23 October 2011

Ifk Lessons; Gaddafi's death 

Seerah of Muhammed*
*: May the Peace, Blessings and Mercy of Allah be upon him
TMQ: Translation to the nearest meaning of the Qur’an

Following the Ifk incident - these were the verses of the Qur'an revealed to the Prophet*:

Selected Verses Surah an-Nur (24)
11: Verily! Those who brought forth the slander (against Aisha, the wife of the Prophet*) are a group among you. Consider it not a bad thing for you. Nay, it is good for you. Unto every man among them will be paid that which he had earned of the sin, and as for him among them who had the greater share therein, his will be a great torment.
12: Why, when you heard it, did not the believing men and believing women think good of one another and say, "This is an obvious falsehood"?
13: Why did they [who slandered] not produce for it four witnesses? And when they do not produce the witnesses, then it is they, in the sight of Allah , who are the liars.
14: And if it had not been for the favour of Allah upon you and His mercy in this world and the Hereafter, you would have been touched for that [lie] in which you were involved by a great punishment
15: When you received it with your tongues and said with your mouths that of which you had no knowledge and thought it was insignificant while it was, in the sight of Allah, tremendous.
16: And why, when you heard it, did you not say, "It is not for us to speak of this. Exalted are You, [O Allah]; this is a great slander"?
17: Allah forbids you from it and warns you not to repeat the like of it forever, if you are believers.
18: And Allah makes the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.) plain to you, and Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise.
19: Indeed, those who like that immorality (the crime of illegal sexual intercourse) should be spread [or publicized] among those who have believed will have a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And Allah knows and you do not know.
20: And had it not been for the Grace of Allah and His Mercy on you, (Allah would have hastened the punishment upon you). And that Allah is full of kindness, Most Merciful.
21: O you who believe! Follow not the footsteps of Shaitan (Satan). And whosoever follows the footsteps of Shaitan (Satan), then, verily he commands Al-Fahsha' [i.e. to commit indecency (illegal sexual intercourse, etc.)], and Al-Munkar [disbelief and polytheism (i.e. to do evil and wicked deeds; to speak or to do what is forbidden in Islam, etc.)]. And had it not been for the Grace of Allah and His Mercy on you, not one of you would ever have been pure from sins. But Allah purifies (guides to Islam) whom He wills, and Allah is All-Hearer, All-Knower.
22: And let not those of virtue among you and wealth swear not to give [aid] to their relatives and the needy and the emigrants for the cause of Allah , and let them pardon and overlook. Would you not like that Allah should forgive you? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.
23: Indeed, those who [falsely] accuse chaste, unaware and believing women are cursed in this world and the Hereafter; and they will have a great punishment
24: On a Day when their tongues, their hands and their feet will bear witness against them as to what they used to do.
25: That Day, Allah will pay them in full their deserved recompense, and they will know that it is Allah who is the perfect in justice.

The Ifk against Aisha (ra)
Summary
The Ifk against the Mother of the Believers, Aisha (ra), was perpetrated after the campaign of Banu al-Mustaliq. As the Prophet* and the expeditionary force were returning from a long and exhaustive journey, they camped not far from Medina in order to recoup their energies. At dawn, or before it, the Prophet* gave the orders to resume the journey. Aisha (ra) stepped out of the tent while her palanquin was placed outside the entrance to the tent. On her return she noticed that she had lost her necklace and retraced her footsteps in order to recover it. As she was a young lady and slight in build, those who carried the palanquin had not noticed that she was not in there. Hence, when she returned the Muslims had departed. Unafraid, she wrapped herself in her mantle and laid down waiting for the Muslims, believing that they would return for her once they found that she was missing. While she waited, Safwan ibn al-Mu'attal as-Salami, who had been out of the camp on an errand, returned to find that the Muslims had left. When he came close and discovered that it was indeed Aisha (ra), he brought her his camel and requested her to ride it. Safwan rushed back to Medina, and arrived in broad daylight.
Malicious rumours about Aisha (ra)
Soon afterwards people began whispering about her delayed return on the camel of Safwan, a young and handsome man. Needless to say that the mushrikeen and munafiqeen latched onto the issue and soon the whole subject became the basis of significant unrest within Medina. Among those who were instrumental in spreading the slander were Hamnah (sister of the Prophet's* wife Zaynab), Hassan ibn Thabit (the poet), and Mistah (son of the slave of Aisha). However, many Muslims and companions provided an audience to the rumours, thereby casting great doubt over the Prophet*'s household and the Prophet* himself. The evidence that even some of the companions were involved in the rumours is in the above verse of Qur'an.
 
Lessons
The Ifk (lie) against Aisha (ra), the Mother of the Believers, was another episode through which Allah (swt) showed us the true characteristics of the Islamic Personality. It was during this event that even some of the believers inadvertently fell into error. The lesson we learn is not just that the believers were prone to errors or that those who slander women unjustly are subjected to 80 lashes. Rather, we understand that believers exhibit a specific thought process, when confronted not only by slander, but by those who do not abide by al-Hukm ash-Shar'i. Fundamental to that thought process is the principle that those around us are only as good or bad as we are. Hence, any accusations at those around us have the potential to be applied on the accuser.
"Why did not, when they heard it, the believing men and women think the best of one another and say, this is an obvious lie (Ifk)." [TMQ 24:12]
Looking at ourselves through others
The fundamental issue is that the verse of Qur'an focuses on how the believing men and women should have evaluated the subject of the slander. Firstly, Allah (swt) addresses the believers in the verse. And in the address He (swt) asks that why did they not think good of themselves when they heard the slander. Aisha was from them, one of the believers. Hence, they should have asked the question, would we be capable of performing this action? If we cannot attribute this to ourselves how can we attribute this to Aisha (ra). This is because Aisha (ra) is from amongst us, one of the believers.
Secondly, from all we know of her excellent piety, such an action would be grossly out of character. Hence, their involvement in this slander was contrary to all the good they knew of her.
This process was illustrated by Abu 'Ayyub Khalid ibn Zaid Ansari. When he heard about the slander, he asked his wife 'Umm 'Ayyub whether she had heard it too. She replied that she had and judged it to be a lie. Abu 'Ayyub then went on to ask her if she would perform such an action. When she replied in the negative, Abu 'Ayyub said, " Aisha is better than you, and if my own wife is not capable of such an action how could we entertain such a thought about Aisha, the Mother of the Believers and the wife of the Prophet*."
From this incident, we learn some important lessons about the manner by which we should look at ourselves and other Muslims. The first is that when Allah (swt) talks of "thinking good about oneselves", Allah (swt) is effectively stating that an attack on Aisha is an attack on yourselves, because you were all from the believers. So if Aisha (ra) had performed such an action then it would be no more than a reflection of the prevailing attitudes amongst yourselves. So an attack on Aisha (ra) was indeed an attack on yourselves, because how could such ideas be allowed to become prevalent amongst you? And when you spread the slander against Aisha (ra) you were spreading slander against your own selves. Hence, the concept we take from this is that when we criticise those around us, how much of that criticism is implicitly a criticism of ourselves.
In the case of valid criticism
This is in the case when there is no smoke or fire. What of the case when Muslims actually are at fault? Does this mean our task begins and ends with criticising them? Again, we must not ignore our responsibility to the situation. If the Muslims around us are bad, it means that we must fulfil our responsibility by recognising it and then attempt to correct them. This concept is illustrated in the narration about the Companions of the Sabbath. "And ask them (O Muhammad) about the town that was by the sea, when they transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath (i.e. Saturday): when their fish came to them openly on the Sabbath day, and did not come to them on the day they had no Sabbath. Thus We made a trial of them for they used to rebel. And when a community among them said, 'Why do you preach to a people whom Allah is about to destroy or to punish with a severe torment?' The preachers said, 'In order to be free from guilt before your Lord (Allah), and perhaps they may fear Allah.' When they ignored the warning that had been given to them, We rescued those who forbade evil, but We seized those who did wrong with a severe torment because they used to rebel (disobey Allah). So when they exceeded the limits of what they were prohibited, We said to them, 'Be you monkeys, despised and rejected.' " [TMQ 7:163 - 166]
If Allah (swt) rescued those who forbade evil, then those who were silent over the wrong doings were part of those who did wrong. As Muslims we need to be sure that we are of the former category, and not the latter. This distinction is difficult to observe because other matters often confuse the motive. As an example, when our own sons and daughters are guilty of bad actions, that does not excuse us of the duty to correct them. We know that if somebody criticises our children, it is a criticism of ourselves. To what extent can we tolerate a criticism of our children knowing that it is our responsibility? Or do we defend them tooth and nail, regardless of our neglect? And if we defend, do we defend because our honour is at stake, or do we defend because we are right? Yet when those outside our own families perform bad actions, we quickly point fingers at them, their parents etc. But from Islam, that finger is pointing straight back at us. Examples are also found outside the family setting. The quarrels in the local mosques or the sins of the rulers in Islamic Lands, do not absolve us of the duty to forbid the munkar. Hence, unless we have tried to correct those around us, thereby fulfilling our responsibility, we should think very carefully before we point fingers at others.
Al-Hukm ash-Shar'i alone forms the criteria. Thus, we look at those around us and compare how their actions are consistent with the obligations from Shari'ah. If we find that they are wanting, then our responsibility is to inform and culture our fellow Muslims. In doing so, we are not doing them a favour. Rather, we are fulfilling a duty, for by having that knowledge we are responsible to culture those around us with it. In addition, criticising them alone, is a distraction from our obligation to advise them. Only when we have conveyed the message can we consider criticising without any implications on our selves.

