayash ibn Rabee'ah said: "Subhanallah, Subhanallah" and when the Prophet (saw) did final Salam, he said: "Who is the one who said Subhanallah" just know?" He said: "Me O Messenger of Allah (saw), I heard that the donkey severs the prayer" and he said: "The Salah is not severed by anything"
I did not find the mention of Idris ibn Yahya but I do not think anyone weakened him, this is why when ibn Jawzi wanted to support his Madhab, he weakened this Hadith by Sakhr ibn Abdillah, and he erred greatly as he supposed he was Sakhr ibn Abdillah Al-Hajibi Al-Munaqri and he is Kufi from late narrators from Malik and Layth and he remained alive in the limit of year 230. As for the one in the Isnad, he is Sakhr ibn Abdillah ibn Harmalah Al-Mudalaji and he is Hijazi, and he was in the limit of year 130, and he is Thiqah, and it is clear in indicating that the Ahadith containing the ruling of severing the prayer with woman, donkey and dog is abrogated, and Ayash heard that the donkey severs the prayer and Ayash is among the predecessors who did two Hujrah then at Makkah, and the Prophet (saw) would invoke for him in the Qunut as established in 2 Sahih, so he knew the first ruling and the abrogation remained hidden to him, so the Prophet (saw) informed him that the Salah is not severed by anything" End of it (Ahmad Shakir speech) in a summarized manner.
(Hafiz Thanaullah Madni): And i lean to this opinion because of previously mentioned reasons.
Having different congregation for different Mazahib in a Masjid
Allamah Abul Ashbal Ahmad Muhammad Shakir, wrote in his tahqiq on Sunnan Tirmidhi, chapter about Jama'ah in a Masjid in which it was prayed once (in Jama'ah)" about the condition of Al-Jami Al-Azhar or the Masjid Al-Husain in which different Mazahib woukld pray behind separate Imams:
"We have seen in it that the Shafi'is have an Imam who prays Fajr for them in darkness and the Hanafis have another Imam who prays Fajr in lightness, and we saw many Hanafis among scholars and students and others waiting for their Imam so he can pray Fajr for them and they would not pray with the Imam of the Shafi'is while the Salah is occurring and Jam'ah present, and we have seen in them two (Jami Al-Azhar and Masjid Al-Husain) and in other than these two that many Jama'at are occurring at the same time, and all of them are sinners while they believe they do good, rather we heard that this evil was occurring in the Haram of Makkah, and that four Imams were praying there, that they would claim to the four Mazahib, but we did not see such as we did not reach this era in Makkah, we only performed Hajj during the era of King AbdulAziz ibn AbdirRahman Aal Su'ud, may Allah protect him, and we heard that he terminated this innovation and gathered the people in the Haram behind one regular Imam, may Allah give Tawfeeq to scholars of Islam to terminate this innovation in all Masajid in different countries, by the Grace of Allah and His help, and He answers invocation"
Is reciting Quran an obligation in Khutbah?
Allamah Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan on reciting Quran in Khutbah or Salah and Salam not being a condition for validity of Khutabh as specified by some Mazahib. He wrote in "Daleel At-Talib" p 374-375 as quoted in Fatawa Hafiz Abdullah Ghazipuri p 261:
"Know that the legislated Khutbah is what comprises exhortation (Targheeb) to people and frightening them (tarheeb). This is the in reality the soul of the Khutbah for which it was legislated. As for putting as conditions Al-Hamd wa Salah upon the Messenger of Allah (saw) or reading something from the Quran, most of it is kharij from what is greatly intended behind the legislation of the Khutbah, and its occurrence in his (saw) Khutbah does not mean it is what is intended as a requisite or a necessary condition"
Repeating salah Jumuah in a Masjid for late comers
Hafiz Abdullah Ghazipuri was asked about a market Masjid which is not Jami Masjid but if enough people gather, they pray Jumuah there. Once 11 Ahle Hadith came late and Ahnaf already finished Jumuah, so one of 11 Ahle Hadith late comers gave khutbah and they prayed Jumuah after, is it correct?
