Answer: In the name of God, The Beneficent and Merciful to whom all praise is due. We ask He send his peace and blessings upon His messenger Muhammad.

• The bulk of this fatwa is derived from Shaikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s book Fiqh Al-Zakat, Vol. 2 pgs. 635-669

Zakat is a specific type of charity (sadaqah). Zakat means to increase, grow or purify. It is a pillar of Islamic practice meant to protect and uplift society from the pitfalls of social hardships. The scholars agree that there is one verse of the Quran which delineates all categories of recipients for zakat distribution.

“Zakat is for the poor and needy, those who work to collect them, bringing the hearts together, the ransoming of slaves, the debtors, in God’s way, and the travelers. This God ordains and God is All-knowing, All-wise.” (9:60)

If you are not a scholar, you would easily infer that there is nothing literally mentioned here on mosques or any other organizations. Though it could be inferred from the literal meaning here that if the mosque or Islamic organization in question was in serious debt and immediate charitable donations other than zakat cannot pay it off, then it could fall under the clear category of debtors and thus become zakat eligible until the debt is paid off. Many jurists do argue that the category of debtors is strictly limited to people drowning in or completely overcome by debt, or in a state of bankruptcy as is mentioned in classical commentaries.

This small research will analyze the category of “in God’s way” as it has been understood from the scholars among the early predecessors until this day.

Linguistically the phrase في سبيل الله (fī sabīlillah) means “in the path/way of God”. In English, we often use the “apostrophe s” to indicate possession and thus translated as “in God’s way”. The meaning here theologically is related to someone working for the practice or promotion of Islam.

Classic Quranic commentaries relying on the companions and their followers as well as the four juristic schools of thought historically understood the meaning of “in God’s way” to be “military spending that would support the religion of God, its path and legislation for God’s servants to follow. Protecting the believers against those enemies who seek to prevent the existence or practice of Islam or the oppression of Muslims,” (At-Tabari). This was interpreted as for the soldiers themselves, as well as the broader needs of military spending.

The reason for this was that, during the Prophet Muhammad’s ﷺ (peace be upon him) time and for centuries thereafter, Muslims were always under the threat of more powerful religious groups such as the Polytheists of Makkah and their allies, the Jews surrounding Madinah, the Christian Byzantines, and the Zoroastrians of Persia who wanted dominance for their own and resented the new prophet and his growing following. This resentment entailed a disdain for Islam and regular incursions against Muslims. Once Muslims founded their own city in Madinah, God called for them to establish a military to protect themselves in order to guarantee their freedom and safety to practice and promote Islam in the world.

Some classical commentators such as Imam Al-Razi and others up until this day differed about the extent of the application of the category of “in God’s way” as a result of the difference between the general meaning vs. the commonly understood meaning that was very much so related to the circumstances faced by the early Muslims. For example, many early Hanafi and Hanbali jurists allowed zakat to be distributed for “in God’s way” toward Hajj expenses for the poor. Other Hanafi jurists such as Imam Al-Kasani said “in God’s way” can be used for the students of sacred knowledge or anyone else working in a specialized capacity for promoting goodness. They did put a condition of poverty on these analogies, but that conflicts with the authentic hadith in which the Prophet ﷺ (peace be upon him) said,

“Charity should not be distributed to the wealthy except in five cases… Among them is the soldier in God’s path” (Ibn Majah 1503)

They mention the apparent contradiction justifying the restriction to only poor people in God’s way by saying that someone may be wealthy while at home in the city where they live, but when they travel on the path of God they require more support and are out of their normal wealthy home environment and thus somehow fit the description of poverty! The problem is that if you make each category of zakat about the poor then why make eight separate categories? This is the wisdom of why the Prophet ﷺ (peace be upon him) said that some of these categories can be distributed to wealthy (meaning not poor). That being said, some of the controversy over the issue is that many early jurists postulated that zakat is only for people and not meant for building mosques or other organizations. In their context, perhaps that makes sense considering how a mosque was built in their time and the limitation of the role or place of the mosque in the Muslim community and the scope of work in which it functioned.

