النص المفهرس

ولو قيل لفاسق: حتى تجد حلاوة الإيمان فقال: لا أصلي حتى أجد حلاوة الترک كفر
يعني حيث رجح حلاوة المعصية على حلاوة الطاعة ساوى بينهما وفي فوز النجاة أو قال: ما
أحسن أو ما أطيب أمراً لا يصلى كفر يعنى لاستحسان المعصية ومرتكبها.1
Anyway, it is a sin to make such a statement about salāh, it entails
considering the punishment of Hell to be light, and giving preference
to the joy of disobedience over the joy of obedience. The person under
question must therefore repent immediately and abstain from making
statements of this type in the future.
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
Considering the usury of the Qur'an to be lawful
Question
A person believes that it is not a sin to give a R1000-00 loan on the
condition that R1200-00 will have to be paid back to him. He feels it is
like any other transaction and there is nothing wrong with it. Is the
īman of such a person in danger? What is the ruling if he does not
know the reality of usury?
Answer
The transaction described in the question is clearly a usurious
transaction.
Tafsir Mazharī:
الربوا في اللغة: الزيادة.
The literal meaning of ribā is: an increase. Allah ta'ālā says:
قال الله تعالى: "ويربي الصدقات". والمعنى أن الله حرم الزيادة في القرض على القدر المدفوع.
Allāh increases charities.2
Riba will mean that Allah ta'ala prohibited any increase [or addition] to the
amount which was given as a loan.3
[The following texts say the same thing]:
1 شرح الفقه الأكبر، ص: ١٧٠،١٧٢.
2 Sūrah al-Baqarah, 2: 276.
3 Tafsir Mazharī, vol. 1, p. 391.
161

(1) الربوا في اللغة: الزيادة والمراد في الآية كل زيادة لم يقابلها عوض.
1
(2) الربا ربوان والحرام كل قرض يؤخذ به أكثر منه أو تجر به منفعة. 2
(3) اعلم أن الربوا قسمان ربا النسيئة وربا الفضل. أما ربا النسيئة فهو الأمر الذي كان
مشهورا متعارفا في الجاهلية وذلك أنهم كانوا يدفعون المال على أن يأخذوا كل شهر قدرا
معينا ويكون رأس المال باقيا. ثم إذا حل الدين طالبوا المديون برأس المال، فإن تعذر عليه
الأداء زادوا في الحق والأجل، فهذا هو الربوا الذي كانوا في الجاهلية يتعاملون به.3
(4) وفي الخلاصة القرض بالشرط حرام ... وفي الأشباه كل قرض جر نفعا حرام، (قوله كل
قرض جر نفعا حرام) أي إذا كان مشروطا كما علم مما نقله عن البحر.4
(5) قال والموفق: کل قرض شرط فیه أن یزیده فهو حرام بغیر خلاف.5
(6) من اعتقد الحرام حلالا ، أو على القلب يكفر أما لو قال لحرام : هذا حلال لترويج
السلعة ، أو بحكم الجهل لا يكون كفرا، وفي الاعتقاد هذا إذا كان حراما لعينه ، وهو
يعتقده حلالا حتى يكون كفرا أما إذا كان حراما لغيره ، فلا وفيما إذا كان حراما لعينه
إنما يكفر إذا كانت الحرمة ثابتة بدليل مقطوع به أما إذا كانت بأخبار الآحاد ، فلا
يكفر كذا في الخلاصة.6
We learn from the above that there are two types of riba. One is riba
al-fadl which is also known as riba al-Hadith because its prohibition is
proven from the Hadith. The second type is riba an-nasĩ'ah which is
also known as riba al-Qur'an because its prohibition is proven from the
Qur'an. The second type of usury was well-known to the Arabs even
before the revelation of the Qur'an and it was widely practised by
1 أحكام القرآن لابن العربي: 32111، دار الفكر.
2 لسان العرب: 5\126.
3 التفسير الكبير للرازي: 4\92.
4 الدر المختار: 5\166.
5 أوجز المسالك: 224112، دار القلم.
6 الفتاوى الهندية: 2\273.
162