The shaykh replied as in his Fatawa p 250:
"There is no relied upon condition missing in the situation asked about, so I don’t see any evidence to declare Salah Jumuah invalid, whoever claims contrary, bringing an evidence is upon him. Yes one should not do such on purpose rather people in a city should pray Jumuah in one place as it was the practice from era of Prophet saw to third century to have single congregation for Jumuah prayer in a city and it was not the practice to pray Jumuah in different places, see at Talkhis al Habeer p 33, as it became practice after and is continuing up to now"
Praying Ghaibana Janazah
Shaykh Mahmood Ahmed Mirpuri said about Ghaibana Janazah, as in his Fatawa Sirat e Msutaqeem p 160:
"Scholars have different opinions about praying in the absence of the dead body. According to Imam Shafi'i and Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal, as well as some other scholars, it is permissible and acceptable to pray Ghaibana Janazah. But some scholars of the Hanafi school of thought do not approve of this.
In support of the first opinion, Imam Ibn Hazm said that none of the companions disapproved of this practice. Those who support this have evidence in a Hadith narrated by Jabir that the Prophet (saw) prayed Ghaibana Janazah for the King Najashi, Ashama, who died in Ethiopia. The Prophet (saw) said the Takbeer four times and he announced to the companions that today, a good person in Ethiopia had passed away, so come and pray for him. The companion say that theu made rows and prayed Ghaibana Janazah behind the Prophet (saw) (Bukhari and Muslim)
This statement shows that praying a funeral in the absence of the dead body is a recognised practice. However it depends on the necessity.
Ghaibana Janazah was also offered for a famous scholar, Imam ibn Taymiyah. When he passed away his funeral was offered in many places, even in Yemen and China. In China, it was announced that the funeral for Imam Ibn Taymiyah shall be held at a certain time.
Some other famous personalities whose funerals were offered in many places inclide, Sheikh Hasan Al-Banna of Egypt, King Faisal of Saudi Arabia, Abul Kalam Azad of India, Ehsan Ilahi Zaheer of Pakistan"
Praying more than 8 Rak’at in Tarawih as Nafl
Shaykh Nazeer Ahmad Rehmani wrote in "Anwar Al-Masabeeh bi Jawab Rak'at At-Taraweeh" p 54 , which is a reply to Shaykh Habib Ar-Rahman A'zami's "Rak'at At-Taraweeh" about the opinion of Imam Muhammad ibn Ali Ash-Shawkani:
"Yes we can say that he (Imam Shawkani) denied "Qasr" or "Hasr" (limitation) to a particular number, meaning he acknowledged 8 Rak'at as the Prophetic action but to restrict to 8 and to say that one cannot pray more as Nafl, then he (Imam Shawkani) does not consider it as correct.
Who denies such? Which Ahl e Hadith said that one cannot pray more than 8 Rak'at Tarawih as Nafl, the dispute is not about praying more or less, the dispute is what is proven from the action of the Prophet (saw). So this statement of Imam Shawkani is definitely not against the Ahl e Hadith Maslak, as molana Maowi (Habib Ar-Rahman A'zami) was presuming happily or wanted to presume, rather THIS IS THE AHL E HADITH MAZHAB"
Praying Tarawih at home or in Masjid?
Hafiz Abdul Mannan Nurpuri was asked: "Is it better to pray Taraweeh at home or in a Masjid?"
He replied in his Fatawa v 2 p 298: "Praying at home is better, yes but praying Taraweeh in Jamaat is better than praying alone, and praying it in last night is better than in first night, and if someone prays in last part of the night at home with a Jama'at, he will combine the 3 virtues"
Does masturbation or voluntary ejaculation by touching wife break fasting?
Sh Albani wrote in his "Tamam Al-Minnah" notes on Fiqh As-Sunnah:
"His (Sayid Sabiq) saying: masturbation (expelling sperm) whether caused by the person kissing his wife or joining to her (touching) or with hand, this makes fasting void and makes Qadha obligatory"
I say: There is no evidence in declaring it void with this and grouping this with jima' (coitus) is not apparent and this is why As-Sanani said: "The most apparent is that there is no Qadha or Kafarah except upon on having Jima', and joining the one not having coitus to him is far removed."
And towards this leaned Ash-Shawkani and this is the Madhab of ibn Hazm see "Al-Muhalla) 6 175, 177 and 205.”
