Question: What is the religious ruling concerning buying in installments?

Answer: First of all, buying in installments is an innovation of the actions that was not known to the Muslims in every preceding generation. Rather it is from the aspects that have been passed onto them from the disbelievers, those who, in the past, took over their lands, colonized them and governed over them with their rules of disbelief. Then when they departed from the lands’ major districts, they left behind their evil and misguided traditions. And, today, the Muslims live upon those practices and acts that the disbelievers imposed on them.

There is another concern – which is the most important – and it is as the Prophet (saws) said:

“I have not left anything that would bring you closer to Allaah, except that I have commanded you to do it. And I have not left anything that would distance you from Allaah, while bringing you closer to the Hellfire, except that I have forbidden you from doing it.” [1]

From this, we see that he (saws) forbade from that which today is called “buying in installments.” Therefore, this kind of business transaction is an innovation, which the Muslims of the past did not know of. I also want to say that this name is an innovation (in itself) for there is nothing found in the books of Fiqh with the name “buying in installments.” Rather, there is found in the Muslim books, that which is called Ad-Dain (debt) and that which is called Al-Qard-ul-Hasan (a goodly loan).

This (latter) has become, in the daily affairs of Muslims, just a name without any form and reality to it. This is in spite of the Prophet’s (saws) incitement towards giving goodly loans and his going to great extents in that, to the extent that he regarded the lending of two dollars to be as if you gave one dollar away in charity. This means: If you lend your Muslim brother two dollars, it is as if you have taken a dollar out of your pocket and given it for charity. Just as he (saws) encouraged these goodly loans, he forbade from taking extra money in exchange for delaying your brother’s payment of his end of the deal.

The Prophet (saws) said:

“Whoever makes two business transactions out of one, then he gets either the lowest of the two or the interest.”

And in another hadeeth, he

“forbade that two business transactions be made for one (transaction).”

The reporter of this hadeeth was asked about the meaning of this forbiddance, so he responded: “It is that you say: ‘I will sell you this thing for such and such amount of money in cash, and for such and such (more) money in delayed payment.”

I will sell you this appliance for 100 dollars in cash directly, and for 105 dollars in installments, meaning as a debt. He (saws) said: “Whoever makes two business transactions out of one, then he gets either the lowest of the two or the interest.” This means that if he takes the extra money, then it is interest, as is seen in the example of the appliance that was sold for 105 dollars, five dollars more in exchange for the delay.

If there were an Islaamic rule for individuals and rulers, this buyer who was deceived and had five extra dollars taken from him in exchange for the businessman’s waiting on the delay, he would have the right to take hold of him and complain about him to the people of knowledge.

So this is the understanding of this hadeeth. The thing being sold is one, however the offer is in two transactions: In cash directly for this amount and in delayed payment for that amount. So the increase of money for the delay in paying at once was labeled as interest by Allaah’s Messenger (saws).

Source

MPAC.ie Comment: This practice attempts to pull the wool over the eyes of Muslims and is the very same approach used by those who claim to engage in ‘Islamic’ mortgages and loans.

Yet Another Reason to Leave Qadianism

One of the first actions undertaken by Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahab on assuming religious power in Saudi Arabia was that of leveling the graves, breaking down the shrines and edifices erected by Sufi deviants who worshiped and prayed to the dead. Indeed in one of his most praiseworthy accomplishments, he expunged the afflictive aberrancy of Sufism from the noble land of the Hijaz.

Those seeking to follow his august archetype by removing all that is contrary to the religion have endured the consternation of the world, but inshaAllah the pleasure of Allah.

The Ruling on Graves

The sunnah is to raise the grave at least one hand above the ground so it is known that it is a grave. It is forbidden to raise it more than that. This is based on a narrative reported by Muslim and others from Harun that Thamamah ibn Shufayy told him: “Once we were with Fadalah bin ‘Ubayd in the Roman land of Brudis. One of our companions died and upon burying him we were ordered by Fudalah ibn ‘Ubayd to level his grave. Then Fudalah said: ‘I heard Allah’s Messenger, peace be upon him, ordering people to level the graves of the deceased.” It is reported from Abul al-Hayaj al-Asadi who said ‘Ali bin Abu Talib told me: “Should I not instruct you to do as the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, instructed me? Do not leave a statue standing without removing it. Do not leave a grave raised without leveling it.”

Tirmidhi said: “Some scholars act upon this opinion. They disapprove of raising the grave more than necessary to indicate that it is a grave, and so people will not step or sit on it.” Muslim governors used to destroy cemetery structures not permitted by the law, in accordance with the authentic sunnah. Ash-Shafi’i said: “I prefer that the soil used for a grave be no more than that dug for that grave. I like to see a grave raised above the ground the length of a hand or so. I prefer not to erect a structure over a grave or to whitewash it, for indeed this resembles decoration and vanity, and death is not the time for either of these things.I have never seen the graves of the Muhajirin or Ansar plastered. I have seen the Muslim authorities destroying structures in graveyards, and I have not seen any jurists object to this.”

Ash-Shawkani said: “It is apparent that raising graves more than what is legally permitted is forbidden. The followers of Ahmad, a group of the followers of Ash-Shafi’i, and Malik are of this opinion. An opinion that raised graves are not prohibited because this practice occurred during the time of the first and later generations without disapproval, which is the position of Imam Yahya and Mahdi in al-Ghayth, is not correct. This argument is based only on their silence about the practice, and silence is not proof when a matter rests on mere assumption, for prohibition of raising graves is presumptive.”

The Condemnation of the Sufi Practice of Worshiping Graves

1. Visits to graves fall into two categories:

(i) visits which are prescribed in Islam and are required for the purpose of making du’aa’ for the dead, praying for mercy for them, remembering death and preparing oneself for the Hereafter. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Visit the graves, for they remind you of the Hereafter.” (Narrated by Muslim, 976).The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to visit graves, as did his Companions, may Allaah be pleased with them.

It was reported that ‘Aa’ishah said that when it was her night for the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) to stay with her, he would go out during the latter part of the night to (the cemetery of) al-Baqee’ and say, “Peace be upon you, dwellings of the believing people. There has come to you that which you were promised, …, and if Allaah wills we will follow you soon. O Allaah, forgive the people of Baqee’ al-Gharqad.” (Narrated by Muslim, 974).

(ii) the second type is bid’ah (innovation), which is visiting graves for the purpose of calling upon their occupants, seeking their help, offering sacrifices to them and making vows to them. This is forbidden and is a major form of Shirk (shirk akbar). Connected to this is the practice of visiting graves to offer du’aa’, perform salaah and read Qur’aan there. This is all bid’ah and is not prescribed in Islam.

2. With regard to praying (performing salaah) at a grave. If what is meant is Salaat al-janaazah (the funeral prayer), this is permissible and is not forbidden. But if what is meant is to perform fard or naafil prayers, this is forbidden and is haraam.

The evidence for the permissibility of praying Salaat al-Janaazah in the graveyard:

It was reported from Abu Hurayrah that a black man or a black woman who used to clean the mosque died. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) asked about him and they said, “He died.” He said, “Why did you not tell me? Show me his grave.” Or he said, “her grave.” So he went to the grave and prayed for her. (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 446; Muslim, 956).

The evidence that it is not permissible to offer any salaat other than janaazah in the graveyard:

(a) ‘Aa’ishah and ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Abbaas said: “When (death) approached the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), he started to cover his face with a cloak of his. When he became distressed he lifted it from his face and said, “May Allaah curse the Jews and the Christians, for they have taken the graves of their Prophets as places of worship.” [The narrator said:] he was warning against doing what they did.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 425; Muslim, 531).

(b) Abu Marthad al-Ghanawi said: the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Do not sit on graves and do not pray facing them.” (Narrated by Muslim, 972).

