Is Meat in the Supermarkets in USA Halal?

In the Name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful.

All praise is due to Allah, the Perfectly Wise.

"The food of the People of the Scripture is lawful to you..." (Quran 5:5)

Recently, a question came up, which has been very controversial in the western countries. Someone asked if the meat that is sold in the supermarkets in USA halal for Muslims to eat. An answer was given to the question by quoting the above verse and a hadith from Sahih Bukhari, and declared that the meat from the supermarkets in USA is permissible to eat. At that time, I could hear the gasps and murmuring throughout the gathering. Some were nodding yes with excitement, some were frowned, and some amazed at the answer.

This opinion can be traced back to Yusuf Qaradawi, who argued that slaughter from the people of the book, doesn't have to comply with all conditions of Muslim Slaughter. He also claimed that as long as Christians consider the method of slaughter to be permissible, it is permissible for us to eat, and he has allowed Muslims to eat the meat that was originated and packed in "Chrisitian Countries". (The Lawful and The Prohibited in Islam by Yusuf Al-Qaradawi pg 59-62)

So, let us look at this issue and the evidences that has been presented to support the controversial opinion. According to the agreed upon principle, if the issue has been addressed in the time of the Prophet (PBUH), then we look at how the Prophet (PBUH) and his companions dealt with that issue, and follow the understanding of the first generation. In fact, the meat of people of the book was an issue during his time, and their attitude towards it is reflected in several ahadith. So, we should try to understand how the first generation, the best generation, understood the permissibility or prohibition of it.

First claim is that the meat of a Christian or a Jew, is permissible to eat for a Muslim. Well, the above command from Allah leaves no doubt in the matter in general. However, we have to understand this in the context of the Christians and Jews traditions at that time. So, if a Jew or a Christian brought meat to the Muslims in Madeena, they would have ate it, and without asking any questions, because the Christians would slaughter according to their religion. This is reflected in several ahadith and has been agreed upon by the scholars.

Also, it is agreed upon that meat from Non-Muslims who are not people of the book is prohibited. No one contest this. There is no difference of opinion in this matter. This prohibition includes the people who do not believe in God, named Athiests, or people with undeclared faith.

If we look at the tafsir of this verse from the companions, we find that people of the book would slaughter their animal according to the rules given to them by their prophets, and say Allah's name on the slaughter. Permission from Allah here is to allow their meat although their beliefs are wrong, but their methods are correct, and they slaughter in the name of God.

"(The food of the People of the Scripture is lawful to you..) meaning, their slaughtered animals, as Ibn `Abbas, Abu Umamah, Mujahid, Sa`id bin Jubayr, `Ikrimah, `Ata', Al-Hasan, Makhul, Ibrahim An-Nakha`i, As-Suddi and Muqatil bin Hayyan stated. This ruling, that the slaughtered animals of the People of the Book are permissible for Muslims, is agreed on by the scholars, because the People of the Book believe that slaughtering for other than Allah is prohibited. They mention Allah's Name upon slaughtering their animals, even though they have deviant beliefs about Allah that do not befit His majesty" (ibn Kathir)

Some people don't agree with the understanding of the companions, and try to use their own understanding. They argue that method of slaughter doesn't matter, and is not intended by Allah in this verse. Although this understanding is against what the Prophet (PBUH) explained, let us assume it to be true for argument sake. So, if a meat is from the people of the book, it is permissible, regardless of how it was slaughtered.

Now, what is required from us is to determine what meat is from the people of the book, and what is not from them. This is where the biggest deviation is occurring in USA. Muslims in USA are generalizing this permission to the extent that, they start eating meat from Supermarkets. In the case of meat available in the supermarkets in USA, we have to evaluate if this meat is covered under the verse of the Quran above, at all. And, what we really are asking is if the meat in the supermarket is from Christians, because Jewish meat are sold separately as Kosher, so there is no matter of doubt on Jewish meat.

So, what is the meat of the Chrsitians? If a Christian is making the sale, does that make the meat halal? If a Christian is the owner of the supermarket, does that make the meat halal?  If the country is populated by mostly Christians, does that make all supermarkets meat halal? If the slaughterhouse owner is Christian, does that make the meat halal? If the worker in the slaughterhouse is Christian, does that make the meat halal? Of course not, because the meat is not a Christian meat that is sold in the supermarkets. It is from undeclared authority, and faith, which means it was prepared without any intention of it to be a Christian meat. USA is not a Christian country. Supermarkets are not Christian markets. Owners may or may not be Christian. Slaughterer may or may not be Christians. Worker may or may not be Christians. So, what differentiate that meat from meat sold in hindu markets in Orlando. Nothing! So, what is the foundation of calling it Christian meat? If one can not call it Christian meat, then it is prohibited, as agree upon.

After this point is clarified about undeclared nature of the meat in supermarkets, some argue that the Prophet (PBUH) allowed a group of Muslims to eat a meat about which they were not sure. This hadith is in Sahih Bukhari, and following is the english translation.

Aa'isha (may Allah be pleased with her) narrated "that some people said to the Prophet (peace be upon him) that a people come to them with meat which they do not know whether they have mentioned the name of Allah upon it or not. The Prophet replied "Mention the name of Allah upon it and eat it." ( Sahih Bukhari Book of Hunting and Slaguthering #415)

So, the claim is that the people were doubtful about the meat, and the Prophet(PBUH) told them to just eat it. When this is read in english as above, it does seems like a general allowance, but if one opens the original book compiled by Muhammad ibn Ismail Al Bukhair himself, there is more context to this hadith. Title given by the compiler of this hadith is "Baab Zabihaht-ul-A'raab wa Nahwihim" meaning "Chapter of slaughter of  Bedouins (new Muslim) and (the rulings) towards it". What this tells us that the group that provided the meat were new Muslims who may have forgot to say Allah's name when slaughter, but their intention was to slaughter according to their religion, which means that the companions of the Messenger had no doubt that the meat is from a Muslim, but they had a doubt about accuracy of the slaughter. Moreover, the assumption was that the meat is from a Muslim and is permitted. Prophet (PBUH) told them to not question these new Muslims about it and just say Allah's name and eat it. So, it is clear that the meat was known to be from a halal source to begin with and the Prophet(PBUH) was not addressing the question of the doubt of the source of the meat.

Hence, this hadith does not provide evidence to ignore the source of the meat whether it is from a Muslim, people of the book, or from Atheist, and can not be used to permit meat from the supermarket in USA, since the source of the meat is undeclared or unknown to begin with. A christian has to present the meat to us as slaughtered according to Christianity for it to be halal, but all meat sold in USA can not be considered Christian meat or meat from the people of the book.

On the other hand, there are confirmed source of Jewish meat that can be permitted with this hadith, because some Jews may not follow the correct method, but if one does not have enough information, they are allowed to eat it. For example, if presented a kosher option, one may chose that.

On the whole, one can not differentiate between Atheist meat, Christian meat or Hindu meat in USA, and permitting any meat within USA on the basis that it is a land of Christians, or owned by Christians, or severed by Christians is not acceptable.

If a person reading this article is a true believer, and will abandon for the sake of Allah if the truth comes forward, I urge them to stop buying from supermarkets in USA, as it is not the meat from the people of the book, even if you relax the understanding of ibn Abbas, whose understanding of Quran was second only to the Prophet (PBUH).

