Senin, 03 Oktober 2011

The meaning of Allaah’s name al-Haleem

 

Can you give me an explanation of the beautiful names of Allah: Al Halim?.

Praise be to Allaah.
 

 

The name of Allaah al-Haleem is mentioned in
a number of places in the Qur’aan, for example the verses in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“And know that Allaah is Oft-Forgiving,
Most Forbearing [Haleem]”

[al-Baqarah 2:235] 

“Kind words and forgiving of faults are
better than Sadaqah (charity) followed by injury. And Allaah is Rich (Free of all needs) and He is Most-Forbearing”

[al-Baqarah 2:263] 

Ibn Jareer said in his Tafseer (4/144): “This means that He gives respite and does not
hasten to punish the one who disobeys Him or goes against His command.” 

Al-Khattaabi said in Sha’n al-Du’a’
(63): “He is forgiving and grants respite, the One Whose anger does not overwhelm Him and Who is not provoked by the ignorance of the ignorant or
the disobedience of the disobedient. One who forgives when he is not able to punish does not deserve to be called Haleem (forbearing); rather the
one who is al-Haleem is the One Who forgives when He is able to punish and Who gives respite and does not hasten the punishment.” 

Qiwaam al-Sunnah al-Asbahaani said in
al-Hujjah fi Bayaan al-Mahajjah (1/144): “Forbearing towards the one who disobeys Him, because if He wanted to punish him at the time of the
sin, He could do so, but He grants him respite until the appointed time. Even though this is a name that may be applied to a person, the
forbearance of a person is not a quality with which a person is born and which then develops when he grows older; it may change at times of
sickness or anger, or because of events that happen. His attribute dies when he dies, but the forbearance of Allaah abides and never disappears. A
person may forgive one thing but not another; he may forgive those against whom he is powerless to exact revenge, but Allaah forgives even though
He is able to punish.” 

Ibn al-Qayyim said in al-Nooniyyah
(3278): 

“He is the Forbearing and does not hasten the punishment for His slave, (granting him respite)
so that he may repent from his sin.” 

Al-Sa’di said in his Tafseer (19): 
“Al-Haleem is the One Who keeps bestowing blessings, both visible and hidden, on His creation, even though they disobey Him and make many
mistakes. So He forgives and does not give the sinners the punishment they deserve; He encourages them to repent and gives them time to turn to
Him.”.

Al-Khaafid

 

Can you give me an explanation of the beautiful name of Allah Al Khafid ?.

Praise be to Allaah.
 

 

Before discussing the meaning of this name,
we should understand some important issues that have to do with the names of Allaah. 

Firstly: The names and attributes of Allaah
should be based on evidence from the Book of Allaah (the Qur’aan) and the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon
him); there is no other source for knowing the names and attributes of Allaah apart from these two sources. 

Based on this, whatever names of Allaah are
affirmed in the Qur’aan and Sunnah are what we must accept and affirm. 

Whatever is denied in the Qur’aan and Sunnah,
we must also deny, whilst affirming its opposite. 

What is neither affirmed nor denied in the
Qur’aan and Sunnah, we must refrain from uttering it and neither affirm it nor deny it, because it has not been narrated in the sense of either
affirming or denying.  

With regard to the meaning of the name
al-Khaafid, it should be noted that if what is meant by it is something that is befitting to Allaah, then it is acceptable, and if what is meant
is something that is not befitting to Allaah, then we must reject it. 

From al-Qawaa’id al-Mathla fi Sifaat
Allaah wa Asmaa’ihi il-Husna by Ibn ‘Uthaymeen. 

Secondly: An action is broader in meaning
than a name. Hence Allaah has attributed to Himself actions for which He is not called by the active participle of the verb in question, such as
wanting (araada), willing (shaa’a) and causing to happen (ahdatha); He is not called al-mureed (the wanter or seeker)
or al-shaa’i (the willer) or al-muhdith (the causer). Similarly He did not call Himself al-saani’ (the maker), al-faa’il
(the doer), or al-mutqin (the one who does things perfectly), or other names derived from actions that He attributes to Himself. The scope
of actions is broader than the scope of words. 

Those who derive a name for Allaah from every
action made a serious mistake and made the number of His names reach more than one thousand. They called Him al-maakir (the plotter),
al-mukhaadi’ (the deceiver), al-faatin (the causer of tribulation), al-kaa’id (the schemer), etc. 

Similarly He has told us about Himself in
words that are broader in scope and are not names by which He has called Himself. We may refer to Him as shay’ (a thing), mawjood
(one who exists), madhkoor (one who is mentioned or remembered), ma’loom (one who is known), muraad (one who is sought), and
so on, but He is not to be named in these terms. 

