Posts Tagged ‘Muslim’

Did the Prophet Muhammad protect an icon of Mary and Jesus inside the Ka’bah at Mecca?

December 25, 2025

Bismillah. This alleged incident, at the time of the Conquest of Mecca when the Ka’bah was purified of the 360+ idols around it and inside it, was famously mentioned by Martin Lings (Abu Bakr Siraj al-Din), may God have mercy upon him, in his book, Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Sources.

In 1990, JIMAS (UK) published a then-recent exchange of letters in the Saudi Gazette between Abu Bilal Mustafa al-Kanadi [The Canadian], may God have mercy upon him, and Martin Lings, in which Kanadi was very critical of Lings: one of his criticism was Lings’ inclusion of this story in his Sirah (Biography of the Prophet), based on its mention by al-Waqidi in Kitab al-Maghazi (The Book of Military Expeditions) and al-Azraqi (d. 250 H) in Akhbar Makkah (History of Mecca). That exchange is reproduced at the bottom of this post, for reference. Neither correspondent referred to the Hadith expert Imam Dhahabi’s discussion and comment on this report.

Imam Dhahabi’s discussion and comment on this report

Muslim [bin Khalid] al-Zanji [The Negro], on the authority of Ibn Abi Najih, on the authority of his father [Abu Najih], who said: Men of the Quraysh sat and reminisced about the building of the Ka’bah … [The builders] depicted prophets, angels and trees inside it. They depicted Ibrahim [Abraham] divining with arrows. They depicted Jesus and his mother …

And in the hadith on the authority of Ibn Abi Najih, on the authority of his father [Abu Najih], on the authority of Huwaytib bin ‘Abdul ‘Uzza and others: On the day of the Conquest [of Mecca], the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, entered the House [of God]. He ordered for a cloth to be moistened and commanded that those pictures be effaced. He placed his palms upon the picture of Jesus and his mother and said, “Erase them all, except what is beneath my hand.” Al-Azraqi transmitted it.[1]

Ibn Jurayj said: Sulayman bin Musa al-Shami [The Syrian] asked ‘Ata’ bin Abi Rabah [The Mufti of Mecca] whilst I was listening, “Did you come across the statue[2] of Mary and Jesus in the House [of God]?” He replied, “Yes, I came across the embellished[3] statue of Mary with Jesus standing in her lap. There used to be six support pillars inside the House: the statue of Jesus and Mary was in the pillar nearest the door.” So I [Ibn Jurayj] asked ‘Ata’, “When was it destroyed?” He replied, “In the fire during the rule of Ibn al-Zubayr.” I asked, “Do you mean that it was there during the time of the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace?” He replied, “I do not know, but I think it was there during his time.”

Dawud bin ‘Abdul Rahman said, on the authority of Ibn Jurayj: I then repeated the question to ‘Ata’ after a while. He said, “The statue of Jesus and his mother was in the middle pillar.”

Al-Azraqi said: [4] Dawud al-‘Attar [The Perfumier] narrated to us, on the authority of ‘Amr bin Dinar, who said, “I came across the statue of Jesus and his mother in the Ka’bah before it was demolished.”[5] Dawud said: One of the gatekeepers informed me on the authority of Musafi’ bin Shaybah that The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, said: “O Shaybah! Erase all the pictures except what is beneath my hand.” When he lifted his hand, there was Jesus, son of Mary, and his mother.

Al-Azraqi said, on the authority of Sa’id bin Salim: Yazid bin ‘Iyad bin Ju’dubah narrated to me, on the authority of Ibn Shihab [al-Zuhri] that The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, entered the Ka’bah containing pictures of angels. He saw the picture of Ibrahim [Abraham] and said, “May God fight them! They made him an old man divining with arrows.” He then saw the picture of Mary and placed his hand upon it, saying, “Erase all [the pictures] in it, except the picture of Mary.”

Al-Azraqi then quoted similarly with another chain of transmission. It is mursal [“hanging loose”; discontinuous].[6] But the statements of ‘Ata’ and ‘Amr are established (thabit): this is a matter that we had never heard of until today. [emphasis added]

Source:

al-Imam Shams al-Din Muhammad bin Ahmad bin ‘Uthman al-Dhahabi (d. 748 H / 1347 CE),
Siyar A’lam al-Nubala’ (Biographies of Notable Nobles),
ed. Dr Bashshar ‘Awwad Ma’ruf,
Mu’assasat al-Risalah, Beirut, 1422 H / 2001 CE, vol. 26, pp. 67-69


[1] The editor of the Siyar adds the reference: Akhbar Makkah,1/165

[2] Timthal: icon, picture or statue

[3] Muzawwaq: embellished, especially with quicksilver (mercury) or an amalgam of quicksilver and gold.

[4] The editor of the Siyar adds the reference: Akhbar Makkah,1/167-8

[5] The Ka’bah has been destroyed and rebuilt several times in its history due to floods, fires, earthquakes, etc.

[6] Mursal especially refers to a Follower (Tabi’i) quoting the Prophet directly without naming the Companion (Sahabi) from whom he must have heard the narration. In this case, Ibn Shihab [al-Zuhri] is a Follower and quotes The Prophet directly without naming the intervening Companion(s), so the narration is mursal. There is much difference of opinion amongst Hadith scholars about the authenticity of the mursal hadith. See the section on this topic in Suhaib Hasan, An Introduction to the Science of Hadith, Al-Qur’an Society, London, 1994, pp. 24-29.

ANALYSIS & BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES from Imam Dhahabi’s Tadhkirat al-Huffaz (Memoire of the Preservers of Hadith)

A. IBN SHIHAB AL-ZUHRI (50-124 H): The most knowledgeable of the Preservers of Hadith (Huffaz)

Abu Bakr Muhammad bin Muslim bin ‘Ubaydillah bin ‘Abdillah bin Shihab bin ‘Abdillah bin Zuhrah bin Kulab, The Qurayshi, The Zuhri, The Madinan, The Imam. He narrated Hadith from Ibn ‘Umar, Sahl bin Sa’d, Anas bin Malik, Mahmud bin al-Rabi’, Sa’id bin al-Musayyib, Abu Umamah bin Sahl and their generation of minor Companions (Sahabah) and major Followers (Tabi’in). The following narrated Hadith from him: Ma’mar bin Rashid, Awza’i, Layth, Malik, Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah and multitudes besides them.

Layth said, “I never saw a person of knowledge at all more comprehensive than Zuhri. He would narrate about encouragement of worship: you would say that he only specialised in that. If he narrated about the (history of) the Arabs and genealogies, you would say that he only specialised in those. If he narrated about the Qur’an and the Sunnah, then similarly … He was amongst the most generous of people … He used to drink honey a lot, but not eat apples. He said: I never forgot any knowledge after my heart had deposited it … No-one has had patience upon knowledge like my patience; no-one has spread knowledge the way I have.”

Nafi’ checked his memorisation of the Qur’an with Zuhri. (Zuhri memorised the entire Qur’an in eighty nights.) ‘Umar bin ‘Abdul ‘Aziz said, “No one remains more knowledgeable about past traditions than Zuhri.” Malik said, “Ibn Shihab remained, but there was no-one similar to him in the world.” Ayyub al-Sikhtiani said, “I did not see anyone more knowledgeable than him.” ‘Amr bin Dinar said, “I did not see the dinar (gold coin) and the dirham (silver coin) less important to anyone than Zuhri: they were like dung to him.” Others said: Zuhri was an accomplished soldier. He used to dye his grey hair with henna.

[The Umayyad Caliph] Hisham bin ‘Abdul Malik asked Zuhri to dictate some knowledge to one of his sons, so he dictated four hundred hadiths to him. Zuhri then assembled People of Hadith and narrated those four hundred hadiths to them. He met Hisham again after a month or so: Hisham tested him by telling him that the book of dictated hadiths had been lost. Zuhri called a scribe and dictated the hadiths again: these were compared against the original book, and there was not a single difference, not even in a letter. Makhul was asked, “Who was the most knowledgeable person you ever met?” He replied, “Ibn Shihab.” He was asked, “Then who?” He replied, “Ibn Shihab.”

Some further statements of Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri:

“Al-Qasim bin Muhammad said to me: I see that you are eager for knowledge: Shall I not then point you to one of its great vessels? … ‘Amrah bint ‘Abdul Rahman, for she grew up in ‘Aisha’s lap. So I came to her and found her to be an ocean that could not be exhausted.”

“I never revised knowledge at all.”

“Whoever would like to memorise hadiths, should eat raisins.”

“A Preserver of Hadith is only born once in forty years.”

“God has not been worshipped via anything better than knowledge.”

B. ‘AMR BIN DINAR, THE PRESERVER OF HADITH, THE IMAM (c. 46-126 H)

The person of knowledge of the Sanctuary (Haram). Abu Muhammad of Jumayh (their freed-slave), The Meccan, al-Athram. He heard traditions from Ibn ‘Abbas, Ibn ‘Umar, Jabir bin ‘Abdillah, Bajalah bin ‘Abdah, Anas bin Malik, Abu l-Sha’tha’, Tawus and many others. Shu’bah, Ibn Jurayj, the two Hammads [Hammad bin Zayd & Hammad bin Salamah], the two Sufyans [Sufyan bin ‘Uyaynah & Sufyan al-Thawri], Warqa’ and many besides them, all narrated from him.

Shu’bah said, “I did not see anyone more established in Hadith than ‘Amr.” Ibn Mahdi said: Shu’bah said to me, “I did not see anyone like ‘Amr bin Dinar.” Yahya al-Qattan and Ahmad [bin Hanbal] said, “He was more established than Qatadah.” ‘Abdullah bin Abi Najih said, “I never saw anyone at all with more (juristic) understanding than ‘Amr, not even ‘Ata’, Mujahid or Tawus.”

Ibn ‘Uyaynah said, “He would not leave the mosque. He would ride a donkey. I only ever saw him sitting down. He was a person of understanding (jurist). He would narrate by meaning … Trustworthy, Trustworthy, Trustworthy … He divided the night into three: he would sleep for a third, teach his hadiths for a third and pray for a third … We did not have anyone with more understanding, knowledge or preservation than ‘Amr bin Dinar.”

The Hafiz Ibn al-Mufaddal established him as one of the four amongst the top generation (of hadith-narrators) after the year 40 H: Zuhri, ‘Amr bin Dinar, Qatadah & Abu Ishaq al-Sabi’i.

C. MUSLIM BIN KHALID AL-ZANJI (100-180 H): “the Imam, the Man of Understanding (Jurist) … Shaykh of the Sanctuary (Haram).”

Muslim bin Khalid al-Zanji [The Negro]. He narrated Hadith from the likes of Ibn Abi Mulaykah, Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri, ‘Amr bin Dinar, Zayd bin Aslam, Hisham bin ‘Urwah, ‘Abdul Malik Ibn Jurayj and their generation. He devoted himself to Ibn Jurayj for a while, gained juristic understanding and gave fatwas, concentrating on knowledge. He transmitted the (Qur’anic) letter variations (huruf) from ‘Abdullah bin Kathir, and gave Shafi’i permission to give fatwas. Shafi’i, Marwan al-Tatiri, Humaydi, Musaddad, Hakam bin Musa, the Hafiz Ibrahim bin Musa, Hisham bin ‘Ammar and others narrated Hadith from him.

Azraqi said, “He was a person of understanding and worship. He would fast all the time.”

Yahya Ibn Ma’in said, “There is no problem with him.”

Ibn ‘Adi said, “He is good in Hadith: I hope there is no problem with him.”

Abu Dawud said, “Weak in Hadith.”

Bukhari said, “Rejected in Hadith.”

Abu Hatim said, “He is not used as a proof.”

Ibrahim al-Harbi said, “He was the Jurist of Mecca.”

Suwayd said, “He was named ‘The Negro’ because of his black skin.” But Ibn Sa’d and others said that he was blonde: he was termed ‘The Negro’ via the irony of opposite meaning. Dhahabi: He died in 180 H, aged 80.

ISLAM & THE SEVEN STAGES OF GRIEF

November 29, 2025
3D Isometric Flat Vector Conceptual Illustration of Stages Of Grief, Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance

ISLAM & THE SEVEN STAGES OF GRIEF

Bismillah.

Previously, there were five stages of grief generally accepted amongst psychologists as:
1. SHOCK, 2. DENIAL, 3. ANGER, 4. BARGAINING, 5. ACCEPTANCE/HOPE.