Other Lessons from this incident

• Accusing a Muslim man or woman unjustly, especially for such a major sin as zina (adultery), is in itself a major sin if there is no truth or proof in the matter. Hence, we should be very careful when talking about these matters unless we have 4 witnesses (pen and the ink).
• There was some Good that came out of this evil event. For example, we learned all these lessons (around false accusations, thinking good of other believers) through this incident. Also, even though Aisha and her family suffered a lot from this, they will get a lot of blessings for  their patience and remaining steadfast
• It is important that Muslims should care for reputation of other Muslims. We should not slander them or lie against them, nor should we be happy if we hear bad news about other Muslims (especially those we may not like). Hence, as stated before, we should always think good of other Muslims and give them the benefit of the doubt. We should also think good of others all the time as our default position and so we should treat bad rumours as lies
• Furthermore, we should not carry rumours around with us, nor spread them. Muslims should not have time for nonsense like this and we should stay clear and not participle in hearsay
• It is also clear from the verses that Allah is jealous about maintaining a good reputation of Muslims and that we  should be free from any unwarranted accusation. Hence, falsely accusing men and women is very wrong
• Allah tells us that this type of thing should not happen again if we are Believers. This is quite a profound expectation
• We shouldn’t talk and spread tales of immorality / titillation / sensationalisation just for the sake of it or to gossip.   Muslims should not publicise these evil things lest they become a self fulfilling prophesy. If society talks constantly about these things they become normalised behaviour (as we see in Western countries) and then people will start to expect this behaviour (or even strive for it) and those that do sin will feel less shame (if any!).  Those that do not engage in the major sin may then settle for talking about these things in a lustful way, or exaggerate the problem or go to extreme lengths to talk about these things. We should not sweep things under the carpet but be aware of the issues and Forbid the Evil (munkar) in the best way.
• We also learn about the importance in protecting Muslim community and society (& family life). To make real accusations people need 4 witness to the act otherwise they are flogged and labelled a fasiq and their witness not accepted in court. Hence, this issue is such an important topic partly because the punishment is so severe and partly because of the effects of this on a family and society. Hence, false accusations are a major sin.
• Related to the previous point, the Muslim Ummah should try hard collectively to protect the reputation and honour of its people, and to avoid fabrication and false stories. We should know that nowadays, no Qur’anic ayah will defend any Muslims of today!
• As with Abu Bakr, we should try to pardon & overlook people who make mistakes. We should be kind and generous to these people (if they are sincere) and not fall to their petty levels
• We also learn about the Prophet’s* humanity. He* didn’t know unseen and over time became more concerned about the rumours – but still thought well of the people despite the fact that he, too, was suffering when hearing these rumours about his family and friends
• Some people also highlight the fact that the enemies of Islam will try to assassinate the influential Muslim person (character), or will get involved in character assassination – where they try to destroy the credibility and reputation of sincere Muslims. This happened in the time of the Prophet* and ever since then to this very day.

Finally, it should be noted that Abdullah ibn Ubai (the leader of the Hypocrites) was not punished despite his involvement in the rumours. Scholars have given a few reasons for this which include:

• punishment in this life for a sin means that the person will not be accounted on the Day of Judgement for that, hence his evil will be left for Allah’s ultimate judgement when he is due to get his full punishment;
• also it could be that, as a clever political leader he was very cunning in the way he spread the rumour and never implicated himself;
• furthermore, guilt is established though witnesses or personal admission (confession) and either no witnesses came forward and he was not the type of person to confess;

The Death of Abu Rafi’
Salam bin Abi Al-Huqaiq (Abu Rafi‘) was a terrible Jew criminal, who had mustered the troops of the Confederates and provided them with a lot of wealth and supplies, on the one hand, and used to malign the Prophet*, on the other. When the Muslims had settled their affair with Banu Quraiza; Al- Khazraj tribe, a rival of Al- Aws, asked for the Prophet’s permission to kill that criminal in order to merit a virtue equal to that of Al-Aws who had killed another criminal of the Jews, Ka‘b bin Al-Ashraf. The Prophet* gave them his permission provided that no women or children be killed.
A group of five people with ‘Abdullah bin ‘Ateeq at their head, headed for Khaibar where ‘Abu Rafi’s fort was situated in a Special Operation. When they approached the place, ‘Abdullah advised his men to stay a little behind, while he went ahead disguised himself in his cloak as if he had been relieving himself. When the people of the fort went in, the gate-keeper called him to enter thinking he was one of them. ‘Abdullah went in and lurked inside. He then began to unbolt the doors leading to Salam’s room. There it was absolutely dark but he managed to put him to the sword: He recounts the story (in Bukhari): "I called, 'O Abu Rafi!' He replied 'Who is it?' I proceeded towards the voice and hit him. He cried loudly but my blow was futile. Then I came to him, pretending to help him, saying with a different tone of my voice, 'What is wrong with you, O Abu Rafi?' He said 'Are you not surprised? Woe on your mother! A man has come to me and hit me with a sword!' So again I aimed at him and hit him, but the blow proved futile again, and on that Abu Rafi cried loudly and his wife got up. I came again and changed my voice as if I were a helper, and found Abu Rafi lying straight on his back, so I drove the sword into his belly and bent on it till I heard the sound of a bone break", and then he left in safety.
On his way back, his leg broke so he wrapped it up in a band, and hid in a secret place until morning when someone stood on the wall and announced the death of Salam bin Abi Al-Huqaiq officially. Abdullah bin ‘Ateeq said that he had never heard any word more pleasing than the death of Abu Rafi. Once they were sure of their victim’s death. On hearing the glad news he left and went to see the Prophet*, who listened to the whole story, and then asked ‘Abdullah to stretch his leg, which he wiped and the fracture healed on the spot.

Hadith: No time to discuss

Feedback:

Signs of ad-Dajjal: Sign of ad-Dajjal and how we can recognise him.

The Day of Judgement: What will happen on the Day of Judgement and how the people will be judged

News

The Death of Gaddafi
Quite a lively debate which was based on the news reports of how he died.
Points that were mentioned included:

• The Muslims of Libya wanted a change, following the Arab Spring changes in Tunisia, Egypt and other places
• Gaddafi was trained in the UK’s Sandhurst Royal Military Academy and soon after returning to Libya overthrew the Libyan King
• Over the years Gaddafi became more like a dictator
• Libyan students and visitors to the UK have often been very suspicious of talking to other people for fear of their lives and the safety of their family
• He is known to have punished Islamic preachers quite severely (by torture, imprisonment and death)
• He is reported to deny the importance of Hadith and the Sunnah (Scholars agree that people who stubbornly reject Hadith are outside of Islam)
• Gaddafi received a lot of military and other support from Western countries like the UK
• Western countries have major financial and oil interests in Libya, which may explain why they fail to intervene ‘for humanitarian’ reasons in places like Zimbabwe, or Burma
• Western countries still support most other dictators in Muslim countries
• The death of Gaddafi after his capture, and that of his son, was probably wrong (still need to know facts).
• It is completely unacceptable that his dead body be put on open display
• The dead should be buried as soon as possible after death
• The people of Libya should take charge of their future based on their best interests

16 October 2011
The Ifk Incident; Hadith on Proof


Seerah of Muhammed*
*: May the Peace, Blessings and Mercy of Allah be upon him
TMQ: Translation to the nearest meaning of the Qur’an

Prophet* marries Juwairiyah
The spoils from Banu Mustaliq were divided as usual, and one of the captives was Juwayriyah, the daughter of Harith, chief of the defeated clan. She fell to the lot of a Helper who fixed a high price for her ransom, and she came to the Prophet* to ask for his intervention on her behalf. She wanted to draw up a contract (Mukatibah) that would guarantee her freedom from slavery and wanted the Prophet’s* help in this. The Prophet* was on that day in the apartment of Aisha, who opened the door to her, and who said afterwards, recounting what had taken place: "She was a woman of great loveliness and beauty. No man looked on her but she captivated his soul, and when I saw her at the door of my room I was filled with misgivings, for I knew that the Prophet* would see in her what I saw. She entered unto him and said: 'O Messenger of God, I am Juwayriyyah, the daughter of Harith, the lord of his people. You well know the distress that has fallen upon me, and I have come to seek thy help in the matter of my ransom.' He answered: 'Wouldst thou have better than that?' 'What is better?' she asked, and he* answered: 'That I should pay thy ransom and marry thee.' "
Juwayriyyah gladly accepted his offer, but the marriage had not yet taken place when her father arrived with some camels for her ransom. They were not the full number he had originally intended to offer, for in the valley of 'Aqiq, shortly before reaching the oasis, he had taken a last look at the fine animals and had been so smitten with admiration for two of them that he had separated them from the others and hidden them in one of the passes of the valley, unable to bring himself to part with them. The remainder he took to the Prophet* and said: "O Muhammad, thou hast captured my daughter and here is her ransom." "But where," said the Prophet, "are those two camels which thou didst hide in 'Aqiq?" And he went on to describe in exact detail the pass in which they were tethered. Then Harith said: "I testify that there is no god but God, and that thou, Muhammad, art the Messenger of God"; and two of his sons entered Islam with him. He sent for the two camels and gave them with the rest to the Prophet, who restored his daughter to him. Then she herself entered Islam, and the Prophet* asked her father to give her to him in marriage, which he did;' and an apartment was built for her.
When it became known that the Bani Mustaliq were now the Prophet's kinsmen by marriage, the Emigrants and Helpers set free their captives who had not yet been ransomed. About a hundred families were released. "I know of no woman," said Aisha, referring to Juwayriyyah, "who was a greater blessing to her people than she."

