Quick Links to Particular Points:

The Prophet ﷺ is alive
Unity with Deviants & Ikthilaaf from Ala Hazrat
Is Maslak e Ala Hazrat only pertaining to Aqaaid?
Refuting the usage of TV/Video
Who is qualified to differ in opinion?

Now what should I say? Mawlana Shu’ayb has spoken very well about Maslak e A’la Hazrat, and A’la Hazrat and Huzur Mufti e Azam e Hind, Huzur Hujjatul Islam, and the predecessors from the family of A’la Hazrat, particularly in regard to Maslak e A’la Hazrat. Take away from it what he said about me. I am nothing, and I say no-one is anything; whatever we are, it is due to following Imam e Ahl e Sunnat wa Jama’at and our dignity and respect is due to steadfastness upon his Maslak. If this does not exist, then there is nothing. And everyone’s links are fixed with A’la Hazrat’s links. And they are themselves attached to Ghawth e A’zam and the Messenger of Allāh ﷺ. He himself has stated:

بے نشانوں کا نشان مٹتا نہیں
مٹتے مٹتے نام ہو ہی جائیگا

The sign of those without a sign does not perish
While perishing, their name will be made 

And what is Maslak e A’la Hazrat? What is the way of the people of Bareilly? Wanting Haqq, speaking Haqq, standing firm upon Haqq, staying firm on Haqq, and walking upon Haqq and preaching to others to walk upon what is Haqq. And there is no concession for anyone concerning matters of Haqq. This is the way of Bareilly.

انبیا کو بهی اجل آنی ہے
مگر ایسی کہ فقط آنی ہے

Death will come to Prophets too
But such that is only momentary

Allāh ﷻ give us all the tawfeeq of justice, and that we are just upon ourselves, and we recognise Haqq and we stay firm on Haqq, and we do not talk about erroneous ikhtilaf. A lot of people in the time of A’la Hazrat were knowledgeable. Never did they bring up such words that ikhtilaf with A’la Hazrat can be done. After them, I see today that even five or ten years ago, this voice was not present. Now there are new motives for people who wish to further their desires, people talk about doing ikhtilaf. Allāh ﷻ grant us all tawfeeq and keep us firm on Maslak e Ahl e Sunnat wa Jama’at, which is called Maslak e A’la Hazrat for recognition.

وآخر دعوانا ان الحمد لله رب العالمين

Janasheen e Mufti e Azam, Qazi ul Quzzat Fil Hind Taajush Shari'ah Huzur Allamah Mufti Akhtar Rida Khan al-Azhari

Translated by Neesarahmed Amjadi

From Fatawa Ridawiyyah, volume-27, page-42

Question: What do the scholars of the religion say with regards to the following issue, that a grimly event is going to occur on the Jumu`ah of Ramadhān ul-Mubārak which has been attributed to you by certain people, i.e., Mawlawī Sāhib has stated that a dreadful noise will be heard on the night of Jumu`ah. Explain (the matter) and gain reward. 

Answer: It will occur. But it was never said that it will occur during this Ramadhān. When it occurs, it will be the fifteenth of Ramadhān which will also be a Friday. Earthquakes will be rampant during that year. Graupel will fall in huge quantity. There will be a huge blast on the fifteenth night of Ramadhān that will also be a Friday night. A loud screech will be heard after the Fajr prayer. It is advised in Hadīth, “Offer the Fajr prayer, enter your houses and shut the doors. Shut all the window panes in the house. Shut your ears and as soon as you hear the noise, fall into prostration and say: سبحن القدوس سبحن القدوس ربنا القدوس (Glory be to the Most Holy! Glory be to the Most Holy! Our Lord is Most Holy). The one who does so will attain salvation and the one who does not do so will be destroyed.” [Musnad ush-Shāshī, Hadīth #837, Maktabat ul-`Ulūm wa al-Hakīm, al-Madīnat ul-Munawwarah]. This is what is contained in the Hadīth. There is no specific mention in it in what year it will occur. Several Ramadhans have passed whose first day was Jumu`ah and Allāh willing there will be many such in the future. The tidings have been given and its occurrence is sure, whenever it is destined. We should always fear Allāh and have hope in Him. And Allāh knows best!

(Translated by Najibullah Qadiri)

Question: What is the ruling of the learned Ulama in this case: A few people are seated in one place together and a person came to them and said, “As Salaamu Alaikum” In Answer the replied “Adaab Arz” or “Tasleemat” or “Bandagi” or one person raised his hand up to his forehead and did not answer anything verbally. Now, did the person fulfill the Fard-e-Kifaayah or not?

The Answer: No (The obligation was not fulfilled) and all of them are sinful until any one of them does not say Wa Alaikumus salaam or Wa alaik or As salaamu Alaikum. The words mentioned above, such as bandagi, tasleemaat, Adaab etc. are not words of salaam. Just to raise the hand is meaningless unless the words of salaam are mentioned with it. It is in Raddul Muhtaar from Zaheeriyah as follows: “The words of salaam in all places is “As Salaamu Alaikum” or saying it with the tanween and with the exception of this, all the other ways of the ignorant is not regarded as salaam.”

I say that the reply will not be fulfilled, since the answer to salaam will be salaam alone or with extra words of salaam such as mention of mercy and blessings, and this is on the basis of the command of Allah, ‘When salaam is being conveyed to you with salaam, then you too reply to the salaam with a good salaam or return the same’ It must be noted that this manner that has been adopted, be it words or signs, then they will either be regarded as salaam or not. In the second case (if it is not salaam), then one will not be relieved from the responsibility of replying to the salaam. In the first instance, this new way that has been adopted is neither salaam and not is it better than salaam for that which has been newly established cannot be better than what has been mentioned in the Sharia and the responsibility of fulfilling the Waajib-e-Kifaayah (that which was compulsory upon every one of them).

It is in Mirkaat Shareef as follows: “It has been proven correctly from Hadith-e-Mutawaatira that to make salaam with words (verbally) is sunnat and the reply is waajib in the same manner (verbally).”

It is in the Hadith Shareef that the Holy Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam said, “He is not from us, who imitates others. Do not imitate the jews or the Christians for the greeting of jew is by raising the finger and the greeting of the of the Christian is by raising the palm of the hand.” This has been narrated by Tirmizi from Abdullah ibn Umar (radi Allahu anhu) and he has also said that the narration is Daeef. Allama Ali Qaari says that this has been mentioned possibly due to research based on narration of Amr bin Shuaib on the authority of his father who narrated from his grandfather and it is true that there has been difference of opinion regarding this before, but the thing to have confidence in here, is that this is actually a Hassan narration. This is especially since Suyuti has narrated this Hadith in Jaame Sagheer from Ibn Amar thus the difference of opinion has ended and the difficulty has been alleviated.

I say, ‘May Allah have mercy on Ali Qaari. Suyuti has given the reference of this Hadith to be Tirmizi thus the situation has been corrected and the issue has been resolved. Thus, there is no real weakness in Tirmizi as has been assumed, for the majority of the Ulama including Tirmizi have quoted the narration of Amar bin Shu’aib from his father who narrated from his grandfather that clearly the Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) said. “Disapproval is permissible”. The reason that the narration is said to be of weak transmission is because the narration is from Ibn Lahi’a. Tirmizi says, ‘Qutaiba bin Lahi’a narrated a Hadith to me from Amar bin Shu’aib who narrated from his father who narrated from his grandfather that verily the Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) said (as per Hadith). Tirmizi said that the transmission of this Hadith is weak and still narrated it.

Ibn Mubaarak narrated this Hadith from Ibn Lahi’a and he did not remove it. And it is evident that in the book of Nikah under the topic regarding that person who marries a woman and then gives her talaaq before he is intimate with her (Makes Dukhool). The Hadith being mentioned has thus been narrated with the same merits. This Hadith is not Sahih Hadith. Ibn Lahi’a’s Hadith has been made Daeef and due to this, in numerous other places it has been regarded as Daeef (weak chain of transmission). It is towards this which we are being pointed here. Yes, it is clear according to me, that the Hadith if ibn Lahi’a is not less meritorious than a Hassan narration and Munaawi has stated this narration in Tayseer as being Hassan. Thus, if with raising the hand etc. the words of salaam were also mentioned, then it would have been regarded as salaam. Tirmizi narrated a Hadith. He says that Suwaid narrated a Hadith to me. From him, Abdullah ibn Mubaarak reported, from him, Abdul Hamid Bahraam. It is evident that he heard from Shahr bin Khushab, he says, that he heard Asma bint yazeed narrate this Hadith that verily Rasoolullah (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) one day passed by the Musjid and a group of females were seated there. He (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) greeted them by using his hand.” Abdul Hameed did so with his hand (to show how it was done). This Hadith is regarded as Hassan. Hazrat Imam Nawawi says that this Hadith is applicable based on this, that the Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) combined both the use of the hand and words (of salaam) and the proof of this, is the narration of Abu Dawood and in this narration (of Abu Dawood), it has been mentioned that they replied to the salaam of Nabi (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam).

After presenting this narration, Allama Ali Qaari has mentioned that there is no objection even if the words of salaam were not present, since it is not necessary according to sharia to say salaams (aloud) to females when passing by them. As for the issue of the Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) making salaam, then, this is from amongst the unique attributes of the Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam). Thus, he was blessed with the right to either make salaam or not to make salaam or he could show a sign (by use of the hand) or not (in other words it was as he pleased). It must be also noted that in some cases, by raising the hand does not necessarily mean that one is intending salaam, but it can be done as an action of humility as well.

I (Aala Hazrat) say, that the crux of all that has been mentioned, is this that the salaam was not really fulfilled and there is no difference in their first statement and in that which was mentioned afterwards except that there has been an issue of the showing of a sign that was mentioned. In other words, the issue of humility being mentioned and the testimony of Hazrat Asma (radi Allahu anha) that the Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) that the Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) conveyed salaams. Now, if we do not accept that this was combined with verbal salaam, then one will have to accept that just by showing the sign is salaam and it is also a fact that just by making a sign is not regarded as salaam in the Sharia. It is thus compulsory to accept about what is mentioned above, in other words there was a combination of salaam and the sign (for the hand raising). Ponder upon it, possibly there is such a bearing in his statement that I am not able to understand it. And Almighty Allah has complete knowledge of all things.

كتبه عبده المذنب احمد رضا عفى عنه

بمحمّد 

What do the learned ‘Úlamā of Islam state in the following case whether it is permissible in the light of Sharī’á, to kiss the nails upon hearing the blessed name of the beloved Prophet śallAllāhu álayhi wa âlihi wa sahbihī wa sallam in the Ad’hān and Khutba? Bayyinu Tujiru

Answer:

The blessed ‘Úlamā have declared that to kiss the nails and brandish them over the eyes upon hearing the blessed name of the beloved Prophet śallAllāhu álayhi wa âlihi wa sahbihī wa sallam during the Adh’ān [call to prayer] is Mustaḥab[preferred]. However, one should not do such [kiss the nails] for the duration of the Khutba, as the ḥukm [of Sharī’á law] is of silence.