3. With regard to the ‘Urs which is held every year: if this involves some kinds of acts of worship, or if the people who attend think that this will bring them closer to Allaah, or if it involves acts of disobedience and sin, then it is not permissible to attend it or take part in it. Even if it is free of all these matters, you should still not attend it, because adopting an occasion as an “Eid” or festival (a regular annual event) other than the Eids precribed in Islam is bid’ah (reprehensible innovation) and is forbidden. The belief of those present, that the soul of the “wali” attends this ‘Urs is an innovated and forbidden belief, because in the future this may be taken as being a part of the religion, and it will lead people astray. So this event must be denounced and people must be warned against it, and you should not attend it. And Allaah is the guide to the straight path.

4. With regard to asking a righteous person to make du’aa’ for you when he is still alive – this is permissible, because there is the hope that his du’aa’ may be answered because of his righteousness. The evidence for this is:
(a) It was reported from ‘Uthmaan ibn Haneef (may Allaah be pleased with him) that a blind man came to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and said: “Pray to Allaah to heal me.” He said, “If you wish, I will pray for you, and if you wish, I will delay that, and that will be better.” (According to another report: “If you wish, be patient – that will be better for you.”) He said, “Pray for me.” So he commanded him to do wudoo’ and to do it well, and to pray two rak’ahs…”
(Narrated by Ahmad, 4/138; al-Tirmidhi, 5/569; Ibn Maajah, 1/441; it is a saheeh hadeeth).
(b) It was reported that Anas said: whilst the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was giving the khutbah (sermon) on Friday, a man stood up and said, “O Messenger of Allaah, the horses have died and the sheep have died. Pray to Allaah to give us rain.” So he spread his hands and prayed (made du’aa’). (Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 890; Muslim, 897).

5. If a wali or Prophet dies, it is not correct, according to sharee’ah, to ask him to make du’aa’ for you, because he has been cut off from this world. This is a kind of shirk which is not committed by any of the righteous people of this Ummah, the Sahaabah and those who follow them.
Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And who is more astray than one who calls on (invokes) besides Allâh, such as will not answer him till the Day of Resurrection, and who are (even) unaware of their calls (invocations) to them? And when mankind are gathered (on the Day of Resurrection), they (false deities) will become their enemies and will deny their worshipping” [al-Ahqaaf 46:5-6]

Shaykh Al-Islam (Ibn Taymiyah – may Allaah have mercy on him) said: To explain further: if what the person wants is something that none is able to do except Allaah – such as asking for healing from sickness, for people or animals, or for his debts to be paid off in some manner that he does not specify, or for his family to be safe and sound, or to be protected from calamity in this world or the next, or for help against his enemy, or for his heart to be guided, or for his sins to be forgiven, or for him to be admitted to Paradise or saved from Hell, or for help to learn knowledge and the Qur’aan, or for his heart to be reformed, his attitude to be made good, his soul to be purified and so on – all of these are things which it is not permissible to seek from anyone other than Allaah. It is not permissible to say to an angel or a Prophet or a shaykh, whether he is alive or dead, “forgive my sin” or “help me against my enemy” or “heal my sick loved one” or “protect my family or my livestock” and the like.

Whoever asks any created being – no matter who he is – for any of these things, is a mushrik who associates others with his Lord. He is like the mushrikeen who worship angels, Prophets and statues which they have created in their image, and his prayer is like the prayers of the Christians to the Messiah and his mother. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And (remember) when Allaah will say (on the Day of Resurrection): “O ‘Eesaa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary)! Did you say unto men: ‘Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allaah?’ ” He will say: “Glory be to You! It was not for me to say what I had no right (to say).” [al-Maa'idah 5:116]

“They (Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allaah (by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful according to their own desires without being ordered by Allaah), and (they also took as their Lord) Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary), while they (Jews and Christians) were commanded [in the Tawraat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)] to worship none but One Ilaah (God – Allaah) Laa ilaaha illa Huwa (none has the right to be worshipped but He). Praise and glory be to Him (far above is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him).” [al-Tawbah 9:31]

(Majmoo’ al-Fataawaa, 27/ 67, 68).

And he [Ibn Taymiyah] said:

Whoever comes to the grave of a Prophet or a righteous man, or what he believes to be the grave of a Prophet or a righteous man although it is not, and asks him for something and seeks his help, one of the three following scenarios applies:

(i) he is asking him for something that he needs, such as to cure his sick animals or to pay off his debt or to take revenge on his enemy or to protect him, his family and his livestock, and other things which no one can do except Allaah. This is obvious shirk and he must be told to repent. If he repents, all well and good, otherwise he must be executed.

If he says, I am asking him because he is closer to Allaah, so that he can intercede for me with regard to these matters, because I am seeking Allaah’s help through his virtue, just as people seek the ruler’s help through those who are close to him – this is also like the actions of the mushrikeen and Christians, who claim that they take their priests and monks as intercessors and ask them to intercede for them with their requests. Allaah tells us that the mushrikeen say:

” ‘We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allaah.’” [al-Zumar 39:3 - interpretation of the meaning].

And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Have they taken (others) as intercessors besides Allaah? Say: “Even if they have power over nothing whatever and have no intelligence?” Say: “To Allaah belongs all intercession. His is the Sovereignty of the heavens and the earth. Then to Him you shall be brought back.” [al-Zumar 39:43-44]
“You (mankind) have none, besides Him, as a Wali (protector or helper) or an intercessor. Will you not then remember (or receive admonition)?” [al-Sajdah 32:4]

“Who is he that can intercede with Him except with His Permission?” [al-Baqarah 2:255].

The difference between Him and His creation is clear: people usually ask some of their leading figures who are in positions of honour to intercede for them with their leaders, so that intercessor asks the leader and he meets the person’s request because he hopes to gain something thereby, or because he is afraid of him, or because he is too shy to refuse, or because he is being friendly towards him, etc. But no one intercedes with Allaah, may He be glorified, until He gives permission to the intercessor. He only does what He wills, and the intercession of the intercessor is only made by His permission. The entire matter rests with Him… The idea of many misguided people, that this person is closer to Allaah than I am, and I am far away from Allaah and cannot call upon Him except through this mediation etc., all of these ideas are ideas of shirk. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And when My slaves ask you (O Muhammad ) concerning Me, then (answer them), I am indeed near (to them by My Knowledge). I respond to the invocations of the supplicant when he calls on Me (without any mediator or intercessor)” [al-Baqarah 2:186]

In al-Saheeh it was reported that when they were on a journey, they were saying Takbeer (”Allaahu akbar”) in loud voices, and the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:“O people, take it easy! You are not calling upon One Who is deaf or absent; you are calling upon One Who is All-Hearing and Ever Near. The One upon Whom you are calling is closer to any one of you than the neck of his camel.”

Allaah has commanded all people to pray to Him and call on Him, and He has commanded them all to say (interpretation of the meaning):

“You (Alone) we worship, and You (Alone) we ask for help (for each and everything).” [al-Faatihah 1:5].

And He has told us that the Mushrikeen say:

” ‘We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allaah.’” [al-Zumar 39:3 - interpretation of the meaning].

Moreover, it may be said to this mushrik: if you call upon this person, that means you think that he knows more about your situation, is more able to grant you what you ask for and is more merciful towards you. This is ignorance, misguidance and kufr. If you know that Allaah has more knowledge and is more able and more merciful, then why do you fail to ask Him, and instead turn to others? Have you not heard what al-Bukhaari and others narrated from Jaabir (may Allaah be pleased with him), who said: the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to teach us to pray Istikhaarah (du’aa’ seeking guidance from Allaah) in all our affairs, just as he taught us the Surahs of the Qur’aan.

Even if you know that this person is closer to Allaah than you and of a higher status than you, this may be true, but what you are implying is wrong. Even if he is indeed closer to Allaah and of a higher status, that only means that Allaah will reward him and give him more than you. It does not mean that if you call on him, Allaah will answer your prayer more than He would do if you called upon Him yourself. If you are deserving of being punished and of having your supplication rejected, for example, because your du’aa’ is offered in an improper manner, then no Prophet or righteous person will help you to do something that Allaah dislikes and is angry with. Even if that is not the case, then you should ask from Allaah because Allaah is more merciful.

(Majmoo’ al-Fataawaa, 27/72-75)

Source: Islam Q&A

It is because of the aforementioned that we praise the actions of the Taliban in destroying the idolatrous monstrosities that blighted the Afghanistan landscape and celebrate our Somali brethren’s obliteration of Sufi shirk and the sufi deformity of the pristine message and uniqueness of Al Islam.