Fasting on Saturday:
Imam Ash-Shawkani wrote in "Nayl Al-Awtar" about the Hadith narrated by al-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawood (2421) and Ibn Maajah (1726) from ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Busr, from his sister, that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:
“Do not fast on Saturdays apart from days when you are obliged to fast. If any one of you cannot find anything other than grape stalks or the twigs of a tree, let him chew it (to make sure that he is not fasting).” Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in al-Irwa’ (960). Abu ‘Eesa al-Tirmidhi said: This is a hasan hadeeth. What is makrooh in this case is for a man to single out Saturday for fasting, because the Jews venerate Saturday. (Hadith copy pasted from islam-qa)
Imam Shawkani, the Mujaddid of his era, wrote:
"An-Nasai, Al-Bayhaqi, ibn Hibban, and Al-Hakim narrated from Kuraib that some people among the companions of the Prophet (saw) send him to Umm Salamah to ask her about the days that the Messenger of Allah (saw) was fasting the most, so she said: "Saturday and Sunday", so I returned to them and it is as if they denied it, so they went all to her and asked her, and she said: "He is right and he would say: "These are the Eed of the Mushrikin and I want top oppose them", and Al-Hakim declared its Isnad authentic, and also Ibn Khuzaymah.
(Sh Subhi Hallaq commented: in his Sahih 2167 with a weak Isnad. I say: narrated by Ahmad 6/323-324 and Tabarani in Al-Kabeer v 23 n 616, 964, and the Hadith, its Isnad is Hasan, Allah knows best)
And At-Tirmizi narrated…
The author of Al-Badr Al-Muneer combined between these Ahadith, he said: "The forbiddance is about singularsing it (on Saturday) and the fasting is about joining a day before or after"
And this is strengthened by what has preceded before, his permission for the one who fasts on Friday to fast Saturday after it, and gathering (Jam') whenever possible is better than abrogation"
End of Imam Shawkani speech.
Sh Subhi Hallaq wrote in note that At-Tirmizi, Ibn Khuzaymah, ibn Hibban, Al-Baghawi and others all combined between these Ahadith in this manner, that what is forbidden is to fast on its own, not when joined with a day before or after.
Ibn Khuzaymah headed a chapter: "Evidence of forbiddance of fasting on Saturday as a voluntarily fast when he singularises (Saturday) for fasting…
Then he headed a chapter: "Rukhsah on Saturday when one fasts on Sunday after it" and he mentioned the Hadith of Umm Salamah above.
Ibn Hibban said: "Mention of Zajar of fasting Saturday singulalry"
Then he headed a chapter: "Mention of the reason because of which it was forbidden to fast on Saturday with the expose that if one joins a day after, its fasting is permissible"
Al-Baghawi wrote in "Sharh As-Sunnah" "chapter on Karahah of fasting on Saturday alone"
Al-Bayhaqi said in Sunnan Kubra: "Chapter about what is narrated from forbiddance to particularize Saturday with fasting"
Note: Imam Shawkani mentioned before that for Imam Abu Dawud the Hadith forbidding to fast on Saturday is abrogated, and for Imam Malik it is Mudhtarab (weak due to contradiction) but he favoured to join them following Ibn Mulaqqin, the author of Al-Badr Al-Muneer.which is the strongest to me as well.
Fasting of Ashura has been shifted to 9th
Hafiz Abdul Mannan An-Nurpuri (rah) wrote as quoted in his “Ahkam Masail” v 1 p 285 that fasting of Ashura has been changed to 9th of Muharram:
“It is narrated in Sahih Muslim that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said that if he remains alive the next year, he will fast on the 9th (of Muharram), so if anyone wants to fast only one day for Ashura, he should fast on the 9th and not 10th as the Prophet (saw) changed the date of 10th to 9th. Allah knows best” End of Hafiz An-Nurpuri’s words
The Hadith is reported in Sahih Muslim, Eng tran. v 3 p 206, Book of Fasting, chapter 20, Which day should be fasted for Ashura? N 2667: “It was narrated that ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them) said: “The Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “If I live until next year, I will certainly fast on the ninth day”
He also wrote as on p 286 of the same vol.:
“The Fatwa of ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas of fasting on the 9th (of Muharram) is according to Marfu’ Hadith, rather the words of the Hadith in Sahih Muslim is a clear Nass that he gave the Fatwa of the 9th based on a Marfu’ Hadith, while his Fatwa for fasting on 9th and 10th, there is not Marfu’ Sahih Hadith supporting it, rather this Fatwa is opposing the Prophetic Hadith of the 9th, this is why his Fatwa of 9th is Rajih (preponderant).