them. The prohibition of this type of usury is proven from a Hadith as
well:
كل قرض جر نفعا فهو حرام.
Every loan which brings about a benefit is unlawful.
(روى الحارث بن أبي أسامة في مسنده (20112\431) بسنده، فقال: حدثنا حفص بن
حمزة، أنبأ سوار بن مصعب، عمارة الهمداني قال: سمعت عليا يقول: قال رسول الله صلى
الله عليه وسلم: كل قرض جر منفعة فهو ربا. وفيه سوار بن مصعب، قال النسائي: متروك.
وقال البخاري: منكر الحديث، وله شاهد ضعيف عن فضالة بن عبيد عند البيهقي في
المعرفة (39114)، موقوفا عليه، بلفظ "كل قرض جر منفعة فهو وجه من وجوه الربا"، وآخر
عن عبد الله بن سلام رضي الله عنه عند البخاري موقوفا عليه. ورواه البيهقي في الكبرى
(35015) عن ابن مسعود، وأبي بن كعب، وعبد الله بن سلام وابن عباس رضي الله عنهم
1
موقوفا علیھم.
Thus, it is an act of kufr to reject this type of usury whose prohibition
is explicitly proven and clearly evidenced from the texts, and to
consider it to be lawful. However, if a person makes such a statement
out of ignorance, it will not be kufr but he will certainly be a fasiq.
Furthermore, it is absolutely wrong to say that usury is also a type of
trade and that there is no difference between usury and a transaction.
The Qur'an refutes such a claim in no unclear terms:
أحل الله البيع وحرم الربوا.
Allah permitted trading and prohibited usury.2
How, then, can the two be the same? In essence, an equitable
distribution of profit is known as trade which is based on mutual help
and support. On the other hand, usury is based on self-motives,
mercilessness and greed.
To sum up, this person must hasten towards repentance and abstain
from his incorrect beliefs.
1 وللمزيد من البحث أنظر: التلخيص الحبير: 122718913، ونصب الراية للأحاديث الهداية: 6014، والسنن
الصغير للبيهقي، ص 490، وبلوغ المرام، ص 252، رقم: 850، 852.
2 Sūrah al-Baqarah, 2: 275.
163

Allāh ta ālā knows best.
The reasons for different groups within the ummah
Question
Nowadays we find several groups, e.g. the Deobandīs, Barelwis, the
Tablighī Jama'at, the people of the khanqahs, and so on. Why is there
no unity in the ummah? It would have been wonderful if the entire
ummah could assemble on a single platform and discuss how the
ummah could become one. Kindly explain how the ummah can
become one.
Answer
In actual fact, the disunity which exists in the ummah is not an
inconvenience but a mercy. Hadrat 'Umar ibn 'Abd al-'Azīz
rahimahullah who is considered to be a second 'Umar [radiyallahu 'anhu]
and whose khilafah is considered to be equal to the khilafat-e-rashidah
says in this regard:
ما سرني لو أن أصحاب محمد لم يختلفوا لأنهم لو لم يختلفوا لم تكن رخصة.
I would not have been happy had the Companions of Muhammad not differed
because if they did not differ, there would have been no concessions.
Fatāwā Shāmī states that the differences among the jurists is a mercy,
and the more the differences the more the mercy. There were always
differences among the 'ulama'. This commenced from the beginning of
Islam and continues to this day. In fact, differences were present from
the beginning of the creation of this world. Did Allah ta'ala send down
exactly the same religion to all the Prophets 'alayhimus salām?
Certainly not. The fundamentals of religion remained the same while
there were always differences in the subsidiary matters. There were
differences between Hadrat Dāwūd 'alayhis salām and Hadrat Sulayman
'alayhis salām [father and son] on several judgements and decisions.
Despite this, Allāh ta'ālā spoke highly of both of them. Allah ta'ālā says:
فَفَهَّمْنَاهَا سُلَيْمَانَ وَكُلَا آتَيْنَا حُكْمًا وَعِلْمًا.
We made Sulayman understand the case and to both We had bestowed
judgement and understanding.1
1 Sūrah al-Ambiya', 21: 79.
164

Was there no difference of opinion between Hadrat Abu Bakr and
Hadrat 'Umar radiyallahu 'anhumā as regards the prisoners of war after
the Battle of Badr.
Were there no differences with regard to waging war against those
who refused to pay zakah? Was there no difference with regard to
sending the army of Hadrat Usamah radiyallahu 'anhu? Was there no
difference with regard to compiling the Qur'an? [During the rule of
Hadrat Abu Bakr radiyallāhu 'anhu].
In short, the Sahabah radiyallahu 'anhum differed with each other on
several issues. Similarly there were differences among the mujtahids
who came later on with regard to various rulings. The different groups
among the Ahl al-Haq which we see today - i.e. those holding correct
beliefs - are all sources of mercy for us. They are all means to reaching
Allāh ta'ālā. We ought to be grateful to Allah ta'ālā for this. If a person
feels that these different groups is disunity then it is a major
misunderstanding on his part. In actual fact, they are all fruits of the
same tree, i.e. of Islam. Thus, a person may choose whichever group he
likes from the Ahl al-Haq. Alternatively, he could consult the true
'ulama' and practise on their advice. Yes, if there is a courageous
person who takes part in the Tablighi Jama'at, goes to the khanqah,
helps and assists the people of the madāris, and takes part in jihad -
then this is the supreme thing to do. This can be understood from a
simple example.
There are several ways of travelling from here [Johannesburg] to
Durban. A person could take his own car, he could go by bus, and if he
has the means, he could take a flight. We learn from this that the
means are certainly different but the destination is one. In the same
way, the different groups are the means, while our destination and
objective is one, i.e. Allah's pleasure and the spreading and
propagating of the true Dīn.
Hadrat Shaykh al-Hadith Maulana Muhammad Zakarīyya Sahib
rahimahullāh writes:
It is essential for the objective to be obedience to Allah ta'ala and
expressing the truth. It must not be for the misplaced defence of one's
group. This is known as extremism and fanaticism. There is no harm
whatsoever in having differences. If they are under the set principles,
they will be praiseworthy. It is blameworthy to turn differences into
disputes and to make them the means of disunity and disharmony
among the Muslims. There is a major difference between the two. We
165