Recently, some people have extended this to seven stages by adding GUILT & DEPRESSION after ANGER. But it varies from person to person: these are not necessarily linear stages: they may be cyclical or iterative.  Hence, the 7 stages of grief are:

1. SHOCK, 2. DENIAL, 3. ANGER, 4. GUILT, 5. DEPRESSION, 6. BARGAINING, 7. ACCEPTANCE/HOPE.

0. GRIEF

0.1 THE PROPHET MUHAMMAD’S YEAR OF GRIEF AND SORROW

The Prophet, peace be upon him, experienced his “year of grief or sorrow” (عام الحزن,  ‘Ām al Huzn) during his tenth year of prophethood, ie 3 years before the Hijra, when his only wife Khadija, his stalwart support for 25 years, died, followed closely by his uncle, Abu Talib, his tribal protector as chief of his clan, the Banu Hashim.

(I’m grateful to the Christian priest, whose name I’ve forgotten, who attended our Qur’an discussion circles c. 2013-14 and wished to co-write with me a Christian-Muslim guide to grief, since he had read about the Prophet’s “Year of Grief.” I didn’t have the time or capacity to work on it at the time, but he gave me an idea that has come to fruition today, God-willing.)

0.2 PROPHET YA’QUB BIN ISHAQ BIN IBRAHIM, aka ISRA’IL (JACOB BEN ISAAC BEN ABRAHAM, aka ISRAEL)

In the Surah named after his 11th son, Prophet Yusuf (Joseph), grief is prominent in the “best of stories.”

قال إني ليحزنني أن تذهبوا به وأخاف أن يأكله الذئب وأنتم عنه غافلون

(Yusuf, Joseph, 12:13)

When his elder 10 sons ask for his permission to take Joseph for a day out, Jacob combines grief (for the past) with fear (of the future):

“It grieves me that you take him away (from me), and I fear that the wolf will devour him whilst ye are heedless of him.”

When his sons lie to him, saying that the wolf had indeed eaten Joseph, Jacob sees through their lies and resigns himself to “beautiful patience” (صبر جميل).

Later, when his first 10 sons manage to come home without the 12th son Binyamin (Benjamin) as well, Jacob expresses extreme sorrow for Joseph, reiterates his commitment to “beautiful patience” and goes blind from grief:

وتولّى عنهم وقال ياأسفى على يوسف وابيضت عيناه من الحزن فهو كظيم 

(Yusuf, Joseph, 12:84)

Although Ibn Kathir quotes the commentator Dahhak as explaining kazeem here to mean ka’eeb: intense grief and broken in spirit, i.e. depressed, the vast majority of commentators agree that Prophet Jacob displayed beautiful patience and did not complain to anyone except God, restraining his sorrow and grief. Others amongst the Salaf said that he waited eighty years to see his beloved son Joseph, for whom his grief equalled that of seventy bereaved parents, but he “was never pessimistic about God.” (Tafsir Tabari)

1. SHOCK

1.1 UMAR BIN AL-KHATTAB: SHOCK, DENIAL, ANGER, ACCEPTANCE

Our Master Umar was in shock, denial and anger upon the news of the Prophet’s death, threatening to kill anyone who said that the Prophet was dead, until Our Master Abu Bakr said the famous words:

“Whoever worshiped Muhammad, he should know that Muhammad has died. Whoever worships God, he should know that God is The Ever-Living, Who Will Never Die.”

Abu Bakr also recited from Surah Āl Imran (The Family of Amram), the verses confirming that Muhammad was mortal and speaking of the possibility of his death, for every soul has a predestined moment of death, praising those who show gratitude. Umar commented: “It was as though I had never heard these verses before!” He rapidly reached the stage or station of Acceptance. 

وما محمد إلا رسول، قد خلت من قبله الرسل، أفائن مات أو قتل انقلبتم على أعقابكم، ومن ينقلب على عقبيه فلن يضرّ الله شيئا، وسيجزي الله الشاكرين

وما كان لنفس أن تموت إلا بإذن الله كتابا مؤجلا، ومن يرد ثواب الدنيا نؤته منها، ومن يرد ثواب الآخرة نؤته منها، وسنجزي الشاكرين

Āl Imran, The Family of Amram, 3:144-5)

3. ANGER

3.1 KHALID BIN WALEED 

Our Master Khalid bin Waleed, the Sword of God, was overcome by grief on his deathbed when he realised he wouldn’t be granted martyrdom on the battlefield (because no human’s sword could defeat the Sword of God). He was especially frustrated at knowing how many people are cowards. Khalid’s last words were:

“I have a wound on every inch of my body, but I’m dying like an aging camel. May the eyes of cowards never (find rest in) sleep!”

ASIDE:

Khalid bin Waleed’s extraordinary life and military genius and career deserve to be immortalised in an epic poem in English. I have written opening and closing stanzas for such a poem. I pray that I or someone else is able to complete it:

OPENING STANZA: THE TALE OF KHALID BIN WALEED 

If your eyes do weep and your heart does bleed

At the state of the Muslim nation, 

Then remember the tale of Khalid bin Waleed:

It is enough as inspiration. 

[…]

CLOSING STANZA: KHALID BIN WALEED’S LAST WORDS

“I’m dying like a camel

(Or like an aging sheep):

May the eyes of cowards 

Never rest in sleep!”

TRIVIUM: THE KHALID BIN WALEED PARK IN PESHAWAR, PAKISTAN

This park goes by its Urdu/Farsi name: Khalid bin Waleed Bagh. The locals are Pathan (Pashtun), and so pronounce it somewhat Farsi style, as follows, making the ‘a’ sound like ‘o’: Kholid bin Woleed Bagh. British Empire troops stationed in Peshawar heard it pronounced like this, switched the syllables around and nicknamed the park, the “Colly-Wolly Bean Bag.”

3.2 TRUE PATIENCE IS ONLY AT THE FIRST BLOW

Anas bin Malik narrated that the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, passed by a woman who was weeping at a graveside, mourning a child she had lost. The Prophet said, “Fear God, and have patience.” She replied, not recognising him, “Get away from me, for you have not been afflicted by my affliction!” She was told that it was the Prophet who had spoken to her, so she came to his door and, finding no doorkeepers, said to him, “I did not recognise you.” He replied, “(True) Patience is only at the first blow.” (Bukhari & Muslim)

TRIVIUM: The Arabic for “blow” here is sadmah, root SDM. The name Saddam is derived from this as an intensive form, thus meaning, “One who delivers crushing blows.”

4. GUILT: JOSEPH’S BROTHERS

The 10 elder brothers of Prophet Yusuf (Joseph) had feelings of grief at the perceived favouritism of their father towards Yusuf. This manifested in Anger when some of them suggested killing him. Others felt guilty about this and suggested throwing him into a well, which is what they did. They must have had some feelings of guilt around this, and around lying to their father about Yusuf being eaten by a wolf. After many years, once they were reunited with Yusuf and his magnanimity, they went through the stages of Bargaining and Acceptance/Hope, admitting their mistakes to both Yusuf and their father Ya’qub. (Yusuf, Joseph, 12:91 & 12:97)

7. ACCEPTANCE/HOPE: NO FEAR, NO GRIEF

The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, endured his Year of Grief with immense patience and acceptance. This is the way of “living in the moment” as “children of the moment in time” (abna’ al-waqt) without fear (of the future) or grief (for the past), the way of the “Friends of God” or saints. The phrase, “There will be no fear upon them, nor will they grieve,” occurs repeatedly in the Qur’an for the People of the Garden in the Hereafter. However, it applies to certain, select people in this world also:

أَلَآ إِنَّ أَوْلِيَآءَ ٱللَّهِ لَا خَوْفٌ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا هُمْ يَحْزَنُونَ
ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ وَكَانُوا۟ يَتَّقُونَ

Lo! Truly, the Friends of God:

There is no fear upon them, 

Nor do they grieve:

Those who have achieved faith (inner security)

And were always saving themselves (taqwa).

(Yunus, Jonah, 10:62-63)

In Imam al-Qushayri’s Treatise on Tasawwuf (Sufism), the first topic he discusses after brief biographies of early Sufis is that of Time (Waqt), where he says that “the Sufi is the son of his time,” i.e. that he lives in the moment. Shaykh Hamza Yusuf linked this to the above Qur’anic verse during a conversation in Abu Dhabi, 2022.

It is narrated from the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, that this applies to people in this world “who did not fear when the people had fear, and did not grieve when people grieved.” They will be surrounded by Light in the Hereafter, and made to sit upon pulpits of Light: even the Prophets and the Martyr-Witnesses will be amazed by their station. (Tafsir Tabari, #17,730 & #17,731)

Usama Hasan

London, UK

8th Jumada al-Thani 1447

28th November 2025

WHO ARE THE MU’ALLAFATU QULUBUHUM (THOSE WHO ARE GIVEN ZAKAT TO BRING THEIR HEARTS NEAR) ?

April 22, 2024

WITH THE NAME OF GOD, ALL-MERCIFUL, MOST MERCIFUL

WHO ARE THE MU’ALLAFATU QULUBUHUM
(THOSE WHO ARE GIVEN ZAKAT/ALMS TO BRING THEIR HEARTS NEAR) ?

Allah (God) says in the Qur’an:

إِنَّمَا الصَّدَقـٰتُ لِلفُقَراءِ وَالمَسـٰكينِ وَالعـٰمِلينَ عَلَيها وَالمُؤَلَّفَةِ قُلوبُهُم وَفِى الرِّقابِ وَالغـٰرِمينَ وَفى سَبيلِ اللَّهِ وَابنِ السَّبيلِ ۖ فَريضَةً مِنَ اللَّهِ ۗ وَاللَّهُ عَليمٌ حَكيمٌ

Truly, the [compulsory] alms are only for: the poor; the needy;
those who work upon them (in alms-collection);
those whose hearts are brought near;
those whose necks are under the yoke;
those who have taken on a major debt;
in the path of God; and the child of the path [i.e. the traveller]:
an obligation from God: for God is Knowing, Wise.

(Surah al-Tawbah, Repentance, 9:60 Hafs)

TAFSIR TABARI ON THIS VERSE (SUMMARISED)

Imam Tabari (224-310 H / 839-923 CE) said:

As for “those whose hearts are brought near”: they were a group of people who were brought closer to Islam (through the incentive of being given wealth), who could not be (openly) supported. The alms benefited themselves and their close families. Such people were: Abu Sufyan bin Harb, ‘Uyaynah bin Badr, Aqra’ bin Habis and similar heads of tribes.

Similar to what we have said, has been said by the People of Interpretation.

Mention of those who said that: Ibn ‘Abbas, Yahya bin Abi Kathir, Zuhri, Mujahid, Hasan [Basri] and Qatadah. Yahya bin Abi Kathir said that such heads of tribes were given a hundred she-camels[1] each by the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace; a few others were given fifty each. Zuhri added that this phrase includes Jews and Christians who submit to God (via Islam), even if they are rich.

The people of knowledge differed about whether or not this category exists today, and whether anyone today may be given charity to bring them closer to Islam?

Some of them said: The category of “those whose hearts are brought together” is invalid today: there is no share in the compulsory alms except for those in need, those in the path of God and those who work upon them (in alms-collection).

Mention of those who said that: Hasan [Basri], ‘Amir [bin Sharahil al-Sha’bi] and ‘Umar bin al-Khattab.

When ‘Uyaynah bin Hisn came to [Caliph] ‘Umar bin al-Khattab [seeking to be given alms], ‘Umar said, “The Truth (has come) from your Lord: so whoever wishes to, may have faith; and whoever wishes to, may deny!” [Surah al-Kahf, The Cave, 18:29 Hafs] That is, there is no bringing near today.

‘Amir [bin Sharahil al-Sha’bi] said: Those whose hearts were brought near, were only during the time of the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace: when Abu Bakr, may God Exalted’s Mercy be upon him, came to power, incentives stopped.

Others said: “Those whose hearts are brought near” exist in every age, and they have a right to some alms.

Mention of those who said that: Abu Ja’far [i.e. Imam Muhammad bin ‘Ali al-Baqir].

