Tag Archives: Islam Q&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.


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


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.


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.


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.


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


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?


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

Is Allah everywhere?

Assalaamu Alaykum,

One of the biggest examples of the corruption of the Ummah is the strange belief among many Muslims that Allah exists everywhere and it is sad to say that such a belief is now the majority view among many Muslims, especially those residing in the west, learning their beliefs from people who are themselves ignorant of the deen.



Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allah have mercy on him) said in regards to the belief that Allah is everywhere:

“This view has implications that are very, very false, because if you say that Allah is everywhere, this implies that He is in lavatories – Allah forbid – and in other places that filled with impurities and filth, and who would describe his Lord in such terms? It is not possible for any believer to describe his Lord in such terms.”
From Fataawa Noor ‘ala ad-Darb by Ibn ‘Uthaymeen

The correct view, from the time of Rasoolullah (Sallallahu Alayhi Wa Salam) to today is that Allah is distinct from His Creation, that He is over His Throne, in a way that befits His Majesty, as explained in this clear evidence based ruling from Islam Q&A.


Question : The Quran says (that means) “Angels and Gabriel ascend to Allah in a day equivalent to 5000 terrestrial years.” Does this imply that Allah is controlling the earthly matters sitting on the throne? Then how can it be that Allah is nearer to us than the veins?
Published Date: 2000-11-16

Praise be to Allah.

It is proven in the Quran and Sunnah (prophetic teachings) and by the consensus (ijma’) of the salaf (early generations) of this ummah (global Islamic nation) that Allah is above His heavens over His Throne (as befits His Majesty), and that He is the Exalted, Most High. He is above all things, and there is nothing that is above Him. Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“Allah, it is He Who has created the heavens and the earth, and all that is between them in six days. Then He rose over (istawa) the Throne (in a manner that suits His Majesty). You (mankind) have none, besides Him, as a Wali (protector or helper) or an intercessor. Will you not then remember (or receive admonition)?” [32:4]

“Surely, your Lord is Allah Who created the heavens and the earth in six days and then rose over (istawa) the Throne (in a manner that suits His Majesty), disposing the affair of all things.” [10:3]

“To Him ascend (all) the goodly words, and the righteous deeds exalt it (i.e. the goodly words are not accepted by Allah unless and until they are followed by good deeds).” [35:10]

“He is the First (nothing is before Him) and the Last (nothing is after Him), the Most High (nothing is above Him) and the Most Near (nothing is nearer than Him).” [57:3]

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “You are the Most High and there is nothing above You…”

There are many similar ayat (verses) and ahadeeth (prophetic narrations). But at the same time, Allah tells us that He is with His slaves wherever they are:

“Have you not seen that Allah knows whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is on the earth? There is no najwa (secret counsel) of three but He is their fourth (with His Knowledge, while He Himself is over the Throne, over the seventh heaven), — nor of five but He is their sixth (with His Knowledge), — nor of less than that or more but He is with them (with His Knowledge) wheresoever they may be.” [58:7]

Allah has combined mention of His being above His Throne with mention of His being with His slaves in one ayah (verse), where He says (interpretation of the meaning):

“He it is Who created the heavens and the earth in six days and then rose over (istawa) the Throne (in a manner that suits His Majesty). He knows what goes into the earth and what comes forth from it, and what descends from the heaven and what ascends thereto. And He is with you (by His Knowledge) wheresoever you may be.” [57:4]

Saying that Allah is with us does not mean that He is mixed with (or dwells in) His creation; rather He is with His slaves by His knowledge. He is above His Throne and nothing is hidden from Him of what they do. With regard to the ayah (interpretation of the meaning):

“And We are nearer to him than his jugular vein (by Our Knowledge).” [50:16]

Most of the mufassireen (exegesists) said that what is meant is that He is near by means of His angels whose task it is to record people’s deeds. And those who said that it means that He is near explained it as meaning that He is near by His knowledge, as is said concerning how He is with us.

This is the view of Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jama’ah (followers of prophetic guidance), who affirm that Allah is above His creation and that He is also with His slaves, and they state that He is far above dwelling in His created beings. With regard to the denial of all Divine attributes as voiced by the Jahamiyyah (a deviant sect) and their followers, they deny that His Essence is above His creatures and that He rose above His Throne, and they say that He is present in His Essence everywhere. We ask Allah to guide the Muslims.

Al-Shaykh ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Barrak

Islam Q&A – Riba-Based Student Loans

Assalaamu Alaykum,

It seems strange that this fatwah even has to be posted, but due to the fitnah in the west, and specifically in the UK in regards to the official government run student loan schemes and whether they are permissible or not, I am glad somebody as reputable as Sheikh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid and Islam Q&A have been able to address this issue.