There are Zabihah Halal markets all over the USA now, and the similar meat is available there. So, please buy from that source, which is "tayyib" (pure).

If someone has another evidence that makes the meat permissible, please provide it, so it can be reviewed.

And Allah Knows best.

JazakAllah Khairin
A Student of Knowledge
AbuArman Jumani

Brothers! Tear down this wall!

In the Name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful.

All praise is due to Allah, the Absolute Ruler.

"And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together and do not become divided." (Quran 3:103)

"The believers are but brothers, so make settlement between your brothers. And fear Allah that you may receive mercy." (Quran 49:10)

As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah. (Quran 6:159)

People have asked this question a million times, but I am not sure if they are seeking an answer to this question, or just making small talk. Question they ask is, how can believers be united as one community? This question is asked in many different formats, and almost in every gathering. Ironically, almost everyone who asks this question has committed to build a wall to prevent such thing from happening.

Recently, I was invited to a meeting for Imams from different communities to a brother's house, and the agenda was to consolidated effort to help new Muslim converts. When the meeting started, I looked around the room, and saw people from different walk of life and cultures present, and seemed to be a good opportunity to settle some differences and unite for this cause. I had some ideas of my own, which I wanted to share with the group. As the people start speaking, they were identifying themselves and the group they belong to. I started to think about which group did I belong to. I could not answer that question, so I decided to stay quite, and just listen.

One of the Imam suggested to conduct the next meeting in "a neutral place". So, I wondered, what made a home of this brother hostile place to meet for Imams, who suppose to be brothers and love each other for the sake of Allah. Anyways, may be a political thing that my simple mind can not comprehend.

As the discussion move forward, there were some great ideas discussed, but there was something bothering everyone, and I couldn't figure out what it was until one of the brother ask the question  "So, should we centralize funding for this new effort?" Oh No! the host Imam immediately went to defense mode, and shut the question down, and every face I could see was flushed with emotion. Then I realize what was the bone that was stuck in the wheel blocking the progress. Instead of stating the obvious here, let me move forward.

See everyone in that room knew what need to be done, and almost everyone agreed on the solution, but the 1000 pound gorilla in the room was sitting in the center, and no one wanted to look at it. Brothers! Issue is that every Imam is part of an organization, and that organization has goals. Furthermore, each organization creates a boundary wall to organize their constituents to be loyal to their group, so the resources can be maximize. This is true for every masjid, and every country, and every school of thought, and every group that uses a label.

Besides the people present, two of the local Imam were not invited, because they were involved in a disagreement with other Imams who were invited. Actually, this is a very common thing that one Masjid or Imam disagrees with another Imam, and they would not like to be in the same room. This is called "Avoidance". It is the second stage of prejudice in the following list, according to the psychologist, Gordon Allport.


1.Antilocution (name calling, stereotyping)
2.Avoidance (defamation by omission, exclusion)
3.Discrimination (refusal of service, denial of opportunity)
4.Physical Attack (threat of physical violence, murder)
5.Extermination (mass assassination, genocide)

It does not matter what the reason is for the dispute, and a Muslim should be open to settle their differences with another Muslim in a moment's notice. and, an Imam should be held on even a higher status, and should not leave any dispute unresolved. Shame on the people who intentionally dis-invite others to avoid conflict in the meeting, but do nothing to solve the dispute. Have they not heard their master, who they claim to follow and love? I implore them to surrender to the following command.

Anas bin Malik (May Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu ’alayhi wa sallam) said, "Do not desert (stop talking to) one another, do not nurse hatred towards one another, do not be jealous of one another, and become as fellow brothers and slaves of Allah. It is not lawful for a Muslim to stop talking to his brother (Muslim) for more than three days.''
[Agreed Upon]


Oh people of Knowledge! Oh leaders of communities! Oh the inheritors of Muhammad ibn Abdullah!

Desist now this foolishness of petty disputes! Be the first one to apologize, even if you were oppressed. Would you take this argument in front of Allah? Would you argue on the day of judgment that you disconnected and avoided another Muslim, because of a dispute in the past?

Brothers! Tear down this wall!

If the Prophet (PBUH) can forgive the people of Makkah, who drove him out of his beloved town, surely our disputes are lesser in degree.

These walls of madhaib (hanafi, hanbali, salafi,), and the walls of race (Pakistani, Indian, Arab, North American...), and the walls of runoff organizations created due to avoiding political situation in the Masajid, are in the way of unity. If you want unity, kick these walls.

Once again, the unity can be achieved if every Imam willing to follow another Imam, if required, for the sake of Allah, regardless of the disputes and difference of opinion. Also, prioritize the common benefit above the organization that made them Imam and pay their bills. Unity requires sacrifice and risk, and only the believers in the hereafter can take that leap of faith.

JazakAllah Khairin

A Muslim, and nothing more.
AbuArman Jumani

Sajda Sahu: Prostration of Forgetfulness

In the Name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful.

In one of the classes this weekend, the teacher was not sure about the correct method for the prostration of forgetfulness and evidences for it. This is usually not understood by majority of Muslims correctly anyways, and has confused me many times before my course in Fiqh-us-Salah, so I want to share it here some information regarding it, in hopes to clarify and gain some rewards of correcting a person's Salah.

NOTE: As I understand it, if Imam is told about having added something in the prayer, then he should turn around towards Qibla and perform two prostration of forgetfulness  and say another tasleem, without getting up. If the Imam is told about something he missed or done incorrectly, he should stand up and continue the Salah where the error occurred, without saying opening takbir. Talking about mistake is not counted as breaking Salah. This is based on the authentic hadeeth, and applicable, if the only conversation occurred is about mistake of the Salah. If other conversations or activities has occurred, and a longer period has occurred before realization, then the whole Salah should be repeated. And Allah knows best.

There are times in our prayers when we may forget something, or we may have doubt that we have completed an action, etc. The prostration of forgetfulness is: two prostrations that the one praying makes in order to compensate for mistakes occurring in the prayer due to forgetfulness (sahu).

Its causes are three: having added something (az-ziyadah), having omitted something (an-naqs) and having been in a state of doubt (ash-shak).
We will look at these causes separately insha'Allah.

(I) Having Added Something (Az-Ziyadah)
If the person praying deliberately adds an extra standing, sitting, bowing or prostration, then his prayer is nullified. If however, he does so due to forgetfulness and does not remember the addition until having completed it, then there is nothing upon due upon him exceptsajdah sahu, whereupon his prayer will be rectified. If however, he remembers whilst performing that addition, then it is obligatory upon him to leave that addition and also to perform sajdah sahu (at the end of the prayer), and then his prayer will be correct.

An example of this is a person who prays the Dhuhr prayer as five raka'at, but does not remember that he has added except whilst inTashahud. So he should complete his Tashahud and make the salutations (give salam) and then prostrate for forgetfulness, and then give the salutation (again). If however he does not remember the addition except after salutation, then he should perform prostration for forgetfulness and give the salutation (again). (The prostration for forgetfulness is two prostrations towards the Qiblah).

Another point is giving salutations (Taslim) before the completion of the prayer. This is counted as an addition of the prayer. So whoever deliberately gives salutations before the completion of the prayer, then his prayer is nullified. If however, it is done due to forgetfulness, and he does not remember this until after a long time then he should repeat his prayer again. If he remembers a short time later, such as after tow or three minutes, then he should complete his prayer, give salutations and then prostrate for forgiveness and then give salutations (again).