Let’s not forget that among the other three juristic schools, “in God’s way” was seen as an exception to the rule of only being distributed to actual needy people. They held that zakat could be used for making weapons, armor, buying camels and horses, building fortresses and city walls, boats and many other institutional resources for military spending.

More recently, in the early 1900’s, the great Azhari Shaikh Ibrahim Qattan of Jordan agreed with this analogy of spending “in God’s way” on all work that specifically benefits the Muslims. He did not put the condition of poverty in his commentary. Shaikh Jamal al-Deen al-Qasmy, Shaikh Muhammad Rasheed Rida and his eminence Sh. Muhammad Shaltoot also agreed with this application of the generality of the Quranic injunction of “in God’s way” with the condition of it being for the sake of endowment related to non-profit work in which no person owns or gains profit from it.

The Grand Mufti of Egypt, Shaikh Husain Makhloof, issued a fatwa in 1948 stating that non-profit organizations that promote social well-being are zakat eligible. In 1958, the Grand Imam of al-Azhar Shaikh Al-Shaltoot made the specific fatwa permitting the usage of zakat under this category for building a mosque with the condition that it is the only mosque in that area, or if the other local mosque is packed and cannot accommodate the Muslims.

After researching the fatwas of our tradition, I think it is important to add a couple of points to this discussion before giving my personal conviction. The phrase سبيل الله (sabīlillah) or God’s path/way appears 65 times in the Quran. Sometimes it comes following the prepositions in or against. Mostly “in God’s way” is for protecting or promoting the goodness of Islam whereas “against God’s way” is about the enemies of Islam trying to prevent Muslims from practicing Islam.

If God wanted us all to understand that this category should only be used to support a standing military for a Muslim nation, then he would have said “the military” or “soldiers” instead of the broad “in God’s way.” But He did not and so He means something else, something broader. That being said, it would be a stretch to interpret this to mean ALL work that promotes goodness because that is what the concept of charity is for, while zakat is for eight specific categories.

I agree with the esteemed scholar and mujtahid (expert scholar) of our era, Shaikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, on this issue. The meaning of “In God’s way” is about supporting specific institutionalized jihad. Jihad is a noble concept of protecting oneself, family and community from evil forces. As we know from scripture, jihad is mostly a personal struggle against evil intentions and committing sin, which obviously is not helped through monetary support. Jihad can also be by the tongue or the pen, so in this case zakat could be used to support non-profit institutions focused on defending Islam and Muslims from vilification and persecution, or to promote the truth of Islam to the world. I do not believe building or supporting a mosque in the Muslim world fits under this category of zakat. I only say this because unfortunately, for the most part, mosques in the Muslim world are not playing some considerable role of protecting and uplifting Islam in society.

On the other hand, establishing mosques in the West is very much so engaged in jihad. It is the center of Muslim identity in a non-Muslim land. The mosque is where focused religious learning and spiritual development occurs. It is the place where the diversity of Muslims can come together to build spiritual bonds and be exposed to many opportunities to promote Islamic values, as well as defend Islam from Islamophobia. It is the central focus of the Islamic presence in a Western society.

I would make a condition on the usage of this category that it becomes invalid if there is no money available for the other categories, specifically that of the poor and needy. Therefore if a mosque maintains a sufficient amount of zakat for the other categories then it may use excess zakat money for other mosque needs, such as paying off debt, materials for education, programs and events that are aimed at promoting or defending Islam, salaries of Imams and teachers, etc… It would not be used for janitorial needs, secretarial or administrative costs, or other non-jihad related needs.

If someone disagrees with this well-established position among prominent scholars, they are free to follow what they feel is best. It is a principle of Islamic jurisprudence that there can be no rebuking in matters of legitimate disagreement. It is unbecoming and perhaps sinful to publicly shame people for following an established legal ruling among the prominent scholars of Islam.