This is not to denigrate Sheikh Hatham al Haddad, his followers on Islam21C or anyone else who holds the opposite viewpoint. I said before others are being unfair and unjust towards him and overly harsh in their refutations of his errant opinions but when someone makes a mistake, it is important the truth of the matter is clarified.

Assalaamu Alaykum,


Link back to original fatwah on Islam Q&A https://islamqa.info/en/249369

Original Question:

I have a question regarding interest. Firstly I would like to make it known that all my family is Muslim and we currently reside in Western Europe. I currently am a first year University student , in my country there is something called the Maintenance loan , which is a loan that can be taken not for the sake of the tuition fees of the university but to support a student in general while studying. This loan is entirely based on interest and ican be very desirable as it has very low interest rates and must also not be paid back till one finds themselves in a stable job hence maybe 10+years. I myself glory be to Allah have no need to take this loan as I am financially stable and have grants from the university itself. However my father has told me that I should take the full amount of this loan as it has very low interest rates. I have told him I do not need this money however he wants it for his personal gain and business endeavours. I know the great risk of interest and that it is very harmful. My question is what should I do in this scenario, would sin fall onto me?

Praise be to Allah

It is not permissible for you to take this loan, no matter how low the interest rate, because Allah has forbidden contracts that involve riba, whether the riba is great or small, even if it is only one dirham, and He has warned the one who consumes it and the one who pays it of punishment, wrath and curses. So beware lest you be one of them.

“Those who eat Ribâ (usury) will not stand (on the Day of Resurrection) except like the standing of a person beaten by Shaitân (Satan) leading him to insanity. That is because they say: “Trading is only like Ribâ (usury),” whereas Allâh has permitted trading and forbidden Ribâ (usury). So whosoever receives an admonition from his Lord and stops eating Ribâ (usury) shall not be punished for the past; his case is for Allâh (to judge); but whoever returns [to Ribâ (usury)], such are the dwellers of the Fire – they will abide therein.

Allâh will destroy Ribâ (usury) and will give increase for Sadaqât (deeds of charity, alms, etc.) And Allâh likes not the disbelievers, sinners.

Truly those who believe, and do deeds of righteousness, and perform As-Salât (Iqâmat-as-Salât), and give Zakât, they will have their reward with their Lord. On them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.

O you who believe! Fear Allâh and give up what remains (due to you) from Ribâ (usury) (from now onward), if you are (really) believers.

And if you do not do it, then take a notice of war from Allâh and His Messenger but if you repent, you shall have your capital sums. Deal not unjustly (by asking more than your capital sums), and you shall not be dealt with unjustly (by receiving less than your capital sums).

And if the debtor is in a hard time (has no money), then grant him time till it is easy for him to repay, but if you remit it by way of charity, that is better for you if you did but know.

And fear the Day when you shall be brought back to Allâh. Then every person shall be paid what he earned, and they shall not be dealt with unjustly”

[al-Baqarah 2:275-281].

The Prophet of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) cursed the one who consumes riba and the one who pays it. Narrated by al-Bukhaari (5962).

It is not permissible for you to obey your father in that, because the rights of Allah and obedience to Him take precedence over the rights of the father and obedience to him. The Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “There is no obedience if it involves disobedience towards Allah; obedience is only in that which is right and proper.” Narrated by Muslim (1840).

For more information, please see the answers to questions no. 181723 and 96613.

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A

Islam Q&A – Does a husband have to be patient with his wife all the time and not divorce her?

We know that the wife of Nuh (as), and the wife of Lut (as) went to jahannam, may Allah protect us from his displeasure, amin. Is this evidence that brothers should patient with their wives all the time, and not divorce them? I have heard that the Messenger of Allah, (pbuh), divorced women. What is the difference between keeping a woman with bad behavior and counseling her, and getting rid of a woman with bad behavior?

Published Date: 2000-10-03 – IslamQ&A – https://islamqa.info/en/10613

Praise be to Allaah.