The proof for this is the hadith of 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with him) who said that, the Prophet (peace be upon him) prayed Dhuhr with five raka'at, so someone said, "Has increase been made in the prayer?" So he replied, "And why is that?" They said, "You have prayed five (raka'at)." So he performed two prostrations after having given the salutation … and in a narration (there occurs), " ... so he turned his feet and faced the Qiblah and performed two prostrations, then he gave the salutation." Reported by the whole group [i.e. al-Bukhari, Muslim and the four Sunan]  [Ahmed 4431, Bukhari 404, Muslim 572, Abu Dawud 1019, Nisai 1250]

GIVING SALUTATIONS (SALAM) BEFORE COMPLETION OF THE PRAYER
Giving salutations before the completion of the prayer is a case of addition in the prayer. So whoever gives the salutation before the completion of the prayer deliberately, then his prayer is nullified.
If however, it is done due to forgetfulness, and he does not remember this until after a long time then he should repeat his prayer again. If he remembers a short time later, such as after two or three minutes, then he should complete his prayer and salutation, then prostrate for forgetfulness, and then give salutation (again).

The proof of this hadith is Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) who said that, "The Prophet (peace be upon him) lead them in the Dhuhr prayer or the 'Asr prayer and gave the salutation after two raka'at. Then he departed quickly from one of the doors of the mosque, and the people were saying that the prayer had been decreased. The Prophet (peace be upon him) meanwhile, stood by a piece of wood placed in the mosque, leaning against it, as if he was angry. So a man stood and said, 'O Messenger of Allah, have you forgotten or has the prayer been reduced?' So the Prophet of Allah (peace be upon him) said, 'I did not forget nor has it been reduced.' So the man said, 'Rather you have indeed forgotten.' So the Prophet (peace be upon him) said to the Companions, 'Is what he is saying true?' They said 'Yes' So the Prophet (peace be upon him) went forward and prayed what remained of the prayer, then he gave the salutation, then he prostrated twice, then he gave the salutation." [Agreed Upon] [Shahih Muslim Chapter 51 Book 4 #1184]

And if the Imam gives the salutation before completion of his prayer and there are some followers who missed part of the prayer and who stand up to make what they had missed, and then the Imam remember that there is something incomplete in his prayer that he has to make up for, so he stands to complete that - then in this case the followers who have already stood to complete what they have missed have a choice between continuing to make up what they missed and then performing prostration for forgetfulness, and between running to following the Imam, and when he performs the salutation to complete what they had missed, and then to prostrate for forgetfulness after giving the salutation, and this is more right and more prudent.

(II) Omission of Pillars (Arkan)
If a person omits a pillar (rukun – Singular for arkan) from his prayer, then if it is in the initial takbir (takbirat ul-ihram), then there is no prayer for him whether he left it deliberately or forgetfully because his prayer has not been established. If it is something other than the initial takbir, then if it is left deliberately, his prayer is nullified. If however, he leaves is due to forgetfulness, then if he goes on and reaches its place in the next raka'at, then he discards the raka'at which he forgot it in, and the following one takes its place. If he has not reached its place in the next raka'at, then it is obligatory upon him to return to the missed pillar and to perform it and whatever comes after it. In either of these two cases it will be obligatory upon him to perform prostration for forgetfulness after the salutation.

An example (of this) is the case of a person who forgets the second prostration in the first raka'at, but remembers this whilst sitting down between the two prostrations in the second raka'at. So he should discard the first raka'at and the second one will take its place, so he counts that as his first rakat and completes his prayer based upon that. Then he should give the salutation, prostrate for forgetfulness, and then give salutation.

A further example (is that of) a person who forgets the second prostration and the sitting before it in the first rak'ah. But he remembers this after standing straight from ruku' in the second raka'at. He should go back to sit and to prostrate, and then complete his prayer from then on. Then he should give the salutation, prostrate for forgetfulness, and finally give the salutation (again).

OMISSION OF OBLIGATIONS (WAJIBAT)
If the person praying leaves an obligation from the obligations of the prayer deliberately, then his prayer is nullified. If however he does so due to forgetfulness, and he remembers it before moving on from its place in the prayer, then he should perform it, and there is nothing upon him.

If he remembers it after having moved on from its place in the prayer, but before reaching the pillar that follows it, then he returns to it and performs it. Then he completes his prayer and gives salutation, prostrates for forgetfulness, and gives salutation. If however, he remembers it after reaching the pillar that followed it, then it is cancelled, so he should not go back to it but should continue his prayer and then prostrate for forgetfulness before giving the salutation.

An example of that (is where) a person raises himself up from the second prostration in the second rak'ah in order to stand for the thirdrak'ah, forgetting the first Tashahud. But he remembers before actually getting up, so he should remain in the sitting position, perform theTashahud, and then complete his prayer – and there is nothing upon him. However if he remembers after beginning to stand, but before standing, but before standing straight, then he should return to the sitting position and perform the Tashahud. He should then complete his prayer and give the salutation, prostrate for forgetfulness and give the salutation (again).

If he remembers after standing straight, then the Tashahud is cancelled for him, he does not return to it. Rather he continues and completes his prayer, and prostrates for forgetfulness before giving the salutation.

The proof for this is what is reported by al-Bukhari and others from 'Abdullah ibn Buhaynah (may Allah be pleased with him) who said that,"The Prophet (peace be upon him) led them in Dhuhr prayer. He stood after the first two raka'at and did not sit (meaning for the firsttashahud), so the people stood along with him. Then when it came to the completion of the prayer and the people awaited his salutation, he said takbir whilst sitting and performed two prostration before giving the salutations. Then he gave the salutation." [Abu Dawud  Book 3  Hadith 1029 ]

(III) Doubt (Shak)
Doubt is to be uncertain about which of the two matters has occurred, and doubt is not taken notice of in matters of worship in three cases:

1.  If it is just a self-delusion, having no reality like devilish whisperings.
2.  If it occurs very frequently to a person such that he does not perform any act of worship except that he is caused to doubt in it.
3.  If it occurs after the completion of the acts of worship, then it is not taken into account, as long as he is not certain of it, in which case he will need to act upon what he is certain of.

An example of this is that a person prays Dhuhr, and after finishing his prayer he doubts whether he prayed three or four raka'at. Then he takes no notice of this doubt unless he is certain that he only prayed three raka'at, in which case he should complete his prayer if it occurs a short while later, then he should give the salutations, prostrate for forgetfulness and then perform the salutation again. If however he does not remember until a long time has passed, then he must repeat the whole prayer afresh.

As for doubt in other than these three cases, then it is taken account of. Doubt in the prayer will be of two kinds:
(i) That one of the two matters is more weighty in his mind, so he will act upon what is more weighty to him, then he will complete his prayer based upon that, after which he should give the salutation, prostrate for forgetfulness and finally give the salutation. An example of this is if a person prays Dhuhr and doubts in a rak'ah (as to whether) it is the second or the third rak'ah? But the weightier case in his mind is that it is the third, so he makes it the third. So after he performs one further rak'ah, he gives the salutation, prostrates for forgetfulness and the he gives the salutation.