It is stated in [Ibn Abidīn’s] Radd al-Muḥtār:

It is Mustaḥab during the Adh’ān that upon hearing [the muaddhin] proclaim ‘Ash-hadu Anna Muḥammadar Rasūlullāh’ the first time, [one should] reply with ‘śallAllāhu álayka Ya RasūlAllāh’ and upon hearing it the second time to declare, ‘Qurratu ‘Aynī Bika Yā RasūlAllāh’, that is to say, ‘You are the coolness of my eyes [Ya] O Messenger of Allah.’ Thereafter, one should say,’ O Allah bless me with good hearing and good eyesight’, this should be said after brandishing the thumbs over the eyes. The beloved Prophet śallAllāhu álayhi wa sallam will lead one into Jannah who does so. The same has been mentioned in Kanz al-‘Abād. This statement is that of Jami’ al-Ramūz of Imām Qahstānī, similar has been declared in Fatāwah Sūfiya.

I have authored a concise book on this topic entitled, munīr al-‘ayn fi ḥukmī taqbīl ul-ibhamayn. In this book I have clarified and answered all objections with reference to numerous ḥadīth.

And Allah knows best. 

Question: What is the ruling of the Ulama-e-Deen regarding whether it is permissible or not to light lanterns and lights etc by the Mazaars of the Awliyah? 

Is it permissible to put chaadars on the Mazaars of the Buzoorgs whilst playing musical instruments, as it is the manner today, where people light candles (lanterns) every Thursdays and carry colorful green and red chaadars (cloths) whilst playing musical instruments and go to the Mazaars. They also bring sweetmeats and rice etc. with them and keep it on the graves and make Faateha. Are these actions permissible in the light of Quran and Hadith? 

The Answer: اقول و بالله التوفیق In reality the basis of ones action is ones intention. The Holy Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) said, “The reward of ones actions is based on the intention” that which is without benefit in Deen and worldly benefit is useless and that which is useless is Makrooh. To spend money in that which is abas is wastage of money and wastage is haraam. Almighty Allah says in the Holy Quran, “And do not be wasteful, for verily, Allah loves not those who are wasteful” 

To give benefit to Muslims is definitely an action in accordance with Shariat.

Rasoolullah (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) said, “If any one of you is able to benefit your Muslim brother, he should do so.” (Ref: Muslim from Jaabir radi Allahu anhu). 

To respect those things attributed to religion is also acceptable. Almighty Allah says, “For those who respect the signs of Allah, then this is from the piety of the hearts.” (Surah Al Haj, verse 32)

Almighty Allah says, “Those who respect the esteem signs of Allah, then this is best for them by their Creator.” (Surah Al Haj, verse 30) 

The graves of the Awliyah-e-Kiraam and the graves of the ordinary Muslims are worthy of being respected. It is disallowed to walk, sit or just keep the foot on the graves and even to lean against it is not allowed. Imam Ahmed, Haakim, etc. narrate from Amaara bin Khurm (radi Allahu anhu) with the merit of a Hassan narration as follows: “The Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) saw me sitting on a grave. He said, ‘O you on the grave! Get off the grave. If you do not cause him discomfort, he will not cause you any discomfort.” 

It is in the narration of Imam Ahmed as follows: “The Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) saw me leaning against a grave. Either he said, ‘Do not harm the one in the grave’ or he said, ‘Do not cause discomfort to the person in the grave’” 

The Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) said, “I prefer this, that I should walk on fire or sew my shoes to my feet, rather than walking on the grave of a Muslim.” (Ibn Majah from Uqba bin Aamir radi Allahu anhu)

These are the five principles of the sharia. By asking whether one can light a lantern or candle etc. on the grave of a person, it actually means on the grave, then this is totally no allowed and it is even more so disallowed on the Mazaars of the Awliyah Allah as this is disrespect and it is to infringe on the rights of the deceased as it has been mentioned in Qunia etc. on the authority of Imam Tarjmaani,

ياثم بوطا القبور لان سقف القبر حق المية- حديث والتخذين عليها المسجد والسرح

Where, it has been mentioned about making a Musjid on a grave (and the reality of the top of the grave being the property of the deceased) 

Thus, if a Musjid is built beside the Mazaar, then there is no objection to this and if the intention is to attain blessings from the pious person then this is praiseworthy. It is in Majma Al Bihaar Al Anwaar as follows: “If anyone builds a Musjid near the Mazaar of a pious servant of Allah or he reads Namaaz in the Mazaar with this intention that he will attain assistance and blessings from the pious servant, or if one wishes to send the blessings of ones Ibaadaat to the soul of the personality and it is not done by facing the grave or in Namaaz to make intention for his respect, then there is nothing wrong with doing so. Did you not see that the Mazaar of Sayyidina Ismaeel (alaihis salaam) is in Musjidul Haraam Shareef in the blessed Hateem and Namaaz there is greater than all the other Musjids of the world?” 

This is on this basis, that the authenticity of the said narration is accepted

والا ففیه باذام ضعیف ان حسنه الترمذی فقد عرف رحمه الله تعالٰی بالتساھل فیه

کما بیناه فی مدارج طبقات الحدیث

If one lights the lamp or lantern etc. away from the Mazaar and there is no Musjid near it or no one is reciting Quran there or no one is sitting their for recitation etc. or that the grave is not in the middle of a road or it is not the Mazaar of any wali Allah or Aalim-e-Deen, in other words there is no real reason and benefit in doing so, then this wastage and as per the law stated, it is not allowed. (Note: It means if it is the Mazaar of a Wali or Aalim etc. then to do so is permissible). This will actually be regarded as impermissible even more if one has this ignorant theory that if one does not light any lantern there then there will be darkness in the grave of the deceased, since now with wastage; this is also having incorrect beliefs. Allah Forbid.

Now, if there is a Musjid there or there is recitation taking place or Zikrullah is taking place or if the grave is on a road and one wishes to let people notice the grave so that they may make dua and send esaale sawaab for that deceased, then it is permissible to place lanterns etc. there. 

Also, if it is the Mazaar of a Wali Allah or Aalim-e-Deen, and one wishes to put lanterns etc. around it to show the excellence of the personality and so that those coming there may show respect, then this is definitely not objectionable and is totally allowed. Actually according to the other four principles it is Mustahab (desirable) and Mandoob (recommendable). It has been stated in Majma Al Bihaar as follows: “If there is a Musjid etc. there and the intention is to make the area bright for the purpose of recitation etc. then there is no objection to placing lights etc. there.”

Imam Allama Arif Billah Sayyidi Abdul Ghani Nablisi (Qadasas Sirahul Qudsi) states as follows in Hadiqa Nadiyah: “The only time one is not allowed to place lights near graves, is when it is totally without benefit. However, if there is a Musjid near the grave or the grave is in the middle of a road or if someone is seated there or if it is the Mazaar of any Wali, Aalim or Muhaqqiq, whose soul is in his body like the way the sun is over the earth, then for his respect, to place lights near his grave and so that people are aware that this is the grave of a Wali Allah and so that they may attain blessings from him and so that they may ask dua to Allah via him, so that there dua may be accepted, then all this is permissible which has not been objected to at all. These actions are based on intention.” 

This Faqeer (Aala Hazrat) has written a clear and detailed answer through the grace of Allah in the book طوالع النور فی حکم السرج علٰی القبور - Based on the very same principles; it is also permissible to put chaadars on the Mazaars of the Awliyah-e-Kiraam. The public does not even have much respect left for the graves of the general Muslims. I have seen this with my one eyes people running with their napaak shoes on the graves of Muslims, without conscious or feeling, without thinking that that is the blessed sand of the graves of their elders. They don’t even realize that one day we too will rest in the same earth. I have seen on numerous occasions, people sitting on graves, gambling, talking vulgar words and laughing aloud. Some have even gone to such extremes that they have no fear, and even urinate on the graves of Muslims. فانا لله و انا الیه راجعون

Thus, those who truly love the pious have used methods of giving respect to the graves of the Awliyah and to protect the sanctity of the Mazaars from the jaahils (ignorant) people who show disrespect. This is done so that the general public may recognize the Mazaars of the pious and understand that they are different from the graves of ordinary people and so that they may not show disrespect and cause their own destruction. It is close to the basis of this, that the Ulama have said that the Published copies of the Quran should be lined with gold trimmings so that people may differentiate it (from any other book) and the Ulama have said this to be good. It is also one of the reasons why the Kaaba Shareef is adorned so much. Now here, (at the Mazaars), there is always been the fear of people showing disrespect (like they show at other graves) and it is for this, that the chaadars and lights etc. are put, so that it may be recognized as the graves of the pious and they may have respect in their hearts. Now, those who object to all these things are either total jaahils (ignorant people) that they are unaware of the state of the things in this era, or they are those same disrespectful, deprived individuals whose hearts are empty from the love of the Awliyah Allah. والعیاذ بالله رب العالمین

This Faqeer has discussed the laws in the above mentioned book from the verse “This is more suitable, that they should be recognised, so that they are not made uneasy.” لله الحمد و

Sayyidi Allama Muhammad ibn Aabideen Shaami states in Tanqeehul Fatawa Al Haamidia from Kashfun Noor An Ashaabil Quboor by Imam Allama Sayyid Naablisi as follows: “But in time, we say that if the aim of doing this (placing lights etc) is to show the excellence of the Mazaars of the Awliyah in the eyes of the people, so that they may not show disrespect to those graves where they see cloths placed on it and Turbans kept on it, as this shows them it is the Mazaar of a Wali, and so that those ghaafil (careless) people who come there for Ziyaarat, attain sincerity and respect in their hearts which usually, are not soft hearts, then it must be noted that I have already stated that the souls present themselves at the Mazaars of the Awliyah-e-Kiraam, then to place chaadars on the Mazaars with this intention, is totally allowed and none should stop this, as the actions are based on intention. Every person will attain that, which he has intended.”

There is also no objection to the chaadars being green or red and silk is also allowed, as this is only not allowed to be worn (by men). However, the musical instruments are not allowed and if there is already a chaadar there and there is no real need to put a new chaadar as the one there has not become old or torn etc. then to put a new one without any reason is not necessary. Instead of putting another one, one should take that money give it to some poor person and send the sawaab to the rooh of that Wali Allah, but if one puts the chaadar also with intention that the khudaam etc, who are there may use it for themselves as they are needy etc. then too, it is allowed. It is not allowed at all, to keep the food of Fateha on graves, just as it is not allowed to keep lights on the actual grave. If it is kept away (near) the Qabr, then it is fine.

والله تعالٰی اعلم

كتبه عبده المذنب احمد رضا عفى عنه

بمحمّد 

Question: 6th Jamadil Ulaa 1320 Hijri - What is the ruling of the Ulama-e-Deen and the learned Muftis in the following case: There some people who keep names such as, Taaju’deen, Muhiy’yud’deen, Nizaamud’deen, Ali Jaan, Nabi Jaan, Muhammad Jaan, Muhammad Nabi, Muhammad Yaseen, Muhammad Taaha, Ghafoorud’deen, Ghulam Ali, Ghulam Hussain, Ghulam Ghaus, Ghulam Jilani and Hidaayat Ali. Is it permissible to keep such names or not? (Translator’s Note: The second part of this query deals with a specific situation and has been left out here due to detail. It can be viewed by the learned scholars in the original document)

The Answer: May their be countless Durood and salaams upon Muhammad Nabi, Ahmed Nabi, Nabi Ahmed (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam). Such words (names) are only befitting the Holy Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam). افضل صلوات الله و اجل تسلیمات الله علیه و علی اله

To keep such names for others is absolutely haraam, as it is accepted that there is no claim of Prophethood, and if this is the case (in other words the name is kept to claim Prophethood), then it is kufr. There is however the chance of claim and this is Haraam and treacherous and this view that in a proper noun the meaning in the first instance is not contemplated, is actually not a statement regarded as being sound in the Sharia and it is also not acceptable according to common law. There is no doubt in it not being referred to as stated in the first meaning but to just think that it is out of sight is also incorrect. It is evident from numerous Hadith Shareef that the Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) changed numerous names which had some weakness in them. It is in Jaame Tirmizi from Ummul Mo’mineen Aisha Siddiqa (radi Allahu anha) as follows: “It was the blessed habit of the Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) that he would change names that were not good.” 