are making difference of opinion which was good for us a cause of
misfortune and destruction for us.
Hadrat Hasan Basrī rahimahullāh was a senior Tābi'ī, a famous jurist
and a senior Sufi. There were times when he was so overcome by his
research on the issue of predestination that he made statements which
were against the majority of the 'ulama'. This resulted in an uproar
and an outcry, followed by false things attributed to him. Ayyub said:
"Two types of people fabricated lies against Hadrat Hasan Basrī
rahimahullah: (1) Those who belonged to the Qadarīyyah sect. They
wanted to proliferate their own views so they made as if Hadrat Hasan
Basrī rahimahullah was on their creed. (2) Those who had personal
hatred for him so they used to proliferate their own statements.
Exactly the same thing is happening in our times. The one who wants
to proliferate his view will attribute it to the senior of a group. The one
who is against him will convey false statements about him. This results
in a widening gulf of disputes and differences. The actual manner of
following a person or group is to see in who among the genuine
'ulama' a person has confidence and regarding whom it is established
that he is a practising 'alim. He must then follow his teachings.
Unfortunately, although we claim love and confidence in a person, we
are lacking in practice. The essence of our total love is that in our love
for our seniors, we hurl verbal abuses at the seniors of others. Allah
ta'ālā says:
وَلَا تَسُبُّوا الَّذِيْنَ يَدْعُوْنَ مِنْ دُوْنِ اللهِ فَيَسُبُّو اللّهَ عَدْوًّا بِغَيْرٍ عِلْمِ.
Do not abuse those whom they worship instead of Allah. Consequently, they
will begin to abuse Allah offensively without understanding.1
The Qur'an goes to the extent of prohibiting us from hurling abuses at
the idols of others.2
Thus, instead of opposing others, we must worry about our own
rectification. However, there are certain groups with whom we have
creedal differences. As long as they do not come onto correct beliefs,
our differences with them will remain. It is not that we hate them or
are antagonistic towards them. Rather, we are aloof from their beliefs
and we express our disavowal of some of their practices.
1 Sūrah al-An'ām, 6: 108.
2 Al-I'tidal fī Marātib ar-Rijāl, p. 212.
166

In short, no matter which group from the Ahl al-Haq a person is
satisfied with, he must join it. If he can take part in the activities of all
true groups, then this is a most meritorious thing.
For further details refer to Ikhtilaf al-A'immah of Shaykh al-Hadith
Hadrat Maulānā Muhammad Zakarīyyā Sahib Kāndhlawī rahimahullāh.
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
Displaying pictures of Khomeini outside the masjid
Question
Is it permissible to paste pictures of Khomeini outside the masjid on
Fridays?
Answer
It is not permissible to have pictures of any animate creation without
absolute necessity. No one is excluded from this ruling even if it is the
picture of a saint. There is absolutely no permission for this. Secondly,
we go to Allah's house - the masjid - for worship so that our bond with
Him may be strengthened. By pasting pictures outside the masjid, we
are actually saying: "Come here and have a look at the pictures." Thus,
to paste pictures is legally and rationally impermissible.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
The masajid or Imam Bārā of the Shi'ahs
Question
Can the masjid which was mentioned in the previous question be
referred to as an Imam Bārā? The reason for asking this question is
that programmes on Shi'ah beliefs are conducted in this masjid. Or
should its present name, Masjid Sayyidunā Abu Bakr Siddīq, be
maintained?
Answer
If this masjid was constructed by the Shi ahs and it was named "Masjid
Sayyidunā Abu Bakr Siddīq" in order to deceive the public, then it is
necessary to inform the public of this. If it was constructed by our
people [Ahl as-Sunnah wa al-Jama'ah] and the wrong people have
taken control of it, then full efforts to put an end to their control must
be made. The masjid of Shi'ahs is similar to their Imam Bārā.
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
167

The imamat of people with corrupt beliefs
Question
Shi'ahs or people with corrupt beliefs are imams in certain masajid. Is
it permissible to perform salah behind them and to send our children
to their madrasah?
Answer
Salah behind an imam who is a Shi'ah is not valid. One must therefore
abstain from this. If people holding Shi'ah and other corrupt beliefs
are teaching in madaris and schools, one should never send one's
children to such places.
A detailed fatwa in this regard can be found in volume two in the
chapter on imamat.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
What to do in the above situation
Question
We have tried our utmost to ensure our masjid is free from such
activities [mentioned above] but have not succeeded in this regard.
What must we do in such a situation?
Answer
Efforts to rectify them must continue. You must neither perform salah
behind them nor send your children to their madrasah as long as they
are not rectified.
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
Beliefs of the Isma'īlī sect
Question
(a) Are the beliefs of the Isma'ilī sect correct? Please provide
proofs if their beliefs are blasphemous because I have heard
that they read the same kalimah as us.
(b) Can we attend their funerals? Can our 'ulama' lead the janazah
salah for them? Can they be buried in our graveyards?
(c) Can any of us marry an Isma'īlī woman? Can our 'ulama'
solemnize such marriages?
Answer
(a)
The Isma'ilī sect holds the following beliefs:
168