The proof for what is established in the Sahihayn (Al-Bukhari and Muslim) and elsewhere in the hadith of 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with him) who said that the Prophet (may peace be upon him) said, "If one of you doubts in his prayer, then let him strive to arrive at what is correct, and complete it upon that basis. Then let him give the salutation and perform two prostrations." [Sahih Muslim Chapter 51 Book 4 Hadith 1168]

(ii) Neither of the two possibilities are weightier in his mind. Therefore, he should act upon that which he is certain of, which will be the lesser of the two, and complete his prayer based upon that, and then prostrate for forgetfulness before giving the salutation, and then give the salutation. An example of this is if a person is praying 'Asr and doubts in a rak'ah (as to) whether it is the second or the third, and neither its being the second nor its being the third is more weighty in his mind. So he makes it the second, performs the first Tashahud and two raka'at after it, and then prostrates for forgetfulness and gives salutation.

The proof for this is what Muslim reports from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "If one of you doubts in his prayer and does not know how many he has prayed –whether it is three or four – then let him cast away the doubt and build upon what he is certain of. Then let him perform two prostrations before giving the salutation. So if he has prayed five, then they will make his prayer even for him, and if he has prayed the full four, then they will be a humiliation for Satan." [Sahih Muslim Chapter 51 Book 4 Hadith 1166]

And from the examples of doubt is a person who arrives whilst the Imam is in the bowing (ruku'). So he gives the initial takbir whilst he is standing up straight, and then he performs the ruku' and this will result in one of three cases:

1. That he is certain that he has reached the Imam whilst he was performing ruku', before he raises up from it. So he has caught therak'ah and recitation of Surah al-Fatihah is not required from him in this case.
2. That he is certin that the Imam raised up from the ruku' before he reached him, then this rak'ah has escaped him.
3. That he doubts as to whether he caught up to the Imam whilst he was performing ruku' – such that he catches that ruku' or whether the Imam raised up from the ruku' before he caught him – such that he will have missed that rak'ah. So if one of the two is more weighty in his mind, then he acts upon that and completes his prayer upon that basis and he gives the salutation, performs prostration for forgetfulness, and then gives the salutation. This is unless it is the case that he did not miss anything from the prayer because no prostration will be due upon him in that case.

But if neither of the two cases has more weight in his mind then he acts upon that what is certain (which is that he has missed a rak'ah), so he completes his prayer upon that basis and he prostrates for forgetfulness before giving the salutation, then he gives the salutation.

It should generally be noted that if a person doubts in his prayer, he should act upon that which he is certain of, or upon what is weightier in his mind – in accordance with the details already mentioned previously. Then if it becomes clear to him that the course of action he has proceeded upon is in accordance with reality and that he has neither added to or deleted anything from his prayer, then he no longer has to perform the prostration for forgetfulness, due to the fact that doubt which necessitates it is no longer present.

A different saying is that it is still necessary to perform the prostration of forgetfulness in order to humiliate the Shaytan, due to the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him), "And if he has prayed it completely then the two prostrations will be a humiliation for the Shaytan."

And due to the fact that he performed a part of his prayer in a state of doubt with regards to its performance and this is the more correct saying insha'Allah.

An example of this is if a person prays and doubts in a rak'ah, whether it is the second or third rak'ah. Neither of these two possibilities carries more weight in his mind, so he makes it the second rak'ah and completes his prayer upon that basis. But whilst continuing, it becomes clear to him, that it was the second rak'ah in reality. In such a case there is no prostration for for forgetfulness due upon him in the saying most well known in the madhhab, but prostration for forgetfulness before the salutation is required from him and the second saying that we hold to be preferable.

PROSTRATION FOR FORGETFULNESS FOR ONE PRAYING BEHIND AN IMAM
If the Imam forgets, then it is obligatory upon those following him in prayer to follow him in performance of the prostration for forgetfulness due to the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him), "The Imam is appointed to be followed, so do not differ with him … "until he said, " … so when he prostrates then prostrate … " This hadith is agreed upon from the hadith of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him).

So whether the Imam prostrates for forgetfulness before the salutation or after it, it is obligatory upon those praying behind him. This is except for the one who arrivced late and needs to make up the part of the prayer he missed, he should not follow the Imam in performance of prostration after the salutation, as this is not possible for him. This is because, he cannot give the salutation along with the Imam, so what he should do, is to first make up what he has missed, and then give the salutation, then to prostrate for forgetfulness, and then to give the salutation.

An example of this (is if) a man enters the prayer along with the Imam in the final rak'ah, and a prostration for forgetfulness is due from theImam after the salutation. So when the Imam gives the salutation, this man should stand to complete what he missed and does not prostrate along with the Imam. Then he has completed what he missed and has given the salutation, he should them perform prostration for forgetfulness aftyer the salutation. But if the follower and not the Imam forgets in the prayer, and nothing of the prayer escapes him, then no prostration is due from him. This is because his prostrating would cause him to differ from the Imam and to disrupt his state of following him. Also the companions (may Allah be pleased with him), left the Tashahhud when the Prophet (peace be upon him) forgot it, so they stood along with him and did not sit for the Tashahhud in order to comply with the duty of following the Imam.

But if he misses part of the prayer due to forgetting whilst praying behind the Imam, or whilst making up what he had missed on his own, then he must prostrate for forgetfulness after completion of what he had missed. This prostration will be either before or after the salutation depending on its cause, as he preceded.
An example of this (is if) a follower forgets to say "Subhana rabbi al-'adhim" in the ruku', but does not miss any action of the prayer, he does not need to prostrate, but if a rak'ah or more uis missed by him, then he must make it up and then prostrate for forgetfulness before the salutation.

A further example (is if) a follower prays the Dhuhr prayer along with the Imam, then when the Imam stands for the fourth rak'ah, the follower remains sitting thinking it to be the last rak'ah. But when he knows that the Imam has stood, he stands. So if he hasn't missed anything of the prayer, then no prostration is due for him. But if it causes him to miss a rak'ah or more, then he should make that up and give the salutation, and then prostrate for forgetfulness, and give the salutation. This prostration is because of the sitting that he added to the prayer when the Imam stood for the fourth rak'ah.

(Note): For what has preceded it, will be clear that the prostration for forgetfulness is sometimes performed before the salutation, and sometimes after it.

So it is performed before salutation in two case:
(i) If it is due to deficiency, due to the hadith of 'Abdullah ibn Buhaynah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace be upon him) prostrated for forgetfulness before the salutation when he left the first Tashahhud, and the hadith with it's wording has preceeeded.

If it is due to doubt when is unable to distinguish which of the two possibilities carries more weight in his mind, due to the hadith of Abu Sa'id al-Khudri about one who doubts in his prayer and does not know how many he has to pray, whether it is three or four raka'at. So the Prophet (peace be upon him) commanded such as person to perform two prostrations before giving the salutation, and the hadith and it's wording have preceeded. And the prostration for forgetfulness is performed after the salutations;

(ii) If it is due to an addition in the prayer, due to the hadith of 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ud when the Prophet (peace be upon him) prayed Dhuhrwith five raka'at, so they mentioned this to him after the salutation, so he (peace be upon him) performed two prostrations and then gave the salutations. He (peace be upon him) did not explain that his prostration after the salutation was due to the fact that he only knew of the addition after having performed it. So this shows that this ruling is general and that prostration because of addition is to be done after the salutation – whether he knows of the addition before the salutation or after it.