It is in Sunan Abu Dawood that the Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) changed the names Aasi, Azeez, Utla, Shaitaan, Hikm, Araab, Hubaab and Shihaab. قال ترکت اسنیدھا للاختصار

He changed the name Ahram and kept the name Zar’a (Ref: Usaama bin Akhzari radi Allahu anhu). 

He changed the name Aasiyah to Jameela (Ref: Muslim from Ibn Umar radi Allahu anhu). 

He changed the name bira to Zainab and said, “Do not refer to your selves as good. Allah knows well, who is good amongst you.” (Ref: Muslim from Zainab bint Abi Salma radi Allahu anhu). 

(The meaning of Bira is ‘pious woman’. The Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam said this was self praise and thus changed it. The Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) also said, “Verily you will be called on the day of Qiyaamat by your names and the names of your fathers, so keep good names.” (Ref: Ahmed and Abu Dawood from Abu Dardah radi Allahu anhu) 

If the first meaning has to be completely ignored, then what now will be said about a certain name being good and a certain name being bad? Also what will one say about instances where the names where changed, and why would certain names be regarded as self praise? In the name being prefixed all are the same? Now, after this, we need to ask those people (who object) if they would keep the names of their children shaitaan, mal’oon (cursed), evil raafdhi or Khuk (swine) etc? They will never allow this. Then it must be noted that it must be accepted that it directly refers to the original meaning of the word and can not mean something else. Now, how then can one (claim that the meaning is not same) and name your children and yourself Nabi? Is there any Muslim who thinks it is correct to keep his child’s name Rasoolullah, Khatimun Nabiyeen or Sayyidul Mursaleen? By no means will someone allow this. How then is it correct to name our children Muhammad Nabi, Ahmed Nabi, Nabi Ahmed etc? I have even heard some who don’t even seem to fear Allah, keeping their child’s name Nabiyullah. Wa La Howla Wa la Quwwata il’la bil’laahil Aliyil Azeem. Is it haraam just to use names that claim Nabuiwat and halaal to use names showing Nabuiwat? It is necessary for the Muslims to change such names. 

It’s not surprising when such disgraced people give weak excuses and even end up trying to keep names attributed to “Allah”, Ya Rab’bal Aalameen etc. for according to their statements, in a Proper Noun the actual meaning of the name is not given any regard. والعیاذ بالله رب العالمین

In the same way, to keep the name Nabi Jaan is also not ideal. If the word jaan has been added individually to show love, and this seems to be the general reason, then it is clear, that it is as if claiming Nabuiwat. And if one takes the meaning where the sentence structure is read in reverse, the it would be Jaan-e-Nabi (The Prophet’s life – The Prophet’s Beloved), this is a thousand times more self praise compared to the name Birah and the Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam) did not like this name (birah), so why will this name be one that is liked. To change this name a little, will not be objectionable. By adding just one alphabet (The Haa) one will end up with a good meaning name which is allowed and one is saved from sin. One should change it to Muhammad Nabiyyah, Ahmed Nabiyyah, Nabbiyah Ahmed and Nabiyyah Jaan. One should rather call and write these names. Nabiyyah here means to be alert and conscious.

In the same way, it is not allowed to keep the names Yaasin and Taahaa since they are those names of Allah and of the Prophet (Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam), that there meanings are not known to us. It is not astonishing if they have such meaning, that they can not be used for any beside Allah and Rasoolullah. Thus, it is better not to keep these names as well, just as it is not permissible to chant that which one does not know the meaning of for perhaps it may mean something that entails shirk (polytheism) falsehood. Imam Abu Bakr Bin Arabi states as follows in the book Ahkamul Quraan: “Ash’hab has reported from Maalik that one should not keep the name Yaasin alone as it is the name of Allah and it is a rare kalaam. And this can be explained in this way, that, it is permissible for the servant to keep such names that are joined to the name of Allah, when this meaning is evident in it such as Aalim and Qaadir. And Maalik has forbidden such names from being kept because they are from those names where the meanings are unknown. Possibly they have such meanings that are only attributed to Allah. Thus, one should not give preference to that which one does not recognize, for there is danger in doing so.”

Allama Shahabud’een Ahmed Kufaji Hanafi Misri quotes this in Naseemur Riyaaz the annotation of the book Shifa by Imam Qaadi Iyaaz and states that it is a great presentation and a foot note has been placed therein by this Faqeer:

قد کان ظھر لی المنع عنه لعین ھذا المعنی لکن نظر الی انه اسم النبی صلی الله تعالٰی علیه وسلم ولا ندری معناه فلعل له معنی لا یصح فی غیره صلی الله تعالیٰ علیه وسلم الخ و العل ھذا اولی و ما تقدم لان کونه اسم النبی صلی الله تعالٰی علیه وسلم اظھر و اشھر فلا یکون له معنی ینفرد به الرب عزوجل والله تعالٰی اعلم

The same (as mentioned above) applies to the name Taahaa. 

Question: What is the ruling of the learned Ulama in this case: What time is the zawaal in summer and what time is it in winter? Now if someone reads Zohr Salaah before twelve noon in summer, when according to calculations zawaal is before twelve noon, will the Namaaz be legitimate or not? Please present an answer that is well supported.

The Answer: According to the sundial, it is such that zawaal is always at twelve noon. Neither does it show it to be before or after. As per the normal watch, then with the exception of four in our town namely the 16th of April, the 15th of June, 1st of September and 25th of December, zawaal is never exactly at twelve noon on any other day. The movement of the watch is the same every day and the movement of the sun is never the same. The elevation from the 4th of July going towards the decline on the 3rd of January is very fast that every day that it passes the curve more than the day before and this daily increase is also not consistent, actually the next increase is more than that which has passed, until that time, that if it reaches a decline at extreme velocity (quickness). Then from the decline position on the 4th of January up to the elevation on the 3rd of July, the movement becomes slow that daily, it passes the bow slower than the day before and the daily slow motion also does not remain the same, but the coming day is slower than the day before until it reaches its height and becomes extremely delayed (slow) and then the same rotation starts again. Now, in India, since we generally go in accordance with the railway time, even these four are not consistent. Hence in the eastern parts of the country, depending on the difference of the longitudes, all the adjustments will be defective (inconclusive) and in the western parts of the country all the adjustments will be increased, for e.g. if the actual time of the city is given, then verily these four will be equal, where the zawaal according to the sundial and the pocket watch, will be exactly at twelve noon and if the time is calculated through the railway time, then according to the difference of longitudes all the adjustments will increase by 12 minutes and 12 seconds. Now from the four days, the two that were exactly at twelve noon for zawaal will now show zawaal to be at 12 hundred hours 12 minutes and 12 seconds (in other words 12 minutes and 12 seconds after 12 noon). And this is based on our theory.

For the sake of benefit an astronomical table showing the actual Nisfun Nihaar (when the sun is at its peak) and the beginning of Zuhr in Bareilly is being presented with the seconds, which will be sufficient for a very long period of time. This is based on railway time as it is the time that is common today. If 12 minutes is deducted from the times given, then one will get the actual times in Bareilly (Shareef).

Even the times for the beginning of Zohr Salaah can be derived from this chart by either adding or subtracting to or from the time and this will serve as an excellent table for years to come. One can not just rely on the 12 noon as per ones watch (in the case of defining zawaal) If one reads his zohr after Nisfun Nihaar then the Namaaz is done and if one read before this, then the Namaaz is not valid. On the 28th November according to railway time in Bareilly, nishfun nihaar is at exactly 12 noon and then after this is will be later until on the 1st of February it will be at 12:24 and then it will become less until on the 8th of May it will be at 12:08. It will then gradually become earlier again until on the 7th of October it will be at 12 noon exactly and then slowly it will now become even earlier than 12 noon until on the 24 October, it will end at around 11:56 and then it will start to become later again until on the 28th of November zawaal will be at exactly 12 noon again. Thus from the 7th October until the 28th of November if any person read his Namaaz at exactly 12 noon or just before, but after nishfun nihaar, his Namaaz is valid. However the Namaaz that was read before the proper time commenced is invalid. (The Actual table from the original document is excluded. Ulama can view detail in original)

كتبه عبده المذنب احمد رضا عفى عنه

بمحمّد 

Question: What is the ruling of the learned Ulama about what is Imaan-e-Kaamil (Completely strong Imaan) and how can one make ones Imaan Kaamil?

The Answer: To accept every word of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam as true and correct and to accept the righteousness of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam with sincerity is Imaan. One who fulfills this is called a Muslim, for as long as any of his words or actions or condition does not show rejection to Allah and His Rasool Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam or he does not falsify what they mention or he does not make blasphemy. Now, one who shows his connection to Allah and His Rasool Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam more than to anyone else and one who loves those who love Allah and His Rasool Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam, even if they are his personal enemies and he hates and shuns those who speak against Allah and His Rasool Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam even if they are his close and loved ones and if he gives what ever he gives for the sake of Allah and if he holds back anything, he does so for Allah, then he has Kaamil Imaan and this is as mentioned by the Holy Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam who said, “One who loves for Allah and hates for Allah and gives for the sake of Allah and holds back for the sake of Allah has complete Imaan.”

كتبه عبده المذنب احمد رضا عفى عنه

بمحمّد 

Question: It must be brought to the notice of the Ulama-e-Ahle Sunnat that today Sunnis sit in the companionship of corrupt sects and have become misled in faith due to a few laws. Even though there are numerous laws explained in your books, this servant has not seen anything relating to this that is why I felt it necessary to query this issue. There issue is that there is a person who refers to Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) as a miserly person. He says that Ameer Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) fought with Hazrat Ali and the family of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam (Hazrat Imam Hassan radi Allahu anhu) and stole the khilaafat from them and he martyred thousands of Sahaba-e-Kiraam to achieve this. Bakr says that he is aware of Ameer Mu’wiyah’s (radi Allahu anhu) wrongs and he can not be called and Ameer.

Amar on the other hand says that Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) is from amongst the senior Sahaba-e-Kiraam and the slightest disrespect to him is to be misled. There is another person, who calls himself a Sunni and also claims to have some knowledge (The truth is that he is actually completely ignorant) says that all the Sahaba especially Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddique (radi Allahu anhu), Hazrat Umar Farouk-e-Azam (radi Allahu anhu) and Hazrat Usman Zul Noorain (radi Allahu anhu) (Allah forbid) were greedy and miserly, as they kept the blessed bier of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam and then were each engrossed in their own schemes of how to become Khalifa. 

Now what is the ruling about these four persons? Can we regard them as being Ahle Sunnat Wa Jamaat or not? What is your (Aala Hazrat’s) view on this issue? Please present a simple yet well supported answer.