Abu Ja’far [i.e. Imam Tabari, who had his own, independent Madhhab] said:

The correct saying from amongst those, in my view, is that God has made alms to serve two purposes. One of them is to fill any gaps (of need) amongst the Muslims. The other is to aid and strengthen Islam. Whatever charity is to aid Islam and strengthen its means, this is given to both rich and poor. This is because it is not given to a person due to his need for it, but is given to him in order to aid the religion. This is just like what is given to a person for the sake of sacred war (Jihad) in the way of God, for that is given to him whether he is rich or poor, and not to fill his gap (of need). Similar are those whose hearts are brought near: they are given that charity even if they are rich: such giving to them seeks to benefit the matter of Islam and seeks to strengthen and fortify it.

The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, gave to whomever amongst those whose hearts were to be brought near, after God opened the victories for him: Islam spread and its people increased in honour. Thus, there is no proof in the argument of the one who says that “Today, no-one is to be brought near to Islam (via alms), because the people of Islam, by their great number, are prevented from being reached by anyone who wishes to give them alms.” The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, gave to those whom he gave whilst they were in the condition that has been described.

TAFSIR IBN KATHIR ON THIS VERSE (SUMMARISED)

Imam Ibn Kathir (700-774 H / 1300-1373 CE) said:

As for “those whose hearts are brought near”:

[1] Some were those who were given (alms) that they may submit (in Islam).

An example is that the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, gave to Safwan bin Umayyah out of the spoils (of war) at Hunayn, a battle that the latter had witnessed as a polytheist. Imam Ahmad, Muslim and Tirmidhi narrated that Safwan bin Umayyah said, “The Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, gave me (wealth) on the Day of Hunayn whilst he was the most hated of people to me, but he continued giving me (wealth) until he became the most beloved of people to me.”

[2] Some were given (alms) in order that they improve their Islam (having already submitted) and for their hearts to become firm.

An example is that he distributed (wealth), on the Day of Hunayn, to a group of tribal chiefs and nobles amongst the released captives: a hundred camels each. He said, “Truly, I give to a man whilst another is more beloved to me, fearing that God will upend him (the former) on his face in the Fire of Jahannam.”

In the two Sahihs (of Bukhari and Muslim), there is on the authority of Abu Sa’id that ‘Ali sent a small nugget of gold, (encased) in its rock, to the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, from Yemen: he divided it amongst four people: Aqra’ bin Habis, ‘Uyaynah bin Badr, ‘Alqamah bin ‘Ulathah and Zayd al-Khayr, and said, “I bring them near.”

[3] Some were given (wealth) because of the hope that their peers would submit (in Islam).

[4] Some were given (wealth) in order to elicit alms from those around them, or

[5] To ward off harm from the border lands around the territory of the Muslims.

The place for detailed explanation of this is the books of jurisprudential rulings (furu’).

And God knows best.

Can alms be given to those being brought closer to Islam, after the (time of) the Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace ?

There is difference of opinion in this matter.

It is narrated from ‘Umar, ‘Amir al-Sha’bi and a group (of authorities) that they are not to be given (alms) after his time, because God has honoured Islam and its people, established them firmly in the land and made the necks of others subservient to them.

Others said: Rather, they are to be given (alms) because he, Blessings and Peace be upon him, gave to such people after the Opening of Mecca [i.e. when Islam had already become established] and the Breaking of (the Tribe of) Hawazin [at Hunayn]: this was a situation where alms might be needed, so these could be diverted to them.

IMAM ABU BAKR AL-JASSAS (HANAFI) & QADI ABU BAKR IBN AL-‘ARABI (MALIKI)[2]

Imam Abu Bakr al-Jassas (305-370 H / 917-981 CE) said in his Ahkam al-Qur’an (Rulings of the Qur’an), whilst discussing the premise that alms are essentially for the poor:

If it is said that “those whose hearts were brought near” would receive alms without being poor, it would be said in reply: they would not receive it as alms; rather, alms would be collected for the poor, but some of it would be given to those whose hearts are brought near, in order to repel their harm against the poor amongst the Muslims, and that the former might submit in Islam, thus strengthening the poor amongst the Muslims. Thus, they would not receive it as alms; rather, alms were collected and used for the benefit (masalih) of the Muslims. This is because wealth given for the poor may be diverted for their benefit (masalih) if the Imam [i.e. the Caliph] rules over them and decides about matters beneficial to them (masalih).

[Summarised] Qadi Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi (468-543 H / 1076-1148 CE) said in his Ahkam al-Qur’an (Rulings of the Qur’an):

THE NINTH ISSUE [regarding this verse of the Qur’an]

About “those whose hearts are brought near,” there are four views:

  1. They were given alms because of the weakness of their certainty, until this became strong. Those who said that they were Muslims, cited the examples of Abu Sufyan bin Harb, Aqra’ bin Habis and ‘Abbas bin Mirdas. Those who said that they were non-Muslims, cited the example of ‘Amir bin Tufail. Those who said that they were polytheists with an inclination towards Islam, cited the example of Safwan bin Umayyah.

  2. Yahya bin Abi Kathir named them as leaders of the following [ten] tribes or clans: Banu Umayyah, Banu Jumah, Banu ‘Amir, Banu Asad, Banu Hashim, Banu Fazarah, Banu Tamim, Banu Nasr, Banu Sulaym and Thaqif.

  3. Ibn Wahb narrated from Malik that he said: Safwan bin Umayyah, Hakim bin Hizam, Aqra’ bin Habis, ‘Uyaynah bin Badr, Suhayl bin ‘Amr and Abu Sufyan were amongst “those whose hearts were brought near,” and that on the day [of Hunayn] when Safwan was given alms, he was a polytheist.

    Asbagh said, on the authority of Ibn al-Qasim: “Those whose hearts were brought near” were Safwan bin Umayyah and certain men of Quraysh.

  4. The Shaykh Abu Ishaq named them to be forty men of the Quraysh and other tribes, including leaders and others.

THE TENTH ISSUE

There has been a difference of opinion as to whether [the category of] “those whose hearts are brought near” persisted.

Some of them said: They [i.e. this category of people] disappeared. This view was expressed by a group (of authorities), and was held by Malik.

Some said: They remain, because the Imam [i.e. the Caliph] may need to bring people near to Islam. [Caliph] ‘Umar discontinued them [i.e. this category of people] because of what he saw of the might of the religion.

My view is that if Islam is strong, this category disappears; but if such people are needed, they are given their share, just as the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, used to give the share. For it is narrated in the Sahih (authentic hadiths): “Islam began as a stranger, and will return as a stranger, as it began.” [Sahih Muslim]

THE ELEVENTH ISSUE

If we say that this category of people has disappeared, then their share returns to all the (other) categories, or to whichever (category or categories) the Imam decides, according to the previous explanation regarding the root of the disagreement.

Zuhri said: Half of their share is to be given to those who frequent the mosques. There is no evidence for this view. The first view (mentioned above) is more correct.


[1] A hundred camels represents a lot of wealth: it is the same as the diyah (blood-money) for murder. In today’s financial terms, it would approximate up to a hundred thousand US dollars or UK pounds, or even more. (AQS)

[2] The Hanafi and Maliki schools are complementary, in the sense that they represent the schools of Reason (Ahl al-Ra’y) and Tradition (Ahl al-Hadith) respectively. A holistic approach to the Sunnah combines these complementary approaches, as per Imam Shatibi (cf. Al-Shanqiti, On Madhhabs & Taqlid, AQS, 1445/2023)

On Following Madhhabs – Shaykh Muhammad al-Amin al-Shanqiti

September 16, 2023

CONTEMPLATING THE QUR’AN

FOLLOWING THE QUR’AN AND SUNNAH:
BENEFITING FROM THE MADHHABS HOLISTICALLY
AND NOT FOLLOWING ONE MADHHAB RIGIDLY

Shaykh Muhammad al-Amin al-Shanqiti

An abridged translation of the author’s tafsir of
an ayah of the Qur’an (Surah Muhammad, 47:24)
from his Adwa’ al-Bayan (Lights of Eloquence)

with an

INTRODUCTION

by

Shaykh Suhaib Hasan

1st Rabi’ al-Awwal 1445 H / 16th September 2023

© Al-Qur’an Society, 1445 H / 2023 CE – All rights reserved.

Contemplating the Qur’an is a treatise on following the Qur’an and the Sunnah, benefiting from the codified Madhhabs holistically whilst not following any one Madhhab rigidly or blindly, by Shaykh Muhammad al-Amin al-Shanqiti (1325-1393 H / 1907-1973 CE) of Mauritania and Saudi Arabia, one of the greatest authorities on the Qur’an of the 20th century CE and the 14th Islamic century. The treatise is an abridged translation of the author’s tafsir of an ayah of the Qur’an (Surah Muhammad, 47:24) from his monumental tafsir, Adwa’ al-Bayan (Lights of Eloquence).

In this treatise, the author covers the following topics:

  • Muslims must contemplate the Qur’an, learn it, understand it and act by it
  • There is no basis for those who say that the above is only for the mujtahids 
  • A muqallid is not an ‘alim: a follower of opinions does not have knowledge
  • Saying that we cannot follow the Qur’an and Sunnah but must follow the codified Madhhabs, is one of the greatest falsehoods
  • A critique of Sawi’s view that holding to the apparent meanings of the Book and the Sunnah is one of the principles of kufr (blasphemy)
  • On Ijtihad, Taqlid and Madhhab; permissible and impermissible taqlid

He concludes with eleven “Important Notes About This Issue,” including:

the Four Imams were united in forbidding their blind taqlid;

Haram/Halal cannot be stated on the basis of taqlid;

the difference between taqlid & ittiba’;

our stance towards the Imams;

every Imam has been criticized for going against the Sunnah in particular matters (with examples);

muqallids must distinguish between their Imam’s actual views and those added to his Madhhab after him;

it is impermissible for a Muslim to believe that the era of ijtihad is closed, and that only four Madhhabs must be followed;

turning away from the Qur’an and Sunnah in favour of the Four Madhhabs is one of the greatest problems that has beset Muslims over recent centuries.

We have added five important Appendices.

Firstly, an earlier, concise fatwa from the Shaykh about following Madhhabs, given in 1385 H (1964/5 CE). The Shaykh moved on from this fatwa somewhat, but we include it for the sake of integrity.

Secondly, we mention the Shaykh’s broadening out from his basis of the Maliki Madhhab after becoming exposed in Mecca and Medina to diverse views and schools from around the Muslim world.

Thirdly, we correct a contemporary misquote from Imam Ibn al-Qayyim, whom the Shaykh quotes extensively in his full discussion.

The misquote attempts to portray Ibn al-Qayyim as saying the opposite of his actual position, so we are happy to set the record straight.

Fourthly, we show how Imam Shatibi also presented a holistic approach to the Madhhabs.

Finally, we include Zamakhshari’s classic, educational and entertaining poem about Madhhabi sectarianism.

THE AGE OF AISHA AT MARRIAGE

September 26, 2021

With the Name of God, All-Merciful, Most Merciful

THE AGE OF AISHA AT MARRIAGE

Abridged translation from Islam Bahiri, Aisha’s marriage to the Prophet aged nine – a big mistake in the books of Hadith (in Arabic), Al-Yawm al-Sabi’, 15th July 2008. With additions from Salahi (2013).

Translation and editing by Usama Hasan

ABSTRACT

Aisha was about 18 years old when her marriage to the Prophet was consummated, and not nine.  The narrations of Bukhari and Muslim saying otherwise are dubious in their texts and chains of transmission.  They contradict the law (Sharia), the intellect, authentic hadiths, and the customs, habits and ethos of the age of Prophethood.  Furthermore, they are completely incongruous with the timeline of the Prophetic mission.

1   The hadith of Bukhari about the age of Aisha at marriage

Imam Bukhari included this hadith with five slightly-different chains of narration in his Sahih:

Aisha said: The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, married me when I was six years old. We then came to Medina and I gave myself to him: I was nine years old then.

2         Timeline of the Prophetic Mission

The foundational sources of Islamic history and of the life of the Prophet overwhelmingly agree on the following timeline of the Prophetic mission:[1]

570-1 CE: Birth of the Prophet

610: Beginning of the Prophetic mission (aged 40)

623: Migration (Hijrah) to Medina, after 13 years of the mission in Mecca

632-3: Death of the Prophet in Medina, after 10 years of his mission there.