From this also is the case of one who forgetfully gives the salutation before completion of the prayer, then he remembers and completes it. He has added a salutation within the prayer, so he should prostrate after salutation due to the hadith of Abu Hurayrah, that the Prophet (peace be upon him) gave the salutation in the Dhuhr or the 'Asr prayed after two raka'at. They mentioned it to him, so he completed the prayer and then gave the salutation, then prostrated for forgetfulness, then the hadith with it's wording has preceded.

(iii) If it is due to forgetfulness when one of the two possibilities carries more weight in his mind, due to the hadith of Ibn Mas'ud that the Prophet (peace be upon him) commanded the one who forgets in his prayer should strive to ascertain what is correct, and then to complete his prayer on that basis, then to give the salutation and to prostrate and the hadith and it's wording have preceded.

Then if two cases of forgetfulness occur for him, one of them requiring prostration before the salutation and the other requiring prostration after it, then the scholars say that prostration before the salutation predominates, so he should prostrate before it.

An example of this (is if) a person prays Dhuhr and stands up for the third rak'ah without sitting for the first Tashahhud, then he sits in the third rak'ah thinking it to be the second. He then remembers that it is the third – so he should stand, pray a further rak'ah and prostrate for forgetfulness and then give the salutation. So this person left the first Tashahhud which requires prostration before the salutation and added a sitting in the third rak'ah which requires prostration after the salutation, so the prostration after the salutation predominates and Allah knows best.

So I ask Allah that He should grant us and our Muslim brothers understanding of His Book and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace be upon him) and that we act upon them inwardly and outwardly in matters of 'aqidah, worships and dealings. Then He grants us all good outcome, indeed He is the Most Beneficent, the Most Gracious.

All praise is for Allah, The Lord of all creation, and may Allah extol and send blessings and peace upon our Messenger (peace be upon him), upon his true followers and all his companions.
Written and compiled by the one in need of Allah, The Most High, Muhammad ibn Salih al-'Uthaymin on the 04/03/1400H.

JazakAllah Khairin,

AbuArman Jumani

Can We Separate God from Government?

In the name of God, the entirely merciful, the especially merciful

"So direct your face toward the way of life that is pure, the nature of God  is the nature of the people upon which He has created them. No change should there be in the creation of God. That is the established way of life, but most of the people do not know." ( Quran 30:30)


John Locke’s second treatise of civil government is one of the turning points in world politics, because most of the governments before his writings professed a state religion and ruled under the laws of God. However, he argued that although authority comes from God, the laws come from men and nature, and hence religions should not be mixed with government. If we want to know the impact of his writings on the west, we should count the significant size countries today, in the west, which derives their constitution from God’s laws, and implements. Answer is none. There is no significant western government left today, who defies John Locke’s ideology. John Locke’s theories did overlap with goals of Islam, and in some cases can be the model of Islamic countries to follow, but his argument to remove God’s authority in legislation brings it odds with Islamic Creed, where all power rests with Allah (God). Since this topic is very large to cover, let us look at two major areas where John Locke’s treatise were very effective  His focus on separation of religion and state and nature of slavery are the two prominent themes that worth discussing.

John Locke’s second treatise is an attempt to explain the rationale behind a civil government, and its authority. He establishes the theory on something called “state of nature”, which men are born in, where they have absolute freedom. However, he, then, points out that absolute freedom by everyone is not sustainable, so he argues that an alternative has to be achieved to maximize the freedom. In theory, he admits God’s authority over men to create law, as he says “In transgressing the law of nature, the offender declares himself to live by another rule than that of reason and common equity, which is that measure God has set to the actions of men, for their mutual security” (Chapter 2 Second Treatise). So, he is admitting that men are born in state of nature which is created by God, and hence God’s laws govern men. This is in complete accordance with Islamic understanding that every human is born in the state of “fitrah” (nature), as the Prophet (PBUH) stated “No one is born except they are upon natural instinct; then his parents turn him into a Jew or Christian or Magian;” (Sahih Muslim, Book 33, Number 6423).

In reality, John Loche never argues for a secular government free of any religion, but instead he argues for a civil government free of tyranny, which, he thinks, can only be achieved through civil government, where men coming together and setting up laws based on “reason” and “natural law”. While describing the legislative process that would govern a society, he says “for the law of nature being unwritten, and so nowhere to be found but in the minds of men” (Chapter 11 Second Treatise). This is where he makes the mistake that many of us make on a daily basis. We consider our senses and reasoning to be the basis of reality, but there is a lot that we can’t sense and understand in the nature, so how can people come together and create a government, when none of them knows the affects of polygyny (a man marrying two women) on the society. Should that be allowed? Or should it be banned. Of course not. What about Polyandry (a woman marrying two men). Should it be allowed? New scientific research can find the true father of a child, so is that ban from God obsolete now? Of course not. God has given us certain rules that defy our reasoning, but in his infinite wisdom are good for us. John, after admitting that God is the source of nature, he omits to mention how he knows that. Of course, he is a man of faith, which is clear in all of his writings. His theory coincides with Islam in all aspects, except the fact that, God has given us some basic rules, and they cannot be overruled by civil government. So, Islam is not a religion, but the laws of original state of men, which John Locke admires, and no government should have an official religion, agreed, but, at the same time, no government can establish laws that go against laws of nature set by God, some of them we cannot perceive completely, but are defined in Islam.

Chapter four of John’s treatise exclusively discusses about slavery, and he makes the point that Islam makes to humankind, which is that free will is not to do as you like, but to have limited freedom under the law that balances the rights of everyone. He says, “Freedom then is not what Sir Robert Filmer tells us, … a liberty for everyone to do what he lists, to live as he pleases, and not to be tied by any laws: but freedom of men under government is, to have a standing rule to live by, common to every one of that society…” (Chapter 4 Second Treatise). Furthermore, John distinguishes between slavery under Judeo-Islamic Law and slavery by trans-Atlantic traders, because slavery by itself is not oppression, as the slave in Judeo-Islamic law becomes slave by a concession given to them by the conquering army by sparing their life in return of their service to the master, and the master has limited rights, and cannot kill him or torture him. So, slavery is an extension of laws governing the debt and war, and man is not absolutely free, because most of us are always under a command of someone else (e.g. government), and slavery if regulated properly is part of that obligation (Locke and Slavery Article). In Judeo-Islamic slavery, a slave was treated as part of the family, and had certain rights, and the owner might work alongside the slave. However, in America, slaves were treated as non-humans, and they have lost all their human rights completely. Islam did not prohibited slavery, but established rights of slaves and owners to an extent that, slavery was no more than a service contract, and an alternative to killing and imprisonment during wars and indebtedness. Judaism and Islam forbid the type of slavery that existed in the America.

In conclusion, western civilization is in decline due to the materialistic ideals they adopted from John Locke and other like him, without understanding his context and adapting his theories as a whole, who argue that the laws are based on reason and laws of nature tangible to us, and since this world govern by the laws of nature, God’s laws are not proven as the truth, and hence the safety limits that God placed on us were removed. How can one admit existence of God, and not the laws he gave in Islam, which were the foundations of the golden age? For example, men are being allowed to rent money and speculatively trade a single property multiple times, which creates a self eating cycle that can only be controlled by keep increasing the rate of “riba” (renting money) and “gambling trades”, but it can reach a critical mass and explode, as it happened in 2008. John Locke’s second treatise is a very impressing and foretelling piece of writing, but his lack of understanding of the connection between nature and God’s laws renders it a flawed theory, in the end. Islam already encapsulates all the good contained in John Locke’s theory, and is the best solution for humanity today.