Here are some other similar fatwas on this subject:

https://www.amjaonline.org/fatwa/en/87740/using-zakat-money-to-pay-the-centers-salaries-and-general-expenses-due-to-the-economic-circumstances-associated-with-the-coronavirus-covid-19-pandemic

https://muslimmatters.org/2007/10/24/the-permissibility-of-zakat-for-islamic-dawah-organizations-a-detailed-analysis/

And God knows best…

Imam John Ederer

Muslim Community Center of Charlotte

Few scholars (and yet many “religious” Muslims) claim that women scholars should not teach mixed gatherings openly as men scholars do and that if she does she should do so behind a curtain. It is also suggested as evidence against this that women should generally stay at home and that her face as well as her voice is of her nakedness (`aura), and they shouldn’t be seen or heard! For those who came to Islam or latched on to it because it is generally so practical and reasonable, you are probably thinking, well, that is ridiculous. The following article will show the strong scriptural refutation most scholars would make against such claims.

The discussion is mainly based in the commentary and juristic interpretation of surah al-Ahzab (Qur’an 33). Surah al-Ahzab is themed contextually with many verses over a few pages which address the pronoun for the feminine plural. These are always referring back to “the wives or women of the Prophet ﷺ (peace be upon him) (أزواج أو نساء النبي)” whereas the word “female believers (مؤمنات)” is only used once at the very end of the context in the verse enjoining the modest covering of Islam which is customarily referred to as Hijab in English. This can be confusing because the “verse of Hijab” is not referring to the modest clothing; rather it was an injunction for us to ask the wives of the Prophet ﷺ from behind a curtain when visiting their homes.

The first occurrence of the feminine plural pronoun is in dealing with the Prophet’s wives desire for extra wealth and provisions. God tells them that if they desire this worldly life then the Prophet should divorce them whereas if they want the Hereafter then that is the reward for exceptional Muslims:

“Dear Prophet, tell your wives that if they want this life and its adornments…” (Qur’an, 33:28).

The next time the pronoun appears, it is referring back to a specific warning against the wives of the Prophet ﷺ from sexual immorality which will bring a double punishment.

“Dearest women of the Prophet whoever among you would commit adultery…” (Qur’an, 33:30).

The next verse with the plural feminine pronoun makes the case in point of the whole issue!

“Dear wives of the Prophet, You are not like any other women. If you are to be pious then do not speak in a soft sweet tone which could lead a person with a diseased heart to get the wrong idea. Live in tranquility in your homes and don’t make a spectacle of yourselves as the women did before Islam…” (Qur’an, 33:32-33).

This verse is clearly denoting the special status of the wives of the Prophet ﷺ and how they carry a much more specific and cautious ruling. As we saw in the previous verses, the deeds of the wives of the Prophet ﷺ carry double the impact and so naturally the law carries double the seriousness. There are clearly unique rules to the wives such as the fact that they do not inherit from the Prophet ﷺ, no man can marry them after, and according to many commentators and jurists, they should stay home and if visited, they should speak from behind a curtain.

The surah then goes into the generality of spiritual equality between women and men, and then goes into a page and a half of other matters clearly moving away from the specificity of either the wives of the Prophet ﷺ or the women believers.

It picks back up admonishing the Prophet ﷺ and his wives about the general rules of their relationship and again we have reference to the plural feminine pronoun again referring to the Prophet’s wives.

“Dear prophet, We have permitted you to be with your wives to whom you have given the bridal dowry…” (Qur’an, 33:50).

Immediately following that is the “verse of the Hijab”. Let us look at the verse and see who it was referring to and the scholarly difference of interpretation and what may have led to such difference while it will probably seem plain and evident to most readers.