For more information on this important topic, please read the following:

Tawassul – its types and related rulings
Etiquette of visiting graves

All praise is due to Allaah, the Lord of the worlds, may the peace and blessings of Allaah be upon our Prophet Muhammad, his family, all his Companions and all those who follow his guidance.

To proceed:

There is a strange phenomenon which is widespread and well known amongst the Muslims and it is using the name ‘Israel’ for the Jewish state which has incurred the wrath the Allaah. And I have not seen anyone refuting this dangerous phenomenon that violates the honour of the noble messenger, from the chiefs of the messengers, Ya’qoob (alaihis salaam) who was praised by Allaah in His Mighty Book along with his two noble forefathers, Ibraaheem and Ishaaq. The Blessed and Most High said,

“And remember Our slaves, Ibraaheem, Ishaaq, and Ya’qoob, (all) owners of strength (in worshipping Us) and (also) of religious understanding. Verily, We chose them by granting them the remembrance of the home [in the Hereafter]. And they are with Us, verily, of the chosen and the best!” [Saad 45-47]

So when this is the status of this noble messenger in Islaam, how can he be attached to them and how can they be attached to him? And many Muslims utter his name in the context of dispraising this Jewish state, by saying, ‘Israeel did such and such…’ and ‘Israel will do such and such…’. And in my opinion this is an evil matter. It is not even permissible for this to exist amongst the Muslims and the situation is more severe since it has become a phenomenon which is widespread amongst them without any rejection. So at this juncture we pose the following question and present the answer to it: Is it permissible to call the disbelieving evil Jewish state by the name ‘Israel’ or ‘the state of Israel’ and then to direct dispraise and defamation towards it in the name of Israeel?

That which is correct is that this is not permissible. The Jews have plotted a great conspiracy whereby they made it their legislated right to establish their state in the heart of the lands of the Muslims, in the name of the legacy of Ibraaheem and Israel. And they plotted a great conspiracy in naming their Zionistic state: “The state of Israel.”

This deception has extended to the Muslims and I do not say the general masses alone, rather to most of the educated ones. They use the name ‘Israeli’ state and even ‘Israel’ in their reports, papers, magazines and their speech, whether it is in the context of merely reporting news or in the context of defaming and dispraising and even cursing.

All of that occurs amongst the Muslims and unfortunately we do not hear any rejection of this speech. Allaah has dispraised and cursed the Jews in the Qur’aan in many places and informed us of His wrath upon them, but with the name ‘al- Yahood’ and with the name of those who disbelieved from Bani Israeel and not in the name of Israeel, the noble prophet Ya’qoob, son of Ishaaq, the noble prophet of Allaah, son of the noble Ibraaheem, the khaleel of Allaah, may Allaah’s peace and blessings be upon them all.

These Jews do not have any religious connection with the prophet of Allaah, Ya’qoob (alaihis salaam), nor with Ibraaheem, the khaleel of Allaah (alaihis salaam) and they have no right to inherit the deen from these two prophets. Rather this is specific for the believers as He, the Most High, said:

“Verily, among mankind who have the best claim to Ibaaheem are those who followed him, and this Prophet and those who have believed. And Allaah is the Walî (Protector and Helper) of the believers.” [Aali Imraan:68]

And He, the Most High, said, while freeing His khaleel Ibraaheem from the Jews, Christians and Mushriks:

“Ibraaheem was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but he was a true Muslim Hanifa and he was not of the Mushrikeen.” [Aali Imraan:67]

The Muslims do not reject the fact that the Jews are from the descendants of Ibraaheem and Israeel. However they hold the firm belief that the Jews are from the enemies of Allaah and the enemies of His messengers, such as Muhammad, Ibraaheem and Israeel.

The Muslims affirm that there is no inheritance between the prophets and between their enemies from the disbelievers, whether they are Jews, Christians, Arab mushriks or other than them. So those who have the best claim to Ibraaheem and all the other prophets are the Muslims, who believe in them, love and respect them and believe in that which was revealed to them from the Books and the Scriptures and they regard that as being from the foundations of their deen. So the Muslims are their inheritors and those of mankind who have the best claim to them. And Allaah’s earth is only for His slaves, who believe in Him and these honoured messengers. He, the Most High, said:

“And indeed We have written in The Zaboor after (We have already written in) Al-Lauh Al-Mahfudh, that My righteous slaves shall inherit the land. Verily, in this (the Qur’aan) there is a plain Message for people who worship Allaah alone. And We have sent you not except as a mercy for the aalameen.” [Anbiyaa:105-107]

So there is no inheritance on the earth, in this dunyaa, for the enemies of the prophets especially the Jews, and in the Hereafter they will have an everlasting punishment in the Fire. So it is amazing to witness the condition of many Muslims who have submitted themselves to the false allegation of the Jews, that they are the inheritors of the land of Palestine. And they enter into debate about the temple of Sulaiman, who the Jews actually disbelieve in and accuse of shameful deeds and are his fierce enemies, and of other prophets from Bani Israeel. The Most High said,

“Is it that whenever there came to you a Messenger with what you yourselves desired not, you grew arrogant? Some, you disbelieved and some, you killed.” [al-Baqarah:87]

How can some of the Muslims submit to them, the least degree of which is their submission as a silent consent, in this false allegation of theirs. And on top of that they call them ‘Israel’ or ‘the Israeli state’? And, by Allaah, there will be a day for their defeat by the Muslims who truly believe in Muhammad (salallaahualaihi wassalam) and in the messengers and their message, the awliyaa of Allaah, and the allies of His prophets and messengers.

So it is obligatory upon the Muslims to return to taking their aqeedah and manhaj from the Book of their Lord and the Sunnah of their Prophet and that which the Messenger was upon, as well as his Companions, and those who followed him in goodness from the best of the taabieen, and the Imams of guidance and the deen. For verily it is the greatest way for them to achieve victory over their enemies and for their might, mastery and their honour in the dunyaa and the aakhirah.

And they should dissociate and free themselves from desires, innovations, false partisanship and it’s people. Then they should strive seriously in making material preparations, such as weapons, in all their different forms and that which this necessitates from alertness and organising troops, as Allaah and His Messenger have ordered:

“And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war (tanks, planes, missiles, artillery, etc.) to threaten the enemy of Allaah and your enemy…” [Anfaal:60]

So the power mentioned in this ayah includes every type of strength from all the different forms of weapons which cause the enemy to fear. The Messenger of Allaah said, “Is the power not warfare.” And warfare includes every type of weapon used in war. And it is obligatory to obtain all those things either by manufacturing, purchasing or other than that.

And I was amazed on another occasion to see the name of this noble prophet being applied to this filthy state and this slandering nation which has incurred the wrath of Allaah. So in mentioning it and dispraising it, people say: ‘Israel’ and ‘the state of Israel’ as if Arabic, the broad language of Islaam, has become narrow and restricted such that they cannot find any name except this.

Then did they think to themselves whether or not this matter would please Allaah and His Messenger, and whether the prophet of Allaah, Israel (Ya’qoob), would be pleased by it or offended, if he were alive. Do they not know that the dispraise and curses which they utter about the Jews, in his name, are directed towards him in a way that they cannot perceive? From Abu Huriarah who said “The Messenger of Allaah said: ‘Does it not astonish you how Allaah protects me from the Quriash’s abuses and curses? They abuse and curse mudhammam while I am Muhammad’ .” [Reported by Ahmed, al-Bukhaaree in his Saheeh, Hadeeth no. 3533, and an-Nasaee.]

So how can you direct your dispraise, curses and slanders for the enemies of Allaah, towards the name of a noble prophet from the prophets, messengers and close friends of Allaah?

So if someone says, “The like of this usage is found in the Torah.” We reply: “It is more than likely that this is from the distortion of the People of the Book, as Allaah has testified against them and stated that they distort the Book with their own hands and then say, ‘This is from Allaah’.

