Category Archives: Fatawah

There are many ‘Mufti Abu Layths’ among us

An uncomfortable truth that many people don’t realize is that there are many ‘Mufti Abu Layths’ among us, but quite a few of them are garbed in traditional clothing. Yet they think and argue in a similar manner. How?

They seek to resurrect and bring up any fringe minority opinion they find and try to give it merit, ignoring the fact that these opinions were explicitly labelled weak and prefaced with the weakening passive (قيل). These weak opinions were transparently mentioned and faithfully cited for centuries in our books *theoretically* , but practically-speaking they were almost never acted upon by our Fuqaha because their weakness was often self-evident. So why bring them up now? Why bring them up to a public audience that does not know what these weakening markers mean, or why the Fuqaha would mention some opinions in later order to others in their works? These nuances are ignored by later writers, who try to depict these opinions as being equal in consideration and worthy of being mentioned, while what they should do instead is ask: why was this opinion ignored and rejected for centuries (i.e. there must be something that led them to put it later in rank to other opinions and weaken it)? Is there a danger if I revive this opinion again?

The absurdity of bringing up minority opinions for any issue is something reasonably clear for many students, but as a rhetorical exercise, one can demonstrate this through the use of a few examples. There is in fact – believe it or not – a Riwayah from Imam Ahmad that restricts the use of Istijmar to stones *only,* and since a number of the scholars of the Hanbali madhhab followed this and they were the only thing that the Prophet peace and blessings be upon ever used, let us all now take this view seriously and throw all of our toilet paper away. Also, don’t forget that there’s a minority opinion held amongst a number of the Salaf (yes, really) that one is not allowed to use water for istinja, since it spoils the water and one will be directly touching the najasah while cleaning themselves. So how will you now relieve yourself if you take all these opinions seriously? These minority opinions are not read to be practiced or followed; students read them, briefly ponder over the interesting details about them, and move on.

You get how silly things will become sooner or later once you open the door to fiqh relativism and the all-opinions-are-equal adage, since sooner or later you are going to open the door to consider any minority opinion out there. If you allow Talfiq unrestrictedly too you are now on the expressway to Zandaqah. It is against such dangerous tendencies that Ibn Rajab wrote his masterpiece Al-Radd ‘Ala man Ittaba’ Ghayr al-Madhahib al-Arba’. Call it “conservatism” or “old-school thinking,” but Ibn Rajab realized what fiqh relativism would lead to: the end of normative Islam as we know it (see his book for his full arguments). And if he were alive today, he would have refuted even more harshly some contemporaries. He had to close the door, lest people open it completely.
Today, once again, there are people who seek to break open the door, yet alas, there is no Ibn Rajab anymore to stop them.

Do you want to know what true knowledge and wisdom is? A lot of people don’t know this, but scholars like Ibn ‘Uthaymin would sometimes mention and even champion a minority view amongst his mature students in the classroom setting, yet he would order his students to *not* mention such views in public, lest they open the door to people taking things easily and playing around. Students are not laypeople.

~ Massoud Vahedi

Original facebook post – https://www.facebook.com/massoud.vahedi/posts/3374176462607063

Yasir Qadhi refuted… by Yasir Qadhi!

This series of short slips show Yasir Qadhi ‘with the greatest of respect’ with his confessed major doubts,  his sophistry, his calls towards a western-friendly, emasculated Islam has changed over the years, how his doubts are met with a return to the Quran and Sunnah, according to the best of understanding, as he once himself followed.

May Allah reward abundently whom-so-ever put this video together, Allah guide our misguided brother Yasir Qadhi and his followers back to the truth, as well as all of us where we fall short, may Allah prevent us from falling into the fitan of liberalism, modernism, doubts and kufr we see all around us today, ameen

Legislated to forbid an evil even when it does not change it

Evils have a wheel that drives them; if one evil comes and does not stumble because no one forbids it another will come after it. So it is legislated to forbid evil even if it does not change; it is sufficient that it disrupts what comes after it.

