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

When does the time for the 'aqīqah lapse and pass?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
If the guardian was financially capable (mūsir) during the majority of the postnatal period (nifās) — which is sixty days — then the obligation of the 'aqīqah remains upon him until the child reaches the age of maturity (bulūgh). Once the child reaches maturity, the demand falls away from the father and those like him. At that point, it becomes Sunnah for the child himself to perform the 'aqīqah on his own behalf.
However, if the guardian was financially incapable (mu'sir) during the postnatal period, and then became financially capable after its expiry — that is, after sixty days — the 'aqīqah is no longer required of him. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What should a person who was favored from Allah with a newborn, but couldn`t afford an Aqeeqah, do?

Aqeeqah (the sheep slaughtered on the seventh day from the child`s birth) is a desirable Sunnah for the financially able since Allah, The Exalted, charges not a soul beyond its capacity. Therefore, if the father couldn`t afford the Aqeeqah before the end of his wife`s confinement, then it isn`t due on him, and if he was able to afford it later on, then it is permissible, but if he didn`t until the child reached puberty, the latter can offer the Aqeeqah himself.

What is the ruling on one who vows to fast a specific or non-specific year? Are the two Eids, the days of Tashreeq, Ramadan, and the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding included in them? And do these days break the consecutiveness if it was intended?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If someone makes a vow (Nadr) to fast a specific, designated year, this vow does not include the days of Eid, the days of Tashreeq (the three days following Eid al-Adha), Ramadan, or the days of menstruation (Hayd) and postnatal bleeding (Nifas). Furthermore, there is no requirement to make up (Qada) these specific days.
 
However, if someone vows to fast a year that is not specifically designated (i.e., any twelve-month period) and stipulates that the fasting must be consecutive, they are bound by that condition. They must not fast on the days of Eid, during Ramadan, or during menstruation, but they are required to make up these days afterward—with the exception of the days of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, which do not need to be made up.
 
It is stated in Hashiyat al-Bajuri ‘ala Sharh Ibn Qasim ({Vol.2/P.606): 'If one vows to fast a specific year, the Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, and days of menstruation or postnatal bleeding are not included. This is because Ramadan does not accept any fast other than its own, and the others do not accept fasting at all. Therefore, they do not enter into the vow, and no makeup is required for them because they are legally excluded—contrary to Al-Rafi’i regarding menstruation and postnatal bleeding.
 
If one vows to fast a non-designated year: if they stipulated consecutiveness (Tatuabu’) in their vow, they must fulfill it; otherwise, they are not bound to it. Consecutiveness is not broken by the days that do not enter into the specific year vow (Eid, Tashreeq, Ramadan, menstruation, and postnatal bleeding). However, one must make up the days missed—excluding the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding—immediately following the end of the year. As for the time of menstruation and postnatal bleeding, it is not made up, contrary to Ibn al-Rif’ah, who argued that it must be made up just like Ramadan.' And Allah the Exalted knows best.

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

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Offering a sacrifice (Udhiyah) on behalf of the deceased is permissible. This is the position of the Hanbalis [Kashshaf al-Qina’ by al-Bahuti (Vol.6/P.428)], and it was held by al-Abbadi of the Shafi’is [Bidayat al-Muhtaj by Ibn Qadi Shuhbah (Vol.4/P.358)]; it is also narrated from some Maliki and Hanafi scholars.
 
Abu Dawud included a chapter in his Sunan titled "Chapter: Offering the Sacrifice on Behalf of the Deceased," in which he narrated from Hanash, who said: "I saw Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) sacrificing two rams. I asked him, 'What is this?' He replied, 'The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) enjoined me to sacrifice on his behalf, so I am sacrificing on his behalf.'"
 
Abu Dawud also narrated from Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "O Allah, this is from You and for You, on behalf of Muhammad and his Ummah; in the name of Allah, and Allah is the Greatest," then he slaughtered it. It is well known that among the Ummah of Muhammad (peace be upon him) are those who have passed away, yet he (peace be upon him) dedicated it to his entire Ummah.
 
Furthermore, multiple Sharia texts have consistently indicated that the rewards of righteous deeds reach the deceased. This includes the permissibility of fasting on behalf of the deceased if they died owing fasts, as well as the permissibility of performing Hajj on their behalf, both of which are established in authentic Hadiths. Since the rewards for fasting—a physical act of worship—and Hajj—a physical and financial act of worship—reach the deceased, then the sacrifice (Udhiyah) is even more likely to reach them.
 
Moreover, the scholars have reached a consensus (Ijma') that the rewards of charities reach the deceased, and the Udhiyah is a form of charity and falls under its general category. Based on all of this, we hold the view that offering a sacrifice on behalf of the deceased is permissible. And Allah the Almighty knows best.