Rather, the distorted Torah contains filthy statements and accusations of disbelief against the prophets, so how can that which is in their Books be used as a proof while this is the condition of these Books. We ask Allaah to grant all the Muslims success with that which He loves and is pleased with from speech and actions. Verily our Lord hears the supplication.

Written by

Rabee bin Umair al-Madkhalee

One can only guess at the commitment and love a mother must have to send her beloved son into the midst of a raging battle, in the knowledge that the one she had carried for nine months and brought into this world through pain and anguish might be taken from her at any moment. One such woman in Islamic history was Nusaybah bint Ka’ab.

It was on the day of Uhud, as the Muslim forces gathered to face the great throng of Quraish and their allies amassed to extinguish the light of Islam. Reeling from an earlier defeat at Badr, the Quraish would stop at nothing to exact revenge for their war dead.

Nusaybah bint Ka’ab like the other Muslim women attended the battle to administer to the wounded, both her husband and son were fighting alongside the Prophet and the other Muslims. Her son ‘Umarah describes what happened on that tremendous day:

“On that day, I was wounded in my left hand. A man, who seemed to be as tall as a palm-tree struck me, then went away without pursuing me to finish me off. The blood began to flow copiously, so the Messenger of Allah told me, ‘Bind up your wound.’

My mother came to me, and she was wearing a waist-wrapper, which she had brought, for the purpose of bandaging wounds. She dressed my wound, whilst the Prophet was looking on. Then she told me, ‘Get up, my son, and fight.’ The Prophet said, ‘Who could bear what you are putting up with, Umm ‘Umarah?’ The man who had struck me came by, and Mohammed said, ‘This is the one who struck your son.’ I intercepted him and hit him in the thigh, and he collapsed. I saw the Messenger of Allah smiling so broadly that I could see his back teeth. He said, ‘You have taken your revenge, O Umm ‘Umarah!’ Then we struck him with our weapons until we killed him, and the Prophet said: ‘Praise be to Allah, who granted you victory over him, gave you the satisfaction of taking revenge on your enemy, and let you see the vengeance for yourself.”

During the battle, Muslim archers placed strategically to guard a pass disobeyed the command to remain and the Quraish noticing a weak point turned the battle to their favour. They made a number of attempts to strike at Muhammad, determined to put an end to his life and message. The Muslims sensing the great danger the Prophet was in surrounded him, happily placing themselves in mortal danger for the sake of their Prophet. Among their number was Nusaybah bint Ka’ab.

Noticing the danger, she had picked up a sword and ran to the defense of the one whom she loved more than her own self. Blow after blow rained down in the Quraish’s savage attempts to strike the Prophet, and those who surrounded Muhammad fell in the service of Islam. Umm Umarah (Nusaybah) herself received many wounds in her desire to protect the Messenger.

Umm Umarah’s actions demonstrate the commitment and love that the early believers had for their beloved Prophet. They would rather die, than see the most blessed one harmed. What has happened to us today? Our Prophet is denigrated, demonized and denounced and we can barely muster a whimper. Those among us, blessed with great wealth, do nothing to silence the libellous liars. To this day, no one has taken a case against the despicable cartoonist who dared defile our religion.

If we had more men like Umar and more women like Umm Umarah, we would indeed be a force to reckoned with.

THE WARS in Afghanistan and Iraq are not going to plan for US president Barack Obama. In Afghanistan, America is about to cross the symbolic threshold of 1,000 deaths writes Lisa Marlowe in the Irish Times.

They are not going well at all, the ‘official’ Killed In Action numbers are grossly under-reported and the casualty numbers are sky-rocketing. The wars are bankrupting America, compounding its $12.4 trillion (€9.16 trillion) national debt.

Allah ‘Azza wa Jall says:

Indeed, those who disbelieve spend their wealth to avert from the way of Allah . So they will spend it; then it will be for them a regret; then they will be overcome. And those who have disbelieved – unto Hell they will be gathered. (al-Anfaal: 36)

SubhannAllah, let the kuffar spend of their wealth, for it will be a source of defeat for them in this life and a torment in the Hereafter. These wars and their greedy capitalist system have brought the west to its knees. Soon and very soon the victory of Allah will come and promise will be fulfilled. These are truly exciting times for the Muslims. Work good deeds ya ikhwaan for our inheritance beckons, and we will soon cast off the shackles of oppression and the mantle of ignominy and arise to take our place of authority over the land:

Allah has promised, to those among you who believe and work righteous deeds, that He will, of a surety, grant them in the land, inheritance (of power), as He granted it to those before them; that He will establish in authority their Deen – the one which He has chosen for them; and that He will change (their state), after the fear in which they (lived), to one of security and peace: ‘They will worship Me (alone) and not associate aught with Me. ‘If any do reject Faith after this, they are rebellious and wicked. (an-Noor: 55)

Al Hafith Ibn Battah mentioned concerning Imam Ahmed:…Saleh ibn Ahmed narrated: A man that was present (during the trials and debates of Imam Ahmed about the Quran being created or not) informed me: I followed him for three days of trials and debates while they were debating with him and speaking to him. He never made a mistake in Arabic grammar! I never thought a person could possess such strength and a strong heart.

Ibn Battah continued to write:…on the authority of Abu Bakr Al Marruthee, he said: Abu Abdullah (Ahmed bin Hanbal) would not make grammatical mistakes. I was informed that while he was being debated with in front of the ruler, he did not make a grammatical mistake!

Abu Bakr Al Marruthee also said: Ibn Abee Hassan -the scribe- mentioned to me: While Abu Abdullah was incarcerated he requested from me (to borrow) the book of Hamzah (a book on Arabic grammar). I gave it to him and he read/reviewed it before being questioned and debated.
(source: Al Ibaanah 2/249 and on)

I (Mustafa) say: Without a doubt, this illustrates the importance the salaf gave to speaking correct grammar. It also shows the strength of Imam Ahmed, and his courage. It would be very difficult for an individual to focus on correct speech, knowing he may very well be living the last days of his life! This also shows his wisdom, not to make a grammatical mistake in order that the people of deviation would not have a proof to say: He doesn’t understand Arabic! The likes of this is mentioned in the below statement of Shiekh Hammad Al Ansari. Allah knows best.

Sheikh ul Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahimahullah) said: The Salaf would admonish their children for making Arabic grammatical mistakes. Due to this, we are ordered, whether it be an obligation or a recommendation, to preserve the Arabic (grammatical) laws, and to correct the tongues that have deviated from the correct speech. By doing so, we preserve the methodology of understanding the Quran and the Sunnah. We also preserve the following of the Arab in their manner of (correct) speech. If people were left with their grammatical mistakes, this would be considered a great deficiency and despicable mistake.
(source: Majmoo’ Al Fatawa 32/252)

Shiekh ul Islam (rahimahullah) also mentioned a statement of Imam Ash Shafi’ee (rahimahullah), he said: …this is because the (language) that Allah choose is Arabic. He revealed His glorious book (The Quran) in this language and He made it the tongue of His final and last prophet, Muhammed -sallahu alahi wa salem. Therefore, we say: it is befitting for everyone that has the ability to learn this language to do so, this is because it should be the most desired language to learn. At the same time, it is not forbidden for people to speak with other than the Arabic language. (source: Iktidah As Siralt Al Mustaqeem 1/521)

Imam Adh Dhahabee (rahimahullah) mentioned: That which a scholar needs to be is:
-Taqiyan (have taqwah)
-Thakiyah (have intelligence)
-Nahwiyan (firm in Arabic grammar)
-Lugawiyan (firm in Arabic language)
-Zakiyan (pure in action and/or intentions)
-Hayiyan (shy)
-Salafiyan (follow the way of the Salaf As Saleh)….
(source: Siyar ‘Alam An Nubalah 13/380)

Imam Adh Dhahabee (rahimahullah) also mentioned the following story: On the authority of Al Mughirah bin Abdur Rahman, he said: Abdul Azeez Ad Darawirdee accompanied a group of people to visit my father for the purpose of reading a book to him. Ad Darawirdee read the book for them but he possessed a poor (Arabic) tongue and made many despicable mistakes. My father said to him: Woe be to you oh Darawirdee! You are in need of correcting your tongue before looking into this affair (hadeeth), more so than anything else. (source: Siyar ‘Alam An Nubalah 8/368)