المنكرات لها عجلة تسير بها، إذا جاء واحد فلم يتعثّر بإنكاره جاء بعده آخر، فيُشرع إنكار المنكر ولو لم يتغيّر فيكفي أنه يعطل ما بعده

~ Shaikh Abdul Aziz Al-Tarefe

The Marriage Of A Noble Qurayshi Woman To A Slave

‘Umar Ibn Al-Khattaab (ra) encouraged the people to perform marriages with different tribes, so that love would develop amongst the people. Therefore, a slave went to a man from the Quraysh and asked him to marry his sister to him, which the latter refused.

‘Umar went to that man and asked him, “Why did you not marry your sister to him? He is a talented and pious individual. You should seek the opinion of your sister; if she accepts the proposal then you should marry her to him.

The man from the Quraysh accepted the advice of ‘Umar and went to his sister to ask her opinion. She agreed to the marriage and the married his sister to the slave.

[Al-Murtadaa, by An-Nadawee, p. 106]

Mawlid – ‘You will certainly follow the ways of those who came before you…’

Assalaamu Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,

So mawlid time again…

We all know the arguments, backwards and forwards on youtube, social media, with work colleagues and friends in the masaajid, we do it every year and others have refuted mawlid much better than myself so I am just going to leave the mawlid tree out there again just to show how ridiculous this whole celebration can get.

The rest you can get from those who are more knowledgeable than myself out there and why we should not celebrate this custom, which was introduced into Islam 300 years after our Nabi (Sallallahu alayhi wa salam) passed into the life of the grave.

Mawlid as a newly innovated matter into our deen, Islam Q&A
https://islamqa.info/en/249

How to deal with those around us celebrating Mawlid, Islam Q&A
https://islamqa.info/en/125690

Assalaamu Alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuhu,

Gingerbeardman

Muhammad Tim Humble – To Those Who Defend Taweez

All praise is due to Allah alone, and may peace and blessings be upon his Messenger, and his family and his companions.

Having read the post from Sunni Path, supporting the use of ta’weez, I think that there is a need for a clear and simple response to the issues raised.

Before delving into the points made in the article, I would like the reader to consider the following questions:

We regularly hear people defending ta’weez that contain the Qur’an and Allah’s names and attributes, but what do you think about the following:

■ Ta’weez that contain the names of shaytaan?

■ Ta’weez that contain the aayaat of Allah written backwards?

■ Ta’weez that contain symbols associated with the worship of the shaytaan, such as the so-called star of david, and the pyramids?

■ Ta’weez that contain illegible writing?

■ Ta’weez that contain pictures of the human body with words and symbols written over the top?

■ Ta’weez that contain the aayaat of Allah scribbled and not given proper respect?

Ta’weez that contain nothing except tables of numbers?

These are the vast majority of the ta’weez that we open every single week, with most of them issued by imams, scholars, and so-called ‘pious people’. Now you have to make a choice between one of two things; either you defend these ta’weez, claiming that they are actually ‘Qur’an’ or that it is permissible to disgrace the words of Allah by scribbling them, or the reader has no choice but to admit that these ta’weez are by consensus of the scholars, haraam.

I estimate that I have opened somewhere between 500 and 1,000 ta’weez in my course of being a raaqi, and at the current count, less than ten of them contained clear Qur’an or the names of Allah, with nothing else written on them. In reality, this is just another example of the magicians hiding behind respectable scholars and their opinions.

We say to the people who make these so called ta’weez from the Qur’an: would you let the sick person simply print a page of the Qur’an and tie it around his or her neck? By Allah, you would not allow it. Instead, they have to use your ‘special’ writings, which they are not allowed to see or open, and often have to pay money for. If you really hold the opinion of ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas (may Allah be pleased with him), why don’t you allow the people to print a copy of aayat-ul-kursi from quran.com and tie it around their necks? It is the greatest aayah in the Qur’an, so why would it not protect them whilst your secret writings and scribbles can protect them? Has Allah given you something greater than aayat-ul-kursi, or is it that you seek help from the shaytaan? Where did you learn what those numbers and symbols mean? Why don’t you share your books with us that tell you how to ‘cure’ someone with pictures of the pyramids and the star of david?