The incident of the Ifk (Slander) against Aisha.
The Necklace

Aisha and Umm Salamah had accompanied the Prophet* on this expedition. One of the next camps was in a pleasant valley, with long stretches of level sand. The Prophet's two tents were pitched as usual somewhat apart from the others, and that day it was Aisha's turn to be with him. She recounted afterwards how he had suggested that they should have a race. "I girded up my robe about me," she said, "and the Prophet* did likewise. Then we raced, and he won the race. 'This is for that other race', he said, 'which thou didst win from me.' " He was referring to an incident which had taken place in Mecca, before the Hijrah. Aisha added, by way of explanation: "He had come to my father's house and I had something in my hand and he said: 'Bring it here to me', and I would not, and ran away from him, and he ran after me, but I was too quick for him."!
The clasp of Aisha's necklace was insecure, and at one of the last halts before they reached Medina it slipped from her neck again. This was when the order to march had already been given and she had withdrawn from the camp to satisfy a call of nature. On her return, she and Umm Salamah seated themselves in their respective howdahs, closed the curtains and unveiled their faces. Only then did Aisha realise her loss; and slipping out from under the curtain she went back to look for it. Meantime the men had saddled the camels, and led them to the howdahs which they strapped each upon its mount. They were accustomed to a considerable difference in weight between them -that of a thirty-year-old woman as compared with a young girl who was slight for her age -and they failed to notice that this time the lighter of the two howdahs was even lighter than usual, so they led away the camels to join the march without a second thought. "I found my necklace," said Aisha, "and returned to the camp and not a soul was there. So I went to where my howdah had been, thinking that they would miss me and come back for me, and whilst I sat there mine eyes were overcome with heaviness and I fell asleep. I was lying there when Safwan' the son of Mu'attal passed by. He had fallen behind the army for some reason and had not slept at the camp. Noticing me, he came and stood over me. He had been used to seeing me before the veil was imposed upon us, and when he recognised me he said: 'Verily we are for God, and verily unto Him we are returning. This is the wife of the Messenger of God.''' His utterance of the verse of return woke her up; and she drew her veil over her face. Safwan offered her his camel and escorted her himself on foot to the next halt.
On the army's arrival there, Aisha's howdah had been lifted from its mount and placed on the ground; and when she did not emerge from it they assumed that she was asleep. Great was the astonishment when, towards the end of the halt, after the men had rested, she rode into the camp led by Safwan. That was the beginning of a scandal which was to shake Medina, and the tongues of the hypocrites were not slow in starting it, but for the moment the Prophet* and Aisha and most of the Companions were quite unaware of the impending trouble. The hypocrites of Medina led by ‘Abdullah bin ‘Ubai bin Salul, sought to make capital out of this incident and spread a malicious scandal against Aishah and unfortunately some of the Muslims also became involved in it

Aisha falls ill

Not long after her return to Medina, Aisha fell ill. By that time the slander that the hypocrites had whispered against herself and Safwan was being repeated throughout the city. Few took it seriously, though amongst those who did was her own cousin Mistah, of the clan of Muttalib. But whether they believed it or not, everyone knew of it, except herself. She was none the less conscious of a certain reserve on the part of the Prophet, and she missed the loving attention which he had shown her in her other illnesses. He would come into the room and say to those who were nursing her "How are ye all today?", simply including her with the others. Deeply wounded, but too proud to complain, she asked his permission to go to her parents' house where her mother could nurse her. "As thou wilt," he said.
To recount what took place in Aisha's own words: "I went to my mother without any knowledge of what was being said, and recovered from my illness some twenty days later. Then one evening I went out with the mother of Mistah -her mother was the sister of my father's mother and as she was walking beside me she stumbled over her gown and exclaimed: 'May Mistab stumble!' 'God's Life,' I said, 'that was an ill thing to say of a man of the Emigrants who fought at Badr!' 'O daughter of Abu Bakr,' she said, 'can it be that the news hath not reached thee?' 'What news?' I said. Then she told me what the slanderers had said and how people were repeating it. 'Can this be so?' I said. 'By God, it is indeed!' was her answer, and I returned home in tears, and I wept and wept until I thought that my weeping would split my liver. 'God forgive thee!' I said to my mother. 'People talk their talk, and thou tellest me not one word of it!' 'My little daughter,' she said, 'take it not so heavily, for there is seldom a beautiful woman married to a man who loveth her but her fellow wives are full of gossip about her, and others repeat what they say.' So I lay awake the whole of that night, and my tears flowed without ceasing."
But in fact, whatever jealousies there may have been between one and another, the wives of the Prophet* were all women of piety, and not one of them took any part in spreading the slander. On the contrary, they defended Aisha and spoke well of her. Of those chiefly to blame, the nearest to the Prophet's household was his cousin Hamnah, Zaynab's sister, who repeated the calumny, thinking thus to further her sister's interests: for it was generally thought that but for Aisha Zaynab would  have been the Prophet's favourite wife; and Zaynab suffered much from her sister's ill conceived zeal on her behalf. Another of the slanderers, in addition to Mistah, was the poet Hassan ibn Thabit, and in the background were Ibn Ubayy and the other hypocrites who had started everything. The Prophet* dearly hoped for a Revelation, but when nothing came he questioned not only his wives but also other near ones. Usamah, who was the same age as Aisha, spoke vigorously in her defence. "This is all a lie," he said. "We know naught but good of her." His mother, Umm Ayman, was equally emphatic in praise of her. As for 'Ali:, he said: "God hath not restricted thee, and there are many women besides her. But question her maidservant and she will tell thee the truth." So the Prophet* sent for her and said: "O Burayrah, hast thou ever seen aught in Aisha that might make thee suspect her?" She answered: "By Him that sent thee with the truth, I know only good of her; and if it were otherwise God would inform His Messenger. I have no fault to find with Aisha but that she is a girl, young in years, and when I am kneeding dough and I bid her watch it she will fall asleep and her pet lamb will come and eat it. I have blamed her for that more than once."
When next the Prophet* went to the Mosque he ascended the pulpit, and having praised God he said: "O people, what say ye of men who injure me with regard to my family, reporting of them what is not true? By God, I know naught but good of my household, and naught but good of the man they speak of, who never entereth a house of mine but I am with him." No sooner had he spoken than Usayd rose to his feet and said: "O Messenger of God, if they are of Aws we will deal with them; and if they be of our brethren of Khazraj then give us thy command, for they deserve that their heads should be cut off." Before he had finished Sa"d ibn 'Ubadah was already on his feet, for Hassan was of Khazraj, and so were the men who had subtly hatched the slander in the beginning. "God's Life, thou liest!" he said. "Ye shall not slay them, nor can yeo Neither wouldst thou have spoken thus, had they been of thy people." "God's Life, liar thyself!" said Usayd. "Slay them we shall, and thou art a hypocrite, striving on behalf of hypocrites." By this time the two tribes were about to come to grips with one another, but the Prophet* motioned them to desist, and descending from the pulpit he quietened them and sent them away in peace.
If Aisha had known that the Prophet* had defended her in public from the pulpit, she would no doubt have been greatly comforted. But she knew nothing of it at the time. She was only aware of his questioning others about her, which suggested that he did not know what to think, and this greatly distressed her. She did not expect him, of himself, to look into her soul, for she knew that his knowledge of hidden things came to him from the next world. "I only know what God giveth me to know," he would say. He did not seek to read the thoughts of men; but she expected him to know that her devotion to him was such as to make the thing she was accused of impossible. In any case, it was not enough that he should himself believe Aisha and Safwan to be innocent. The situation was a grave one, and it was imperative to have evidence which would convince the whole community.
The Prophet asks Aisha...

"I was with my parents," said Aisha, "and I had wept for two nights and a day; and while they were sitting with me a woman from the Helpers asked if she could join us, and I bade her enter, and she sat and wept with me. Then the Prophet* entered and took his seat, nor had he sat with me since people began to say what they said of me. A month had passed, and no tidings had come to him about me from Heaven. After uttering the testification there is no god but God, he said: 'O Aisha, I have been told such and such a thing concerning thee, and if thou art innocent, surely God will declare thine innocence; and if thou hast done aught that is wrong, then ask forgiveness of God and repent unto Him; for verily if the slave confess his sin and then repent, God relenteth unto him.' No sooner had he spoken than my tears ceased to flow and I said to my father 'Answer the Messenger of God for me,' and he said: 'I know not what to say.' When I asked my mother she said the same, and I was no more than a girl, young in years, and there was not much of the Qur’an that I could recite. So I said: 'I know well that ye have heard what men are saying, and it hath settled in your souls and ye have believed it; and if I say unto you that I am innocent and God knoweth that I am innocent -ye will not believe me, whereas if I confessed to that which God knoweth I am guiltless of, ye would believe me.' Then I groped in my mind for the name of Jacob, but I could not remember it, so I said: 'But I will say as the father of Joseph said: Beautiful patience must be mine; and God is He of whom help is to be asked against what they say' [Al-Qur'an 12:18]. Then I turned to my couch and lay on it, hoping that God would declare me innocent. Not that I thought He would send down a Revelation on my account, for it seemed to me that I was too paltry for my case to be spoken of in the Qur’an. But I was hoping that the Prophet* would see in his sleep a vision that would exculpate me.
"He remained sitting in our company and all of us were still present when a Revelation came to him: he was seized with the pangs which seized him at such times, and as it were pearls of sweat dripped from him, although it was a wintry day. Then, when he was relieved of the pressure, he said in a voice that vibrated with gladness: 'O Aisha, praise God, for He hath declared thee innocent.' Then my mother said 'Arise and go to the Messenger of God,' and I said: 'Nay by God, I will not rise and go to him, and I will praise none but God.' “ Verses of Surah an-Nur were revealed about this incident: "Verily! Those who brought forth the slander (against Aishah) are a group among you." [Al-Qur'an 24:11]
The Revelation

The new Revelation also dwelt upon the whole question of adultery, and, while prescribing the penalty, it likewise prescribed, as the penalty for slandering honourable women, that the slanderers should be scourged. The principal elements involved in the slander affair, Mistah bin Athatha, Hassan bin Thabit and Hamnah bint Jahsh, were flogged with eighty stripes and who confessed their guilt. But the hypocrites, who had been more insidious like Abdullah bin Ubai, had none the less been only implicit, nor did they confess to having had any part in it, so the Prophet* preferred not to pursue the matter, but to leave them to God.
Abu Bakr had been in the habit of giving his kinsman Misrah an allowance of money on account of his poverty, but now he said: "Never again by God will I give unto Mistah, and never again will I show him favour, after what he hath said against Aisha, and after the woe he hath brought upon us." But there now came the Revelation: Let not the men of dignity and wealth amongst you swear that they will not give unto kinsmen and unto the needy and unto those who have migrated for the sake of God. Let them forgive and let them be indulgent. Do ye not long that God should forgive you? And God is Forgiving, Merciful. Then Abu Bakr said: "Indeed I long that God shall forgive me." And he returned to Mistah and gave him what he had been used to giving him and said: "I swear I will never withdraw it from him!" The Prophet* likewise, after a certain time had elapsed, showed great generosity to Hassan; and he married his cousin Harnnah, Mus'ab's widow, to Talhah, by whom she had two sons.
Almost a month later, the Messenger of Allah* and Umer bin Al-Khattab were engaged in the following talk: "Don’t you see Umer if I had had him (Abdullah bin Ubai) killed, a large number of dignitaries would have furiously hastened to fight for him. Now, on the contrary, if I ask them to kill him, they will do so out of their own free will." Umer replied "I swear by Allah that the Prophet’s judgement is much more sound than mine."

