Articles

Generalizing Judgments
Author : Dr. Hassan Abu_Arqoub
Date Added : 27-12-2022

Generalizing Judgments is one of the Leading Causes of Conflict

 

One of the biggest mistakes a man could fall into is generalizing judgments, and doing so is a signal of inaccuracy as far as judging things and people is concerned. Although generalizing is the first thing that crosses human mind, the wise person overcomes this dilemma by giving it further thought and arriving at a more precise result.

If a person bought some fruits and vegetables and after going home, he realized that they were of poor quality, he will immediately judge all greengrocers as cheaters. This reflects a high degree of injustice to other greengrocers. Here, the bad news is that this is what we do all the time. For example, when a woman discovers that her husband has been cheating on her, she would accuse all men of treachery and vice-versa. This leads to living in a sea of unfair generalizations, which aren`t accepted by reason and logic and, at the same time, are contrary to reality.

The question that arises here is how to handle such generalized judgments?

As a listener, one shouldn`t accept generalized judgments nor take them for granted. When your child tells you that all the other children go picnicking with their parents on Fridays, there is no doubt that this is inaccurate since many parents work on that day, some prefer to rest and relax while others conduct family visits and the like.

As a speaker, one should make sure not to generalize judgments. Thus, one should say: a greengrocer had cheated me, some husbands cheat on their wives and vice versa, some children go picnicking with their parents on Friday, and the like. This way is acceptable and accurate.

When something is said: "it may seem simple, but extremely difficult to apply." If we give it more thought, we would realize that generalizing judgments ruins many relationships and undermines the security of the country and the people. For example, a member of a certain clan kills someone from another clan, then the family of the killed attack the family of the killer and set their properties on fire. The key question that arises here is that what is the fault of the killer`s family? One individual committed the crime but all his family members were harmed as a result. Why does such thing happen? It is because the judgment has been generalized and every member of the killer`s family was considered a killer. This is the practice of the people of Jahhiliyyah (Pre-Islamic times of ignorance) for they used to kill many for one. As a result, Allah Prescribed Qisas (Retaliation in kind); "Eye for an eye", or "Retributive justice.") where the killer alone is punished."

The same goes in case a non-Arab killed an Arab. A judgment is generalized whereby it will be said that non-Arabs are plotting to kill us so it is allowed to kill them in self-defense. The same goes when a non-Muslim kills a Muslim. It will be said that non-Muslims are killing Muslims so Muslims must kill them first. All of this is due to generalization, which makes a person feel that his/her identity is at risk and then becomes driven to wage a sacred war to defend that identity although the root of the problem has nothing to do with the issue of identity in the first place. It is simply a fight between two individuals each of whom belongs to a certain religion or denomination.

This is where the role of the wise people come into play. They address the problem according to its actual size and keep it under control. In fact, Islam teaches us to deal with issues in this manner since Allah Says (What means): "No bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another." [Az-Zumar/7], as well as, The Almighty Said (What means): "That man can have nothing but what he strives for;" [An-Najim/39], and He, The Most Exalted, Said (What means): "(Yet) is each individual in pledge for his deeds." [At-Tur/21]. As reflected in these texts, each person must be held accountable for his/her own deeds.

As Muslims, we experience the injustice resulting from generalizing judgments on steady basis since whenever a terrorist attack takes place in the west, western countries adopt tough positions towards Islam and Muslims. In a survey conducted by Prof. Mohammad Abu An-Nimer, it was found out that five thousand sources of the Library of Congress connect violence to Islam. 

As Muslims, we must portray the magnanimous image of Islam and never assume that the true beautiful image of Islam is self-evident. This is in addition to avoiding falling into the trap of generalizing judgments since the others aren`t essentially the same.

 

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

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.

What is the ruling on wiping the front of the head beneath the ḥijāb, and is it permissible to wipe over the ḥijāb if it was put on while in a state of purification (wudu`)?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is permissible to wipe the front portion of the head (nāṣiyah) with the fingertips. It is likewise sufficient to place a wet hand over a head covering (ḥijāb), provided the moisture actually reaches the hair beneath it — if it does not, it does not suffice. A head covering is not treated in the same manner as leather socks (khuff) and may not be wiped over in lieu of the head itself.
Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Majmūʿ (Vol.1/P.407): "If a person is wearing a turban and does not wish to remove it — whether for a valid reason or otherwise — he should wipe the entire front portion of the head... The same ruling applies to whatever a woman wears on her head. If, however, he confines himself to wiping over the turban without wiping any part of the head itself, this does not suffice — and there is no disagreement among us on this point." He further states: "A woman is like a man in the manner of wiping the head... She should insert her hand beneath her head covering so that the wiping falls upon the hair itself. If she places her wet hand over her head covering, our scholars stated: if the moisture does not reach the hair, it does not suffice her." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on performing the night prayer (*qiyām al-layl*) between the first and second adhān of Fajr? And which is better: delaying the prayer until shortly before the Fajr adhān, or performing it earlier than that?