My brothers and sisters, these people hide behind legitimate opinions, in order to confuse you and take you away from the path of Allah. Let me give you an example:

■ The Sunni Path post quotes those who allow ta’weez:

Sa’id ibn al-Musayyib, ‘Ata’, Mujahid, Abd Allah ibn ‘Amr, Ibn Sirin, ‘Ubayd Allah ibn Abd Allah ibn `Umar, and others (Allah be well pleased with them all). [Musannaf, 5.439]

How many of you looked at that list of people and believed them all to be from the companions? By Allah, there is only one companion mentioned in that whole list; all the rest are from the generations who came after them.

Furthermore, all of the narrations from that companion are weak. They contain Muhammad ibn Is-haaq, who is someone whose narration is not accepted unless he clearly states that he heard the hadith directly from his teacher (the Arabic term is: mudallis), which in this case he did not.

So, let me say explicitly that there is not one single companion from the companions of the Messenger of Allah (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, and may Allah be pleased with them) who allowed ta’weez of any kind, whether from the Qur’an or not!

■ Let us quote the author of the Musannaf in full:

“The Chapter of those who allowed the hanging of Ta’weez”
“The permissibility of this was reported from Sa’eed ibn al-Musayyib, ‘Ataa’, Mujaahid, Abu Ja’far al-Baaqir, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr, Muhammad ibn Seereen, ‘Ubaydullah ibn ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, and ad-Dahhaak and IT IS NOT AUTHENTIC from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr, ad-Dahhaak, Mujaahid, and Ibn Seereen, and the rest are authentic.”

The author himself says that there is no companion who this is authentically reported from, and that half of the taabi’een mentioned are also not authentic. This is in the very same passage that the author of the post quoted – so why did he choose to stop just before the part where the author says that it isn’t authentic?

So out of that long list, we are left with ‘Ataa, Abu Ja’far, and ‘Ubaydullah – three people, none of whom were companions of the Messenger of Allah (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and even their view says that the permissibility is limited to that which is from the Qur’aan alone!

On top of that, the very same book (al-Musannaf) mentions other narrations which state that all ta’weez are haraam, even if they come from the Qur’an (authentically narrated from the companions Ibn Mas’ud, Ibn ‘Abbas, Hudhayfah, ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Aamir, and Ibn ‘Ukaym – may Allah be pleased with them all). Why didn’t the author include those narrations? Is it perhaps because he doesn’t want you to know?

Even if we accept some or all of the narrations from people who allowed ta’weez, these people are talking about writing a simple aayah of the Qur’an, or some of the names of Allah, clearly and in a way that can be understood by everyone who reads it.

Don’t be fooled by statements such as ‘the vast majority of the scholars’ and ‘it is mentioned in such-and-such a book’ – anyone can write words like these. Why don’t we talk about something quantifiable, and say ‘the vast majority of the companions, if not all of them, considered ta’weez to be haraam, in all of its forms’.

Finally, we say to the author of the Sunni Path post and his supporters: Do you know why some of the scholars allowed ta’weez from the Qur’an? Because it is the uncreated speech of Allah, and therefore cannot be considered shirk. Would you like to share with the brothers and sisters what you really believe about the Qur’an that we read, and that you claim to write on the ta’weez?

Allah knows best, and all praise is for Allah alone, and may peace and blessings be upon our messenger Muhammad, and his family and his companions.

Boycotting is the Final Treatment

Shaykh Albaani was asked:

_‘How should I deal with my neighbor who has removed her Jilbaab that she used to wear, should I boycott her?’_

Shaykh Albaani answers:

‘Boycotting a Muslim as an individual in an Islamic society is like treating a sick person with cauterization, like it has been mentioned in a proverb and in an unauthentic hadeeth: that the last treatment/cure is cauterization so boycotting is the final treatment.

It is not allowed for a Muslim man or woman to be hasty in boycotting the one who has deviated from his Islaam, rather it is upon us to follow them up, by visiting them, by reminding them about their Deen or by refuting them, perhaps they will return and repent.

