Articles

The Reality of Faith (Al-Iman)
Author : Dr. Hassan Abu_Arqoub
Date Added : 30-03-2026

The Reality of Faith (Al-Iman)

 

Allah the Almighty sent the Archangel Gabriel (Jibril) to ask the Prophet ﷺ essential questions as a means of teaching the Ummah. Among these was the pivotal question: "What is Iman (Faith)?" To understand our religion, we must take a focused look at the meaning of faith and the scholarly nuances surrounding it.

In essence, Iman is the heart’s internal conviction (Tasdiq) in everything brought by our Master Muhammad ﷺ that is "necessarily known to be part of the religion" (Ma’lum min al-din bi al-darurah). These are matters so fundamental that they require no complex deduction, such as the obligation of Prayer, Fasting, Zakat, and Hajj, or the prohibition of usury, adultery, gambling, injustice, and alcohol.

Iman is the very first obligation upon a morally and legally responsible person (Mukallaf). Its foundation is the heart’s affirmation, free from doubt or hesitation, coupled with "submission and compliance" (Idh’an) to the truth of the Prophet’s message.

The primary evidence that faith is an act of the heart is Allah’s statement: "Those—He has written faith in their hearts." [Al-Mujadilah/22]. This verse, among many other textual proofs, demonstrates that the true location of faith is the heart.

One might ask: What about the famous definition by some scholars that faith is "speech by the tongue, conviction by the heart, and action by the limbs"?

The answer is that this is a description of the perfection of faith (Kamal al-Iman), not its minimum requirement for validity (Asl al-Iman). While the heart’s conviction is the root, the declaration of the Two Testimonies (Shahadatayn) and the performance of good deeds are the fruits that complete and perfect it.

Pronouncing the Shahadah is a condition for applying worldly legal rulings to a person (such as marriage, inheritance, and burial in Muslim cemeteries). It is not technically a "part" or "pillar" of the internal reality of faith itself.

The Mute or Incapable: If someone truly believes in their heart but is physically unable to speak (due to a condition like being mute), they are saved in the sight of Allah.

The Silent Believer: If a person recognizes the truth and submits in their heart but passes away before anyone asks them to testify—provided they weren't stubborn or refusing—they are a believer before Allah, though they were not treated as Muslims in this life because they never voiced their belief.

The Stubborn Refuser: If someone is asked to testify and refuses out of arrogance or spite (without a valid excuse like fear), they are considered a disbeliever, as their refusal indicates a lack of internal submission.

Born Muslims: A person born to Muslim parents who believes in their heart but neglects to verbally recite the Shahadah is a "sinful Muslim" because they neglected a secondary obligation, but they remain within the fold of Islam.

As Imam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami explained in Al-Tuhfah: "Faith, according to the theologians, has two perspectives: salvation in the Hereafter—which depends solely on internal conviction—and the application of worldly rulings—which depends on the verbal testimony."

Good deeds are not a pillar of faith's existence, but they are the cause of its increase and strength. Faith is dynamic; it increases with obedience and decreases with sin, but the "root" (the conviction in the heart) does not vanish simply due to a sin. Allah says: "The believers are only those who, when Allah is mentioned, their hearts become fearful, and when His verses are recited to them, it increases them in faith..." [Al-Anfal/2].

Based on this understanding, a person who falls short in their religious duties (like someone who misses prayer out of laziness) is not a disbeliever as long as they do not deny that the prayer is obligatory. Similarly, someone who commits a sin (like drinking alcohol out of weakness) is not a disbeliever as long as they do not claim that the sin is "permissible" (Halal). They remain a believer, though their faith is deficient and they are in need of repentance.

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 is the ruling of Islamic Law on a menstruating woman (ḥā'iḍ) reciting the Islamic ruqyah (Qur'anic/spiritual healing)?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is permissible for a person in a state of janābah (major ritual impurity), or a menstruating woman (ḥā'iḍ), or a woman in postpartum bleeding (nufasā'), to recite for the purpose of ruqyah (spiritual/Qur'anic healing), even if this includes some verses of the Noble Qur'an — whether recited from memory or by looking at the Muṣ-ḥaf (the physical copy of the Qur'an) without touching or carrying it — provided that the intention behind the recitation is ruqyah, protection (taḥṣīn), and remembrance (dhikr), not the intention of tilāwah (Qur'anic recitation as an act of worship in itself). This remains permissible even if what is recited is an entire sūrah, such as Sūrat al-Mulk.
Imam al-Khaṭīb ash-Shirbīnī (raḥimahullāh) said: "It is lawful for a person in janābah to utter its [the Qur'an's] remembrances and other content — such as its admonitions, its narratives, and its rulings — so long as it is not with the intention of [reciting] Qur'an. [This is] like his saying upon mounting [a vehicle]: 'Glory be to Him Who has subjected this to us, and we could never have accomplished this [by ourselves]' [Sūrat az-Zukhruf: 13] — meaning, [could never have] been capable of it — or upon a calamity: 'Indeed we belong to Allah, and indeed to Him we shall return'... In fact, my teacher, ash-Shihāb ar-Ramlī, issued a fatwā that even if he recited the entire Qur'an without the intention of [reciting] Qur'an, it would be permissible." [Summarized from Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, Vol. 1/P.217] And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Is it required to fast consecutively when making up missed fasts?

● It is preferable to fast consecutively when making up missed fasts if they were missed due to a valid excuse.
● However, if the fasts were missed without a valid excuse, then fasting consecutively is obligatory, because making up the missed fasts in this case must be done immediately.
Separating the makeup fasts goes against the obligation of immediacy, but if someone does so, their fasts will still be valid. However, they will be sinful for delaying without a valid reason.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on compensating the patient in case of medical error on the part of the treating physician?

 
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The foundational principle is that every mistake issued by a physician that causes harm to another due to his negligence or lack of expertise obligates him to guarantee liability and compensate the harmed party. The Sharia maxim, in this regard, states: "The direct actor is liable."
 
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "As for if he was skilled but his hand committed an error—such as exceeding the proper limit of incision, cutting in an incorrect site, cutting with an instrument that inflicts excessive pain, or cutting at an unsuitable time—he is liable, because it is destruction (Itlaf) whose liability does not differ between intent and mistake, thus resembling the destruction of property; and because it is a prohibited act, so he guarantees liability for its secondary effects." [Al-Mughni].
 
However, if the physician performed what was necessary in the most complete manner and took all measures of care and caution, but complications occurred that could not be avoided according to specialists, then no liability rests upon him.
 
Shaykh al-Islam Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "The cupper and the circumciser bear no liability if they have not been negligent, and likewise the veterinarian if he bleeds an animal and it perishes." [Rawdat al-Talibin].
 
Al-Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "I know of no disagreement that if the practitioner transgresses and the patient perishes, he is liable. Anyone who undertakes knowledge or practice he does not know is a transgressor; so if perishing arises from his action, he is liable for the blood-money (Diyah) while capital retaliation (Qisas) is dropped from him, because he did not act independently without the patient's permission. And the physician’s offense in the view of the generality of jurists is borne by his agnates ('Aqilah*)."* [Ma'alim al-Sunan].
 
If negligence or transgression is established against the physician, it is necessary to compensate the patient or seek forgiveness from him. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.