Undoubtedly the wives of Nooh and Loot (peace be upon them) will enter Hell with those who will enter it, but they did not commit any obvious sin that would imply kufr, otherwise it would not have been permissible for these Prophets to have remained married to kaafir women, because Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“… Likewise hold not the disbelieving women as wives” [al-Mumtahanah 60:10]

Perhaps the wife of Nooh was concealing kufr, or perhaps, despite the fact that Nooh had been calling people to Allaah for so long, she was influenced by the call of her people when she saw that all of her people were following kufr, so she became doubtful and wondered how he alone could be a believer when all of these people were disbelievers, and they formed the majority of their nation. So her kufr may have been secret. The same applies to the wife of Loot, of whom they said that her only sin was that she told her people about his guests, i.e., she called them to come and commit obscene actions with them. This was her sin, but it is possible that she was also a kaafir in secret. Hence Allaah said (interpretation of the meaning):

“… except his wife, she will be of those who remain behind” [al-‘Ankaboot 29:32]

This is a summary of the response given by Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Jibreen, may Allaah preserve him.

It is permissible for a husband to divorce his wife so long as there is a shar’i reason for doing so, such as a lack of religious commitment, a bad attitude, lack of chastity, negligence, etc., even if she is not a kaafir. But if she is a righteous believer, let him keep her, even if he dislikes some of her characteristics, as the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said. It was narrated that Abu Hurayrah said: the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Let not a believing man hate a believing woman. If he dislikes one of her attributes, he will be pleased with another.” (Narrated by Muslim from Abu Hurayrah, 1469).

When the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) wanted to divorce Hafsah, Allaah revealed to him: Go back to Hafsah, for she fasts a lot and prays a lot at night, and she will be your wife in Paradise. Al-Mundhiri said: this was narrated by al-Nasaa’i and Ibn Maajah. ‘Awn al-Ma’bood Sharh Sunan Abi Dawood, hadeeth no. 2283.

The husband has to strive to reform his wife and pray to Allaah to reform her. Allaah will reform a wife in whom there is some crookedness, if He wills, as He said concerning His slave Zakariya (interpretation of the meaning):

“… and [We] cured his wife for him…” [al-Anbiya’ 21:90]

Some of the mufassireen (commentators) said that she used to have a sharp tongue, i.e., her speech towards her husband was offensive, so Allaah reformed her.

A man may put up with the difficulty of keeping his wife in order to ward off a greater difficulty, which is that of separating the children and dividing the family. But if the harm caused by staying with one’s wife is greater than the harm caused by separating from her, there is nothing wrong with him divorcing her. And Allaah is the Source of strength.

Islam Q&A
Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid


RE the sister getting told to remove her hijab by the armed Nice Police in France, no I won’t be sharing the image and shame on those who have done so already.

Where is your protective jealously for our sister? What if it was your wife, daughter, mother or sister, would you be happy with her image being shared and looked at by all these men on social media?

paris policeYes the oppression in this case is terrible, part of the wider oppression felt by the Muslims in France, especially our sisters who are being literally forced by gun-toting cops to uncover themselves and take clothing off in public, but that in no way justifies you sharing such images.

Given the background of the image with semi-naked men and women do you even think it’s appropriate or even permissible to share such an image anyway even if the sisters face is not clear / blocked out?

It’s like all the people sharing images of models in Burkinis to show a visual image of the French ban on this item of clothing and claiming you are sharing such images to defend modesty… Stupid doesn’t even begin to cover such people.


Here is a Fatwah from Sheikh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid at Islam Q&A on women sharing their image on social media, I hope the intelligent among you would realize if this applies to sisters sharing images of themselves, it applies doubly to men sharing these pictures of sisters in hijab or even worst actual indecent images.

We need to remember such dhulm is a test, a trial and yes sometimes a punishment from Allaah and that to end such oppression doesn’t just mean denouncing it, but that as Muslims we need to wake up and return to our deen and that Allaah informs us in the Quran:

For each one are successive [angels] before and behind him who protect him by the decree of Allah . Indeed, Allah will not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves. And when Allah intends for a people ill, there is no repelling it. And there is not for them besides Him any patron.
Quran translation, Surah ar-Ra’d, 13:11



Praise be to Allaah.  
We do not think that the Muslims should be so sensitive with regard to issues that are the matter of scholarly differences or make them the cause of division and fitnah among the Muslims.

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen  (may Allaah have mercy on him) said, when speaking about the matter of one who prays ten rak’ahs with the imam, then sits down and waits for Witr and does not complete the Taraaweeh prayers with the imam:

It grieves us deeply that we find in the Muslim ummah a group which differs concerning matters in which differences of opinion are acceptable, and they take these differences as a means to cause division. Differences within the ummah existed at the time of the Sahaabah, yet they remained united. The youth in particular and to all those who are committed to Islam must remain united, because they have enemies who are laying in wait. 