If we stay with them and become despondent or we waste our time with them and become neglected and we fear this sickness will transfer to other than its source then we say salaam (farewell) to them, we do not seek the ignorant ones.

All praise belongs to Allaah Lord of the Worlds.’

[Taken from ‘Explanation of al-Adab al-Mufrad’ tape 8 side A]

Arab Nationalism in the Masaajid

Assalaamu Alaykum,

I help out in a Masjid in my local area, they give me a spot to run new Muslim activities, mentoring etc, as well as store Dawah materials and I help them out in terms of admin tasks in the Masjid. It’s a pretty good relationship for everyone.

However several times in the past couple of years of helping out some brothers have asked for help or favours or leniency from those involved in the running of the Masjid, implying they are more deserving as Arabs.

Leading to them perhaps getting a little more terse a response than perhaps they are used to from myself.

Ahmad (22978) narrated from Abu Nadrah: Someone who heard the khutbah of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) on the second of the days of at-Tashreeq told me that he said: “O people, verily your Lord is One and your father is one. Verily there is no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab or of a non-Arab over an Arab, or of a red man over a black man, or of a black man over a red man, except in terms of taqwa. Have I conveyed the message?” They said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) has conveyed the message.
Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in as-Saheehah (6/199).

We need to clear to the ignorant among us, that our Masaajid and Islamic centres are upon the Quran and Sunnah, even better to be upon the best of understanding of that, the Salafi Manhaj.

We can be pretty tolerant of others as well, but if they wish to have a place of worship for their arab nationalism I suggest the Masaajid is not the right place for them to push that ignorance upon the rest of us.

Now here is a fatwah from a person of knowledge, who has used his understanding of arabic as a language to push back against asabiyyah in the arab community.

https://islamqa.info/en/182686

Is the Arab Muslim better than the non-Arab Muslim?

A while ago I read a hadith from the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him): It was narrated from ‘Utbah ibn ‘Abd that he said: A man said: O Messenger of Allah, curse the people of Yemen for they are tough fighters and great in number, and their fortresses are well fortified. He said: “No.” Then the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) cursed the non-Arabs, and the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “If they come to you, with their women and carrying their children on their shoulders (then show kindness to them), for they are of me and I am of them.” Narrated by Ahmad, and also by at-Tabaraani, except that he said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) cursed the non-Arabs, the Persians and Romans (Byzantines), and the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “If the people of Yemen pass by you, with their women and carrying their children on their shoulders (then show kindness to them), for they are of me and I am of them.” The isnaads of both reports are hasan, and Baqiyyah clearly stated that each narrator heard it from another.

My question is:

Why did the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) curse the non-Arabs, the Persians and Byzantines? Didn’t many of them become Muslim after the conquest of Syria and Iraq, and even as far as China? Is the hadith proven to be sound and of a high level of authenticity? Why did he not say, O Allah, curse the disbelievers, and leave it at that? Is the Arab Muslim considered to be better than the non-Arab Muslim? I am from Syria and am not fully Arab; does this mean that my Islam is less than the Islam of those who are fully Arab among you? Were there any of the Sahaabah who were not Arabs?

Praise be to Allah

Firstly:

We have explained previously that Islam does not pay attention to differences in colour, race or lineage. All people are descended from Adam, and Adam was created from dust. Rather according to Islam, superiority of some people over others is measured by faith and taqwa (piety, mindfulness of Allah), doing what Allah has enjoined and refraining from what Allah has forbidden.

At-Tirmidhi (3270) narrated from Ibn ‘Umar that the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) addressed the people on the day of the conquest of Makkah and said: “O people, verily Allah has taken away from you the arrogance of Jaahiliyyah and its pride in forefathers. People are of two types: righteous and pious, who are dear to Allah, and doomed evildoers, who are insignificant before Allah. People are the descendants of Adam, and Allah created Adam from dust. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning): ‘O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted’ [al-Hujuraat 49:13].”

Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh at-Tirmidhi.