 

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The time for night prayer (qiyām al-layl) begins after the Maghrib prayer and lasts until the second adhān of Fajr. The best time for it is the last third of the night, and best of all are the fourth and fifth sixths of the night. If the night is divided into two halves, the latter half is better.
Whoever intends to pray at night is encouraged to delay the Witr until he has prayed the night prayer. If he knows that he will not wake up, it is better for him to pray and perform Witr before sleeping, so that he does not miss both the night prayer and the Witr.
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vpl.1/p.462): “I say: The voluntary prayer of the night, that is, the absolute voluntary prayer (al-nafl al-muṭlaq), is better than the absolute voluntary prayer of the day, because of the report in Muslim: ‘The best prayer after the obligatory prayer is the night prayer.’ In another narration of his: ‘In the night there is an hour that no Muslim man meets while asking Allah for any good of this world and the next except that He gives it to him, and that is every night.’ It is also because the night is a time of heedlessness. I restricted the voluntary prayer to the absolute kind following the commentator, although what the ḥadīth and the underlying meaning require is that the night rawātib be preferred over the day rawātib, since the jurists preferred the two rakʿahs of Fajr over everything except Witr. The middle of the night is better than its two ends if it is divided into thirds, because heedlessness is greatest then and worship is hardest. If he wishes to pray during some third, the best is the fourth and fifth sixths, based on the ḥadīth in the two Ṣaḥīḥs: ‘The most beloved prayer to Allah the Exalted is the prayer of Dāwūd: he would sleep half the night, stand for a third of it, and sleep for a sixth.’ Then the latter part is better than the first if he divides it into two halves, because of the saying of Allah the Exalted: ‘And in the hours before dawn they would ask forgiveness’ [al-Dhāriyāt: 18], and the report of the two Shaykhs: ‘Our Lord, Blessed and Exalted, descends,’ meaning His command descends, ‘to the lowest heaven when the last third of the night remains, and says: Who calls upon Me, that I may answer him? Who asks of Me, that I may give him? Who seeks My forgiveness, that I may forgive him?’”
It is also stated in ʿUmdat al-Sālik (p. 60): “It is better to perform it [the Witr] immediately after the sunnah of ʿIshāʾ, unless he has tahajjud, in which case it is better to delay it so that he performs Witr after it. If he performs Witr and then wishes to pray tahajjud, he prays two rakʿahs at a time and does not repeat the Witr, nor does he need to cancel it with a single rakʿah before the tahajjud. It is recommended that he not deliberately pray after it.”
Qiyām al-layl is a term applied to any prayer performed at night. Tahajjud, on the other hand, refers to the night prayer that follows sleep, whether it is prayed after Maghrib or after ʿIshāʾ, or the prayer performed after ʿIshāʾ without sleep. On this basis, the Witr is also called tahajjud, since it is only prayed after ʿIshāʾ.
It is stated in al-Majmūʿ (Vol.4/p.84): “The sound position, as stated in al-Umm and al-Mukhtaṣar, is that the Witr is called tahajjud.”
It is stated in Nihāyat al-Zayn (Vol.1/p.114): “Among the absolute voluntary prayers is qiyām al-layl. If it is performed after sleep, even during the time of Maghrib and after having prayed ʿIshāʾ early (taqdīman), it is called tahajjud.”
And it is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Bujayrimī ʿalā al-Khaṭīb (Vol.1/p.418): “His statement: ‘(the night prayer)’: the genitive construction (iḍāfah) carries the sense of fī, meaning a prayer in the night. His statement: ‘(it would be more fitting)’: the reason it is more fitting is that the night prayer includes both tahajjud and other prayers.” And Allah Almighty knows best.

What do you say about someone who stays up all night on Laylat al-Qadr but misses Fajr prayer?

Such a person has deprived themselves of a great reward. Performing obligatory acts is more beloved to Allah than voluntary acts. Fajr prayer is an obligation, and performing it in congregation is equivalent to worshiping for the entire night. So how can someone neglect it while striving for voluntary prayers?!