The word al-Waajid (the one who is
independent of means) is not mentioned as a name of Allaah except in the hadeeth which lists the beautiful names (of Allaah). But the correct view
is that this is not the Prophet’s words, although the meaning is sound. For Allaah is indeed the One Who has the means (dhu’l-wajd) and is
independent of all others, so it would be more apt to call Him al-Waajid than al-Mawjood (the one who exists) or al-Moojid
(the initiator). The word al-mawjood (one who exists) may refer to something that is perfect or imperfect, good or evil (so the thing
referred to by this name may be perfect or imperfect). If a name may refer to either of these, then it cannot be a name of Allaah, so we cannot
call Him al-Shay’ (the thing) or al-Ma’loom (the one who is known). Hence Allaah is not called al-Mureed (the seeker) or
al-Mutakallim (the speaker) or al-Moojid (the initiator). He has called Himself by names that carry the most perfect meanings in that
regard viz. al-Khaaliq (the Creator), al-Baari’ (the Creator), and al-Musawwir (the Shaper). Al-Moojid (the initiator)
is like al-Muhdith (the one who causes things to happen), al-Faa’il (the doer) and al-Saani’ (the maker). This is a very
subtle and deep understanding of the beautiful names of Allaah, so give some thought to it. And Allaah is the Source of strength, 

From Madaarij al-Saalikeen by Ibn
al-Qayyim, 3/383-385 

Thirdly:  The names that are given to Allaah
must be taken from the sound texts; this is not a matter that is subject to ijtihaad or individual reasoning. But what is said in the context of
speaking about Him is not subject to the same restrictions, so for example it may be said that He is al-qadeem (the Ancient), al-shay’
(the thing [i.e., as opposed to nothing]), al-mawjood (the one who exists), al-qaa’im bi nafsihi (the self sufficient). This is the
bottom line with regard to the issue of whether His names are tawqeefi (i.e., not subject to ijtihaad) or it is permissible to call Him by some
names that are not reported in the texts. 

From Badaa’i’ al-Fawaa’id by Ibn
al-Qayyim, 1/162 

Fourthly: Among the names of Allaah there are
some which cannot be used in isolation unless their opposite is also mentioned; if such a name is used on its own, it may give an impression of
imperfection – exalted be Allaah far above that. These names include al-Mu’ti, al-Maani’ (the Giver, the Withholder); al-Daarr,
al-Naafi’ (the One who harms, the One Who benefits); al-Qaabid, al-Baasit  (the Constrictor, the Expander); al-Mu’izz, al-Mudhill
(the Honourer, the Humiliator); al-Khaafid al-Raafi’ (the Abaser, the Exalter). Allaah cannot be called al-Maani’ (the Withholder),
al-Daarr (the One who harms), al-Qaabid (the Constrictor), al-Mudhill (the Humiliator) and al-Khaafid (the Abaser)
using these names on their own; rather they must be accompanied by their opposites, because they only appear as such (in pairs) in the
Revelation. 

From Ma’aarij al-Qubool by al-Hakami,
1/64. 

Once the following is understood, the name
al-Khaafid is only narrated in the hadeeth which lists the beautiful names of Allaah. The correct view is that this is not the words of the
Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), as stated above in the words of Ibn al-Qayyim. This is what has been confirmed by more
than one scholar such as Imam Ibn Taymiyah (as stated in al-Fataawa, 6/379-380, 8/96, 22/482); al-Haafiz ibn Katheer in his Tafseer
(3/515); al-Haafiz ibn Hajar in al-Fath (11/221) and al-Buloogh (1395), and others. 

But the meaning of this name is correct, so
long as it is accompanied by the name al-Raafi’ (the Exalter). It was proven in Saheeh Muslim (179) from the hadeeth of Abu Moosa
al-Ash’ari that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Allaah does not sleep and it is not befitting that He should
sleep. He lowers justice and raises it. The deeds of the night are taken up to Him before the deeds of the day, and the deeds of the day before
the night…”  There are also some reports from the salaf concerning that, and the mu’allaq report which al-Bukhaari narrated in his
Saheeh (al-Fath, 8/487) from Abu’l-Darda’, which says that he said concerning the verse “Every day He is
(engaged) in some affair (such as giving honour or disgrace to some, life or death to some)” [al-Rahmaan 55:29 – interpretation of the meaning]:
“He forgives sins, relieves distress, raises some people in status and humiliates others.” This was also narrated in a marfoo’ report (i.e.,
attributed to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)). 

Once this is
understood, the scholars have also discussed the meaning of the name al-Khaafid, such as the following: 

1 – al-Khattaabi said in Sha’n al-Du’a’(58):

Al-Khaafid, al-Raafi’
(the Abaser, the Exalter): similarly when it comes to these two names, it is better to mention them together. Al-Khaafid is the one who brings
down tyrants and humiliates the arrogant Pharaohs, and al-Raafi’ is the one who raises His close friends (awliya’) in status through their acts of
obedience; He raises them in status, supports them against their enemies and grants them the ultimate victory. No one can prevail except the one
whom Allaah raises and no one can be lowered except the one whom He humiliates. 

