Skip to main content

Have German ideologues learnt lessons from the genocidal actions of General Lothar von Trotha In Namibia?!

Written by abumuaawiyah on . Posted in Contemporary Issues, Featured, Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Refutations, Sin.

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

The genocide perpetrated by German colonialists against the Namibians occurred from 1904 to 1908. During the 31 years of colonisation in Namibia, it is estimated that over 70,000 Namibians were killed. This atrocity was largely ignored by successive German Governments for nearly a century, until May 28, 2021, when former German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, representing the government, along with Chancellor Angela Merkel, publicly acknowledged these events as genocide. The majority of this genocide took place among two tribes, primarily the Herero and the Nama.

Germany sought to expand its territory, and even prior to the onset of the First World War, they were actively searching for resources to support their ambitions for global dominance. This pursuit led them to Africa, specifically to Namibia, Tanzania, Rwanda, Burundi, Cameroon, Nigeria, Chad, Gabon, and Togo, during a period when Africa’s borders had not yet been delineated by the colonialists. Consequently, they briefly colonised these areas. However, one may wonder why their presence in Africa was not more prolonged. In Namibia, their intention to raise cattle resulted in the appropriation of lands belonging to two tribes, which constituted the primary means of sustenance for these communities. As a result, these tribes were dispossessed, plunged into poverty, and subjected to forced labour. This situation ultimately led to confrontations between the tribes and the colonialists, prompting the latter to perpetrate genocide under the command of General Lothar von Trotha, who orchestrated a ruthless campaign aimed at exterminating both the Herero and the Nama peoples. The massacre ensued, claiming thousands of lives.

It is noted that the primary reason the Germans did not inflict more casualties or maintain a longer presence in Africa was the imminent outbreak of the First World War, necessitating their return to Germany to engage in the conflict in Europe. By the years 1914-1918, German colonialists had lost all their African territories to either the British or the French as a consequence of the war in Europe. Around the same time, German colonialists governed a significant area of East Africa in the early 1900s known as German East Africa, which included present-day Tanzania, Rwanda, and Burundi. The conflict that took place between the German colonialists and the natives was referred to as the Maji Maji Rebellion, which lasted from 1905 to 1907. The reason for this conflict was because the German colonial authorities imposed heavy taxes and enforced labour, compelling the local populace to engage in cotton farming for export. This shift forced the indigenous people to abandon their own food cultivation in favour of cotton production, resulting in widespread hunger and growing resentment among the community.

So, in July 1905, when the populace could no longer tolerate their circumstances, they initiated an uprising in the Matumbi Hills, which rapidly extended throughout southern and eastern Tanzania. However, the German response was marked by extreme brutality, resulting in the massacre of individuals, the incineration of villages, and the destruction of food supplies, including the targeting of civilians. Estimates suggest that between 75,000 and 300,000 Africans perished due to starvation. Ultimately, this rebellion was suppressed by 1907, yet it significantly undermined the German perception of effortless colonial governance in Africa, contributing to their eventual withdrawal from the continent by 1918.

However, despite the government of Angela Merkel acknowledging that this incident constitutes genocide and their agreement to provide compensation, no payments have been made. This promise has been outstanding since 2013. In contrast, Germany has compensated Israel and individual Holocaust survivors. Since 1945, Germany has disbursed over $86.8 billion dollars in various forms of compensation to Israel, benefiting both Holocaust survivors and Jewish organizations. This compensation has addressed forced labour, confiscated property, and the suffering endured. Yet, regarding Namibia, although promises were made, no payments have been rendered.

https://www.state.gov/reports/just-act-report-to-congress/germany/

Have German ideologues truly absorbed the lessons from the atrocities perpetrated by their ancestors during the violent colonial era against Namibians?! It appears that they have not gained enough valuable insights, as evidenced by their compensation to the Jews while neglecting to compensate the Namibians. Furthermore, they continue to supply arms to Netanyahu’s genocidal administration, which are employed in the killing of Palestinians, despite occasionally criticising Netanyahu’s administration for its settlement expansion. Please read further below:

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/german-minister-says-future-arms-deliveries-israel-depend-gaza-situation-2025-05-30/

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-vows-continued-support-of-israel-as-fm-visits-berlin/a-72802920

https://www.firstpost.com/world/germany-says-will-continue-arms-deliveries-to-israel-even-as-public-wants-stricter-control-13894497.html

Germany Says to Continue Israel Arms Sales Amid Embargo Call

https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/large-majority-germans-want-tighter-controls-arms-exports-israel-2025-06-04/

Independence Clauses- A Legacy of the French Colonialists and Post-Colonialists

Written by abumuaawiyah on . Posted in Contemporary Issues.

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Allah, The Exalted, said:

وَيۡلٌ۬ لِّلۡمُطَفِّفِينَ
ٱلَّذِينَ إِذَا ٱكۡتَالُواْ عَلَى ٱلنَّاسِ يَسۡتَوۡفُونَ
وَإِذَا كَالُوهُمۡ أَو وَّزَنُوهُمۡ يُخۡسِرُونَ
أَلَا يَظُنُّ أُوْلَـٰٓٮِٕكَ أَنَّہُم مَّبۡعُوثُونَ
لِيَوۡمٍ عَظِيمٍ۬
يَوۡمَ يَقُومُ ٱلنَّاسُ لِرَبِّ ٱلۡعَـٰلَمِينَ

Woe to Al-Mutaffifin [those who give less in measure and weight (decrease the rights of others)], those who, when they have to receive by measure from men, demand full measure, and when they have to give by measure or weight to men, give less than due. Think they not that they will be resurrected (for reckoning), on a Great Day, the Day when (all) mankind will stand before the Lord of the ‘Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists)? [Surah Al-Mutaffifeen]

Allah explained who the Mutaffifeen are in his statement: [ٱلَّذِينَ إِذَا ٱكۡتَالُواْ عَلَى ٱلنَّاسِ يَسۡتَوۡفُونَ – Those who, when they have to receive by measure from people, demand full measure] -Meaning, they take from them in full what is established to be their due and demand in full without any loss.

[وَإِذَا كَالُوهُمۡ أَو وَّزَنُوهُمۡ يُخۡسِرُونَ – And when they have to give by measure or weight to people, give less than what is due] -Meaning, when they give the people what they are entitled to by way of measure or weight, they give them less- either by giving short measure or weight, or by not giving the full measure or weight, or by not filling the measuring or weighing equipment and what is similar that. This is tantamount to stealing the people’s wealth and not being fair to them. If this is the threat of divine vengeance against those who give short measure and short weight, then those who take people’s wealth by force or by stealing are more deserving of this threat than those who give short measure and short weight.

