Conditions of wiping over socks

What are the conditions for wiping over the socks? Please give the daleel (evidence) for that.

Praise be to Allaah.

Four conditions apply to wiping over the socks.

The first condition:

That they should have been put on when one was in a state of tahaarah (purity, i.e., when one has wudoo’). The evidence for that is what the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to al-Mugheerah ibn Shu’bah: “Don’t worry, because I put them one when I was clean.”

The second condition:

That the khufoof (leather slippers which cover the ankle) or socks should be taahir (pure). If they are naajis (impure) then it is not permissible to wipe over them. The daleel for that is that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) led his companions in prayer one day wearing shoes, which he took off whilst he was praying. He said that Jibreel had told him that there was something dirty on them. This was narrated by Ahmad from the hadeeth of Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (may Allaah be pleased with him) in his Musnad. This indicates that it is not permissible to pray wearing anything that is naajis, because if the naajis thing is wiped over, the person will be contaminated by that najaasah (impurity), so he cannot be considered to be taahir (pure).

The third condition:

They may be wiped over when one is purifying oneself from minor impurity (i.e., doing wudoo’ after passing wind, urine or stools), not when one is in a state of janaabah (major impurity following sexual activity) or when ghusl is required. The evidence for that is the hadeeth of Safwaan ibn ‘Assaal (may Allaah be pleased with him) who said: “The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) commanded us, when we were travelling, not to remove our khufoof for three days and three nights, except in the case of janaabah. But we could keep them on and wipe over them in the case of stools, urine and sleeping.” This was narrated by Ahmad from the hadeeth of Safwaan ibn ‘Assaal (may Allaah be pleased with him) in his Musnad. So the condition is that wiping the socks may be done when purifying oneself (doing wudoo’) from minor impurity, and it is not permissible in the case of major impurity, because of the hadeeth which we have mentioned here.

The fourth condition:

That the wiping may be done within the time specified by sharee’ah, which is one day and one night in the case of one who is not travelling, and three days and three nights in the case of one who is travelling. This is because of the hadeeth of ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allaah be pleased with him) who said: “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) stated one day and one night for the one who is not travelling, and three days and three nights for the one who is travelling, i.e., for wiping over the khufoof.” This was narrated by Muslim. This period starts from the first time one wipes over the socks when doing wudoo’ after some minor impurity, and it ends twenty-four later for the one who is not travelling, and seventy-two hours later for the one who is travelling. So if we assume that a person purifies himself for Fajr prayer on Tuesday and remains taahir (pure, i.e., keeps his wudoo’) until ‘Isha prayer on Tuesday evening, then he sleeps and wakes up to pray Fajr on Wednesday, and he wipes his socks at five o’clock zawaali time , then the period begins from 5 a.m. on Wednesday and lasts until 5 a.m. on Thursday. If we assume that he wiped his socks before 5 a.m then he can pray Fajr on Thursday with this wiping and pray as much as he wants as long as he remains taahir, because according to the most correct scholarly opinion, wudoo’ is not broken when the time period for wiping over the socks expires. That is because the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not set a time limit for tahaarah, rather he set a time limit for wiping over the socks. Once that time limit expires, one cannot wipe over the socks again, but if a person remains in a state of tahaarah then his tahaarah is still valid, because this is what is implied by the shar’i evidence, and whatever is proven by shar’i evidence cannot be invalidated unless there is further shar’i evidence to that effect. There is no evidence to suggest that wudoo’ is broken when the time limit for wiping over the socks expires, because what the basic principle is that he remains as he is (i.e., taahir) until it becomes apparent that this is no longer the case.

These are the conditions which apply to wiping over the khufoof. There are other conditions which were mentioned by some of the scholars, but some of these are subject to further debate.

I’laam al-Musaafireen bi Ba’d Aadaab wa Ahkaam al-Safar by Shaykh ibn al-‘Uthaymeen p.14

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/9640

It is not essential for socks to be of leather

What is nature of socks during wipening.? Can a person wipe on any socks or it must be leather. Give the answer in light of Quran and Hadith?

Praise be to Allaah.

It was narrated that al-Mugheerah ibn Shu’bah said: “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did wudoo’ and wiped over his socks and shoes.” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 92; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Sunan al-Tirmidhi, no. 86)

The author of al-Qaamoos said: jawrab (socks) means something that is wrapped around the feet.

Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi said: jawrab means a thin cover for the feet made of wool, worn to keep the feet warm.

It was narrated that Yahyaa al-Bakka’ said: I heard Ibn ‘Umar saying, “Wiping over the socks (jawrabayn) is like wiping over the leather slippers (khuffayn).”

Al-Musannaf by Ibn Abi Shaybah, 1/173

Ibn Hazm said: wiping over anything that is worn on the feet – of things that are permitted to be worn and which come up above the ankles – is Sunnah, whether they are slippers (khuffayn) made of leather or felt or wood, or socks made of linen, wool, cotton, camel hair or goat hair, whether leather is worn over them or not, or whether they are overshoes or slippers worn over slippers or socks worn over socks.

Al-Muhalla, 1/321

Some scholars differed as to whether it is permissible to wipe over the slippers (khuffaayn). The correct view as indicated by the evidence is that it is permissible to do that, as stated above.

And Allaah knows best.

See the answer to Question No. 8186 and 9640

Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/13954

Saudi Di Mata Seorang Al-Qaidah

Kamis, 20 Maret 2008 06:38:19 WIB

SAUDI DI MATA SEORANG AL-QAIDAH


Oleh
Abu Ahmad As-Salafi



MUQADDIMAH
Daulah Su’udiyyah atau negeri Saudi Arabia adalah salah satu daulah di jazirah Arabiyyah yang dikenal sebagai pembela dakwah Salafiyyah yang gigih sejak berdirinya hingga saat ini.

Usaha yang agung dari dauluah Su’udiyyah di dalam mendakwahkan Islam yang haq menyejukkan mata dan membesarkan hati setiap muslim yang cinta kepada Islam yang haq, tetapi sebaliknya membuat geram dan panas orang-orang yang hatinya diselubungi oleh kebatilan dan kebid’ahan!

Di antara orang-orang yang sangat dengki kepada perjuangan daulah Su’udiyyah adalah seseorang yang menyebut dirinya Abu Muhammad Al-Maqdisi di dalam bukunya yang berjudul Kawasyif Jaliyyah fi Kufri Daulah Su’udiyyah – Edisi Indonesia : Saudi di Mata Seorang Al-Qaidah.

Dengan izin Allah telah sampai kepada kami kitab bantahan terhadap kitab Kawasyif di atas yang berjudul Tabdid Kawasyifil Anid fi Takfirihi Lidaulati Tauhid oleh Syaikh Abdul Aziz Ar-Ris dengan kata pengantar Syaikh Shalih Al-Fauzan, Syaikh Abdul Muhsin Al-Ubaikan dan Syaikh Abdullah Al-Ubailan.

Untuk menunaikan kewajiban kami dalam nasehat kepada kaum muslimin dan membela dakwah yang haq maka dengan permohonan pertolongan kepada Allah akan kami paparkan kesalahan-kesalahan kitab Kawasyif Jaliyyah di atas dengan mengacu kepada kitab Tabdid Kawasyif dengan harapan bisa memberikan rambu-rambu syar’i terhadap para pembaca kitab ini secara khusus dan kaum muslimin secara umum.

PENULIS DAN PENERBIT
Buku ini ditulis oleh Abu Muhammad Al-Maqdisi, nama lengkapnya adalah Isham [1] bin Muhammad bin Thohir Al-Burqowi, Lahir pada tahun 1378H/1959M di desa Burqoh daerah Nablus Palestina. Dia tumbuh di Kuwait, dia berguru pada awalnya kepada Muhammad Surur bin Nayif Zainal Abidin [2] tokoh utama kelompok Sururiyyah [3] hingga dia dikeluarkan dari kelompok Muhammad Surur karena fatwanya yang menyelisihi kelompok tersebut, kemudian dia berguru kepada para pemuda sisa-sisa kelompok Juhaiman yang tinggal di Kuwait, dan mengarang beberapa kitab seperti Kawasyif Jaliyah, Millata Ibrahim, Murji’atu Ashr, dan yang lainnya, kemudian dia dikeluarkan dari kelompok tersebut karena ketergesaannya dalam takfir, maka dia menyerang balik kelompok tersebut dengan menulis sebuah risalah kecil yang mensifati mereka sebagai “thaghut-thaghut kecil’. Sesudah itu dia bergabung dengan beberapa perorangan yang ghuluw dalam takfir yang mereka tidak sholat di masjid-masjid kaum muslimin dan sholat Jum’at di padang pasir! [Lihat Tabdid Kawasyif hal. 24-45]

Buku ini diterjemahkan ke dalam bahasa Indonesia oleh Abu Sulaiman dan diterbitkan oleh Penerbit Jazera Solo, cetakan pertama September 2005

MELECEHKAN DAN MEGKAFIRKAN PARA ULAMA
Buku Kawasyif Jaliyah ini penuh dengan pelecehan dan takfir terhadap para ulama Sunnah, penulis berkata dalam hal. 303 dari bukunya ini :”Perhatikanlah bagaimana para syaikh ada di setiap tempat. Inilah Syaikh Ibnu Baz, Syaikh Ibnu Utsaimin, pegawai negara, dan mereka yang membela-bela dan melindungi negara ini . Kemudin apa yang kalian inginkan, sesungguhnya itu adalah Islam dan tauhid (!)… mereka telah menyesatkan umat ini, mereka telah mentalbis dihadapan mereka agamanya dan mereka memfitnahnya atas nama ilmu, tauhid dan Islam (?!)”.

Di dalam hal. 312 dari bukunya ini dia mengatakan bahwa para ulama seperti Syaikh Bin Baz dan Syaikh Utsaimin sesat dan menyesatkan (!)

