Posts Tagged ‘Muslim’

The Muslim Arsenal

June 1, 2026

THE MUSLIM ARSENAL

1st June, 2026 CE ~ 15th Dhul Hijjah (Month of Pilgrimage) 1447 H

Bismillah. So, this is not about Pakistan’s nuclear bomb: rather, here are some reflections after almost half a century of being a Muslim Gooner, with the last day of the Hajj (Pilgrimage to Mecca) and Eid al-Adha (Festival of Sacrifice) being followed by yesterday’s Arsenal Champions Parade celebrating a very successful 2025-26 season.

Above: Allah, then Arsenal (Photo: Usama Hasan)

Contents

Some childhood memories.

1       A is for Allah, and then for The Arsenal

2       “Arsenal” is derived from Arabic.

3       A tongue-in-cheek fatwa: All North London Muslims should support the Arsenal. It is haram to support certain other teams.

4       Is Football analogous to Religion?

5       Football reflects human emotions, life-lessons and even spirituality.

6       Love vs. Hate: we shouldn’t hate Tottenham.

7       Some Muslim Arsenal players, and the meanings of their names.

Some childhood memories

Our parents moved to the UK in July 1976 (and I’ve followed every FA Cup Final since then) and the vast majority of their children, children-in-law and grandchildren support The Arsenal. (The outliers include a couple of Liverpool fans and a quartet who support Chelsea.) Thus, the 2026 Premier League title marks a glorious celebration of 50 years in this country for the Gooners in our family.

We lived in North London for two over two decades, 1976-1997, before most of us moved to the East End of London to be near the Al-Tawhid (Unification) Mosque in Leyton. In North London, we actually lived in the Wood Green / Tottenham area for over 20 years. At our local primary school, most kids were Spurs fans, but a substantial minority were Arsenal. At my secondary schools in Muswell Hill and Friern Barnet, it was pretty even between Arsenal and Spurs, whilst Arsenal support dominated at my sixth-form at the City of London School for boys, although there was also substantial Liverpool support. As our father once commented, we should have been supporting our local club, Tottenham Hotspur aka Spurs, but thanks to reasons about which I’m not entirely clear, related to my older brothers and their friends, we ended up choosing the “red” (and “right”) half of North London.

Some of my best friends at primary and secondary schools were Spurs fans. At secondary school, I once needed a new sports/PE kit bag. My dear Mum, not knowing quite how seriously we took our football rivalries, bought me a Spurs PE bag from a local shop – we lived in Tottenham, remember! It felt embarrassing and shameful to take this school weekly for a couple of years, since I had no choice, although I did minimise the damage by ‘accidentally’ spilling some white paint over the Spurs logo on the bag.

For many years at the end of the 1970s and beginning of the 1980s, our father would bring my older brothers and me to the Asian Centre on the Seven Sisters’ Road, next to the Finsbury Park tube station entrance/exit, on Saturday mornings for Arabic, Qur’an and Urdu lessons. This building is now occupied by ‘Halal House’ and a bookshop for the adjoining Muslim Welfare House. From the top floor of the building, we could actually see the Clock End shed and southeastern corner of the nearby Highbury pitch, and I would sometimes climb up there and gaze longingly at that ‘hallowed turf’: we weren’t allowed to go to football matches because that wasn’t done in devout Muslim families at the time; furthermore, we always went home (to Tottenham!) around 1pm, otherwise we could have had a free, albeit extremely limited, view of 3pm home games on Saturday afternoons. We did, however, witness streams of fans driving past the Asian Centre with Arsenal and Wembley flags on the day of the 1980 FA Cup Final, that we lost 1-0 to West Ham.

We had to go shopping with parents that afternoon, and I listened on the car radio to the first part of the final, including Trevor Brooking’s headed goal. We watched the second half on TV at home: this ended in a heartbreaking defeat. Dad then announced that he had to give a lecture at a mosque somewhere, and that his sons had to accompany him, as usual. As luck would have it, this mosque was in East Ham, next to West Ham, and on our drive to the mosque, to compound our misery, we got stuck in a traffic jam consisting of Hammers fans blaring their horns loudly and waving their flags, ecstatic at their well-deserved, giant-killing victory. Just days later, we lost on penalties to Valencia in a European cup final, after a 0-0 draw aet. Parallels between 1980 and 2026 then, in terms of two cup-final defeats, except that this time we clinched a glorious league title to compensate.