This noble Aayah shows that just as a person takes from the people what he is entitled to, it is also obligated on him to give them everything they are entitled to – whether related to wealth or mutual dealings; rather included in the generality of this Aayah are proofs and statements, because indeed what usually takes place between those engaged in argumentation and discussion is that each of them is eager to establish his proofs, therefore, it is obligated on a person also to make known the proofs possessed by the other person and examine the proofs of the other person just as he examines his own proofs. In relation to this affair, the justice of a person is known as opposed to whether he is afflicted with bigotry, his humility as opposed to being haughty, his common sense as opposed to foolish behaviour. We ask Allah bestow on us every good.

Then Allah issued a threat to those who give short measure, stated with amazement regarding their state of affairs and their persistence upon what they are doing. Allah said: [أَلَا يَظُنُّ أُوْلَـٰٓٮِٕكَ أَنَّہُم مَّبۡعُوثُونَ – Think they not that they will be resurrected (for reckoning), on a Great Day, the Day when (all) mankind will stand before the Lord of all that exists – Meaning, what makes them dare to give short measure is because they do not believe in the Last Day, otherwise had they believed in it and known that they will stand before Allah to give account – whether related to something small or big, they would stopped and repent. [Tafsir As-Sadi]

The vast majority of what are referred to as Francophone African nations were informed that a condition of their quest for independence was the necessity to continue utilizing a currency established by their former colonizer, which in turn undermines their sovereignty. For instance, the French colonial authorities created two distinct currencies for their former colonies: the XAF for Central Africa and the CFA for West Africa. The deception surrounding these currencies lay in their pegging to the French Franc, which was the previous currency and has now transitioned to the Euro. Furthermore, these fabricated currencies for the African nations were also promised guaranteed convertibility to the French Franc at a predetermined rate. Consequently, for this currency to yield profits for the French government, all these so-called Francophone countries were mandated to deposit 65% of their foreign reserves with the French central bank. Thus, while France was ostensibly granting independence, these nations were compelled to utilize a currency crafted by their former colonial ruler for trade, alongside the fact that the colonial power required 65% of all foreign earnings from the colonized to be retained in the reserves of the colonial master, enabling him to provide the colonized with a fixed foreign exchange rate. Therefore, whenever the colonial master engaged in trade with the ex-colonies, 65% of the earnings that were meant for these African nations would instead be retained within the French treasury. As a result, the colonial master was appropriating the majority of the foreign exchange earnings of others, holding onto 65% until 2005, when this percentage was reduced to 50%.

Furthermore, in the realm of international trade, these nations found themselves unable to engage in buying or selling on the global market without the intervention of the French government, which maintained control over their reserves. Their priority was to favour France for every raw material produced within their borders before considering trade with any other nation. Consequently, the colonial powers amassed billions and trillions by seizing the profits of their former colonies. This is how the colonial rulers profited immensely from the riches of the oppressed, only to label them as impoverished and ungrateful. Additionally, from this wealth that was taken and plundered under the guise of independence agreements, the colonial powers extend loans to their own citizens while imposing interest charges. From this appropriated wealth, they provide loans with Riba to the very nations who rightfully own the wealth. Moreover, whenever these nations require foreign exchange, they are compelled to navigate through the French treasury, which incurs additional fees.

Can anyone point to a single nation that Muslims conquered and treated its inhabitants in such a manner? It is crucial that we do not interpret discussions surrounding these issues as mere nationalism; rather, they represent a pursuit of justice and fairness. On the other hand, we should not frame this issue as one of pan-Africanism, for we are Muslims striving to adhere to the path of the righteous predecessors. Muslims did not establish oppressive systems to exploit and plunder the resources of the indigenous people; instead, they engaged in fair trade. Colonialism was nothing but what our own hands earned, thus we must return to repentance. Read:

The State of the Ummah: Causes that led to its Weakness and the Means of Rectification (eBook): https://abukhadeejah.com/state-of-ummah-causes-of-weakness-means-of-rectification-ebook/

“The Last Word Syndrome” On Social Media

Written by abumuaawiyah on . Posted in Contemporary Issues, Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq'.

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

“The Last Word Syndrome” On Social Media After Proof is Clearly Distinguished

Imam Al-Barbahaaree, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: Al-Hasan (al-Basree) said, “The wise man does not argue or seek to overcome with stratagem rather he propagates his wisdom. If it is accepted, he praises Allah and if it is rejected he praises Allah”. [Sharh As-Sunnah]

Al-Allamah Salih Al-Fawzan, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

The wise man is the one who posses wisdom, and wisdom is to place something in its place. Similarly, the wise one means the one with understanding.

He does not debate (with) a fruitless debate that is devoid of benefit.

He propagates his knowledge and if accepted he praises Allah. This is what is sought after. If it is not accepted, he is absolved of his responsibility and the proof is conveyed.

“He praises Allah” because he established and conveyed the proof, and fulfilled what is required of him, and the guiding of the hearts is in the hands of Allah. [1]

Nowadays, many individuals on social media platforms, such as Twitter and others, engage in discussions on various topics. However, when they encounter someone whom they consider less knowledgeable or inferior in a particular area, or when their own inflated status in another domain is challenged, they struggle to accept reality. They often believe that they alone should be the authoritative voices on specific subjects, dismissing others whom they deem to have lesser expertise. Consequently, anyone who attempts to correct their misunderstandings is not only viewed as incorrect but also as having insulted their authority and expertise, whether in relation to religious or worldly matters, even when those they regard as adversaries cite recognised experts in the field. Without hesitation, they resort to social media to harshly criticize those they see as opponents, often distorting their statements. When faced with critical questioning regarding the foundation of their accusations, they typically respond with further ambiguity or employ various evasion tactics that is not befitting anyone who claims moral superiority. Then when subsequently challenged and find themselves cornered, they exhibit a tendency to engage in a series of tirades, manipulation, emotional blackmail, and misrepresentation on social media, driven by a desire to have the final say. We observe this behaviour among individuals on social media—those who are confident in their mistakes, as well as those who are uncertain about their correctness, often driven by an inflated sense of self-worth that compels them to maintain a favourable image at all costs, while simultaneously portraying their adversaries in a negative light.