Tidak hanya berhenti disitu bahkan dia kafirkan para ulama Sunnah dan dia katakan mereka telah keluar dari Islam secara keseluruhan di dalam kitabnya uang berjudul Zalla Himarul Ilmi Fi Thin sebagaimana dalam situs sesatnya Minbaru Tauhid wal Jihad

Syaikh Abdul Aziz Ar-Ris berkata :”Jika ini sikapnya terhadap para ulama sunnah di zamannya maka dia adalah mubtadi yang sesat tidak ada kemuliaan sama sekali baginya” [Tabdid Kawasyif hal. 14]

Al-Imam Abu Utsman Ash-Shobuni berkata :”Tanda yang palling jelas dari ahli bid’ah adalah kerasnya permusuhan mereka kepada pembawa Sunnah Rasulullah Shallallahu ‘alaihi wa salam mereka melecehkan dan menghina ahli Sunnah. [Aqidah Salaf Ashabul Hadits hal. 14]

MEMBELA AHLI BID’AH
Penulis membela mati-matian kelompok Juhaiman yang mengadakan pemberontakan di Masjidil Haram tahun 1400H [4], dia berkata dalam hal. 265 :”Tidak diragukan lagi bahwa bukanlah tergolong bughat. Baik secara bahasa atau syar’i atau istilah, mereka tidak termasuk bughat”

Penulis juga membela Abdurrohim Ath-Thohan dan Aidh Al-Qorni di dalam footnote hal. 291 dari bukunya.

KEDUSTAAN-KEDUSTAANNYA
[1]. Di dalam hal. 116 dan 158 Al-Maqdisi menuduh Raja Abdul Aziz sebagai boneka dan antek Inggris, hal ini adalah kedustaan yang nyata, karena ini adalah klaim tanpa bukti dan dalil dan didustakan juga oleh kitab-kitab tarikh (sejarah).
[2]. Al-Maqdisi berkata dalam footnote hal.161 dari bukunya ini : “Buku-buku pelajaran SD. Sebagian kurikulum telah selesai disatukan dan mereka sekarang sedang bersungguh-sungguh untuk menyelesaikan sisanya dengan bertahap sejalan dengan siasat kamuflasenya. Dan orang yang mau merujuk kepada kurikulum-kurikulum yang telah disatukan pasti dia mendapatkan sekulerisme dan zionisme tampak di segala sisinya”

Syaikh Abdul Aziz Ar-Ris berkata :”Aku telah mempelajari kebanyakan matapelajaran-matapelajaran syar’i di seluruh jenjang pendidikan SD, SMP dan SMU tatkala aku menjadi pelajar, di dalamnya terdapat pelajaran Al-Qur’an secara hafalan dan tilawah, pelajaran Tauhid sejak awal tahun pelajaran hingga kelas 3 SMU dengan spesialisasinya, tidaklah keluar murid melainkan telah mengenal tiga macam tauhid dan hal-hal yang menyelisihinya, demikian juga terdapat pelajaran fiqih dan hadits, di dalamnya juga terdapat peringatan dari pemikiran-pemikiran yang merusak seperti sekulerisme dan zionisme. Aku memohon kepada Allah agar melanggengkan nikmat ini dan menambahnya, dan agar membalas pemerintah kami dan para ulama kami dengan kebaikan” [Tabdid Kawasyif hal. 191-192]

SYUBHAT-SYUBHAT TAKFIR AL-MAQDISI DAN JAWABAN-JAWABANNYA
[1]. Al-Maqdisi mengkafirkan Saudi Arabia karena bergabung dengan PBB sebagaimana dia paparkan secara panjang lebar di dalam hal. 85-115

Jawaban
Pertama : Saudi Arabia menyetujui atuaran-aturan PBB yang sesuai dengan syari’at Islam dan menolak aturan-aturan PBB yang tidak sesuai dengan syari’at Islam. Saudi Arabia menolak persamaan gender laki-laki dan wanita, menolak point ke-16 dari piagam HAM tentang bolehnya perkawinan antar agama, menolak point ke-10 piagam HAM yang memberikan kebebasan berpindah agama [Lihat Hasyiyah Kitabatil Mamlakah Arabiyyah Su’udiyyah wal Munadhdhamat Duwaliyyah hal. 181. Mauqiful Mamlakah Arabiyyah Su’udiyyah Minal Qadhaya Aalamiyyah Fi Haiatil Umam Muttahidah hal. 98 dengan perantaraan Tabdid Kawasyif hal. 95-96]

Kedua : Saudi bergabung dengan PBB untuk suatu kemaslahatan yaitu menjaga dirinya dari rongrongan orang-orang kafir, sebagaimana Rasulullah mengadakan perjanjian Hudaibiyyah dengan orang-orang kafir Quraisy untuk kemaslahatan kaum muslimin.

[2] Al-Maqdisi mengkafirkan Saudi Arabia karena membuat peraturan-peraturan tentang percetakan, penerbitan, pengawasan perbankan, kepabeanan, dan yang lainnya sebagaimana dia paparkan di dalam hal. 28-32 dari bukunya ini

Jawabannya
Semua peraturan-peraturan ini tunduk kepada undang-undang dasar Saudi, yaitu berhukum kepada Kitabullah dan Sunnah Rasulullah. Kalau ada kekeliruan maka itu adalah kekurangan dan kesalahan pembuatnya dan pelaksananya yang bisa diperbaiki dan diluruskan.

[3]. Al-Maqdisi mengkafirkan Saudi Arabia karena tuduhan wala (loyal) kepada Amerika, karena Saudi telah melakukan kerjasama perdagangan dan militer dengan Amerika serta mendatangkan tentara-tentara Amerika ke Saudi sebagaimana dia paparkan dalam hal. 115-138 dari bukunya ini.

Jawabannya.
Tentang kerjasama perdagangan dengan orang-orang kafir tidak ada satupun dalil syar’i yang melarang bahkan Rasulullah Shallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam biasa berjual beli dengan orang-orang Yahudi, bahkan ketika beliau meninggal baju besi beliau masih tergadai di tempat orang Yahudi untuk membeli makanan keluarganya [Shahih Bukhari 3/1068]

Al-Hafidz Ibnu Hajar berkata : “Hadits ini menunjukkan bolehnya mu’amalah dengan orang kafir pada sesuatu yang belum terbukti keharamannya” [Fathul Bari 5/141]

Syaikh Abdullah bin Abdurrahman Al-Bassam berkata ; “Hadits ini menunjukkan tentang bolehnya mu’amalah dan jual beli dengan orang-orang kafir, dan bahwasanya hal ini tidak termasuk muwalah (loyalitas) kepada mereka” [Taudhihul Ahkam 4/75]

Demikian juga kerjasama militer dengan orang-orang kafir bukankah bentuk wala’ kepada mereka bahkan ketika Rasulullah Shallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam berangkat hijrah ke Madinah bersama Abu Bakar, beliau mengupah seorang kafir dari bani Dil sebagai penunjuk jalan, dan mengantar keduanya sampai ke Madinah. [Shahih Bukhari 2/790]

Rasulullah Shallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam juga pernah bekerjasama dengan kabilah Khuza’ah yang musyrik dalam Fathu Makkah. [Lihat Musnad Ahmad 1/179]

Al-Imam Ibnu Qayyim rahimahullah berkata :”Sesungguhnya meminta bantuan orang musyrik yang bisa dipercaya dalam jihad adalah dibolehkan jika diperlukan, karena mata-mata beliau di Al-Khuza’i waktu itu masih kafir” [Zadul Ma’ad 3/301]

Rasulullah Shallallahu ‘alaihi wa sallam juga pernah meminta bantuan Shofwan bin Umayyah pada waktu perang Hunaian dalam keadaan Shofwan waktu itu masih kafir. [Diriwayatkan Imam Ahmad, Abu Dawud, Nasa’i dan yang lainnya dan dishahihkan oleh Syaikh Al-Albani di dalam Irwaul Ghalil 5/344, lihat Shaddu Udwanil Mulhidin hal. 49]

Tentang masuknya tentara Amerika ke Saudi pada waktu perang Teluk kemarin maka dikatakan oleh Syaikh Abdul Muhsin bin Hamd Al-Abbad : “Para ulama Saudi Arabia ketika membolehkan datangnya kekuatan asing ke Saudi Arabia karena darurat, hal ini seperti kasus seorang muslim yang meminta pertolongan kepada non muslim untuk membebaskan dirinya dari para perampok yang hendak masuk kerumahnya untuk melakukan tindakan kriminal di rumahnya dan pada keluarganya, apakah kita katakan kepada orang yang terancam dengan para perampok ini : Kamu tidak boleh meminta pertolongan kepada orang-orang kafir untuk menyelamatkan diri dari perampokan?!” [Madariku Nazhar fi Siyasah hal. 12]

Sebagai tambahan keterangan bahwa pasukan Amerika yang datang ke Saudi pada waktu perang Teluk tahun 1411H telah keluar dari Saudi pada tahun 1424H yaitu setelah jatuhnya rezim Saddam Husein di Iraq. Hal ini menunjukkan bahwa maksud pemerintah Saudi dalam mendatangkan pasukan Amerika ini adalah untuk suatu keperluan dan jika sudah tidak diperlukan maka ditarik lagi ke Amerika.

[4]. Al-Maqdisi mengkafirkan Saudi karena Saudi mengizinkan bank-bank ribawi beroperasi di Saudi dan melindungi bank-bank yang melakukan praktek-praktek riba tersebut sebagaimana dia paparkan di dalam hal.213-222 dari bukunya ini.

