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

What are the Sharia consequences when the sacrificial time for the uḍḥiyyah comes to an end?

 
 
 
 
 
 

 
In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If the sun sets on the final day of Tashriq (the 13th of Dhu al-Hijjah) and the Udhiyah (sacrificial animal) has not yet been slaughtered, its designated time has expired. Should a person slaughter it after this point, it will not be counted as an Udhiyah.
 
However, if the sacrifice was a vowed one (Mandhurah), they are strictly obligated to slaughter it as a makeup act (Qada’), and its meat must be distributed entirely according to the rules governing vowed sacrifices.
 
It is stated in Bushra al-Karim (p. 702): "If one slaughters after sunset on the final day [of Tashriq]... it does not count as an Udhiyah, unless it was a vowed sacrifice, in which case it is fulfilled as a makeup act (Qada’)." And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

How to perform the witr prayer in terms of connection (wasl) and separation (fasl)?

 
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The Witr prayer has several forms that vary in terms of virtue:
 
The First Form: Separating every two units (rak‘ah) with a Tashahhud and a Taslim (salutation). This is superior to connecting the units, even if it is only a single rak‘ah. This is based on the Hadith of ‘Aishah (may Allah be pleased with her): 'The Messenger of Allah ﷺ used to pray eleven units between the end of the ‘Isha prayer and dawn, performing the Taslim after every two units and performing Witr with a single unit.' (Related by al-Bukhari & Muslim).
 
The Second Form: Connecting the units with only one final Tashahhud at the very end.
 
The Third Form: Connecting with two Tashahhuds—meaning reciting the Tashahhud before the final unit without performing the Taslim, then standing to complete the final unit. This form is considered the lowest in rank so that the Witr prayer remains distinct from the obligatory Maghrib prayer, as stated in the Hadith: 'Do not make the Witr resemble the Maghrib prayer.' (Narrated by Al-Daraqutni, who stated its narrators are trustworthy).
 
It is stated in Bushra al-Karim Sharh al-Muqaddimah al-Hadramiyyah: 'It is permissible to connect [the Witr] with one Tashahhud in the final unit—which is better—or with two Tashahhuds in the last two units, as both methods are established in Sahih Muslim from the actions of the Prophet ﷺ. In the connected method, more than two Tashahhuds are prohibited. Furthermore, separating (al-Fasl) is better than connecting (al-Wasl) if the number of units is the same, because the Hadiths supporting it are more numerous and it involves more devotional actions.' And Allah the Exalted 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.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on obtaining financing from Islamic banks by bringing invoices in prior arrangement with the seller, then taking the cash after the financing is approved — with the purpose of settling debts and buying a car?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It appears from the transaction described that its underlying purpose is to obtain cash through resorting to a legal artifice (ḥīlah/tawarruq-style trick), and it is not permissible to engage in such trickery or to coordinate with the various parties merely to obtain liquidity. This is because such artifices bring the sale closer in reality to a ribā-based (usurious) transaction, even if it outwardly appears otherwise.
The Prophet ﷺ said: "Do not commit what the Jews committed, thereby making lawful what Allah has made unlawful through the flimsiest of tricks." This was related by Ibn Baṭṭah in his book Ibṭāl al-Ḥiyal (p. 47), and many scholars have graded it as ḥasan (sound/acceptable).
We have already explained the impermissibility of engaging in such deceptive dealings with Islamic banks in Fatwa No. 516, so please refer to it. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.