Ahmad (22978) narrated from Abu Nadrah: Someone who heard the khutbah of the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) on the second of the days of at-Tashreeq told me that he said: “O people, verily your Lord is One and your father is one. Verily there is no superiority of an Arab over a non-Arab or of a non-Arab over an Arab, or of a red man over a black man, or of a black man over a red man, except in terms of taqwa. Have I conveyed the message?” They said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) has conveyed the message.

Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in as-Saheehah (6/199).

Al-Bukhaari (4898) and Muslim (2546) narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: We were sitting with the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and Soorat al-Jumu‘ah was revealed to him: “And [He has sent the Prophet to] others of them who have not yet joined them” [al-Jumu‘ah 62:3]. I said: Who are they, O Messenger of Allah? He did not answer him until he had asked three times. Among us was Salmaan al-Faarisi and the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) put his hand on Salmaan and said: “If faith were at the Pleiades, some men from among these people [the Persians] would get it.”

Al-Bukhaari (5990) and Muslim (215) narrated that ‘Amr ibn al-‘Aas said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) say, out loud and not secretly: “The family of Abu Fulaan (the Father of So and so) are not my friends. My friends are Allah and the righteous believers.”

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was speaking of a clan that was closely related to him, and pointed out that mere lineage did not make them his friends; rather his friends were Allah and the righteous believers of all backgrounds.

End quote from Iqtida’ as-Siraat al-Mustaqeem (144).

See also the answers to questions no. 12391 and 3793.

Secondly:

Imam Ahmad (17195) narrated: Haywah ibn Shurayh told us: Baqiyyah told us, Baheer ibn Sa‘d told me, from Khaalid ibn Ma‘daan, from ‘Utbah ibn ‘Abd that he said: A man said: O Messenger of Allah, curse the people of Yemen for they are tough fighters and great in number, and their fortresses are well fortified. He said: “No.” Then the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) cursed the non-Arabs, and the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “If they come to you, with their women and carrying their children on their shoulders (then show kindness to them), for they are of me and I am of them.”

The commentators on Musnad al-Imam Ahmad (ar-Risaalah edn., 29/194) said:

Its isnad is da‘eef (weak). Baqiyyah – who is the son of al-Waleed – is mudallis [i.e., he engaged in tadlees, which is when a narrator narrates a hadith that he did not hear directly from his shaykh, without mentioning the name of the third party from whom he did hear it, using wording that may or may not give the impression that he heard it directly], and narrated by saying ‘an (“from”, without clearly stating that he heard the hadith himself from another narrator). His hadith cannot be accepted unless it is clearly stated that each stage of the isnad that one narrator heard it directly from another.

It was also narrated by Ibn Abi ‘Aasim in al-Aahaad wa’l-Mathaani (2280); at-Tabaraani in al-Kabeer(17/304) and in ash-Shaamiyyeen (1139), via ‘Abd al-Wahhaab ibn Najdah al-Hooti; and by Ibn Abi ‘Aasim (2280) from Hishaam ibn ‘Ammaar, both of whom narrated it from Baqiyyah ibn al-Waleed with this isnaad. In ash-Shaamiyyeen it mentions Ismaa‘eel ibn ‘Ayyaash instead of Baqiyyah, and we think it most likely that this is an error on the part of the copyist. End quote.

Even if we assume that the hadith is saheeh (sound), it is to be understood as referring to those among them who are deserving of being cursed, namely the disbelievers, evildoers and their ilk. These people were only singled out for mention because in most cases they were disbelievers and were misguided, especially at that time.

Thirdly:

In the answer to question no. 115934, we noted that Ahl as-Sunnah wa’l-Jamaa‘ah are unanimously agreed that the Arabs are superior to others in terms of descent and lineage, and that regarding the Arabs as superior is in general terms, and does not apply at the individual level. So a non-Arab who is pious and righteous is better than an Arab who falls short in his duties to Allah, may He be exalted.

Therefore an Arab Muslim cannot be superior to a non-Arab Muslim just because he is an Arab. Rather superiority is based on taqwa (piety, mindfulness of Allah). So whoever is more mindful of Allah and obedient to Him is better than his counterpart, regardless of whether he is an Arab or a non-Arab.