Hadith: Nawawi’s 40 Hadith
Hadith 33: Onus of Proof is on the Claimant; The Taking of an Oath is on the Denier
Ibn 'Abbas said that the Messenger of Allah*, said: "Were people to be given according to their claims, some would claim the wealth and blood of others. But the burden of proof is upon the claimant and the taking of an oath is upon the one who denies (the allegation)." [al-Bayhaqi, al-Bukhari and Muslim]
And this hadith is a principle from the Principles of the Shariah, and a great authority to which one resorts in case of dispute or argument, and it implies that judgement is not simply passed by the claim of an individual.
There are in every judicial dispute at least two litigating parties, the plaintiff and the defendant. The first claims what is contrary to the apparent fact; the second holds to the apparent fact and denies the claim. This hadith forms an important maxim. The text of the hadith has been expressed in the following way:
"Evidence is for the person who claims; the oath is for the person who denies."
This hadith shows the supreme importance of proof to the administration of justice. The necessity of proof is a restrainer to false, weak, and unsubstantiated claims. Therefore it becomes important to know upon who the onus of proof lies. There is no doubt that the burden is upon the plaintiff. This is explained by the fact that what is apparent is presumed to be the original state; any one who makes a claim to the contrary must prove such claim. The proof of a matter requires presentation of evidence until the matter attains the degree of certainty. Certainty is that which can be established by sight or proof. It can only be dispelled by another certainty. Since it is established that a defendant is presumed to be free from liability until the claimant proves the contrary, it is important to know who is the defendant and who is the plaintiff, who of the two must bear the onus of proof, and whose evidence takes precedence in case of conflict.
Some scholars have said that the criteria for being an acceptable witness are:
1. The witness must be sane and competent.
2. In general, the witness must be an adult.
3. The witness must be a Muslim unless it be in a case dealing with non-Muslims.
4. The witness must be of sound memory.
5. The witness must be a person of integrity and honesty.
The importance of giving one's testimony
It is an obligation that people offer their testimony truthfully when called upon to do so. Allah the Almighty says: And the witness should not refuse when they are called.   [Surah al-Baqarah: Ayah 282] It is considered a sin to conceal what one has witnessed. Allah tha Almighty says: And conceal not the testimony, for he who hides it is certainly sinful of heart.  [Surah al-Baqarah: Ayah 283]
A warning to those who make successful false claims
It is noted that Islam stresses on appealing to fearing Allah whenever there is misuse of authority, or taking chances over others in all human relations such as trading, family disputes, and making false claims against others. The Prophet*, said: "I am a human being. You come to me as litigants. Perhaps, one of you is better in presenting his argument than the other and I decide in his favour according to what I have heard. If I have decided anything for someone from the rights of his brother, he should not take it for I have portioned for him a portion of the Hell fire." In another hadith the Prophet*, warns us that taking as little as a spin of a palm of someone else's property unjustly will be horribly taken responsible for in the Day of Judgment.
Summary
That the one who claims something must prove it to be his
That the one who denies what he is accused of must take an oath of denial
A person is free of guilt or claims made against him or her until proven otherwise.

Feedback
The Last Day

News
Two Muslim children who are young and finished A-Levels, and one is going to University and is only 13 years old
Linked to the topics we also talked about what is ‘intelligence’ and who are clever. Are the well known ‘clever’ people really clever if the or not Muslim?
We also talked about the difference between Proof and Evidence.

09 October 2011


Banu Mustaliq and Abdullah ibn Ubai, No Harming nor Reciprocating Harm and Some Etiquettes of Visiting the Graves

Seerah of Muhammed*

*: May the Peace, Blessings and Mercy of Allah be upon him

TMQ: Translation to the nearest meaning of the Qur’an

Seerah: Banu Mustaliq and Abdullah ibn Ubai (Leader of the Hypocrites)

The Quraish now stirred up their own Red Sea coast allies, the Bani l-Mustaliq, a clan of Khuza'ah, to make a raid on Medina, hoping no doubt that the raiders might gather support from other coastal tribes, and thus open up the way once more for themselves. But the other clans of Khuza'ah were more favourably disposed to the Prophet* than the Meccans realised, and news of this project reached him in good time. He was thus given the opportunity to demonstrate his undiminished and even increased power along the western route also, to within a few marches from Mecca itself. After eight days, considerably before the Bani l-Mustaliq were prepared to set out, he was already encamped on their territory at one of their watering places. From there he advanced and by a quick manoeuvre was able to close in upon the tent-dwellers, who surrendered without much resistance. Only one Muslim was killed, and of the enemy no more than ten. About two hundred families were made captive, and the booty included some two thousand camels and five thousand sheep and goats.

Tribalism (nationalism) leading to the argument and in-fighting

The army camped there for a few more days, but its stay was cut short by an untoward incident. A quarrel broke out at one of the wells between two coastal tribesmen, from Ghifar and Juhaynah, as to which bucket belonged to which, and they fell to fighting. The Ghifarite, whom 'Umar had hired to lead his horse, shouted for help -"O Quraish", while the juhaynite called on his traditional allies of Khazraj, and the more hotheaded of both Emigrants and Helpers rushed to the scene. Swords were drawn and blood might have been shed had not some of the closer Companions intervened on both sides. This would normally have been the end of the matter. But it so happened that more of the hypocrites than usual had taken part in this expedition; it was in familiar and well-watered territory, and from the outset there had been hope of an easy victory and spoils well worth the effort.

Ibn Ubai was sitting apart with a group of his intimates when the sound of the quarrel came to their ears, and one of them went to see what was the matter. He returned to report, quite truly, that 'Umar's man had been entirely to blame, and that it was he who had struck the first blow. This served to fan afresh the embers of bitterness which were still smouldering from the ordeal of the Trench. For the last five years the tension had gradually mounted until the presence of Muhammad and the other Emigrants had brought the whole of Arabia against them. Added to this, the rich and hospitable Jewish tribes which had played so important a part in the community had been rooted out -two of them exiled and the third killed. The civil wars of the oasis had indeed called for a solution, but Ibn Ubai was convinced that if he had been made king he would have known how to put an end to the discord without involving his people in more dangerous hostilities. And now these impoverished refugees had had the effrontry to obstruct the passage of their benefactors to the well! "Have they gone so far as this?" said Ibn Ubai. "They seek to take precedence over us, they crowd us out of our own country, and naught will fit us and these rags of Quraish but the old saying 'Feed fat thy dog and it will feed on thee.' By God, when we return to Medina, the higher and the mightier of us will drive out the lower and the weaker."

A boy of Khazraj named Zayd, who was sitting at the edge of the circle, went straight to the Prophet* and told him what Ibn Ubai had said. The Prophet* changed colour, and 'Umar, who was with him, suggested that he should forthwith have the traitor beheaded, but he said: "What if men should say, O 'Umar, that Muhammad kills his companions?" Meantime one of the Helpers had gone to Ibn Ubai and asked him if he had in fact said what the boy had reported, and Ibn Ubai came straight to the Prophet* and swore that he had said no such thing. Some of the men of Khazraj who were present also spoke in his defence, anxious to avoid trouble. The Prophet* let it seem as if the incident were closed; but a surer way of avoiding trouble was to busy men's minds with something else and he gave the order to break camp immediately. Never before had he been known to move off at that hour: it was not long after midday; and with brief halts at the times of prayer they were kept on the march through the heat of the afternoon, then all through the night and from dawn until the heat of the next day became oppressive. When they were finally told to pitch camp, the men were too tired to do anything but sleep. During the march the Prophet* confided to Sa'd ibn 'Ubadah, who for the Muslims had been gradually replacing Ibn Ubai as the chief man of Khazraj, that he believed young Zayd to have spoken the truth. "O Messenger of God," said Sa'd, "You, if you will, shall drive out him, for he is the lower and the weaker and thou are the higher and the mightier." He asked him none the less to deal gently with Ibn Ubai as ibn Ubai felt that his kingship was robbed by the Prophet, nor was the Prophet* intending to mention the incident again; but soon after his talk with Sa'd the matter was taken out of his hands, for the Revelation descended upon him and that chapter was revealed which is named the Surah of the Hypocrites, one of whom it quotes, though not by name, as having said the very words spoken by Zayd. The Prophet* did not however give out this chapter until they had returned to Medina. But he rode up to Zayd and leaning towards him took hold of his ear. "Boy," he said, "Your ear heard truly, and God has confirmed your speech."

In the meantime 'Abdullah, the son of Ibn Ubai, was deeply distressed for he knew that his father had spoken those words. He had also been told that 'Umar had wanted the Prophet* to put his father to death, and he was afraid that the sentence might be passed and the order given at any moment. So he went to the Prophet* and said: "O Messenger of God, I am told that thou art minded to kill Abdullah ibn Ubai. If  you must do it, then give me the order, and I will bring you his head. Khazraj know full well that there is no man amongst them of more filial piety unto his father than myself, and I fear that if thou should give the order to another my soul would not suffer me to look upon the slayer of my father walking amongst men, but I would slay him, and having thus slain a believer on behalf of a disbeliever I would enter the fire of Hell." But the Prophet* said: "No, but let us deal gently with him and make the best of his companionship so long as he be with us.'"