Shiekh Hammad Al Ansari (rahimahullah) said: When a Muwahid (person implementing Tawheed) makes a mistake in Arabic grammar, he is accused of not understanding (his religion). The Shiekh’s son commented: Meaning: It is befitting for a person upon the Sunnah to learn the sciences of the Arabic language in order not to make grammatical mistakes (source: Al Mejm’oo 2/557)

Sheikh Muhammed bin Saleh Al Uthaymeen (rahimahullah) said: From the benefits of learning the Arabic language is correction of the tongue with the Arabic tongue which the speech of Allah was revealed in. Because of this, understanding the Arabic language is extremely important. But the sciences of the Arabic language are difficult in the beginning and become easy thereafter. It is the example of a house made of cane (the likes of sugar cane), but its door is made of steel. Meaning, it is difficult for one to enter, but once one does, is then made easy. Due to this, I encourage the student to learn the foundations of the language in order to make the rest easy for him/her. (source: Sharh Al Ajromiyah pg.9)

The aforementioned speech of Ibn Taymiyyah reminds us of the statement of Umm Abdellah Al Wadie’yah concerning her father, the beloved Sheikh Muqbil bin Hadee Al Wadi’ee. She wrote: My father would admonish us (her and her older sister) if we made a mistake in Arabic grammar. He would say: Don’t be like the people of Sa’daa, they learn Arabic for several years until they reach the level of ‘Al Mugnee al Labeeb’ (famous book in Arabic grammar), yet they continue to speak similar to the normal layman. (source: Nubtha Muktesirah pg.52)

Sheikh Muqbil (rahimahullah) also mentioned: The sciences of the Arabic language (nahoo) are from the important forms of knowledge that are incumbent upon the Muslims to focus on. This is because the enemies of Islam seek to divert the Muslims away from the language of their religion and busy them with what has less importance in their religion. And Allah is the Helper. (source: Ershad Thawil Fitan pg.65)

He likewise said: If a student becomes strong in the Arabic language, this will make learning other subjects easy for him. (source: Intro. to Al Hilal Adh Dhahabiya pg.8)

In closing we say, one thing that a person especially a salafee who is in seek of knowledge can reflect over to help encourage the studying of the Arabic language, is the following question of reflection and contemplation:

What would you do if you came into contact with the greatest scholars of our time, the likes of Sheikh Saleh al Fowzan, Sheikh Ahmed an Najmee, Sheikh Abdul Azeez ala Sheikh, Rabea bin Hadee, Sheikh Ubaid al Jabiree, etc…, what if you came into contact with these scholars without having a translator?! How much would you truly be able to benefit from them?! How many questions could you possibly ask?! How would you understand their answers and advice?
Source

The Status of the Arabic Language in Islam

By: Shaykhul-Islaam Taqiyyud-Deen Ibn Taymiyyah (d.728H)

As for becoming accustomed to talking to one another in a language other than Arabic, which is the symbol of Islaam and the language of the Qur‘aan, so that this becomes a habit in the land, with one’s family and household members, with one’s friends, in the marketplace, when addressing government representatives or authority figures or when speaking to people of knowledge, undoubtedly this is makrooh (disliked), because it involves being like the non-Arabs, which is makrooh, as stated previously.

Hence when the early Muslims went to live in Syria and Egypt, where the people spoke Byzantine Greek, and in ’Iraaq and Khurasaan, where the people spoke Persian, and North Africa (al-Maghrib) where the people spoke Berber, they taught the people of those countries to speak Arabic, so that Arabic became the prevalent language in those lands, and all the people, Muslim and kaafir alike, spoke Arabic. Such was also the case in Khurasaan in the past, then they became lax with regard to the language and got used to speaking Farsee until it became prevalent and Arabic was forgotten by most of them. Undoubtedly this is disliked.

The best way is to become accustomed to speaking Arabic so that the young people will learn it in their homes and schools, so that the symbol of Islaam and its people will prevail. This will make it easier for the people of Islaam to understand the Qur‘aan and Sunnah, and the words of the Salaf, unlike a person who gets used to speaking one language, then wants to learn another, and finds it difficult.

Know that being used to using a language has a clear and strong effect on one’s thinking, behaviour and religious commitment. It also has an effect on making one resemble the early generations of this Ummah, the Companions and the Taabi’een. Being like them improves one’s thinking, religious commitment and behaviour.

Moreover, the Arabic language itself is part of Islaam, and knowing Arabic is an obligatory duty. If it is a duty to understand the Qur‘aan and Sunnah, and they cannot be understood without knowing Arabic, then the means that is needed to fulfil the duty is also obligatory.

There are things which are obligatory on all individuals (fard ’ayn), and others which are obligatory on the community or Ummah (fard kifaayah, i.e., if some people fulfill them the rest are relieved of the obligation).

This is the meaning of the report narrated by Aboo Bakr Ibn Abee Shaybah who said: ’Eesa Ibn Yoonus told us from Thawr from ’Umar Ibn Yazeed that ’Umar wrote to Aboo Moosa al-Ash’aree () and said: “Learn the Sunnah and learn Arabic; learn the Qur‘aan in Arabic for it is Arabic.”

According to another hadeeth narrated from ’Umar (), he said: “Learn Arabic for it is part of your Religion, and learn how the estate of the deceased should be divided (faraa‘id) for these are part of your Religion.”

This command of ’Umar, to learn Arabic and the Sharee’ah combines the things that are needed, for Religion involves understanding words and actions. Understanding Arabic is the way to understand the words of Islaam, and understanding the Sunnah is the way to understand the actions of Islaam…” [1]

Footnotes:

[1] Iqtidaa‘us-Siraatil-Mustaqeem (2/207)

Shaykh Muhammad bin Ibraaheem Aal as-Shaykh (rahimahullaah), quoted the research of previous scholars quoting the concensus amongst the four madhhabs on the unlawfulness of nutmeg due to its intoxicating nature. Further, the Permanent Committee For Research and Verdicts quoted Shaykh Muhammad (quoting the previous research) in their Fataawee (v.22/pp.162-168), signed by Shaykh Ibn Baaz (president), Shaykh ‘Abdur-Razzaaq ‘Afeefee (vice-president), and others, and dated 4/11/1376.

The above information was provided by Moosaa ibn John Richardson.

The following research is to establish that nutmeg is an intoxicant and is used for recreational use. As such we advise that you clear your spice racks of it, and notify others.

Abernethy MK, Becker LB. Section of Emergency medicine, University of Chicago Hospitals and Clinics, IL 60637. Acute nutmeg intoxication. Am J Emerg Med. 1992 Sep;10(5):429-30.

Nutmeg is a common household spice sometimes abused for its hallucinogenic properties. This abuse is well reported in the medical literature over the last century. Ingestion of less than one tablespoon can produce symptoms similar to those of an anticholinergic toxic episode. Common presenting complaints are hallucinations, palpitations, and feelings of impending doom. We report a case of intentional nutmeg intoxication in a 23-year-old college student. As laboratory tests are usually normal, this diagnosis should be considered in patients presenting with an acute psychotic break accompanied by symptoms resembling an anticholinergic toxic episode. Treatment is primarily supportive once other life-threatening conditions have been ruled out.

Mathias B. Forrester. Epidemiology and Disease Surveillance Unit, Texas Department of State health Services, 1100 W 49th Street, Austin, TX 78756. Nutmeg intoxication in Texas, 1998-2004. Human & Experimental Toxicology, Vol. 24, No. 11, 563-566 (2005).

Nutmeg is a spice that contains volatile oils comprised of alkyl benzene derivatives (myristicin, elemicin, safrole, etc.), terpenes and myristic acid. Nutmeg has a long history of abuse. This study describes the nutmeg ingestion calls received by Texas poison centers from 1998 to 2004. There were 17 calls involving nutmeg ingestion, of which 64.7% involved intentional abuse. When abuse and non-abuse ingestions were compared, abuse ingestions were more likely to involve males (100 versus 66.7%) and adolescents (55.6 versus 16.7%). The majority of both abuse and non-abuse calls were managed outside of health care facilities (54.5 and 66.7%, respectively). None of the ingestions resulted in more than moderate clinical effects or death.