3         Historical critique of the narration of Bukhari

According to the narration of Bukhari, the Prophet married Aisha in 620 when she was six, and the marriage was consummated in 623 when she was nine. This would mean that she was born in 614, four years into the Prophet’s mission. This is a glaring error, as we shall now show.

3.1        Comparing Aisha’s age to that of her older sister Asma

The above historical sources are unanimous that Asma was 10 years older than Aisha, and that Asma was born 27 years before the Hijrah, i.e. in 596.

Thus:

Asma was born in 596: she was 14 when the Prophetic mission began and 27 at the time of the Hijrah.

Aisha was born in 606: she was 4 when the Prophetic mission began and 17 at the time of the Hijrah. She was married at 14; the marriage was consummated when she was 17, or 18 if we allow for a few months after the Hijrah.

The historical sources are unanimous that Asma died soon after a famous historical incident, the death of her son Abdullah bin Zubayr at the hands of Hajjaj bin Yusuf in 73 H, when she was aged 100.

Thus, she was born in 596 and died c. 693-696.[2]

3.2        Tabari: all of Abu Bakr’s children were born before the Prophetic mission

The previous point is in agreement with Tabari’s statement that all of Abu Bakr’s children, including Asma and Aisha, were born before the Prophetic mission.

When the Prophetic mission began, Asma was 14 and Aisha was 4. This further confirms the weakness of Bukhari’s narration.

3.3        Comparing Aisha’s age to that of Fatima, the Prophet’s daughter

Ibn Hajar, author of the premier commentary on Bukhari, mentions a narration in his Al-Isabah that Fatima was born in the year of the rebuilding of the Ka’bah, when the Prophet was 35 years old, and that she was 5 years older than Aisha.

According to this, Aisha would have been born around the time of the Prophetic mission. She would then have been 13 at the time of the Hijrah, and not 9 as the narration of Bukhari says.

This again illustrates that the narration of Bukhari is unreliable and suffers from what is known as idtirab (inconsistency) in Hadith terminology.

[NB: Ibn Hajar does not appear to have noticed this inconsistency, because in his same work Al-Isabah, he repeats that Aisha was born four years into the Prophet’s mission, even though other narrations, some of which he himself mentions, indicates that she was born several years before this. – U.H.]

3.4        Aisha’s age when she accepted Islam

Ibn Kathir mentions in Al-Bidayah wa l-Nihayah that “amongst the females who accepted Islam during the first three years of the Prophetic mission were Asma and Aisha. This was whilst the Prophet’s preaching was covert. Then, in the fourth year of his mission, God commanded him to announce his mission publicly.”

This again contradicts the original narration of Bukhari, since the latter implies that Aisha was born in the fourth year of the Prophetic mission.

However, according to the correct calculation, Aisha was born 4 years before the Prophetic mission began and so was 7 when she accepted Islam, being just about old enough to do so.

[Salahi (p. 204) further adds that Aisha is mentioned in Ibn Ishaq’s Sirah, the earliest book on the biography of the Prophet, amongst the first fifty people to accept Islam.  She is nineteenth on the list. There are no children on the list, although Ibn Ishaq mentions that she was young.  Salahi estimates that she must have been at least ten, making her 18 at the time of her marriage. – U.H.]

3.5        Aisha’s early memories of Islam

Imam Bukhari himself narrates in a chapter, “Abu Bakr’s neighbouring the Prophet” that Aisha said:

“My earliest memories are of my parents already practising Islam. The Prophet would visit us daily, morning and evening. When the Muslims were persecuted, Abu Bakr left, intending to migrate to Abyssinia.” [He was persuaded to return from the outskirts of Mecca. – U.H.]

The historical sources are unanimous that the first Muslim migration to Abyssinia was in Year 5 of the Prophetic mission. If Aisha was born in Year 4 of the Prophetic mission, there is no way she could have remembered her father heading towards Abyssinia. But the correct date for her birth is 4 years before the Prophetic mission: this is consistent with her remembering her father’s attempted journey, when she would have been around 9 years old.

3.6        The appropriate age of marriage

In his Musnad, section on Aisha, Imam Ahmad narrates that when the Prophet’s first wife Khadijah bint Khuwaylid died, Khawlah bint Hakeem, wife of Uthman bin Maz’oon, came to the Prophet and suggested that he should remarry. When the Prophet asked to whom, she said,

“A virgin or a matron, as you wish.”

The Prophet replied, “A virgin.”

Khawlah then recommended Aisha.

This establishes that Aisha was ready for marriage at this time, and that the Prophet did not need to wait for a few years.

The Qur’an (Women, 4:6) confirms that the minimum age of marriage is the same as that for financial responsibility.

Therefore, there is no way that Aisha could have been only 6 years old at this time.

3.7        Aisha’s previous engagement

In his Musnad, Imam Ahmad also narrates from Khawlah bint Hakeem that Abu Bakr had already agreed with Mut’im bin Adi that Aisha would marry the latter’s son, Jubayr bin Mut’im.  Abu Bakr then called off this engagement so that she could marry the Prophet.

Now, there is no way that Abu Bakr would have engaged her to Jubayr after the beginning of the Prophet’s mission, because Mut’im and his family were polytheists; Jubayr even fought against the Muslims at the Battles of Badr and Uhud.  Thus, this engagement must have been when Jubayr and Aisha were both children, before the Prophet’s mission began.  This again confirms that Aisha could not have been born four years into the Prophet’s mission; in fact, she was born four years before it began, as we have established above.

3.8        Aisha remembering the revelation of a Qur’anic verse as a child

Imam Bukhari narrates that Aisha said: “I was a little girl playing when this verse was revealed to Muhammad: Nay, the Hour is their appointed time; the Hour is more calamitous and more bitter.[3]

Now, it is established that Surat al-Qamar was revealed c. 614 CE, around four years into the Prophet’s mission.  This again is consistent with the correct view that Aisha would have been around 8 years old at this time: this fits with her saying, “I was a little girl playing then.”

3.9        A virgin must not be married without her permission

Imam Bukhari also narrates from the Prophet that he said, “A virgin must not be married without her permission.” 

It is impossible that the Prophet could say such a thing and do the opposite, for if the original hadith is to be believed, Aisha was six years old and playing with her friends and dolls when she got married – there is no mention of her permission being asked.  And even if it had been, it would have no Sharia acceptability, since it was before her age of responsibility, puberty and intellectual maturity.

3.10    Aisha nurses the wounded at the Battle of Uhud

[Salahi reminds us that Imam Bukhari also quotes that Aisha, along with Umm Salamah, nursed the Muslim soldiers at the Battle of Uhud, which took place 18 months after her marriage.[4]  Had she been nine upon marriage, she would have been only eleven at this time.  The Prophet did not allow anyone under 15 to join the army as a soldier – would he have allowed a girl of 11 to come along?  (Abdullah bin Umar turned 15 between the Battles of Badr and Uhud: he was not allowed to participate at Badr, but was allowed at Uhud.)]

4         Criticism of the chain of transmission

The original hadith has five routes of narration in Sahih Al-Bukhari.

4.1        The narrations in Bukhari are all suspect, because they are those of Hisham bin ‘Urwah to the people of Iraq

The five different chains of transmission (isnad) given by Imam Bukhari all have two narrators between him and Hisham bin ‘Urwah, who narrates from his father ‘Urwah from Aisha.  Thus, the hadith is singly-narrated by Hisham, Urwah and Aisha.  The two narrators between Bukhari and Hisham in each case are all people of Iraq:

  • Farwah bin Abi l-Mighra’ and Ali bin Mishar
  • ‘Ubayd bin Isma’il and Abu Usamah
  • Mu’alla bin Asad and Wuhayb
  • Muhammad bin Yusuf and Sufyan [bin ‘Uyaynah]
  • Qabisah bin ‘Uqbah and Sufyan [bin ‘Uyaynah]

Hisham appears to be the weak link in this chain.  Ibn Hajar narrates in his Hady al-Sari as well as in his Tahdhib that Imam Malik did not approve of Hisham’s narrations to the people of Iraq. Imam Malik said that Hisham went to Kufa in Iraq three times to narrate hadiths: the first time, he said: “My father narrated to me that he heard Aisha …” The second time, he said: “My father informed me on the authority of Aisha …”  The third time, he said: “My father, on the authority of Aisha …”

In other words, Imam Malik did not accept Hisham’s narrations in Iraq, since he went there to narrate in his old age when his memory had faltered somewhat, and he practised tadlis, i.e. obscuring or omitting the mode of transmission, making the narration suspect. 

4.2        Hisham never narrated these hadiths in Medina: the Muwatta omits them completely

Furthermore, Imam Malik learnt hadiths directly from Hisham in Medina for many years, but the age of Aisha at marriage is not mentioned in the Muwatta at all.  Thus, Hisham never mentioned this narration at all in Medina, but only in Iraq where his narrations are suspect anyway.  These considerations strengthen the earlier historical ones, confirming that the hadith about the age of Aisha is seriously flawed.

5         Conclusion

Islam Bahiri concludes:

Aisha was about 18 years old when her marriage to the Prophet was consummated, and not nine.  The narrations of Bukhari and Muslim saying otherwise are textually corrupt and dubious in their chains of transmission.  They contradict the law (Sharia), the intellect, authentic hadiths, and the customs, habits and ethos of the age of Prophethood.  Furthermore, they are completely incongruous with the timeline of the Prophetic mission.

Thus, we are not obliged to revere Bukhari and Muslim more than the Prophet, peace be upon him.  We have the right to reject what they accepted and accept what they rejected.  Islam is neither confined to the scholars of Hadith and Fiqh, nor to their time.  Thus, we are able to critique, correct and evaluate the books of Hadith, Fiqh, Sirah and Tafsir.  We are able to reject the numerous mistakes and fabrications found in them. In the end, these books are a purely human heritage: we are not obliged, and in fact it does not befit us, to imbue them with sacredness or divinity.  We are equal human beings to the people of our history.

6         References

  1. Islam Bahiri, Aisha’s marriage to the Prophet aged nine – a big mistake (or lie) in the books of Hadith (in Arabic), Al-Yawm al-Sabi’, 15th July 2008. Reproduced in Jamal al-Banna, Tajrid al-Bukhari wa Muslim min al-ahadith allati la tulzim [Expunging Bukhari and Muslim of non-binding hadiths], Da’wah al-Ihya’ al-Islamiyyah, Cairo, Dhu l-Qi’dah 1429 / November 2008.

  2. Adil Salahi, Muhammad – His Character and Conduct, Islamic Foundation, Markfield, 2013, pp. 203-5

[1] Al Kamil fi l-Tarikh by Ibn al-Athir; Tarikh Dimashq by Ibn ‘Asakir; Siyar A’lam al-Nubala’ by Dhahabi; Tarikh by Tabari; Al-Bidayah wa l-Nihayah by Ibn Kathir; Tarikh Baghdad by Khatib Baghdadi; Wafayat al-A’yan by Ibn Khillakan and many others.

[2] The three years’ uncertainty in her date of death is simply due to uncertainty between the pre-Islamic lunisolar Arabian calendar and the Islamic lunar calendar: over a century, the two differ by three years. – U.H.

[3] Qur’an, Surat al-Qamar, The Moon, 54:46

[4] Bukhari, Sahih, Kitab al-Jihad wa l-Siyar (Book of War and Military Expeditions), Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah, Beirut, 1423/2002, p. 530, no. 2880.