So the Fatwa (of ibn ‘Abbas) of fasting on 9th is in “Sahih Muslim” and the Fatwa of fasting on the 9th and 10th is in “Musannaf AbdurRazzaq” and the Muhadiths have made in their principles of Tarjeeh (giving preponderance) that at time of contradiction, the Ahadith of Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim will have Tarjeeh over other books of Hadith, and this is why his Fatwa of 9th is Rajih.
And except the Fatawa of fasting on 9th, all others Fatawa are against the Marfu’ Sahih Hadith, and when a Fatwa opposes a Marfu’ Hadith, even if it is the narrator of the Hadith who gives such a Fatwa, then action will be according to the Marfu’ Hadith and not on the Fatwa, as there is no proof for anyone with the Prophet (saw) (La Hujjata li Ahadin ma’a Nadbi (saw)), and there is very good discussion on this topic in “Irshad Al-Fuhul” (of Imam Ash-Shawkani) and you can check it” End of Hafiz An-Nurpuri’s words
The Fatwa of ibn ‘Abbas of fasting on the 9th is in “Sahih Muslim” Eng tran. v 3 p 205, Book of Fasting, chapter 20, Which day should be fasted for Ashura? N 2664:
“It was narrated that Al-Hakam bin Al-A’raj said: “I came to ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them) while he was reclining on his Rida at Zamzam and said to him: “Tell me about the fast of Ashura.” He said: “When you see the crescent of Muharram, then count, and fast on the ninth day.” I said: “Is this how the Messenger of Allah (saw) used to fast it?” He said: “Yes””
Giving Zakat to scholars for Masalih of Muslims
Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan wrote in Rawdatu Nadiyah: As for Sabeelillah, the meaning here is the way towards him and Jihad, and though it is from greatest way to Allah, there is no evidence to restrict to this share, rather it is correct to spend to everything that is a way (Tareeq) to Allah"
Nawab sahib further wrote: "Among fi Sabeelillah is to spend on scholars who stand for the religious Masalih of Muslims, they have a share in the Maal, whether they are rich or poor, rather spending this way is from greatest of matters, as scholars are inheritors of Prophets, holders of Deen, by them purity of Islam and Shareeah of Saydil anaam are protected"
Giving Zakah for Da’wah and publication
Dr Luqman Salafi wrote in his Tafsir “Taysir Rahman”: “Similarly spending from the Zakah fund for publication of Dawah books and pamphlets is allowed, since all such pieces of work are done to keep the Word of Allah high”
Ruling on accidentally kissing daughter in law on lips
Question: I was so happy and exalted about the good behavior of my daughter in law that in this state of love ( Muhabat), I gave a hug to my daughter in law and a kiss on her lips. I swear by considering Allah present (with his knowledge) and seeing that there was no bad intention in my heart nor mixture. She is still today (like) my daughter and until death she will remain my daughter. Will the Nikah of my son have any influence with this action without will (ghayr ikhtyari).
Answer by Mufti Abder Khaliq, Darul Ifta, Jami’ah Ashrafiah, Lahore:
As you gave a kiss on the lips, in the asked situation there will be Musaharat forbiddance ( Meaning kissing does make the son or father of this man haram as if she did nikah with this man). The woman who was kissed, she will be forbidden to the son of the man. They can not stay together nor there is any kind of ruju’ (as in divorce) so the son should give her divorce and free her. The Fuqaha have affirmed that giving a kiss on the lips establishes forbiddance of Musaharat mutlaqan, even if the one who kissed claim he had no desire (Shahwat). End of his fatwa
Reaction of Shaykh Thanaullah Isa Khan Madni:
The fatwa of the Mufti of Jami’ah ashrafiah is subject of criticism. The Muhaqiq and Rajih position of Ahle Ilm is that even with desire, forbidance of Musaharat is not established. There is a hadith in Sunan Daraqtuni from Aishah : “The Haram does not make fasid the Halal”. And Imam Daraqutni with his sanad brought the marfu’ narration from ibn Umar : “ The haram does not make the halal haram.” About this sanad the author of Ta’liq Al Mughni ( Allamah Al Muhadith Shamsul Haqq Atheemabadee) : “ Its isnad is Aslahu (better) than that of Aishah”
And in Fath Al Bari ( 9, 156) : “Ibn Majah brought a part of the hadith of ibn Umar : “The haram does not make the halal haram” and its sanad is aslahu than the first”
In Sahih Bukhari under the chapter : “Women that are permissible ( for nikah) and women that forbidden”, there is a saying of ibn Abbas : “If one does zina with the sister of his wife, his wife is not forbidden”
Hafiz ibn Hajar affirmed it is the position of Jumhoor, he said in Fath Al Bari: “ Jumhur denied (that forbiddance is established with zina) and their prove is that the nikah in the Law is considered as what is done with ‘aqd (contract), not what is done with intercourse, and also there is no Mahr nor ‘Iddah nor inheritance. Ibn Abdil Barr said: “The people of fatwa in different countries agreed that it is not forbidden for the zani to do nikah with the one he did zina, so the nikah of her mother and daughter is much more permissible” ( 9 : 157)
So forbiddance with touching without desire should be much more not established. This is why the father kissing daughter in law on her lips does not establish forbiddance of Musaharat. What is strange is that he gives fatwa of forbiddance Musaharat and on the other hand he gives hukm of giving her talaq. According to their words, if she has become a muharam, what is the meaning of giving divorce ? The claim of Mufti Sahib that giving a kiss on lips established forbiddance of Musaharat is without daleel, there is no Asl to that.