The Answer: Almighty Allah described the Sahaba of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam in two categories in Surah Hadeed. One group are those who accepted Islam before the Victory at Makkah and who spent their wealth in the way of Allah sincerely and made Jihad. The second group refers to those who accepted Islam after the Victory at Makkah. Almighty Allah mentioned in the Holy Quran about both the groups “Wa Kul’la Wa’d Allahu Husna” wherein Almighty Allah promised both groups good things. In giving this promise of giving them good things, Almighty Allah says in the Holy Quran, “They have been kept a great distance away from Hell. They will not even hear its sound. These are the ones who will live forever in the way they desire. The most difficulty moments of Qiyaaamat will not cause them any sadness, The Angels will welcome them by saying, This is that day of yours which you have been promised.”

Almighty Allah has mentioned the above as the status and excellence of every Sahabi. Now, if anyone says ill about any sahabi, then he wants to belie the word of Allah. To present false and incorrect narrations regarding some of their dealings against that, which Allah has mentioned, is not the manner of the Muslims. In the same verse, Almighty Allah even answered such people by promising good to both the groups of the Sahaba-e-Kiraam (radi Allahu ta’ala anhum). Almighty Allah also says, “Allah knows well, whatever you are to do.” (In other words Allah knows everything and has still promised both groups his Mercy and blessings). Now after this, whoever barks or says such things, will go to jahanum (Hell). Allama Shahabud’deen Khufaji states as follows in Naseemur Riyaz, the commentary of Shifa Shareef by Qaadi Iyaaz as follow: “One who slanders Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah (radi Allahu anhu) is a dog from amongst the dogs of Hell.” 

Amongst the four statements (presented in the question), only Amar’s statement is correct and true. Zaid and Bakr are liars and the fourth person is the worst and most evil of all three as he is a raafdhi (Shia). To Appoint an Imam (Caliph) is the most difficult task of all difficult tasks. All the issues of the world and religion have connection to this and if the blessed Janazah of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam had to be kept even until Qiyaamat, then there would have been still no possibility of any harm at all. The blessed bodies of the Ambia (alaihimus salaatu was salaam) never become disintegrated. Hazrat Sulaiman (alaihis salaam) remained standing for one entire year after passing away. He was only laid to rest in his blessed grave after one year. 

Now, the Blessed Janaazah of the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam was in the room of Ummul Mo’mineen Siddiqa (radi Allahu anha), and it is the same place where the blessed Rauza-e-Anwar is today. The Janaazah Mubaarak was not going to be taken out of that Hujrah. It was a small Hujrah and all the Sahaba wished to be part of the Janaazah Salaah, so small groups of Sahaba-e-Kiraam came in one after the other. They partook in the Janaazah Salaah and went out (and the next group came in). This chain of actions ended on the third day. 

Now, if this practice of the Sahaba had to take three years, then the blessed janaaza would have been kept their for three years and this, would have been the reason for the (so-called) delay in placing the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam to rest in his blessed Rauza Mubaarak. If according to this Iblees (cursed person) this was being greedy (power hungry), then the strongest objection would be on Ummul Mo’mineen Siddiqa and Hazrat Ali (Radi Allahu anhum). They were not greedy. The issue of burial and kaffan is the right of the family members. Why did Hazrat Ali and Ummul Mo’mineen then just wait and do nothing for three days? They are the ones who did this for the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam. They should have done the last rites as well. (All this is being just given as example to allow the ignorant to understand that these could be the objections that they would have to make on great people like Hazrat Ali and Ummul Mo’mineen). Now, it can be established that the objections by these people are baseless and cursed and the issue of not resting the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam in his blessed grave quickly had religious benefits in it and Hazrat Ali (radi Allahu anhu) and all the Sahaba-e-Kiraam were pleased with this.

These evil cursed people (May Allah destroy them) are not just hurting the Sahaba, but they are causing discomfort to the Prophet Sall Allaho Alaihi Wa Sallam. It has been mentioned in the Hadith Shareef as follows: “Anyone who has hurt my sahaba has hurt me and one who has hurt me has caused Allah displeasure and one who displeases Allah, it is soon that Allah will seize him.”

والله تعالٰی اعلم

كتبه عبده المذنب احمد رضا عفى عنه

بمحمّد 

What is the ruling of the Ulama-e-Ahle Sunnat concerning whether the Jhoota (Food which has already been eaten from) of a kaafir (unbeliever) is paak (clean) or not? Please make sure everything has been translated into Urdu, so that the general public may understand properly.

The Answer: A kaafir is Na paak (impure). Almighty Allah says, “The Unbeliever is completely impure.” (Surah Tauba verse 28) والله تعالٰی اعلم

Here, there impurity refers to their inner impurity. Now, if there is evidence of alcohol or any other impure substance in their mouth, then impurity also becomes apparent and in such case, their jhoota is definitely impure and whatever their saliva touches such as Huqqa etc. will all become na paak. It is in Tanweerul Absaar: “The jhoota of a person after consuming alcohol and the jhoota of a cat after eating mice are both impure.”

In the same way, if the moustache of a kaafir who takes alcohol is so big that the alcohol gets onto it, then whatever it touches, such as water etc. will be impure and this is until he does not thoroughly clean it.”

If there is no sign of apparent impurities then even though his jhoota will not be called na paak like that of a dogs, “It is in Tanweerul Absaar and Durar that the jhoota of humans is regarded as pure, even though it is that of person in state of Junoob (in need of ghusl), or a kaafir, condition that his mouth is paak.”

In brief, It is not necessary that everything which is not na paak is totally pure and without defects. The mucus from the nose is also not regarded as na paak, but which intelligent person will have the audacity of licking it with ones tongue or lips? Muslims, Alhumdulillah feel the same way and have the same dislike concerning the jhoota of a kaafir and this dislike is based on their Imaan:

“And this is to remove or make less the dislike of the Kufaar from their hearts and their sights, and this is disloyalty to the Muslims. Verily the Ulama have clarified this just as it has been mentioned in Uqood Dariya. Verily the Mufti must give that fatwa (verdict) which according to him is best for the Muslims and the best thing for the Muslims is to keep in them the dislike for the Kufaar, and not in removing this (dislike).”

Thus, one who intentionally eats and drinks the jhoota of kaafir is also disliked by other Muslims. He becomes one concerning whom people have suspicions. They suspect him to have love and friendship with the Kufaar. It is in the Hadith Shareef as follows: “One, who has faith in Allah and the last day, should not stand in suspicious places.” 

The Prophet (Sall Allaho alaihi wasallam) has stated in numerous Hadith: “Stay away from that which is bad to hear.”

رواه الامام احمد عن ابی الغادیة والطبرانی فی الکبیر و ابن سعد فی طبقات و العسکری فی الامثال و ابن مندة فی المعرفة والخطیب فی الموتلف کلھم عن ام الغادیة عمة العاص بن عمرو الطفاوی و عبدالله بن احمد الامام فی الزوائد المسند و ابو نعیم و ابن مندة کلا ھمافی العرفة عن العاص المذکور مرسله و ابونعیم فیھا عن حبیب بن الحارث رضی الله تعالی عنھم

Also the Prophet (Sall Allaho alaihi wasallam) has stated in numerous Hadith as follows: “Stay away from every such thing for which you have to present an excuse.” 

رواه الضیاء فی المختارة والدیلمی کلا ھمابسند حسن عن انس و الطبرانی فی الاوسط عن جابر و ابن بنیع و من طریقة العسکری فی امثاله والقضاعی فی مسنده معا و البغوی و من طریقة الطبرانی فی اوسطه والمخلص فی السادس من فوائده و ابو محمد الابراھیمی فی کتاب ا لصلٰوة و ابن النجار فی تاریخه کلھم عن ابن عمرو و الحاکم فی صحیحه و البیھقی فی الزھد و العسکری فی الامثال و ابو نعیم فی المعرفة عن سعد بن ابی وقاص و احمد و ابن ماجة بسند احسن و ابن عساکر عن ابی ایوب الانصاری کلھم رافیعه الی النبی صلی الله تعالٰی علیه وسلم والبغاری فی تاریخه و الطبرانی فی الکبیروابن مندة عن سعد بن عمارة من قوله رضی الله تعالٰی عنھم اجمعین

And the Prophet (Sall Allaho alaihi wasallam) says, “Give glad tidings and do not do that which causes dislike (hatred) amongst the people.”

Then, to open this topic without valid reason in Shariat is ghibat and ghibat is haraam. (فما ادى اليه فلااقل ان يكون مكرها)

Thus it has been proven from evidence of Shariah and sahih Ahadith that it is necessary to abstain from the jhoota of unbelievers:

And numerous laws in times differ due to difference of opinion based on the difference of the era and situation. The proofs of this are those Furoo (practical laws) which are gathered in the books of the Imams. This is which I (Aala Hazrat) have and with this, I have given the fatwa on numerous occasions, and Allah Almighty is my Rubb. My complete trust is in Him and my proof is from Him, and Allah, All Pure, Almighty, knows well everything.”

والله تعالٰی اعلم

كتبه عبده المذنب احمد رضا عفى عنه

بمحمّد 

What do the learned Ulama-e-Deen and the Mufti’s of Islam decree in the issue of Jhinga (shrimp / prawn). Is it permissible to eat it or not? Or is it Makhrooh or Haraam? Please forward a reply with signature and Official seal.

The Answer: In our Madhab (Hanafi), with the exception of fish, all the other (sea) creatures are regarded as Haraam (not permissible for consumption). Thus, those few who say that the jhinga (shrimp) is not a fish, according to them; it should be regarded as haraam. This humble servant has however, researched this thoroughly and has found that according to the Books of Language (Dictionary); Books of Tibb and the Books of information on animals, the jhinga is regarded a fish. 

It is in Qaamoos: “Irbiyaan (shrimp) which is with the Hamza-e-Maksoora, is a fish, which in appearance is like a large ant.”

It is in Sihah and Taajul Uroos as follows: “Irbiyaan is a whitish fish which looks like a large ant and is usually found in Basra.”

It is in Siraah as follows: “Irbiyaan is a type of fish.”

It is in Muntahi ul Arab as follows: Irbiyaan is a type of fish which is known as jhinga in hindi

It is in Makhzan as follows: “It is known as Roobiyaan and Irbiyaan. It is called Roobiyaan Fish and Machli and Mek Machli and in Hindi it is called jhinga.”

It is in Tuhfatul Mo’mineen as follows, “In Farsi, Roobiyaan is the name of a Fish.”

It is in Tazkira-e-Dawood as follows: “Roobiyaan is a type of fish which is found a lot in the seas of Iraq and Qaam. It is like a reddish crab with lots of legs, but it has more flesh on it.”

It is in Hayaatul Haywaan Kubra as follows: Roobiyaan is slightly red and is a very small fish.

Now after examining all this, then according to Merajud Diraaya it should be Halaal since in the quotation of Merajud Diraaya it is clear that all species of fish are Halaal: “And Taafi is not a fixed species, but it is a description which every species is linked towards.”

It is clearly stated as follows in the Meraj (book as mentioned above), “Such a small fish in which the stomach can not be cut open and it is fried (or cooked) without removing the stomach, then with the exception of Imam Shafi’i it is Halaal according to all the A’ima. It is in Raddul Muhtar that it has been mentioned in Merajud Diraaya. If a fish is found in the stomach of a fish then it can be consumed, but according to Imam Shafi’i (radi Allahu anhu) it will not be eaten as it is regarded in the ruling of bird droppings and according to him, the droppings of the bird is regarded as napaak (impurity).”