Al-Sharh al-Mumti’, 4/225

Two groups have gone to extremes with regard to this matter. The first group denounced everyone who prays more than eleven rak’ahs and said that doing so was bid’ah. The second group denounced those who do only eleven rak’ahs and said that they are going against scholarly consensus (ijmaa’).

Let us listen to what Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:

Here we say that we should not go to extremes or be negligent. Some people go to extremes in adhering to the number mentioned in the Sunnah, and say that it is not permissible to do more than the number mentioned in the Sunnah, and they aggressively denounce those who do more than that, saying that they are sinners. 

This is undoubtedly wrong. How can they be sinners, when the Prophet SAWS (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), upon being asked about night prayers, said that they are to be done two by two, and he did not specify any particular number? Of course  the one who asked him about the night prayer did not know the number, because if he did not know how to do it, it is even more likely that he did not know the number. And he was not one of those who served the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) so that we might say that he knew what happened inside his house. Since the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) told him how to do it but did not say how many times, it may be understood that the matter is broad in scope, and that a person may pray one hundred rak’ahs then pray Witr with one rak’ah. 

With regard to the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), “Pray as you have seen me praying”, this does not apply in absolute terms even for these people. Hence they do not say that a person should pray Witr with five rak’ahs sometimes and with seven rak’ahs sometimes and with nine rak’ahs sometimes. If we understand it in absolute terms, then we would have to pray Witr with five rak’ahs sometimes and with seven rak’ahs sometimes and with nine rak’ahs sometimes. But what is meant by the hadeeth is pray as you have seen me praying with regard to how to pray not how many rak’ahs, unless there is a text to state what the number is.  

Whatever the case, a person should not be strict with people with regard to a matter that is broad in scope. We have even seen some brothers who are strict on this matter accusing the imams who pray more than eleven rak’ahs of following bid’ah, and they leave the mosque, thus missing out on the reward of which the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever stands with the imam until he finishes (the prayer), the reward of qiyaam al-layl will be recorded for him.” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 806; classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi, 646). Some of them even sit down after completing ten rak’ahs, thus breaking up the rows of worshippers by sitting there, and sometimes they start talking and disturb the people who are praying. 

We have no doubt that their intentions are good and they are doing their best to come to the right conclusion, but that does not mean that they are correct. 

The other group does the opposite. They sternly denounce those who pray only eleven rak’ahs and say that they have gone against scholarly consensus. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“And whoever contradicts and opposes the Messenger (Muhammad) after the right path has been shown clearly to him, and follows other than the believers’ way, We shall keep him in the path he has chosen, and burn him in Hell — what an evil destination!”

[al-Nisa’ 4:115]

All the generations who came before you only knew the number as twenty-three rak’ahs, and they denounce anyone who says anything different. 

Al-Sharh al-Mumti’, 4/73-75

With regard to the evidence quoted by those who say that it is not permissible to do more than eight rak’ahs in Taraaweeh, they quote the hadeeth of Abu Salamah ibn ‘Abd al-Rahmaan, who asked ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her), “How did the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) pray during Ramadaan?” She said: “He did not pray more than eleven rak’ahs in Ramadaan or at other times. He would pray four, and do not ask how beautiful and long they were, then he would pray four, and do not ask how beautiful and long they were, then he would pray three. I said, ‘O Messenger of Allaah, will you sleep before you pray Witr?’ He said, ‘O ‘Aa’ishah, my eyes sleep but my heart does not.’” 

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 1909; Muslim, 738

They said: This hadeeth indicates that the Messenger of Allaah was consistent in his prayers at night in Ramadaan and at other times.

The scholars refuted this use of the hadeeth as evidence by saying that this is what the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did, but the fact that he did something does not imply that it is obligatory.

The evidence that there is no set number for prayers at night – which include Taraaweeh – is the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Umar according to which a man asked the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) about prayer at night. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Prayers at night are to be offered two by two (two rak’ahs at a time). If any of you fears that the time of dawn is approaching then let him pray one rak’ah as Witr.”

(Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 846; Muslim, 749)

If we look at what the scholars of the prominent schools of thought said, you will clearly see that this matter is broad in scope and that there is nothing wrong with doing more than eleven rak’ahs.

Al-Sarkhasi, who is one of the imams of the Hanafi school, said:

It is twenty rak’ahs, apart from Witr, in our view.

Al-Mabsoot, 2/145

Ibn Qudaamah said:

The favoured view according to Abu ‘Abd-Allaah (i.e., Imam Ahmad, may Allaah have mercy on him), is that it is twenty rak’ahs. This was the view of al-Thawri, Abu Hanfeefah and al-Shaafa’i. Maalik said it is thirty-six.