So the fact that you are not fully Arab does not mean that you are less than one who is fully Arab in terms of virtue and status simply because of that. As is clear from what we have mentioned above, the real standard is faith and righteous deeds.

Fourthly:

There were some of the Sahaabah who were not Arabs, such as Salmaan and Miqsam, who were Persians, Bilaal al-Habashi (who was Ethiopian) , Zunayrah ar-Roomiyyah (who was Byzantine), Barakah al-Habashiyyah (who was Ethiopian) and others such as Suhaym the freed slave of Banu’l-Has-haas, Ya‘eesh the slave of Banu’l-Mugheerah, Khaalid ibn al-Hawaari, and Tamaam al-Habashi.

Al-Haakim (8194) narrated that Ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “I saw (in a dream) many black sheep who were joined by many white sheep.” They said: How did you interpret it, O Messenger of Allah? He said: The non-Arabs will join you in your religion and your lineage.” They said: The non-Arabs, O Messenger of Allah? He said: “If faith were at the Pleiades, some men from among the non-Arabs would get it.”

Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in as-Saheehah (1018).

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

The confirmation of that is seen in the many Persians, both free men and freed slaves, among the Taabi‘een and those who came after them, such as al-Hasan, Ibn Sireen, ‘Ikrimah the freed slave of Ibn ‘Abbaas, and others, and those who came after that of people who were prominent in faith, religious commitment and knowledge, until these prominent figures became better than most of the Arabs.

Similarly, among types of non-Arabs, such as the Ethiopians, Byzantines, Turks and others, there are people who excelled in faith and religious commitment, too many to be counted, which is something well known to the scholars, because true virtue is in following that with which Allah sent Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) of faith and knowledge, both inwardly and outwardly. So the more strongly a person adheres to it, the better he is, and virtue is only in terms of the praiseworthy qualities mentioned in the Qur’an and Sunnah, such as Islam, faith, righteousness, taqwa, knowledge, righteous deeds, ihsaan and so on.  There is no virtue in a person simply being an Arab or non-Arab, or being black or white, or being a city dweller or desert dweller.

End quote from Iqtidaa’ as-Siraat al-Mustaqeem (p. 145)

And Allah knows best.
Islam Q&A

Desirable acts on the day of Eid

Source:  Bits and Pieces – Desirable acts on the day of Eid

[throughbitsnpcs] dates.png

The Sunnahs that the Muslim should observe on the day of Eid are as follows:

1 – Doing ghusl before going out to the prayer.

It was narrated in a sahih hadeeth in al-Muwatta’ and elsewhere that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar used to do ghusl on the day of al-Fitr before going out to the prayer-place in the morning. Al-Muwatta’ 428.

Al-Nawawi (may Allaah have mercy on him) said that the Muslims were unanimously agreed that it is mustahabb (recommended) to do ghusl for Eid prayer. The reason why it is mustahabb is the same reason as that for doing ghusl before Jumu’ah and other public gatherings. Rather on Eid the reason is even stronger.

2 – Eating before going out to pray on Eid al-Fitr and after the prayer on Eid al-Adha:

Part of the etiquette is not to go out to pray on Eid al-Fitr until one has eaten some dates, because of the hadeeth narrated by al-Bukhaari from Anas ibn Maalik, who said that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used not to go out on the morning of Eid al-Fitr until he had eaten some dates… of which he would eat an odd number. Al-Bukhaari, 953.

It is mustahabb to eat before going out to emphasize the fact that it is forbidden to fast on that day and to demonstrate that the fast has ended.

Ibn Hajar (may Allaah have mercy on him) suggested that the reason for that was so as to ward off the possibility of adding to the fast, and to hasten to obey the command of Allaah. Al-Fath, 2/446

Whoever does not have any dates may break his fast with anything that is permissible.