Boris Burkas

August 14, 2018

With the Name of God, the Apparent, the Hidden

BORIS BURKAS

 

 

  1. The “Boris Burkas” controversy is a good opportunity to further debate around the Islamic veil in a civil way. A key issue is that the niqab or face-veil does not (currently) have the social acceptability in the UK that it does in some Muslim-majority countries. There needs to be more civilised dialogue to help wider society understand why thousands of British women choose to wear a face-veil in public. Conversely, the principles of Islamic ethics and law dictate that public security and safety is of paramount importance: we also need an internal dialogue amongst proponents or defenders of the face-veil about this issue.
  2. It is important to summarise what Boris said: he critiqued the Danes, some of whom still swim stark naked in public, for banning the burka (or correctly, niqab). He expressed the wish that the fringe practice of face-veiling, at which he poked fun, would disappear in Britain, but opposed a ban. He also echoed Jack Straw’s 2006 call for face-veiling to end.
  3. I recently spent an hour in a residential area of the Highfields district of Leicester, and observed that about half of all women walking on that street wore the niqab. Several had teenage daughters with them who covered their hair but not the face.  There are clearly a few parts of UK cities, such as Birmingham, Leicester, Blackburn and elsewhere, where the niqab is quite common, although nationally it is a fringe practice.
  4. Face-veiling was clearly known in pre-Islamic Arabia, including amongst men. Reasons for it included simple environmental ones such as the problem of sandstorms – Arab horsemen riding with their faces covered are a familiar sight in the desert. Cultural practices often become divorced from their origins. It is for this reason that Tuareg men still cover their faces with the tails of their turbans, sometimes even when indoors. At the Marrakech Declaration conference in 2016, the most senior Islamic cleric of Niger attended wearing this traditional Tuareg dress.
  5. Aside from culture, veiling also of course has religious and spiritual dimensions. Islamic culture and tradition continued and adapted many Jewish, Christian and Arabian pre-Islamic practices. The veiling of women in Islam came to fundamentally symbolise higher theological and metaphysical truths, the most central of which is that God is veiled by creation, and the veil (hijab) between humanity and God is lifted in the Hereafter for those who purify their souls sufficiently. Now, God has the Most Beautiful Names: a traditional Islamic idea is that the masculine represents and manifests Transcendence, Majesty and the Outer whilst the feminine represents and manifests Immanence, Beauty and the Inner. (These metaphysical concepts related to gender are explored in ‘The Tao of Islam: A Sourcebook on Gender Relationships in Islamic Thought’ by Sachiko Murata, 1992.) Of course, there are other, non-traditional views on the subject, especially more modern ones.
  6. Thus, the Muslim woman became veiled because she represented the Divine Beloved and the Divine Beauty. Her veiling in public also became an extension of her home-based role, where she remained in purdah (a curtain or veil), a term that has ironically been borrowed for the suspension of UK parliaments before elections. Occasionally, veiling applied to men too: we can also be beloved sometimes, and there is a minority South Asian Muslim practice of veiling the bridegroom – I have witnessed this at a wedding in the UK. Of course, the Christian practice of veiling the bride is well known in the UK. The Muslim caliph, sultan or local emir was sometimes veiled in public, to preserve an element of mystery, respect and power. His doorkeeper was literally known as “the veiler” (hajib). Metaphysically, the ruler here represented the Divine Majesty and Divine Power. Of course, there is a gender-asymmetry here that may be mistaken for, or perverted into, gender-inequality, as Munira Mirza alludes to in her article on this subject.
  7. Boris was wrong to comment that he could find no scriptural justification for face-veiling in the Koran, on two counts. Firstly, his comment is inaccurate, since traditionally, some Islamic authorities have interpreted some verses to include face-veiling, as I described in detail in my 2011 paper, Islam and the Veil. Secondly, his comment implies that scriptural literalism is justified, whereas scripture was always supposed to be read alongside considerations of history, society, morality, spirituality and ethics. NB: at least Boris was closer to the mark than the Prince of Wales, who famously and inaccurately said in his 1990s lecture at the Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies, that “veiling was a cultural tradition, and not from the Prophet of Islam.”
  8. Clearly, face-veiling is not fully accepted in UK society, as politicians’ comments from Jack Straw (2006) onwards illustrate. However, it is not totally unknown, so there are cultural blindspots in operation. I have already mentioned the bridal veil, a beautiful Christian tradition. There is also the practice of entertainers and party-goers wearing masks. In 2013, I attended an interfaith meeting at Lambeth Palace, that was also addressed by Baroness Warsi: in his closing remarks, Justin Welby, Archbishop of Canterbury, referred to “masqued parties” in previous centuries at the palace, that he said were a euphemism for wife-swapping parties. To this day, British newspapers continue to report about private sex parties where all participants wear masks. This again raises the question of private vs. public practice.
  9. In contrast to the UK, face-veiling is clearly socially-acceptable, and even the norm, in some parts of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan and other Muslim-majority countries, where people might invert Boris’ comments and speak of “bank robbers dressed as women.” In Saudi Arabia, I noticed that niqabs were of different levels of opacity and transparency, and saw young girls having great fun lifting and lowering their veils as they peered out at the world in preparation for a religious, socially-conservative adult life. During my years of teaching at mosque, college and university in the UK and Pakistan, the female students adopted diverse dress-codes with regard to covering or not covering their heads and faces, and there was always social acceptance from other students and teachers, both male and female. I have also come across face-veiling teachers in Islamic schools in the UK and Pakistan. In Pakistan, “Burka Avenger” is a popular cartoon series promoting education and female empowerment.  It was so successful that it was bought by Nickelodeon Pakistan. Islamic face-veiling has come to the UK via British multiculturalism and needs to be understood seriously, rather than treated with knee-jerk reactions.
  10. Having grown up in the UK since the age of five, I was at first uncomfortable talking to women in niqabs, but I learnt to respect their choices and to gauge basic emotions such as sadness or joy from their eyes. To return to a spiritual aspect of this question, I find sunglasses, that are obviously worn by both men and women, annoyingly including indoors, to be far more of a barrier to meaningful contact: in many spiritual traditions around the world, the eyes are a window into, and a mirror of, the soul. Clearly, eye-contact is prohibited by ray-bans, whereas at least you can tell if a niqab-wearer is smiling from the twinkling of her eyes. If we can’t see each other’s eyes, we can’t see into each other’s souls.
  11. Having said all of the above, there is a clear principle of Islamic ethics and law that public welfare (maslaha) overrides most other considerations. In western, (post-)Christian societies, there are genuine concerns about social acceptability and public security. This must be considered in the debate, especially by defenders and proponents of face-veiling.
  12. Anecdotally, I have come across several western non-Muslim men, who describe the veil as being “sexy” and “mysteriously attractive.” This raises another internal question for some Muslims: if the veil is supposed to symbolise and promote modesty and chastity, how do we guard against it becoming counter-productive?

CONCLUSIONS

  1. Boris Johnson should apologise for the offence caused by his comparing face-veiled women to pillar-boxes and bank robbers. Perhaps in the future, such comments will not be offensive because the national debate will be mature and integrated enough for face-veiled women themselves to laugh along with the jokes. But with all the racial and religious tensions in the UK, particularly around Islam, visibly-different Muslim women are one of our most vulnerable minorities, especially those who wear the niqab. A senior politician, a possible future Prime Minister, should display higher standards in public and be more responsible: for example, he probably knows that he would never get away with similarly mocking the characteristic dress of British ultra-orthodox Jews.(DISCLAIMER & APOLOGY: On a private electronic discussion group of salafi activists c. 2009-10, I once made a flippant remark about our men and women dressing like “clowns and ninjas.” I was making a serious point about integration and traditional dress, by which I stand: public perception and respect for local society is important in Islam. But the comment was made public and used against me by my opponents during the 2011 Tawhid Mosque controversy, so for the record, although many salafis told me that they found the comment funny, I would like to apologise for any offence caused.)
  2. We need more civilised and mature debate in the UK to address at least two major aspects of this issue. Firstly, I hope that more proponents of the niqab, especially face-veiled women themselves, articulate their thinking and experience so that wider society understands the practice better, leading to more social acceptance and less fear around it, as exists already in many Muslim-majority countries. Secondly, I hope that the proponents and defenders of the face-veil consider genuine concerns in wider society around security and facial visibility, since the niqab has not been native to these shores in the past.
  3. Those insisting that the niqab be discarded are taking an illiberal position: it is better to have a respectful debate. If, as a result, some or all women remove their niqabs, then all well and good from the perspective of opponents of niqab, but those women’s free choice must be respected. I know of several British Muslim women who used to wear a niqab, but stopped doing so for reasons of social cohesion after 9/11 and 7/7. On the other hand, I was told anecdotally that more young women wore the niqab as a defiant response to Jack Straw in 2006. And in the same year, a white British female convert to Islam who had worn the niqab for 10 years, gave Channel 4’s alternative Christmas Day message.
  4. It is better to debate a matter without settling it, than to settle it without debating. I hope and pray that this whole controversy leads to a better understanding of the issue in the UK through constructive debate.
  5. Boris Bikes were a huge success. There might be a lucrative commercial opportunity right now for someone to market a suitable line of “Boris Burkas.” But joking aside, I would genuinely love to see Boris discuss this issue with a niqab-wearer, especially one that could match his wit and stand up for her free choice. It would be very helpful for both sides to have such an interaction. I hope someone can arrange such an encounter.

 

Usama Hasan

London

14th August 2018

 

Jesuit Muslims

December 28, 2016

JESUIT MUSLIMS (OR MUSLIM JESUITS)

From Ibn ‘Arabi, al-Futuhat al-Makkiyyah [The Meccan Revelations], Dar Ihya’ al-Turath al-‘Arabi [House of Revival of Arab Heritage], Beirut, 1418/1997, vol. 1, pp. 286-291.

[NB: This is not about the Christian, Roman Catholic Order of Jesuits, but refers to Muslims who also follow Jesus in their practices and states.]

With the Name of God, All-Merciful, Most Merciful

Chapter 36: On the recognition of [Muslim] Jesuits …

Know, may God strengthen you, that the Way of Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, includes all previous ways, and that the latter have no validity in this world save that of them that is endorsed by the Muhammadan Way, by the endorsement of which they remain valid. We exert ourselves in worship via these ways because Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, endorsed them, not because the prophet specific to that way in his time endorsed it.

This is why the Messenger of God, peace be upon him, was given “Comprehensive Words” (jawami’ al-kalim). Thus, when a Muhammadan does a work, and the entire responsible universe today of human and jinn is Muhammadan, for there is no divine way in the universe today except for the Muhammadan Way, this worker from the [Muslim] nation may coincide in his work, with an opening in his heart and path, with a path of one of the previous prophets that it is included in this Way, which endorses it and the result of following it. Thus, such a person will be attributed to the founder of that way and called Jesuit (‘Isawi), Mosaic (Musawi) or Abrahamic (Ibrahimi) …

There is no prophethood with a way (shar’) after Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace … This is why it is mentioned in the report that “the people of knowledge are the inheritors of the prophets” …

The original Jesuits are the disciples and followers of Jesus … the second Jesuits are those who followed Jesus directly without a veil and then followed him via Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, and there is an experiential difference between the two. This is why the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said about such a person, “Truly, he will be rewarded twice” [cf. Qur’an, The Story, 28:52-55], and similarly, such a person has two different sets of inheritances, openings and experiences, in each of which he is only attributed to the relevant prophet.

These are the second Jesuits. Their base of principles is to unify God, free of all likenesses. This is because the initiation into existence of Jesus, peace be upon him, was not by way of a human male, but by the manifestation (or likeness) of a spirit in the form of a human [Q. Mary 19:17]. This is why the doctrine of God manifested in a form dominated the nation of Jesus, son of Mary, over all other nations: they make forms, images and likenesses in their churches, and worship within themselves by focusing their attention on these. The origin of their prophet, peace be upon him, was by a likeness, so this reality has continued amongst his nation until now.

Then, when the Way of Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, came and forbade likenesses (images), whilst he, peace be upon him, included the reality of Jesus, and his way in his, he laid the path for us, peace be upon him, “that we worship God as though we see Him,” in imagination, which is the meaning of making images. But he forbade us from this (making images) in the sensual/physical world, lest physical forms or images [of God] should appear in this nation.

Furthermore, this particular teaching, “Worship God as though you see Him,” was not stated to us by Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, directly; rather, it was stated by Gabriel, peace be upon him, and it was he who appeared in the total likeness of a man to Mary at the conception of Jesus, peace be upon him … We were the ones addressed by that statement, which is why it occurs at the end of the tradition, “This was Gabriel: he wished for you to know, since you would not ask”; or in other narrations, “He came to teach the people their religion,” or “He came to you, to teach you your religion” …

Moreover, you should know that their [the Jesuits’] base of principles also includes the teaching that comes from ways other than that of Jesus, peace be upon him, “… but if you were not able to see Him, then truly, He sees you.”

Our shaykh, Abu l-‘Abbas al-‘Uraybi, may God have mercy upon him, was Jesuit at the end and extent of his path, which was the beginning of ours [i.e. the beginning of Ibn ‘Arabi’s path was Jesuit]; then we moved to a solar, Mosaic opening, then to Hud, peace be upon him, then to all the prophets, peace be upon them. After that, we moved to Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace. Thus was our matter in this path, may God establish us in it and not divert us from the straightness of the path …

Jesuits have extremely active aspiration, their prayers are answered and their speech is heard. One of the signs of the Jesuits, if you wish to recognise them, is that you will see each of them having mercy and compassion towards everyone, whoever they are, no matter what religion they follow. They entrust other people’s matters to God: when they address the servants of God, they do not utter anything that will constrain people’s hearts in respect of anyone at all.