1. They believe that Allah ta'ala does not possess
attributes.
2. They believe in the first intellect, i.e. Allah ta'ālā
created a creation and all other creations were born
from it. This first intellect bears the attributes of Allah
ta'ālā.
3. They consider miracles to be baseless.
4. They reject the finality of prophet-hood and believe
Muhammad ibn Isma'il to be the final Prophet.
5. They consider it compulsory to obey the Auliya'.
6. They believe that their imams are created from Allah's
light and their bodies are not like those of normal
humans.
7. They hate the Sahabah radiyallahu 'anhum especially
Hadrat Abu Bakr and Hadrat 'Umar radiyallahu
‘anhumā.
8. They believe that the bounties of Paradise and
torments of Hell are metaphysical and not physical.
9. They get immersed in explanations to everything to
the extent that they believe that every verse of the
Qur'an has an internal meaning even if it is an explicit
verse.
10. They reject the Resurrection and believe in the
transmigration of souls.1
A sect which holds the above beliefs cannot be Muslim
because these beliefs are out of the circle of Islam.2
(b)
It is prohibited to attend their funerals, to perform their
janāzah salah and to bury them in Muslim graveyards. This is because
these rules are specifically for Muslims while these people are not
1 ملخص من الحركات الباطنية في العالم الإسلامي عقائدها وحكم الإسلام فيها، للدكتور محمد أحمد
الخطيب، الفصل الثاني: الجانب الباطني في عقائد الإسماعيلين، ص: 85-143.
2 وللإستزادة أنظر: الحركات الباطنية: ص: 85-143، وإمداد الفتاوى: 10616-108، مذاهب عالم كا
انسائیکلوبیدیا، ومكالمة بين المذاهب.
وللدلائل أنظر: الفقه الأكبر: 1213، وشرح الفقه الأكبر: 27، وعقيدة الطحاوي: 916.
169

Muslims. However, in non-Muslim countries you get graveyards which
are reserved for Muslims. As per the law of these countries, we do not
have the right to stop any person who expresses the kalimah
outwardly. We have no alternative in this regard.
Ahsan al-Fatāwā:
ولا تصل على أحد منهم مات ابدا ولا تقم على قبره .. ما كان للنبي والذين آمنوا أن يستغفروا
للمشرکین.
Never offer salah over any of them who has died, nor stand over his grave.1
It is not proper for the Prophet and the Muslims to seek pardon for the
polytheists.2
The kufr of the Shi ahs is obvious and the above verses clearly prohibit
us from performing their janazah salah, going to their graves and
seeking forgiveness for them.3
(c)
It is clear from their above-mentioned beliefs that these
people are unbelievers. Thus, it is neither permissible to enter into any
marriage with them nor to solemnize their marriages. Allah ta'ālā says:
ولا تنكحوا المشركات حتی یؤمن.
Do not marry idolatresses until they believe.ª
Fatāwī Hindīyyah:
لا يجوز نكاح المجوسيات ... ويدخل في عبدة الأوثان وعبدة الشمس والنجوم والصور
التي استحسنوها والمعطلة والزنادقة والباطنية والإباحية وكل مذهب يكفر به معتقده،
5
کذا في فتح القدیر.
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
1 Sūrah at-Taubah, 9: 84.
2 Sūrah at-Taubah, 9: 113.
3 Ahsan al-Fatāwā, vol. 4, p. 220.
4 Sūrah al-Baqarah, 2: 221.
5 الفتاوى الهندية: 28111، وكذا الشامي: 4913.
170