I hope the described person will leave the Ta’asub of taqleed and will correct his fatwa.”
Wiping the face after invocation
Hafiz Zubair Ali Zai on wiping the hands on the face after Du'a, he wrote in "Hadiyatul Muslimeen" p 58 under the chapter "Wiping the face in invocation":
"Imam Bukhari said: "Ibrahim ibnul Munzir narrated to us, he said Muhammad ibn Faleeh said, my father informed me from Abu Naeem and he is Wahb, he said: "I saw ibn Umar and ibn Az-zubayr invoking and wiping their hands on their face"
(“Al-Adab Al-Mufrad” of Al-Bukhari p 214, 609, bab 276)
The chain of narration of this narration is Hasan and some people's jarh is rejected.”
Shaykh Ubaydullah Mubarakpuri was asked about ruling of playing football and whether it falls into imitating disbelievers, and he replied as in his "Fatawa" v 1 p 154:
"First it is appropriate to explain this Hadith, by which the side which forbids Football to Muslims takes as evidence. Allamah Ameer Yamani said in "Subul Salam" v 4 p 273: in the explanation of the Hadith "Whoever resembles a people is among them":
"This Hadith indicates that whoever imitates perverts (Fusaq) is among them, or disbelievers or innovators IN ANYTHING IN WHICH THEY ARE PARTICULAR IN FROM CLOTH, RIDING OR FORMS (HAY'AH)" (End of sh Yamani quote)
Now if the matter is among Shi'ar (sign, emblem, logo) of non Muslim people or a sign of perversion and corruption, then it is Haram by the Sharee'ah and not permissible.
And if the matter is only a sign of non Muslim national or country's sign, then adopting it is harmful and against Maslalah (benefit) from the point of view of politics and civilization, as each country, Qawm, community, Mazhab, culture, and civilization have such characteristics which distinguish it form others and this Qawm and culture is attached to these specific particularities. Hence the Muslim should avoid non Muslim country and national distinguished particularities and Shi'ar.
But if the matter is not among their essential particularities then THERE IS NO HARM OR PROBLEM IN CHOOSING IT, AND THIS IS NOT COUNTED AMONG BLAMED IMITATION.
Now we have to look at the status of Football, and it is evident that this game is not a religious or Mazhabi sign of British, so one cannot declare it non permissible and forbidden from the religious point of view.