It is very important to recognise that individuals from diverse backgrounds engage with social media for various purposes. A person may struggle to gain recognition within their own country or face limitations in expressing certain opinions; however, they can reach a different audience online, where they may seek to influence others by initially capturing attention through shared information, gradually attracting unsuspecting supporters through the details they provide, the inquiries they address, and the notable figures they reference. Once they establish an online presence, particularly when their influence is restricted elsewhere and their mistakes are exposed, their online conduct can become increasingly problematic. When confronted in a broad platform like social media and challenged for a public misstep—one that could have been addressed privately—their dominant demeanour often surfaces in all online discussions. This is because they are typically unwilling to acknowledge the possibility of alternative perspectives, instead striving to assert their correctness at all costs.

We continue to witness the coercive communication tactics employed by numerous individuals on social media, which have become an ingrained aspect of their nature and behaviour. Consequently, discerning individuals begin to distance themselves from these individuals, as many start to feel the repercussions of their attitude of needing to have the final word. The peak of this opinionated conduct is evident in their conversational patterns, particularly when they are unable to contribute meaningfully to the discussion. Ultimately, they resort to summarizing and paraphrasing the discussion’s outcomes, presenting themselves as the initiators or as more knowledgeable than others. In addition, they endevour to evade accountability for their negative actions, as they hope to be forgotten amidst the torrent of tweets, ultimately seeking to emerge as the victor in any dialogue. This addiction compels them to impose their views and showcase their perceived superiority, blurring the lines between those they can challenge without consequence and those who can effectively articulate their mistakes, contradictions, deceptions, and misrepresentations.

When an individual expresses facts, whether gently or harshly, they often trigger their ‘Last Word Syndrome,’ leading them to respond with disdain or to divert the conversation, presenting themselves as more knowledgeable and wise than others. Consequently, discerning individuals recognize that such people on social media become isolated from those with sound judgment, yet they attract a following of unjustifiably discontented individuals or those united by a shared animosity towards someone who refuses to remain silent about their wrongdoings when clarification is warranted. Thus, every discussion transforms into a battleground for these egomaniacs, where the perception of not achieving victory is seen as unworthy of their status and undeserved by those they consider ignorant for daring to challenge or reveal their mistakes.

It is crucial to recognize that individuals who exhibit such behavior are likely to persistently undermine the authentic emotions and experiences of others, believing that this will render others feeling overlooked and insignificant. Consequently, upon encountering such individuals, it is prudent to maintain a sensible distance, adopt appropriate positions, and leave their affair to a select few who can effectively address their negative behaviour without becoming entangled in it. This is due to the fact that the pursuit of validation can become an unending cycle, fueled by the abuser’s refusal to acknowledge reality stemming from their inflated self-perception. These individuals cannot be confronted about their actions by just anyone, even in the most gentle manner, without incurring severely adverse repercussions. Engaging in reasoning, communication, or compromise with them is futile. They are incapable of viewing situations from alternative perspectives; instead, they thrive on eliciting reactions and emotions, often resorting to any means necessary to provoke them.

They relish the attention garnered from reprimands directed at them by multitudes of people, which only serves to embolden their misbehaviour online. The more you respond, the more detrimental the situation becomes. Consequently, your silence and withdrawal of attention inflict significant discomfort upon them. This is their form of punishment while we observe how those capable of reprimanding them expose their behaviour for all rational individuals to witness. It is futile for anyone to provide them with attention; instead, what is required from all of us is to assert our positions without hesitation or compromise. This is due to the fact that for these individuals, the matter is not about the subject at hand, but rather about exerting control and manipulation. They flourish in chaos, and permitting others to have the final say would undermine their perceived authority over you.

Another important matter to consider is their continuous role as a source of drama. For nearly three decades, some Salafi teachers in the West, guided by senior scholars from Muslim regions, have managed to navigate the complexities of this drama. They have learned to discern when it is appropriate to engage and when to simply observe, responding thoughtfully and then moving forward. This experience stems from their interactions with individuals who have long sought drama, even before the emergence of twitter, and who have personally encountered those capable of fabricating false narratives to rationalise their anger to others in pursuit of a bigger agenda. Thus whenever the egomaniacs begin their tirade on social media, regardless of the numbers that follow them, we remind ourselves as follows:

They are once again drawn into their dramatic tendencies, attempting to evade a deeply painful situation. Their intense behaviour stems from a desire for recognition. Consequently, let these individuals believe they can dominate conversations through intimidation and manipulation, silencing others in the process. As adults in our late forties to fifties, with children and grandchildren, we know that after truth is manifest, those who cannot refrain from having the final say often possess a fragmented self-identity. They frequently experience high levels of anxiety and seek to alleviate their stress by insisting on being ‘right’ and prevailing in every dispute. Lacking a solid sense of self, they define their identity through reactivity and unnecessary confrontations. Their actions reflect their own issues, not ours; thus, we should remain calm and avoid emotional provocation, instead, while relying on others to address the behaviour of these people, we ask Allah for Tawfiq to strengthen ourselves.

Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

Whoever is given strength and facilitated to (engage in) something, his pleasure will be found in utilising that strength. Whoever is granted the strength to have sexual relations will find pleasure in utilising his strength in it. Whoever is given strength to become angry and overcome (others) will utilise the strength of his anger. Whoever is given the strength to eat and drink, his pleasure will be found in utilising his strength. Whoever is given the strength to (acquire) knowledge and understanding, his pleasure will be found in utilising his strength and directing it towards knowledge. Whoever is given strength in loving Allah, turning to Him in repentance, submission and obedience, being devoted to Allah (sincerely in one’s) heart, having an ardent desire to please, obey, and meet Allah in (the Hereafter) and desiring to come close to Allah, be recognised and loved by Allah, he will find his pleasure and bliss in utilising this strength in that. All the pleasures will dwindle and disappear, except this one (i.e. love of Allah). [2]

We ask Allah:

اللَّهُمَّ أَصْلِحْ لِي دِينِي الَّذِي هُوَ عِصْمَةُ أَمْرِي

وَأَصْلِحْ لِي دُنْيَايَ الَّتِي فِيهَا مَعَاشِي

وَأَصْلِحْ لِي آخِرَتِي الَّتِي فِيهَا مَعَادِي

وَاجْعَلِ الْحَيَاةَ زِيَادَةً لِي فِي كُلِّ خَيْرٍ

وَاجْعَلِ الْمَوْتَ رَاحَةً لِي مِنْ كُلِّ شَرٍّ

O Allah! Rectify my religion for me, which is the safeguard of my affairs; rectify my worldly [affairs], wherein is my livelihood; and rectify my Afterlife to which is my return; and make life for me [as a means of] increase in every good and make death for me as a rest from every evil. [Saheeh Muslim Number: 2720]