Belief in the transmigration of souls
Question
Is it true that after death, a soul moves from one body to another in
the sense that when a person dies, his soul migrates to another new
body which is to be born? It remains with the new body until death
and then migrates to another body and this continues until the day of
Resurrection.
Answer
The 'ulama' say that this is the belief of the fire worshippers, Hindus
and deviated Shi ahs. They believe that the souls of good people enter
the bodies of other good people, and find solace there. The souls of bad
people enter the bodies of bad people, and have to endure difficulties
there. The Shi'ahs believe that Allah ta'ala settled into Hadrat 'Alī
radiyallahu 'anhu and the soul continued migrating to their [Shi ah]
imāms.
This is known as tanasukh - the transmigration of souls. This belief is
both rationally and traditionally baseless.
The following is stated in an-Nibrās:
التناسخ هو انتقال الروح من جسم إلى جسم آخر، وقد اتفق الفلاسفة وأهل السنة على
بطلانه، وقال بحقيقته قوم من الضلال فزعم بعضهم أن كل روح ينتقل في مائة ألف
وأربعة وثمانين من الأبدان، وجوز بعضهم تعلقه بأبدان البهائم بل الأشجار والأحجار على
حسب جزاء الأعمال السيئة وقد حكم أهل الحق بكفر القائلين بالتناسخ والمحققون
على أن التكفير لإنكارهم البعث.1
Tanāsukh refers to the migration of a soul from one body to another. The
philosophers and Ahl as-Sunnah concur that it is baseless. Some deviated
people believe in it and claim that every soul migrates into 100 084 bodies.
Some of them even say that the soul attaches itself to the bodies of animals,
and even to trees and rocks depending on the recompense for their evil deeds.
The Ahl al-Haq state that those who believe in tanasukh are unbelievers. Other
scholars say that they are labelled unbelievers because of their rejection of the
Resurrection.
'Umdatul Qārī:
1 النبراس، ص 213.
171

وقال ابن بزيزة: استدل بظاهره قوم لا يعقلون على جواز التناسخ، قلت: هذا مذهب
مردود، وقد بنوه على دعاوی باطلة بغير دليل وبرهان.
Tuhfatul Ahwadhī:
وفي حديث ابن مسعود عند مسلم: "أرواحهم في أجواف طير خضر لها قناديل معلقة
بالعرش تسرح من الجنة حيث شاءت ثم تأوي إلى تلك القناديل" الحديث. قال في المرقاة:
وقد تعلق بهذا الحديث وأمثاله بعض القائلين بالتناسخ وانتقال الأرواح، وتنعيمها في
الصور الحسان المرفهة، وتعذيبها في الصور القبيحة، وزعموا أن هذا هو الثواب والعقاب،
وهذا باطل مردود لا يطابق ما جاءت به الشرائع من إثبات الحشر والنشر والجنة والنار،
ولهذا قال في حديث آخر: حتى يرجعه الله إلى جسده يوم بعثة الأجساد، قال ابن الهمام:
اعلم أن القول بتجرد الروح يخالف هذا الحديث كما أنه يخالف قوله تعالى: "فادخلي في
عبادي" انتهى. وفي بعض حواشي شرح العقائد: اعلم أن التناسخ عند أهله هو رد الأرواح
إلى الأبدان في هذا العالم لا في الآخرة، إذ هم ينكرون الآخرة والجنة والنار، ولذا كفروا
انتهى.
قلت: على بطلان التناسخ دلائل كثيرة واضحة في الكتاب والسنة، منها قوله تعالى: "حتى
إذا جاء أحدهم الموت قال رب ارجعون لعلي أعمل صالحا فيما تركت كلا إنها كلمة هو
قائلها ومن ورائهم برزخ إلی یوم یبعثون".2
Al-Muhallā:
وأما من زعم أن الأرواح تنقل إلى أجساد آخر فهو أصحاب التناسخ، وهو كفر عند جميع
أهل الإسلام. 3
Ar-Rūh:
وإنما التناسخ الباطل ما تقوله أعداء الرسل من الملاحدة وغيرهم الذين ينكرون المعاد أن
الأرواح تصير بعد مفارقة الأبدان إلى أجناس الحيوان والحشرات والطيور التي تناسبها
1 عمدة القاري: 31314، وهكذا قال ابن حجر في فتح الباري: 2\184.
2 تحفة الأحوذي: 5\270.
3 المحلى: 451.
172

وتشاكلها فإذا فارقت هذه الأبدان انتقلت إلى أبدان تلك الحيوانات فتنعم فيها أو تعذب
ثم تفارقها وتحل في أبدان أخر تناسب أعمالها وأخلاقها وهكذا أبدا فهذا معادها عندهم
ونعيمها وعذابها لا معاد لها عندهم غير ذلك فهذا هو التناسخ الباطل المخالف لما اتفقت
عليه الرسل والأنبياء من أولهم إلى آخرهم وهو كفر بالله واليوم الآخر وهذه الطائفة
يقولون أن مستقر الأرواح بعد المفارقة أبدان الحيوانات التي تناسبها وهو ابطل قول
وأخبثه.1
Hadrat Maulānā Shams al-Haq Afghanī writes in 'Ulum al-Qur'an:
1.
Tanāsukhī recompense (recompense based on the belief in the
transmigration of souls) defies justice because recompense in such a
case is connected only to the soul and not to the body, whereas both
the soul and the body were criminals in committing a crime.
2.
In tanāsukhī recompense, there is no knowledge of the crime.
In order for a crime to be punishable, the crime has to be established,
and the criminal must have knowledge of the crime and its
punishment - as is the case with courts of this world. However, an
animalistic soul does not know what crime it committed in the past,
and for which crime it is being punished by being placed in an animal
form. Tanāsukh is therefore irrational.
3.
Differences in the number of deaths and births are sufficient to
refute tanasukh. If the birth of animals is as a result of human souls
being placed in animal bodies because of their sins, then the number
of humans who die and the number of animals which are born have to
be exactly the same. If 100 000 humans dies on a certain day, and half
or more of them were criminals, then the same number of insects and
other animals are not born on that same day. Instead, millions and
billions of animals are born.
4.
If we were to accept tanasukh, we will have to believe in the
oneness of the souls of humans and animals. We will have to say that
the souls of animals are actually human souls which - because of their
crimes - have come into the bodies of animals. However, the
dissimilarity between the two is obvious: Human souls possess
intelligence and the power of speech while animal souls do not.
Secondly, take the example of a human soul being in a cat. When the
1 الروح لا بن القيم الجوزية، ص 142.
173