We say that it is only regarded as droppings if it has changed its originality. As for those fish which are so small that their stomachs can not be cut open, then according to the Shafi’i Imams, it is not Halaal to consume, since they base this on the (same) ruling that (apply to) the droppings of the bird as being an impurity and according to the remainder of the Ulama, to consume such fish is halaal. 

However, this faqeer (Aala Hazrat) has seen in Jawaahir that all such small fish are Makrooh-e-Tahreemi and this seems to be more correct. It is in Jawaahir as follows: “It has been mentioned that all very small fish are Makrooh-e-Tahreemi. This seems to be more correct. The jhinga (shrimp) looks a lot different from any other fish. It looks more like a worm and it must be noted that the term Maahi (fish) is also used for things which are not really from the fish species, such as a skink or a small limbed lizard, even though it is the young of an alligator and is born on the dry banks of the river Nile (commonly). There is no source according to our A’ima (Learned Leaders) that shows the shrimp to be lawful to consume and even if it is a fish, then the shrimps here are generally very small and the law will be as correctly mentioned in Jawaahir. Thus, it is better when faced with such difference of opinion and doubt to abstain if there is no necessity, and to abstain is Oola (better).

والله تعالٰی اعلم

كتبه عبده المذنب احمد رضا عفى عنه

بمحمّد ن المصطفى صلى الله تعالى عليه وسلم

First Note: It is the manner of the learned scholars to end their decrees with the words “And Allah Knows” which in Arabic will read as follows:

والله تعالٰی اعلم This will be used at the end of the decrees rather than the translation.

Second Note: The above mentioned Arabic text is one of the ways which Aala Hazrat (radi Allahu anhu) ended his decrees and this became one of his well recognised signatures, wherein he referred to himself as the servant of the religion, hopeful of salvation through his Master Muhammad (sall Allaho alaihi wasallam). This will not be translated in the rest of the book, but the actual Arabic text will be used to end the decrees. 

Taken from ‘Ahl as-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah: an Introduction’Imam Ahmed Raza Barelwi in his fatawa – like other scholars of Ahlu’s Sunnah – has enjoined Muslims to be steadfast in their belief and better their social standing. These are available as small booklets and following are the subjects of his fatawa:

- Shari’ah is the ultimate law and following it is obligatory for all Muslims;

- to refrain from Bid’ah is of utmost importance 

- a Sufi without knowledge or a Shaykh without actions is a joke of the devil;

- it is impermissible to imitate the Kuffar, to mingle with the misguided [and heretics] and to participate in the festivals of the Hindus.

- it is polytheism [shirk] to prostrate to any other than Allah táālā with the intention of worship. And if such a prostration is out of reverence [sajdah at-taĥiyyah], it is Haram.

- it is prohibited to ridicule other muslims and consider oneself higher than others.

- the iconography of the Shi`ah [ta’aziyah] and respecting such icons is forbidden

- Qawwali [sama’a] with musical instruments is forbidden

- it is not permissible for women to travel to visit graves [or maqams of awliya]

- it is not permissible to make pictures of living things.

- abbreviating the blessing ‘sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam’ to an acronym ‘sa’d lam ayn meem’, [in english it is abbreviated as PBUH] is impermissible

- to visit fake graves [that have no basis or record but simply the product of folklore] is impermissible 

- feeding the poor and needy with the intention to donate the reward to the dead is permissible; but to hold obsequies and banquets where even the rich are invited is impermissible 

—

Translated by Sidi Muhammad Aqdas

Answer:

After looking at various references regarding the age of our beloved mother Sayyidah A'ishah (Allah is pleased with her) at the time of her nikah with the best of all men (peace be upon him), i understand that she was 16-17 years old, and not 6; and the marriage was later solemnised when she was 19 years old and not 9.

The nikah took place 10 years after the announcment of prophethood in 620 CE and Ibn Hisham in his Seerah writes that Sayyidah A'ishah along with Sayyiduna Ali (Allah is pleased with them both) were the first children to accept Islam. This would mean Sayyidah A'ishah had been born before the announcement of prophethood.

According to some of the Historians, she was born in 605 CE which means she was around 15-16 years old at the time of Hijrah and 19 when moved in with the Prophet (peace be upon him).

Most historians have said she passed away at the age of 67 and Imam Al-Usfuri and Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal have recorded that she passed away 50 years after Hijrah, 672 CE. If you do the maths, it should tell us the age of Sayyidah A'shah (Allah is pleased with her) at the time of birth and then marriage too.

And verily Allah knows best.

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the doorstep of Scholars) 

Question:

As salaamu alikum.
I would like to know weather a husband can use condom/contraception whilst performing intercourse with his wife. Does islam give permission for it.

Answer:

Using a condom in Islamic Law is permissible if it is a mutual agreement between the husband and wife and there is a valid reason for not planning to have a child. If the wife is not happy with the husband using contraception and vice versa then it is disliked and in some cases maybe severely disliked depending on the reason and severity of disagreement. Also, the contraception used must not be made of any impurity such as extracts from an unlawful animal.

The purpose of a condom is to stop the male's sperm from meeting the female's egg which is known as "Azl" in Arabic. The companions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) practiced this and the Quran or the Messenger (peace be upon him) never forbade it.

The honorable Jabir (Allah is pleased with him) narrates,

"We used to practice azl whilst the Quran was being revealed (in the time of the Prophet)" (Bukhari)

There is an addition in Muslim,

"And this news reached the Prophet (peace be upon him) and he never prohibited us from it".

This act of avoiding pregnancy must be due to a valid reason.

A relevant example for those who live in Europe is the fear of the child not being given a Islamic environment. Imam Ibn Al-Hummam writes in his masterpiece, Fath Al-Qadeer,

"It is better to practice "Azl" for partners living in a non Dar Al-Islam country where there is fear that the child will not be a pious and practicing Muslim".

If there is no valid reason then the pleasure of Allah is that you give birth to children and be pleased with the way of nature chosen by Allah and increase the human race and add to it's continuity. This is the pleasure of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as he said,

"I will be proud of the size of my nation (ummah) compared to the other nations on the day of Judgement".

May Allah give us all children that become pious and add value to the societies they live in.

And verily Allah knows best.

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the doorstep of scholars) 

Question:

AssalamuAlaykum Wa rahmatullahi Wa Barakatahu..

I have some questions regarding marriage. After some days i am going to marry and want to know some legal and illegal activities during intercourse.

1) Can wife and husband completely naked while intercourse or need to have some clothes on them.

2) Can Wife and Husband see each others private parts?

3) Can Husband kiss on his wifes private parts?

Please tell me regarding this. I have read some books but dont know whether they are authentic or not. Some references says all are permissible and some says Cannot kiss wifes private parts(sexual parts) and can be completely naked.

some says cannot be completely naked and cannot see each others private parts.

I have searched a lot and now completely helpless regarding this issue. Please answer my questions so that i may not do any illegal activities.

JazakAllahu Khairan.

Answer:

1. It is disliked to be completely naked whilst intercourse as the messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said,

"When one of you enjoys intercourse with his wife, he should cover themselves and not be completely naked like donkeys" (Ibn Majah)

The scholars have said that there is fear of the child being obscene, immoral or sinful if the husband and wife are completely naked whilst intercourse.

2. When husband and wife are not enojoying intercourse it is fine to be completely naked in front of each other as Allah says in the Quran,

"They are your clothing and you are their clothing" (Surah Al-Baqarah, Verse: 187).

However, Muslims should not remain completely naked without necessity as there is fear of exposure to the creation of Allah.

3. The private parts of the human body are Taahir (clean and pure) as long as there is no visual impurity. Therefore it is permissible to touch one's own private parts or the private parts of one's marital partner. The messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said,

"I do not care whether i touch my nose or my private part (as they are both taahir, clean and pure)". (Muwatta Imam Muhammad).

There are also other narrations in the Muwatta of Imam Muhammad that establish it is fine to touch the private part as it is clean and pure. Some companions would reply to someone who asked, "Cut it off if you think it is impure".

However, Islam teaches purity, physically and spiritually and therefore it is disliked to touch the private part of one's marital partner with the mouth. The mouth is used to recite the Quran and Hadith and also to take the name of Allah and His beloved Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). It is not an act of the pious. Some scholars have regarded it as impermissible. Thus one should abstain from such.

And Allah knows best,

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the doorstep of scholars) 

Question:

asslamualaykum respcted mufti saab. i wanted to know what the opinion of the ulema of the ahl e sunnat have on the aspect of hate in islam 

1) is there any thing as hate in islam 

2) if there is then what or who should we hate

3) who has the right to hate . anyone or just the ulema. 

4) did our predessesors ever hate or did they only show love 

please can you give a detailed answer with examples. 


Answer:

Wa Alaykum Al-Salam

1. Islam is not pacifism. Ab Umamah narrates from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) that he said, “He who loves for the sake of Allah, hates for the sake of Allah, gives for the sake of Allah and refuses for the sake of Allah has completed his Faith (Iman)”. In another narration, “The dearest of actions near Allah is to love for the sake of Allah and to hate for the sake of Allah”.

2. Every Muslim must only hate for the sake of Allah. One must hate all that is prohibited, disliked and wrong in Islam and one should hate those who commit forbidden acts due to their forbidden act.

3. Already answered in number two.

4. All our predecessors acted upon the Qur’an and Hadeeth. Here are two examples. Imam Bayhaqi records that a misguided person asked Sayyiduna Ayyub Al-Ansaari whilst he was walking, “Can you tell me the meaning of a word”. Ayyub Al-Ansari changed his path and gestured with his finger, "Not even half a word". The great Fudayl Ibn Ayad used to say, “When you see a deviant on a path, take another path”.

Allah knows best for His knowledge is complete.

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the doorstep of scholars) 

Question:

Is it permissible to pray behind Deobandis?

Answer:

Wa Alaykum Al-Salam,

From amongst the conditions of an Imam for Salah is that he must not be an open sinner or misguided. The Salah behind such an Imam is Makrooh. This is mentioned in most if not all the books of Hanafi Fiqh. The fatwa is that it is severely Makrooh to perform Salah behind an open sinner or a misguided Imam. It is necessary (wajib) to repeat such salah.

As for the Deobandies, many of their general public are misguided due to rejecting one or more beliefs from the necessities of the Ahl Al-Sunnah. These are beliefs upon which every scholar from amongst the pious predecessors unanimously agreed upon. As for the actual Deobandies, they hold beliefs of infidelity. Such as comparing the knowledge of the Prophet (peace be upon him) with animals, children and mad men, see Hifz Al-Iman by Ashraf Ali Thanwi. Also, that the Prophet (peace be upon him) is the seal of the Prophets but it doesn't mean that another prophet can not come in his or after his time, see Tahzeer Al-Naas by Qasim Nanotwi. And also, that the knowledge of satan is more than the knowledge of the Prophet (peace be upon him), see Baraaheen-e-Qaati'ah by Khaleel Ahmad Ambethwi and verified by Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi.