[1] An Excerpt from It’haf Al-Qari Bitta’liqaat Alaa Sharh As- Sunnah Lil Imam Barbahaaree. 2/265-266
[2] Al-Fawaa’id 121-122

Allah is pure and only accepts what is pure

Written by abumuaawiyah on . Posted in Aqeedah (Creed & Belief), Methodology - 'Manhaj', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Purification of The Soul, Scholars of Islam, Shirk, Sin, Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

In The Name of Allāh, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

The Messenger of Allāh, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him, said: “Indeed Allah is pure and He does not accept, except that which is pure”.

Al-Allamah Salih Al Fawzan, may Allah preserve him, said:

In this hadith he, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him, described Allāh, The Exalted, that He is pure. “Allah is pure”, meaning: Allah is free from all imperfections and deficiencies. He is pure in His Essence, His Names and Attributes, and His Commandments and Prohibitions. Allah is pure in every aspect and imperfection cannot reach Him. Due to this, Allah does not accept actions, statements and intentions except that which is pure. He does not accept filthy statements, actions and intentions. Allah does not accept except what is pure, as Allāh, The Most High, said:

إِلَيْهِ يَصْعَدُ الْكَلِمُ الطَّيِّبُ وَالْعَمَلُ الصَّالِحُ يَرْفَعُهُ
To Him ascend (all) the goodly words. [35:10]

Allah does not accept, except good speech and good actions. As for filthy speech, indeed Allah rejects and hates it, such as lies, backbiting, tale carrying, abuse, false speech and false testimony, and all filthy statements, (such as) shirk and kufr. All of this is filthy speech and does not ascend to Allah, and they are not accepted.

Al Minhatur Rabbaaniyyah Fee Sharh Arba’een An-Nawawiyyah’ page:133-134

Riba (Usury) of the tongue

Written by abumuaawiyah on . Posted in Methodology - 'Manhaj', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Purification of The Soul, Sin.

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him] said, “Verily, the worst act of usury is to attack the honour of a Muslim without a just cause”. (1) Meaning: The greater in evil and the more strictly prohibited is to unleash your tongue against the honour of a Muslim by insulting him, acting haughtily towards him, and speaking ill of him through abusive language or slander. This becomes a stricter prohibition because honour is more valuable than wealth. “Without a just cause”. This shows there are instances in which it is allowed to refer to someone negatively by using language like “such and such is an oppressor or transgressor” or “such and such is an innovator (in religious affairs) and an open sinner” to warn others is allowed. (2)

This has been referred to as usury because the transgressor receives his honour and then goes above and beyond it as if he has added an increase that infringes on the boundaries concerning the honour of a Muslim, which is more valuable than his wealth. According to At-Teebee, may Allah have mercy upon him, “From the standpoint of emphasis, honour is included in the categories of wealth. Usury is classified into two types: that which is conventional and is described as what is added to debts, and that which is not unconventional, such as verbally disparaging someone’s honour.” Al-Qaadhee, may Allah have mercy upon him, said, ”Violating a Muslim’s honour means dealing with him more than he deserves of what is to be said about him, or more than is permitted to be said about him, which is why it is compared to usury and regarded as one of its types. Then it is considered to be worse because it contains more harm and is more serious in corruption”. (3)

[1] Abu Daawud 4876

[2] An Excerpt from ‘Awnul Mabood Sharh Sunan Abee Daawud’ 13/152

[3] An Excerpt from ‘Mirqaatul Mafaateeh Sharh Mishkaat Al-Masaabeeh’ 8/3157

 

One of the great blessings bestowed upon teacher and student

Written by abumuaawiyah on . Posted in Basics, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Purification of The Soul, Scholars of Islam, Worship - 'Ibaadah', Zuhd (Abstinence).

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Shaikh Abdus Salaam Burgess, may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

Just as it is obligated to a student to recant a mistake, similarly, it is obligated to a teacher to return to the truth when he errs. He is not to be prevented from returning to the truth after reviewing a statement that he made and finds that it is in opposition to what is correct, for indeed that is a sign of equity and humbling (oneself) to the truth. Therefore, it is obligatory that one follows what is correct, whether it was (conveyed) by a younger or older person. It is a blessing that a teacher has amongst his students one who notifies him of his mistake and leads him to what is correct, so that he does not persist upon that ignorance. This requires that one shows gratitude to Allah, The Exalted, and then being thankful to the person through whom one was guided, whether it was a student or other than him.

An Excerpt from ‘Awā’iq at-Talab p. 52

Recalling Discussions With Inquisitive Pupils

Written by abumuaawiyah on . Posted in Basics, Contemporary Issues, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Discussion With Inquisitive Pupils In Year 6 (2009)

The discussion started when the son of a student of knowledge – a young inquisitive learner- asked about the definition of a beard.

Another pupil said: “My dad has a different opinion.”

Teacher said: “Your dad is more knowledgeable than us, but I’m citing Imam Albani, may Allah have mercy on him.”

Pupil: “How can I determine if my dad’s arguments are stronger or weaker?”

Teacher: “Ask your dad to explain his view clearly, and then in our next lesson I can present my evidence from other scholars.”

Pupil: “Which scholar is more knowledgeable?”

Teacher: “We’ll address that later based on what the senior scholars of our time have said. For now, consult your dad, and we can discuss it afterward.”

Pupil: “But Ustadh, if my dad knows more than you, he will grasp the proofs better.”

Teacher: “That’s true, but the senior scholars have a deeper understanding of the proofs than he does.”

Pupil: “So, who should I follow?”

Teacher: “As you are still young, follow what the elder teachers in the Masjid convey from the senior scholars. When you grow older and can understand the scholars’ views independently, you will gain a broader perspective, InShaAllah, while studying in Saudi Arabia and meeting both senior scholars and younger scholars, as well as advanced students of knowledge.”

A third pupil said: “Who is more knowledgeable, Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah or Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi?”

Teacher: “Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah is, but also Al-Allamah Rabee is very capable of making his own judgement from the Qur’an, the Sunnah and the understanding of the Salaf without blindly following Shaikh Al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah”.