soul was in a human body, it detested eating a rat. Now how is it
possible that when it goes into the body of a cat, the same soul which
detested eating a rat suddenly discards its natural aversion and is
prepared to run after a rat? This sudden change is illogical.1
Allāh ta'ālā knows best.
Paying respects to a statue
Question
A city in Tajikistan has a statue of the founder of the city. When
youngsters get married, they go before this statue, place a rose there
and pay respects to it. Is it permissible to pay respects to a statue in
this way? Will their marriage break if they do this?
Answer
To pay respects to a statue in a manner described in the question is not
permissible in the Shari'ah. This is the beginning of idolatry. By and
large, this is how idolatry started. However, it does not affect the
marriage pact in any way.
'Allāmah Shāmī rahimahullāh writes:
و (كفر به) أي بالاعتاق للصنم (المسلم عند قصد التعظيم) لان تعظيم الصنم كفر.
وفي الشامية: والصنم صورة الإنسان من خشب أو ذهب أو فضة، فلو من حجر فهو وثن
كما في البحر.
(قوله وإن أثم وكفر به) فالإثم في الإعتاق للشيطان والكفر في الإعتاق للصنم بقرينة
تفسيره مرجع الضمير المجرور ... وما فعله الشارع هو ما مشى عليه المصنف في المنح، وهو
ظاهر البحر أيضا.
والأظهر ما في المتن والجوهرة من الكفر بكل منهما.
2
Ibn Qayyim rahimahullah writes:
1 Hadrat Maulānā Shams al-Haq Afghanī: 'Ulūm al-Qur'an, pp. 210-213.
For further details refer to: Madhāhib 'Ālam Ka Encyclopaedia and Mukalamah
Bayna al-Madhāhib, p. 153, Maktabah Fārūqīyyah.
2 الدر المختار مع فتاوى شامي: 65013، ط: سعيد.
174

الوجه الثالث عشر: أن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم نهى عن بناء المساجد على القبور، ولعن
من فعل ذلك، ونهى عن تخصيص القبور، وتشريفها، واتخاذها مساجد، وعن الصلاة إليها
وعندها، وعن إيقاد المصابيح عليها، وأمر بتسويتها، ونهى عن اتخاذها عيدا، وعن شد
الرحال إليها، لئلا يكون ذلك ذريعة إلى اتخاذها أوثانا والإشراك بها، وحرم ذلك على من
قصده ومن لم يقصده بل قصد خلافه سدا للذريعة.
الوجه الخامس عشر: أنه صلى الله عليه وسلم نهى عن التشبه بأهل الكتاب في أحاديث
كثيرة، كقوله: "إن اليهود والنصارى لا يصبغون فخالفوهم." وقوله: "إن اليهود لا يصلون في
نعالهم فخالفوهم؟" وقوله في عاشوراء: "خالفوا اليهود صوموا يوما قبله ويوما بعده." وقوله:
"لا تشبهوا بالأعاجم." وروى الترمذي عنه: "ليس منا من تشبه بغيرنا." وروى الإمام أحمد
عنه: "من تشبه بقوم فهو منهم.
'Allāmah Ibn Qudāmah Hambalī rahimahullāh writes:
ولا يجوز اتخاذ السرج على القبور لقول النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: "لعن الله زوارات
القبور المتخذات عليهن المساجد والسرج." رواه أبو داود والنسائي ولفظه لعن رسول الله
صلى الله عليه وسلم ولو أبيح لم يلعن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم من فعله ولأن فيه
تضييعا للمال في غير فائدة وإفراطا في تعظيم القبور أشبه تعظيم الأصنام ولا يجوز اتخاذ
المساجد على القبور لهذا الخبر ولأن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: "لعن الله اليهود
اتخذوا قبور أنبيائهم مساجد." يحذر مثل ما صنعوا متفق عليه وقالت عائشة: إنما لم يبرز
قبر رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم لئلا يتخذ مسجدا ولأن تخصيص القبور بالصلاة
عندها يشبه تعظيم الأصنام بالسجود لها والتقرب إليها وقد روينا أن ابتداء عبادة الأصنام
تعظيم الأموات باتخاذ صورهم ومسحها والصلاة عندها.2
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
1 إعلام الموقعين: 1393.
2 المغني: 38712، دار الكتب العلمية.
175