Almost a month later, the Messenger of Allah* and Umer bin Al-Khattab were engaged in the following talk: "Don’t you see Umer if I had had him (Abdullah bin Ubai) killed, a large number of dignitaries would have furiously hastened to fight for him. Now, on the contrary, if I ask them to kill him, they will do so out of their own free will." Umer replied "I swear by Allah that the Prophet’s judgement is much more sound than mine."

Tayammum
During the journey, there was not one well within reach, and the men had used up all the water they carried with them, intending to fill their skins and bottles at the well watered camp they had been aiming for. It would not be possible to pray at dawn, for they had no means of making their ablutions. But in the last hours of the night the verse of earth-purification (Tayammum) was revealed to the Prophet* - an event of untold importance for the practical life of the community: If ye find not water then purify yourselves with clean earth, wiping therewith your faces and your hands.'

Hadith: Nawawi’s 40 Hadith

Hadith 32 : No Harming nor Reciprocating Harm

It was related on the authority of Abu Sa'id Sa'd bin Malik bin Sinan al-Khudri, that the Messenger of Allah*, said:  "There should be neither harming [darar] nor reciprocating harm [diraar]" [Ibn Majah, Al-Daraqutni and others]

Know that he who harms his brother has oppressed him, and oppression is Prohibited [Haraam], as has preceded in the hadith of Abu Dharr : "O My servants ! I have forbidden dhulm (oppression) for Myself, and I have made it forbidden amongst you, so do not oppress one another", and the Prophet* has said: "Verily your blood [ie lives] and your property and your honour are all Sacred/Prohibited". And he said this on many occasions, including the Sermon he gave at the Farewell Hajj.

Some scholars have said : "ad-darar is that by which you attain benefit, but in it is harm for your neighbour". And other scholars have said ad-darar is that you harm one who has not harmed you, while ad-diraar is that you harm one who also harms you in a way that is not responding equally or taking revenge rightfully", and this is similar to his* statement "Return the Trusts given to you, to those who entrusted them to you, and do not betray the one who betrays you".

And what is correct from an examination of all the evidences is that it is not correct for someone to harm his brother, whether he has harmed him or not, except if he avenges himself to the extent that Justice allows him to [ie equally], and this is not considered to be oppression nor harm, as long at is in a fashion that the Sunnah makes permissible for him.

There is another version on the hadith in which the Prophet*, says: "No harm or harming in Islam". There is the additional phrase "in Islam". In a third version, the hadith states: "It is cursed whoever harms a mu'min (believer)."

The text of this hadith becomes one of the most important maxims. Later on other maxims were derived from the text of this hadith. Some of them are as follows:

1. Harm is to be prevented from appearing as much as possible.
2. Harm is to be eradicated.
3. Harm is not to be removed by a similar harm.
4. Preventing harm takes precedence over gaining or attaining benefits.
5. If there is a conflict between factors permitting something and others prohibiting something, the prohibition takes precedence; that is, it is going to be given the priority.
6. Something harmful is not given precedence just because it was pre-existing. In other words, the pre-existence of something does not allow it to continue to exist and be the cause of harm.
7. Another maxim is if there is a conflict between individual harm and public harm, the prohibition of public harm will take precedence.

There is a real story related to maxim number 6. This story took place in Al-Andalus (Muslim Spain) where the people built a mosque. After several years or decades, many houses had been built around the mosque and at that time when the mu'zin wanted to make the call for prayer (Adhan), he used to climb up to the minaret. The fuqaha (jurists) ruled that the mu'zin should stop going up to the minaret in order not to cause any harm (from the minaret, one was able to see into other people's homes and thus invade their privacy). This is similar to the introduction of double decker buses in the Muslim world a century ago – causing uproar!

The above are some of the maxims that are derived from the text of this present hadith.

When scholars talk about doing things right from the first time either based on experience or anticipation that certain things will cause harm, they urge people to take precautions to prevent any kind of harm. When we look at these maxims, we see that they are very great where we have to anticipate the harm and not to allow it to take place. If it takes place, efforts should be done in order to bring it to an end or to remove it. If it cannot be removed, we should try our best to minimize the harm.

Two interpretations of "harm/harming"

Regarding the interpretation of the text, scholars point out that what is stated in the hadith (i.e. the usage of the word "harm") is not a matter of emphasis. It is more sound because the two statements have different meanings. These scholars have given two interpretations of "harm/harming":

1. The first part of the hadith is the noun "no harm" and then the second part is the verb "harming". Harm is not allowed in shari'ah and causing harm without valid reasons is rejected and not accepted.
2. The second interpretation says that the first part of hadith (harm) means that the person causes harm to someone else by doing something which is beneficial to the doer. This kind of act is not allowed in Islam. The second part of hadith (harming) means that the person causes harm to someone else which is not even beneficial for him.

For example, suppose a person builds another floor (story) on top of his house and this results in his house being higher than his neighbours. This is beneficial to him but it causes harm to his neighbours as it invades their privacy. However, in the punishment of a criminal, there would be harm but the reason is valid. The aim here is to bring justice. In bringing justice, if there is any harm to an unjust person or criminal, then this harm is legal and allowed.

Causing harm without a valid or good reason

1. Ibn Rajab says the Prophet*, said that if the main objective is to actually cause the harm, then this is totally prohibited. There are many types of harms that are mentioned in the Qur'an:

• Wasiyyah (will) - if a person has some money and he wants to give it to someone who is no related to him. He is allowed but he must not exceed the limits (one third). If he exceeds the limits, he will cause harm to the immediate inheritors. Another situation is to give someone more than he deserves, as stated in the Qur'an. To favour any one of the inheritors is harm. Ibn Abbas considers this as a major sin. Some Muslims practice this because of ignorance or self-interest. [See Surah An-Nisa' : Ayah 12]
• Marriage and relationship between husband and wife. In al-raj'ah (returning), as stated in Surah Al-Baqarah Ayah 231 - someone divorces his wife and then he reconciles with her, but his intention in reconciliation is so that he can cause her harm. This is not allowed in Islam. Another point is aleyla' (disassociating with one's wife).
• Traveling or being away from the family for a long time and without a good reason - this can cause harm to the wife and family.
• Breastfeeding - in the case of divorce, the husband tries to take the baby away from the mother and not allow her to feed him. This is prohibited. [See Surah Al-Baqarah : Ayah 233]
• Selling and trading - when someone is in great need of something, the seller (who knows this) sells him at a very high price - this is not allowed. Some scholars consider this as a form of riba' (profit) which is prohibited in Islam.
• Somene who wants to buy is not good at bargaining, and because of this the seller sells at a very high price, more than it is worth. This is prohibited. According to Imam Malik if the price exceeds a third of what it is worth, it is considered harm.

2. Someone may do something for a beneficial reason and with a good intention. But he overdoes it, and consequently causes harm to others. Examples of this scenario are as follows:

• Burning rubbish on your property on a windy day. This will cause harm to your neighbours. It may cause harm to the environment and the people in the neighbouring countries. This kind of harm should be brought to an end.
• Building a high building, as mentioned above. Building a high building where it will obstruct air, sunlight, and moonlight, is not allowed because it will cause harm.
• Digging a well that will cause damage to the well of one's neighbour. If one needs to dig a well, he should position it a little further away from his neighbour's.
• Behaving on one's property in a way that will harm his neighbours.
• Causing bad smell to spread from one's property to his neighbours'.

There are also some other types of actions which imply that Allah did not ask His servants to do anything that will cause us harm. He said that whatever Allah commands us to do is beneficial in this world and the Hereafter. And whatever Allah prohibits is harmful to us whether it is in this world or in the Hereafter. Examples of these actions include:

• Tayammum (ablution without using water) - this is permissible for sick people or when there is no water.
• The traveler or the sick does not have to fast - they can make up for it in the future.
• Another example is taken from the biography of Prophet*, where he saw someone walking and asked about him. The companions told him that this man made a vow or commitment that he will perform pilgrimage walking. The Prophet*, said Allah is not in need for this one to torture himself. He asked his companions to tell the man to look for a ride, that is, to use an easier way or means to go for his pilgrimage.
• The person who has debt. If you lend someone money and he is indeed in a very bad financial situation, then you should give him time for him to get the money and pay you back.

Feedback:

Allah: 10 things about Allah that we need to know (followed by a short quiz)

Jannah-Jahannum: Things that are important to know about Paradise and Hellfire (followed by a short quiz)

News: 

Vandalism of Graves in Israel/Palestine

Below is an article which convers some of the background to the topic

Israeli Settlers Continue ‘Price-Tag’ Rampage

by Pierre Klochendler, October 11, 2011

http://original.antiwar.com/klochendler/2011/10/10/israeli-settlers-continue-price-tag-rampage/

“On Saturday, we as a nation atoned for our sins. I as a Jew feel ashamed of myself. I’m asking for forgiveness,” declared Ron Hulday, mayor of this mixed city, immediately at the closing of the Day of Atonement. As Jews fasted and prayed to amend for their past behavior, vandals, presumably Jewish, desecrated tombstones in two cemeteries of the Jewish-Arab city, one Muslim, another Christian, with slanderous tags against Arabs and “Russians,” the country’s largest minorities.

One in five Israelis is an Arab; there are more than one-and-a-half million citizens from the former Soviet Union. Yom Kippur is the most solemn day of the Jewish calendar. According to tradition, God “seals” the Book of Life into which each person’s fate is inscribed for the coming year in accordance to his or her past deeds. “The perpetrators are weak-kneed terrorists,” fumed former Chief Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau, “for the dead cannot defend their name.” Sheikh Ahme Abu Ajwa, president of the Islamic Movement in Jaffa, joined the chorus of unanimous condemnations: “This is an attempt by extremists to incite the Arabs.”