Above: Fans walk past Halal House, next to the iron gates of the Muslim Welfare House, Seven Sisters Road, EPL Title Parade, 2026. Next door used to be the Asian Centre in the 1980s. From the top floor windows, a corner of the Highbury pitch was visible. (Photo: Usman Hasan)

In 1989 during the George Graham era, I went to my first Arsenal match. A Jewish friend from school, Eddie, showed me the ropes: he waited for me with his dad outside the tube station and I accompanied them to Highbury. Entrance was £3. We lost 3-1 to Nottingham Forest. I later went to our penultimate home game, since we were in pole position to win the league: five points ahead of Liverpool, although having played a game more. However, we lost 2-1 to Derby. Dean Saunders scored both of Derby’s goals, and later signed for Liverpool. Derby’s goalkeeper was the legendary Peter Shilton. Simultaneously, Liverpool came from behind to beat Wimbledon 2-1 away. The opposing sets of fans at Highbury, glued to their radios, let the opposing fans know each time a goal was scored by chanting the name of the team scoring in the other game. In midweek, Liverpool won their game whilst we drew 2-2 at home to Wimbledon, who thus had a major influence on the title trajectory at the end of the season. Liverpool also won their game in hand.

The league title that season (1988/89) was decided fatefully at Anfield: Liverpool v Arsenal, the last game of the season, being played days after all the other final-round fixtures, on a Friday evening. (Due to the Hillsborough disaster, Liverpool’s matches had been rescheduled, leading to this unusual slot). The match would kick-off around 8pm; the second half around 9pm. Sunset would be at around half-time. This posed a problem for Jews observing Shabbat (Sabbath), since the more devout ones would not be allowed to watch the match, due to Shabbat being reserved for worship. There were two Jewish lads in my sixth-form tutor group who were also football fans: Andrew (Liverpool) and Stacey, a keen Gooner who regularly went to away matches, even on school nights. Andrew told me that due to Shabbat beginning at sunset, coinciding at half-time of the title decider, he would watch the first half and put the second half to record on the VCR timer, only to watch it 24 hours later at the end of the Sabbath. Throughout Saturday until sunset, he would avoid going out or talking to anyone who might tell him the score. Andrew was far more Orthodox than Stacey, and in fact I didn’t even know that Stacey was Jewish. I asked Stacey whether he would be with the away fans at Anfield. “No, I’m Jewish,” he replied. “Oh,” I asked him, “so you’ll watch the first half, record the second half and watch it back a day later?” “No, I’m not that Jewish!” came Stacey’s hilarious reply.

Liverpool were now three points clear of us, with a goal difference better by four goals. However, we had scored more goals, so we needed to win by two goals to become league champions for the first time since the League/FA Cup double-winning season of 1971. The title decider in 1989 was 0-0 at half-time. Alan Smith scored midway through the second half, and Michael Thomas scored in injury time at the end of the game to earn us a remarkable and deserved title, since we had led the table for most of the season. Just as our victory over Man U in the 1979 FA Cup “three-minute” Final was the greatest FA Cup Final ever in my eyes, our last-gasp title in 1989 was the greatest top-flight title of all time.

1        A is for Allah, and then for The Arsenal

‘Alphabet’ of course is derived from alpha-beta, the first two letters of the Greek alphabet. A comes from alpha; in Hebrew and Arabic, Semitic sister-languages, the first letter of the alphabet is aleph and alif respectively. Both aleph and alif are written as a simple vertical stroke, like the English capital I, which is also how the foundational number 1 is written. One is also written with a simple vertical stroke in English: no surprise, since numerals in English are Arabic numerals. Here is how Alif and the Arabic number 1 appear on my wordprocessor: ﺍ , ١

Thus, aleph, alif, alpha and a are primary, in the sense of being the first letter of the alphabet. Aleph and Alif are primary and foundational in terms of mathematics also, since they also denote the number One. It is no coincidence that in Arabic, the name Allah for the One Source of Everything begins with alif, the primal letter and number.

English alphabet books for kids usually begin with a is for apple.

In Urdu, it’s usually: alif is for anar – pomegranate.

In Arabic, it’s: alif is for asad – lion.

In the 1980s or 90s, Yusuf Islam, the pop singer formerly known as Cat Stevens, released a song and album entitled A is for Allah.