Demetriades AK, Wallman PD, McGuiness A, Gavalas MC. Department of Accident and Emergency, University College London Hospital, London WC1E 6AU, UK. Low cost, high risk: accidental nutmeg intoxication. Emerg Med J. 2005 Mar;22(3):223-5.

nutmeg poisoning is rare but probably underreported and should be considered in recreational substance users with acute psychotic symptoms as well as central nervous system neuromodulatory signs that may mimic in part an anticholinergic hyperstimulation.

Sangalli BC, Chiang W. Hudson Valley Regional Poison Center at Phelps Memorial Hospital Center, Sleepy Hollow, New York 10595, USA. Toxicology of nutmeg abuse. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol. 2000;38(6):671-8

BACKGROUND: Unpleasant and frightening side effects associated with the abuse of nutmeg occasionally generate emergency department referrals. We report a young patient’s first-time experience with nutmeg and review the mechanisms of its toxicity. CASE REPORT: A 13-year-old female ingested 15-24 g of nutmeg over a 3-hour period and smoked and shared 2 joints of marijuana. To facilitate ingestion, the nutmeg was put into 00-000 gelatin capsules. Bizarre behavior and visual, auditory, and tactile hallucinations developed. She also experienced nausea, gagging, hot/cold sensations, and blurred vision followed by numbness, double, and “triple” vision, headache, and drowsiness. Nystagmus, muscle weakness, and ataxia were present. Her vital signs and laboratory tests were normal. She received 50 g of activated charcoal and except for complaints of dizziness and visual changes, her 2-day admission was uneventful. The central nervous system activity of nutmeg is often postulated to result from biotransformation of its chemical components to amphetamine-like compounds, but this has not been proven. Nutmeg contains several compounds with structural similarities to substances with known central nervous system neuromodulatory activity.

Pytte M, Rygnestad T. Nutmeg–more than a spice. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 1998 Nov 20;118(28):4346-7.

Nutmeg is an easily obtainable spice that has been widely used domestically for centuries because of its psychotropic effects. Several cases of nutmeg poisoning, including one fatality, have been published. The active ingredients are volatile oils where myristicin and elemicin are thought to be the most important constituents. These have anticholinergic and psychotropic properties and are metabolised to compounds similar to amphetamine. We present the first reported case of nutmeg poisoning in Norway.

And then some other research papers establishing the same. The intoxicating nature of nutmeg is thoroughly established.

Source: HealthyMuslim.com

Shaykh Ahmad ibn Hajr al-Haytamee (d.974), the soofee ash’aree, however an authority on the fiqh math-hab of ash-Shaafi’ee according to the later followers of the math-hab, seems to have the most detailed information on the topic. Thus, his words and research on the matter are important and our scholars have quoted them.

He (may Allaah forgive him and have Mercy on him) mentioned that nutmeg is haraam according to the four math-habs, due to its intoxicating nature. He mentioned how the scholars have used nutmeg as a yardstick by which to judge other substances, like qaat, which leads one to understand that it was understood clearly to be an ideal example of an intoxicant. He further considered its use to be from the major sins, as it is “the use of an intoxicant”. All of this under “Major Sin #170″ of his book “Az-Zawaajir” (2/417-422 of the Nazzaar Mustafaa Baaz printing)

His research was quoted by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibraaheem (may Allaah have Mercy on him), and the Permanent Committee further quoted Shaykh Muhammad (quoting al-Haytamee) in their Fataawee (v.22/pp.162-168), signed by Shaykh Ibn Baaz (president), Shaykh ‘Abdur-Razzaaq ‘Afeefee (vice-president), and others, and dated 4/11/1376. Source

[Taken from ‘Silsilah Ahadeeth ad-Daeefah’ 1/83 A summary of the research by the Muhaddith, Shaykh, Allamaa’ Muhammad Nasiruddeen al-Albaani Translated by Abbas Abu Yahya]

Shaykh al-Albaani said in ‘Silsilah ad-Da’eefah’: 83 – ‘What a blessed reminder are prayer beads and indeed the best place to prostrate on is the earth and on that which the earth produces.’ Mawdoo (Fabricated) Narrated by ad-Daylamee in ‘Musnad al-Firdaws’ (4/98); he said that Abdoos bin Abdullaah informed us that Abu Abdullaah al-Hussain bin Funjoowayah a-Thaqafi informed us that ‘Ali bin Muhammad bin Nassrooweeyah narrated to us that Muhammad bin Haroon bin Isa bin Mansoor al-Hashami narrated to us that Muhammad bin ‘Ali bin Hamzah al-‘Alawee narrated to me that Abdul Samad bin Musa narrated to me that Zainab bint Sulayman bin ‘Ali narrated to me that Umm al-Hasan bint Jafar bin al-Hasan on the authority of her father on the authority of her grandfather on the authority of ‘Ali marfoo’ (ascribed to the Messenger of Allaah sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam).

Research of the Isnad [1]

Suyooti mentioned it in his book ‘al-Manha fee as-Subha’ (2/141) and Shawkani conveyed it from him in ‘Nail-Awtaar’ (2/166-167) and they remained quiet about this narration!

I say (Albaani): This chain has darkness upon darkness; the majority of the narrators are Majhool (unknown) and some of them have been blamed: I did not find anyone who wrote a biography for Umm al-Hasan bint Jafar bin al-Hasan. Al-Khateeb wrote a biography for Zainab bint Sulayman bin ‘Ali in his ‘Tareekh’ (14/334) and he said: ‘She was of the best of women.’ Al-Khateeb wrote a biography for Abdul Samad bin Musa, he is al-Hashmi, (14/41) but he did not mention anything about him either praising or criticizing him. However, Dhahabi conveyed in ‘al-Meezan’ on the authority of al-Khateeb that he said regarding him: ‘Indeed they regarded him as weak (Da’eef).’ Perhaps that was in some of al-Khateeb’s other books, then I corrected that and said: Rather that is in another hadeeth which will be mentioned with no. 2898. Then Dhahabi said: ‘He narrates rejected narrations on the authority of his grandfather Muhammad bin Ibraheem al-Imaam’

I say (Albaani): Perhaps he is the point of objection in this hadeeth. As for Muhammad bin ‘Ali bin Hamza al-‘Alawee then al-Khateeb also wrote a biography for him (3/63) and said: ‘Ibn Abee Haatim said: I heard from him and he is Sadooq (truthful) who died in the year 286.’ Muhammad bin Haroon, he is Muhammad bin Haroon bin al-Abbas bin Abee Jafar al-Mansoor, and al-Khateeb also mentioned him (3/356) saying: ‘He was from the people who had intelligence, had excellence and was a lecturer. He held the post of an Imaam of the masjid al-Madina in Baghdad for 50 years and he died in the year 308.’ As for Abdullaah bin al-Hussain bin Funjoowayah at-Thaqafi then he is Thiqaah (trustworthy), his biography is in ‘Siyaar alaam an-Nubala’ (17/383) and ‘Shadhrat ad-Dhaab’ (3/200). Likewise with Abdoos bin Abdullaah, his biography is in ‘Siyaar alaam an-Nubala’ (19/98) and in ‘Lisaan al-Meezan’ (4/95). [The Explanation] From what has preceded it becomes clear to you that the Isnaad (chain) is Da’eef (weak), so it cannot be used as evidence.