2 – al-Haleemi said, according to al-Asma’
wa’l-Sifaat by al-Bayhaqi (1/193): 

The name al-Khaafid
should not be used on its own in du’aa’ without the name al-Raafi’. Al-Khaafid is the one who puts people in a lower position, and al-Raafi’ is
the one who puts them in a higher position. 

3 – Qiwaam al-Sunnah al-Asbahaani said in
al-Hujjah fi Bayaan al-Mahajjah (1/140): 

Among His names are al-Khaafid, al-Raafi’
(the Abaser, the Exalter). It was said that al-Khaafid is the one who brings down tyrants and humiliates the arrogant Pharaohs, and al-Raafi’ is
the one who raises His close friends (awliya’) in status and supports them against their enemies. He humiliates whomsoever He will among His
slaves, lowering him in status and making him unknown and insignificant. And He elevates whomsoever He will among His slaves, raising him in
status and position. No one can rise except those whom He raises in status and no one can be humiliated except those whom He lowers in status. And
it was said that He raises justice and lowers it. 

Then he narrated the hadeeth of Abu Moosa
that was narrated by Muslim (293): “Allaah does not sleep and it is not befitting that He should sleep. He lowers justice and raises it. The deeds
of the night are taken up to Him before the deeds of the day, and the deeds of the day before the night…” 

Then he said: The
scholars said: what is meant by “He lowers justice and raises it” is: He lowers justice by causing oppressors to prevail, and He raises justice by
causing justice to prevail. He lowers justice by means of the unjust and he raises justice by means of just leaders. By alternately lowering and
raising the level of justice He tests His slaves to see how they will be patient in the face of adversity and thankful for times of ease. 

4 – Shaykh Ibn Sa’di said in al-Haqq
al-Waadih al-Mubeen (258):  

He is al-Raafi’ for people who are righteous
and knowledgeable and have faith, and He is al-Khaafid for His enemies. 

It says in Tawdeeh al-Kaafiyah al-Shaafiyah
(390): Know that the divine attributes that have to do with deeds are all connected to or based on these three attributes: absolute power,
ever-executed will and perfect wisdom. All of these are attributes of Allaah. The effects of these attributes prevail everywhere in the universe,
giving precedence to some and putting others behind, benefiting some and harming others, giving to some and withholding from others, abasing some
and exalting others. There is no difference in this between physical and moral, religious or worldly.  

Shaykh Muhammad Khaleel Harraas said in
Sharh al-Qaseedah al-Nooniyyah, 2/114: 

Allaah is al-Khaafid,
al-Raafi’ (the Abaser the Exalter). He abases the kuffaar by making their lives miserable and keeping them away from Him, and He raises His close
friends by drawing them close to Him and making them happy. He alternates things amongst His slaves, so He humiliates some people and makes them
insignificant and takes away their pride, and He raises others by causing them to inherit the authority and land of the former. 

All of these words are true, and they are
included in the meaning of al-Khaafid, al-Raafi’ (the Abaser, the Exalter). 

And Allaah knows best.

Jumat, 30 September 2011

Ruling on amulets and hanging them up; do amulets ward off the evil eye and hasad (envy)?

 

I would like to know if talismans are allowed. I have read kitabu tawheed and some books by bilal philips, but i found in al-muwatta that theres hadiths allowing some sorts of talisans, and even kitabu tawheed mentioned some salafs allowed it. The hadiths can be found in al-muwatta, volume 50, hadiths 4, 11 and 14.Please reply. And tell me the authenticity of these hadiths, and give me more information about this issue.Thank you.

Praise be to
Allaah.

Firstly, we could not find the ahaadeeth
whose soundness the questioner asked about, because we do not know the
text of those ahaadeeth. He said that they were in volume 50 of al-Muwatta’,
but al-Muwatta’ is only one volume. 

Hence we will quote what we are able to
of the ahaadeeth that have been narrated on this topic, and we will
explain – in sha Allaah – the rulings of the scholars on them. Hopefully
some of this will be what the questioner is looking for. 

1.                
It was narrated from ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood that the Prophet
of Allaah (peace and blessings
of Allaah be upon him) said: 

“The
Prophet of Allah (peace and blessings
of Allaah be upon him) disliked ten things: Yellow colouring, meaning
khalooq (a perfume made from saffron), dyeing grey hair, trailing
the lower garment, wearing a gold ring, throwing dice, a woman adorning
herself before people who are not her mahrams, using spells (ruqyah)
except with the Mu'awwidhatan, wearing amulets, coitus interruptus,
and having intercourse with a woman who is breastfeeding a child; but
he did not declare them to be prohibited.” 

(Narrated by al-Nasaa’i, 50880; Abu Dawood,
4222) 

“having
intercourse with a woman who is breastfeeding a child” means, if she
becomes pregnant this will harm the child who is breastfeeding. 