The desecrations weren’t just isolated incidents. They share a common modus operandi. What’s been labeled by settlers as a “price tag” for “eye-for-eye” retribution against Palestinians collectively accused by them of violent actions perpetrated by isolated Palestinians against Israelis, has become not merely the “plague” of the day, but “policy.” In just the past fortnight, there were numerous such attacks. In the West Bank, according to police sources, young extreme right-wing settler activists attempted to torch a Palestinian village mosque and sprayed its walls with injurious “death to Arabs” and “price tag” graffiti, their signature. Alarmingly, the outbreak of assaults has known no respite and no border, national or physical. The door of a left-wing Israeli activist living in Israel proper was sprayed with menacing paint.

But the gravest incident occurred last week in the Bedouin Israeli village Tuba-Zanghariya. A mosque was torched and severely damaged. Copies of the Quran were destroyed in the blaze. The blackened walls were sprayed with “price tag” graffiti in revenge for the alleged murder, a week earlier, of two settlers, father and son, who were driving on a West Bank road at the time of the Palestinian bid for statehood at the United Nations. Police investigators had concluded — hastily it seems — that the deaths were the result of a traffic accident. But evidence showed that Palestinian youths had thrown rocks at the car which caused it to overturn. Last week, the suspected rock-throwers were arrested.

Other recent vengeful actions included the defacement of the Tomb of Joseph, a shrine revered by Jews but also by Muslims, located near the West Bank town Nablus. All politicians and religious figures have stood up united in their condemnation and reprobation: “Jews do not desecrate holy sites, period,” is the mantra. “Israel … will show no tolerance for those who oppose it,” stated Netanyahu at the start of the weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday. The statement was wide open to interpretation — as in “when” Israel “will show no tolerance.” For beyond the veneer of moral indignation and making, appropriately, good Kippur resolutions, what’s striking is the double-standard policy with regard to rule of law enforcement against “price tag” assailants. Police are responsible for law and order — including in the settlements. Whereas a suspected arsonist of the Israeli mosque was quickly apprehended, no one was ever detained, let alone tried, for “price tag” arsons and defacements of Palestinian mosques and for other acts of vandalism against Palestinian property, such as uprooting olive trees, a common settler practice.

When a military jeep was destroyed and tagged two weeks ago in response to the forced evacuation and demolition by police units — the army usually provides only peripheral security to the operation — of an “unauthorized settlement outpost” “illegally” built on “Palestinian-owned” land in the occupied West Bank, the perpetrators were quickly arrested. But the army is sacrosanct, so it would seem. Other such “outposts” are slated for evacuation at the end of the High Holiday season. Tension between the Israeli military and police and settlers is on the rise. Wednesday, settlers blocked an army vehicle and assaulted its soldiers. “A Jewish authority has taken shape in the West Bank,” warned political commentator Zvi Barel in the daily Haaretz. “Its goal is to replace the state as sovereign authority, and eventually also supplant the military authority.” Hence, the ominous warning issued last month by Bar-Ilan University Prof. Hillel Weiss at a settlers’ event marking the creation of a new “Jewish Authority” (as counterweight to the Palestinian Authority) labeled “the rescue of the Jewish people and the land of Israel.”

The notorious far right-wing speaker said: “Instead of a governmental authority which gleefully cracks the skulls of Jewish youths, instead of what the state calls ‘the rule of law,’ there are Jews who stand up. … We Jewish citizens to be abandoned to the authority of an artificial enemy state [a future Palestine] declare that this will never happen.” Yom Kippur seals the Days of Awe. This holy day presaged more such days to come. In the land ostensibly cursed by its own holiness, each parcel of it is replete with shrines, pilgrimage sites, houses of prayers, places of worship, and cemeteries. “Price tag” militants not only target places of elemental religious tolerance, which all too often have been misrepresented as ferment of political intolerance.

As the land — who controls it, what stands on it, and who lives in it — is slated for division (at least nominally under U.N. auspices), the “price taggers” also risk turning to ashes any prospect of a two-state solution.  (Inter Press Service)

Comment - Some Etiquettes of Visiting the Graves
It is wrong to desecrate graves. We then discussed some of the etiquettes about visiting the grave and burials, including:

- Do not walk on a grave as the dead body can feel it

- The visitor benefits from remembering death and the dead, remembering that their destiny will be either Paradise or Hell. This is the primary purpose of the visit

- The deceased also benefits and is treated kindly by the visitor greeting him with salaams

- At the beginning of Islam, visiting graves was not allowed for men and women alike, because the Muslims were new in Islam and came from a background where grave-worship and attachment to the dead were widespread. So they were forbidden to visit graves. But once Islam was well-established and they understood Islam, Allah prescribed visiting the graves because of the lessons and reminders of death and the Hereafter involved in that, and so that they could make du’aa’ for the deceased and pray for mercy for them. The Prophet* said: “I had prohibited you from visiting the graves, but now I encourage you to visit them, because they are a reminder of the Hereafter.” [Abu Dawud]

- The Prophet said: " Surah Ya Seen is the heart of the Qur'an, no man reads it desiring Allah and the afterlife except he is forgiven. Read it over your dying/deceased."

- Some of the Surahs you can recite are: Surat al-Fatiha, Surat al-Baqara, beginning, Ayat al-Kursi, and amana al-rasul, Surat Ya Seen, Surat al-Mulk, Surat al-Takathur and Surat al-Ikhlas 12 or 11 or 7 or 3 times

- Weeping for the dead is permissible, whereas crying and wailing are not

- Women are allowed to visit the graves but not during the funeral / burial

02 October 2011

Lessons from Trench, Al Qadha Wal-Qadr

Seerah of Muhammed*
*: May the Peace, Blessings & Mercy of Allah be upon him
TMQ: Translation to the nearest meaning of the Qur’an


Saad bin Muadh passes away
When Saad had passed judgement on Banu Qurayzah he returned to his sick-bed in the Mosque. He had already prayed that if God had any more fighting for him to accomplish against His enemies He would let him live, and if not that He would let him die; and now his condition grew rapidly worse. One night not long after the siege the Prophet found him apparently unconscious. He sat down at his head which he gently raised and laid against his breast, and then he prayed: "O Lord, verily Saad hath striven upon the path, with fullness of faith in Thy messenger, leaving naught undone that was his to do. Take then unto Thyself his spirit with the best acceptance wherewith Thou takest the spirits of Thy creatures." Saad heard the Prophet's voice, and opening his eyes he said: "Peace be on thee, O Messenger of God, I bear witness that thou hast delivered thy message." An hour or two later, after the Prophet had returned home, Gabriel came to him and told him that Saad was dead. Also, after the prayer, the Prophet* proceeded to join the burial; he reached the house as they were washing the body. The mother of Saad was weeping loudly, gave vent to her grief in appropriate Arab verse. They chided her for reciting poetry on such an occasion; but the Prophet* interposed, saying: "Leave her alone; every mourner exaggerates except the mother of Saad"
When they carried his bier to the cemetery, the bearers were amazed at the lightness of their load, for Saad was a heavy man, but when they mentioned this to the Prophet he said: "I saw the Angels carrying him." They set down the bier at the edge of the grave and he led the funeral prayer, with a multitude of men and women praying behind him. Then when they lowered the body unto the grave the Prophet's face turned suddenly pale and he said three times SubhanAllah, "Glory be to God!", this being an affirmation of the Absolute Transcendence of God, sometimes uttered, as now, with reference to a limit that needs to be transcended. All those who were present repeated it and the cemetery resounded with the glorifications. Then after a moment he gave utterance to the words of victory, Allahu Akbar, "God is most Great", and the cemetery resounded again as the magnification was likewise taken up by those who were present. Afterwards, when asked why he had changed colour, the Prophet said: "The grave closed in upon your companion, and he felt a constriction which, if any man could escape it, Saad would have escaped. Then God gave him blissful relief."!
Jabir narrated that the Messenger of Allah* had said: "The Throne of the Compassionate shook for the death of Saad bin Muadh.

Some virtues of Saad ibn Muadh
Allah fulfilled the du’a of Saad as there was no more fighting with the Quraish, he died as a martyr and he delivered the verdict on the treachery of the Quraizah tribe.
Also, Saad is the only person we know of where the Prophet* asked the people to stand up (‘Stand up for your Master’) when he came in to give the verdict
Some narrations say that the Prophet* rushed to get to his body before the angels
Every mourner exaggerates except the mother of Saad – because his loss is truly a great loss
The angels participated in his Janazah by carrying the coffin
Despite his greatness, even Saad was squeezed in the grave – causing the Prophet to say SubhanAllah *3 then Allahu Akbar *3
The Prophet* often remembered Saad afterwards: Anas narrated that the Prophet* was gifted a garment of sarcenet and he prohibited the use of silk. The people admired it, whereupon he said: "By Him in Whose Hand is the life of Muhammad, the kerchiefs [tissues] of Saad ibn Muadh in Paradise are better than this.” [Bukhari & Muslim]
Also, we are told that the Throne of Allah shook upon the news of Saad’s death. Some scholars say this is because of the commotion caused amongst the angels carrying the Throne of Allah when they heard.

Lessons from Ghazwah al-Ahzab (Khandaq) and Banu Quraizah

• Do not double cross: It was mentioned by the children that going back on your word is not good and to double-cross and turn against your friends deserves punishment.
• Importance of taubah (Repentance): If we do something wrong and we know it is wrong we should be sincerely ‘sorry’ for our actions and ask Allah for forgiveness, make intention not to do it again and try to do more good deeds to cancel out the bad.
• Know your friends & enemies: It is important to know who your friends and enemies are and what they are like, and what they are thinking.
• Important to have independent judge: An independent judge was chosen – one that was acceptable to both sides. Hence, whatever decision was made they all accepted. Also, hudges should make judgement based on the evidence and be fair in their decision – and try to do what is correct (not give decisions based on what people want or think should happen for their own benefit)
• The Jewish tribe had not learned lessons from other tribes that broke their agreement with the Prophet*. IT should have been clear that they should not betray their agreement, let alone switch sides and threaten the existence of Islam. If they did there would be a severe punishment. Following this, the last major Jewish tribe was expelled from the Holy Land.