“Dear believers don’t hang around the Prophet’s house hoping to be invited for a meal. If you are invited, then go and eat, but don’t linger around too long afterwards hoping to talk as that often annoyed the Prophet and he was shy to tell you to leave. God is not shy to say the truth. If you ask them (feminine plural), then do so from behind a curtain. That is purer for your (masculine plural) hearts and theirs (feminine plural). You must not annoy the Prophet nor should you ever marry his wives after he passes. Indeed these are of the most serious of affairs to God.” (Qur’an, 33:53)

Three verses later, the surah reveals the injunction for the modest covering women are to wear and God felt it necessary to specify the wives of the Prophet ﷺ, his daughters and all the believing women so as to leave no doubt about its legislative intention.

“Dear prophet, tell your wives, your daughters and the believing women to cover their entire bodies with clothing…” (Qur’an, 33:59).

This was the last verse in the surah using the plural feminine pronoun in which we see all previous verses specifying that to the wives of the Prophet ﷺ.

Interpretations of the Verse Regarding Staying at Home

As you can see, the context and linguistics is addressing the wives of the Prophet ﷺ, although some scholars said that it should address all other female believers as well since they are our example. They said it is similar to the verses which address the Prophet ﷺ. On the other hand, other scholars held the position of the specificity of the text to the wives of the Prophet ﷺ as both a specific admonition and to clarify their special status.

Prominent Classical Commentaries

Al-Tabari (310) — Indicates that the verse about staying in the house except for need is for all women. He narrates many narrations of circumstances in which the verse of Hijab was revealed all of which indicate it is specific to the wives of the Prophet ﷺ. He does mention one opinion of Qatada that it was for all homes to have a curtain between strange men and the women of the house. Ibn Kathir follows Imam al-Tabari’s commentary.

Ibn Atiya (546) — Makes no mention of the verses being general for all women rather his commentary follows the natural linguistics which are specific to wives of the Prophet ﷺ.

Ibn al-Jawzi (597) — Makes no mention of the verses being general for all women rather his commentary follows the natural linguistics which are specific to wives of the Prophet ﷺ.

Imam al-Razi (606) — Makes no mention of the verses being general for all women rather his commentary follows the natural linguistics which are specific to wives of the Prophet ﷺ.

Al-Qurtubi (671) — Indicates that the rulings are general for all women.

Al-Nasafi (710) — Makes no mention of the verses being general for all women rather his commentary follows the natural linguistics which are specific to wives of the Prophet ﷺ.

Imam Al-Sutooti (864) — Makes no mention of the verses being general for all women rather his commentary follows the natural linguistics which are specific to the wives of the Prophet ﷺ.

Ibn Ashoor (1393) — Actually makes the point that the verses are specific to the wives of the Prophet ﷺ when speaking about things which the believing women weren’t generally commanded to elsewhere in the Qur’an. He states that it would be noble for a believing woman to follow them, but she is not obligated to.

Related Hadiths

Ibn Hajar, radi Allahu `anhu (may God be pleased with him), narrates the hadith in his commentary on al-Bukhari — This verse stay in your homes is in reality specific to the wives of the Prophet ﷺ since Umm Salamah used to say: “I won’t be moved by a camel’s back until I am reunited with the Prophet,” (al-Fath 3561).

It is also narrated in most of the historical commentaries how after the verse of Hijab was revealed, Umar saw Sawdah (ra) — the wife of the Prophet ﷺ— walking around outside for some reason and asked her why she is outside. She went and asked the Prophet ﷺ about Umar’s rebuking her and he responded: “God has permitted you to go out if you need to,” (Muslim 2170).

It is also narrated in many sound narrations that after the loss of the Battle of the Camel led by A’ishah (ra), she would cry when reading the verse about staying in the house.

Is a Woman’s Face of her Nakedness?

In Sura al-Noor men and women were commanded to lower their gaze since the face is apparent. So if that is to be a proof for men not watching a female speaker then that would also prevent women from watching a male speaker. The vast majority of the scholars say that the face and hands of a woman are not from her nakedness, but should still not be stared at. In commenting on this verse many commentators particularly from the Hanafis say that the injunction to lower the gaze is understood at the moment of desire. If there is no desire then the verse is inapplicable. Others said that the restriction is lightened in professional interactions like buying and selling or teaching etc.