This hadeeth was classed as da’eef
(weak) by al-Albaani in Da’eef al-Nasaa’i, 3075) 

2.                
It was narrated from Zaynab the wife of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Mas’ood
from ‘Abd-Allaah that he said: 

“I heard the Messenger of Allaah
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) say, ‘Spells (ruqyah),
amulets and love-charms are shirk.” I said, “Why do you say this?
By Allaah, my eye was weeping with a discharge and I kept going to So
and so, the Jew, who did a spell for me. When he did the spell, it calmed
down.” ‘Abd-Allaah said: “That was just the work of the Shaytaan who
was picking it with his hand, and when (the Jew) uttered the spell,
he stopped. All you needed to do was to say as the Messenger of Allaah
(peace and blessings of Allaah
be upon him) used to say: ‘Adhhib il-ba’s Rabb al-naas ishfi anta al-Shaafi
laa shifaa’a illa shifaa’uka shifaa’an laa yughaadiru saqaman (Remove
the harm, O Lord of mankind, and heal, You are the Healer. There is
no healing but Your healing, a healing which leaves no disease behind.’” 

(Narrated by Abu Dawood, 3883; Ibn Maajah,
3530) 

This hadeeth was classed as saheeh by
al-Albaani in al-Silsilat al-Saheehah, 331 and 2972. 

3.                
It was narrated that ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Aamir said: I heard the Messenger
of Allaah (peace and blessings
of Allaah be upon him) say: “Whoever wears an amulet, may Allaah not
fulfil his need, and whoever wears a sea-shell, may Allaah not give
him peace.” 

(Narrated by Ahmad, 16951) 

This hadeeth was classed as da’eef
by Shaykh al-Albaani in Da’eef al-Jaami’, 5703. 

4.                
It was narrated from ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Aamir al-Juhani that a group
came to the Messenger of Allaah
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) [to swear their allegiance
(bay’ah) to him]. He accepted the bay’ah of nine of them
but not of one of them. They said, “O Messenger of Allaah, you accepted
the bay’ah of nine but not of this one.” He said, “He is wearing
an amulet.” The man put his hand (in his shirt) and took it off, then
he (the Prophet (peace and blessings
of Allaah be upon him)) accepted his bay’ah. He said, ‘Whoever
wears an amulet has committed shirk.” 

(Narrated by Ahmad, 16969) 

This hadeeth was classed as saheeh by
Shaykh al-Albaani in al-Silsilah al-Saheehah, 492.  

Secondly: 

Amulets (tameemah, pl. tamaa’im)
are things made from pearls or bones that are worn on the necks of children
or adults, or are hung up in houses or cars, in order to ward off evil
– especially the evil eye – or to bring some benefits. 

These are the comments of the scholars
on the various kinds of amulets and the rulings on each kind. These
comments contain important and useful points. 

1.  
Shaykh Sulaymaan ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhaab said: 

“Know that the scholars among the Sahaabah
and Taabi’een and those who came after them differed as to whether it
is permissible to hang up amulets which only contain words from the
Qur’aan or names and attributes of Allaah. 

One group said that this is permissible.
This was the view of ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas and others. This
is the apparent meaning of the report narrated from ‘Aa’ishah and it
was the view of Abu Ja’far al-Baaqir and Ahmad, according to one report.
They interpreted the hadeeth as referring to amulets which involve shirk;
with regard to those which contain words from the Qur’aan or the names
and attributes of Allaah, then they are like ruqyah which uses
the same words. 

I say, this appears to be the view of
Ibn al-Qayyim. 

Another group said that this is not permissible.
This was the view of Ibn Mas’ood and Ibn ‘Abbaas, and is the apparent
meaning of the view of Hudhayfah, ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Aamir and Ibn ‘Akeem (may
Allaah be pleased with him). This was also the view of a group of the
Taabi’een, including the companions of Ibn Mas’ood and Ahmad, according
to one report which was chosen by most of his companions. It was also
the view of the later scholars, who quoted this and similar ahaadeeth
as evidence. The apparent meaning is that it is general in application
and does not differentiate between amulets which contain Qur’aan and
amulets which contain other things, unlike ruqyah where there is a differentiation.
This is supported by the fact that the Sahaabah who narrated the hadeeth
understood it to be general in meaning, as was quoted above from Ibn
Mas’ood. 

Abu Dawood narrated that ‘Eesa ibn Hamzah
said: “I entered upon ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Akeem and his face was red due
to high fever. I said, ‘Why don’t you hang up an amulet?’ He said, ‘We
seek refuge with Allaah from that. The Messenger of Allaah
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever hangs up
anything will be entrusted to its care…”’” 

This scholarly difference was concerning
hanging up amulets which contain Qur’aan or names and attributes of
Allaah, so what do you think about the things which were innovated later
on, doing spells (ruqyah) using the names of shayaateen (devils) and
others and hanging them up, and even being attached to those shayaateen,
seeking refuge in them, slaughtering animals for them, asking them to
ward off harm and bring benefits – actions which are pure shirk?
This is prevalent among many of the people, except for those whom Allaah
keeps safe and sound. Think about what the Prophet
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said and what was the practice
of the Sahaabah and Taabi’een, and what the scholars after them mentioned
on this topic and others. Then look at what happened in the later generations.
It will become clear to you what the religion of the Messenger
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is, and how it has now become
alienated in all ways. And Allaah is the One Whose help we seek. 