Al-Mughni, 1/457

Al-Nawawi said:

Taraaweeh prayer is Sunnah according to scholarly consensus. Our view is that it is twenty rak’ahs with ten tasleems, and it is permissible to pray it individually or in congregation.

Al-Majmoo’, 4/31

These are the views of the four imams concerning the number of rak’ahs of Taraaweeh prayer. All of them said something more than eleven rak’ahs. Perhaps the reasons why they said something more than eleven rak’ahs include the following:

1-     They thought that the hadeeth of ‘Aa’ishah did not mean that this was the specific number.

2-     A greater number was narrated from many of the salaf.

See al-Mughni, 2/604; al-Majmoo’, 4/32

3-     The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to pray eleven rak’ahs and make them very lengthy, so much so that it used to take him most of the night. Indeed, one night in which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) led his companions in praying Taraaweeh, he did not end his prayer until just before dawn, and the Sahaabah feared that they would miss suhoor. The Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them) loved to pray behind the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and they did not feel that it was too long. The scholars thought that if the imam made the prayer so long, this would be too difficult for the members of the congregation and that might put them off. So they thought that the imam should make the recitation shorter and increase the number of rak’ahs.

The point is that the one who prays eleven rak’ahs in the manner narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is doing well and is following the Sunnah. Whoever makes the recitation shorter and increases the number of rak’ahs is also doing well. A person who does either of these two things is not to be denounced. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said:

If a person prays Taraaweeh according to the madhhabs of Abu Haneefah, al-Shaafa’i and Ahmad, with twenty rak’ahs, or according to the madhhab of Maalik, with thirty-six rak’ahs, or with thirteen or eleven rak’ahs, he has done well, as Imam Ahmad said, because there is nothing to specify the number. So the greater or lesser number of rak’ahs depends on how long or short the qiyaam (standing in the prayer) is.

Al-Ikhtiyaaraat, p. 64

Al-Suyooti said:

What is narrated in the saheeh and hasan ahaadeeth is the command to observe night prayers during Ramadaan, which is encouraged without specifying a particular number. It is not proven that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) prayed twenty rak’ahs of Taraaweeh, rather that he prayed at night, with an unspecified number of rak’ahs. Then he delayed it on the fourth night lest it become obligatory for them and they might not be able to do it. Ibn Hajar al-Haythami said: There is no saheeh report that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) prayed twenty rak’ahs of Taraaweeh. The narration which suggests that he “used to pray twenty rak’ahs” is extremely weak (da’eef).

Al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah, 27/142-145

So you should not be surprised that people pray Taraaweeh as twenty rak’ahs. There have been generation after generation of those imams (who used to pray twenty rak’ahs), and all of them are good.

And Allaah knows best.

Islam Q&A


From Islam Q&A – https://islamqa.info/en/130484

What is the belief of Imam Ibn Rushd, and what was the true nature of his difference of opinion with Imam Abu Haamid al-Ghazaali?

Published Date: 2016-04-06


Praise be to Allah


Ibn Rushd is a name that was shared between Ibn Rushd the grandson (known to the West as Averroes) and Ibn Rushd the grandfather. Both of them had the kunyah Abu’l-Waleed, and both of them had the name Muhammad ibn Ahmad. Both were appointed as qaadi (judge) of Cordoba.

The one referred to in the question is Ibn Rushd the grandson (Averroes), who died in 595 AH. He is famous for his focus on philosophy and writing books in that field. As for Ibn Rushd the grandfather, he did not get involved in philosophy; he died in 520 AH.

Al-Abbaar said:

He attained a level of perfection, knowledge and virtue that was unsurpassed in Andalusia. He was a modest and humble man, of whom it was said that he was never distracted from researching and studying academic issues since he reached the age of discernment, except on two nights: the night his father died and his wedding night. In terms of books and other writings he filled almost ten thousand pages. He had a strong inclination towards philosophy, and became a leading figure in that field. People would turn to him to ask him his verdict on medical issues as much as they would ask him about matters of fiqh. He also had a deep knowledge of the Arabic language, and it was said that he had memorised the diwaans (collected poems) of Abu Tammaam and al-Mutanabbi.

Among the most famous of his works were the following: Bidaayat al-Mujtahid, on fiqh; al-Kulliyaat(Generalities) on medicine; Mukhtasar al-Mustasfa on usool; and many other works on philosophy, in which he summarised the thoughts of the Greek philosophers. So he wrote Jawaami‘ Kutub Aristotalis;  a summary of al-Ilaahiyyaat by Nicolaus of Damascus, a Greek philosopher; and a summary of Aristotle’sMetaphysics) b Aristotle. He also summarised many other books, of which there are too many to list here, to the point that he was known as the one who propagated and carried the banner of Aristotelian thought. That ultimately led to him becoming isolated, and he was shunned by the people of his era because of the strange views that he expressed and the weird, alien knowledge that he propagated.