There are many other beliefs of infidelity mentioned by the deobandi scholars such as Allah can lie in their books which are published even today by their own establishments. May Allah protect every Musslim from such beliefs and opinions. Any deobandi who knows of this and accepts it as correct is also out of the folds of Isslam. Salah behind such a deobandi is haram and the same as performing salah behind a Hindu. See Al-Ataya Al-Nabawiyyah Fi Al-Fatawa Al-Ridwiyyah, Fatawa Mustafawiyyah, Fatawa Amjadiyyah and all the Fatawa of the Scholars who lived where the deobandi sect emerged from.

And Allah knows best.

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri

(Beggar at the doorstep of Scholars) 

Question:

Is saying Narah Tahqeek correct, some peoplesay that u should say haqsab yaar
because Imam Hassan ismissed out in haqchaaryaar, they also say that nara tahqeekwas started by wahabis, is there any proof on this?can we say it,if one person stops narah tahqeek harchaaryaar, what can we say about such person?

Answer:

It is perfectly permissible to proclaim “Haq Chaar Yaar” for surely the four greatest companions (Allah is pleased with them) according to definite research are upon the truth (Haq). Imam Hasan (Allah is pleased with him) also without doubt is upon the truth and so are many and many other companions. However, missing the name of any of them does not affect the permissibility of proclaiming one, two, three or four of them are upon the truth. This is simply because one does not intend to limit the truth for those he proclaims are on the truth.

If the proclamation is for the Al-Khilafah Al-Raashidah, then verily it is wrong to miss out the name of Imam Hasan for surely without his eminence, that Khilafah is not complete. However, it is clear that the proclamation “Haq Chaar Yaar” is not for the Al-Khilafah Al-Raashidah but for the closest friends of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). This is clear in the word, “Yaar”. The great Imam Qadi Ayad of Spain in his Al-Shifa records from Ibn Mas’ood that the Messenger of Allah said, “Allah has chosen four of them for me”. These are the four friends for whom the proclamation is made. The great Muhaddith and Jurist, Imam Ahmad in his Musnad narrates from Anas that the Messenger of Allah said that the love of four will not gather in the heart of a hypocrite. They are Abu Bakr, Umar, Usman and Ali (Allah is pleased with them all). This is the reason for the proclamation.

A person who stops such proclamation can not be accused until his intention is known. Maybe he has mistaken the proclamation to be for Al-Khilafah Al-Raashidah or for limiting the truth for them four. If that is the case then he is not accused by the Shari’ah. Or maybe he has been misguided to believe the four are not upon the truth. If he does not believe the four great companions to be on the truth then either he is a Shi’ah who believes that the Shaykhayn (Abu Bakr and Umar) are not upon the truth or a Wahhabi who believes that Ameer Al-Mumineen Ali Ibn Ab Taalib was wrong against Ameer Mu’awiyah (Allah is pleased with them both). I mention these two reasons according to our era and verily Allah and His Messenger (peace be upon him) know best.

Whether this proclamation was innovated by the Wahhabies or not has no relevance to its permissibility. This is simply because it is not from the types of resemblance that is prohibited by our Law. It is not a sign of a Wahhabi. Bukhari, Muslim and Abu Dawud have recorded from Ibn Abbas that when the Prophet (peace be upon him) came to Madinah, he saw that the Jews fasted on a specific day, the 10th of Muharram. He (peace be upon him) asked the Jews why they fast on that day. They said that the day is of great importance for us, on this day our Prophet Musa (upon him be peace) was relieved from fir’awn (pharaoh). The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “We have more right (to celebrate the success) of the Prophet Musa (upon him be peace). Therefore, the Prophet (peace be upon him) fasted on that day and also ordered (the companions) to fast on that day”. According to another narration a companion objected that this is the way of the Jews and the Prophet (peace be upon him) said we shall fast for two days. In the same way, we are the correct Ahl Al-Sunnah Wa Al-Jama’ah and we have more right to proclaim the fact that our Prophet’s (peace be upon him) most beloved four companions are on the truth and verily Allah knows best.

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the doorstep of scholars) 

Question:

Is there ijmah of siddiue e akbar or maslak of jamoor, if someone says hazrat ali is afzal is he still a sunni? because some people say afew sahaba believe he was afzal.

Answer:

There is an Ijma' of the Ahl Al-Sunnah Wa Al-Jamaa’ah on the fact that Sayyiduna Abu Bak Al-Siddeeq is the most superior amongst the companions of our beloved Prophet (peace be upon him and Allah is pleased with them all). He, who believes that Sayyiduna Ali or any other companion is more superior above Sayyiduna Abu Bakr, is misguided from the Ahl Al-Sunnah Wa Al-Jamaa'ah. This is what Imam Ahmad Raza in his various Fatwas and Sadr Al-Shari’ah in his Bahar-e-Shari’at have established. Imam Ahmad Raza has also written two pamphlets on this issue, “Matla’ Al-Qamarayn” and “Al-Zulaal Al-Anqaa” in which there are many and many references and quotes of our most authentic personalities from the past.

A few quotes from Imam Ahmad Raza (Allah is pleased with him) relevant to the question will be of much benefit. He says, “According to research the word Qat’I is used for two meanings. Firstly, when there is absolutely no possibility of another meaning and nothing affects it, like in Muhkam and Mutawatir. Secondly, there is no possibility of another meaning which is produced through evidence although a possibility remains, like in Majaaz and Takhsees. The first type is known as Ilm Al-Yaqeen and the person who rejects it is known as an infidel. The second type is known as Ilm Al-Tamaaniyyah and the person who rejects such is known as an innovator and misguided. One can in no circumstance call a person who rejects the second type an infidel”.

Imam Ahmad Raza then explains that the superiority of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr is proven through the second type mentioned above. He says, “We do not need to prove the superiority through the first type of Qat’I evidence for we do not call the Tafdeelies, infidels. We seek refuge in Allah from calling such. However, their misguidance is established through the other meaning of Qat’I which only an unaware person would refute. This is because much evidence (Nusoos) has come to prove this and the Ahadeeth have reached Al-Tawatur Al-Ma’nwiy, therefore, weak and unstable possibilities which are not produced through evidence have no affect in Qat’I of this meaning. The scholars of Usool have clearly explained this”.

Further more, Imam Ahmad Raza explains, “Without doubt, weak, in reality has absolutely no contradiction with authentic, therefore weak contradiction will neither cause loss to us neither will it benefit he who refutes us”.

The great Imam also clears the misunderstanding that most people fall victim to whilst dwelling into this issue, “Contradiction is one thing and mere affirmation or negation is another thing. One will realise this when he reads the following Ahadeeth, do not give superiority to a Prophet over another Prophet, do not give me superiority over Yunus Ibn Matta, Adam is the most superior amongst the Prophets and Ibraheem is the best of all creation. Will anyone accept these as a contradiction to the superiority of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him and upon them all)”. Hence the answer to the fact that there are narrations from the Sahabah that another is more superior than Abu Bakr (Allah is pleased with all of them).

Imam Ahmad Raza also explains that the reconciliation between the statements of the scholars is simple after understanding what has been mentioned before. Those scholars who mentioned this issue as Qat’I meant the second type of Qat’I and those who mentioned it as Zanni meant the highest type of Zanni which is the same as the second type of Qat’i. From this we understand that those who mentioned there is no ijma’ on this issue, simply meant that there is no Qat’I Ijma’, (in the meaning of the first type of Qat’i) on this issue.

Verily this issue is not from amongst the Usool of our religion. However, if one says, because this issue is not from the Usool of our religion and not Qat’I, therefore, we are free to choose whether to accept it or not, the Imam says, “Tell them to leave all the necessary (Waajib) aspects of the religion and then observe what kind of a wrath the Shari’ah brings upon them. When it has become known and clearly proven by the statements of our predecessors, it is necessary for one to accept it”. Verily when scholars apparently differ we must reconcile and accept those that are the pillars of our religion, especially those who mentioned this issue as being Qat’i. Imam Ahmad Raza writes, “Amongst them is he who has mentioned this issue most, the lion of Allah, whose blessed face Allah has glorified. It is established through Tawaatur that he would give superiority to the Shaykhayn (Abu Bakr and Umar) above himself and the whole of the ummah. Further he removed all ambiguity from this issue in the narration of Daar Qutni where he said, anyone who gives superiority for me above Abu Bakr or Umar, verily I shall punish him the punishment of an accuser. Imam Zahabi says the narration is Saheeh. Is it possible that Sayyiduna Ali (Allah is pleased with him) would carry out such statement if it was not Qat’I and had contradiction? Whereas it is he who narrates from the Prophet (peace be upon him), wave punishments as much as possible for the Muslims. Amongst them is also Sayyiduna Maymoon Ibn Mahraan who is amongst the Fuqaha of the Taabi’een. He was asked if Abu Bakr and umar were more superior or Ali. His hair rose in fear and his veins began to expand upto the etent that his knife fell from his hand and he said, I had never thought that I’d live to see the day when people begin to give superiority for another above Abu Bakr and Umar. From amongst them is Imam Maalik Ibn Anas when he was asked who is most superior after the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), he replied, Abu Bakr and Umar, then he said, is there any doubt in that? Also, amongst them is the great Imam Abu Hanifah. He was asked about the signs of the Ahl Al-Sunnah. He replied that the sign of the Ahl Al-Sunnah is that one believes Abu Bakr and Umar as most superior after the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him. How can it be a sign if one who believed otherwise would also remain amongst the Ahl Al-Sunnah?). Also, amongst them is the great Imam Muhammad Ibn Idris al-Shafa’I who recorded the ijma’ of the Sahabah and the Tabi’een on this issue. Among them is also the Imam of Ahl Al-Sunnah Wa Al-Jama’ah Imam Ab Al-Hasan Al-Ash’ari, Imam Hujjah Al-Islam Al-Ghazali, Imam Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani, Imam Ahmad Al-Qustalani, Imam Abd Al-Baaqi Al-Zarqaani and Imam Mulla Ali Al-Qaari and many others (May Allah shower mercy upon them all). Al-Sayyid Al-Shareef Ab Al-Husayn Al-Noori narrated from his Sheikh and Murshid Ale Rasool Ahmadi, he said that I heard from Shah Abd Al-Azeez Al-Dahalwi, he used to say that the superiority of the Shaykhayn (Abu Bakr and Umar) is Qat’I or similar to Qat’I”.

Finally, Imam Ahmad Raza finishes by saying, “The superiority of the Shaykhayn is Qat’I in its second meaning and it is similar to Qat’I in its first meaning. Now it has become clear that if one says regarding those who say there is an Ijma’ on this issue, that even they are established on Zann then he is correct as long as he means Zann Bi Al-Ma’na Al-A’am or Qat’I Bi Al-Ma’na Al-Akhas and this will not cause any loss to us neither will it benefit the rejector. If he meant vice versa then he is wrong and he has no strength to prove his point for the many and many evidences that have been established against him”.

The above are not but extracts from the Khatamah (Conclusion) from one of Imam Ahmad Raza’s pamphlets on this issue. If one wishes then he shall seek refuge towards them for surely they are full of enlightened evidence from the Qur’an, Hadith and the statements of our predecessors and what I have mentioned above is not but a drop from its ocean and surely Allah knows best.