Is a Woman’s Voice of her Nakedness?

Hanafi’s: Ibn Abideen Al-Darr Al-Mukhtar: “Like her face and hands, her voice is not of her nakedness.”

Maliki’s: Hashiyat al-Dasooqi: “It is said that the women’s voice is not of her nakedness since we have so many female scholars of Hadith. It can only be of her nakedness if a man is attracted by it so then it would be disliked to listen to it.” It is the well-established opinion that her voice is not nakedness as mentioned by al-Adawi.

Shafi’ee: Majmoo al-Nawawi: “It was said that Al-Qadhi Husain was asked if the woman’s voice is of her nakedness and he answered that both opinions are found in the school, but that the more correct is that it isn’t.”

Hanbali: Insaaf al-Mardawi: “It is the more correct opinion that the voice of a woman is not of her nakedness.”

Dr. Su’ad Salih the previous Deen of Islamic Law at Azhar University says the there is nothing wrong with a female scholar teaching a mixed gathering since it is well established that great women scholars of the past did so. There is nothing in the scripture that would prohibit a modest woman of knowledge and character to preach to the masses. She states that the fact widows were commanded to stay in the house for mourning is evidence that generally they may leave the house. She similarly negates the claim that a woman’s voice is of her nakedness since the Qur’an did ask us to ask the wives of the Prophet ﷺ behind a curtain thus hearing their voice. She also reminds us that there were thousands of female scholars of hadith and fiqh who taught many men. The verse does not prohibit all speech; rather it forbids a sweet soft toned voice that may be seen as attractive:

“…If you are to be pious then do not speak in a soft sweet tone which could lead a person with a diseased heart to get the wrong idea.” (Qur’an 33:32)

Dr. Husam al-Farfoor and Dr. Abdul-Hameed al-Ubaydee, both professors of comparative jurisprudence in Syria and Iraq as well as the great scholar Muhammad Al-Didow al-Shanqeeti agree with her fatwa.

One of the biggest problems facing religion today is modern relevance. For many people of faith, this means coming to terms with reforming their religion to fit modern times by dismissing or “re-interpreting” scripture. The beauty of Islam among religions is in its universality, its compatibility with science, and its versatile legal tradition which remains relevant across times and cultures.

Modernity between Acceptance of Reality and Rejectionism

For the Muslim, the correct attitude is not to resist or reject modernity, rather embrace it with our divine law. Unfortunately, some “conservative” Muslims fear modernity for one reason or another, thus detracting from their relevance. This way of thinking alienates many educated, reasonable Muslims, because they have to live in reality and Islam seems to be at odds with it.

We have ample means of accommodating modernity embedded in the Qur’an, the Sunnah and our vast, rich, 14-century legacy of jurisprudence. So for us, it is not a matter of reform per se, rather that of revivalist research of scriptural interpretation. The Islamic orthodoxy of law is quite vast and versatile. There are two issues that have hindered the proper manifestation of this versatility: closing of the doors of ijtihad (deriving new rulings from legal principles) for centuries, and a huge decline in the general quality of education in the Muslim world in the last two centuries. These two issues have led to some scholars blindly following certain, fixed schools of thought, and in turn to the subjugation of religious values to popular culture; thus our current dilemma/dichotomy.

Female Role in Society

One of the issues of modernity is female leadership. So you have the culture and its supporting fatwas from the Muslim world that women are not to be leaders outside of motherhood. You have a general consensus that women can be scholars and preach Islam, but only to other women, lest they corrupt the men with their sex appeal! In the west, Muslims are divided three ways over the issue of female leadership.

1. Since immigrants are still the major stakeholders in the Mosques, most mosques have not had a female board member, executive director (Amirah) and have never had a woman scholar or preacher speak to the community.
2. Some movements have started to make women Imams, leading prayers and giving Friday sermons to mixed gatherings. This has no traction in mainstream mosques due to the lack of precedent in the history of Islamic Law.
3. Some Mosques are empowering sisters as female board members and executive directors, and inviting female preachers to speak to mixed gatherings. They are reviving some historical precedents of Islamic Law to achieve relevance in dealing with modernity.