(Tayseer al-‘Azeez al-Hameed, p.
136-138) 

2.  
Shaykh Haafiz Hukami said: 

If they – i.e., amulets – contain clearly-written
Qur’aanic verses or saheeh ahaadeeth, there was some dispute among the
salaf – the Sahaabah, the Taabi’een and those who followed them – as
to whether they are permissible. 

Some of them – i.e., some of the Salaf
– said that this was permissible. This was narrated from ‘Aaishah (may
Allaah be pleased with her), Abu Ja’far Muhammad ibn ‘Ali, and others
among the salaf. 

Some of them said that this was not allowed;
they regarded it is makrooh and not permitted. They include ‘Abd-Allaah
ibn ‘Akeem, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Amr, ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Aamir, and ‘Abd-Allaah
ibn Mas’ood and his companions such as al-Aswad and ‘Alqamah, and those
who came after them such as Ibraaheem al-Nakha’i and others – may Allaah
have mercy on them. 

Undoubtedly not allowing that is a safer
precaution to prevent means that lead to wrong beliefs, especially in
our own times. If most of the Sahaabah and Taabi’een regarded it as
makrooh in those noble times when the faith in their hearts was greater
than a mountain, then regarding it as makrooh in these times of trials
and tribulations is more appropriate and is more on the safe side. So
how about when this concession has led people to things which are purely
haraam and they have made it a means to those things? For example, they
make amulets for seeking refuge, on which they write an aayah or soorah
or the phrase “Bismillaah ir-Rahmaan ir-Raheem (In the name of
Allaah, the most Gracious, the Most Merciful), then underneath it they
put some devilish mumbo-jumbo, the meaning of which no one knows except
one who has read their books. Or they divert the hearts of the common
folk from putting their trust in Allaah and make them dependent on the
things that they have written, and most of them frighten the people,
before anything even happens to them. One of them will come to the person
whom he wants to trick out of his money, knowing that the person is
relying on him and trusts him, and he says: “Such and such is going
to happen to your family or your wealth or to you,” Or he says, “You
have a qareen (constant companion) from among the jinn,” or the
like, and he describes things to him and and tells him things about
himself that the Shaytaan whispers to him, to make him think that he
has true insight and that he cares about him and wants to bring him
some benefit. When the heart of the ignorant fool is filled with fear
of what has been described to him, he turns away from his Lord and turns
to this charlatan with all his heart and soul; he puts his trust in
him and relies on him instead of Allaah, and says to him, “What is the
way out from the things that you have described? What is the means of
warding them off?” It is as if he (the charlatan) has control over benefit
and harm, at which point his hopes are raised and he becomes more greedy,
wondering how much he will be able to take. So he tells him, “If you
give me such and such, I will write an amulet for that which will be
this long and this wide” – he describes it and speaks to him in a nice
manner. Then he hangs up this amulet to protect him from such and such
diseases. Do you think, after all that we have mentioned, that this
belief is a form of minor shirk? No way; it means that one is taking
as one’s god someone other than Allaah, putting one's trust in someone
other than Him, turning to someone other than Him, relying on the deeds
of created beings and trying to divert people from their religion. Can
the Shaytaan do any of these tricks except with the help of his devilish
brethren among mankind? 

“Say: ‘Who can guard and protect
you in the night or in the day from the (punishment of the) Most Gracious
(Allaah)?’ Nay, but they turn away from the remembrance of their Lord”

[al-Anbiyaa’ 21:42 – interpretation of the meaning] 

Then along with the devilish mumbo-jumbo,
he writes on the amulet something from the Qur’aan, and hangs it up
when he is not taahir (in a state of purity), when he is in a state
of minor or major impurity, and he never shows any respect towards it
or keeps it away from other things. By Allaah, none of the enemies of
Allaah have treated His Book with as much contempt as these heretics
who claim to be Muslims. By Allaah, the Qur’aan was revealed to be recited
and followed, for its commandments to be obeyed and its prohibitions
heeded, for its information to be believed and its limits to be adhered
to, for its parables and stories to serve as lessons, and for it to
be believed in.

“… the whole of it (clear and unclear Verses)
are from our Lord…”

[Aal ‘Imraan 3:7 – interpretation of the meaning] 

But these people have ignored all of that
and cast it behind their backs; they have merely memorized a few words
in order to earn their living from them, like any other means of earning
a living that enables them to do haraam things, not things which are
permitted. If a king or a governor wrote a letter to his subordinate,
telling him to so such and such and not to do such and such, commanding
the people in your city to do such and such and forbidding them to do
such and such, etc., and he took that letter and did not read it or
think about its instructions, and he did not convey that to those to
whom he was commanded to convey it, but instead he took it and hung
it around his neck or his arm, and did not pay any attention at all
to what was in it, the king would punish him severely for that. So how
about that which was revealed from the Compeller of the heavens and
the earth, Who has the highest description in the heavens and on earth,
to Whom is all praise in the beginning and at the end, to Whom all things
return, so worship Him and put your trust in Him, He is sufficient for
me, there is no god but He, in Him I put my trust and He is the Lord
of the Mighty Throne. And if they (amulets) contain anything but the
two revelations (i.e., Qur’aan and saheeh Sunnah) then this is shirk
without a doubt, and is more akin to the azlaam (arrows used
during the jaahiliyyah for seeking luck or help in decision making)
in being far-removed from the characteristics of Islam. 