Jawabannya.
Tidak diragukan lagi bahwa riba dalah haram dan termasuk dosa besar, Allah Azza wa Jalla berfirman

“Orang-orang yang makan (mengambil) riba tidak dapat berdiri melainkan seperti berdirinya orang yang kemasukan setan lantaran (tekanan) penyakit gila. Keadaan mereka yang demikian itu, adalah disebabkan mereka berkata (berpendapat), sesungguhnya jual beli itu sama dengan riba, padahal Allah telah menghalalkan jual-beli dan mengharamkan riba, orang-orang yang telah sampai kepadanya larangan dari Rabbnya, lalu terus berhenti (dari mengambil riba), maka baginya apa yang telah diambilnya dahulu (sebelum datang larangan) ; dan urusannya (terserah) kepada Allah, orang yang kembali (mengammbil riba), maka orang itu adalah penghuni-penghuni neraka ; mereka kekal di dalamnya” [Al-Baqarah : 275]

Akan tetapi sekedar melakukan riba tidaklah menjadikan pelakunya kafir keluar dari Islam dengan kesepakatan ulama ahli Sunnah, tidak seperti pendapat Al-Maqdisi yang mengatakan bahwa memberi izin praktek ribawi adalah kekafiran terhadap Allah.

Demikian juga keberadaan riba di suatu negeri tidaklah menjadikan dalih tentang bolehnya memberontak kepada waliyatul amr, telah datang suatu pertanyaan kepada Syaikh Abdul Aziz bin Baz yang berbunyi : “Apakah adanya sebagian kemaksiatan dari dosa besar di negeri ini seperti bank-bank ribawi menjadikan bolehnya memberontak kepada waliyyul amr dan melepas ketaatan dari mereka?”

Syaikh Abdul Aziz bin Baz berkata : “Adanya kemaksiatan-kemaksiatan tidaklah membolehkan pemberontakan, adanya kemaksiatan dari rakyat dan pemerintah tidaklah membolehkan pemberontakan kepada waliyatul amr, akan tetapi wajib memerintahkan kepada yang ma’ruf dan melarang dari yang mungkar. Wajib atas waliyyul amr agar berusaha dengan sungguh-sungguh dalam menghilangkan kemungkaran, hendaknya bertakwa kepada Allah dan bersungguh-sungguh dalam menghilangkan kemungkaran dengan cara-cara yang syar’i, dan wajib atas para ulama agar memberikan nasehat, dan wajib atas setiap warga negara agar bertakwa kepada Allah, istiqomah, menjauhi kemungkaran, dan saling berwasiat dalam meninggalkan kemungkaran, dan wasiat adalah dengan memerintahkan kepada yang ma’ruf sebagaimana firman Allah Jalla Jalaa Luhu.

“Dan orang-orang yang beriman, lelaki dan perempuan, sebagian mereka (adalah) menjadi penolong bagi sebagian yang lain, mereka menyuruh (mengerjakan) yang ma’ruf, mencegah yang mungkar” [At-Taubah : 71]

Adapun mencabut ketaatan atau memberontak kepada waliyyul amr dengan sebab-sebab kemaksiatan, riba dan yang lainnya, maka ini termasuk agama Khowarij dari perbuatan orang-orang Khowarij..”[Dari Kaset Ahdaf Hamalat I’lamiyyah dengan perantara Tabdid Kawasyif hal. 159]

[5]. Al-Maqdisi mengkafirkan Saudi karena –katanya Saudi memerangi dan memenjarakan para pemuda yang pulang dari jihad di Afghanistan dengan sebab mereka mengatakan “Rabb kamu adalah Allah”, dan karena mereka berjihad sebagaimana dia paparkan dalam halaman 282 dari bukunya.

Jawabannya
Sesungguhnya mayoritas para pemuda Saudi yang pergi berjihad ke Afghanistan dan pulang ke Saudi tidaklah di penjara dan tidak diapa-apakan. Syaikh Shalih Al-Fauzan berkata ; “Sesungguhnya yang dipenjara adalah yang berusaha merusak dan melakukan peledakan, atau mendoktrin para pemuda dengan pemikiran-pemikiran yang menyeleweng” [Ta’liq atas Tabdid Kawsyif hal. 160]

Demikian juga para ulama Sunnah seperti Syaikh Bin Baz dan Syaikh Al-Utsaimin selalu menyeru dan menghasung jihad di Afghanistan pada periode pertama (ketika masih bersih dari hizbiyyah), seandainya benar pemerintah Saudi memenjarakan para pemuda dengan sebab mereka berjihad tentu yang paling pertama masuk penjara adalah Syaikh Bin Baz, Syaikh Utsaimin, dan murid-murid keduanya.

Pemerintah Saudi begitu gigih mendukung jihad Afghanistan periode pertama sebagaimana dinyatakan oleh Amir Sulthan bin Abdul Aziz di hadapan para duta negara anggota PBB tanggal 17/1/1406H sebagaimana dalam Majalah Al-Faishol edisi 106 Robi’ul Akhir 1406H hal. 20 [Dengan perantara Tabdid Kawasyif hal. 161-162]

KONTRADIKSINYA
Al-Maqdisi mengkafirkan pemerintah Saudi karena bergabung dengan PBB (lihat hal. 85-115 dari bukunya ini) tetapi dia tidak mengkafirkan pemerintah Thaliban yang ingin bergabung dengan PBB, dia berkata di dalam tulisannya yang berjudul Hijrah Li Afghanistan dalam situsnya di internet. [Lihat Tabdid Kawasyif hal. 91]

PENUTUP
Inilah sedikit yang bisa kami paparkan dari kesalahan-kesalahan kitab Kawasyif Jaliyyah oleh Al-Maqdisi, untuk mengetahui studi kritis yang lebih detail tentang kitab ini bisa merujuk kepada kitab Tabdid Kawasyifil Anid fi Takfirihi Lidaulati Tauhid oleh Syaikh Abdul Aziz Ar-Ris setebal 269 halaman. Semoga Allah selalu menjadikan kita sebagai orang yang mendengarkan nasehat dan mengambil yang baik darinya. Amin

[Disalin dari Majalah Al-Furqon, Edisi 1, Th. Ke-7 1428/2008. Diterbitkan Oleh Lajnah Dakwah Ma’had Al-Furqon Al-Islami, Alamat : Ma’had Al-Furqon, Srowo Sidayu Gresik Jatim]
_________
FooteNote
[1]. Dalam edisi terjemah tertulis Ashim ini adalah kekeliruan penerjemah
[2]. Syaikh Shalih Al-Fauzan berkata : “Orang ini –Muhammad Surur- hendak menyesatkan para pemuda Islam dengan perkataannya ini, memalingkan mereka dari kitab-kitab aqidah yang shahihah dan dari kitab-kitab salaf, dan dia arahkan para pemuda Islam kepada pemikiran-pemikiran baru, dan kitab-kitab baru yang mengandung syubhat-syubhat” [Ajwibah Mufidah ‘an As’ilatil Manahijil Jadidag hal. 55-56]
[3]. Lihat Fitnah Sururiyah di majala Al-Furqon edisi tahun 4 rubrik manhaj.
[4]. Pemberontak kelompok Juhaiman ini mengakibatkan korban yang banyak sekali dari jama’ah haji.

http://www.almanhaj.or.id/content/2388/slash/0

[Ditukil dari laman Abdullah al-Aussie, berjudul Saudi Di Mata Seorang Al-Qaidah]

His voice is beautiful but he recites Qunoot in Fajr every Friday; should I pray Taraweeh behind him?

We have an imam in our area whom Allaah has blessed with a beautiful voice which sends shivers down the spine, but this imam has a habit which is closer to innovation: he recites Qunoot in Fajr every Friday. What is the ruling on praying behind him even if it is a naafil prayer, such as qiyaam al-layl (night prayers) in Ramadaan [i.e., Taraweeh]? Please note that there are many mosques – praise be to Allaah – but their imams have ordinary voices.

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

The scholars differed concerning the ruling on reciting Qunoot in Fajr prayer every day. Some of them are of the view that it is Sunnah, and others are of the view that it is a reprehensible innovation (bid’ah).

The second view is the correct one. That has been discussed in the answer to question no. 20031.

Thus it is clear that what this imam is doing is something innovated for which there is no basis.

So he should be advised to think again about what he is doing, and he should follow one of the two opinions mentioned above: either to recite Qunoot in Fajr every day or to forego reciting Qunoot, depending on what evidence he thinks is most valid.

Secondly:

With regard to praying Taraweeh behind him, there is no reason why you should not do so, because the fact that he recites Qunoot in Fajr has nothing to do with Taraweeh prayer. Moreover, it seems that he recites Qunoot in Fajr on Friday on the basis of a misinterpretation, thinking that there is some special virtue in that.

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked:

What is the ruling on going to different mosques, seeking out an imam with a beautiful voice, because of the khushoo’ (humility) and proper focus on prayer which result from that?

He replied:

It seems – and Allaah knows best – that there is nothing wrong with that, if the aim is to seek help by means of that in developing proper humility and focus in prayer, and to find joy in prayer and find tranquillity in his heart, because not every voice brings joy. So if the aim in going to hear the voice of one imam or another is the desire to seek good and to perfect one’s focus in prayer, then there is nothing wrong with that; rather it is to be appreciated, and he will be rewarded according to his intention. A person may attain khushoo’ behind one imam and not behind another, because of the difference between the two recitations and the two prayers. So if the intention behind going to a distant mosque is to listen to the imam’s recitation because of his beautiful voice, and to benefit from them, and so that he will focus properly in his prayer, and not just because of whims and desires or for a change of scene, rather it is for the purpose of benefit and knowledge, and seeking to attain khushoo’ in prayer, then there is nothing wrong with that. It is proven in the saheeh hadeeth that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The people who will receive the greatest reward for prayer is those who walk the furthest [to the mosque], then those who walk the next furthest.” So if his intention is also to increase the number of steps he takes, that is also a good aim. End quote.

Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn Baaz (11/328, 329).

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/122701

Ruling on offering congratulations at the beginning of the Hijri year

What is the ruling on offering congratulations on the occasion of the Hijri new year and saying “Kull ‘aam wa antum bi khayr” or praying for blessing, or sending a card with best wishes for blessings in the new year?