Other Lessons that we can learn

• Contradictory and opposing ideologies and peoples will often get together to fight Islam. This happened with the alliance between the Jewish tribes (who should have been close to the message of the Prophet* and the idol-worshippers of the Quraish. We see this happening today with the alliance between the Western nations (who always talk about ‘freedom’, ‘democracy, ‘human rights’, ‘justice’ etc) and some of the most brutal dictators in the world. They even supported Saddam Hussein, Hosni Mubarak & Col. Gaddafi before turning against them. Even now they support other kings and dictators who are very strict in their fight against sincere Muslims around the Muslim world.
• Science & Technology in Islam: The Prophet* adopted the strategic & military idea of the Persian trench in warfare. This was a new innovation to the Arabs and it was an aspect of material progress (or new technology) which is referred to as Madinniyah in Arabic. We can learn that it is allowed to develop and take scientific and technological advances as they are quite general and universal in their application, and are not rooted in a particular system or viewpoint of life. There is nothing Eastern or Western about a trench (or camera or canon) because they did come into existence purely out of a particular viewpoint – just human progress. However, Muslims should try to use them in a halal way. However, this is different to aspects of culture or ideas (Hadhara) where Muslims should be careful what they adopt – making sure ideas and concepts are not contradictory to Islam. An example cited by some scholars is democracy as opposed to voting. Voting (or identifying a preference) is okay as a tool but making new rules and laws that contradict Islam through ‘democracy’ (where the people are elevated to the status of Gods and can rule) should not be embraced so willingly.
• Prophet* demonstrating true leadership – he was digging the trench as part of his Ummah and was not doing it  for publicity – by inviting the newspapers or TV crews to see him at work. This was genuine. Also, the Prophet* went hungry like his followers (tying rocks to his stomach) and when invited for food shared it with his followers. In addition, the Prophet* was increasing the very low morale of his followers through Islamic songs (Nasheeds) as well as giving them glad tidings (through prophesy about future conquests) when they were very low in mood.
• The Prophet* was always looking on the positive and expected a good response after he dispatched his companions to ascertain if Banu Quraizah had broken the treaty. He awaited happy news but prepared for bad by asking his companions not to openly declare any treachery that would shatter the morale of his followers. Hence, they replied in a coded fashion.
• As always, it is the difficult and testing times that really demonstrates who are the stronger believers. The hearts of people are exposed when they are under duress and so the response to the Coalition army elicited opposite reactions from the Hypocrites (Munafiqun) and the believers. Only when we are tested will we truly be able to say which side of the fence we are – in easy times we can all claim to be good obedient Muslims…
• Hudhaifa demonstrated his discipline when he could have shot Abu Sufyan but kept hold of his instructions not to cause any trouble.
• This was the point when Allah ordered the Muslims to follow  the Prophet*, as we have an excellent example in the Prophet* for all matters. Not just prayer, but fasting, Jihad, manners, etiquette etc
• The punishment should always fit the crime. What Banu Quraizah did (even in those days) was extremely severe and treacherous. It deserved a severe punishment not just because of the treachery against the Muslims but the treachery against the Messenger of Allah. Also, this is the punishment that the Jewish elders accepted because it was written in their books (Bible -  book of Deuteronomy) how people who fought their Prophets were sentenced in exactly the same way.
• Saad ibn Muadh was not lenient or showing weakness and when he came to make his judgement he did what would please Allah. He was not concerned by what his friends or enemies would think, not concerned about the newspaper headlines or news comments but only about seeking Allah’s pleasure. This differs wildly from the leaders of today’s Muslims who are too concerned about what their Western backers will think and so are not taken seriously either by the West or their own people.
• People do criticise the Battle of Banu Quraizah, but Muslims need to remember that this was ordered by the Angels – and they participated in this.
• As with all previous battles and tests we must remember that Victory is from Allah. Although we should prepare as best we can we should acknowledge that only Allah grants victory if He so pleases.

Main Topic: Al Qadha Wal-Qadr 

Al Qadha Wal-Qadr is different to Al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya (fatalism)
The Early Days
During the time of Rasool Allah* and the Sahabah, the meaning of Qadr was well understood without any ambiguity and what it meant was very clear. There was no debate. inquiries, or differences in this issue, except the discussion between Abu Ubaidah and Umar, when Umar decided not to proceed in his trip to as-sham, once the news came telling that there was a plague spreading there and decided to go back to Medina, telling the people '' I'm returning back, thus you should return as well''. In this incident Abu Ubaidah did not attend Umar's consultation with the people and the result of the consultation.
However, when Abu Ubaidah heard of Umar's orders. he came to Umar telling him ''O Umar, are you running away from Allah's Qadr.'' By this he was objecting Umar's decision to return back to Medina. Umar was amazed by this objection raised by Abu Ubaidah and Umar said to him, ''O Abu Ubaidah. I wish someone other than you would have said this. Yes. I am running away from Allah's Qadr to Allah's Qadr ''. He explained this by saying, if you see a man coming to a place where there are two areas, one area is lush and the other barren. Don't you see that if he takes his cattle to the lush area, he is doing so according the Allah's Qadr and if he take his cattle to the barren area, he is also taking it by Allah's Qadr.
This is the only report which talked about the difference in understanding Al-Qadr, amongst the Sahabah. Otherwise, Muslims in general understood Al-Qadr the way it is in the Qur'an and the Sunnah. This understanding is that everything is written in the preserved tablet (al-Lowh al-Mahfooz), from the very beginning (before creation) and there is no relationship for this in the man's actions or in the obligations Allah orders us to carry. This situation continued all the way till the second half of the second century Hijri or till the middle of the Abbasid era. Due to the translation of the Greek, Persian and Hindu philosophies, some misconceptions accumulated in the minds of some people and the question of al-Qadha wal-Qadr emerged and over shadowed the concept of Al-Qadr. After that, the issue of al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya (fatalism) became widespread among the people. It influenced them and shaped their behavior. It was one of the declining factors for the Muslim Ummah and when the decline became more obvious (during our time).
The Qadr as the word is what Allah knows and wrote in preserved tablet (al-Lowh al-Mahfooz) at the very beginning (of creation). However, al-Qadha wal-Qadr means the question of having the actions occur against man's will. This includes the characteristics of objects, which also occur against man's will. Thus, the real meaning of both are different. Although, the meaning which may come to the mind of the people once they hear both terms may be the same, which is the ability of man to stand and face what was written.
Therefore, we need to understand the reality of both and the difference between them. Al-Qadr is all that Allah (swt) knows which is everything in al-Lowh al-Mahfooz. This taken from many Sharii text (which are used as Daleel for the meaning of al-Qadr); for example when Allah (swt) says: ''(All) except the family of Lut. Them all we are surely going to save (from destruction). Except his wife, of whom We have decreed that she shall be of those who remain behind (i.e. she will be destroyed)''. [Al Hijr 15: 59-60]
Also: '..And the Command of Allah is a decree determined.'' [Al-Ahzab 33:38], and ‘Say: ''Nothing shall ever happen to us except what Allah has ordained for us..'' [At-Tauba 9:51]; or ‘And there is nothing hidden in the heaven and the earth, but is in a Clear Book (al-Lowh al-Mahfooz) [Al-Naml 27:75]
The meaning of all of these Ayat is that Allah knows everything in the universe and Allah wrote it in a clear book. And in the Hadith which mentions that Allah wrote the Qadr of everything 50,000 years before the creation of the universe while His throne was on the water. And the Hadith which mentions that Allah (swt) created the pen and instructed it to write. The pen asked, ''O Allah, what should I write''. Allah said, ''write the Qadr of everything till the day of judgement.'' And the Hadith which mentions that if the Ummah gathered to benefit you in something, they will never be able to benefit you with something other than what Allah wrote for you and if the whole Ummah got together to harm you in something, they will never be able to do it. unless Allah wrote it for you. Pens are laid down, and the ink has dried. (Ibn Abbas)
Based upon this understanding, early Muslims believed in al-Qadr without any ambiguity. There was no doubt in a Muslim's Aqeedah, so long as no alien ideas were attached to this understanding. However, after Muslims got influenced by alien thoughts, a veil covered their minds, causing them to loose the clarity of their understanding of the Aqeedah. Muslims used to believe in the Qadr and keeping it in the realm of belief (Iman). 