If they (amulets) contain anything other
than the two revelations and instead contain mumbo-jumbo from the Jews
or worshippers of the temple, stars or angels, or those who use the
services of the jinn, etc., or they are made of pearls, strings, iron
rings, etc., then this is shirk, i.e., hanging them up or wearing
them is shirk, beyond a doubt, because they are not among the
permissible means or known forms of treating disease. It is simply a
belief that they will ward off such and such a problem or pain because
of their so-called special features. This is like the belief of idol-worshippers
concerning their idols, and they are like the azlaam (arrows)
which the people of the jaahiliyyah used to take everywhere with them
and consult whenever they had to make a decision. These were three arrows,
on the first of which was written ‘Do’, on the second ‘Do not do’ and
on the third ‘Try again.’ If the person picked out the one which said
‘Do’, he would go ahead and do that thing; if it said, ‘Do not do’,
he would not do it, and if it said, ‘Try again,’ he would consult them
again. Instead of this, Allaah – to Whom be praise – has given us something
better, which is the prayer of Istikhaarah. 

In conclusion, these amulets which do
not contain Qur’aan or Sunnah are just like the azlaam in that
they involve corrupt beliefs and go against the sharee’ah and are far-removed
from the characteristics of Islam. Those who believe in pure Tawheed
keep as far away as possible from such things. The faith in their hearts
is too great to permit anything of this sort to enter their hearts.
Their status is too high and their certainty of faith is too strong
for them to put their trust in anyone other than Allaah or to seek the
protection of anyone other than Him. And Allaah is the Source of strength. 

(Ma’aarij al-Qubool, 2/510-512) 

The view that amulets are not allowed
even if they contain words from the Qur’aan is the view of our shaykhs: 

3.   
The scholars of the Standing Committee said: 

The scholars are agreed that it is haraam
to wear amulets if they contain anything other than Qur’aan, but they
differed concerning those which do contain Qur’aan. Some of them said
that wearing these is permitted, and others said that it is not permitted.
The view that it is not permitted is more likely to be correct because
of the general meaning of the ahaadeeth, and in order to prevent means
of shirk. 

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz, Shaykh
‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ghadyaan, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Qa’ood. 

(Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah,
1/212) 

4.  
Shaykh al-Albaani (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

This misguidance is still widespread among
the Bedouin, fellahin (peasants) and some of the city-dwellers. Examples
include the pearls which some drivers put in their cars, hanging them
from the rear-view mirror. Some of them hang an old shoe on the front
or back of the car; some hang a horse-shoe on the front of their house
or shop. All of that is to ward off the evil eye, or so they claim.
And there are other things which are widespread because of ignorance
of Tawheed and the things which nullify it such as actions of shirk
and idolatry which the Messengers were only sent and the Books were
only revealed to put an end to. It is to Allaah that we complain of
the ignorance of Muslims nowadays, and their being far away from their
religion. 

(Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth al-Saheehah,
1/890, 492) 

And Allaah knows best

The atheist who does good deeds is worse than the one who kills his mother and takes care of dogs

 

What is the reason for people not believing in God being punished? I read that good deeds of such people will not be accepted. So if someone does all he can do to help people and be useful to the society, he will be punished nevertheless if he did not believe in God. But what exactly is the reason of punishing a good man for his atheism?

Praise be to Allaah. 