Women Scholars Preaching Islam to Mixed Gatherings

The subject I would like to tackle now, with divine providence, is having female scholars who advise and preach to both men and women. Naturally, some people will object, saying it is un-Islamic to have a woman speak to a mixed crowd, counsel or give fatwa to men. The same people would not object to a male scholar counseling a woman, outside of seclusion of course! To give them the benefit of the doubt, they have never seen or heard of this in the Muslim community. Here lies the power of culture in defining our traditions. The resolution of such issues should not be determined by what we see people doing, rather by what Islam says about the matter.

So the question is, what does Islam say about having women scholars, preachers and teachers who address both men and women?

The Holy Qur’an tells us:

“The believing men and women are patrons of each other. They command to good, rebuke evil, establish prayers, give alms, obeying God and His messenger. They will have God’s mercy. Indeed God is Mighty and Wise.” (Qur’an, 9:71)

This verse, like many others, puts men and women on equal footing regarding the practice of religion. It is especially significant regarding our question, because its linguistics equates men and women working together in preaching.

Umar sums up the drastic change to Arabia regarding women

“.كنا في الجاهلية لا نعد للنساء شيئا حتى أنزل الله فيهن ما أنزل وقسم لهن ما قسم،” و في رواية: “فلما جاء الإسلام وذكرهن الله، رأينا لهن بذلك علينا حقا”

 “Back in the days of ignorance before Islam, we didn’t consider women of much significance at all. This all changed with the emergence of Islam in which God mentioned them with respect and gave them new rights then we realized their rights over us.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, 5843)

Aisha – The Founding Mother Scholar, Judge and Orator

There are many texts which unquestionably show that Aisha was a huge precedent for female scholarship. Trained for 9 years in the house of the Prophet ﷺ, Abu Musa al-Ash’ari the great scholar of the companions is reported to have said about her:

“.ما أُشكل علَينا أصحابُ محمَّدٍ صلَّى اللهُ عليْهِ وسلَّمَ حَديثٌ قطُّ ، فسأَلنا عائشةَ ، إلَّا وجَدنا عِندها منه عِلمًا”

“Sometimes we the companions of Muhammad ﷺ would get confused about Islamic teachings. We would then go and ask Aisha about itand we found she always had the knowledge we were seeking in it.” (Jami` at-Tirmidhi, 3883)

It was also authentically transmitted by al-Zubair bin al-Awam, the great companion who was of the six nominated by Umar to decide among them the Caliph after him:

ما رأيت أحدا من الناس اعلم بالقرآن ولا بفريضة ولا بحلال ولا بحرام ولا بشعر ولا بحديث العرب ولا بنسب من عائشة رضي الله عنها

“I never saw anyone more knowledgeable of the Qur’an, Islamic Law, poetry, Arab history and lineages than Aisha radi
Allahu
`anha
 (may God be pleased with her).” (Al-Hakim, 4/11)

In his masterpiece on the biographies of the greatest prominent Muslims of our past, Imam al-Dhahabi relates that the famous scholar and general of the tabi’in (the generation of Muslims who were born after the death of the Prophet ﷺbut who were contemporaries of His companions) in Iraq, Al-Ahnaf bin Qays, said:

سمعت خطبة أبي بكر الصديق وعمر بن الخطاب وعثمان بن عفان وعلي بن أبي طالب والخلفاء من بعدهم فما سمعت الكلام من في مخلوق أحسن ولا أفخم من في عائشة

“I heard the sermons of Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali and the Caliphs after them and yet I never heard speech from the mouth of anyone better or more eloquent than from Aisha.” (Siyar al-A’lam al-Nubalaa)

This should close the case, but some might say that Aisha was an exception. Well, she was in fact unique, since she was the greatest woman scholar among the companions, and greater than the top handful of men as well. That being said, as the mother of the believers, she naturally became a standard of excellence and an example to be followed by other women.