Another of their signs is that they see the best in everything and only goodness flows from their tongues … e.g.

(1) What is narrated from Jesus, peace be upon him, that he saw a pig and said to it, “Go safely, in peace.” Upon being asked about this, he replied, “I train my tongue to speak goodness.”

(2) The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, passed by a carcass and said, “How beautifully white are its teeth!” whereas those with him said, “How horrible is its stench!”

(3) The Prophet, may God bless him and grant him peace, commanded the killing of snakes in specific situations and informed us that God loves courage, even if only in killing snakes. However, despite this, when he was in the cave in Mina where Surah al-Mursalat [Qur’an Chapter: The Messengers, no. 77] descended upon him (it is known as the Cave of al-Mursalat until today – I have entered it, seeking blessings), a snake came out of its hole and the Companions rushed to kill it but it frustrated them, the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace, said, “Truly, God saved it from your evil just as He saved you from its evil.”

[3a] He thus named it (killing snakes) “evil”, even though it is a commanded matter, just like His saying, Most Exalted, regarding retribution, “The reward of a bad deed is a bad deed like it; [so whoever forgives and reforms, their reward is with God: truly, He does not love the oppressors” – Q. Consultation 42:40] – He named retribution a “bad deed” and encouraged forgiveness.

Thus, the Prophet’s eye, may God bless him and grant him peace, only fell upon the best aspect of the carcass. Similarly, the friends of God only see the best in everything they look at: they are blind to the faults of people, although not to faults in themselves, for they have been commanded to avoid these. Similarly, they are deaf against listening to obscenity and dumb against uttering bad words, even if this is allowed in some places.

This is how we have known them [the Jesuits], so Glory be to the One who purified them, chose them and guided them to the straight path. “They are the ones whom God has guided: by their guidance, follow!” [Q. Cattle 6:90]

This is the station of Jesus, peace be upon him, within Muhammad, may God bless him and grant him peace, for he preceded him in time and these states were transmitted from him by the latter. God said to His Prophet [Muhammad], may God bless him and grant him peace, after mentioning several prophets including Jesus, peace be upon them, “They are the ones whom God has guided: by their guidance, follow!” [Q. Cattle 6:90].

However, the station of Messenger determines that the beautiful must be explained and distinguished from the ugly in order to be known, as the Exalted said, “… that you may explain to the people what has been revealed to them” [Q. The Honey-Bee 16:44]. Thus, when he explained the bad side of a person, it was by inspiration from God, such as his saying about someone, “What a bad son of his tribe!” Similarly, Khidr killed a lad and said about him, “His nature had been stamped as an ingrate unbeliever (kafir)” and reported that if he had left him alive, he would have behaved badly towards his parents. He also said, “I did not do that of my own accord.” [i.e. it was by God’s command; Q. The Cave 18:74, 80-82]

Thus, the essences of such people, whether prophets or saints, are characterised by kind speech, seeing the best in everything and listening attentively only to goodness. However, if there is the occasional exception to this, it is by divine command, not from their own tongue.

This is what we have mentioned of the states of the Jesuits, as facilitated by God upon my tongue, “and God speaks the Truth and He guides to the Way.” [Q. The Confederates 33:4]


Abridgment and Translation: Usama Hasan

London, 28th December 2016 / 29th Rabi’ al-Awwal 1438

 

FREEDOM – Islamic reflections on Liberty

December 25, 2016

With the Name of God, All-Merciful, Most Merciful

FREEDOM

Reflections by Imam Usama Hasan, Head of Islamic Studies at Quilliam Foundation, in preparation for the Inspire Dialogue Foundation conference in Cambridge, Saturday 17th September 2016, hosted by Lord Rowan Williams, Emeritus Archbishop of Canterbury

There are many universal human rights: arguably, freedom is one of the basic ones, intertwined with life itself. As Tipu Sultan, the famous Indian resistance leader against the British, exclaimed: “better to live one day, free as a lion, than to live as a slave for a thousand years.” Caliph Omar once berated one of his commanders, who had followed the common pre-Islamic medieval wartime practice of enslaving the women and children of a defeated army, asking: “how could you enslave people whom God had created free?!” echoing Moses’ defiant response to Pharaoh in the Qur’an (26:22), which asks: “is this the favour, of which you are reminding me, that you have enslaved the Children of Israel?”

Theologically, true faith is based on free will and free choice: any practice that is not free, including faith and religious observance, cannot be genuine. Hence the famous Qur’anic declaration (2:256), “There is no compulsion in religion!”

The centrality of freedom to faith raises important issues: drugs, alcohol, mental illness, carnal lusts and social pressures all mean that our choices and decisions in life are not totally free. How, then, are these actions judged by fellow humans and by God? In particular, one of the goals of religious practice has always been to remove internal shackles that inhibit our expression of humanity, enabling greater self-awareness and realisation of our potential. Thus, a tradition of the Prophet Muhammad says that “the world is a prison for the believer,” i.e. the moral person, and great sages survived imprisonment because they were, internally, free spirits. Ideas of freedom and liberty have, of course, strongly shaped the modern world since the 18th century with the abolition of slavery, French and American republican ideals and anti-colonial independence movements.

It is my firm belief that the great philosophers, sages and prophets: Moses, Mary, Christ and Muhammad, Buddha and Confucius, and men and women of God through the ages, supported the liberation of men and women of all colours, races and religions, children and slaves, individuals and populations, from the yokes of tyranny and oppression. Our modern heroes in this regard range from Wilberforce to Jefferson to Gandhi, Jinnah, Martin Luther King and Mandela.

But today, we still have our modern forms of slavery: bonded and child labour; entire multiple-generation families working in sweatshop factories; highly-organised international rings dealing in human trafficking, including that of children, for financial and sexual exploitation. Therefore, we need to address the above problems by rekindling the same spirit that historically liberated children from labour into education, slaves from enslavement into liberty, peoples from colonisation into independence, and people of colour from segregation and apartheid into civic equality.

Tony Blair, whilst UK Prime Minister, once said in an historic speech on Capitol Hill that “to be American is to be free.” In reality, as spiritual-animal beings made in the image of the Divine, to be human is to be free. Now, let’s continue with working towards inner and outer freedom, and sharing it with our fellow travellers, with the goal of reaching our full and common humanity.

The coward of the caliphate

July 1, 2015

Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim [With the Name of God, All-Merciful, Most Merciful]

[MUSLIM TUNISIA – LOGO]

BREAKING NEWS: Tens of innocent holiday-makers, supporting the economy of Muslim Tunisia and the livelihoods of Tunisian Muslims, killed and injured in a cowardly attack in the city of Sousse in Muslim Tunisia

9 Ramadan 1436 [26 June 2015]

In a cowardly attack, which God facilitated Muslim members of the local security services to cut short and save many innocent lives, a coward of the so-called caliphate, the loser Abu Yahya, calling himself al-Qayrawani, as though he was steeped in prayer and learning at one of the world’s most ancient mosques and universities, although neither was the case, launched an inhuman attack upon Muslim-owned resorts where innocent, guest civilians were enjoying their summer holidays, supporting the economy of Muslim Tunisia and the livelihoods of Tunisian Muslims, and benefiting from traditional Muslim hospitality in the city of Sousse. Taking advantage of soft targets on the al-Qantawi beach: men, women and children, including families and the elderly, our deluded brother was unfortunately able to reach the Imperial Hotel. Rather than attempting to share the beautiful teachings of mercy, compassion and kindness of the Noble Qur’an and the Holy Prophet, a mercy to the worlds, Abu Yahya mercilessly killed nearly forty people aged 19 to 80 in cold blood and injured just as many, leaving little children psychologically and emotionally traumatised. Most of them were nationals of western democracies where millions of Muslims enjoy unparalleled freedom and prosperity as equal citizens, including the freedom to practise their faith and criticise their governments. This was a painful blow and a message dyed with blood to the 99% Muslim Tunisia and their civilised friends of all faiths and humanistic philosophies, from a small band of people devoid of true faith, understanding, compassion or humanity. Civilised people should seek God’s refuge and protection against more sad news in the coming days, by the permission of God, for in Muslim Tunisia, there are hate-filled, ruthless and raging madmen who do not sleep on the absurd grievances taught to them by their tours of qital [fighting for the sake of fighting, devoid of ethics and humanity] in Iraq, Syria, Libya and elsewhere. We ask God to accept the innocent victims amongst the ranks of the martyrs, and make from their blood a ray of light to illuminate the path of noble and courageous people everywhere. We ask God to envelop the innocent victims in His Mercy and Compassion, and to deal with their murderer with His Infinite Justice. [END]

The caption under the photo of Seifeddine Rezgui that is being circulated online reads, The coward of the so-called caliphate Abu Yahya (may God deal with him harshly), the loser who carried out the attack on Muslim Tunisia, murdering people from the same western nations that taught him to enjoy break-dancing and the football of Real Madrid

 

Make sense?  Now read the pathetic and monstrous original:

[ISLAMIC STATE TUNISIA – LOGO]

BREAKING NEWS: Tens of Crusader coalition nationals killed and injured in unique raid in the city of Sousse in Muslim Tunisia

9 Ramadan 1436 [26 June 2015]

In a unique raid, for which God facilitated the causes of success, a soldier of the Caliphate, the gallant knight Abu Yahya al-Qayrawani, launched an attack upon the filthy dens where prostitution, vice and disbelief in God are bred in the city of Sousse. In spite of the stringent security protecting these target dens on the al-Qantawi beach, our brother was able to reach the target in the Imperial Hotel. God enabled him to defy the infidels with a great defiance, killing nearly forty and injuring just as many. Most of them were nationals of states of the Crusader coalition that wages war on the state of the Caliphate. This was a painful blow and a message dyed with blood to the apostates in Tunisia and those behind them, their masters in the Crusader alliance. They should brace themselves for good news that will sadden them in the coming days, by the permission of God, for in Muslim Tunisia, there are gallant men who do not sleep on the grievances taught to them by their tours of jihad in Iraq, Syria, Libya and elsewhere. We ask God to accept our brother amongst the ranks of the martyrs, and make from his blood a ray of light to illuminate the path of monotheists everywhere. [END]

The caption under the photo of Seifeddine Rezgui that is being circulated online reads, The soldier of the Caliphate Abu Yahya al-Qayrawani (may God accept him), the knight who carried out the raid in Muslim Tunisia.

ISIL on Tunisia hotel attack 2015

 

Read both visions and narratives for the world, and make up your mind.  Choose the right one, and share it with others! As Muslims, including British Muslims, we need to challenge extremist and murderous rhetoric robustly whenever it appears, dismantling its arguments so that we do not leave a shred of doubt for impressionable people.  May God guide us to help heal humanity’s self-inflicted wounds, and not deepen them further.

Usama Hasan

London, 14 Ramadan 1436 / 1 July 2015

Abortion – Rulings in Islamic Jurisprudence and Muslim-majority countries

October 23, 2014

Bismillah.  Here is a translation I put together for my presentation at the International Summer School on Science and Religion, Paris, August 2014.

The discussion is interesting because these Sharia scholars refer to the modern science of embryology in their discussion, although there are one or two minor errors in the scientific references.  The traditional juristic positions are based on Qur’an/Hadith, so abortion is prohibited after 0, 40 or 120 days, with some exceptions.  Thus the hadiths are not conclusive.  But the science is not conclusive either as to “beginning of life”: people make a case for 0 days (conception), 40 days (foetal brain activity) or 120 days (development of major organs).  Note that the latter two views are relevant to “end of life” discussions also, i.e. brain-death vs. organ-death.  In the end, this is a complex ethical problem with medical and religious input: the material provided below is intended to educate, clarify and provoke thought and debate around this difficult topic.