3 – Takbeer on the day of Eid

This is one of the greatest Sunnahs on the day of Eid because Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“(He wants that you) must complete the same number (of days), and that you must magnify Allaah [i.e. to say Takbeer (Allaahu Akbar: Allaah is the Most Great)] for having guided you so that you may be grateful to Him” [al-Baqarah 2:185]

It was narrated that al-Waleed ibn Muslim said: I asked al-Awzaa’i and Maalik ibn Anas about saying Takbeer out loud on the two Eids. They said, Yes, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar used to say it out loud on the day of al-Fitr until the imam came out (to lead the prayers).

It was narrated in a sahih report that ‘Abd al-Rahmaan al-Sulami said, “They emphasized it more on the day of al-Fitr than the day of al-Adha.”. Wakee’ said, this refers to the takbeer. See Irwa’ al-Ghaleel, 3/122/

Al-Daaraqutni and others narrated that on the morning of Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha, Ibn ‘Umar would strive hard in reciting takbeer until he came to the prayer place, then he would recite takbeer until the imam came out.

Saying takbeer when coming out of one’s house to the prayer place and until the imam came out was something that was well known among the salaf (early generations). This has been narrated by a number of scholars such as Ibn Abi Shaybah, ‘Abd a l-Razzaaq and al-Firyaabi in Ahkaam al-Eidayn from a group of the salaf. For example, Naafi’ ibn Jubayr used to recite takbeer and was astonished that the people did not do so, and he said, “Why do you not recite takbeer?”

Ibn Shihaab al-Zuhri (may Allaah have mercy on him) used to say, “The people used to recite takbeer from the time they came out of their houses until the imam came in.”

The time for takbeer on Eid al-Fitr starts from the night before Eid until the imam enters to lead the Eid prayer.

Description of the takbeer:

It was narrated in the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah with a saheeh isnaad from Ibn Mas’ood (may Allaah be pleased with him) that he used to recite takbeer during the days of tashreeq:

Allahu akbar, Allahu akbar, laa ilaaha ill-Allah, wa Allahu akbar, Allah akbar, wa Lillaah il-hamd (Allaah is Most Great, Allaah is most Great, there is no god but Allaah, Allaah is Most great, Allaah is most great, and to Allaah be praise).

It was also narrated elsewhere by Ibn Abi Shaybah with the same isnad, but with the phrase “Allahu akbar” repeated three times.

4 – Offering congratulations

The etiquette of Eid also includes the congratulations and good wishes exchanged by people, no matter what the wording, such as saying to one another Taqabbala Allaah minna wa minkum (May Allaah accept (good deeds) from us and from you” or “Eid mubaarak” and other permissible expressions of congratulations.

It was narrated that Jubayr ibn Nufayr said: When the companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) met one another on the day of Eid, they would say to one another, “May Allaah accept (good deeds) from us and from you.”

Offering congratulations was something that was well known among the Sahaabah, and scholars such as Imam Ahmad and others allowed it. There is evidence which suggests that it is prescribed to offer congratulations and good wishes on special occasions, and that the Sahaabah congratulated one another when good things happened, such as when Allaah accepted the repentance of a man, they went and congratulated him for that, and so on.

Undoubtedly these congratulations are among the noble characteristics among the Muslims.

The least that may be said concerning the subject of congratulations is that you should return the greetings of those who congratulate you on Eid, and keep quiet if others keep quiet, as Imam Ahmad (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: If anyone congratulates you, then respond, otherwise do not initiate it.

5 – Adorning oneself on the occasion of Eid.

It was narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) said that ‘Umar took a brocade cloak that was for sale in the market and brought it to the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), and said, “O Messenger of Allaah, buy this and adorn yourself with it for Eid and for receiving the delegations.” The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said to him, “Rather this is the dress of one who has no share (of piety or of reward in the Hereafter)…” Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 948.

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) agreed with ‘Umar on the idea of adorning oneself for Eid, but he denounced him for choosing this cloak because it was made of silk.

It was narrated that Jaabir (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had a cloak which he would wear on the two Eids and on Fridays. Saheeh Ibn Khuzaymah, 1756,

Al-Bayhaqi narrated with a saheeh isnaad that Ibn ‘Umar used to wear his best clothes on Eid.