Praise be to Allaah.

Shaykh Muhammad ibn Saalih al-‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked: What is the ruling on congratulating people on the occasion of the Hijri new year, and how should one reply to a person who offers congratulations?

He replied:

If someone offers you congratulations, then respond to him, but do not initiate such greetings. This is the correct view concerning this matter. So if a person says to you, for example, “Happy New Year”, then you can say, “May Allaah make it a good and blessed year for you.” But you should not initiate such a greeting, because I do not know of any report that the salaf [early generations of Islam] congratulated one another on the occasion of the new year, rather the salaf did not regard the first of Muharram as the first day of the new year until the caliphate of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him.

Shaykh ‘Abd al-Kareem al-Khudayr said concerning offering congratulations on the occasion of the hijri new year:

Praying for another Muslim in general terms, in phrases that are not meant as a kind of ritual on special occasions such as Eid, is acceptable, especially if what is meant by this greeting is friendship and to show a friendly face to one’s fellow Muslim. Imaam Ahmad (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “I do not initiate the greeting but if someone greets me I return the greeting, because responding to the greeting is obligatory. But being the first to offer congratulations is neither Sunnah nor forbidden.

Islam Q&A

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/21290

‘Umar did not seek the help of Allaah by virtue of the status of al-‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him)

Hadeeth: Anas ibn Maalik (may Allaah be pleased with him) narrated that when they suffered drought, ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) would seek rain by virtue of al-‘Abbaas ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib, and he would say: “O Allaah, we used to ask You for rain by virtue of our Prophet and You gave us rain. Now we ask You for rain by virtue of the paternal uncle of our Prophet, so give us rain” and they would be given rain. Is this saheeh? Is this evidence that it is permissible to seek the help of Allaah by virtue of the status of the awliya’ (close friends of Allaah)?.

Praise be to Allaah.

The hadeeth referred to by the questioner is a saheeh hadeeth which was narrated by al-Bukhaari, but anyone who studies it will find that it is evidence that one should not seek help from Allaah by virtue of the status of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) or of anyone else, because tawassul (using a means to achieve a goal) and al-waseelah is the thing that helps you to achieve that goal. The waseelah referred to in this hadeeth (“we used to ask You for rain by virtue of our Prophet and You gave us rain. Now we ask You for rain by virtue of the paternal uncle of our Prophet, so give us rain” and they would be given rain) is seeking the help of Allah by virtue of the du’aa’ of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), as a man said: “O Messenger of Allaah, our wealth has been destroyed and the roads are cut off, so pray to Allaah to help us.” And because ‘Umar said to al-‘Abbaas: “Get up, O ‘Abbaas, and pray to Allaah, so he prayed to Allaah.” If this had come under the heading of seeking Allaah’s help by virtue of a person’s status only, then ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) would have sought the help ofo Allaah by virtue of the status of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) before doing so by virtue of the status of al-‘Abbaas, because the status of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is greater before Allaah than that of al-‘Abbaas or anyone else. If this hadeeth came under the heading of seeking the help of Allaah by virtue of status that it would have been more appropriate for the ameer al-mu’mineen ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) to seek the help of Allaah by virtue of the status of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), not the status of al-‘Abbaas ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib.

To sum up, there is nothing wrong with seeking the help of Allaah by means of the du’aa’ of a person who it is hoped will have his du’aa’s answered because of his righteousness. The Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) used to seek the help of Allaah by means of the du’aa’ of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) for them. Similarly, ‘Umar sought the help of Allaah by means of the du’aa’ of al-‘Abbaas ibn ‘Abd al-Muttalib (may Allaah be pleased with him). So if you think a man is righteous and likely to have his du’aa’s answered because his food, drink, clothing and housing are halaal, and because he is known to be a man of worship and piety, there is nothing wrong with asking him to pray to Allaah for you and ask for what you like, on condition that this does not stir up self-admiration in this person whom you ask to make du’aa’ for you. If it does stir up self-admiration, then it is not permissible for you to doom him by making this request of him, because that will harm him.

I also say: This is permissible, but I do not recommend it. I think that each person should ask Allaah by himself, without appointing any intermediary between him and Allaah. That brings a greater hope and is nearer to fear of Allaah. I also encourage anyone who asks his brother whose du’aa’s he hopes will be answered to make du’aa’ for him, to intend thereby to treat him kindly – i.e., the one who will make du’aa’ – and not do it for the sake of meeting his own needs, because if he asks him for the sake of meeting his own needs, then it will become like asking him for money and the like, which is blameworthy. But if he intends thereby to benefit his brother who will make du’aa’ by treating him kindly, then treating a Muslim kindly is something for which a person will be rewarded, as is well known – and that is better. And Allaah is the source of strength. End quote.

Majmoo’ Fataawa wa Rasaa’il Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (2/277).

For more information on the hadeeth about ‘Umar seeking the help of Allaah by virtue of al-‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with them both) and the fact that this tawassul was by virtue of his du’aa’ and not of his status, please see the book al-Tawassul by Shaykh al-Albaani (may Allaah have mercy on him), pp. 50-68.

Islam Q&A

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/118099

It is not permissible to congratulate the kuffaar on their festivals in any way whatsoever

In light of Christmas and the coming New Year, here is a relevant article:

It is not permissible to congratulate the kuffaar on their festivals in any way whatsoever

What is the ruling on eating the food (rice, meat, chicken or cake) that is given to us by a Christian friend that he made for his birthday or for Christmas or the Christian New Year? What is your opinion on congratulating him by saying, “Insha Allaah you will continue to do well this year” so as to avoid saying Kull ‘aam wa antum bi khayr (approx. “season’s greetings”) or “Happy New Year” etc?.

Praise be to Allaah.

It is not permissible for a Muslim to eat things that the Jews and Christians make on their festivals, or what they give him as a gift on their festivals, because that is cooperating with them and joining in with them in this evil, as is explained in question no. 12666.

It is not permissible for him to congratulate them on their festivals in any way whatsoever, because that implies approval of their festival and not denouncing them, and helping them to manifest their symbols and propagate their innovation, and sharing their happiness during their festivals, which are innovated festivals that are connected to false beliefs that are not approved of in Islam. See also question no. 47322.

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/81977

Why we can't Attach Our Feet in Salaah

Author: Shaykh Muhammad ibn 'Abdil Wahhaab al 'Aqeel

Topic: Did you know

Reference: Audio tape - more about reference here...

…and from it is the saying of Anas, may Allaah be pleased with him, in a Sunnah from the Sunan of Salaat; and it is the spacing in the Salaat; that a Muslim stands beside his Muslim brother and attaches is feet, knees and shoulders to his brother without being excessive or negligent, as was legislated by the Messenger – صلى الله عليه وسلم – who said:

“You will straighten your lines or Allaah will separate between your hearts or faces.”

This is why when the hearts have become separated during this time, so did the feet. Why is it that we can’t attach our feet to each other’s feet? It is because our hearts are detached from one another, if our hearts were attached to one another, our feet would also be attached. This is why if a person who loves you and whom you love were to put his foot over yours, you would not get upset, you would not say; ‘why is he bothering me’, this is because your heart loves him. But because there is a detachment between you and him, you cannot stand that he attaches his foot to yours let alone that he puts his foot over yours.

This is why Anas, may Allaah be pleased with him, when he describes his state at the time of the Messenger of Allaah – صلى الله عليه وسلم – and his state after that, he says; “At the time of the Messenger – صلى الله عليه وسلم – we would attach our feet to our brother’s feet, and our knees to our brother’s knees, and our shoulders to our brother’s shoulders, in obedience to the Messenger’s orders – صلى الله عليه وسلم - , but if we were to do so today, he would escape like an obstinate mule.”

By Allaah I saw with my own eyes here in Madeenah, a man wanted to attach his foot to his brother’s foot, by Allaah his brother cut his Salaat, he cut his Salaat and left the whole first line and went to the second line. He left the first line to escape this Sunnah, and the cause of this is ignorance, may Allaah preserve you. This is why we must teach the people the Sunnah of the Prophet – صلى الله عليه وسلم – because people are enemies to what they are ignorant of.

http://subulassalaam.com/articles/article.cfm?article_id=79

The Ultimate Aim of Yoga

I'd like to quote from the Chairman of the National Fatwa Council of Malaysia himself, Datuk Dr Abdul Shukor Husin, which was quoted by The New Paper in an article on page 16, a few weeks back:

"Many Muslims in the country fail to understand the ultimate aim of Yoga. It combines physical movements, religious elements, chanting and worshiping for the purpose of achieving inner peace and ultimately be one with God."

Thus, it is a COMBINATION of physical, mental and spiritual elements to be one with God..

Thus, to say that the mere physical form of Yoga is permissible is a false claim and judgement.. Because it is obvious that Yoga is not an exercise but converted in to an exercise, compared to Silat or other Martial Arts that are really meant as an exercise..

To form an analogy between Yoga and Silat is obviously an invalid qiyas.

What would we say if someone were to take some forms of movements from the Muslim prayer and make it into an exercise?

Wallahu a'lam

George Yeo akui hikmah disebalik pengharaman insurans dan wang faedah

TURUT AMBIL KIRA PENCAPAIAN DUNIA ISLAM Yeo: Pendekatan demikian bantu semai sikap saling hormat-menghormati antara Islam dengan bukan Islam

MASYARAKAT dunia harus melihat agama Islam pada perspektif yang meluas dengan turut mengambil kira pencapaian penting dalam Dunia Islam.

Ini kerana pendekatan sedemikian mampu membantu menyemai sikap saling hormat-menghormati di kalangan masyarakat Islam dan bukan Islam hari ini.

Kegagalan masyarakat untuk berbuat demikian akan hanya mengakibatkan seseorang itu memperlekehkan hubungan antara kaum dan dalam mencari penyelesaian terhadap masalah-masalah yang ada.

