|
Fiqah Hanafi
|
Fiqh -
Fiqah Hanafi
|
|
Written by hizmetbooks.org
|
|
Tuesday, 03 Safar 1431 Satr-e Awrat and Ladies' Covering Themselves
from Se'adat-e-Ebediyye
Those parts of a responsible person's body which are haram for him (or her) to open and show others and for others to look at while in Salaah or everytime are called Awrat parts. Men and women were commanded to cover their awrat parts through the suras of Ahzab and Nur, which were revealed in the third year of the Hegira. In Hanafi and Shafi'i Madhhabs a man's awrat parts for Salaah are between lower part of his navel and lower parts of his knees. The knees are awrat in Hanafi and the navel is awrat in Shafi'i. The Salaah performed with these parts open is not acceptable. When performing the Salaah, it is sunnat for men to cover their other parts [arms, head], [and to wear socks if a long robe or a gown is not available]. It is makruh for them to perform the Salaah with these parts exposed.
All parts of free women, except their palms and faces, including their wrists, outer parts of their hands, hanging parts of their hair and under their feet are awrat for Salaah, in Hanafi. There are also valuable books saying that outer parts of hands are not awrat. According to them, it is permissible for women to perform Salaah while outer parts of their hands up to wrists are bare. But, for having followed all the books, it is better for women to perform Salaah wearing a gown with sleeves long enough, or a head cover large enough, to cover their hands. There are (savants) who said that women's feet were not awrat in Salaah, but those same savants said that it was sunnat to cover and makruh to open them when performing Salaah and when going out. [It is written in the book Kadihan that hanging parts of hair are like feet]. If one-fourth of a man's or woman's awrat part remains bare as long as one rukn, the Salaah becomes annulled. If a smaller part remains ex posed, the Salaah does not become nullified, but it becomes makruh. For instance, the Salaah of a woman one-fourth of whose foot has remained bare will not be sahih. If she herself uncovers it, her Salaah becomes annulled immediately. [See second chapter!]. It is written in Umdat-ul-Islam, "A woman's Salaah which she performed with bare heelbone, ankle, neck or hair is not accept able. Thin tissue that lets the shape or color of the thing under it be seen is equal to none." [Please see seventeenth chapter!] In Shafi'i, a woman's whole body is awrat all the time other than her two hands and her face.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Fiqh -
Fiqah Hanafi
|
|
Written by hizmetbooks.org
|
|
Tuesday, 03 Safar 1431 Reverence due to Masajid
THERE ARE TWENTY-TWO THINGS THAT ARE NOT PERMISSIBLE TO DO IN A MOSQUE:
Places where people come together in order to worship are called temples or places of worship. Jewish temples are called Synagogues or Hawras. Christian temples are called Churches or Bi'as or Sawme'as. Muslim temples are called Masjids or Jami's. In temples methods of worship and religious commandments and prohibitions are taught. People who are responsible for making speeches in today's temples dwell upon two things:
- Through bright, obtrusive words; tragic stories, melodious, touching recitals, and even with musical instruments and loud-speakers, today's preachers try to move the audience to a level of enthusiasm and compassion, in order to conquer their hearts so that the people will give them selves up and be driven towards a certain purpose.
- To teach the commandments and the prohibitions of the religion, and to get the people to obey them.
Today in Christian churches and Jewish synagogues only the first aim is being accomplished, which results in the unity of egos and thoughts, rather than in the unity of hearts and souls. And in the name of religious obligations, tenets that were put forward by ancient men of religion are being taught, but these things differ, depending on time and place. For this reason, churches and synagogues are no longer temples but places for politics and conferences, where people are benumbed and dragged behind the desires and thoughts of leaders and chiefs.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Fiqh -
Fiqah Hanafi
|
|
Written by Al Majlis ul Ulama SA
|
|
Tuesday, 03 Safar 1431 The Question of Raf-ul-Yadain
Introduction
In this article, we shall give forty-two (42) Sahih evidences for the issue of not raising the hands in the Hanafi Madhhab. This article is a reproduction of an excellent booklet written by Majlisul-Ulama of South Africa
NARRATIONAL EVIDENCE
Although the Hanafi Madhhab has also rational evidence for its view regarding Rafa’ Yadain, this booklet discusses only the Naqli (narrational) evidence on which is based the Hanafi practice of abstention from Rafa’ Yadain. The primary basis of all acts of Ibaadat is narrational evidence, not rational proofs. Rational proof is simply adduced as additional substantiation to strengthen an argument.
AHAADITH OF SAYYIDINA RASULULLAH
Sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi wa Sallam
|
| Proof 1 |
Uthmaan Bin Abi Shaibah - Wakee’ - Sufyaan - Aasim (Ibn Kulaib) - Abdur Rahmaan Bin Aswad - Alqamah said:
Abdullah Bin Mas’ood (radhiyallahu anhu) said:
‘Should I not perform with you the Salaat of Rasulullah (Sall Allahu alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallim)?”
Alqamah said: ‘Then he (Ibn Mas’ood) performed Salaat and he did not raise his hands except once.’
