عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

Do we Need A New Understanding of Islam?
Author : Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh
Date Added : 01-03-2015

Do We Need A New Understanding of Islam

 

 

Islam is Allah`s religion which He has approved to all mankind and through which he has sealed heavenly laws, completed virtuous behavior, and observed man`s nature and honor on this earth. It is so clear that it is understood by people from different backgrounds. Allah Says in the Noble Quran (What means): "Say thou: "This is my way: I do invite unto God,- on evidence clear as the seeing with one’s eyes,- I and whoever follows me. Glory to God! and never will I join gods with God!" [Yousef/108]. In light of the gruesome events befalling our nation at this critical time along with the acts committed in the name of Islam, some calls have emerged and these promote drawing a new map to Islam based on a new understanding of it. Unfortunately, these calls found a fertile soil for their growth due to the previously mentioned acts from which Muslims themselves have suffered before others. Therefore, are we really in need for a new understanding of Islam through drawing a new map to it and rephrasing texts of the Quran and Sunna (Prophetic tradition)?

Such calls contain a great deal of extremism that outweighs that which we are already facing. The repercussions will be so disastrous that the door will be wide open for more extremism and violence through providing different pretexts for extremists and everyone who has a tendency for extremism. These calls will appear as an invitation to waging war against Islam and a golden opportunity to attack it, and may be they are already as such whether their proponents had good intentions or not.

Undoubtedly, we are in a dire need to carry out serious reconsiderations of our understanding to Islam. If we are to define the nature and form of these reconsiderations, then we had better say that today we are in need for a sound understanding of our religion and its texts, and that we should start filtering it from impurities and ideas which are taken for granted by some scholars and  laymen. As a result, these have infected the Islamic mind with illnesses, which influenced our methodology of thinking and understanding. Thus, these acts and repercussions were a definite result for such illnesses.

Sound understanding of Islam must be built on sound bases: First, adherence to the Quran. Second, sound adherence to the Prophet`s Sunna. Third, sound understanding of their texts in light of the overall rules and intentions of Islamic Sharia in alienation from any deviations, distortions, or subjective interpretation of texts to support a certain thought or belief, or justify a certain act. This understanding must also be based on the rules and principles of Ijtihad (independent reasoning), and the suitable Ijtihad of earlier scholars, which are connected with the principles of Islamic Sharia and takes the wants and needs of this era into consideration, and agree with the overall  intentions and rules of Islamic Sharia.  By Filtering lots of opinions, acts of Ijtihad, and books of Jurisprudence in general, I don`t mean deleting them altogether, rather, intend to make their reader realize that they targeted a certain time or circumstance that doesn`t fit our era; or they came within the framework of an act of Ijtihad that had deviated from the methodology of sound understanding to the nature of our religion and its relation to life. This filtering doesn`t harm us or undermine our Islamic jurisprudence or belittle its status, God forbids, because Al-Imam Ahmad (May Allah have mercy on him) said that opinions of scholars are either adopted or dismissed except those of our Prophet (PBUH). Therefore, it isn`t permissible to shed blood, violate peoples` honor and usurp their properties based on some scholars` views which contradict the texts of the Quran and the Sunna as well as the overall intentions of Islamic Sharia. Such views are even regarded more sacred than the Quran and the Sunna through being adopted as a basis for reasoning instead of the Quranic texts, the sound Sunna and the methodology of Ijtihad which is based on sound understanding.

We must realize that since the death of our Prophet (PBUH) until today, our history has witnessed many scholars, Mujtahideen (Those who resort to independent reasoning), and thinkers, who did their best within the frame of their daily life, community and time. Thus, it isn`t acceptable for any group or sect during any stage of our history to impose the view of a particular scholar on others as the true religion which can`t be subjected to Ijtihad or interpretation and which should be imposed with the sword as a mercy to all creatures!! Nowadays, our Islamic world is actually witnessing a living example of this.

Yes, today we are in need for a sound understanding of Islam, but not a new one because sound understanding paves the road for our nation to overcome its illnesses and achieve its renaissance. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

"I told my family at night: 'I will fast tomorrow as qaḍā' (a make-up fast),' but I forgot to make the intention before sleeping. Is my fast valid?"

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
 
The intention is obligatory in acts of worship. For obligatory fasting, the required intention is to resolve to fast during the night [before dawn]. Its proper locus is the heart, while verbalizing the intention out loud in acts of worship is a sunnah — so that the tongue may align with the heart. If the intent behind the statement in question was the intention to fast, then it is valid; but if the intent was merely to inform someone, or reflected hesitation or doubt, then it is not valid.
 