Demikian pandangan Menteri Ehwal Luar, Encik George Yeo, semasa berucap dalam majlis makan malam semasa merasmikan Persidangan Projek Pemerintahan Global S. T. Lee di Hotel Four Seasons Jumaat lalu.

Dalam ucapannya, Encik Yeo memberikan contoh satu pencapaian Islam yang seharusnya dijadikan iktibar kepada masyarakat dunia - iaitu nilai-nilai Islam yang mengharamkan insurans dan kadar faedah.

'Kita berada di tengah-tengah krisis kewangan. Banyak yang ditulis mengenai pengharaman pembayaran insurans dan wang faedah dalam Islam. Kita pernah mentertawakan pengharaman yang aneh ini, namun terdapat kebijaksanaan dalamnya,' ujar Encik Yeo.

Beliau berkata keprihatinan yang tersemat berhubung beberapa peraturan kewangan Islam adalah mengenai bahaya moral apabila kepentingan mereka yang membuat tuntutan mula menyimpang.

'Apabila kita lihat masalah dunia kewangan hari ini dan apa punca krisis ini, ia disebabkan keinginan mereka yang membuat tuntutan itu ditentang. Jadi, ada sesuatu dalam kewangan Islam yang betul-betul masuk akal,' ujar Encik Yeo.

Encik Yeo menambah, dalam memerangi pengganasan, dunia juga harus mengenang pencapaian Islam dalam membangunkan kegemilangan tamadunnya seperti pemerintahan Islam di Samarkand, Bukhara, Damsyik, Baghdad, Kahirah dan Cordoba.

Encik Yeo juga merujuk kepada sebuah pameran tamadun Islam di Musee d'Orsay, sebuah muzium di Paris.

Pameran yang sama juga kini boleh dilihat di Muzium Seni Islam di Doha, Qatar, yang direka arkitek Amerika Syarikat kelahiran China, Ieoh Ming Pei.

Projek Pemerintahan Global ini merupakan sebuah projek tiga tahun yang bakal mengumpulkan pemikir- pemikir dan pengamal-pengamal terbaik dari seluruh dunia Barat dan Timur untuk membangunkan wawasan dan saranan tentang cara memerintah dunia, termasuk Asia yang pesat membangun.

'Apabila kita membincangkan tentang pemerintahan global, ia perlu dibina atas dasar menghormati sesama manusia dan menghormati kepelbagaian yang ada padanya.

'Dalam pemerintahan global, secara dasarnya kita harus mengiktiraf kepelbagaian dan perbezaan ini,' ujar Encik Yeo.

Projek yang merangkumi beberapa kumpulan kerja itu akan menghasilkan sejumlah kertas kerja, pelan dasar, artikel akademik dan buku sepanjang projek tersebut.

Beberapa bengkel dan persidangan antarabangsa turut dirancang.

It dipengerusikan bersama oleh Dekan Sekolah Dasar Awam Lee Kuan Yew (LKYSPP), Profesor Kishore Mahbubani and Pengarah Pusat Asia dan Globalisasi (CAG), Profesor Ann Florini.

[BH, 8 Dec 2008. http://cyberita.asia1.com.sg/singapura/story/0,3617,131889,00.html?]

Ibn Shamsud-Deen:

Kebenaran akan unggul juga. Hikmah pengharaman bayaran insurans dan wang faedah kini diakui dan dirasakan oleh orang bukan Islam, Allahu Akbar!

Tapi sedih sekali bila orang Islam sendiri masih terlibat dengan insurans.. bukan sahaja mereka jahil tentang pengharamannya, malah mereka merasakannya sebagai suatu keperluan, na'udzu billah..

Apakah kerana dirasakan sebagai keperluan, jika ada ulama atau majlis fatwa yang mengeluarkan fatwa mengharamkannya, akan muncul pihak2 tertentu dan suara-suara sumbang membantah fatwa tersebut atas "hujjah" ianya suatu "keperluan yang bermanfaat", sebagaimana muncul suara tersebut membantah fatwa yang dikeluarkan Majlis Fatwa Kebangsaan M'sia berkenaan Yoga?

Inilah petanda akhir zaman...

Contemporary VS Classical

In the period where more people tend to recite the Qur'an following the melodious styles of contemporary recitors such as Shaykh Mishary Rashid al-Afasy, I seem to find more peace, comfort and tranquility in the classical recitations the likes of Shaykh Shuraym, Shaykh Mahmoud al-Husary, Shaykh Abdullah Basfar.. the style of recitation that those lovers of Mishary might find boring or monotonous..

But it is in these classical recitations that somehow I feel the beuaty of the Quranic recitation with clear tajweed.. unlike the contemporary ones which at times sound like mere melody.. especially when recited by imitators who perhaps tend to follow the melody more than actually paying attention to Tajweed..

I don't know.. it's just what i feel..

Research needed into causes of terrorism – Naif

ref: http://www.saudigaz ette.com. sa/index. cfm?method= home.regcon&contentID=200811282 3205

MADINA – Prince Naif Bin Abdul Aziz, Minister of Interior, spoke Wednesday at the Islamic University in Madina on terrorism-related subject, foremost among them the problem of deviant thought, critics of the Salafist approach, misguided use of the Internet, rehabilitation of detained deviants and the role of senior scholars.

The Interior Minister, addressing university students and staff in a dialogue session, said he had asked the Imam Mohammed Bin Saud and the King Saud universities in Riyadh to conduct research into why “such people slide into involvement in such acts and how the issue can be successfully dealt with.”

He said the creation of a national strategic plan and a national research center to confront deviant thought was a subject worthy of attention.

“I have spoken often of the need for intellectual security that not only keeps up with but advances ahead of public security,” he said. “The Saudi citizen is the most important security officer. We require substantial research into the causes of terrorism and what pushes terrorists into it. This research should identify evidence in as objective a fashion as possible.”

“Our thought and ideas in our world of both today and yesterday, will remain, and we must stay with what is correct and instruct the next generation in it. We fear first and foremost Allah, and we should not err by accepting un-Islamic approaches. The truth should only be defended with proof, for we are in great need of security.”

As to the research center, Prince Naif said that King Abdullah had proposed an international research center to combat terrorism to some 54 nations. “We hope,” he said, “to see this proposal realized in the near future.”

When asked about suggestions to encourage institutions by creating an award for combating deviant thought in the name of the Prince, he responded by saying that the subject had been discussed and that the prize would be more deserving of bearing the name of King Abdullah, Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques.

Prince Naif then revealed that the Ministry of Interior had foiled around 160 terrorist operations in the Kingdom.

“If the terrorists had succeeded in only 20 to 30 percent of their intended plans,” the Prince warned, “it would have caused a genuine catastrophe.”

Prince Naif went on to talk of the dialogue of ideas, describing any failure to confront ideas with ideas as a reflection of lack of effort.

“There are still in our time conflicting ideas and it is up to us to be aware of who are active in this field. They are known to us, we know who they belong to, and we know their thought. Their presence enables us to identify any thought emanating from those principles and ideas, and therefore we do not rule out the existence of anti-Islamic motives in general and against this nation, the nation of the Prophet’s Sunnah.”

Prince Naif continued by addressing critics of Salafism in the media saying that their attacks are unfounded and that they try to blow trivial matters out of all proportion.

“This must be challenged with correct knowledge and it is the jurisprudents of Islam who are best equipped to do that.”

“We are a Salafi nation built on the Qur’an and we take pride in that and everyone knows it. Salafism is not a sect. It is not one of the four schools. It is the approach taught to us by the Prophet (peace be upon him).”

The Prince continued by describing the history of the Saudi states and all the efforts made to preserve the Kingdom’s path up to this day.

The Prince also commented on the use of the Internet which is widely believed to be used to recruit youth and attract them toward deviant thought by saying that the Internet can be used in both meaningful and harmful ways, and while there is no international law limiting freedom of speech we have to be able to distinguish between the good and the bad.

The Prince spoke of the committee charged with advising detainees and correcting thought as performing a duty and achieving the desired goals.

“People cannot say,” said the Prince, “that the committee has applied any pressure or malpractice in its investigations. They have met hundreds of people and they have seen the truth.”

Prince Naif said dangers can be avoided through a review of the prevailing global system.

“It is clear,” he said, “that it is incumbent upon all Muslims, and most notably the Muslim scholars and seekers of knowledge and callers to Islam to take part in solving the problems and crises of human society.” – Okaz/SG

Menteri: Niqab Hanya Adat

KAHIRAH: Kementerian Ehwal Agama Mesir kini menyertai perdebatan mengenai sama ada seorang wanita Muslimah patut memakai kerudung muka (niqab), dengan menerbitkan sebuah buku yang berhujah bahawa ia tidak termasuk ajaran Islam.

Akhbar Al-Masry al-Yom menyiarkan sedutan buku itu, bermaksud Kerudung (niqab) itu adat, bukan ibadat, oleh Menteri Ehwal Agama, Encik Mahmud Hamdi Zaqzuq, yang akan diagihkan pihak kementerian kepada masjid-masjid.

'Saya tidak akan membenarkan budaya niqab merebak di Mesir,' kata beliau seperti dinukil akhbar berkenaan.

Pemakaian kerudung dibahaskan beberapa mazhab Sunni, dengan majoriti berkata amalan itu tidak wajib.

Namun semua mazhab akur wanita harus menutup aurat keculi muka dan tangan.

Buku Encik Zaqzuq menukil fatwa Mufti Mesir, Rektor Universiti Al-Azhar dan ulama lain bahawa pemakaian niqab tidak bersandarkan Al-Quran atau Hadis.

Di Mesir, pemakaian niqab sering dikait dengan pengikut Salafi, yang merupakan aliran pemikiran utama di Arab Saudi.