Rulings on Abortion – Islamic Jurisprudence (PDF)

Abortion laws in OIC countries – summary (PDF with UK, US & France for comparison; the 7 most common justifications for abortion in legal systems around the world are interesting, according to the UN; research by Sofia Patel)

[Update 26/10/2014:]

Here are some suggested study/discussion questions:

1. What does Islamic tradition say about the beginning of life? (0 days = conception; 40-49 days = 6-7 weeks; 120 days = 4 months = 17 weeks 1 day)

2. Are the hadiths about ensoulment after 40 or 120 days related to Aristotle’s view (40 days for boys; 80 days for girls) ?  Do these have a common origin (e.g. divine revelation), or did Greek ideas influence the transmission of some hadiths?

3. Is Ibn al-Qayyim’s comparison of pre-ensoulment foetal life to plant life valid? Is this related to the Ikhwan al-Safa’s theory about mineral/plant/animal/human soul, all derived from the Cosmic Spirit?

4. Is abortion ever justifiable in Islam?  If so, under what conditions?

5. How far are the 7 international legal justifications for abortion, listed by the UN, compatible with the holistic, universal objectives of Islamic law (maqasid al-sharia) ?

6. Islamic jurists often speak about the danger to a mother’s life or health in discussions about abortion.  Are considerations of a mother’s mental health also relevant or included in such discussions?

7. Are there are any other considerations regarding the welfare (maslaha) of mother and foetus/child, consistent with the letter and spirit of Islamic law, that should be taken into account in such discussions?

With the Name of God, All-Merciful, Most Merciful

 

ABORTION, STAGES OF THE EMBRYO AND THE BEGINNING OF LIFE

 

Summarised from: Dr. Ali Muhyi l-Din al-Qarahdaghi & Dr. Ali Yusuf al-Muhammadi, Fiqh al-Qadaya al-Tibbiyyah al-Mu’asirah (Jurisprudence of Contemporary Medical Issues), Dar al-Basha’ir al-Islamiyyah, Beirut, 1426/2005, pp. 428-451

 

Summary and translation by Dr. Usama Hasan

August 2014

 

 

Contents

 

1        A General Ruling on Abortion. 2

 

2        Specific Rulings on Abortion, related to the Stages of the Embryo. 2

 

2.1        The “mixed fluid” stage (al-nutfah al-amshaj): days 0-8. 3

2.2        The “clinging” stage (al-‘alaqah): days 9-22/23. 3

2.3        The “chewed lump” stage (al-mudghah): days 23/24-42, i.e. up to 6 weeks. 3

2.4        The stage of the creation of bones, and the clothing of them with flesh. 4

2.5        When is the spirit breathed in? [ensoulment] 4

2.6        [The view of modern science] 5

2.7        Our view.. 5

 

3        Rulings on Abortion. 7

 

3.1        [Fatwa of the Islamic Fiqh Academy] 8

3.2        [Resolution of the Islamic Organisation for Medical Sciences] 8

3.3        Views of past jurists about abortion. 8

3.4        [Discussion] 9

3.4.1        [Abortion is prohibited in general, as per Ghazzali’s view] 9

3.4.2        [Ibn Taymiyyah’s view] 10

3.5        Summarised Juristic Rulings Related to Foetuses. 10

3.6        The Ruling on Abortion due to Deformities. 11

 

 


1. A General Ruling on Abortion

Abortion is, in general, haram (morally and legally prohibited and sinful) unless out of necessity due to the mother’s life: abortion is allowed if the mother’s life is in danger, or if she is in danger of great and severe harm.

 

This is indicated by all the Qur’anic verses that prohibit transgression on any person’s life in any stage of life, e.g. Whoever kills one person … it is as though he has killed all people;[1] Do not kill your children due to poverty: we sustain you and them;[2] Do not kill your children due to fear of poverty: we sustain them and you.[3]

 

As for abortion being allowed to save the mother’s life, this is from the evidence indicating that the foetus owes its existence to the mother so it cannot cause her death; also, her life is real and stable, and is therefore preferred over the foetus’ life that is not certain. This falls under repelling a greater harm by tolerating a lesser harm.[4]

 

2. Specific Rulings on Abortion, related to the Stages of the Embryo 

The specific ruling on abortion is connected to the stages of the embryo, from the fertilisation of ovum by sperm to the breathing of the spirit into it and the completion of these stages.

 

The Qur’an mentions that the human was created from dust that turned to dry clay. Clay includes various minerals such as iron, phosphorus, calcium, copper, etc. It also has subtle plant-like and animal-like structures. God created Adam from this clay, and from Adam He created Eve. Then natural reproduction continued with the mixing of the man’s semen and the woman’s ovum, each one of them contributing 23 chromosomes to the genetic code. God calls this the “mixed fluid.”[5] This is the basis of the creation of humans, except for the miraculous creation of Jesus, peace be upon him.[6]

 

The stages of the embryo, [that give rise to] the ruling on abortion at each stage, are as follows:

 

2.1    The “mixed fluid” stage (al-nutfah al-amshaj)[7]: days 0-8

 

This is the fertilisation of the ovum by sperm, and may be done artificially outside the womb. The fertilised cell divides, becoming 16 cells after about 4 days. These settle in what the Qur’an calls a “safe place,” i.e. the womb: Then We made him a drop of fluid in a safe place.[8]

 

2.2    The “clinging” stage (al-‘alaqah): days 9-22/23

 

God described this stage with “creation”[9] whereas the previous stage was described as “making,” indicating that this stage has characteristics and changes that make it deserving of such a label.[10]

 

The ‘alaqah linguistically relates to “clinging,” i.e. to the womb wall. The group of cells that developed by division from a single one are composed essentially of a nucleus and cytoplasm, having no limbs or other distinguishing structures of a human body, but they suck their necessary sustenance and oxygen inside the womb from the structures and fluids around them.[11] This stage lasts 2 weeks.

 

2.3    The “chewed lump” stage (al-mudghah): days 23/24-42, i.e. up to 6 weeks

 

This stage is so named[12] because the embryo looks like it has been chewed by a human mouth. During this stage, the heart cavity forms, as do the reproductive organs. The small umbilical cord, which grows as the foetus develops, transports the necessary sustenance and oxygen to the foetus from the mother and its waste products in the other direction.

 

All the stages, up to and including this one, end around 40-42 days, as stated by specialist doctors and embryologists. Around 42 days, a new stage of development begins, when the embryo begins to take the form of a human being with all its apparatus, following which the stage of a new creation beings after the breathing of the spirit: We clothed the bones with flesh, then We began a new creation – so Blessed is God, the Best of Creators![13]

 

Scientific instruments and investigation, as well as imaging of the foetus inside the womb, have all shown us that the foetus takes the form of a human after the sixth week, i.e. after about 42 days of pregnancy,[14] and this is also indicated by the hadith of Sahih Muslim (see below).

 

2.4    The stage of the creation of bones, and the clothing of them with flesh

 

The skeleton begins to become apparent after 40 days. Its initial centres of development are the jaw and collar-bone, followed by the thigh and shin.

 

2.5    When is the spirit breathed in? [ensoulment]

 

[Canonical hadiths speak of three stages of creation of the foetus, each lasting 40 days, after which there is ensoulment. However, the hadiths are slightly ambiguous as to whether these three stages are consecutive or parallel. Respectively, these two interpretational possibilities imply ensoulment after 120 days or 40 days, and traditional authorities are indeed divided into two camps about this. Interestingly, Aristotle taught that ensoulment for boys and girls occurred after 40 days and 80 days, respectively. – Translator’s note]

 

All the stages, up to and including this one, end around 40-42 days, as stated by specialist doctors and embryologists. Around 40-42 days, a new stage of development begins, when the embryo begins to take the form of a human being with all its apparatus, following which the stage of a new creation beings after the breathing of the spirit. The foetus takes the form of a tiny human after the sixth week, i.e. after about 42 days of pregnancy. This is also indicated by the various narrations of Sahih Muslim that mention the basic creation of a person in their mother’s womb taking 40, 42 or 45 days and nights. One narration mentions “40 plus a few nights.”[15]

 

Hafiz Ibn Hajar says, “Once the fluid remains in the womb for 40 days or nights, God gives permission for its [full] creation … this is when the angel descends upon it … The narrations of the hadith of Ibn Mas’ud agree on 40 days; the hadith of Anas does not mention any timing; the narrations of Hudhayfah’s hadith differ: some of them mention 40, others 42, 43, 45 or ‘40 plus a few’.”[16]

 

The scholars reconcile these narrations by saying that they may differ according to individual embryos; according to Qadi ‘Iyad, the narrations mean that the following stages occur at the beginning of the second period of 40 days, i.e. days 41-80.[17]

 

2.6    [The view of modern science]

 

In modern embryology, this period of days 40-49 is when the embryo becomes a foetus, and when ultrasound is able to detect the beating heart. The bone skeleton also begins to appear.[18] Hence, these narrations do not contradict.

 

Modern science also indicates that the initial creation (Stages 1-3) is completed in the first 40-odd days. However, one hadith in Bukhari and Muslim appears that to say that each of Stages 1-3 takes 40 days, after which the spirit is breathed in, i.e. after four months or 120 days.[19]

 

However, if we analyse this hadith carefully, we find it does not unequivocally indicate the meaning that the previous people of knowledge understood. In fact, its beginning agrees with the others hadiths of Sahih Muslim which say that all three stages are completed within the first 40-odd days. The word thumma can mean “then” for consecutive stages or “moreover” for simultaneous stages. “With such interpretations,” says the leading authority Dr. Muhammad Salam Madhkur, “the hadith agrees with modern medicine.”[20]

 

2.7    Our view

 

There are three major stages, based on our understanding of the hadith of Ibn Mas’ud in Bukhari:

 

  1. From the fertilised egg to the beginning of the small human form (0-40 days, roughly)
  2. Formation of a small human (40-120 days, roughly)
  3. Breathing of the spirit (ensoulment), i.e. 120 days onwards

 

Any intentional harm to the embryo is haram (prohibited) after 40 days.

 

In terms of life:

 

  1. 0-40 days – there is the lowest level of life, beginning with the developing cell life. Cell division leads to similar living cells that form a structure, but this does not reach the level of human life.
  2. Week 6: the foetus begins to take the form of a small human. Ultrasound detects its heart beating. Blood circulation begins to work. Major skeletal nodes appear.
  3. Week 7: Thigh and shin bones appear.
  4. Week 8: Upper and lower arm bones appear, as do weak, stretching movements.       However, this does not represent complex human life.
  5. End of Week 11- Week 12: the foetus enters a new, distinctive stage. Its brain is developed, its functions start: the beginning of a human entity emerges clearly, as follows. Movements develop from reflex reactions to complex, compound actions such as bending the back, raising the head, kicking the feet and moving the mouth and lips. Brain stem activity begins, sending electrical signals to the heart.       Periods of rest and stillness follow activity and movement: sleep and waking, sensation and shock, jump and play. Electrical signals appear that can be recorded and traced to the foetal brain, indicating surface brain activity.

 

However, the doctors say that the brain is not fully-formed in terms of its basic structure until the 4-month mark. Dr. Muhammad Ali Albar says, “At the end of the fourth month, the foetus can hear and make movements by its own will. Individual, personalised facial features appear. Do not all these indicate the breathing of the spirit?”

 

All this is the medical aspect of the issue, revealed by modern medicine and rare, modern instruments that monitor the development and movements of the embryo and foetus; none of these means were available in the past. If we analyse this modern knowledge and the hadiths on the subject, we find that there is no contradiction. In particular, only one hadith seems to mention three periods of 40 days; most of the narrations mention a total of 40, 42, 45 or 40-odd days.

 

Modern medicine does not speak about the spirit, which is mentioned in the hadith. Only God knows the nature and reality of this spirit.[21] The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, informed us that this spirit is breathed in after 120 days, so this must be affirmed.

 

Although bear in mind that only one narrator from Ibn Mas’ud, Zayd b. Wahb, mentioned the breathing of the spirit after 120 days; the rest of the narrators mentioned the writing of sustenance, lifetime and eventual misery or happiness, but did not mention the breathing of the spirit; neither did the other Companions who narrated the hadith: Ibn ‘Abbas mentioned it, but did not attribute it to the Prophet, peace be upon him.[22] It is possible to reconcile these two hadiths: the angel visits twice – once after 40 days to arrange the formation of the foetus and again after 120 days to breathe the spirit.[23] God knows best.