Thanks,
Law abiding citizen
AbuArman (Adnan) Jumani

References

1. The Second Treatise of Civil Government: 1690: John Locke
2. Locke and slavery: An Article: http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/phl302/distance_arc/locke/locke-slavery-lec.html
3. http://www.constitution.org/jl/2ndtreat.htm
4. Sahih Muslim: Compiled by Imam Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj

Importance of Electronic Communication in Islam

In the Name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful.

"Verily, we have sent down the Reminder, and, verily, we will guard it" (Quran 1:59)

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was the final prophet to come, Quran is the final revelation, and Islam is the final set of rules from Allah, and there will be no more amendments, or updates coming. If we think about this for a second, this is a very important part of the message of Islam. Every other religion came before it was localized in time and place, and then another Prophet will come to replace the earlier one, and new set of rules may come down to match the situation of that nation. However, it changed with Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), and he was given something that had to last until Qiyamah. So, how can an Arab living in a desert, who can not read or write, will set an example for all humanity to follow until the end of days?

Answer is very simple that Allah chose Islam as a religion for mankind, and he is the Most Wise. He selected the best of the human being to present the best way of life. Islam has survived more than 1434 years because, it does not prohibit scientific research and development, rather it makes it part of faith to benefit from new ideas and inventions, as long as they don't go against the principles of Islam. Following ahadith shows this point clearly.


Narrated Zaid bin Thabit al-Ansari, one of the scribes of the Revelation: Abu Bakr sent for me after the casualties among the warriors (of the battle) of Yamama (where a great number of Qurra (memorizers of the Quran, were killed)...Abu Bakr said to me (Zaid bin Thabit): You are a wise young man and we do not suspect you (of telling lies or of forgetfulness) and you used to write the Divine Inspiration for Allah's Apostle. Therefore, look for the Qur'an and collect it (in one manuscript)'...So I started locating the Quranic material and collecting it from parchments, scapula, leafstalks of date palms and from the memories of men (who know it by heart)..." (Bukhari 6:201)


Narrated Anas bin Malik: Hudhaifa bin Al-Yaman came to Uthman at the time when the people of Sham (Syria) and the people of Iraq were waging war to conquer Armenia and Azherbijan. Hudhaifa was afraid of their differences in the recitation of the Quran, so he said to Uthman, 'O chief of the Believers! Save this nation before they differ about the Book (Quran) as Jews and Christians did before'... 'Uthman then ordered Zaid bin Thabit, 'Abdullah bin Az-Zubair, Said bin Al-As and Abdur Rahman bin Harith bin Hisham to rewrite the manuscripts in perfect copies (in Qureyshi tongue)... Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy ... and ordered that all the other Quranic materials whether written in fragmentary manuscripts or whole copies, be burnt..." (Bukhari 6:510)

 When Umar (RA)  and Abu Bakr came to Zaid bin Thabit, and asked him to compile Quranic verse in a single text, they were basically recognizing that Islam will not be preserved if it is not recorded in its entirety in one place as a back up copy. (Bukhari 6:201) Then, Uthman (RA) recognized that oral recitation of the Quran is being debated, and there is a need to standardize the Quran as a written form. He asked Zaid bin Thabit and a few others to make several copies and sent to all corner of the world.

Similarly, we have to recognize that if we want to survive as a community, we need to take the aid of everything available. In our generation, every organization and community is using electronic media to preserve, and share their message, which is very powerful than other forms of primitive communication. Just like many of us have text of Quran at home now, which was the adoption to new medium,  it is an obligation of the muslim community to "upgrade" the Ummah to the 21st century. Websites, emails, and other software and internet based portals are very powerful tools, and not utilizing in the service of a masjid is like not having any text of Quran in the masjid. There are basically three benefits of using websites and emails for a muslim community, which are the most convincing ones.

First benefit is the power of availability and accessibility of the internet, which means if there is an effort requiring funds for the masjid, anyone around the world could know about it, and respond to it. Also, community members can access the information they are looking for from anywhere at anytime. Events can be organized with a simple effort, and notification can be sent to people without any expense to the masjid.

Second benefit is to preserve the message and communication. In fact, it is an obligation for every Muslim to practice Islam, and make every effort to preserve Islam for the next generations to come. If properly setup, electronic media is much more reliable and long lasting than physical media. If there is a message posted on a notice board of the masjid, it will be replaced soon, or fall off, or wear of. However, a website post will stay there for as long as we want it to be available.  For example, prayer time table can be posted on the website and accessible easily. This sounds an obvious thing, but it is worth mentioning.

Third but not least benefit is that message of Islam and community can be reached to people who don't come to masjid that often, or do not have enough time to volunteer. It is vital to reach out to people who are available online, and attract them to the masjid, and having a website and electronic communication can do that. Every organization in the world has a web presence now, and not having a website for the masjid, is like not having any sign or markings outside the building of the masjid that people can use to find the masjid.

Actually, these benefits are so common now that almost everyone is aware of it. Moreover, these are just top three benefits of electronic communication within Muslim community, but we could list hundreds of them without covering all. If the Prophet (PBUH), or Umar or Abu Bakr were alive today, they would have certainly taken advantage of internet and electronic media to preserve, share, and preach Islam. Many of us struggle to keep up with the community, so bringing the community closer to the Muslims will serve the purpose, which Allah has assigned to us.

JazakAllah Khairin

How doubts can lead you astray?

In the Name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful.

Following is a very common but important discussion, in the words of a scholar himself.

I had an informal discussion a few days ago with former Muslim from Chennai who had become an atheist and the first question he asked me was why Allah created human beings and this world. So, I suggested to him that, perhaps there was an even bigger question that he should ask, as the earth and its inhabitants are less than a speck in the galaxy, which is itself only a speck in the universe. I proposed that, instead, it would be better to ask why Allah created.

The athiest from Chennai then said to me, "Okay, so why did God create?" I responded saying, "He created because He is the Creator. Creators create. Creation is the natural consequence of having the attribute of being the Creator." A creator who creates is superior to a creator who doesn't create. For example, if someone told you that she was a painter and you asked her to show you one of her pain
tings and she said she hadn't painted any, you would probably think to yourself, "Is she kookoo, or what?" He still wanted to ask, "Okay, but why did He create?" I wanted to ask him, "Why did the Sun shine? Isn't that just what suns do?" But he switched the topic back to why did God create human beings, before I could verbalize my thought.

The purpose of telling the atheist that Allah created because He was the Creator - that the act of creation is a manifestation of His attribute of being the Creator, was to remove the concept of creation out of need from the discussion. As human beings, we make or create things out of a need we have for them. Allah, the Almighty Creator, has NO NEED. All creation needs Him and depends on Him for their existence, sustenance, etc. However, inspite of making that clear from the beginning, we will find the atheist coming back to this point, time and time again in the course of our discussion.

So the atheist from Chennai cut my response and asked me, "Let's go back to the original question, 'Why did Allah create human beings?' " I told him, "God created human beings for Paradise, but He gave them a free will to choose to go or not to go." However, because that was a fair reason and the act of a benevolent God, he went to the answer he wanted to hear me say, "I thought God created humans to worship and serve him? Isn't that what the Qur'aan says?" I answered, "Yes. That is true, but it should be understood within the context of His creating them for Paradise." He tuned out the second part of my answer and then said what he wanted to say from the very beginning of our conversation, "I can't believe in a God that needs people to worship him. Like a dictator who takes pleasure in his subjects blindly obeying him or a like tyrant who, due to his own insecurities, forces his people to bow down and worship him."