And it is an open reality that this game is not a Shi'ar of British Qawm or civilization, rather it is merely a form or training and bodily Riazat which they have adopted, like in our country different types of body training are frequent and only adopted by us (in India). So like we have in our countries activities and training forms to refresh the body and maintain health and strength and improve it such as Banott, Dor, Gulli Bala, Kushti, Kaloch andazi and others. And there is no doubt in them being Mubah and permissible, so likewise any game which has the same purpose is permissible and Mubah, though its creator is English, France, Germany, Italy, America, China, Japan…"
Dying on Friday night
Hafiz Thanaullah Madni weakens the Hadith in Sunnan Tirmizi: "There is no Muslim who dies on the day of Friday or night of Friday except that Allah protects him from the trial of the grave"
Hafiz Thanaullah Madni wrote in his Fatawa v 1 p 245:
" Sharih Tirmizi Allamah (AbdurRahman) Mubarakpuri wrote: "The Hadith is weak because of Inqita but it has Shawahid", then he quoted from Allamah Suyuti some narrations and Shawahid quoted in "Mirqat (Tuhfatul Ahwazi 4/188) but in all consideration these narrations being authentic or able to be authentic seems doubtful"
Hafiz Thanaullah Madni wrote after:
"But it reaching the level of being a Hujjah and taking as evidence is a difficult matter. And it is an agreed matter that Nabi Akram (saw) passed on a Monday and Abu Bakr also in his death illness wished this (ie die on a Monday) and Imam Bukhari headed a chapter as thus: "Bab dying on a Monday" (Sahih Bukhari, Kitab Janaiz Bab 94). The explanators (of Bukhari) wrote that the aim of the author was to weaken the Hadith about the virtue of dying on a Friday. And in reality the day chosen and preferred by Allah for the death of the last of Prophets, this one should be more virtuous and better. And based upon this the first Caliph Abu Bakr (Rad) wished to die on this day. This is what is with us and Allah knows better"
Barakah of reading Sahih Bukhari
Shaykh AbdurRaoof Khan Rehmani Jandgarhi Nepali wrote in his "Nusratul Bayan fi Bayan Sihati Al-Bukhari" p 236 about the Barakah obtained through reading Sahih Bukhari, summarised below
1) Imam Abu Muhammad ibn Abi Hamzah wrote after mentioning comments of many Arifeen:
"Sahih Al-Bukhari is not read at times of difficulty except that I found relief, and no mount or ship is climbed except that it will reach safely"
(Muqadimah Fathul Bari, Irshadus Sari, Ittihaf, Taysir Al-Qari)
2) Hafiz ibn Katheer wrote:
"Reading Sahih Al-Bukhari brings end of drought years and in Istisqa, the Barakah brought in completing it brings rain"
(Irshadus Sari, Bidayah wa Nihayah)
3) Allamah Qayrati wrote:
"It is the one read at times of difficulties
You will see it removing hardship for the one in difficulty"
Hafiz Sakhawi also mentioned experiences and stories of saints after completing Sahih Bukhari (Fath Al-Mughith)
4) Muhadith Meer Jamaludin quoted from his teacher Aseeludin that he completed Sahih Al-Bukhari 120 times for 120 different reasons, and whenever he read it for a reason, he obtained it, sometimes he read it for himself and sometimes for others" (Ittihaf An-Nubala)
5) Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan mentions in Ittihaf Nubala p 361 that at time of Hafiz ibn Daqeeq Eeed, Tatars brought lots of destruction, so the ruler of Shaam ordered to scholars to gather and complete the reading of Sahih Bukhari and Haifz ibn Daqeeq Eed mentioned that their Fitnah ended before even completing it
6) Shaykh Abdul Haq Muhadith Delhawi wrote that many scholars read Sahih Bukhari to remove difficulties and illnesses and they were successful in it
7) When Greece attacked Turkiya, Mustafa Kamal Pasha instructed Shaykh Sanusi to complete the reading of Sahih Bukhari and before its completion, Turkey was granted victory
8) Shaykh Jendaghari said his teacher and Murshid Shaykh AbdurRahman Mubarakpuri acknowledged the Barakah of completing Sahih Bukhari in the introduction of "Tuhfatul Ahwazi"
9) Shaykh Ahmadullah Parthabghari Delhawi (student of Mian Nazeer Husayn Dehlawi) would complete Sahih Bukhari when facing difficulties, he himself would read and would give some parts to his students to read as well, including his student sh AbdurRauf Jendaghari
Ruling on Qawwali
Shaykh Mahmood Ahmed Mirpuri wrote as in his "Fatawa Sirat e Mustaqeem" o 273 about Qawwali and Na't:
"Na't (poem describing the Prophet (saw)) are not prohibited. Similarly Qawwali (folk songs) are also allowed with the following conditions:
i) they should not contain any material against Islamic belief
ii) they should be without music
iii) they should not be sung by females
We can easily find na't fitting these conditions, but it is hard to find a Qawwali that fits the criteria. Generally they contain Bid'ah and unislamic materials.”
Putting feet towards the Qiblah
Hafiz Thanaullah Isa Khan Madni was asked: "Is it permissible to lay down with the feet or sleep with the feet towards the Qiblah?"