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the doorstep of scholars) 

To perform Salah behind an open sinner or a misguided person whose misguidance has not reached infidelity is severely disliked and must be repeated (Kariha Tahreeman Wa Tajibu I’aadatuhu). In Durar, Tahtaawi Al-Durar, Majma’ Al-Anhar, Tabyeen Al-Haqaa’iq, Al-Fatawa Al-Ridwiyyah, Radd Al-Muhtar, Bahar-e-Shari’at and several other books of Hanafi Fiqh it says, “It is disliked (severely) and it is necessary to repeat such pray for showing disrespect towards them is necessary and they do not care in the matter of their religion”.

The Messenger of Allah said, “When a sinner is praised, it causes the anger of Allah and due to it, the arsh shakes”. In putting forward an open sinner or a misguided person for leading the prayer is showing him much great respect, surely that is praising the person and a means to gain the anger of Allah. The Imam is an intermediate between the servant and Allah and therefore one should be cautious of whom he chooses as his Imam. This is the rule in the Hanafi school and verily Allah knows best.

Zahid Husain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the doorstep of scholars) 

Question

What is the ruling regarding those people who state that the Ahlul Bayt are more afzal than all the Prophets alaihis salaam except RasoolAllah Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam?

Answer:

Anyone who believes a person who is not a prophet or a messenger to be more superior than any Prophet or Messenger of Allah is a non-believer (Kaafir). This is clear in our books of fiqh-e-akbar and asgar (Books of beliefs and jurisprudence).

And the knowledge of Allah is complete. 

Question:

What was the purpose of RasoolAllah Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam's going on Meraj in their bodily form? As many claim that as there was no purpose then there is no haqiqat in there going on meraj in bodily form and it must've been spiritually as some previous scholars have claimed. Are they correct to have this view?

Muhammad Azar

Answer:


The true purpose of Mi'raaj is known by Allah best and mentioned in the Qur’an as, “So that we show him our signs…..”. No action of Allah is free from divine wisdom. How can there be no purpose and no benefit in one one ascending above the heavens and past the Sidrah Al-Muntaha'? How can there be no purpose and benefit in reaching the Arsh of Allah? 
How can there be no benefit and purpose in gaining the closeness to Allah? Can a Muslim say such?

The truth is that the Prophet Muhammad's (peace be upon him) Mi'raaj occured with his blessed body and soul. This is the stance of the Ahl Al-Sunnah Wa Al-Jama'ah. Anyone who differs is from the Ahl Al-Bid'ah (misguided). Mullah Ahmad Jeewan writes in Tafseeraat-e-Ahmadiyyah, "He who says it was only with the soul or in the sleep, is a Mubtadi', Daal, Mudil and Fasiq". Which means he is from the Ahl Al-bid'ah and he is misguided, a misguider and a sinner. There is absolutely no logic in believing the Mi'raaj to be with the soul without the body. This is because, if it occured with the soul on its own, the non-believers of Makkah would not have made a major issue of it and they would have accepted the occurence of Mi'raaj. For every person holds the possibility to travel anywhere with his soul whilst sleeping.

And the knowledge of Allah is complete.

Wa Al-Saamu Alaykum,

Zahid Husain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the door step of Scholars) 

Question:

Assalamu Alaikum Mufti Sahib. I am a mureed of Huzoor Taajush Shariah and studying Hifz. Every year i lead a few rakaats of Taraweeh. The isha times our Masjid in Keighley (main mosque) have are of the 15 degree ruling. I read the salaah in the mosque and repeated it at home at the correct time. Outside Ramadan I have done the same. What is the proper ruling on isha times and the summer when Isha will not even appear in UK? Can i follow the Sahibain or do I have to follow Imam Abu Hanifa, as i am Taajush Shariah's mureed?

Answer:

Wa Alaykum Al-Salam,

I hope you are well and so are the brothers in Keighley. I pray to Allah that you remain steadfast on the truth all through your life.

Answer:

The time of Isha' Salah according to the great Imam Abu Hanifah is when the horizon becomes comlpetely dark after sunset. When the sun sets, redness appears in the horizon where the sun had set. This redness is known as the nautical twilight. When the redness sets, whiteness appears. This whiteness is known as the astronomical twilight. When the whiteness sets, the horizon becomes completely dark. this is the end time of Maghrib and the beginning time of Isha'.

The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said that the time for Isha' Salah begins when the Shafaq (twilight) sets. Imam Ibn Hummam In Fath Al-Qadeer records that the Messenger of Allah said, "When the horizon becomes completely dark".

In Al-Fatawa Al-Hindiyyah and Al-Fatawa Li-Qadi Khan it says, "Abu Hanifah (May Allah shower mercy on them) said, it is the whiteness which follows the redness upto the extent that if someone performs his Isha' Salah after the redness disappears and the whiteness has not yet disappeared then it is not permissible".

Therefore, if one performs his Isha' Salah before the whiteness sets in the horizon his Salah is invalid and will have to be performed again at the correct time. This is upon which Fatwa is given in the Hanafi School as can be seen in Fath Al-Qadeer, Tasheeeh Al-Qudoori, Bahr Al-Raa'iq, Radd Al-Muhtar, Al-Fatawa Al-Ridwiyyah and Bahar-e-Shari'at.

As for the days when Isha' Time does not occur in specific countries, one shall perform Qada of Isha' Salah in the time of Fajr as mentioned by Imam Ahmad Raza in his Fatawa and by Sadr Al-Shari'ah in his Bahar-e-Shari'at. Al-Sheikh Taaj Al-Shari'ah has also written the same as above in verification of a Fatwa in Fatawa Europe of Mufti Abd Al-Wajid from Amsterdam, Holland.

If such days occur in the month of Ramadan, Mufti Shareef Al-Haq issued a Fatwa saying, if the Muslims regard the Taraweeh Salah as highly important and will cause an uproar if not performed then those Muslims shall follow the Isha' Salah time according to the Sahibayn only in them days and Allah knows best.

Wa Al-Salam Alaykum,

Zahid Husain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the doorstep of Scholars) 

Question:

Assalaamu Alaykum respected Mufti Sahib,

I have a question regarding the status of our Salah if we were to read behind Imams who are not Hanafis but are either Shafi or Wahabis. I am a University student in London and the Mosques that I go to pray my Salah are Shafi or Wahabi. There isn't any Hanafi mosques in this locality. Is my Salah valid? Is there a difference of opinion among the Hanafis on this issue? What is the relied upon position? Is it better for me to pray alone or behind a bidati? What comments do the Ulema have about some examples we can extract from the Salaf where they had read Salah behind the people of Bida? 

Please can you answer all the contentions that I have put forward. This issue is really puzzling me, and I would like some clarity on the issue. 

JazakAllah Khair 

Wassalaamu Alaykum

Answer:

Wa Alaykum Al-Salam,

Answer:

A Hanafi can perform his Salah behind an Imam who is a Shafa’I as long as the Imam fulfils the obligatory acts and conditions of cleanliness and Salah according to the Hanafi Fiqh as well as fulfilling the obligatory and necessary acts of his own school of thought. Imam Ibn Abideen writes in his Radd Al-Muhtar, “If one knows that the Imam fulfils the obligations of the pre-conditions and conditions of that specific Salah, although he does not fulfil the necessary (wajib) acts, then there is no harm in performing behind him”, similar to this, is mentioned in Bahr Al-Raa’iq of Ibn Nujaym Al-Misri. In Al-Fatawa Al-Hindiyyah, it says that Salah behind the Imam of the other three schools is permissible as long as the Imam does not hold prejudice opinions against our school, he fulfils the obligatiory acts of cleanliness (ablution) according to our school and that his Salah would not be deemed as invalid in our school”. Therefore, if blood exits the body of the Imam, flows onto his skin and he does not perform ablution again then the Salah of a Hanafi behind such an Imam is invalid. In the same book it also says that if one does not know if the Imam fulfils the aforementioned conditions then his Salah will be valid but disliked. In the case that the Imam does cater for the Hanafi followers, it is more virtuous to perform in congregation behind him rather than performing alone. However, in the case of the Salah in congregation being disliked, it is better to perform Salah alone for he is excused from congregation and something disliked to Allah and His beloved (peace be upon him) can not be better than that which is not disliked.

To perform Salah behind an open sinner or a misguided person (one from the people of bid’ah) whose misguidance has not reached infidelity is severely disliked and must be repeated (Kariha Tahreeman Wa Tajibu I’aadatuhu). In Durar, Tahtaawi Al-Durar, Majma’ Al-Anhar, Tabyeen Al-Haqaa’iq, Al-Fatawa Al-Ridwiyyah, Radd Al-Muhtar, Bahar-e-Shari’at and several other books of Hanafi Fiqh it says, “It is disliked (severely) and it is necessary to repeat such pray for showing disrespect towards them is necessary and they do not care in the matter of their religion”.

The Messenger of Allah said, “When a sinner is praised, it causes the anger of Allah and due to it, the arsh shakes”. In putting forward an open sinner or a misguided person for leading the prayer is showing him much great respect, surely that is praising the person and a means to gain the anger of Allah. The Imam is an intermediate between the servant and Allah and therefore one should be cautious of whom he chooses as his Imam. In Mishkaat Al-Masaabeeh, Hazrat Ibrahim Ibn Maysarah narrates that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "He who respects a misguided person has helped destroy Islam". The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) also said, “Do not sit with them, do not eat with them, do not converse with them, do not perform Salah with them………..”. In Bayhaqi, regarding the great Muhaddith, Imam Muhammad Ibn Mubarak, it says that two deviants came to his gathering and asked Him if they could recite a Hadeeth to Him, Ibn Mubarak replied, "I do not want to hear a Hadith from you". They asked if they could recite a verse of the Qur'an, again Ibn Mubarak replied, "I do not want to hear a verse from you, either you both leave or i will leave". So they left. The students asked why he did not hear a verse for surely they can't fabricate a verse. He replied, “what if they incorrectly commented on the verse and that commentary touched my heart, I would have also become misguided”. It has been recorded by Sheikh Abd Al-Qadir Al-Jilaani that one must not associate with the misguided people to protect his own faith and that Fudayl Ibn Ayad used to say, “When you see a deviant on a path, take another path”. Sayyiduna Ayyub Al-Ansari used to change his path when he used to see a misguided person as is recorded in Bayhaqi. This was the way of our predecessors (Salaf). They did not perform their Salah behind the misguided people. If one claims such then it is upon him to bring evidence. As for the Wahhabies, their misguidance and texts of infidelity are clear upon all (although we are cautious from labelling them apostates) and therefore one's Salah behind them is invalid and must be performed alone if there is no other Imam and verily Allah knows best.

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the doorstep of Scholars) 

Question: Assalamu Alaikum Mufti Sahab, Hope you are well and InshaAllah hope to see you soon.
I have been researching about how we have differences in Salah due to them being taken out at different degrees, 

now i read the other question posted about Isha/taraveeh time posted by a Hafiz sahab and your answer to it clarifies many things, however the question i wanted to ask is about the Sehri times. What Degree do Ulamas use to give one hour extra time for Sehri ?? Not all Mosques do it but some of our Sunni Mosques do.

JazakAllah.
Answer:
Wa Alaykum Al-Salam,

The Imams of all schools are united on the time of Fajr which is the time to end the eating of Sehri. The time for Fajr begins when the sun is 18 degrees below the Horizon as has clearly been proven in Dar Al-Qubh An Waqt Al-Subh by the great Imam Ahmad Raza (Allah is pleased with him). The scholars of astronomy are also united on the fact that the twilight begins when the sun appears 18 degrees below the horizon of sunrise which is the break of dawn, end of sehri and beiginning of Fajr. Those people who continue eating after this time has occured, whether that be by mistake or due to following the wrong time table (whether it has been wrongly verified by a Mufti or an Aalim) have not fasted that day. They will have to do Qaza and no Kaffarah is upon them. This is clear in the book of fasting according to our Fuqaha.