It is stated in *Bushrā al-Karīm* (Vol.1/P.216): "It is a sunnah to verbalize the intention — that is, whatever has already been intended in the heart, whether an obligatory or a voluntary act — such as specifying the number of rak‘ahs, just before the opening takbīr — so that the tongue may assist the heart, and because this is further removed from whispered doubts (waswasah), and in order to accommodate the view of those who held it obligatory in every act of worship that requires an intention (even though this is a minority position), by analogy with Ḥajj."
 
Accordingly: if the intention to fast arose in your heart before the second adhān [i.e., before Fajr], then your fast is valid.
 
And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

The imam recited a verse containing a prostration of recitation (*sajdat al-tilāwah*) but did not prostrate. After the imam's *salām*, a follower (*maʾmūm*) performed a prostration of forgetfulness (*sujūd al-sahw*) because the imam had not performed the prostration of recitation. Is it permissible to go against the imam in this way?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
There is no sin on the imam if he omits the prostration of recitation (sujūd al-tilāwah), even deliberately. The maʾmūm (the one following the imam) is obliged to follow the imam in the prayer, so if the imam does not perform the prostration of recitation, it is not permissible for the follower to prostrate, because the imam is appointed only to be followed.
If the follower introduces a prostration after the imam’s salām but before his own salām, in a case where there is no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw), his prayer is invalidated if he knew it to be prohibited. Otherwise, he is excused on account of his ignorance and his prayer is not invalidated.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Imām al-Jamal ʿalā Fatḥ al-Wahhāb: “His statement: ‘So the omission of the hayʾāt (the non-essential sunnahs of the prayer) is not compensated for by prostration; if one prostrates for any of them deliberately, his prayer is invalidated, unless he is excused due to his ignorance.’”
Since this issue is one that is hidden from the laymen, as it is among the subtleties of knowledge, and the laymen are excused for ignorance of whatever is of such a nature, and their act of obedience is not invalidated because of it, it may be said that the prayer of one who has not acquired knowledge of this issue is not invalidated, with the necessity of learning the rulings remaining. As for after knowing it, the prayer is invalidated. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible to offer an Udhiyah on behalf of the deceased?

In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Offering an Udhiyah (sacrificial animal) on behalf of a deceased person is permissible. This is the official position of the Hanbali school (as stated in Kashshaf al-Qina’ by al-Bahuti,Vol.6/P.428) and was also upheld by the prominent Shafi'i scholar Al-’Abbadi (mentioned in Bidayat al-Muhtaj by Ibn Qadi Shuhbah,Vol. 4/P.358). It has likewise been narrated as a valid view among some Maliki and Hanafi scholars.
 
In fact, Imam Abu Dawud dedicated an entire chapter in his Sunan collection entitled, "Chapter on Sacrificing on Behalf of the Deceased." In it, he recorded a narration from Hanash, who said: "I saw 'Ali sacrificing two rams, so I asked him, 'What is this?' He replied, 'The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) commanded me to offer a sacrifice on his behalf, so I am sacrificing on his behalf.'"
 
Imam Abu Dawud also narrated from Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "O Allah, this is from You, for You, and on behalf of Muhammad and his Ummah (community). In the Name of Allah, and Allah is the Greatest," and he then slaughtered the animal.
 
The textual evidence here lies in the fact that our Master, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), offered a sacrifice on behalf of his entire community—and it is well-established that his community includes those who have already passed away.
 
Furthermore, there is an abundance of sacred texts demonstrating that the rewards of righteous deeds reach the deceased. For instance, it is permissible to fast on behalf of a deceased person who passed away with missed obligatory fasts, and it is equally permissible to perform Hajj on their behalf, both of which are firmly established in authentic Hadiths. Therefore, if the reward of fasting (which is a purely physical act of worship) and Hajj (which is a joint physical and financial act of worship) can reach the deceased, then the reward of an Udhiyah reaches them with greater reason (by way of A Fortiori argument). This is because it is a purely financial act of worship, falling under the general category of charity (Sadaqah).
 
Additionally, scholars have reached a consensus (Ijma') that the rewards of charity reach the deceased, and since the Udhiyah is inherently an act of charity, it falls under the same ruling. Consequently, based on all the aforementioned evidence, we hold the view that offering a sacrifice on behalf of the deceased is entirely permissible. And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More