It is the matter of common sense that man
has been created, and the created being must have a Creator. The Creator
of man is Allaah, Who created the heavens and the earth, and created
all things. Man has to acknowledge this reality. It is also the matter
of common sense that the Creator of this universe is the One who deserves
to be worshipped, obeyed, feared, hoped and loved. This means that the
one who does not acknowledge this truth is an atheist and a denier,
and is ignorant and corrupt; his intellect is less than human. Whoever
does not submit truly as a slave to Allaah, Who has created the heavens
and the earth, but is too proud to worship Him, or worships some created
being alongside Him, is refusing to worship Allaah, or is a mushrik
(one who associates others in worship with Him). Both the one who refuses
to worship Allaah and the one who associates others in worship with
Him are kaafirs (disbelievers), like atheists and deniers. Whoever denies
the Creator or refuses to worship Him, or joins others in worship with
Him, deserves the most severe punishment, because for a man to deny
his Creator, or refuse to worship Him, or join others in worship with
Him, is the most serious of human sins, the most abhorrent of beliefs
and the worst deviation. If a person is like this, there is no value
in any good deed that he does. The atheist who does deeds that are good
in his own eyes, and does whatever good deeds he can for his society,
is like a man who kills his father and mother and takes good care of
dogs. Does it not make sense that he should be punished and that his
good treatment of dogs should not count for anything?  The most
important rights are the rights of Allaah, which are that He should
be acknowledged and worshipped. The one who neglects this most important
right will not benefit from anything he does with regard to people’s
rights. Therefore if the atheist does not believe in Allaah and does
not worship Allaah, there cannot be any good in the actions that he
does for people’s benefit. But this atheist or mushrik who treats people
well is still better than the atheist or mushrik who oppresses and mistreats
people, and denies them their rights. He may be rewarded for his good
deeds by being granted provision of food and drink in this world, but
he will have no share in the Hereafter. Look at yourself, and believe
in Allaah and His Messenger, and follow the guidance of Allaah with
which He sent His Messenger (peace
and blessings of Allaah be upon him), the Seal of the Prophets, so that
you might avoid the punishment of Allaah. Know the difference between
the believer and the atheist, the one who worships Allaah alone and
the one who associates others in worship with Him. Allaah says (interpretation
of the meaning):

“The
likeness of the two parties is as the blind and the deaf and the seer
and the hearer. Are they equal when compared? Will you not then take
heed? [Hood
11:24]

 

Bowing to anyone other than Allaah is haraam

 

Is it permisible to bow while greeting a respectable/elder person/parent Other than saying "As-salam Alaykum Wa-rahmatullahi Wa-barakatuh".

 

Praise be to Allaah. 

The usual greeting is “Assalaamu
‘alaykum wa rahmat-Allaahi wa barakaatuhu (Peace be upon
you, and the Mercy of Allaah and His Blessings), because Allaah says
(interpretation of the meaning):

“greet
one another with a greeting from Allaah (i.e. say: As-Salaamu
‘Alaykum — peace be on you), blessed and good”

[al-Noor 24:61]

The ahaadeeth explain this greeting
clearly.

 But bowing is not permitted, unless
the person being greeted is old and is unable to stand up, or is one
of your parents and you do not want to make him or her stand up to shake
your hand or embrace you. So if you bow and kiss his head or forehead
out of respect for the rights that he has over you, then this is not
the kind of bowing that constitutes an act of worship. Undoubtedly bowing
is an act of worship towards Allaah, as in rukoo’ (the bowing in prayer),
so if that is done without shaking hands or kissing, it is an act of
veneration towards that person and is therefore shirk.

Ruling on seeking the help of the jinn

 

Some people, when they want to pray against a person, say, “O jinn, seize him, O ‘ifreet seize him; may seven (jinn) seize you, may they break your back and suck your blood.” What is the ruling on such words?

Praise be to Allaah. 

This
is shirk, and is a type of seeking the help of the jinn. Some people
do this because they have fear of the jinn in their hearts and they
are afraid of their power, and because their hearts are devoid of sincere
faith and trust in Allaah. So they are content with these illusions
and they seek the help of created beings which are not able to bring
benefit or ward off harm for themselves, let alone for anyone else.

 When Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have
mercy on him) was asked about this matter, he said:

“This is even more abhorrent than associating others in worship with
Allaah. We must not do this, we must beware of it, we must advise others
not to do it and we must denounce those who do it. If a person is known
to commit such actions of shirk, it is not permissible to let him marry
a Muslim woman, to eat meat slaughtered by him, to pray over him [the
funeral prayer] or to pray behind him, until he announces his repentance
to Allaah, which includes devoting his du’aa’ and worship sincerely
and purely to Allaah alone.”

(Iqaamat al-Baraaheen ‘ala Hukm
man istaghaatha bi ghayr Allaah, p. 30)

 The Standing Committee for Academic Research and
Issuing Fatwas has issued a fatwa stating that:

“seeking the help of the jinn and turning to them to meet one’s needs
by harming someone or benefitting him is shirk, because it is a kind
of worship directed to someone other than Allaah. It is a kind of benefitting
from the jinn to fulfil one’s needs, in return for which the jinn benefits
by having the human’s veneration and trust, and being called upon by
him to fulfil his desires. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

‘And
on the Day when He will gather them (all) together (and say): “O you
assembly of jinn! Many did you mislead of men,” and their Awliyaa’ (friends
and helpers) amongst men will say: “Our Lord! We benefited one from
the other, but now we have reached our appointed term which You did
appoint for us.” He will say: “The Fire be your dwelling place, you
will dwell therein forever, except
as Allaah may will. Certainly your Lord is All-Wise, All-Knowing.”