As for the one hour extra given in some Masjids, this is nothing but ignorance. This is not based on any degree. This is based on the baseless rule of removing 1 hour and 20 minutes from the time of Fajr, splitting the night in to seven parts and labelling the final part as Fajr or on another basis which has no basis in the Hanafi Law. This is impermissible and worthy of Allah's punishment. Those people who eat for an hour extra after the break of dawn are accountable for missing their fasts as has been mentioned above. Blaming the Masjid committee will not free them from liability and blindly following them is a separate offence. There is no fatwa of a Mufti or Scholar to support such incorrect and invalid timings. These people should fear Allah and fear the questioning on the day of Judgement. May Allah guide the Muslims.

"Some people have thought the final seventh part of the night is Fajr, this is absolutely incorrect" (Bahar-e-Shariat) 

And Allah knows best.

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the doorstep of Scholars) 

The Imams of all schools are united on the time of Fajr which is the time to end the eating of Sehri. The time for Fajr begins when the sun is 18 degrees below the Horizon as has clearly been proven in Dar Al-Qubh An Waqt Al-Subh by the great Imam Ahmad Raza (Allah is pleased with him). Those people who continue eating after that time has passed, whether that be by mistake or due to following the wrong time table (whether it has been wrongly verified by a Mufti or an Aalim) have not fasted that day. They will have to do Qaza and no Kaffarah is upon them. This is clear in the book of fasting according to our Fuqaha.

And Allah knows best.

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri 

Question:

As-salam-mu alaikum, 
Is it permissible to eat the so-called "Halal" KFC's which are now opening around the country. They say they are certified by the HFA. Are we allowed to eat at these "halal" outlets?
What about other fast food chains which have halal stores, such as Subway and Nando's?
What about the halal stores they have in the arab countries, such as Saudi Arabia?

Answer:

Wa Alaykum Al-Salam, 

The essence of all meat is haram and impure. However, any meat of a halal animal slaughtered by a Musslim in the valid way according to Islamic law becomes Halal to consume and pure to use. It's permissibility can be established through the information delivered by a Musslim, if not witnessed the act of slaughtering. The information of a non-Muslim is not sufficient to change any meat from it's essence and establish it as halal. It will remain in it's essence. 

The Hanafi Fuqaha agree that the information of a non-Muslim to establish something haram or halal (Diyaanaat) is not considered (See Hidayah, Jawharah, Radd Al-Muhtar, Al-Ataya Al-Nabawiyyah and Bahar). The Fatwa in the Hanafi Fiqh also says that any meat that is once established as halal and later it is out of the eyes of a believer and in the eyes of a non-believer, it (the halal meat) returns back to it's essence, thus, not halal anymore. See Al-Ataya Al-Nabawiyyah and Bahar for references. 

After knowing the above, it is clear that, firstly, the meat in takeaways which is delievered by a non-Muslim is not halal, secondly, the takeaways where there are no Muslim workers or there are but at some point the meat is out of the eyes of the Muslim and in the eyes of the non-Muslim is not halal and thirdly, organisations which do not consider such rulings are not to be considered as a certification to establish halal. 

As for KFC, Subway and Nandos, I have no information regarding them yet. What i have mentioned above is enough to know the rule in our Hanafi Law. 

And Allah knows best 

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the doorstep of Scholars) 

Answer

Wa Alaykum Al-Salam,

The usage of the Huqqah (also known as sheehsha and water pipe) can be permissible and can be impermissible, depending on it's contents (substance). If tobacco is used, which does not have the capibility of intoxicating a person to such an extent that the person would not know what he utters and stumbles whilst walking, it is permissible and there is no reason to regard it as not permissible or haram. In Al-Hadeeqah Al-Nadiyyah, Allamah Abd Al-Ghani Al-Nablusi writes, "From amongst the generally practiced innovations is the usage of the Huqqah and the drinking of coffee which is common amongst the general and specific public in todays time. The truth is that there is no reason for it's hurmah (regarding it haram) and neither for it's karahah (regarding it makrooh). In Al-Durr Al-Mukhtar it is regarded the same as onions and garlic. Ibn Abideen comments on it, "Which is permissibility in the chosen school". Imam Ahmad Tahtawi and Allamah Ab Al-Sa'ood write in it's foot notes regarding the comparison of it with onions and garlic, "it is not hidden that the karahah is minor (tanzeehi) which is permissible".

Today many Scholars have discovered many disadvantages of smoking tobacco and therefore regarded it as severely disliked or haram. Although these opinons are based on assumptions and far from the correct opinion for mere assumptions and estimations are not enough to establish something as severely disliked or haram in Islamic Fiqh, it is still better to refrain from unnecessary consumption.

As for smoking a substance that has the capability to intoxicate a person to an extent where he does not know of what he utters and stumbles whilst walking is impermissible, regardless of its quantity.

For more information on the Huqqah, one should refer to Huqqah Al-Marjaan Li-Muhimm Hukm Al-Dukkhaan written by Imam Ahmad Raza (Allah is pleased with him).

And Allah knows best.

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the doorstep of Scholars) 

Answer:

To listen to Qawwali is permissible if its conditions are met. This is for the Ahl (capable) as agreed upon by the expert Scholars and glorified Saints (Awliya’) of Allah (Allah is pleased with them all). In todays day and age, the concept of Qawwali has completely changed. Qawwali in the past was that which in today’s custom is known by the names, Hamd, Naat, Nasheed etc. Unfortunately, the name “Qawwali” is now only used if there is an addition of musical instruments and at times with the “add on” of dancing and whirling depending on the mood of those present. Musical instruments are forbidden. And so is dancing if it is with intent. This can be understood from the conditions for the permissibility of listening to Qawwali. Sayyiduna Muhammad Ibn Mubarak Karmani, the Mureed of Khwaja Fareed Al-Deen Ganj-e-Shakar and Khalifah of Mahboob-e-Ilaahi, Sultaan Al-Mashaa’ikh, writes in Siyar Al-Awliya that Hazrat Sultan Al-Mashaa’ikh (Hazrat Nizam Al-Deen, Nizam Al-Awliya) says,

“Sima’ (to listen to Qawwali) is permissible if a few conditions are met. The singer must be an adult and not a child or a female. The listener must only listen to everything in the remembrance of Allah. The words that are sung must be free from obscenity and indecency and they must not be void. Musical instruments must not be present in the gathering. If all these conditions are met, Sima’ is permissible.”

Listening to Qawwali with musical instruments and dancing is not newly attributed to the Chisti Mashaa’ikh but the false accusations had begun already in the time of the great ones from the Chisti Mashaa’ikh. In the same authentic book of the Chishti Mashaa’ikh, it says,

“Someone complained to the Sultan of the Mashaa’ikh that some of the dervishes danced in a gathering where there were musical instruments. He said, they did not do good as something impermissible cannot be condoned.”

In Fawaa’id Al-Fu’aad, Sultan Al-Mashaa’ikh Mahboob-e-Ilaahi himself writes,

“Musical instruments are Haram.”

One who listens to musical instruments must take heed from the aforementioned quotations and especially those who attribute themselves as followers of the great Chisti Mashaa’ikh and falsely accuse them of permitting such acts. They regard it Forbidden and unlawful and these regard it permissible and their tradition. How rude is this accusation! It is from principle that mere tales and stories have no stance against authentic statements and texts.

The Chisti Mashaa’ikh were followers of the Hadith of the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Sayyiduna Sultan Al-hind Khwaja Mu’een Al-Deen Hasan Ajmeri was so steadfast on following the Sunnah that at one point he took oath that he would never miss an act that is a Sunnah of the beloved Prophet (peace be upon him). Would he ever go against such clear prohibitions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) after such an oath? Imam Ahmad Raza in Masaa’il-e-Sima’ writes that the Hadith are Mutawatir in prohibition of musical instruments. Here is a very rigorously authentic narration he quotes which is enough for the seeker of the truth,

“Verily amongst my nation (ummah) will be those who will deem permissible the female’s private part (fornication), silk, khamr (alcohol) and musical instruments" (Bukhari, Musnad Imam Ahmad, Sunan Abi Dawood and Ibn Maajah)

Imam Ahmad Raza attended the holy shrine of the great khwaja Ghareeb Nawaz many times and so did his son Mufti A’zam-e-Hind. They have both expressed immense love for the great Sheikh (Allah is pleased with him) and his silsilah and are both adamant on the fact that he prohibited such Qawwali that is listened with the involvement of musical instruments. Allamah Hasan Raza Khan wrote an amazing manqabat in his praise and was adamant that Khwaja Ghareeb Nawaz forbade the use of musical instruments. There is no authentic piece of text to show the great Mashaa’ikh of the Chisti silsilah ever allowed musical instruments, yet people today accuse them of allowing it. On the contrary there is authentic text to establish they forbade such. It is a principle that the weak must not be acted upon when there is authentic and sound opposing it. May Allah open the eyes of the wrong doers and those who falsely accuse due to ignorance.

Some people say that if it was impermissible, the great Mashaa’ikh would not allow it outside their shrines. This is the utterance of their ignorance. It is not the duty of those who have left this world to stop acts that are impermissible from happening outside or on their shrines. This is not considered evidence in the law of Islam. Otherwise stealing would become permissible as it happens outside the Ka’bah; the house of Allah. Prostrating to other than Allah would become permissible as it happens on the graves of many saints of Allah. Females uncovering their beauty and filling their faces with make up and lip stick would become permissible as they attend the graves of many saints with such appearance. Smashing and destroying the shrines and building toilets on them would become permissible as has happened in Saudi on the graves of those who are much greater than all saints; the great Sahabah (Allah is pleased with them). Smashing and destroying the houses of Allah; The Masjids, and building temples for idol worshipping on that very earth would become permissible as has happened in various places in India and the list can continue to many disgusting and atrocious acts becoming permitted. May Allah protect us from such.

And Allah knows best,

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri
(Beggar at the doorstep of Scholars and Saints) 

Question:

Salaam my question is sometimes i have to listen to music i have no option. i was wondering will this be classified as a sin?reasons why i have to listen to music is because when i go back to manchester my cousin plays music and he plays it really loud also sometimes when we are sat at home he puts music channels on to whichi have to listen i have nowhere else to go as it is only a flat so what would the ruling be on this?JazakAllah

Answer:

Wa Alaykum Al-Salam, 
It is not permissible to listen to musical instruments. There are several Ahadeeth of the Prophet (peace be upon him) which forbid the use of and to listen to musical instruments. Here is one which is rigorously authentic, "Verily amongst my nation (ummah) will be those who will deem permissible fornication, khamr (alcohol) and musical instruments". This Hadith is recorded by Imam Bukhari, Imam Ahmad, Imam Ab Dawood and Ibn Maajah. 
One must refrain from attending places where forbidden acts take place. The excuse written in the question is not a valid excuse according to Isslamic law. One who has no intent of listening to music but music reaches his ears, he is not accountable for it. 

And Allah knows best. 

Zahid Hussain Al-Qadri 
(Beggar at the doorstep of Saints)