Shaykh ash-Shuyookh Ibn Hamawiyyah said:

When I entered the city, I asked about Ibn Rushd and I was told that he was under house arrest on the orders of the caliph Ya‘qoob, and no one was allowed to visit him, because of the many strange views that were narrated from him, and the many shunned branches of knowledge that were attributed to him. He died under house arrest in Marrakesh.

You can see his biography in Siyar A‘laam an-Nubala’ (21/307-310)


There has been a lengthy debate on the real nature of the beliefs of Ibn Rushd, and many books have been written both supporting him and opposing him. There has been a great deal of confusion as to his real beliefs and views.

Because here we do not have the time or space for a detailed discussion of the beliefs of Ibn Rushd, it will suffice to point out some of the flawed ideas in his books that are subject to controversy.

1.     Interpretation of Islamic teachings so as to be in harmony with Aristotelian philosophy

Perhaps looking at the brief biography of Ibn Rushd referred to above will be sufficient to highlight this inclination in the thought of Ibn Rushd. He was infatuated with the thought of Aristotle to the extent that Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allah have mercy on him) said of him: He is one of the most adherent of people to the views of Aristotle. End quote from Bayaan Talbees al-Jahamiyyah (1/120). Ibn Rushd tried hard to explain Aristotelian thought and present it to the people in a new Arabic style. Whilst doing that, when he saw a contradiction between Aristotelian thought and the fundamentals of Islam, he would try to find a far-fetched interpretation that could lead to undermining and destroying Islam. It was as if Aristotelian philosophy was the counterpart of the teachings of Islam which came from the Lord of the Worlds and are embodied in the texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah. It was on this basis that he wrote his famous book Fasl al-Maqaal fi Taqreer ma bayna ash-Sharee‘ah wa’l-Hikmah min al-Ittisaal (The Decisive Treatise, Determining the Nature of the Connection between Religion and Philosophy).

2.     His belief that Islamic teachings have both exoteric (apparent) and esoteric (hidden) meanings

Ibn Rushd said:

Islamic teachings are of two categories: exoteric (apparent) and esoteric (hidden). The exoteric or apparent meanings are for the masses to adhere to and follow, and the esoteric or hidden meanings are for the scholars. As for the masses, what they must do is understand Islamic teachings according to the apparent meaning, and refrain from interpreting them in any manner other than the apparent meaning. It is not permissible for the scholars to explain them to the masses in any way other than in accordance with the apparent meaning. As ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said: Tell the people what they can understand; do you want the words of Allah and His Messenger to be rejected? End quote.

Al-Kashf ‘an Manaahij al-Adillah (p. 99); published by Markaz Diraasaat al-Wahdah al-‘Arabiyyah

Ibn Rushd discussed this esoteric idea at length in his books, to the extent that he regarded it as one of the main characteristics of the saved group of the ummah of Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) who adhere to the exoteric aspects of the teachings of Islam, and they do not disclose their esoteric meanings to the people. End quote.

Al-Kashf ‘an Manaahij al-Adillah (p. 150)

Hence Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (may Allah have mercy on him) wrote at length refuting the views of Ibn Rushd in this book and explaining that esoteric interpretation of Islamic texts is flawed. These discussions appear in his two significant books, Bayaan Talbees al-Jahamiyyah and Dar’u Ta‘aarud al-‘Aql wa’n-Naql.

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

When Ibn Sina (Avicenna) and his ilk realised that the words of the Messenger cannot be interpreted in this philosophical manner – rather they became certain that the meaning that he intended was what the people understood – they tried to explain that by saying: He was addressing the masses in a manner that they could understand, even though he knew that the truth with regard to that particular issue was not as the people understood it. Hence what these people were effectively saying was that the Messengers lied in order to serve a purpose. This is the way of Ibn Rushd (Averroes) and others who follow esoteric interpretations (baatiniyyah). End quote.

Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (19/157)

3.     Favouring philosophical views regarding the resurrection and requital

With regard to the issue of resurrection and requital, he favoured the view of the philosophers that the resurrection would be of souls only. In fact in this regard he fell into misguidance that was more grievous than simply believing in the philosophical view that the resurrection would be of souls only, as he regarded this issue as being one that is subject to ijtihaad, and said that what is required of anyone who examines the matter is to believe in the conclusion that he reaches. He said:

The truth concerning this issue is that what every individual must do is believe the conclusion to which his research leads him. End quote.

