Articles

Underestimating People of Specialty
Author : Dr. Hassan Abu_Arqoub
Date Added : 10-05-2023

Underestimating People of Specialty

 

There is no doubt that every person can determine right from wrong in his/her field of specialty. Of course, this is based on a set of rules and foundations on which that specialty rests. He/she also have the competence to determine the experts and the non-experts of that field.

One stunning matter of this era is that some unspecialized and unqualified individuals judge people of specialty. This isn`t new since similar it also existed in past times. For example, some questioned the knowledge of Al-Ghazali and claimed that he wasn`t qualified as a jurist. When this news reached Imam Sayooti, he gave a full answer and it read as follows:

"The ignorant who said that Al-Ghazali wasn`t qualified to be a jurist deserves to be severely whipped and imprisoned for a long time to stop similar people from daring to criticize this great Imam of Islam. His saying as such about this eminent scholar emanates from extreme ignorance and lack of religiosity, so he is the most ignorant of the ignorant and the most evil of the evil sinners. During his time, Al-Ghazali was called Hujjat al-Islam (An honorific title meaning "authority on Islam" or "proof of Islam) and the Master of Jurists. He wrote valuable books on Fiqh and the Shafie Madhab rests on his works. Al-Ghazali revised and edited the Shafie Madhab where he removed irregular Fatwas and weak sayings and summarized it (Madhab) in the books: Al-Baseet, Al-Waseet, Al-Wajeez, and Al-Kholasah. Moreover, the books of the two Sheikhs are adopted from Al-Ghazali`s books.

Accordingly, the person who said the above about al-Ghazali was controlled by ignorance, stupidity and sin. It is safer to ignore what he said and leave his punishment in the Hands of Allah.

The above text indicates that transgression against the scholars existed in the past, still exists, will exist and isn`t something strange since Prophets and Messenger (PBUT) were subjected to worse that by the incompetent.

Al-Sayooti described such person as "Ignorant" and "Stupid", so he is considered as an evil sinner. Therefore, from an Islamic perspective such person has sinned and must make sincere repentance.

Al-Sayooti suggests a solution for such an audacity by disciplining this person and applying a discretionary punishment embodied in "Whipping" and "Imprisonment" to be an example for others and avoid transgressing against the scholars. This punishment is also meant to prevent the spread of such ill behavior amongst the members of society and prevent other ignorant individuals from undermining the people of knowledge and specialty. However, this disciplining and discretionary punishment is within the jurisdiction of the Muslim ruler or the authorities representing him. This clearly shows that it is the duty of government to defend the people of knowledge and specialty.

Finally, Al-Sayooti seized this opportunity to clarify the grace-virtue of Al-Ghazali and described him as "Hujjat al-Islam". Here, Al-Sayooti is teaching us to defend the people of grace-virtue and never accept undermining them in any form, and this is the duty of all the members of society.

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

A man donated a burial plot, but before registering it in favor of the Ministry of Awqaf and before burying anybody there he said that he didn`t want to donate it and planted it. What is the ruling of Sharia on this?

All perfect praise be to Allah the Lord of the Worlds. May His peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

If he had endowed it as a cemetery, then he can`t take it back, even if he didn`t register it in favor of the Ministry of Awqaf. If he said: "I have endowed this plot as a cemetery, then it becomes an endowment." However, if he didn`t endow that plot-but it was his intention to do so-then he is allowed to back down. And Allah The Almighty Knows Best.

What is the difference between Tahajjud prayer and night prayer, and do they have a particular Witr prayer other than that of Isha (evening prayer)?

Tahajjud and Qiyam-Al-Lail (night prayer) are two words for the same meaning which is offering voluntary prayer at night after sunset, but before dawn break. However, Tahajjud is offered after waking up; whereas, Qiyam-Al-Lail is permissible before sleeping, or after it. Therefore, every Tahajjud is a Qiyam, but not every Qiyam is a Tahajjud. Moreover, there is no specified Witr for both of them, but Witr after Isha is by itself the Witr of Qiyam, and it is a Sunnah to postpone it until after Qiyam if the worshiper thought that he was most probably going to wake up in order to offer it, but if he wasn`t sure of waking up, then he is at liberty to offer it before going to bed as was reported in the Prophet`s Hadith.

Is it permissible for a menstruating woman to recite the Quran from the computer without actually touching the Quran?

It is not permissible for a woman in her menstrual period, or in postpartum to recite the Quran, even by heart, or without actually touching the Quran itself. Recitation itself is what is prohibited on her regardless of how it is done. However, it is permissible for her to surf through the Quran by her eyes, or to recall it in her head without uttering the words. There is no harm for her to look at the Quranic verses on the computer without touching it, or to utter the words as this is called looking not reciting or reading.

Is it permissible for the guardian to give Sadaqa (voluntary charity) from the money of the orphans?

It is impermissible for the guardian to donate from the money of the orphans because he is entrusted with the safekeeping of that money, and is prohibited from donating it.