So a man should wear the best clothes that he has when going out for Eid.

With regard to women, they should avoid adorning themselves when they go out for Eid, because they are forbidden to show off their adornments to non-mahram men. It is also haraam for a woman who wants to go out to put on perfume or to expose men to temptation, because they are only going out for the purpose of worship.

6 – Going to the prayer by one route and returning by another.

It was narrated that Jaabir ibn ‘Abd-Allaah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: On the day of Eid, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to vary his route. Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 986.

Islam Q&A – Is The Fasting of One who Doesn’t Pray Accepted?

Assalaamu Alaykum,

Every year I ask myself whether I should post this Fatwah up, and every year I do so reluctantly.

Some might argue it’s better the ones who are not praying do something good, but in reality if their fasting and perhaps even the Shahadah is not accepted what is the point of fooling them and the masses?

We need to deal with the bigger evil first, people not praying which is a bigger obligation, and potentially could even cause them to fall into kufr before moving onto fasting.

 

Islam Q&A    https://islamqa.info/en/49698

Question: Is it permissible to fast without praying?

Answer:

Praise be to Allaah.

No good deeds will be accepted from one who does not pray – no zakaah, no fasting, no Hajj or anything else.

Al-Bukhaari (520) narrated that Buraydah said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever does not pray ‘Asr, his good deeds will be annulled.”

What is meant by “his good deeds will be annulled” is that they will be rendered invalid and will be of no benefit to him. This hadeeth indicates that Allaah will not accept any good deed from one who does not pray, so the one who does not pray will not benefit at all from his good deeds and no good deed of his will be taken up to Allaah.

It seems from the hadeeth that there are two types of those who do not pray: those who do not pray at all, which annuls all their good deeds, and those who do not offer a particular prayer on a particular day, which annuls the good deeds of that day. So annulment of all good deeds happens to those who forsake all the prayers, and annulment of the good deeds of a particular day happens to the one who omits a particular prayer.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen was asked in Fataawa al-Siyaam (p. 87) about the ruling on the fasting of one who does not pray.

He replied:

The fast of one who does not pray is not valid and is not accepted, because the one who does not pray is a kaafir and an apostate, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“But if they repent [by rejecting Shirk (polytheism) and accept Islamic Monotheism], perform As-Salaah (Iqaamat-as-Salaah) and give Zakaah, then they are your brethren in religion”

[al-Tawbah 9:11]

And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Between a man and shirk and kufr stands his giving up prayer.” Narrated by Muslim, 82. And he (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The covenant that separates us from them is prayer; whoever gives up prayer is a kaafir.” Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 2621; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi.

This is also the view of most of the Sahaabah, if not their consensus. ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Shaqeeq (may Allaah have mercy on him), who was one of the well-known Taabi’een, said: The companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not think that omitting any action made a person a kaafir, except for prayer. Based on this, if a person fasts but he does not pray, then his fast is rejected and not accepted, and it will not avail him anything before Allaah on the Day of Resurrection. We say to him: Pray then fast, because if you fast but do not pray, then your fast will be rejected, because acts of worship are not accepted from a kaafir.

The Standing Committee (10/140) was asked: if a person is keen to fast in Ramadaan and to pray in Ramadaan only, but he stops praying as soon as Ramadaan is over, does his fasting count?

They replied:

Prayer is one of the pillars of Islam, and it is the most important pillar after the Shahaadatayn. It is an individual obligation (fard ‘ayn), and whoever does not do it because he denies that it is obligatory, or he does not do it because he is careless and lazy, is a kaafir. With regard to those who fast Ramadaan and pray in Ramadaan only, this is trying to cheat Allaah, and unfortunate indeed are those who only acknowledge Allaah in Ramadaan. Their fasting is not valid if they do not pray at times other than Ramadaan, rather this makes them kaafirs in the sense of major kufr (kufr akbar), even if they do not deny that prayer is obligatory, according to the more sound of the two scholarly opinions.

Islam Q&A