Now, in my opinion, this hadeeth is Baatil (false) due to its meaning for the following reasons:

Firstly: that prayer beads are a Bida’ which were not present at the time of the Prophet -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam- and were innovated after the Messenger -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam [2], so how could it make sense that the Messenger – alayhi asallam- would encourage his Companions in a matter they did not know?! The evidence for this is what Ibn Waddah al-Qurtubi mentioned in ‘al-Bida’ wal-Nahee anhaa’ (p.12) on the authority of Saltt bin Bahraam who said: ‘Ibn Mas’ood passed by a woman who had a Tasbeeh (prayer beads) and would count upon them, so he broke it and threw it away. Then he passed by a man who was counting upon pebbles, so he kicked him with his leg. Then he said: You have preceded the Prophet! You have carried out an oppressive Bida’! You have preceded the Companions of Muhammad -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam- in knowledge!’ The chain up to Saltt is Saheeh, he is Thiqaah (trustworthy) from the Atbaa’ at-Tabi’een (followers of the successors of the Companions), so its chain is broken. Then it was narrated on the authority of Abaan bin Abee ‘Ayaash who said: I asked al-Hasan about a Nathaam (a thread with pearls etc. arranged upon it) made from pearls and date stones etc, is Tasbeeh counted upon it? So he said: None of the women of the Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam or the female emigrants did this. However, its chain is very weak.

Secondly: that prayer beads oppose the guidance of the Messenger sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam: Abdullaah bin ‘Amr said: ‘I saw the Messenger of Allaah sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam counting the Tasbeeh with his right hand.’ Narrated by Abu Dawood (1/235), Tirmidhi (4/255) who graded it hasan, Ibn Hibban (2334), Hakim (1/547), Bayhaqi (2/253) and its chain is Saheeh just as Dhahabi said. I researched it in ‘Saheeh Abu Dawood’ (1346).

[The Command of the Messenger] Then prayer beads oppose the command of the Messenger sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam, when he said to some women: ‘You should make Tasbeeh[3], Tahleel[4], Taqdees[5] and do not be negligent and forget Tawheed (and in a narration: mercy), and count them on your fingertips since they will be questioned and will respond.’ This hadeeth is Hasan, narrated by Abu Dawood and other than him, Hakim and Dhahabi authenticated it and an-Nawawi and al-Asqalani graded it as Hasan as is mentioned in ‘Amali al-Adhkaar’ (1/84) and it has supporting evidence on the authority of ‘Aeysha which is Mawqoof (the Isnad only goes back to the Companion), see ‘Saheeh Abu Dawood’ (1345). This is why a group of scholars have made the hadeeth ‘What a blessed reminder are prayer beads…..’ Da’eef; as is mentioned by Shaykh Muhammad Khaleel al-Qawooqjee in ‘Shawaariq al-Anwaar al-Jaleela’ (1/113).

[Here the Shaykh mentions technical information related to the Isnad of the hadeeth, He continues:] It may be said: Some of the Ahadeeth mention performing Tasbeeh with pebbles and the Messenger -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam- approved of it, therefore there is no difference between this and Tasbeeh using prayer beads, as Shawkani said.

I say (Albaani): Perhaps this would be acceptable if the Ahadeeth regarding this were authentic, however this is not the case. Most of what is narrated regarding this are two Ahadeeth which Suyooti brings in his booklet as we indicated, so it is necessary to mention them and explain their mistakes:

Firstly on the authority of Sa’ad bin Abi Waqqas that he and the Messenger of Allaah sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam entered upon a woman while she was counting Tasbeeh on date stones or pebbles in front of her and the Messenger -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam- said: ‘Shall I inform you of that which is easier upon you than this or better?’ He said: ‘SubhanAllaah equivalent to the number of what Allaah created in the heavens….’ the hadeeth. Narrated by Abu Dawood (1/235), Tirmidhi (4/277-278), Ibn Hibban 92330 – in his book ‘Zawaid’, Doorqi in ‘Musnad Sa’ad’ (130/1), Mukhalas in ‘al-Fawaid’ (9/17/2), and Hakim (1/547-548)[6] by way of ‘Amroo bin al-Harith that Sa’eed bin Abi Halaal narrated to him on the authority of Khuzaimah on the authority of ‘Aeysha bint Sa’ad bin Abi Waqqas on the authority of her father. Tirmidhi said: ‘Hadeeth Hasan.’ Hakim said: ‘Saheeh al-Isnad.’ Dhahabi agreed with him, however he was mistaken because this Khuzaimah is Majhool (unknown) even Dhahabi himself said in ‘al-Meezan’: ‘Khuzaimah is unknown and so is Sa’eed bin Abi Halaal.’ Hafidh said likewise in ‘Taqreeb’: ‘Indeed he is unknown.’ Even with Sa’eed bin Abi Halaal being Thiqaah, as-Saajee mentioned on the authority of Ahmad that he became confused and Yahya also described him as confused as in ‘al-Fasal’ by Ibn Hazm (2/95).

Perhaps what supports this argument is his narrating this hadeeth, because some of the trustworthy narrators who narrated from Sa’eed do not mention Khuzaimah in their chain, so the chain becomes broken. This is why Hafidh al-Mizee did not mention ‘Aeysha bint Sa’ad amongst the shuyookh (those who were narrated from) of Ibn Abi Halaal, so this Isnad is not without the defects of Jahaala (a narrator being unknown) or Inqitaa’ (a break in the chain), so how can this hadeeth be Saheeh or Hasan?! Some of those who authored works claiming Prayer Beads are from the Sunnah were ignorant of this information or they pretended to be ignorant of it such as those of the present day who follow their desires and blindly follow their Shaykh Abdullaah al-Ghamaari who likewise pretended to be ignorant of this truth. He mentioned this hadeeth in his ‘Kanz’ (103) so that he could make the Prayer Beads permissible for his Mureeds (loyal followers) consequently making it permissible for them to wear them around their necks just as some of the Mushayikh (shaykhs) of the Soofi orders wear them. See the refutation against him in the introduction to volume three of this ‘Silsilah’ (p.37) and you will see the strangest of the strange.

The second hadeeth is on the authority of Safeeyah who said: ‘The Messenger of Allaah sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam entered upon me while I had 4,000 date stones in front of me and I would count Tasbeeh upon them. He said: ‘O daughter of Huyaiya what is this?!’ She answered: ‘I am counting Tasbeeh upon them.’ He said: ‘I have said more Tasbeeh than this while I have been standing here near you.’ She requested: ‘Teach me O Messenger of Allaah!’ He said: ‘Say SubhanAllaah equivalent to the number of what Allaah created of things….’ Narrated by Tirmidhi (4/274), Abu Bakr ash-Shafi’ee in ‘al-Fawaaid’ (73/255/1), Haakim (1/547) by way of Hashim bin Sa’eed on the authority of Kanana Maula (the freed slave of) Safeeyah, from her. Tirmidhi regarded it as weak by saying: ‘This hadeeth is Ghareeb (strange), we do not know it except from this route of the hadeeth of Hashim bin Sa’eed al-Koofee and his Isnaad is not well-known. Also, there is a hadeeth on this issue on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas.’ As for Hakim then he said: ‘Saheeh al-Isnaad’ and Dhahabi[7] agreed with him and this is strange coming from him, since he mentioned this Hashim bin Sa’eed in ‘al-Meezan’ and said: ‘Ibn Ma’een said: He is nothing. Ibn ‘Adee said: Whatever he narrated cannot have supporting narrations.’ This is why Hafidh said in ‘Taqreeb’: ‘He is weak’. This Kanana’s condition is unknown; no-one other than Ibn Hibban regarded him as trustworthy.

Then I amended this and said: However a group of narrators have narrated from Kanana and from them were Zuhayr and Hudayj, the two sons of Muwayyeeyah, Mohammad bin Talha bin Musrif and Sa’adaan bin Basheer al-Juhani; all these four are trustworthy and also included along with them is Yazeed bin Mughliss al-Bahilly, whom a group regarded as trustworthy while others regarded him as weak. So the one from whom the likes of these narrate is included in the group of those who are regarded as ‘Sadooq’; just as I recently researched in a uniquely detailed piece of study ‘Tamaam al-Mina’ (p.204-206), so do not be deceived by some of the ignorant ones, like Saqqaf and other than him; therefore the defect in this hadeeth is only Hishaam.