Here we would like to recall a statement made by Imam Ash-Shawkaanee, may Allah have mercy on him, which the young learners do not know. The Imam stated:

Know that when differing arise among Muslims regarding whether this thing (matter) is a Bidah or not a Bidah, (something) disliked or not disliked, prohibited, or not prohibited, or other than that, there is a consensus among Muslims (i.e. their scholars) —both the early generations and those that followed, from the era of the Companions to the present day, which is the thirteenth century since the advent of the Prophethood—that the obligation in any differing – in any issue among the issues of the religion – between Imams of Ijtihad is to refer back to the Book of Allah, the Exalted, and the Sunnah of His Messenger, as stated in Allāh’s Book:

فَإِن تَنَٰزَعْتُمْ فِى شَىْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ وَٱلرَّسُولِ

And if you disagree among yourselves over anything then refer it back to Allāh and the Messenger. [An-Nisa 59]

The meaning of referring back to Allah, the Exalted, is to refer to His Book, and the meaning of referring to His Messenger, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him, is to refer to his Sunnah after his passing. This is a matter about which there is no differing among the Muslims.

If a Mujtahid among the Mujtahideen says that this (thing) is lawful while another says this (thing) is unlawful, neither is any of the two more entitled to the truth than the other, even if he possesses more knowledge, older, or closer to the (early era of Islam). This is because each of them is a servant of Allāh among the servants of Allāh, (required) to worship (Allāh) based on what is found in the pure Sharia- that which is found in Allāh’s Book and the Sunnah of His Messenger, and what is required of him is required of other than him among Allāh’s servants. His abundant knowledge, the attainment of the level of Ijtihad, or even surpassing it, does not exempt him from any of the religious laws legislated by Allah for His servants, nor do they exclude him from those who have reached the age in which one is held accountable for his actions among the servants (of Allāh). [1] [Paraphrased]

 

Discussion with a pupil in year 11 on Saturday 19th 2025

Pupil: Is it permissible to call yourself a Maliki?

Teacher: To my knowledge, no scholar has raised objections to this view, as many have explored the Madhahib, recognising that the four Imams are all upright scholars within Ahlus Sunnah. However, the upright scholars associated with a particular Mad’hab, such as Imam Ibn Abdil Barr al-Maliki, Imam Abi Al-Izz Al-Hanafi and others, were not blind followers nor did they reject clear proof, instead, they were Mujtahidoon who adhered to the evidence when it was presented to them. This principle also applies to students who have reached the level where they can comprehend the proofs.

Pupil: “Can you send me something about this?”

Teacher: Firstly, you and I have not reached the level where we can investigate the evidences, but we can depend on what the reliable students of knowledge transmit from the senior scholars. As for some information on Mad’habs, visit this link: https://abukhadeejah.com/taqleed-blind-following-four-imams-salafis/

Here we would like to add a statement of Imam Abdul Aziz Bin Baz, may Allah have mercy upon him, who said:

If a person is a student of knowledge and adheres to the Hanafi Madhab in certain matters that are clear to him to be correct and his Madhab is stronger than other than it; then follows Ash-Shafi’i, Maliki’s, or Ahmad’s in other matters where it appears that their Madhab in those matters is correct based on the proofs, there is no harm in this because a believer wherever Allāh gives him knowledge, he follows the proof and looks to the proof.

So, what is established with proof, it is obligatory to adhere to it, regardless of whether it aligns with the Madhab of Shafi’i, Abu Hanifa, Maliki, Ahmad, or any other scholars. The important thing is that it must agree with the proof – substantiated by a verse or a noble sound hadith from the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allāh be upon him.

However, as for following whims or personal desires, then no. Playing about – sometimes this and other times that (arbitrarily between opinions), this is not permissible. But it is incumbent upon him to seek to know the proof and asking the people of knowledge regarding what is difficult for him. If he knows the proof, acquainted with the proof that this madhab in this issue is more valid while another is more valid in a different matter, there is no harm in this; otherwise, he should consult the scholars, seek their verdicts guidance, and act according to what they guide him to based on knowledge. [2] [Paraphrased] [End of quote]

In the above clarification provided by Imam Abdul Aziz Bin Baz, may Allah have mercy on him, he mentioned that one should avoid following personal desires. Does this imply that a student of knowledge cannot consult more than one scholar?

Question: If I ask a scholar and he gives me a verdict, is it impermissible to ask other than him? Also, the brother says: I present these two questions because I have heard them from some of the Mashayikh who give verdicts to the peopl, since I am not fully convinced by their responses. Firstly, it is said that if you ask a scholar and he gives you a verdict, you should follow what he says and not seek another verdict (a verdict from other than him). Is this correct, or am I able to ask until my heart is assured?

The response: This is incorrect, instead, it is obligated to the questioner to strive to ask until they find peace in their heart. They should seek -among the people of Shariah knowledge – for the [الأعلم فالأعلم – most knowledgeable in levels of knowledge] and [والأورع فالأورع – the ones known to possesses more fear of Allah that makes a person stay away from doubtful matters out of fearing of falling into something forbidden] until his (the questioner’s) heart is at ease that the verdict is correct, appropriate and in accordance with the Shariah, as the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, stated, “Righteousness (birr) is good morality, and wrongdoing is that which wavers in your soul and which you dislike people finding out about.” He , peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said: “Consult your heart. Righteousness is that about which the soul feels tranquil and the heart feels tranquil, and wrongdoing is that which wavers in the soul and moves to and fro in the breast even though people again and again have given you their legal opinion [in its favor].” [I] A believer seeks knowledge and understanding in the religion, and asks the people of knowledge until his heart is at ease that the verdict aligns with the Shariah based on his ability and how far he can strive.

Question: With regards to the student of knowledge, if someone approaches him for a verdict and it is known that the individual has already sought a verdict from someone else, is the student permitted to respond to this request for a verdict.

The Shaikh responded: There is no objection (or hindrance), but the mufti must diligently seek out the Shariah proofs and should not be lackadaisical. He should refer to the Quran and the Sunnah to provide the questioner with what he knows of Allah’s Shariah- the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. He should not be lackadaisical (or approach the matter lightly), instead it is obligated to him to strive and investigate thoroughly so that he only issues rulings based on insight and knowledge. If a questioner asks him a question, while he knows that he has asked someone else, there is no objection (or hindrance). If he is asked, he says: “What did so-and-so say?” This is so that he would be able to either agree or disagree with the previous response. There is no harm in this. The companions used to do this, asking those who asked them (questions): “What did so-and-so say?” He (the questioner) said: “So and so says”, then he (i.e. the one asked the question) either says that he is in agreement with the verdict or he opposes it and says: “The verdict is such and such”.