In his famous work Al-Isabah fee Tamyeez as-Sahabah, Imam ibn Hajar al-Asqalani reports on 1543 women scholars of Islamic Law, Hadith and Arabic literature!

As for teaching, the great granddaughter of the Prophet ﷺ Nafeesah bint al-Hasan was reported to have lectured to the masses in the Prophet’s mosque as well as in Cairo. It is also well-documented that scholars like Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Hajar, Ibn al-Jawzi and Imam al-Thahabi were all taught by female scholars.

For those of you who are still not convinced that it is acceptable for a sister to assert herself,

Imam Al-Haythami relates a story about the woman Umar put in charge of the policing of the marketplace of Madinah. Yahya bin Abi Saleem said:

رأيْتُ سَمْرَاءَ بنتَ نُهَيْكٍ وكانَتْ قد أَدْرَكَتِ النبيَّ صلَّى اللهُ عليهِ وسلَّمَ عليْها دِرْعٌ غَلِيظٌ وخِمارٌ غَلِيظٌ ؛ بيدِهِا سَوْطٌ تُؤَدِّبُ الناسَ ، وتَأْمُرُ بالمعروفِ وتَنْهَى عَنِ المنكرِ

“I saw Samraa bint Nuhayk, who met the Prophet ﷺ, wearing a rough Hijab with chainmail and a whip in her hand. She would discipline the people commanding to good and rebuking evil.” (Majma’ al-Zawa’id 9/267)

The majority of our scholars throughout history have said that there is nothing wrong with listening to a woman’s speech unless it is flirtatious or provocative. Both men and women were prohibited from (prolonged) looking at an attractive person. To say a woman clergy member cannot speak in front of men because some men may find her attractive is the same as prohibiting women from listening to a male Imam, since women have desires as well, and were equally rebuked from looking where there is attraction.

Just because the Muslims have strayed from the scholarly tradition of old and have become used to certain ways of dealing does not mean that our traditional sources of law do not support a different way of doing things more suitable for the reality we live in today.

It is of the utmost importance that we not judge Islam by the state of Muslims today. Our religion is much bigger and better than that. There were many great generations who were not only relevant but standard setters for civilization in general wherever they were.

There are many causes and struggles going on here in the US right now. Our religion is completely capable of addressing and solving the world’s problems. We are obligated to create a generation that has the right tools to bring moral balance to issues like feminism, economy, racism, class warfare, political corruption, oppression or anything else related to morality or ethics.

Originally posted in July 2010

Since we are in the month of Rajab, I thought it would be timely to discuss an event from life of the Prophet ﷺ (peace be upon him). The average, educated Muslim and even many scholars have little to no knowledge about this subject. It is an established part of the guidance Allah revealed and preserved for us and carries much divine wisdom. Since the 4^th of July just passed, I’d like to research this issue and see what we kind of fiqh (jurisprudence) we get from it.

In looking at this issue, we must acquaint ourselves with a common practice among the Arabs during the times of Jahiliyyah (the times of ignorance before the Qur’an was revealed). According to the major Arabic dictionaries and historical encyclopedias, al-Ateerah was an occasion in which Arabs would slaughter animals during the first 10 days of Rajab seeking to fulfill their vows (al-nathr) and to receive the favor of their gods.¹ Then, according to the well-established biography of the Prophet ﷺ, the Prophet ﷺ was guided to Islamicize this tradition.²