Kementerian Ehwal Agama Mesir sebelum ini mengumumkan ia akan menerbitkan buku-buku yang membantah fahaman Salafi dan akan mengagihkannya ke masjid- masjid.

Pakar sosiologi, Cik Mona Abaza berkata di Mesir, 80 peratus wanita memakai kerudung. Tetapi baru-baru ini dekan Univerisiti Helwan memberhentikan pelajar wanita yang memakai kerudung.

Cik Soad Saleh, bekas pensyarah Fakulti Syariah di Universiti Al-Azhar, juga berkata niqab tidak wajib. -- AFP.

http://cyberita.asia1.com.sg/luarnegara/story/0,3617,131044,00.html?

Ibn Shamsud-Deen:

Untuk mengatakan pemakaian niqab tidak bersandarkan al-Qur'an dan Hadith, barangkali mereka tidak mempelajari hadith dengan teliti.

Larangan Rasulullah agar wanita tidak memakai niqab mahupun sarung tangan semasa ihram jelas menunjukkan ada sandarannya di dalam hadith. Begitu juga adalah sangat mafhum para isteri Rasulullah memakai niqab, sehingga pemakaian niqab disebutkan sebagai Sunnah para isteri Rasulullah.

Walaupun ana secara peribadi setuju dengan pandangan dan hujjah Syeikh al-Albani dan mendukung pendapat jumhur ulama bahawa niqab itu tidak wajib, ana begitu tersentak apabila sang menteri ini membuat kenyataan ianya tiada sandaran dalam al-Qur'an dan as-Sunnah. Apatah lagi apabila beliau mendakwa menukil fatwa dari para ulama.

Jika benar demikian, apakah para ulama yang beliau tukil fatwa mereka tidak melihat wujudnya khilaf tentang sama ada niqab itu wajib ataupun tidak? Tidakkah mereka melihat para ulama yang berpendapat niqab itu wajib (seperti Syeikhul Islam Ibnu Taimiyyah) memiliki kekuatan hujjah? Bahkan, ana secara peribadi melihat kedua-dua pihak memiliki kekuatan hujjah, lalu akhirnya ana lebih cenderung kepada hujjah Syeikh al-Albani dan pendapat jumhur ulama.

Lalu apakah para ulama yang berpendapat niqab itu wajib hanya menyimpulkan pendapat demikian berdasarkan ijtihad semata-mata tanpa dalil nas?

'ala kulli hal, bila diteliti artikel di atas, jelas motif sebenar.. motif sebenar bukanlah untuk membasmikan budaya niqab tapi lebih kepada membanteras fahaman Salafi.. kerana Kementerian Hal Ehwal Agama Mesir telah mengumumkan akan menerbitkan buku-buku yang membantah fahaman Salafi dan diagihkan ke masjid-masjid.

Mufti Mesir Syeikh Ali Gomaa memang dikenali sebagai anti-Wahhabi/Salafi.. video ceramah beliau membantah fahaman Salafi boleh didapati di Youtube..

Dua kesimpulan boleh dibuat:

1) Menarik kan? Mereka kononnya berpegang kepada fikrah yang menyatukan semua golongan/fahaman dalam umat Islam, yakni fikrah Hasan al-Banna yang menyeru agar setiap golongan/fahaman bersatu atas dasar yang sama.. tapi mereka begitu benci kepada "fahaman" Salafi sehingga ingin dibantah habis-habis..

2) Perkembangan ini menunjukkan bahawa da'wah Salafiyyah semakin berkembang, khususnya di Mesir.. dan yang ana tahu, antara yang gigih berda'wah di sana ialah Syeikh Muhammad Hasan, Syeikh Muhammad Hussain Ya'qub dan Syeikh Abu Ishaq al-Huwainy.. Moga Allah melimpahkan rahmat, taufiq dan hidayah-Nya kepada mereka dan para penda'wah Salafi yang lainnya di Mesir.

Wa billahi at-Taufiq wa al-Hidayah.

Definition of udhiyah and ruling thereon

What is meant by udhiyah (sacrifice)? Is it obligatory or Sunnah?.

Praise be to Allaah.

The word udhiyah means an animal of the ‘an’aam class (i.e., camel, cow, sheep or goat) that is slaughtered during the days of Eid al-Adha because of the Eid and as an act of worship, intending to draw closer to Allaah thereby.

This is one of the rituals of Islam prescribed in the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and according to the consensus of the Muslims.

In the Qur’aan:

1 – Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Therefore turn in prayer to your Lord and sacrifice (to Him only)”

[al-Kawthar 108:2]

2 – Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Say (O Muhammad): Verily, my Salaah (prayer), my sacrifice, my living, and my dying are for Allaah, the Lord of the ‘Aalameen (mankind, jinn and all that exists).

He has no partner. And of this I have been commanded, and I am the first of the Muslims”

[al-An’aam 6:162]

The word nusuk (translated here as sacrifice) means sacrifice; this is the view of Sa’eed ibn Jubayr. And it was said that it means all acts of worship, including sacrifice, which is more comprehensive.

3 – Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And for every nation We have appointed religious ceremonies, that they may mention the Name of Allaah over the beast of cattle that He has given them for food. And your Ilaah (God) is One Ilaah (God Allaah), so you must submit to Him Alone (in Islam). And (O Muhammad) give glad tidings to the Mukhbitoon [those who obey Allaah with humility and are humble from among the true believers of Islamic Monotheism]”

[al-Hajj 22:34]

In the Sunnah:

1 – It was narrated in Saheeh al-Bukhaari (5558) and Saheeh Muslim (1966) that Anas ibn Maalik (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) sacrificed two white rams speckled with black. He slaughtered them with his own hand, said ‘Allaahu akbar’ and put his foot on their necks.”

2 – It was narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) stayed in Madeenah for ten years, offering sacrifice (every year on Eid).” Narrated by Ahmad, 4935; al-Tirmidhi, 1507; classed as hasan by al-Albaani in Mishkaat al-Masaabeeh, 1475.

3 – It was narrated from ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Aamir (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) shared out sacrificial animals amongst his companions, and ‘Uqbah got a sheep that was six months old. He said, “O Messenger of Allaah, I got a sheep that is six months old.” He said, “Offer it as a sacrifice.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 5547.

4 – It was narrated from al-Baraa’ ibn ‘Aazib (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever offers a sacrifice after the prayer has completed his rituals (of Eid) and has followed the way of the Muslims.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 5545.

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) offered sacrifices, as did his companions (may Allaah be pleased with them). And he said that sacrifice is the way of the Muslims.

Hence the Muslims are unanimously agreed that it is prescribed in Islam, as was narrated by more than one of the scholars.

But they differed as to whether it is Sunnah mu’akkadah (a confirmed Sunnah) or it is obligatory and it is not permissible to omit it.

The majority of scholars are of the view that it is Sunnah mu’akkadah. This is the view of al-Shaafa’i, Maalik and Ahmad according to his most well-known view.

Others were of the view that it is obligatory. This is the view of Abu Haneefah and one of the views narrated from Ahmad. This was also the view favoured by Ibn Taymiyah who said: “This is one of the views narrated in the madhhab of Maalik, or it appears to be the view of Maalik.”

From Risaalat Ahkaam al-Udhiyah wa’l-Dhakaah by Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him).

Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “Udhiyah is Sunnah mu’akkadah for the one who is able to do it, so a person should offer the sacrifice on behalf of himself and the members of his household.”

Fataawa Ibn ‘Uthaymeen, 2/661.

Islam Q&A

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/36432


Ibn Shamsud-Deen:
This is indeed a matter of khilaf. Unlike some of our shadeed brothers who insist that the correct opinion is that it is wajib, as though all the mashayikh view so. Again, it is a matter of khilaf and they'll be surprised to know that Shaykh Ibn 'Uthaymeen himself favoured the view that it is only Sunnah Mu'akkadah. Wallahu a'lam

There is nothing wrong with trimming the moustache or shave it altogether

I trim my moustache so short that it cant be seen... is that correct? Are we allowed to say Al Hussayn was a Martyr?.

Praise be to Allaah.

The scholars are unanimously agreed that it is permissible to trim or cut the moustache, because of the many ahaadeeth that have been narrated concerning that, such as the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “Let the beard grow, and trim the moustache.” Narrated by al-Bukhaari (5442). And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever does not remove anything from the moustache is not one of us.” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi (2685) and classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.

Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-Majmoo’ (1/340)” As for cutting the moustache, there is unanimous agreement that it is Sunnah. End quote.

But there is a difference of opinion among the scholars as to how much may be removed.

Al-Shawkaani said in Nayl al-Awtaar (1/148): The people differed as to the amount that may be cut from the moustache. Many of the salaf were of the view that it may be removed completely and shaved off, because of the apparent meaning of the words shave and remove completely. This was the view of the Kufis [and is one view narrated from Imam Ahmad. What is meant by the Kufis is the followers of Abu Haneefah (may Allaah have mercy on him)].

Many others were of the view that it is not allowed to shave it or remove it completely. This was the view of Maalik [and of al-Shaafa’i and of Ahmad, according to another report from him].

Imam Maalik was very strict about shaving the moustache and regarded it as mutilation for which a person deserved to be disciplined. He said that shaving it was a bid’ah (innovation) which had appeared among the people. This was narrated from him by al-Nawawi in al-Majmoo’ and by Ibn al-Qayyim in Zaad al-Ma’aad and others, but the majority of scholars were of a different view, as they thought that there was nothing wrong with shaving or cutting it, although they differed as to which is better. End quote.

Al-Mardaawi said in al-Insaaf (1/121): He may shave his moustache or trim the ends, but shaving is better. This was stated by him [i.e., Imam Ahmad]. End quote.

Ibn al-Qayyim stated in Zaad al-Ma’aad (1/171) that Imam Ahmad (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: If he shaves it there is nothing wrong with it, and if he cuts it there is nothing wrong with it. The evidence that Imam Ahmad quoted for that is that the ahaadeeth enjoined shaving and cutting.