Question: What if he refrains from giving a ruling, does that constitute concealment of knowledge?

The Shaikh: If he knows that the verdict is false (i.e. refrains from saying what is correct), it is tantamount to concealment of knowledge. However, if it is based on Ijtihad, investigation, and opinion, then there is no issue. [3] [Paraphrased] [II]

Another question: In light of verdicts and giving verdicts, many of our brothers ask about a single topic from more than one student of knowledge, and they may encounter differing opinions. What guidance do you offer to those who ask questions, should they be satisfied with the response of one individual, or can they ask this one and that one until they reach their desire (understanding or goal)?

If the Fatwa does not reassure the questioner’s heart, while he intends good, knowledge, and Al-Wara (i.e. his intention is the fear of Allah that keeps a person from doubtful matters lest they fall into what is forbidden), there is no harm. He asks until his heart is assured with the proof and that this is the Shariah ruling. However, if his intention is driven by personal desire, that is not permissible. If he is seeking what agrees with his desires, this is not permissible; instead, it is incumbent upon him to strive to know the truth based on its proof until his heart is assured and seek for those he believes to be closer to good conduct and knowledge among the scholars of fatwa- seeking a verdict from one regarding whom his heart is at ease with that they are closer to knowledge of the truth.

He searches for the people of knowledge, and when seeking their verdicts – from whom he thinks is most closer to reaching the truth. Thus, he gives importance to assurance and to reach the truth, and not seeking for what agrees with his desire. The one who asks questions to this one and that one so that his heart is at ease and upon tranquility with the verdict based on its proof, there is no harm on him in doing so because this is part of seeking confirmation of the truth. [4] [Paraphrased] [end of quotes]

In saying all this, Taqleed has its precise place. Al-Allamah Salih Al-Fawzan, may Allah have mercy upon him, stated on this link that the layperson or the beginner in the path of knowledge has no option but to make Taqleed because they do not have the ability to make Ijtihaad, so they make Taqleed of the people of knowledge, as Allah said:

فَسْـَٔلُوٓا۟ أَهْلَ ٱلذِّكْرِ إِن كُنتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ

Ask Ahl Adh-Dhikr (the people of Shariah knowledge) if you do not know. [5] [Paraphrased]

In recent times, following the passing of the senior scholars, such as Imam Abdul Aziz Bin Baz, Imam Muhammad Ibn Salih Al-Uthaymeen, Imam Al-Albani, Al-Allamah Muqbil Bin Hadi Al-Wadi’ee, Al-Allamah Ubaid Bin Abdillah al-Jabiri, Al-Allamah Al-Luhaydan, and Al-Allamah Al-Ghudiyaan, may Allah grant them mercy, everyone has reflected and realised the importance of these great scholars. However, there are still senior scholars in their 80s and 90s alive today, such as Al-Allamah Rabee Bin Hadi Al-Mad’khali, Al-Allamah Salih Al-Fawzan, Al-Allamah Abdul Muhsin Al-Abbaad, and Al-Allamah Abdul Aziz Aala Ash-Shaikh. May Allah protect them, prolong their lives upon everything that is pleasing to Him and protect all the Muslims Aameen.

————————————————————————–

[I] https://www.nawawis40hadith.com/nw/hadith/27/righteousness-and-sin

[II] https://abukhadeejah.com/differing-where-there-is-room-for-ijtihad-should-not-damage-our-unity/

Tolerated Differing and Impermissible Differing in Islam: The Great Imāms of Sunnah did not declare those who differed with them in the affairs of permissible ijtihād to be astray and they did not make binding upon others their own opinions.

[1] Sharh As-Sudoor Bi-Tahreem Raf Al-Quboor pages 1-2

فاعلم أنه إذا وقع الخلاف بين المسلمين في أن هذا الشيء بدعة او غير بدعة ، أو مكروه او غير مكروه ، او محرم او غير محرم ، او غير ذلك ، فقد اتفق المسلمون : سلفهم وخلفهم ، من عصر الصحابة الى عصرنا هذا – وهو القرن الثالث عشر منذ البعثة المحمدية – أن الواجب الاختلاف في أي أمر من أمور الدين بين الأئمة المجتهدين : هو الرد الى كتاب الله سبحانه ، وسنة رسوله الناطق بذلك
الكتاب العزيز ( ٤ : ٥٩ فإن تنازعتم في شيء فردوه إلى الله والرسول ( ومعنى الرد الى الله سبحانه : الرد الى كتابه
ومعنى الرد إلى رسوله ال : الرد الى سنته بعد وفاته وهذا مما لا خلاف فيه بين جميع المسلمين . فإذا قال مجتهد من المجتهدين
هذا حلال . وقال الآخر : هذا حرام : فليس
أحدهما أولى بالحق من الآخر وإن كان اكثر منه علماً ، أو اكبر منه سنا ، او اقدم منه عصراً لأن كل واحد منهما فرد من أفراد عباد الله ، ومتعبد بما في الشريعة المطهرة، مما في كتاب الله وسنة رسوله ، ومطلوب منه ما طلب الله من غيره من العباد . وكثرة علمه وبلوغه درجة الاجتهاد او مجاوزته لها لا يسقط عنه شيئاً من الشرائع التي شرعها الله لعباده ، ولا يخرجه من جملة المكلفين من العباد

[2] https://binbaz.org.sa/fatwas/8426/%D8%AD%D9%83%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D9%86%D9%82%D9%84-%D8%A8%D9%8A%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B0%D8%A7%D9%87%D8%A8-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%81%D9%82%D9%87%D9%8A%D8%A9

 

[3]