And thus We do make the Zaalimoon
(polytheists and wrongdoers) Awliyaa’ (supporters and helpers) of one
another (in committing crimes), because of that which they used to earn’
[al-An’aam 6:128-129]

And Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

‘And
verily, there were men among mankind who took shelter with the males
among the jinn, but they (jinn) increased them (mankind) in sin and
transgression’ [al-Jinn 72:6]

When a human seeks the help of the jinn, to cause harm to another
or to protect him from the evil of one whose evil he fears, all of this
is shirk, and whoever is in this state, his prayer and fasting mean
nothing. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“If
you join others in worship with Allaah, (then) surely, (all) your deeds
will be in vain, and you will certainly be among the losers” [al-Zumar
39:65]

Whoever is known to do such things, cannot be prayed over if he dies,
his funeral cannot be attended, and he cannot be buried in the Muslim
graveyard.” 

(Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah,
1/407-408)

 The jaahili (ignorant) nature of their seeking the
help of the jinn and putting their trust in them is highlighted in the
words of shirk that they utter, such as:

“By the help of Allaah and you; I am under Allaah’s care and yours;
I have no one except Allaah and you; I am Allaah’s slave and yours;
I put my trust in Allaah and in you; this is from Allaah and from you;
I have Allaah in heaven and you on earth,” etc.

 Undoubtedly these phrases are expressions of shirk,
because they make a created being the rival of the Creator. Exalted
be our Lord far above that.

 They even call upon Jibreel (peace be upon him) and
Muhammad (peace and blessings of
Allaah be upon him) instead of Allaah, by uttering words of ignorance
such as, “O Jibreel, help me,” and “O Muhammad, intercede for me.” And
Allaah is the One Whose help we seek.

A person’s believing his haraam action to be permitted is not always a condition for denouncing him as a kaafir

 

Can a person who insults the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) be denounced as a kaafir merely for speaking that insult, or must he also be shown to believe that his action is permitted?

Praise be to Allaah. 

The Sahaabah, Taabi’een and the Ahl al-Sunnah
who came after them were unanimously agreed that whoever says or does
something which is blatantly kufr is a kaafir, without any need to show
that he believes it to be permissible.

 The scholars agreed that kufr may take
the form of denying, disbelieving or turning away.

 This may be a verbal action, such as
insulting Allaah or His Messenger
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), or mocking the religion
and its rulings; or it may be a physical action, such as prostrating
to idols, circumambulating graves, or offering sacrifices to the jinn
and idols.

 Or it may be an act of omission, such
as not doing a certain kind of action at all. Ishaaq ibn Taahawayh and
others narrated that the Sahaabah were agreed that the one who does
not pray deliberately is a kaafir. It was narrated in Saheeh Muslim
via Ibn Jurayj from Abu’l-Zubayr al-Makki from Jaabir that the Prophet
(peace and blessings of Allaah
be upon him) said, “Between a man and shirk or al-kufr there
stands his neglecting the prayer.”

 The use of the definite article al-
here indicates that major kufr (al-kufr al-akbar) is being referred
to. But there are some differences among the imaams of the madhhabs
concerning the kufr of one who does not pray. Some said that he does
not become a kaafir in a complete sense so long as he does not deny
that prayer is obligatory.

 Others said that he is guilty of major
kufr, because there was consensus among the Sahaabah on that point,
although there were differences as to the point at which he becomes
guilty of kufr by not praying. Some said that he is a kaafir is he neglects
to pray one prayer until the time for it is over; others said that he
is not a kaafir unless he neglects prayer completely.

 To sum up, Ahl al-Sunnah do not regard
a person as a kaafir for general sins or for every sin, as the Khawaarij
and Mu’tazilah said when they denounced people as kaafirs for major
sins. They regarded as sins some things that are not sins, and applied
the rulings of kufr in such cases. Sometimes they would condemn people
for the apparent meaning of their words (i.e., they were too quick to
judge). This is what many of the later Khawaarij and Mu’tazilah do,
because when judging people they do not differentiate between the action
and the person, or between one issue and another. They may denounce
as a kaafir anyone who does not agree with them in these deviations.
They were described by the Messenger of Allaah
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), “They kill the people of
Islam and leave alone the people who worship idols.” (Narrated by al-Bukhaari
and Muslim from the hadeeth of Abu Sa’eed).

 The Ahl al-Sunnah tread a middle path
between the Khawaarij and the Murji’ah. They do not denounce those who
commit major sins as kaafirs, so long as they do not believe their actions
to be permissible. Neither do they agree with the view of the Murji’ah,
that sin does not undermine a person’s faith at all, and that no one
can be denounced as a kaafir unless he is known to believe that his
action is permitted. This is false according to the Qur’aan, Sunnah
and scholarly consensus (ijmaa’). So anyone who insults Allaah
or His Messenger (peace and blessings
of Allaah be upon him) is a kaafir, with no need to show that he believes
his action to be permissible. Scholarly consensus on this point was
narrated by more than one scholar. Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh said that the
scholars were unanimously agreed that whoever insults Allaah, may He
be glorified, or slanders His Messenger
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), or rejects anything that
Allaah has revealed, or kills one of the Prophets of Allaah – even if
he believes in that which Allaah has revealed – is a kaafir.

 And Allaah knows best.