What indicates that these two hadeeth are weak is that this story is mentioned on the authority of Ibn Abbas without mentioning pebbles and its wording is as follows: Ibn Abbas said: On the authority of Juwayreeyah that the Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam left her early when he went to pray the morning prayer, while she was in her place of prayer, then he returned after he had prayed Duha prayer and she was still sitting. So he said to her: Are you still in the same state that I left you in? She answered: Yes. The Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam said: ‘I have already said four statements after you, three times, and if they were weighed against what you have said today then they would outweigh what you have said.

They are: SubhanAllaahi wa bihamdihee, ‘adad Khalqihi, wa ridha nafsihi, wazeenat ‘arshihee, wa Midaad kalimaatihi. (Allaah is free from imperfection and praise is for him; to the amount of his creation, the pleasure of His own Self, the beautification of His ‘Arsh and the extent of His words.) Narrated by Muslim (8/83-84) and Tirmidhi (4/274) and he authenticated it. Also narrated by Nisa’ee in ‘Amal al-Yawm wa Layla’ (161-165), Ibn Majah (91/23), Ahmad (6/325 & 429-430).

So this authentic hadeeth indicates two matters: The first is that the person in the story is Juwayreeyah and not Safeeyah as was mentioned previously in the second hadeeth! The second matter is that the mention of pebbles in the story is rejected. What supports this is that Abdullaah ibn Mas’ood RadhiAllaahu anhu rebuked those whom he saw counting Tasbeeh upon pebbles. This has been mentioned on the authority of Ibn Mas’ood via many chains, one of which has already preceded. If the use of pebbles for counting Tasbeeh was that which the Messenger -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam- had relayed then it would not have been hidden from Ibn Mas’ood, inshAllaah. Indeed this rebuke was adopted by some of those who graduated from the school of Ibn Mas’ood, including none other than Ibraheem bin Yazeed Nakhai, the scholar from Koofa, who used to prohibit his daughter from helping women braid thread together for prayer beads which they would use for Tasbeeh[8]! Narrated by Ibn Abi Shaybah in ‘al-Musannaf’ (2/89/2) with a good chain. [The Amount of Dhikr] If the Dhikr were a lot, a person might perhaps say: It is not possible to enumerate exactly the amount counted upon fingers as is the way mentioned in the Sunnah.

The reply is: indeed this matter of contempt came from another Bida’, which is the act of performing the Dhikr (remembrance) of Allaah much more than the limited amount – which Allaah the Most-Wise did not legislate. So this Bida’ necessitated another Bida’ which is the prayer beads since, as far as I know, the most that has been mentioned in the authentic Sunnah is indeed one hundred and it is possible for the one used to doing so to count this easily on one’s fingers. As for the hadeeth: ‘Whoever says one hundred times a day: ‘Laa ilaaha illAllaah wahdahu la shareeka lahu…..’ the hadeeth. So the intent is: one hundred in the morning and one hundred in the evening; as is clearly mentioned in some of the authentic narrations and they have been explained in ‘Saheehah’ (2762). As for what Ibn Abi Shaybah (2/391) narrated on the authority of Weeqa on the authority of Sa’eed bin Jubayr who said: Umar bin al-Khattab saw a man counting Tasbeeh with prayer beads he had, Umar said: What would be better than this would be for him to say: ‘SubhanAllaah …..’ This is rejected due to the following reasons: the disconnection between him and Sa’eed as well as Weeqa being weak and he is Ibn Eyaas who is layin in hadeeth (he is not discarded, he is upright in himself but his hadeeth are not precise). If there was only one resultant evil from the prayer beads which is that they have, or have nearly, annihilated the Sunnah of counting on fingers – which they agree is better – then this would have been sufficient evil since it is indeed rare that I see an old person count the Tasbeeh on his fingertips! Indeed the people have also diversified innovating with this Bida’, so you see some of those who ascribe themselves to one of the Soofi orders wearing prayer beads around their necks![9]

Some of the people use prayer beads while they are talking to you or while they are listening to you talk! The last thing my eyes fell upon a few days ago was a man going along some streets, busy with people, on an ordinary bicycle and in one of his hands were prayer beads!! They make a pretence to the people of not neglecting the remembrance of Allaah, even for the blink of an eye! Many of these Bida’ become the cause of the loss of an obligation. It has happened to me – and to others – many a time that I have given my Salaams to one of them and they have replied with just a signal, without saying as-Salaam! The evils of these Bida’ are innumerable. How excellent was the saying of the poet: Every good is in the following of the Salaf * and every evil is in the innovations of the Khalaf[10]


A Summary of what the Shaykh mentioned:

A – that prayer beads are a Bida’ which were not present at the time of the Prophet sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam and were innovated after the Messenger sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam [11], so how could it make sense that the Messenger alayhi asallam would encourage his Companions in a matter they did not know?!

B – That prayer beads oppose the guidance of the Messenger -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam: Abdullaah bin ‘Amr said: ‘I saw the Messenger of Allaah -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam- counting the Tasbeeh with his right hand.’

C – Then prayer beads oppose the command of the Messenger -sallAllaahu alayhi wa sallam-, when he said to some women: ‘You should make Tasbeeh, Tahleel, Taqdees and do not be negligent and forget Tawheed (and in a narration: mercy), and count them on your fingertips since they will be questioned and will respond.’

D – Ibraheem bin Yazeed Nakhai, the scholar from Koofa, used to prohibit his daughter from helping women braid thread together for prayer beads which they would use for Tasbeeh!

E – As far as I know, the most that has been mentioned in the authentic Sunnah is indeed one hundred and it is possible for the one used to doing so to count this easily on one’s fingers.

F – If there was only one resultant evil from the prayer beads which is that they have, or have nearly, annihilated the Sunnah of counting on fingers – which they agree is better – then this would have been sufficient evil since it is indeed rare that I see an old person count the Tasbeeh on his fingertips!

G – How excellent was the saying of the poet: Every good is in the following of the Salaf * and every evil is in the innovations of the Khalaf[12]

All Praise belongs to Allaah, may His peace and blessings be upon our final Prophet Muhammad, his family, his companions and all those who follow his guidance.

[1] Headings were added for clarity (T.N.)

[2] What supports that is the statement of the scholars of language: ‘Indeed the words: ‘as-Subha’ (Prayer beads) is a newly created word, it was unknown to the Arabs.’

[3] To say ‘SubhanAllaah’ (T.N.)

[4] To say ‘La illaha ill Allaah’ (T.N.)

[5] ‘To say ‘SubhanAllaah al-Malikul Quddoos; or Subooh Quddoos Rabb al-malaikatu war-Ruhu; and it is possible that Taqdees means to say Allaahu Akbar’. (Mishkat al-Masabih (2/9) –Checked by shaykh Albani) (T.N.)

[6] Suyooti attributed it in ‘al-Manha’ to Nisa’ee and Ibn Majah and Shawkani followed him in that, however there is some speculation about this due to two points: a- That Ibn Majah did not relate this narration at all. b- That Nisa’ee narrated it in ‘al-Yawm wa Layla’ as is mentioned in ‘at-Thufah’ (3/325), so it was necessary to qualify it and I did not see this in the printed version.

[7] Suyooti followed him in this in ‘al-Manha’ & Shawkani was deceived by it.

[8] In this and what has preceded is a clear refutation of Shaykh al-Habashee in his claim that no-one has preceded me in rejecting prayer beads.

[9] Shaykh Abdullaah al-Ghamari, the shaykh of the Darqaweeyah order and other orders, encourage them saying: ‘There is nothing wrong with wearing prayer beads around the neck as it is the same as a writer placing his pen on his ear!’ How amazing it is when a Faqih makes a good analogy because this is the most baseless analogy on the face of this earth as it is built upon fabricated ahadeeth.

[10] The transliteration of which is: ‘Kullu khairin fee ittiba’ man Salaf * wa Kullu Sharrin fee Ibtida’ man Khallaf’ (T.N.)

[11] What supports that is the statement of the scholars of language: ‘Indeed the words: ‘as-Subha’ (Prayer beads) is a newly created word, it was unknown to the Arabs.’

[12] The transliteration of which is: ‘Kullu khairin fee ittiba’ man Salaf * wa Kullu Sharrin fee Ibtida’ man Khallaf’ (T.N.)

Source: Miraath.net