Hence the brother who asked this question may know that there is nothing wrong with what he is doing, although it is better to cut the moustache so that the edge of the lip appears, and not to remove it altogether, because this is what the Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to do. It was narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to cut his moustache. Narrated by Ahmad (2733). Shaykh Ahmad Shaakir said: Its isnaad is saheeh.

Islam Q&A

http://www.islam-qa.com/en/ref/98500

Salafism = Ultraconservative Islam?

Ultraconservative Islam on rise in Mideast

By PAUL SCHEMM, Associated Press Writer Paul Schemm, Associated Press Writer – Sun Oct 19, 11:56 am ET

CAIRO, Egypt – The Muslim call to prayer fills the halls of a Cairo computer shopping center, followed immediately by the click of locking doors as the young, bearded tech salesmen close shop and line up in rows to pray.

Business grinding to a halt for daily prayers is not unusual in conservative Saudi Arabia, but until recently it was rare in the Egyptian capital, especially in affluent commercial districts like Mohandiseen, where the mall is located.

But nearly the entire three-story mall is made up of computer stores run by Salafis, an ultraconservative Islamic movement that has grown dramatically across the Middle East in recent years.

"We all pray together," said Yasser Mandi, a salesman at the Nour el-Hoda computer store. "When we know someone who is good and prays, we invite them to open a shop here in this mall." Even the name of Mandi's store is religious, meaning "Light of Guidance."

Critics worry that the rise of Salafists in Egypt, as well as in other Arab countries such as Jordan and Lebanon, will crowd out the more liberal and tolerant version of Islam long practiced there. They also warn that the doctrine is only a few shades away from that of violent groups like al-Qaida — that it effectively preaches "Yes to jihad, just not now."

In the broad spectrum of Islamic thought, Salafism is on the extreme conservative end. Saudi Arabia's puritanical Wahhabi interpretation is considered its forerunner, and Saudi preachers on satellite TV and the Internet have been key to its Salafism's spread.

Salafist groups are gaining in numbers and influence across the Middle East. In Jordan, a Salafist was chosen as head of the old-guard opposition group, the Muslim Brotherhood. In Kuwait, Salafists were elected to parliament and are leading the resistance to any change they believe threatens traditional Islamic values.

The gains for Salafists are part of a trend of turning back to conservatism and religion after nationalism and democratic reform failed to fulfill promises to improve people's lives. Egypt has been at the forefront of change in both directions, toward liberalization in the 1950s and '60s and back to conservatism more recently.

The growth of Salafism is visible in dress. In many parts of Cairo women wear the "niqab," a veil which shows at most the eyes rather than the "hijab" scarf that merely covers the hair. The men grow their beards long and often shave off mustaches, a style said to imitate the Prophet Muhammad.

The word "salafi" in Arabic means "ancestor," harking back to a supposedly purer form of Islam said to have been practiced by Muhammad and his companions in the 7th century. Salafism preaches strict segregation of the sexes and resists any innovation in religion or adoption of Western ways seen as immoral.

"When you are filled with stress and uncertainty, black and white is very good, it's very easy to manage," said Selma Cook, an Australian convert to Islam who for more than a decade described herself as a Salafi.

"They want to make sure everything is authentic," said Cook, who has moved away from Salafist thought but still works for Hoda, a Cairo-based Salafi satellite channel.

In most of the region, Salafism has been a purely social movement calling for an ultraconservative lifestyle. Most Salafis shun politics — in fact, many argue that Islamic parties like the Muslim Brotherhood and the Palestinians' Hamas are too willing to compromise their religion for political gain.

Its preachers often glorify martyrdom and jihad — or holy war — but always with the caveat that Muslims should not launch jihad until their leaders call for it. The idea is that the decision to overturn the political order is up to God, not the average citizen.

But critics warn that Salafis could easily slide into violence. In North Africa, some already have — the Algerian Salafi Group for Call and Combat has allied itself with al-Qaida and is blamed for bombings and other attacks. Small pockets of Salafis in northern Lebanon and Gaza have also taken up weapons and formed jihadi-style groups.

"I am afraid that this Salafism may be transferred to be a jihadi Salafism, especially with the current hard socio-economic conditions in Egypt," says Khalil El-Anani, a visiting scholar at Washington's Brookings Institution.

The Salafi way contrasts with the Islam long practiced in Egypt. Here the population is religious but with a relatively liberal slant. Traditionally, Egyptian men and women mix rather freely and Islamic doctrine has been influenced by local, traditional practices and an easygoing attitude to moral foibles.

But Salafism has proved highly adaptable, appealing to Egypt's wealthy businessmen, the middle class and even the urban poor — cutting across class in an otherwise rigidly hierarchical society.

In Cairo's wealthy enclaves of Maadi and Nasr City, robed, upper-class Salafis drive BMWs to their engineering firms, while their wives stay inside large homes surrounded by servants and children.

Sara Soliman and her businessman husband, Ahmed el-Shafei, both received the best education Egypt had to offer, first at a German-run school, then at the elite American University in Cairo. But they have now chosen the Salafi path.

"We were losing our identity. Our identity is Islamic," 27-year-old Soliman said from behind an all-covering black niqab as she sat with her husband in a Maadi restaurant.

"In our (social) class, none of us are brought up to be strongly practicing," added el-Shafei, also 27, in American-accented English, a legacy of a U.S. boyhood. Now, he and his wife said, they live Islam as "a whole way of life," rather than just a set of obligations such as daily prayers and fasting during the holy month of Ramadan.

A dozen satellite TV channels, most Saudi-funded, are perhaps Salafism's most effective vehicle. They feature conservative preachers, call-in advice shows and discussion programs on proper Islamic behavior.

Cairo's many Salafist mosques are packed on Fridays. Outside Shaeriyah mosque, a bookstall featured dozens of cassettes by Mohammed Hasaan, a prolific conservative preacher who sermonizes on the necessity of jihad and the injustices inflicted on Muslims.

Alongside the cassettes, a book titled "The Sinful Behaviors of Women" displayed lipstick, playing cards, perfumes and cell phones on the cover. Another was titled "The Excesses of American Hubris."

Critics of Salafism say it has spread so quickly in part because the Egyptian and Saudi governments encouraged it as an apolitical, nonviolent alternative to hard-line jihadi groups.

These critics warn that the governments are playing with fire — that Salafism creates an environment that breeds extremism. Al-Qaida continues to try to draw Salafists into jihad, and its No. 2, the Egyptian Ayman al-Zawahri, praised Salafists in an Internet statement in April, urging them to take up arms.

"The Salafi line is not that jihad is not a good thing, it is just not a good thing right now," said Richard Gauvain, a lecturer in comparative religion at the American University in Cairo.

The Salafis' talk of eventual jihad focuses on fighting Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq, not on overthrowing pro-U.S. Arab governments denounced by al-Qaida. Most Salafi clerics preach loyalty to their countries' rulers and some sharply denounce al-Qaida.

Egypt, with Saudi help, sought to rehabilitate jailed Islamic militants, in part by providing them with Salafi books. Critics say President Hosni Mubarak's government sees the Salafists as a counterweight to the opposition Muslim Brotherhood.

The political quietism of the Salafis and their injunctions to always obey the ruler are too good an opportunity for established Arab rulers to pass up, said novelist Alaa Aswani, one of the most prominent critics of rising conservatism in Egypt.

"That was a kind of Christmas present for the dictators because now they can rule with both the army and the religion," he said.

The new wave of conservatism is not inevitable, Aswani maintains, noting that his books — including his most popular, "The Yacoubian Building" — have risque themes and condemnations of conservatives, and yet are best-sellers in Egypt.

"The battle is not over, because Egypt is too big to be fitting in this very, very little, very small vision of a religion," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081019/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_egypt_rising_salafis

Some Acts from Sunnah for Discussion

A few issues that I'd like to open for discussion here:

1) Growing the beard

As we know, shaving the beard is haram according to the majority of scholars, including the 4 Imaams. (Refer to the article Shaving the Beard: A Modern Effeminacy by Shaykh Muhammad al-Jibaly.)

There's khilaf (disagreement) among scholars regarding cutting the beard:

• The beard should be left to grow naturally, without cutting it at all. (I.e. not even a little) As far as I know, this is the view of Imam an-Nawawi & Shaykh Bin Baz. (I'm not sure about Shaykh Uthaymeen and I shall not generalize this view to all the Saudi scholars.)
• The beard should be left to grow naturally. However, one can trim his beard to make it neat and tidy. This is the view of Imam Malik, Imam al-Shafi'i (if I'm not mistaken), and Imam al-Ghazali.
• One should cut his beard what exceeds a handful. This is in following the action of Ibn 'Umar radiyAllahu 'anhuma. This is the view of Shyakh al-Albani. The Hanafees view it as wajib.

Discussion points:

• Does anyone know the view of Imam Ibn Hajar?
• What if a person cuts less than a handful? What's the ruling? What if it was done to tidy it and make it neat?
• Imam an-Nawawi views that one shouldn't cut his beard at all. In S'pore, I only see Ustaz Ghouse Khan having a thick and long beard. Where are the Shafi'ees? Hehe.. I don't even see many ustazs following the example of Ibn 'Umar at the very least.. many tend to keep short, short goatees.. Subhanallah..

2) To trim or to shave the moustache?

The Sunnah is to trim the moustache. This is as stated by the Lajnah, as can be read from Fatwa-Online. There's nothing wrong in shaving the moustache.

In a previous entry, I posted a link to an answer in Islam-qa. I quote:

Al-Tabari and al-Qaadi ‘Iyaad favoured the view that both are permissible: shaving and trimming; al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar also inclined towards this view in Fath al-Baari (10/347).

See: al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah (25/320).