(Abu Dawood)
|
| Proof 2 |
| Hasan Bin Ali - Muaawiyah - Khaalid Bin Amr Bin Saeed - Abu Huzaifah. They said Sufyaan narrated to us with this same isnaad (as mentioned in No. I above). He said:
‘He (Ibn Mas’ood) raised his hands in the beginning once.” Some narrators said: ‘one time’.
(Abu Dawood)
|
| Proof 3 |
|
| Hannaad - Wakee’ - Sufyaan - Aasim bin Kulaib -Abdur Rahmaan bin Al Aswad - Alqamah who said: ‘Abdullah Bin Mas’ood (radhiyallahu anhu) said:
“Should I not perform with you the Salaat of Rasulullah (Sall Allahu alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallim)?’
He (Ibn Mas’ood) then performed Salaat and he did not raise his hands except in the beginning once.’
Tirmithi added also that in this regard there is also the narration of Baraa’ Bin Aazib (radhiyallahu anhu): Tirmithi said:
“The Hadith of Ibn Mas’ood is Hasan.
*This is also the view of many of the Ulama among the Sahaabah of Rasulullah (Sall Allahu alaihi wa Aalihi wa Sallim) and the Taabieen. This is also the view of Sufyaan and the Ahl-e-Kufa (i.e. the Ulama of Kufa).”
* i.e. The view of Ibn Mas’ood (radhiallahu anhu).
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Fiqh -
Fiqah Hanafi
|
|
Written by Shaykh Nuh Hamim Keller
|
|
Tuesday, 03 Safar 1431
What is a Madhhab?
Why is it necessary to follow one?
© Nuh Ha Mim Keller 1995
The word madhhab is derived from an Arabic word meaning "to go" or "to take as a way", and refers to a mujtahid's choice in regard to a number of interpretive possibilities in deriving the rule of Allah from the primary texts of the Holy Qur'an and hadith on a particular question. In a larger sense, a madhhab represents the entire school of thought of a particular mujtahid Imam, such as Abu Hanifa, Malik, Shafi'i, or Ahmad--together with many first-rank scholars that came after each of these in their respective schools, who checked their evidences and refined and upgraded their work. The mujtahid Imams were thus explainers, who operationalized the Qur'an and sunna in the specific shari'a rulings in our lives that are collectively known as fiqh or "jurisprudence". In relation to our din or "religion", this fiqh is only part of it, for the religious knowledge each of us possesses is of three types. The first type is the general knowledge of tenets of Islamic belief in the oneness of Allah, in His angels, Books, messengers, the prophethood of Muhammad (Allah bless him and give him peace), and so on. All of us may derive this knowledge directly from the Qur'an and hadith, as is also the case with a second type of knowledge, that of general Islamic ethical principles to do good, avoid evil, cooperate with others in good works, and so forth. Every Muslim can take these general principles, which form the largest and most important part of his religion, from the Qur'an and hadith.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
Fiqh -
Fiqah Hanafi
|
|
Written by Mufti Muhammad Shafi
|
|
Tuesday, 03 Safar 1431 The unlawfulness of Mut’ah
By MMufti Muhammad Shafi
Allah says in the Holy Qur’an:
(And also prohibited are) the women already bound in marriage, except the bondwomen you come to own. It is has been written by Allah for you. All except them have been permitted for you to seek (to marry) through your wealth, binding yourself, (in marriage) and not only for lust. So, whoever of them you have benefited from, give them their due as obligated. And there is no sin on you in what you mutually consent to after the (initial) settlement. Surely, Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise. (Surah an-Nisaa, Ayat 24)
The root of the Arabic word, istimta' is م - ت - ع (meem, taa, ‘ain) which means to derive benefit. Any benefit derived from a person or from wealth, property, assets, etc. is called istimta’. According to Arabic grammar, the addition of the letters س (seen) and ت (taa) to the root of any word gives the meaning of seeking. Based on this lexical explanation, the simple and straight sense of the Qur’anic expression, Istamta’tum (you have benefited), as understood by the entire Muslim ummah from the revered early elders to their successors and followers, is just what we have stated a little earlier. But, a sect[1] says that it means the conventional mut’ah and, according to its adherents, this Ayat proves that mut’ah is halaal (lawful). Therefore, it is pertinent here to give a brief account of mut’ah and its unlawfulness.
Mut’ah, which was in vogue before the advent of Islam, was a temporary contract between a man and a woman for having sexual relationship between them for a specified period in exchange of money or a specified kind offered by the man to the woman. This type of contract, which was never meant to create permanent rights and obligations of marriage, was clearly prohibited by the Holy Qur’an and the Sunnah; however, this particular sect claims that it is still halaal. They sometimes seek support to this claim from the present Ayat just on the ground that the word mut’ah has been derived from the same root wherefrom the word Istamta’tum used in this Ayat has been derived. Obviously, this argument is too far-fetched, and the present Ayat itself is sufficient to refute it, because before the word, Istamta’tum, Allah uses the words “binding yourself in marriage and not only for lust,” which clearly prove that the sexual relationship approved by Allah (in the Holy Qur’an) is the only one which aims at chastity through the permanent bond of marriage, and not a relationship based on satisfying lust for a temporary period which has been termed by the Holy Qur’an as flowing water.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 3 |
|