That A (or Alif) is for Allah is intuitive to devout Muslims. My love for the Arsenal was always increased by the cool fact that our team name also began with A, so that we have always been the first team listed alphabetically in the top division during my lifetime. Luckily, R occurs just before S in the English alphabet, so Aston Villa always come after us in this list. Arsenal’s alphabetic prominence is likely to remain for a long time, unless Aldershot Town FC somehow make it to the Premier League. (The Scottish team I picked to support from childhood is Aberdeen, simply because of their similar alphabetical leadership.)

Hence, for Muslim Gooners: A is for Allah, and then for The Arsenal.

2        “Arsenal” is derived from Arabic

Talking of Arabic, the English word Arsenal is actually derived from Arabic, possibly via Ottoman Turkish.

The origin is dar sina’ah (or sina’at) al-aslihah, meaning ‘house of weapons manufacture’, i.e. a weapons factory. This three-word phrase became contracted to Arsenal by the dropping of the initial d, contraction of the middle word and eliminating the final word whilst retaining its definite article al- (the). Thus:

dar sina’at al-aslihah → ar-sina-al → Arsenal.

Thus, the Arabic for ‘weapons factory’ became transformed into the English for ‘weapons store.’

Given this Arabic origin of the name Arsenal, it is entirely appropriate that we have (or had) official Arabic calligraphy on our new stadium since 2006, announcing its name: the Emirates (al-imārāt), referring to our sponsor, the national airline of the emirate of Dubai from the United Arab Emirates.

3        A tongue-in-cheek fatwa: All North London Muslims should support the Arsenal. It is haram to support certain other teams.

Given that (i) the name Arsenal is derived from classical Arabic, the sacred language of Islam;

(ii) our neighbours and biggest rivals are Spurs: being a team with strong Jewish (Israelite) roots leading to them being dubbed a ‘Jewish club,’ the physical and spiritual cousins of Arabs (Ishmaelites) and Muslims;

We can imagine a fatwa: All North London Muslims should support the Arsenal. This is wajib (obligatory). Furthermore, it is prohibited (haram) to support Spurs, since they are a different, albeit related and neighbourly, tribe. It is also prohibited to support any team with an emblem or nickname that is blasphemous, such as The Red Devils (Manchester United) because of its clear Satanist connotations.

4        Is Football analogous to Religion?

Talking of fatwas, it should be obvious that football (and sports in general) has many similarities with religion. The tribalism of supporters. The “sacred rituals.” Football stadia stimulate the local economy, just as mosques do on a smaller, although more regular, basis: there are over 2,000 mosques in the UK, and I estimate that the average attendance for weekly Friday prayers is about a thousand people: thus, businesses near mosques have a total, potential market of about two million people every Friday lunchtime. The pitches in major stadia are regularly described as “hallowed (holy) turf.” The pilgrimages to the home stadium. On the latter, two examples stand out: Anfield became a shrine and a “holy” site of pilgrimage after the dreadful Hillsborough disaster, 1989; the Emirates stadium, when Arsenal clinched the title coincidentally during the Islamic “Month of Pilgrimage” (Dhul Hijjah) to Mecca, the holiest days of the year. At Paddington station last week, I bumped into three young Saudi men who had flown over for their first visit to the UK “because of Arsenal.” On the train two days later, after our trophy-lift at Crystal Palace, an Indian man sat next to me on the train – he had flown in that morning from Houston, Texas. Gooners were said to be flying in from New York City and elsewhere for the parade yesterday. There were hundreds of thousands of Gooners celebrating at the Emirates stadium on the night we clinched the title, I estimated, and the crowd sizes beneath the elevated stadium were reminiscent of the crowds in Mecca, with the Grand Mosque and its minarets towering over them. (Nearly 60,000 attend every fortnight for home games; multiply this by many times to account for all the fans who came for a free celebration.) At the parade today, there were anywhere between half a million and two million fans, depending on various estimates. When I mentioned the international nature of these celebrations to my father, he commented, “It’s like Hajj!” Indeed, in more ways than one, given that this has all coincided precisely with the actual Hajj season.

Above: the waxing crescent moon (3rd night hilal) of Dhul Hijjah 1447, the Month of Pilgrimage to Mecca, over the skies of London, 19 May 2026. The first 13 days of this month, especially the first 10, are the holiest days of the Islamic calendar. We beat Burnley on the 2nd night and were confirmed champions the next night. The Champions League final began just after sunset in Mecca on the 13th. The blessings did not quite last for Arsenal, who lost the penalty-shootout. (Photo: Usama Hasan)

Above: Jupiter, the waxing crescent moon (hilal) of Dhul Hijjah 1447 and Venus over Arsenal fans outside the Emirates Stadium on the 3rd night of the lunar month (19 May 2026), when we were confirmed as Premier League Champions.