I reminded the Chennai Atheist that I had already pointed out earlier that God did NOT create out of a need. Creation is only a manifestation of His attribute of being the Creator. Furthermore, tyrants and dictators demand obedience for their own agrandizement and material benefit, and what they demand obedience to is mostly not good. On the other hand, Allah prescribed worship, which is a way of life and not merely prayers, in order for people to live good lives and thereby facilitate their paths to paradise for which they were created.

The atheist then digressed saying that there was no need for obedience to religious laws as all countries now had legal systems. So I pointed out to him that many man-made laws are subjective and not objective. Each ruling party makes laws in their own interest, and when they are overthrown, the new party or ruler changes the laws to suit their own interests. Only God, who created humankind and knows their natural needs can make laws which are truly objective, as He has no bias or special interests.

The Chennai Atheist then changed the topic to the concept of evil in a world created by a good God. He asked, “How do you explain AIDS babies? What fault is it of theirs that their parents had AIDS and they are born into this world in suffering only to die before maturity? What did they do to deserve such punishment?” I responded saying that I agreed with him that AIDS was not the child’s fault. The AIDS babies become a test for the adults around them. Either the challenge of looking after such babies will bring out their higher human qualities of love, care, sympathy and concern for the welfare of the less fortunate - which would earn those who displayed them immeasurable rewards - or it was a wakeup call for those who had become heedless to the realities of life in the same way that death sometimes wakes people up, or it was a punishment for those who had caused their infection due to their corrupt lifestyle. However, it was not a punishment for the children as they had done nothing to deserve it.

“How is that fair?” the atheist asked, “How is that fair that an AIDS child suffers and dies in childhood?” I thought for a moment, “In the larger scheme of life, we really don’t know what would have happened if the child grew up. We have no idea of what evil he or she might have done later or what greater evil might have happened to them, so that dying early spared others from their potential evil or they were spared from the potential evil of others.” But before I could discuss this thought, the atheist from Chennai went on to another related point, “Some people are put on an easy track to paradise by being born in Muslim families, while others are put on a swift track to hell by being born in non-Muslim families. How is that fair?” I responded saying, “Being born in a Muslim family is no guarantee of Paradise, because Islam cannot be inherited like a nationality or ethnicity. Islam is a spiritual choice and decision which each and every Muslim must make for it to be real and of benefit. Due to the fact that so many Muslims today are cultural Muslims who only practice Islam externally according to custom oftentimes mixed with shirk (worshipping others besides God or along with God), finding real Islam may be even more difficult for a “born-Muslim” to find than for a non-Muslim. As quiet as it is kept, there will be many many people in Hell with the names, Muhammad and Fatimah.”

I went on to explain that the Prophet (pbuh) had explained that at the end of the world, while the mass of humankind are being resurrected for judgment, all those children who died before puberty and maturity along with all others who did not hear the true message of Islam – whether in the times of the previous prophets (may God’s peace be upon them all), or after the time of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) – those who were retarded, deaf or senile, or to whom the message came so garbled that they could not possibly understand its truths, all would be resurrected together in the prime of their youth and with all of their faculties. After their resurrection they would see before themselves a wall of blazing fire and a messenger will come out from the fire and explain in detail the main message of all the prophets of God; to worship God alone through obedience to His commands. Following that, he will instruct them to enter the fire from which he came, and they will all move towards it, but its roaring heat and burning flames will turn many back. In spite of that, some people will walk into it and appear to be burned up completely. Others will try to enter repeatedly, each time running back from fire’s ferocity. Eventually, when all who entered were finished and only those who did not remained, those who remained will stop trying and simply refuse to enter. The Prophet (pbuh) explained that those who entered would go straight on to paradise, while those who refused to enter are those who, had they received the clear message in this life, would have rejected faith and died disbelievers.

The atheist from Chennai then questioned the validity of Islam in general saying, “Islam existed only 1400 years ago, so why should we follow this message which has obviously been extracted from previous older books of Christianity (2,000 years ago) and Judaism (5,000+ years ago)?” I replied, “According to Muslim belief, Islam did not come into existence 1,400 years ago with Muhammad (pbuh), but with the first human beings. It is the same manual of life given to the father and mother of humankind, and reintroduced whenever people strayed from the message over the generations of human existence. As to the Qur’aan being extracts from Torah and the Gospels, that is one possible interpretation of the similarities. The other interpretation is that due to all of them coming from the same source, there will be shared information. At any rate, higher criticism of the Bible and modern research have revealed that the “Torah” was written by more than one author and contains many contradictions, and the over 5,000 manuscripts of the Gospels have no two manuscripts agreeing on all the details. Furthermore, these manuscripts are in Greek, and Jesus and his disciples spoke Aramaic and the very authors of the Gospels are unknown. On the other hand, the Qur’aan, which has only one version, has withstood all academic scrutiny thereby confirming its originality. Also, the Qur’aan’s many verses containing modern scientific data strongly and clearly point towards its divine origin. So following it instead of the earlier revelations which have become distorted and changed simply makes good sense, if one is to choose a revealed book to follow. Finally, if one were to look historically at what happened to Christianity in terms of following the teachings and practice of Jesus (peace be upon him), it would become very clear that Christianity is a different religion from what Jesus (pbuh) brought and taught. Islam on the other hand, has remained virtually unchanged over the centuries. The way Muslims pray today is the same way that Muhammad (pbuh) taught his followers 1,400 years ago. Likewise, the way Muslims fast, perform pilgrimage, etc. have all remained in their original form. The final revelation of Islam has remained in its original form and will remain that way until the end of this world.”

The final parting question which the Chennai atheist asked me questioned the logic of the Qur’aan’s divine preservation. He said, “If God is all powerful, why didn’t he preserve the previous books of revelation when he could have easily preserved all of them?” I responded saying, “Of course if Allah wished to preserve all of them He could easily have done so, just as He could have prevented Satan from tempting Adam and Eve. However, because the earlier prophets (may God’s peace be upon them all) were sent to particular people, in particular locations for particular periods of time, and prophets were sent after them, there was no need to preserve them. Allowing them to change the texts of the earlier scriptures was part of the test faced by the earlier generations. However, since Allah decided to end the line of prophets with Muhammad (pbuh), his book of revelation had to be preserved along with his living interpretation of the scripture called his “way” (Sunnah), in order for the eternal message of Islam to remain accessible to humankind until the end of the world. Furthermore, the final scripture was also divinely preserved as the Last Prophet’s standing miracle for people of this world until the Last Day. The main miracles of the earlier prophets, which were tangible proofs to the people of their own era that they were in fact prophets of God, can no longer be witnessed today (e.g., Noah’s Ark, Moses’ staff, parting of the Red Sea, etc. and Jesus’ revival of the dead, giving sight to the blind, etc.). So, Allah made the main miracle of the final prophet, a literary miracle which would remain as proof for all the generations of human beings and the Jinn to come.”