هل إذا سألت عالماً وأفتاني فلا يجوز سؤال غيره؟
السؤال: أيضاً يقول الأخ المؤمن: هذان سؤالان أعرضهما لأنني سمعتهما من بعض المشايخ الذين قد يفتون للناس، ونظراً لأنني لم أطمأن إليهما سألت عنهما.
الأول: يقال: إذا سألت عالماً فأفتاك فنفذ ما قاله لك ولا تستفت غيره، فهل هذا صحيح أو أنني أستطيع السؤال حتى يطمئن قلبي؟
الجواب: ليس هذا بصحيح، بل ينبغي للسائل أن يجتهد في السؤال حتى يطمئن قلبه، ويتحرى الأعلم فالأعلم والأورع فالأورع من أهل العلم حتى يطمئن قلبه إلى أن الفتوى صحيحة وأنها مناسبة وموافقة للشرع، كما قال النبي ﷺ: البر حسن الخلق، والإثم ما حاك في نفسك وكرهت أن يطلع عليه الناس ويقول ﷺ: استفت قلبك، البر ما اطمأنت إليه النفس واطمئن إليه القلب والإثم ما حاك في النفس، وتردد في الصدر، وإن أفتاك الناس وأفتوك.
فالمؤمن يطلب العلم ويتفقه في الدين ويسأل أهل العلم حتى يطمئن قلبه إلى أن الفتوى موافقة للشرع، حسب اجتهاده وطاقته.
المقدم: طيب بالنسبة لطالب العلم إذا أتاه شخص ليستفتيه وعلم منه أن قد استفتى شخصاً قبله، هل له أن يجيبه على هذا الاستفتاء؟
الشيخ: لا مانع، لكن على المفتي أن يتحرى الأدلة الشرعية، وألا يتساهل، أن يتحرى الكتاب والسنة فيعطي السائل ما يعلمه من شرع الله؛ كتاب الله وسنة النبي ﷺ ولا يتساهل، بل ينبغي له الاجتهاد والتحري حتى لا يفتي إلا عن بصيرة وعن علم.
وإذا سأله سائل يعلم أنه قد سأل غيره فلا مانع، وإن سأله قال: ماذا قال لك فلان؟ حتى يستطيع بذلك إما أن يوافقه أو يخالفه فلا بأس.
كان الصحابة قد يفعلون هذا، قد يفعلون هذا يسألون من سألهم: ماذا قال لك فلان؟ يقول: قال فلان، فيقول: هو على فتواه، وقد يخالفه فيقول: الفتوى كذا والفتوى كذا. نعم.
المقدم: طيب لو امتنع عن فتواه، هل يعتبر ذلك من كتمان العلم؟
الشيخ: إن كان يعلم أن الفتوى باطلة يكون من كتمان العلم، أما إذا كان بالاجتهاد والتحري والرأي فلا بأس

https://binbaz.org.sa/fatwas/5402/%D9%87%D9%84-%D8%A7%D8%B0%D8%A7-%D8%B3%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA-%D8%B9%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%A7-%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%81%D8%AA%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A-%D9%81%D9%84%D8%A7-%D9%8A%D8%AC%D9%88%D8%B2-%D8%B3%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%BA%D9%8A%D8%B1%D9%87#:~:text=%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AC%D9%88%D8%A7%D8%A8%3A%20%D9%84%D9%8A%D8%B3%20%D9%87%D8%B0%D8%A7%20%D8%A8%D8%B5%D8%AD%D9%8A%D8%AD%D8%8C%20%D8%A8%D9%84,%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A8%D8%B1%20%D9%85%D8%A7%20%D8%A7%D8%B7%D9%85%D8%A3%D9%86%D8%AA%20%D8%A5%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%87%20%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D9%81%D8%B3

[4]

حكم سؤال أكثر من عالم لاتباع المستفتي هواه
بمناسبة الفتوى والاستفتاء سماحة الشيخ؛ كثير من إخواننا يسأل عن موضوع واحد أكثر من طالب علم، ولربما وجد اختلافًا في القول، فما هو توجيهكم لأولئك الذين يسألون، هل يكتفون بسؤال شخص واحد؟ أم يسألون هذا، وذاك حتى يصلوا إلى مبتغاهم؟
إذا كان السائل لم يطمئن قلبه للفتوى، وهو قصده الخير، وقصده العلم، قصده الورع؛ فلا حرج، يسأل حتى يطمئن قلبه للدليل، وأن هذا هو الحكم الشرعي، أما إذا كان يقصد الهوى هذا لا يجوز، إذا كان يطلب ما يوافق هواه هذا لا يجوز، لكن عليه أن يجتهد في أن يعرف الحق بدليله؛ حتى يطمئن قلبه للفتوى، ويتحرى من يظنهم أقرب إلى الخير، وأقرب إلى العلم من أهل الفتوى يعني: يستفتي من يطمئن قلبه إلى أنه أقرب إلى معرفة الحق، يتحرى في أهل العلم، وفي استفتائهم من يظن، ويغلب على ظنه أنه أقرب إلى إصابة الحق، فهو يهتم بالطمأنينة، وإصابة الحق لا بما يوافق هواه، فالذي يسأل هذا وهذا لينشرح صدره، وليطمئن إلى الفتوى بدليلها؛ نرجو أن لا حرج عليه؛ لأن هذا من باب التثبت في الحق.
المقدم: جزاكم الله خيرًا.

https://binbaz.org.sa/fatwas/16116/%D8%AD%D9%83%D9%85-%D8%B3%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%84-%D8%A7%D9%83%D8%AB%D8%B1-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%B9%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85-%D9%84%D8%A7%D8%AA%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B3%D8%AA%D9%81%D8%AA%D9%8A-%D9%87%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%87

[5] https://www.alfawzan.af.org.sa/ar/node/15726

Nobility determined based on adherence to truth and not due to the level of one’s intellect or status

Written by abumuaawiyah on . Posted in Aqeedah (Creed & Belief), Basics, Methodology - 'Manhaj', Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Purification of The Soul, Scholars of Islam, Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Imam Ash-Shaatibi, may Allah have mercy upon him, stated:

Know that Allah has established this Shariah as proof against the creation (humankind and jinn) – the old and young alike, the obedient and the disobedient, the righteous and the wicked. He did not specify the proof against anyone in exclusion of another one. Also, all the other revealed laws were established as proof against all the nations to whom they were revealed. The Shariah is the judge- in general, and specifically; the judge on all those who have reached the age of responsibility. It is the path attached to (what Allah has ordained) and it is the Greatest Guide. Have you not heard the statement of Allah, The Most High:

وَكَذَٲلِكَ أَوۡحَيۡنَآ إِلَيۡكَ رُوحً۬ا مِّنۡ أَمۡرِنَاۚ مَا كُنتَ تَدۡرِى مَا ٱلۡكِتَـٰبُ وَلَا ٱلۡإِيمَـٰنُ وَلَـٰكِن جَعَلۡنَـٰهُ نُورً۬ا نَّہۡدِى بِهِۦ مَن نَّشَآءُ مِنۡ عِبَادِنَاۚ وَإِنَّكَ لَتَہۡدِىٓ إِلَىٰ صِرَٲطٍ۬ مُّسۡتَقِيمٍ۬

And thus We have sent to you (O Muhammad) Ruhan (an Inspiration, and a Mercy) of Our Command. You knew not what is the Book, nor what is Faith? But We have made it (this Qur’an) a light wherewith We guide whosoever of Our slaves We will. And verily, you (O Muhammad) are indeed guiding (mankind) to the Straight Path (i.e. Allah’s religion of Islamic Monotheism). [Ash-Shura 52]

He (the Prophet) – peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- was the first to be guided to the Book and Iman, and then those who followed him. The Book is the Guide and also the Sunnah that was revealed to him explains that guidance (i.e. the Sunnah and the Qur’an explain each other). All the creation (mankind and Jinn) are guided through it. Therefore, when this is the case that the Shariah is worthy of being a decisive proof against them and a beacon by way of which they are guided to the truth, their nobility is determined by the extent to which they embrace its rulings- through acting upon them in speech, belief, and deeds– and not merely due to the level of their intellects or their nobility amongst their people. That is because Allah, The Most High, has determined nobility through Taqwa and no other than it. Allah, The Most High, says: [إِنَّ أَڪۡرَمَكُمۡ عِندَ ٱللَّهِ أَتۡقَٮٰكُمۡۚ- Verily, the most honourable of you with Allah is that (believer) who has At-Taqwa] [49:13]

Al-I’tisam 3/434

A firm, abiding, truthful shyness

Written by abumuaawiyah on . Posted in Aqeedah (Creed & Belief), Basics, Monotheism - Tawheed, Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Purification of The Soul, Shirk, Sin, Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Abdullah Bin Mas’ud, may Allah be pleased with him, said that the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, “Be shy of Allah (in a manner) that shyness should be”. They said, “We do feel shy of Allah, and all praise and thanks be to Allah”. The prophet said, “It is not like that. Rather the one who is truly shy of Allah, let him safeguard his head and what it carries, safeguards the stomach and what it carries, remembers death and affliction. He who wants the Hereafter should do away with the adornments of this life, then indeed he is truly shy of Allah, The Mighty and Majestic”.

“Be shy of Allah (in a manner) that shyness should be”.

Al-Allamah Al-Mubaarakfuri, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: “A firm, abiding and truthful shyness“.

 

“We do feel shy of Allah”.

Al-Allamah Al-Mubaarakfuri said: They said, “O Messenger of Allah! We do feel shy of Allah and all praise and thanks be to Allah”, but they did not say, “We are truly shy of Allah” due to their acknowledgment of the fact that they are unable to do so.

 

“And all praise and thanks be to Allah”.

Meaning, all praise and thanks be to Allah for granting us Tawfeeq [i.e. for guiding and enabling us to perform righteous deeds].

 

Then the Messenger said: “It (shyness) is not like that”.

Al-Mubaarakfuri said: “True shyness is not what you think; rather it is to safeguard all the limbs from what is not pleasing to Allah”.

 

“Rather the one who is truly shy of Allah, let him safeguard his head and what it carries, safeguards the stomach and what it carries, remembers death and affliction. He who wants the Hereafter should do away with the adornments of this life, then indeed he is truly shy of Allah, The Mighty and Majestic”.

Al-Allamah Al-Mubaarakfuri said, “Safeguard the head by refraining from disobedience to Allah, that you do not make prostrate to other than Allah and refrain from showoff while praying. Neither lower your head for other than the sake of Allah nor raise it out of pride. Regarding what the head carries, such as the tongue, the eyes, and the ears, do not utilise them for what is forbidden. Safeguard the stomach by refraining from eating what is forbidden as well as safeguarding what is connected to it, such as the private parts, the legs, the two hands, and the heart.

 

“Remembers death and affliction”.

Al-Allamah Al-Mubaarakfuri said: Remember death and your abode in the grave. “He who wants the Hereafter should do away with the adornments of this life”. Meaning, “This is because the two cannot be combined in a perfect manner, even those who are strong (in Iman) cannot do so. Therefore, whoever does this (i.e. the things mentioned this hadith), indeed he is truly shy of Allah.

An Excerpt from Tuhfah Al-Ahwadhi. 7/131

A profound and insightful reflection on the virtue of patience

Written by abumuaawiyah on . Posted in Aqeedah (Creed & Belief), Featured, Monotheism - Tawheed, Morals and Manners - 'Akhlaaq', Pearls of Wisdom, Purification of The Soul, Scholars of Islam, The Salaf - Pious Predecessors, Worship - 'Ibaadah'.

In The Name of Allah, The Most Merciful, The Bestower of Mercy.

Sa’eed Bin Jubayr, may Allah have mercy upon him, said, “Patience is the person’s acknowledgment that what has afflicted him is from Allah, seeking for reward from Allah and hoping for Allah’s good recompense. Indeed, a man maybe in a state of distress whilst he is being whipped, but you see nothing from him except patience”. (1)

 

Regarding the statement “Patience is the person’s acknowledgement that what has afflicted him is from Allaah”.

Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy upon him,  said, “It is as if this statement is an explanation of the statement “Innaa lil laah – to Allah we belong”. Thus, the person acknowledges that he belongs to Allah and his owner does whatever He wants with him.

 

Regarding the statement “Seeking for reward from Allah”.

Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim said, “It is as if this statement is an explanation of the statement “Wa Innaa Ilayhi Raaji’oon – and to Him (i.e. Allah) we shall return”. Meaning, we shall return to You, so that you reward us due to our patience and the reward for being patient during calamity will not be lost”.

 

Regarding the statement “Indeed, a man maybe in a state of distress whilst he is being whipped, but you do not see from him except patience”.

Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim said, “Patience is not that one bears the whip, rather it is to restrain the heart from getting angry with Allah’s decree and to restrain the tongue from complaining about Allah. Whoever is whipped and his heart is displeased with Allah, he is not one who is patient”. (2)

[Ref 1: As-Sabr  Wath-Thawaab Alayhi. By Ibn Abee Dunya page 113]

[Ref 2: Iddat As-Saabireen pages 183-184]