Talking of parades, the daily and nightly scenes of celebration around the Emirates Stadium over the past fortnight have showcased London’s diverse and multicultural scene. People of all faiths and none have come together in a spirit of harmony. Images from Africa of fans in Arsenal thobes (Arab robes) have gone viral, as has the Mayor of NYC Zohran Mamdani’s Indian-style Arsenal kurta at Eid Prayers. (The latter was blue, probably because Mamdani is a Democrat and Arsenal’s home colour of red is associated with Republicans, Trump and the MAGA movement.) Muslim women in red headscarves were prominent at the celebrations. This is a powerful rejoinder to divisive, far-right groups such as the so-called “Football Lads’ Alliance.”

I once gave a Friday prayers sermon (khutbah) on this topic at Imperial College Islamic Society, c. 1997. It was generally well-received, especially by football fans. Some years earlier, I’d talked to a Cambridge University lecturer in English Literature about this topic, after discovering that he was passionately following Arsenal’s title-winning campaign in 1990/1. “Do you think football is like religion?” I asked him. “Yes, it’s my religion substitute!” he replied.

Many football players who are believers regularly pray before or after matches, or invoke their faith in God. In the current Arsenal setup, it is said that Saka, Eze and Madueke participate in Bible study groups together. Eze makes the sign of the cross when he scores, and Saka points to heaven. In previous years, Arsenal had many Muslim players, of whom a bit more later. Mesut Ozil would always lift his hands in prayer before matches, palms facing the heavens, in keeping with Islamic tradition that is interestingly shared by many African Christian players, unlike the Western Christian tradition of putting hands together in prayer.

Many Muslim football players place their foreheads on the ground in prayer, in a pose of prostration (sajdah) upon scoring a goal. Demba Ba did this every time he scored for Newcastle United, before leaving the club after refusing to wear the shirt, since their main sponsor was now a gambling firm. When Egypt scored first against England at Wembley once, the entire team placed their heads on the ground in prostration. Prostration is done for gratitude in this context and brings about humility. “Be Humble!” has now become a phrase associated with football players as well as religious leaders. I was disappointed when a leading English footballer-turned-presenter once mocked the practice as “eating grass”, although it is clear that he wasn’t aware of its significance. In contrast, English cricket commentators have always been aware that Pakistani cricketers’ prostrations, eg after the 1992 World Cup Final, were gestures of prayer and gratitude.

Ultimately, true religious pilgrimage in all religions connects with the Sacred, the Transcendental, the Immanent. It would be easy to dismiss football, but its power to unite (and divide) people cannot be ignored. “Football represents controlled aggression,” Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks once said on a BBC TV documentary about Arsenal bringing Muslim and Jewish children to play football together. “Rather than fighting physically, we compete sportingly.” (Sacks, and the former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, were both Arsenal fans.)

Sacks’ comment applies to many (all?) sports, especially team sports like football, cricket and rugby. Centuries ago, our ancestors would wage physical battles against invaders; modern team sports have evolved from the same human passions for conquest and defence, victory and revenge. Even the nature of many team sports involves invading and conquering territory (rugby, football) or applying well-timed blows (cricket). In the past, non-combatants would encourage their armies by loud cheering and waving banners, practices that continue in modern team sports.

One of the reasons that World Cups in various sports arouse so much passion is precisely because international matches are a controlled version of war. National sentiment reaches epic proportions, and there was even the “Soccer War” between Honduras and El Salvador in 1969.

After the recent 2026 title win, the Arsenal legend Thierry Henry, in a social media post, addressed Gooners worldwide as “Dear Arsenal Nation, …” In Arabic/Islamic terms, this is equivalent to saying: ya ummat al-Arsnal, as opposed to the more usual, ya ummat al-Islam (O Nation of Islam!).

There is a question here for Muslim Gooners: is it possible to be a member of both the Arsenal Nation (ummah) and Muslim Nation (ummah)?

If so, let’s widen the question: is it possible to be a member of both the British [or insert your political nationality here] Nation (ummah) and Muslim Nation (ummah)?

Thus, football illustrates a crucial question about the loyalties of believers in contemporary nation-states.