 

According to the doctors, life begins with a single cell but gradually develops into a full human life. The jurists draw the line (for full human life) at 120 days, which is when the spirit is breathed in. Similarly, all plants and animals enjoy life but do not benefit from the spirit of God that is breathed into humans, and on the basis of which the angels were commanded to prostrate to the human.[24]

 

The moment of breathing the spirit at 120 days is a matter of the unseen – humans and our medicine cannot know it, so we must accept it without interpretation or explanation, especially since it does not contradict modern science. After 120 days, the foetus is a complete human, deserving all that a human being enjoys after birth: respect, rights and the prohibition of harm against it.

 

Plant life has less power than animal life, which has less than human life. Animals may have more or less chromosomes: apes have more than other animals, whilst humans have the most at 46 chromosomes.[25]

 

Imam Ibn al-Qayyim mentions two types of embryonic life:

 

  • plant-like life before ensoulment, and
  • complete, human life after ensoulment.[26]

 

Foetal life after 40 days is complete in a material sense, just like complete animal life but more respected than the latter since it is in the fundamental human form. However, it lacks the divine breathing that bestows, and God knows best, the special human attributes such as knowledge, logical thinking, deduction and analysis as explained in the verses about the creation of Adam. God created Adam to settle in the world and civilise it and to be its steward, so He breathed His Spirit into him, taught him the Names. He gave him, along with knowledge and logical deduction, the capability to act. Along with intellect, He gave him choice and will. These higher attributes do not appear in the early stages of the foetus, but only after 120 days, e.g. voluntary movement etc.

 

3. Rulings on Abortion

It is undoubtedly haram (prohibited) to harm the embryo that is younger than 40 days. The prohibition becomes more severe after 40 days. The greatest prohibition occurs after 120 days, in which case killing the foetus would be like murdering an independent human being. These levels of prohibition are appropriate in Islam to describe the size of the crime and its effects.

 

3.1    [Fatwa of the Islamic Fiqh Academy]

 

The Islamic Fiqh Academy issued a ruling (no. 56-6/7) prohibiting abortion absolutely, and mandating medical techniques to save and protect the lives of embryos and foetuses. Furthermore, Ruling No. 113 (12/7) says in Clause 2 that, “The embryo has a right to life as soon as it is formed. It must not be harmed by abortion, or by any type of damage …”

 

3.2    [Resolution of the Islamic Organisation for Medical Sciences]

The Council on Conception, part of the Islamic Organisation for Medical Sciences, issued the following resolution: “The Council has considered contemporary medical, scientific realities explained by modern research and medical technology. It concluded that:

 

  • the foetus is alive from the beginning of pregnancy
  • its life is to be respected during all stages, and especially after ensoulment
  • transgression against the foetus by abortion is not permissible, except for an extreme medical necessity
  • some members disagreed, allowing abortion before 40 days, especially in case of a valid reason”[27]

 

3.3    Views of past jurists about abortion

 

  • The schools of jurisprudence in the past agreed that abortion was haram (prohibited) after 120 days.[28] Some of them even said that this was so when the mother’s life was in danger, e.g. Ibn ‘Abidin said, “If the foetus is alive, abortion is prohibited, since the mother’s death is hypothetical and it is not permissible to kill a human being on the basis of a whimsical matter.”[29] But if her death is certain or very likely, not simply hypothetical, then her life is to be given precedence over the foetus’, which may be aborted.
  • As for before ensoulment, most jurists regard abortion as prohibited (haram) also, unless it is to safeguard the mother. This is the view of the Malikis and Ibadis, the dominant view of the Hanafis and Shafi’is, one view of the Hanbalis and the apparent view of the Zahiris.[30] Some of the Hanafis, Shafi’is, Malikis and Hanbalis allowed abortion before ensoulment[31], as did the Zaydis on condition that both parents agreed. Some jurists, including Lakhmi (Maliki) and Abu Ishaq Marwazi (Shafi’i) allowed abortion before 40 days, but prohibited it thereafter.[32] Some Hanafis allowed abortion before ensoulment for a valid reason, even if it did not reach the level of necessity, whilst others specified the condition of necessity.[33] Some Shafi’is allowed abortion before ensoulment if the conception was via illegal extra-marital sex (zina: fornication or adultery).[34]

3.4    [Discussion]

 

The majority of jurists held that abortion was prohibited at any stage based on:

 

  • the verses prohibiting the taking of life, e.g. 6:151 and 17:33. A foetus is a life without doubt.
  • God forbade pilgrims from hunting (5:95), and the Prophet forbade the destruction of ostrich eggs by pilgrims, stipulating their value in compensation in cases of violation.[35] Malik said, “I have always heard that the compensation due upon a pilgrim for killing an ostrich is a camel. In case of an ostrich egg, my view is that the amount is a tenth of a camel’s value, just as the compensation for the foetus of a freewoman is to free a slave, male or female; these are worth 50 dinars, which is a tenth of his mother’s blood-money.”[36] Ibn al-Qasim said, “Malik compared the egg to a foetus,” i.e. in essence, like a foetus that is prohibited to harm.

 

3.4.1   [Abortion is prohibited in general, as per Ghazzali’s view]

 

Thus, the stronger view is that of the majority, i.e. that harming embryos is prohibited, even before ensoulment. One researcher who emphatically supported this position was Imam Ghazzali. In explaining the difference between coitus interruptus and abortion before ensoulment, he said: “The child is formed when the sperm enters the womb … Coitus interruptus is not like abortion or burying the infant alive because the latter two are crimes against an existing thing that is of different stages. The first stage is that the sperm enters the womb, mixes with the woman’s water and prepares to accept life: spoiling this would be a crime. Once it becomes a chewed lump and a suspended lump, the crime becomes more obscene, and even more so once ensoulment has taken place and the process of creation has levelled out. The extremity of such obscenity is once the foetus has become an independent life [i.e. been born as a baby].” He then mentioned that the beginning of the embryo’s existence is from the entry of semen into the womb.[37]

 

3.4.2   [Ibn Taymiyyah’s view]

 

Shaykh-ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah was asked about a man who said to his wife, “Abort your foetus: the sin is upon me.” If she does this, what expiation is due upon them both?

 

He answered: “They must free a believing slave: if they are unable to, they must both fast two months consecutively. In addition, they must give compensation to the heirs of the foetus who did not kill it: not to the father, for he ordered its killing, and so deserves nothing.” In answer to another question, he said, “Abortion is prohibited by the consensus of the Muslims: it is like burying children alive or killing them, which God has forbidden (81:8-9 & 17:31).”

 

He also said about a woman who aborted her foetus by striking her belly or by drinking medicine, “She must give compensation to the heirs of the foetus, other than the mother, by the Sunnah of the Messenger of God and the agreement of the Imams.”[38]

 

3.5    Summarised Juristic Rulings Related to Foetuses

 

  1. Blood-money and expiation if prohibited abortion is carried out: the perpetrator, whether father, mother or someone else, must pay the blood-money, which is a tenth of that of the mother according to the Malikis and Shafi’is; others distinguish between a male and female foetus.[39] According to the Shafi’is and Hanbalis, expiation is also due, being the freeing of a slave if possible, otherwise fasting for two consecutive months.[40]
  2. The waiting-period (‘iddah) of a widow or divorced woman ends by [termination of the pregnancy:] delivery of the child or abortion of the foetus.
  3. The father of the child must pay maintenance for the pregnant mother in case of divorce.[41]
  4. A pregnant woman may break her fast during Ramadan if she fears harm.[42]
  5. Delay of the punishment for extra-marital sex [i.e. flogging and/or stoning to death] whilst the woman is pregnant. [43]
  6. The foetus has incomplete personhood, so it has rights of inheritance etc.[44]

 

3.6    The Ruling on Abortion due to Deformities

 

The following declaration was issued by the Islamic Fiqh Academy of the Muslim World League:

 

The Academy analysed this matter during its twelfth meeting held in Mecca 15-22 Rajab 1410 H / 10-17 February 1990 CE. The council of religious scholars, after consultation with specialist medical experts who attended for this purpose, declares the following:

 

  • Once pregnancy reaches 120 days, abortion is not permissible, even if medical analysis shows that the foetus is deformed. The only exception is if it is established, by a medical panel consisting of reliable, specialist experts, that the continuation of pregnancy comprises a confirmed danger to the life of the mother, in which case abortion is allowed, whether or not the foetus is deformed, in order to repel the greater of two evils.
  • Before 120 days of pregnancy, if it is established and confirmed, by a medical panel consisting of reliable, specialist experts, using instrument-based monitoring, that the foetus is dangerously and incurably deformed, and that if it remains and is born to term, it will have a bad life, with both it and its family suffering much pain, then in that case: abortion is permissible if the parents request it. The academy, whilst making this declaration, advises the doctors and parents in such cases to save themselves from God, and to take every caution in this matter.

 

[1] Q. 5:32

[2] Q. 6:151

[3] Q. 17:31

[4] Ibn ‘Abidin 5/377, al-Sharh al-Kabir with commentary by Disuqi 4/268, Sharh al-Kharshi 5/274, al-Iqna’ 4/129, Kuwaiti Encyclopaedia of Jurisprudence 2/59.

[5] Q. 76:1

[6] Q. 3:59

[7] al-nutfah: the ejaculated fluid of the man or woman; amshaj: a mixture of the essential parts of a thing. See the lexicons al-Misbah al-Munir, Lisan al-‘Arab and al-Qamus al-Muhit.

[8] Q. 23:13

[9] Q. 23:14

[10] Muhammad Salam Madhkur, al-Jinin [Foetuses], 1389, p. 56

[11] Dr. Mukhtar al-Mahdi, The Beginning of Human Life, Book 2 of the Islamic Organisation for Medical Sciences, Kuwait, pp. 65 onwards.

[12] Q. 23:14 & 22:5

[13] Q. 23:14

[14] Papers by Dr. Hassan Hathout, Dr. Mukhtar al-Mahdi, Dr. Ahmad Shawqi, Dr. Muhammad Na’im Yasin & Dr. Abdullah Salamah.

[15] The Arabic for “a few” here is bid’, which refers to a single-digit number, i.e. 1-9 maximum. (Translator’s note)

[16] Fath al-Bari 11/480-1

[17] Fath al-Bari 11/481

[18] Dr. Mukhtar al-Mahdi’s paper, p. 65

[19] Fath al-Bari 11/481

[20] Al-Jinin (Foetuses), p. 54

[21] Q. 17:85

[22] Fath al-Bari 11/468

[23] Ibn al-Qayyim, Kitab al-Ruh [The Spirit], p. 205

[24] Q. 38:71-72

[25] This is not true: some apes have 48 chromosomes, with a very clear and close relationship to the 46 human chromosomes. (Translator’s note)

[26] Kitab al-Ruh, p. 38 & Shifa’ al-‘Alil, pp. 38-41

[27] Book 1, Islamic Organisation for Medical Sciences, p. 351

[28] Fath al-Qadir 2/495 [Hanafi], Hashiyah al-Disuqi 2/267 [Maliki], Nihayat al-Muhtaj 8/416, Al-Majmu’ 5/301 [Shafi’i], Al-Mughni 7/815 [Hanbali], Al-Muhalla 11/29-31 [Zahiri].

[29] Ibn ‘Abidin, Hashiyah, 1/602

[30] See sources previously cited.

[31] See sources previously cited; also al-Furu’ 6/191, al-Insaf 1/386

[32] See sources previously cited; also Rahuni’s commentary on Zurqani 3/264; Sharawani 6/248; Nihayat al-Muhtaj 8/416

[33] Ibn ‘Abidin 2/380

[34] Nihayat al-Muhtaj 8/416

[35] Ibn Majah, Sunan – Manasik 3077; Ahmad 744-5

[36] Al-Mudawwanah 2/437

[37] Ghazzali, Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din [Revival of the Religious Sciences], 2/53

[38] Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmu’ Fatawa [Collected Fatwas], 34/159-161

[39] Meaning that the blood-money for a male is double that of a female. (Translator’s note)

[40] See sources previously cited; also Bidayat al-Mujtahid 2/656

[41] This implies that this payment comes to an end upon abortion. (Translator’s note)

[42] This implies that this concession comes to an end upon abortion. (Translator’s note)

[43] This implies that this punishment is due upon abortion.  The authors are referring to ancient/mediaeval punishments, although the Ottomans abolished these in the mid-19th century, since they were no longer suitable for the age. (Translator’s note)

[44] See the brilliant book by our teacher, Muhammad Salam Madhkur: Al-Jinin [Foetuses], where he has explained this in detail.