Chapter Six: Taqlīd and Ijtihād
There is no difference between taqlīd and ittiba'
Question
Is there any difference between taqlīd and ittiba' (following) in the
sense that one is considered impermissible and the other permissible?
Do we find any such differentiation by the past scholars?
Answer
There is no difference between taqlid and ittiba', both are the same.
There is also no such differentiation by the past scholars. Yes, we
certainly find their statements with respect to the opposite of this, viz.
disunity. A few texts are quoted below from which it will be gauged
that there is no difference between taqlīd and ittiba'. The supreme
shaykh of the Ahl al-Hadīth, Maulana Sayyid Nadhīr Husayn Dehlawī
(d. 1330 A.H.) defines taqlīd as follows:
The common meaning of taqlīd is to accept and practise on the
statement of the 'ulama' at the time of not having knowledge of a
particular matter. In line with this common meaning, ittiba' of the
mujtahids is referred to as taqlīd.
He writes further on:
It is thus established that it is permissible to refer to the ittiba' of
Rasūlullāh sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam and the ittiba' of the mujtahids as
taqlīd.1
Nūr al-Anwār:
التقليد اتباع الرجل غيره ... الخ.
2
Taqlīd refers to a person following another ...
Hāshiyah Nāmī:
3
التقلید اتباع الغیر علی ظن.
Taglīd refers to following another on an assumption.
Kashshaf Istilāhāt al-Funūn:
1 معيار الحق، ص 66-67، الكلام المفيد في إثبات التقلید، ص 30.
2 نور الأنوار، ص 220.
3 حاشية نامي على الحسامي، ص 190.
176

التقليد اتباع الإنسان غيره فيما يقول.1
Taqlīd refers to a person following what another says.
It becomes absolutely clear from all the above quotations that taqlīd
and ittiba' are one and the same. Even the supreme shaykh of the Ahl
al-Hadith does not see any difference between the two. However, in
our common usage, following the imams is referred to as taqlīd while
following Rasūlullah sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam is referred to as ittibā'.
Most ghayr muqallids consider taqlīd and ittiba' to be different. They
say that ittiba' is praiseworthy while taqlīd is blameworthy. Yet when
they write against taqlīd, they write something which is different to
their own accepted definition.
بل نتبع ما وجدنا عليه آباءنا.
[They say]: the muqallids are like polytheists who used to follow their
ancestors and forefathers. Then they also refer to taqlīd as ittiba'.
However, they cannot understand this much that the forefathers of
the polytheists were not mujtahids. How, then, can this be presented
as an example !?
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
The definitional and general usage of the word taqlīd
Question
Since when did the word taqlīd began to be used in its definitional
meaning? When did its general usage become popular? Was this word
in vogue and used during the eras of Rasūlullah sallallahu 'alayhi wa
sallam and the Sahābah radiyallahu 'anhum?
Answer
Although there is evidence of the meaning of the word taqlīd being in
vogue, the actual word was not in vogue in those days. This is similar
to the definitions of Ahadith - e.g. mudtarib, hasan, da'if and so on -
which were not used during the era of the Sahabah radiyallahu 'anhum.
These words came into vogue later on. Likewise, the word taqlīd
became common later on. However, there is certainly evidence of the
meaning of taqlīd being used by the Sahabah radiyallahu 'anhum and
Tābi'în. The words iqtidā' and ittiba' were used in those days. For
example:
1 كشاف اصطلاحات الفنون للشيخ القاضي محمد التهانوي (م 1191ه): 117812، سهيل أكيدمي.
177

اقتدوا بالذين من بعدي أبي بكر وعمر .!
Follow those who are to come after me, Abu Bakr and 'Umar.
Rasūlullah sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam said with reference to the
Sahābah:
بأيهم اقتديتم اهتديتم.
1
Whichever one from among them you follow, you will be guided.
The definitions of the principles of Hadith (usul al-Hadith) were also
not found in those days. However, they were accepted later on and
became common. Furthermore, when it comes to the levels of the
narrators (tabagāt) as laid down by the Muhaddithūn, we find
Tabaqāt-e-Hanafīyyah, Tabaqāt-e-Shafi'īyyah, Tabaqāt-e- Mālikīyyah
and Tabagāt-e-Hanabilah, but we do not come across Tabaqat-e-Ghayr
Muqallidīn.
The correct view is that taqlid only refers to relying on the statement
of an Imam in contradictory or unclear texts. In essence, emulation is
that of Rasulullah sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam and not the mujtahid
himself. If a person is offended by and detests the word taqlīd itself, we
will not refer to him as an abandoner of a compulsory duty if he does
not use this word. However, one thing is certain, it is not possible to
escape from accepting the reality of taqlīd.
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
Reliable books on the topic of taqlīd
Question
Which books in the view of Hadrat Mufti Sahib are the most
comprehensive and reliable on the subject of taqlid and the opposition
to it? Please provide a list.
Answer
The following books are reliable and beneficial for this topic:
Nizām al-Islam: Hadrat Maulānā Qutb ad-Din Khan.
1 رواه الترمذي وحسنه، رقم: 3662.
2 رواه رزين، مشكوة: 55412، باب مناقب الصحابة، ورواه عبد بن حميد في مسنده من حديث ابن عمر
مرفوعا، كذا في التلخيص الحبير: 46214، باب أدب القضاء.
178