He replied as in his "Fatawa" v 1 p 194: "This is permissible, it has not been declared forbidden in any Hadith"
He replied to a similar question on p 196-197: "Whether the sleeping person is in the room or outside, no hadith forbids putting the feet towards the Qiblah, though natural respect shows that one should avoid putting feet towards the Qiblah. The noble Quran states: "Whoever respects the Sha'air of Allah, this is from the Taqwa of hearts" (Al-Hajj: 32)"
Can anyone be a caller to Islam?
Hafiz Thanaullah Madni was asked: "Can every member of Ummah Muhammadiyah be a Mubaligh (preacher) and are there some conditions?" and he replied as in his Fatawa v 1 p 220:
"Every member of Ummah Muhammadiyah can be a mubaligh on the condition that he is aware of the related topic. It is mentioned in the noble Quran: "Say this is my way, I call to Allah upon Baseerah, me and those who follow me" (Yusuf: 108), and it is mentioned in Hadith: "Transmit from me even if it was a verse"
Is Dawah an obligation on every Muslim ?
Shaykh Mufti Ubaydullah Khan Afeef was asked: "Is Tabligh (Dawah) an obligation on every Muslim? What conditions does Islam set for it?"
He replied in His Fatawa v 1 p 294: "Every individual of the Muhammadiyah Ummah, not only he is Shar'an capable of, rather he has been charged with it (made Mukallaf).
1) In the Quran: "Say (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم): "This is my way; I invite unto Allah with sure knowledge, I and whosoever follows me" (Yusuf: 108)
This noble verse established clearly that every person of the Ummah is capable of Tabligh, on the condition that he is aware of the related topic, and without any condition or particularization (shart wa Qayid), he can do Tabligh in every country and in every condition.
2) "You are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind; you enjoin Al-Ma'ruf and forbid Al-Munkar, and you believe in Allah" (Aal Imran 110)
If you ponder on this verse time after time, do you see any condition or particularization which can make exception that so and so cannot do Tabligh and so and so cannot do it? Rather enjoining good and forbidding evil is such an obligation that because of negligence in it a group among the children of Israel was cursed:
3) "Those among the Children of Israel who disbelieved were cursed by the tongue of Dawud (David) and 'Îsa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary). That was because they disobeyed and were ever transgressing beyond bounds. They used not to forbid one another from Al-Munkar which they committed. Vile indeed was what they used to do." (Al-Maidah 78-79)
4) "Thus We have made you a just (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger (Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم) be a witness over you" (Al-Baqarah 143)
And to be a witness the order to embody truth and justice in individual and communal life is given in the following verses:
5) "O you who believe! Stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah" (An-Nisa 135)
6) "O you who believe! Stand out firmly for Allah as just witnesses" (al-Maidah 8)
And remaining steadfast upon witnessing the truth and justice is emphasized in His speech:
"By Al-'Asr (the time). Verily, man is in loss, Except those who believe and do righteous good deeds, and recommend one another to the truth, and recommend one another to patience." (Al-Asr 1-3)
The topic of this great Surah shows clearly and clarifies that to be saved from loss in hereafter, like every human needs to have faith in Allah and do good, likewise every individual who has faith and walks on the straight path, the obligation to advise others to remain steadfast has been added for him, and this obligation is told in such a manner that except someone under necessity or excused, there is no indication to any condition, particularization, exception.
This is why Da'wah and Tabligh is obligatory upon every Muslim according to his capacity, in whichever country he resides in…”
Saying first “Good morning” or “Good evening” to disbelievers
Imam Bukhari narrated in his "Al-Adab Al-Mufrad", chapter 541: A person greeting the Dhimmi with a gesture,
Alqamah said: "Abdullah used to greet the Persian grandees with a gesture" (authentic)
Commentary: Imam Al-Albanee deduced from this narration that one could initiate greeting a non-Muslim first with other known forms of greeting such as "good morning", "how are you" and similar others, See Silsilat Al-Ahadeeth is Saheehah (2/320)
Source: Eng tran p 721, edition dakwah corner with commetaries of Ibrahim AbdurRauf taken from Albani, Awaishah, Zuhairee and Luqman Salafee.