Al-Kashf ‘an Manaahij al-Adillah (p. 204)

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

The followers of philosophy are further removed from the path of Islam than ahl al-kalaam:

Among them are some who think that this is part of the religion of Islam.

And among them are some who have more knowledge of religious texts than others, so they started to reject the views of ahl al-kalaam unless they are supported by a text. Whenever there was a text to support their views, they would deal with that text in one of two ways: either they would accept it completely, if it was in accordance with their understanding and thoughts, or they would deal with it like all other similar cases, and say that the Messengers spoke of that by way of comparison in order to help the people understand (and it is not to be taken literally), because there was no other way to explain it and therefore they needed to put it in these words. Ibn Rushd and others like him followed this method, therefore they are closer to Islamic teachings than Ibn Sina and his ilk. In terms of practical issues, they were closer to the limits of Islam than those who neglected Islamic duties and regarded as permissible that which Islam forbids. However both groups are somewhat deviant, commensurate with the extent to which they went against the Qur’an and Sunnah, and they are correct and sound in as much as they are in harmony with them.

Hence with regard to the issue of the universe being created (and not having existed from eternity) and the resurrection of bodies, Ibn Rushd took a neutral stance and stated that both views were valid, although he was more inclined in his heart to his predecessor (Aristotle). He responded to the comments of al-Ghazaali in Tahaafut at-Tahaafut, but many of his arguments are incorrect and al-Ghazaali was in the right. He attributed some of his arguments to Ibn Sina and not to his predecessor (Aristotle), and he attributed any mistakes to Ibn Sina. In some of his arguments he spoke ill of al-Ghazaali and accused him of being unfair, because he based his views on flawed kalaami arguments, such as the idea that God does not have to have a reason or wisdom behind what He does, and that the One Who is all powerful and able to choose may decide to choose one thing over another for no reason. And some of his arguments were very confused and unclear. End quote.

Minhaaj as-Sunnah (1/255)

4.     Failure to pay attention to the Sunnah as a source of legislation

One of the main characteristics of the methodology of Ibn Rushd in his books, which at the same time was one of the main reasons for his errors, was his failure to pay attention to the Prophetic Sunnah as a source of legislation.

Dr Khaalid Kabeer ‘Allaal (may Allah preserve him) said:

Ibn Rushd did not pay due attention to the Prophetic Sunnah and its status as a main source of Islamic legislation after the Holy Qur’an, and he did not quote it widely in his books of kalaam and philosophy. Therefore he missed out on many hadiths that are directly connected to many of the academic topics that he discussed. Moreover, in many cases he did not correctly understand many of the hadiths that he did quote in his books, and he subjected them to misinterpretation in order to support his views and his Aristotelian ideas. End quote.

Naqd Fikr al-Faylasoof Ibn Rushd (p. 97)

This is a brief overview that highlights some of the scholarly criticism of the beliefs of Ibn Rushd (Averroes). This criticism may be summed up by noting that he overlooked many of the Islamic guidelines that were clearly laid out by the Lawgiver, and he promoted the method of interpreting the texts in a manner other than their apparent meaning and subjecting some clear texts to ijtihaad, on the basis of some weird, alien ideas that had come from ancient civilisations that have perished.

Because of that, he is celebrated by many of those who are part of the liberal secular trends today, to the point that they think of the philosopher Ibn Rushd as a pioneer of enlightenment, even though they know that much of the knowledge in his books is regarded as extinct and wrong by modern standards of knowledge. But their aim is to glorify all liberal thoughts and ideas that are not in harmony with the fundamentals of Islam and are contrary to the facts mentioned in Islamic texts, and they resort to interpreting these texts in a very weird manner, whilst at the same time presenting themselves as people of religious commitment and Islamic knowledge and understanding. In Ibn Rushd they see what they are looking for, and they regard his books as pioneering works. We think that in his books you will find promotion of adherence to Islam and referring to it, which we do not find in the books of these modern thinkers. He adhered to the practical side of Islamic teachings and venerated those teachings in the fields of fiqh, judicial rulings and issuing fatwas, that would not be pleasing to these modern thinkers, and they would not even match up to one tenth of his level of knowledge. May Allah destroy them, how they are deluded away from the truth!”[at-Tawbah 9:30].