Imam an-Nawawi views that the moustache is to be trimmed from the edges, making the upper lip visible. Imam Ibn Hajar views that the moustache should be trimmed excessively. (I think that means very thin. What I've read, the argument is that Ibn 'Umar used to trim his moustache excessively such that it appeared as though he shaved it.)

In an article that I received through email, our brothers in Egypt prefer shaving the moustache. I quote:

The growth of Salafism is visible in dress. In many parts of Cairo women wear the "niqab," a veil which shows at most the eyes rather than the "hijab" scarf that merely covers the hair. The men grow their beards long and often shave off mustaches, a style said to imitate the Prophet Muhammad.

But I've also read that Imam Malik viewed shaving the moustache as bid'ah. Hmm..

Discussion point:
Flexibility and respect for the difference of opinions, that's my stance. So I'd agree with Imam al-Tabari, al-Qaadi 'Iyyaad and Imam Ibn Hajar that both (shaving and trimming the moustache) are permissible. Thus, it's a matter of choice.


3) Placing the Hands in Prayer

As we've understood from the Sunnah (especially from Shaykh al-Albani's book Sifat Salatun-Nabi), the Sunnah is to place the right hand over the back of the left palm, wrist and lower arm. And the hands should be placed upon the chest.

Discussion points:

• placing the right hand over the left or grasping the wrist? To me, it's a matter of choice. It'd be better to practice the first option sometimes, and to practice the other option at other times, in closer following of the Prophet's actions.
• ultimately upon the chest (such that the hands are quite close to the throat) or below the breast? I'd prefer below the breast (still upon the chest, as chest is above the level of the elbows).

By doing so, we won't appear too different from the common people. As far as I know, below the breast is practiced by Imam Ibn Khuzaymah (see Sifat Salatun-Nabi), Imam Ahmad and Imam al-Shafi'i. [So I wonder where the opinion of putting the hands just above the navel (covering it a little) and a little to the left comes from...]


4) Moving the Index Finger in Tashahhud

Yes, this is the Sunnah, as explained by Shaykh al-Albani in his book.

Shaykh Muqbil ibn Hadi al-Wadi'ee on the hand, views that the index finger should be pointing straight, without moving it. [Pointing from beginning till end.]

Both opinions are debatable, from what I know. Hence, I'd like to quote from Shaykh 'Abdurrazaq 'Afeefee who said that "While it is better to move (index finger), both are from the Sunnah."

In al-Majmoo', Imam an-Nawawi's view is the same as Shaykh Muqbil's. And it can be said that this view is the stronger view in the Shafi'i madhhab.

Discussion: should we insist on moving the index finger?

If you ask me, I'd see the situation. If I'm on my own or among people familiar with this Sunnah, I'd move my index finger. However, if I'm with the common people, I'd only point it so as not to appear too different from them, as well as to teach them the stronger opinion from the Shafi'i madhhab.

Additional note:
Our brother and dear friend Khairul Anwar related to me that he prayed beside Shaykh 'Ubayd al-Jaabiree hafizahullaah.. the Shaykh is very calm and "relaxed" in his prayer.. the Shaykh wasn't tensed during his standing in prayer (unlike some shadeed brothers who usually get tensed in prayer, placing the hands very high upon the chest)..

The Shaykh placed his hands upon his chest/below his breast (I can't recall exactly what was related to me.. what I recall is about the Shaykh being very "relaxed" during the standing, "relaxed" in placing of his hands upon his chest) and the Shaykh only point his index finger in Tashahhud, without moving it..

So I'd advise our shadeed brothers not to be too rigid in this matter.. especially those who are quick to comment or even denounce others who "seem to differ" from the Sunnah..


5) Isbaal

Brothers usually are aware of this matter, that it is haram from the garment (especially the lower garment) to cover the ankles.

But is it really necessary to shorten the trousers and the robe such that it reaches mid-calf?

I agree with the answer in Islam-qa that what is required to reach mid-calf is the 'izaar (loin cloth). Whereas for the trousers and robe, it's sufficient for it to be above the ankles.

Although to me it's kinda harsh/strict that the answer states that the trousers/robe shoudn't touch the ankles at all.

From my understanding, as long as it doesn't go beyond the ankles and covering them, it is perfectly fine


Wa billaahi at-Tawfeeq,
Wallaahu a'lam

Kuch Kuch HOTA Hai!

Don't ask me what the title means.. I truly don't know.. I just thought it would make a catchy title, hehe..

Wanna talk about HOTA.. hmm.. So HOTA is now automatic for all Muslims in Singapore.. if we disagree, we should opt out.. right? Hmm..

Yes, Muis did publish pamphletes about the permissibility of organ donation.. BUT... It doesn't fully truly address our situation..

As far as I know, donation of an organ (usually the issue involves kidney) becomes permissible out of necessity.. thus, the "supply" (organs donated) should only meet the "demand"...

But when everyone becomes automatic donors (upon their death), wouldn't the "supply" exceed the "demand"? Thus, wouldn't it result in a different ruling?

In the midst of the "debate" on the ruling of organ tansplant/donation some time back, a friend shared with me that the mashayikh in Saudi view that it should be a case to case basis.. that is, if there's a need to an organ donation/transplant, bring this up to the mashayikh and they'll advise on what should be done..

It's just disappointing we don't see it happening in S'pore.. I don't mean to insult or belittle anyone.. but the credibility of the Office of Mufti is just questionable to me.. the way they answer questions online are just "amazing"..

Just one example.. they insist that keeping of beard is only Sunnah (optional) according to the Shafi'i madhhab, despite the fact that I mention to them that Imam al-Shafi'i stated clearly in al-'Umm that it is haram to shave the beard..

Wa billaahi at-Tawfeeq wa al-Hidaayah,
Wallaahu a'lam

I hate trimming my beard!

Being in the Army, i've no choice but to trim my beard..

Some people might say, "At least you get to keep your beard.." While that is true, there's more to the issue than what meets the eye..

1) I applied for Muis support letter to keep the beard online (through Muis website). It's computer-generated (Muis is actually lazy to entertain "trivial matters"), and one has to choose from 3 options:

• I am a Shafi'i and it is encouraged to keep the beard
• I am a Shafi'i and I have made a vow to keep the beard
• I am a Hanafi

I was like, "Huh???" I was reminded that when I asked Muis about the beard several years ago, the reply that I received from them states that keeping the beard is only optional (sunnah) according to the Shafi'i madhhab.

They must be kidding right? But that was their reply. Despite the fact that I clearly stated in my question that Imam al-Shafi'i rahimahullah stated in al-Umm that it is haram to shave the beard.

I've also read somewhere that Imam al-Nawawi rahimahullah viewed the beard should be left to grow naturally, should not be cut at all, not even a little. (Imagine that.. one shouldn't cut his beard at all..) I follow the view that one can trim his beard to keep it neat and tidy.. in fact, one can trim up to a fist length, following the action of Ibn 'Umar radiyAllahu 'anhuma and some of the Salaf.

'Ala kulli hal, the four madhhabs agree that it is haram to shave. [Refer to the article by Shaykh Muhammad al-Jibalee on "Shaving the Beard: A Modern Effiminacy".]

Upon the advice of Ustaz Hamzah, I chose the 2nd option. The letter was sent for processing and it turned out that my request to keep the beard is supported. [For some reason, I have the feeling that if one were to choose the 1st option, he won't get the approval.] [I didn't make a vow.. rather, I "interpret" it as a "vow"(conviction/strong determination) to adhere to the Sunnah of the Messenger.]

[Guess what? There's a trainee in my camp who keeps the beard too.. in fact, his request was approved concurrently with mine.. and he actually is a Shi'ite.. guess he knows how to go around things..]


2) In Muis letter, it is stated I've made a vow to keep the beard. Thus, the letter serves as a request to allow me to keep it. But it also states that I should keep my beard short and neat.

I was like "huh????" The Sunnah is to keep the beard long and thick! At most, keep it at fist-length.. thus, that's why the approval letter from the army requires me to keep my beard short.. haiz..


3) I've trimmed my beard before.. but merely to tidy it from unsightly "sproutings".. but never this short.. one thing about trimming the beard.. once u start trimming it, u'll feel that it's not tidy enough that u'll be trimming and trimming until Allah knows when.. and somehow u feel it's tidy/neat enough.. and then you realise that "gosh! now my beard is really short...."

Not forgetting the fact that since I've to keep it short throughout my 2 yrs in Army, imagine the number of times i'll be trimming my beard..

I fear that I'll get used to this habit such that I'll feel very comfortable with it and forget the main purpose of growing the beard long and thick....


Wallahu al-Musta'an

The ruling concerning Drawings on the Prayer Carpets

Question: Is it a condition regarding the prayer carpet that it carries religious pictures, like a picture of the two sacred Masjids (in Makkah and Al-Madinah) or a picture of some other Masjids or Qur'anic verses, etc? What is your opinion concerning the pictures that are on the width of the prayer carpet and not its length? what is the Islamic ruling regarding the permissibility or impermissibility of praying on carpets that have pictures of animals or birds and other similar things?

Answer: It is not permissible for drawings of Qur'anic verses or animals or birds to be made on the carpets that are used for prayer. This is due to what writing Qur'anic Verses on prayer carpets contains of disrespect of the Qur'an. Also, making pictures of things that have souls (i.e.,animate beings) is not permissible. It is not a condition that prayer carpets must carry religious pictures, like pictures of the two sacred Masjids or a picture of some other Masjids. Rather, this is disliked, because looking at it will distract the person who is offering prayer and this weakens the person's devotion and humility in the prayer, which is required by the Islamic law. Indeed, Allah praised those who exhibit humility and devotion (Khushu') when he said: "Verily, the believers are successful. They are those who are humble in their prayer....." (Al-Mu'minun 23:1-2) May Allah send blessings and peace upon our prophet Muhammad.

Permanent Committee for Research and Verdicts

Fatawa Islamiyah, Vol.3, p.g 38,39, DARUSSALAM.