Sh Albani wrote on v 2 p 320: "If it is said: "is it permissible to start with other than Salam, like his saying: "How did you spent morning or night? or "How are you?". I say: what appears to me, Allah knows best, is that it is permissible, because the prohibition mentioned in the Hadith is only about "Salam", which only means when mention absolutely the Islamic Salam which contains the name of Allah, Azza wa Jalla, as in his saying: "As-Salam is a name from the names of Allah that he put on the earth, so spread the Salam between you", narrated by Bukhari in Al-Adab Al-Mufrad, 989, and it has preceded n 184 (in Silsilah)…and what straightens this is the saying of Alqamah… So ibn Masood allowed starting Salam with a gesture, because this Salam (with gesture) is not particular with Muslims…as for what is mentioned in some Hanbalis books, like "Ad-Daleel" that it is forbidden as well to start with words: "How did you spend night or evening" or "How are you", I do not know any evidence for it in the Sunnah, and it is clearly affirmed in "Manar As-Sabeel" that it is done by analogy to the Salam (saying Salam aleykum, which is forbidden to start to disbelievers, only reply is allowed)"
Ruling on making Jam’iyah, Tanzeem
Hafiz Thanaullah Madni was asked about different organisations in Pakistan, Markazi Jamiat Ahl e Hadith, Jamiat Ahl e Hadith, Ghurab Ahl e Hadith, Ishaat Tawheed and Sunnah (of sh Rustami) and others, about Tanzeem Sazi (establishing an organisation), their Shar'i ruling, the status of their Ameer and is it better to revive Islam individually or by joining one of these Tanzeem.
He replied in vol 1 of his "Fatawa Thaniyah Madniyah" p 773-774:
"1) There is no problem Shar'an in Jama'at Bandi and Tanzeem Sazi in different names, with the condition that the Da'wah is to Allah and there is service to the religion in any kind of form. Naming does not make any difference.
It is narrated in "Sahih Bukhari that the Prophet (saw)": "Wrote to me the names of those who accepted Islam, so we wrote the names of 1500 people". This Hadith is an evidence for Tanzeem Sazi.
2) The status of the Ameer of the Jama'aat and Tanzeem is the status of the Ameer in travel, not the status of "Ameer Al-Mumineen" where he can apply the SHariah in his limits.
3) To revive Islamic …, instead of doing individual efforts, it is better to join the Tanzeem that one believes to be closest to the truth.
It is well known that one and one makes eleven (ek or ek Ghiayran).”
Ruling on voting and entering parliament
Hafiz Thanaullah Madni wrote in his Fatawa Thaniyah Madniyah v 1 p 634 about voting in Pakistan:
"Considering Religious benefits, we consider it appropriate to vote for the party or the person which is closer and more sympathetic to Islam"
He wrote on p 636: ""When there is a religious person or someone who likes Islam against someone far from Religion or secular, then not voting at this time is not only wasting vote but indirectly giving advantage to people far away from religion"
About entering parliament, he allowed it on p 634 : "To participate in an Kafir or unjust system or to do Ta'awun, there is no difference between the two. The real aim is to do good and opportunities to reach it. In Islam Wasail follow Maqasid"
Ruling on Rallies
Shaykh Mahmood Ahmed Mirpuri (rah was asked about participation in demonstrations in UK against oppression against Muslims such as Palestine and others, and he replied, as in "Islamic verdicts, Fatawa Sirat e Mustaqeem", published by Darussalam p 303:
"It is the basic duty of Muslims, according to the Shari'ah, to help and support other Muslims. This help can be in different ways according to needs, ie financial, moral, ect. To stop aggression on Muslims, or any other human being, is our responsibility. To show your sympathy and support to the victims of cruelty, different channels may be used including demonstrations, picketing and rallies. These sometimes have impact on others and gain the attention, and perhaps support. It develops a pressure on governing bodies. So it depends on your intention and purpose. However if you organize something which the Muslims are disunited upon, then it may turn you against you as a disadvantage rather than benefits"
Shaykh Muhammad ibn AbdilWahab
Allamah Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan wrote in AtTaj wal Mukallal p 334:
"Some people believe that Sahib (ruler) of Najd upholds Khariji beliefs, but I do not believe it to be correct as these people follow the way of Muhammad ibn AbdilWahab and he was from Hanbali Mazhab, he learned Hadith from Shuyukh of Madeenah and returned to Najd where he acted upon the Ijthadat of late Hanbalis scholars such as ibn Taymiyah, ibnul Qayim and others, and these people were among most severe against innovators"
As quoted in "Shaykh Muhammad ibn AbdilWahab ke bare mein do Mutadhad Nazrie" of Shaykh Mahfooz Ar-Rahman Faizi.