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A



I am pursuing a marriage is there any particular books or lectures I can benefit from which will cover the ruling of marriage and other topical areas which will bring about a successful marriage. In addition a book which is exclusive for sister so that my intended spouse can learn fatwa of women.

Published Date: 2016-03-12

Praise be to Allah

The Islamic texts encourage marriage and state that it is the way of the Prophets and Messengers. Allah, may He be exalted, says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And indeed We sent Messengers before you (O Muhammad (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him)), and made for them wives and offspring”

[ar-Ra‘d 13:38]

“And marry those among you who are single (i.e. a man who has no wife and the woman who has no husband) and (also marry) the Salihoon (pious, fit and capable ones) of your (male) slaves and maid-servants (female slaves). If they be poor, Allah will enrich them out of His Bounty. And Allah is All-Sufficent for His creatures’ needs, All-Knowing (about the state of the people)”

[an-Noor 24:32].

As-Sa‘di (may Allah have mercy on him) said:

If they” that is, married people or those who want to get married “be poor, Allah will enrich them out of His Bounty”. So you should not let what you imagine – that if he gets married, he will become poor because of having too many dependents – prevent you from getting married.

This offers encouragement to get married, and is a divine promise to the one who gets married that he will become independent of means after having been poor. { And Allah is All-Sufficent for His creatures’ needs } that is, He is very kind and bestows much bounty

All-Knowing” – He knows who deserves His grace and bounty in both religious and worldly terms, or in one of them, and who does not deserve that. So He gives to all in accordance with His knowledge and wisdom.

End quote.

Tayseer al-Kareem ar-Rahmaan (p. 567)

For more information, please see fatwas no. 136885 and 220841, which discuss the virtues of marriage.

With regard to books that speak of the virtues of marriage, the rulings thereon and ways of making marriage successful, there are many such books, including the following:

Tuhfat al-‘Aroos by Mahmoud Mahdi al-Islambooli. This is a very useful book in which the author speaks of proposals and the rulings thereon, the essential parts and conditions of the marriage contract, the rights and duties of both spouses, and rulings on intimacy.

[Translator’s note: This book is available in English under the title: The Bride’s Boon]

Az-Zawaaj fi Zill al-Islam by Shaykh ‘Abd ar-Rahmaan ‘Abd al-Khaaliq, in which the author discusses the rulings on marriage in Islam, how to choose a life partner, rulings and conditions of the marriage proposal, impediments and outcomes of the marriage contract , ways to guarantee family stability, and ways of dealing with disputes between the spouses; then he speaks of the end of the marriage, either through death or separation during life by means of talaaq, khula‘ or annulment of the marriage.

Az-Zawaaj al-Islami as-Sa‘eed by Mahmoud al-Masri Abu ‘Ammaar

[Translator’s note: other books available in English include the following:

A Gift for a Muslim Bride by Muhammad Haneef Abdul Majeed

Secrets to a Successful Marriage by Afshan Khan

Traversing the Highs and Lows of Muslim Marriage by Sadaf Farooq]

With regard to books that speak about rulings having to do with Muslim women, there are also many such books. By way of example we may mention Jaami‘ Ahkaam an-Nisa’ by Shaykh Mustafa al-‘Adawi and Fataawa al-Mar’ah al-Muslimah, compiled by Ashfraf ‘Abd al-Maqsood

And Allah knows best.

Islam Q&A


Is it permissible for a Muslim man to wear his shirt tucked in his pants, showing the shape of his legs, buttocks, etc., especially in some countries where women are not ashamed to look at them? And when they perform prayer, shouldn’t they be wearing a long shirt covering their private parts while they prostrate?

Published Date: 1997-08-06

Praise be to Allah.

The `awrah (private parts to be necessarily covered) for men includes what is between the navel and the knees as stated by the Prophet SAWS (peace be upon him), so covering it is obligatory according to Islamic law. Wearing shorts that disclose the thighs or show the shape of the buttocks, does not cover the `awrah. Neither does a dress that is transparent and displays skin complexion, nor a tight dress that shows the size, shape or bends of the `awrah. All of this is prohibited (haraam) in front of people whether the women are ashamed of looking at it or not (as asked in the question). If the trousers (or pants) are wide enough and not tight, then one may tuck his shirt in it as long as it does not display his `awrah. Covering the `awrah is obligatory during the prayer and outside it. What many people do is cover their `awrah while going to prayer but are negligent of it outside the prayer. This is a clear mistake and a wrong act which happens due to lack of understanding or as a result of a misunderstanding of the matter.

May Allah cover our sins in this world and in the hereafter.

Islam Q&A
Sheikh Muhammed Salih Al-Munajjid