Time ran out, and the Chennai atheist and I parted gracefully. No, he did not return to Islam as far as I know, as this discussion took place only a few weeks ago. Do pray for him. At any rate, the goal on my part was not his conversion, but merely providing reasonable and logical Islamic answers for his Islam-related questions which he could not find previously. Whether, he accepted them or not, was not my responsibility, as Allah told Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and all the believers, “You cannot guide those whom you would love to guide. Allah guides those whom He wishes.” (Soorah al-Qasas, 28:56) And He also said, “Your responsibility is to convey the message, and it is I who will take people to account.” (Soorah ar-Ra’d, 13:40)

Dr. Bilal Philips

Education: The missing link

In the Name of Allah, the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful

All praise is due to Allah, the knower of All


“Read and your Lord is Most Honorable, who taught (to write) with the pen, who taught man what he knew not.”  (Qur’an, 96-3-5)



“Only those from amongst His servants who possess knowledge are the ones who fear Allah; surely Allah is Mighty Most Forgiving.”
(Qur’an, 35:28)

Also Anas Radiyallahu ‘anhu related that the Messenger of Allah Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam said: “Seeking of knowledge is obligatory upon every Muslim.” (Ibn Majah, graded as Sahih by Shiekh Albani)


I was listening to one of my Profressor, who was teaching us comparative religions, and he brought a wonderful point, and it just penetrated my heart. He said that education has three roles in a culture. It can preserve the culture, it can transfer the culture, and it can transform the culture. Just like other groups, Islam has a culture and for it to survive, education need to be established. On the surface, it could be obivous to some, but it has deep impact on our survival. Education is nothing but acquiring knowledge with its correct understanding. Islamic culture welcomes all other cultures, except when they contradict the Islamic culture.

Of course, there are two type of knowledge that we have. One is revealed knowledge that was revealed by Allah through messengers, and it is the most reliable knowledge, because once we know that it is truly from Allah, it becomes the absolute truth. Other type of knowledge is emperical knowledge that we acheive through our experiences like what we perceive, what we measure, what we observe, etc. Emperical knowledge is less reliable, because there is a chance of error, and we are always revising it.

Both are important. Emperical knowledge will benefit us in this world which is our home till death. It is our obligation to seek the knowledge of this world to benefit ourselves and others. Most importantly, Revealed knowledge will benefit us in this world as well as in the life after death.

As we know that Islam is not a religion but a way of life, and every way of life has a culture, and this way of life can only survive if the education fulfils the above three rules. If one of them are missing, it falls short, and could damage Islam. Usually, when I visit the masjid or listen to "religious" scholars, they are transfering the knowledge. Some of them may be preserving the knowledge, and others may not be preserving it. However, most of them do not transform the knowledge according to the audience and situation.

Abu Hurairah Radiyallahu ‘anhu narrated that The Prophet Sallallahu ‘alaihi wasallam said: “Whoever seeks a way to acquire knowledge Allah will make easy his way to paradise.” (Trimidhi # 2655)

But, if a Muslim does not seek knowledge, they make it almost impossible for themselves to enter paradise. They will not be aware of the commands of Allah and prohibitions, and will commit sin. On the other hand, if a Muslim seek out knowledge, they are helped by Allah, as mentioned in the above hadith. So, if a person is sincere, why wouldn't they seek out the knowledge. In this case the whole chain is broken, so most of the links are missing.

The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: "... The superiority of the learned over the devout is like that of the moon, on the night when it is full, over the rest of the stars. The learned are the heirs of the Prophets, and the Prophets leave (no monetary inheritance), they leave only knowledge, and he who takes it takes an abundant portion. - Sunan of Abu-Dawood, Hadith 1631


Aisha reported: The Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said, “Whoever performs a deed that is not in accordance with our matter will have it rejected.” [Sahih Muslim, Book 18, Number 4266]


Once a Muslim starts to seek knowledge, this knowledge should be preserving Islam by only including what comes from Quran and Sunnah, and it does not include additions in revealed knowledge. If the Islamic culture is preserved in this education, it can survive that generation, and be available for the next generation. It is one of the missing link that prevent Muslims from progressing. Most don't trust the knowledge because it is tainted with innovations, and hence don't seek it.

"Truly, Allah does not remove Sacred Knowledge by taking it out of servants, but rather by taking back the souls of Islamic scholars [in death], until, when He has not left a single scholar, the people take the ignorant as leaders..." (Sahih Bukhari Book of Knowledge Hadith # 100)

Then, this preserved knowledge should be transferred to the next generation, which will ensure the survival  of Islam from generation to generation, and death of scholars will not result in loss of knowledge. This does not happen in the most household where parents are knowledgable. The parents will go to the classes, but they do not sit with their kids and explain them what Allah has commanded, and why we should follow it. This is one of the missing link that prevent Muslims from progressing

“And We have not sent you (Mohammed) except as a giver of glad tidings and a warner to all mankind, but most men know not.” (Quran 34:28)

Preserving the knowledge and transferring the knowledge is not enough, because knowledge is useless if not applied in practice. However, the culture, and lifestyles evolve with time and place, and one applicaiton of the knowledge may not work in other circumstances, so knowledge has to be transformed into appropriate applicaiton for the situation. This is where most knowledgable folks slip, and cause damage to Islam. One group is so reluctant to transform that they create incompatible version of Islamic culture that does not work for a certain society, although it is not due to contradiction to basic tenants. Other group transform the knowledge unconditionally to assimilate with the situation so much that Islamic culture loses its foundation and Islam is lost. Correct path is to allow transformation without compromising the fundamentals of Islam. This path is called ijtihad or search for answer.

The saying of the Prophet (saw) when he sent Mu’az as Qadi to Yemen: “By what will you pass judgement?’ He said: By the Book of Allah. The Prophet (saw) said: If you do not find it there? He said: By the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (saw) .He said: And if you do not find it ? He said: 'I will exercise my own ijtihad’ He (saw) said: ‘Praise be to Allah who has made the messenger of the Messenger of Allah to accord with what Allah and His Messenger loves.” [Ahmad: 5/230, Abu Dawud:3592, at-Tirmizi:1327]

“Say, my Lord, increase me in Knowledge.” (Qur’an, 20:114)

I would like to end with a personal story. When I was a child, my school, National High School in Karachi, Pakistan, had a logo, which was on our uniform and everywhere else in the school. In this logo, there was a sentence that I really liked. It said, "My Lord, increase me in knowledge". I didn't know that it was part of Quran, because no one really teaches Quran to their kids in our family. We just learned how to read the Arabic, but never go back and read it or taught the meaning. Quran was more like a sacred book that was wrapped in a cloth and stored in a secret location. I used to repeat that sentence all the time, and it just became part of my habbit and it will always at my tongue when I am free. It was catchy, and beautiful, and short.

Also, I was very short in stature, and was afraid to remain a short person, so I will always make two duas. One was to have height of  5 feet 6 inches, and other to have my knowledge increased. Alhamdulilah, both of these duas were accpeted, and my height today is exactly 5 feet 6 inches, and Allah has increased my knowledge in revelations, and my emperical knowledge. I suggest to all my brothers and sisters to make their utmost goal to seek knowledge, and best of the knowledge is revealed knowledge.

If you don't seek knowledge of Islam, you are certainly among the losers. Why not make the intention to find an online school, a book, a teacher, or some other means to start seeking knowledge regularly and consistently. Of course, after you acquire it, apply that knowledge, otherwise it is like the money you earned but never spent.


Jazakallah Khairin

AbuArman Jumani
A seeker of knowledge