Confusion in the Minds of later Muslims
But now, Muslims started noticing this Iman in the Qadr, before performing any action and they started to carry various actions shaped by this Iman in the Qadr. Thus, they surrounded themselves by what is predetermined. Muslims started to think that whatever Allah predetermined is going to happen, regardless if they became active or passive in carrying out an action. They started believing like this, despite the fact that they know for sure that, it is impossible for anyone to have access to Allah's knowledge. In other words, the Muslims do believe that it is impossible for anyone to know what Allah's knowledge is.
Muslims know all of this, yet they still link their actions with this knowledge of Allah. Thus, al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya (fatalism) emerged. It became something different than believing in al-Qadr. This is because, believing in the Qadr is to believe conclusively that nothing will happen in this universe, other than what Allah has predetermined everything and wrote in al-Lowh al-Mahfooz. However, al-Qadariya al-Ghaibiya means to surrender to what is predetermined. There is a difference between believing in the Qadr and surrendering to the predetermined. Surrendering to this predetermined is simply the result of believing in the Qadr with the absolute surrender; which is that what is predetermined is going to happen and nothing will happen if Allah did not predetermined it.
Al-qadariyyah al-ghaybiyyah is to surrender to the destiny (qadr); and to refer everything to the actions of fate hidden from man; and that activity of man in life has no effect; he is rather compelled and not of free will; he is like the feather in space where the winds move it wherever they like. This idea has spread, and taken as ‘aqeedah, since the late times of the Abbasid era, and continued till today. The obligation of belief in al Qadha wal-qadr was used as a means by which this idea was introduced to Muslims. Because of it, the failing people found under its cover a pretext for their failure. The ignorant and inactive people found in their reference to it an excuse for their laziness and reluctance. Many people consented for the injustice to befall them; the poverty to eat their flesh; the disgrace to reign at them, and the sins prevail on their actions. All of this is in surrender from their side to al-qadariyyah al-ghaybiyyah which they believe in, claiming that this is a submission to al Qadha wal-qadr of Allah
This idea still dominates the people, has control on many of their actions. Though, the one who studies and scrutinizes the matter finds that al-qadariyyah al-ghaybiyyah was not known at the time of the Sahabah, nor it came to the mind of anyone of them. Had it existed with the Muslims, they would have not made conquests, nor endured the difficulties. They would have rather left the qadar to do whatever it likes, and would have said: “whatever is destined till take place, whether you strove for it or not!” However, there knowledgeable Muslims realised: the castle cannot be conquered without the sword (force); the enemy cannot be subjugated without the force; that rizq (provision) must be sought; the disease must be averted from it; the Muslim who drinks alcohol must be lashed; and the thief ’s hand must be amputated; the ruler must be accounted; and the political manoeuvres must be carried out with the enemies. Muslims did not believe in that, when they saw the Muslims’ army under the leadership of the Rasool*, his archers violated the orders of the leadership. They saw the army win at Hunayn after the defeat, because the army which fled from the battle in fear of the arrows returned to the fight when the Rasool* called on it, while he* and a few people remained steadfast in the battle, before the eyes of the fleeing army.

The Correct View
Allah taught us to link between the causes and the effects (al-asbab wal-musabbabat). He made the case produce the effect. The fire burns, and burning does not occur without fire. The knife cuts, and cut does not occur without a knife. He created man, and He made in him the capability to carry out an action. He gave him the full choice to carry out his actions; he eats the time he wishes; he walks when he wishes; he travels when he wishes. He seeks knowledge so he becomes learned; he murders so he is punished; he abandons Jihad so he becomes humiliated; and he refrains from striving for provision (rizq) so he becomes poor. So there is no presence to al-qadariyyah al-ghaybiyyah in the life reality, and nor in the Shari’ of Allah .
As regards to al Qadha wal-qadar, they have nothing to do with alqadariyyah al-ghaybiyyah, whatsoever. This is because al Qadha is the action that occur from man and on him, without his will. This is like seeing with his eyes and not with his nose; he hears with his ears and not with his mouth; and he has no control over the beats of his heart. This is like a storm from the sky or an earthquake, from which a person falls from the roof of a house over another person, thus killing him. All of such actions enter in the Qadha; and man is not accounted for them. These actions have nothing to do with the freewill actions of man. Al-qadar is the attributes of things by which matter results, such as predestined burning in the fire, predestined cutting in the knife and the predestined reproduction instinct in man. All of these attributes (in things) can’t carry out an action without a perpetrator. If a man exercised an action using them (the objects) by his choice, he would be the perpetrator and not the qadar present in the object. So if a person burnt a house using fire, he would be the one who made the burning and not the fire which burns by the attribute predestined in it. Thus man is accounted for the action of burning he did. This is because he is the one who exercised a specific action, by his own choice, using the qadar.
So al-qadar does not produce a matter without an action of a perpetrator. Al-Qadha has no relation with the actions of man which he performs by his choice. Thus, both al-Qadha and al-qadar have no relation with the free actions of man. They also have relation with the universal law in terms of controlling it. They are rather part of the universal law, which proceeds according to the laws that Allah exerted to the universe, man and life. Therefore, man is capable to have effect, in the strife for earning livelihood and in the method of livelihood. He is capable to correct the deviation of the unjust ruler or to dispose him. He is capable to have effect in everything that enters in the domain of his free actions. Thus alqadariyyah al-ghaybiyyah is not more than a superstition and imagination.

Reward and Punishment
The basis of the discussion in al-Qadha wal-Qadar is not the action of man in terms of whether he created the action or Allah created it. Neither is it the will of Allah (SWT) in the sense that His will is conditional on the action of man so it must exist by this will. Neither is it the Knowledge of Allah in terms of Him knowing that man will do such and such action and that His Knowledge encompass that, nor that this action of man is written in the al-Lawh al-Mahfuz so he must act according to what has been written.
The basis of the discussion is definitely none of these things, because they have no relationship to the subject from the viewpoint of reward and punishment. The topic of discussion on whose basis the question of al-Qadha wa al-Qadr is built is the issue of reward and punishment for an action i.e.: Is man obliged to perform an action, good or evil, or does he have a choice? And, does man have the choice to perform his action, or does he have no choice?
When we say the basis is reward and punishment, we mean this from the perspective of the origin of accountability i.e. free will. This is because without free will reward and punishment would be meaningless.
The person who scrutinises the actions of people sees that we live within two spheres:

1. one which we dominate, seen as the sphere that is present within the region of our conduct, and within which our actions happen absolutely by our choice;
2. the other sphere dominates us, we exist within its domain, and the that which occurs upon us within it happen without our choice, whether they originate from us or fall upon us.

The actions that fall within the sphere that dominates us, we have no choice in them or in their existence. They can be divided into two kinds: The first are those required by the law of the universe. The second are those actions which are not directly necessitated by the laws of the universe. We are not accounted for anything that occurs within this sphere and it is classified as fate (Qadha) from Allah (swt).
The laws of the Universe being from Allah is fairly simple to grasp. However understanding how those things that fall upon us which are not necessitated by the universal law are Qadha from Allah requires more thought. The easiest examples for this are the accidental happenings such as the contracting of an illness, train accidents or tripping and spraining your ankle. However this area of the sphere which dominates us is not limited to accidents it also includes things we intend such as arriving at a destination, passing an exam or establishing an Islamic State. The key issue to grasp is that we only control our actions i.e. our limbs and not anything beyond this. When it comes to the examples that I mentioned such as reaching a destination, passing an exam or establishing an Islamic State we only control our actions and therefore make an attempt to achieve a goal, the result is definitively not in our control and involves complex interrelationships between people and matter, it includes many factors that are not in the control of people. When embarking upon a journey we may make an attempt to reach a destination but fail due to many factors such as the car breaking down or an accident on the motorway – so we do not definitively control whether we will arrive at our destination.
Complex situations must be studied carefully to ascertain which aspects are actually Qadha and which aspects are in peoples control, it is dangerous to generalise and label things as Qadha without making this distinction. Take the example of marriage, often people label this as Qadha, upon further scrutiny we would ascertain that there are elements which are in man’s control and elements outside of his control. Whether the man and the women initially meet or not is not in their control, once they have met the decision they make to agree to the marriage is their decision and is not forced upon them by Allah (swt). Even if they decide to marry whether they are able to make it to the actual wedding is not within their control.
If we do not control something then by definition it falls into the second sphere and therefore is from Allah (swt). It is important to understand that when we say what is in man’s control and beyond man’s control we mean man as in mankind not an individual man. As something may not be in your control as an individual but is in someone else’s control and therefore cannot be Qadha from Allah (swt), an example is if someone swears at you, it is in his control and so is not Qadha. Rather it is an action that he will be accounted for.
If something occurs upon us which we don’t control such as winning a prize or tripping and breaking a leg we can conclude that this is from Allah (swt) but is beyond the role of our minds to understand how Allah (swt) ensured that this would happen to us. It is beyond our perception to discuss how Allah does things and ensures that certain things will occur upon us without our control.
As for the sphere that man dominates, it is the sphere in which he proceeds willingly according to the system he chooses, whether it is the divine law (shariah) or any other. In this sphere, actions carried out by man or befalling him occur by his will. For example, he walks, eats, drinks and travels anytime he likes, likewise he refrains from doing any of these things when he likes; he also burns with fire and cuts with a knife when he chooses; and he satisfies the instincts of procreation and ownership and the hunger of the belly as he likes. All this he performs or abstains from willingly. Therefore, man is accounted for those deeds which occur within this sphere. Thus, he is rewarded for the action which is rewardable, and he is punished for it if it is punishable. These actions have nothing to do with al-Qadha or vice versa. Because man is the one who undertook them with his own will and choice. Therefore, actions of choice do not come under the subject of al-Qadha.
The issue of Qadr is to do with the attributes of things that Allah (swt) placed within the universe, man and life. In reality it is a subset of the discussion of Qadha as it is related to the universal laws in the sphere which Allah dominates, however due to the controversy that existed over it during the centuries it was discussed as a topic on its own. It is clear from the observation of reality that all attributes of the universe, man and life are from Allah (swt) whether this is the weight of a stone, the sexual inclination in man or sharpness of a knife.
Although we are subject to al-Qadha wal Qadar this does not mean that we become fatalistic and submit ourselves to whatever is going to happen to us as we have no knowledge of that. There is a difference between Aqeeda and Hukm Shari and in issues of action we must refer to the Shariah rules as Allah (swt) has ordered us regardless of whether we control the outcome or not.

Hadith : No time for Hadith section today

Feedback:
Different colours: How wonderful Allah’s creation is with all the beautiful and varied colours around us
Prayer: Some very important aspects of prayer that we should all remember (followed by a short quiz)
Mosque: some essential facts about the mosque and visiting it
Islamic Calendar: all the months of the Islamic Calendar and how it differs from the Gregorian calendar

News:
Pakistan Floods - How people have been affected and the duty of Muslims to care for those affected. Also touched upon the Qard of Allah (see above) and that those drown may become martyrs
Palestine's Statehood bid and the US/UN -  The long-standing issue affected many Muslims and how America (who claim to be impartial) are clearly backing one group more than the other. Hence, they should not be seen as fair or impartial.
Assassination of Imam Anwar al-Awlaki - This sets a dangerous precedence where people can be assassinated without being able to defend themselves in court. A country that claims to uphold freedom and justice ('the rule of law') is clearly being hypocritical and open state-sponsored murder is now acceptable against people who  voice different opinions.