5        Football reflects human emotions, life-lessons and even spirituality

“Be Humble!” is an important religious and spiritual lesson that has recently become popularised by top football players. Football mirrors many human emotions: joy and sadness, happiness and sorrow, love and hate. It also teaches life-lessons, such as the cycles of success and defeat. For me, three memorable examples stick out:

Firstly, the Manchester City “bottle guy” who surely regrets mocking us with his stunt now.

Secondly, In 1995, David Seaman was the goalkeeping hero in a European semi-final penalty shootout against Sampdoria but conceded the winning goal scored by Real Zaragoza from the halfway line in the final in the last minute of extra time; to top the irony, the goalscorer was a former Spurs player, Nayim!

Thirdly, In 2006, Jens Lehmann was another goalkeeping hero in the Champions League semi-final, saving a last-minute penalty from Villareal to ensure victory, but was sent off early in the final against Barcelona – a major factor in our eventual, heroic defeat.

But the fruits of patience and perseverance are arguably visible in our triumph now after a raft of second-place finishes over the past decade, including three-in-a-row before this year.

6        Love vs. Hate: We Shouldn’t Hate Tottenham

Because our approach to life should be based on the essential Qur’anic message of mercy and love, there should be no room for hate. Chants of “we hate Tottenham and we hate Tottenham … we are the Tottenham-haters” and “Stand up if you hate Tottenham,” ubiquitous at Arsenal matches are utterly wrong. Why are Spurs living rent-free in our heads, anyway? Pity them, maybe, and even respect them where appropriate, eg they’ve won two European trophies in the past half-century whilst we’ve only won one. On the other hand, we’ve reached two Champions League finals to their one, although North London has lost all three. We should have confidence in the values of our own club, and not be obsessed with others. This is analogous to the spiritual teaching of looking inwardly and not pointing fingers at others outwardly. I thus request Arsenal fans to stop such unbecoming chants. They got Jack Wilshere into serious trouble in 2015!

I once met two Jewish brothers, who supported Arsenal and Spurs respectively. I mentioned the above point to the Gooner brother, saying that we shouldn’t chant hate against Spurs, since Abrahamic believers should focus on love, not hate. “Well yes, but there have to be some exceptions!” he replied.

As a part-time imam, I often conduct nikah ceremonies: Islamic wedding blessings. I once came across a brother and sister, both passionate Arsenal fans, who had amazingly and independently ended up marrying passionate Spurs fans!  Football rivalries evoke powerful emotions – witness the well-known spikes in domestic abuse after Old Firm derbies (Glasgow, Celtic v Rangers) and last year’s employment tribunal ruling that bosses can reject applicants who support rival football team to existing staff – so I was inspired by meeting these couples who showed that love can indeed conquer hate. 

Respect is important, as is healthy rivalry. North London Derbies, much like India-Pakistan cricket matches, become very boring when they’re one-sided.

This section could be added to the fatwa above!

7        Some Muslim Arsenal & Spurs players, and the apt meanings of their names

William Saliba – his surname roughly means “The Crucifier.”

Mesut Ozil – Mesut is the Turkish form of the Arabic Mas’ud, meaning “One Made Happy.”

Marouane (Marwan) Shamakh – “Towering Rock”

Jehad Montasser (Jihad Muntasir) – “Victorious Jihad”. This was a youth player who played a few minutes for our first team during one of those weird “Simod Cup” tournaments in the 1980s. Perhaps it’s just as well that he didn’t become an Arsenal legend, because 35,000 Highbury fans chanting “Jihad” every week would have been interesting, although it would have fit somewhat with our militant logo of a military cannon. (Cf. Ten Truths About Military Jihad)

Finally, a couple of Muslim Spurs players with interesting names:

Nayim (Na’eem): “a blessing.” Nayim is a practising Muslim from the Spanish enclave of Ceuta (Sibtah) in Morocco. I’m sure he’d claim divine blessings for that European-trophy winning-goal from the halfway line against us in 1995.

Nacer Chadli: his surname is the French spelling of Shadhili, indicating a family allegiance to a major Sufi order (tariqa), the Shadhiliyyah.

Above: The Arsenal Team Bus passing Holloway Mosque, Champions Parade, 31st May 2026. There were a number of mosques on the parade route around the Emirates Stadium, reflecting Arsenal’s significant Muslim support. These include the Holloway Mosque, the Muslim Welfare House, the Finsbury Park Mosque on St. Thomas’s Road (off Blackstock Road) and perhaps others.

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