Īdāh al-Adillah: Hadrat Maulānā Shaykh al-Hind (1268-1339 A.H.)
Al-Adillāh al-Kāmilah: Hadrat Maulānā Shaykh al-Hind.
Sabīl ar-Rashād: Hadrat Maulānā Rashīd Ahmad Gangohī (1244-1323
A.H.)
Khayr at-Taqlīd: Hadrat Maulana Khayr Muhammad Sahib.
Tanwir al-Haq: Hadrat Maulānā Khayr Muhammad Sahib.
Tahqīq Mas'alah Taqlīd: Hadrat Maulānā Muhammad Amīn Safdar
Ukārwī (1355-1421 A.H.)
Al-Kalām al-Mufīd fī Ithbāt at-Taqlīd: Hadrat Maulānā Sarfaraz Khan
Sāhib (d. 1432 A.H.)
Taqlīd Kī Shar'ī Haythiyat: Justice Muftī Muhammad Taqī 'Uthmānī.
Taqlīd Kī Shar'ī Darūrat: Hadrat Muftī 'Abd ar-Rahīm Sahib Lājpūrī
(1321-1422 A.H.)
Many other useful books on this subject can be obtained from
Gujrānwālā and Bihālnagar in Pakistan.
Allāh ta ālā knows best.
Choosing a different madh-hab for certain subsidiary matters
Question
Can a person leave the madh-hab of one Imam to follow another in a
certain subsidiary matter? For example, if a Shafi'ī wants to keep a fast
in Ramadan it is necessary for him to make an intention for it at night.
If he forgets to make the intention, can he make intention in the
morning while thinking to himself that he is following the Hanafis in
this regard? Or take the example where the wife is a Shafi'ī and the
husband is a Hanafi. Whenever she touches him, her wudu' will break.
Can the woman follow the Hanafi madh-hab in this matter?
Answer
A person may follow another Mujtahid only at the time of extreme
necessity. He cannot follow his whims in normal situations. Similarly,
it is totally forbidden to follow another Imam solely for personal
motives and out of following one's desires. Who is going to
differentiate between a necessity and no necessity? This can only be
done by erudite 'ulama' and the honourable muftīs; it is not the work
of anyone and everyone. 'Allamah Ibn 'Abidin writes in 'Uqud Rasm al-
Muftī:
179

لو أفتى مفت بشيء من هذه الأقوال في مواضع الضرورة طلبا للتيسير كان حسنا ... وبه علم
أن المضطر له العمل بذلك لنفسه كما قلنا، وأن له الإفتاء به للمضطر فما مرأنه ليس له
العمل بالضعيف والإفتاء بالمجهول على غير موضع الضرورة كما علمته عن مجموع ما
قررناه.1
He writes in his commentary to ad-Durr al-Mukhtar:
(إن الحكم والفتيا بالقول المرجوح جهل) قلت: لكن هذا في غير موضع الضرورة.
2
In short, permission is only granted if there is a severe need. If not,
there is the fear of Din becoming a plaything.
'Allāmah Shāmī rahimahullah writes in the chapter on accepting a
testimony:
(ولا من انتقل من مذهب أبي حنيفة إلى مذهب الشافعي) قوله من مذهب أبي حنيفة أي
استخفافا قال في القنية من كتاب الكراهية: ليس للعامي أن يتحول من مذهب إلى مذهب
ويستوي فيه الحنفي والشافعي.
وفي آخر هذا الباب من المنح: وإن انتقل إليه لقلة مبالاته في الإعتقاد والجرأة على الإنتقال
من مذهب إلى مذهب كما يتفق له ويميل طبعه إليه لغرض يحصل له فإنه لا تقبل
3
شهادته.
Ad-Durr al-Mukhtar states:
وإن الحكم الملفق باطل بالإجماع وفي رد المحتار مثاله متوضي سال من بدنه دم ولمس
امرأة ثم صلى فإن صحة هذه الصلاة ملفقة من مذهب الشافعي والحنفي والتلفيق باطل
فصحته منتفية.4
In the above question, when the woman performed wudu' in
accordance with the Hanafi madh-hab, her salah will not be valid
according to the Shafi'ī madh-hab. The reason for this is that touching
1 عقود رسم المفتي، ص 44.
2 رد المحتار: 7411، مطلب لا يجوز العمل بالضعيف، ط: سعيد.
3 رد المحتار: 48115، كتاب الشهادات.
4 الدر المختار: 7511، مطلب لا يجوز العمل بالضعيف.
180