In Islamicizing these traditions, the Muslims were commanded to slaughter in the name of Allah alone and give the meat to the poor, family and friends, just as we do the udhiyyah (slaughter for Eid al-Adha). The proof for this is in the hadith (narration) that states, “The Prophet was asked about al-Ateerah and he said it was haqq (truth).”³ The Prophet ﷺ also said, “Indeed every year, each household is responsible for the slaughter of al-Udhiyyah and al-Ateerah.”⁴ In the following set of authentic ahadith, the practice was allowed or seen as sunnah (established tradition of the Prophet ﷺ). Abu Razeen al-Uqaylee asked the Prophet ﷺ, “We used to slaughter animals in Rajab. We would eat from its meat and give it to those who came to us.” The Prophet ﷺ responded, “Laa, ba’s” meaning “no problem” or “that’s fine.”⁵ At his farewell pilgrimage three months before he passed away, the Prophet ﷺ said, “…Whoever wishes let him slaughter…and whoever wishes not [to] then let him not…”⁶

On the other hand, there is another hadith, which is the most common and authentic of all, that says, “No far and no Ateerah.”⁷ To a layman, this seems to be a contradiction, but it is far from that. Imam Shafi’i and his students hold that this hadith combined with the aforementioned ahadith only abrogates the obligation of al-Ateerah. So their position is that al-Ateerah remains a sunnah and thus the meaning of the vague hadith is “No far or Ateerah is an obligation.” This was the position of Ibn Seereen and Imam Ahmad as well as many of the Scholars of Hadith.⁸

Some Malikis, as noted by Ibn Rushd in al-Bidayah, took this hadith as a full abrogation,  thus making it makrooh (disliked) to take part in al-Ateerah. Al-Allamah ash-Shawkani disagrees with the Malikiyyah based upon solid usool (method used to derive fiqh). He said, in agreement with the Shawafi’, “In combining the hadith it must be said that the meaning is ‘there is no obligation of Far or Ateerah’ thus making it a sunnah which the Prophet ﷺ allowed. This can be the only opinion because we don’t know the exact chronological order of these texts except that they are all within the last couple years of the Prophet’s life… There is no doubt that the hadith ‘No Far and No Ateerah’ by itself indicates prohibition. That can’t be the case after we combine this hadith with the other ahadith and the fact that full abrogation cannot be established except with knowledge of the order of the statements or by a clear claim that it is abrogated.”⁹

The majority of scholars from the Hanafi and Hanbali schools of thought said that this hadith came as an abrogation of the legislation of these practices as a sunnah, and thus it was replaced by al-Udhiyyah. They hold that this abrogation was not that of prohibition but rather that of negating it as an Islamic practice like the Udhiyyah, yet it still remains an acceptable and permissible cultural act.¹⁰ Ibn al-Qayyim said, “If it we gather these ahadith then we see that this hadith of abrogation is that of it being a sunnah (Islamic practice) without there being a prohibition or dislike in it. So if a person wanted to slaughter an animal in Rajab for whatever reason and he wanted to give the meat to the poor, then that would not be disliked ¹¹

I decided to do this research after seeing a forum where some modern Saudi scholars and Salafi brothers were demeaning the honorable Shaikh Abdullah ibn Bayyah for using this issue as a proof in allowing Muslims in the West to take part in non-religious holidays or occasions. The fact is that it is solid proof indeed. The Saudi scholars and their followers contended that the hadith “No Far and No Ateerah” is a case-closing hadith which is – as we have seen in this article – far from the majority position of ahle Sunnah (Sunni Muslims). When doing this research, I read many modern scholars  from the Muslim world claiming that this issue is a clear cut abrogation that led to the prohibition of this act and any others like it. They make a point to mention that celebrating any day other than the two holidays revealed to our beloved Prophet ﷺ would be an innovation rejected by the masses. The fact is that I believe they’re seeking to hide the legitimate majority opinion based in the established schools of fiqh in order to serve their expression of political frustration. I believe they are frustrated that not only are the Muslims nowhere near becoming a superpower, but we have also become very weak in the world today. Our scholars see our governments as cowardly and unable to stand up to Western injustices, and they feel like they must stand up as representatives of this deen (religion) and do something. The problem, however, is that the “don’t be Western in any way, shape, or form” attitude has only alienated us more and weakened our  ability to articulate our message to the masses.

These are indeed noble intentions, but the act is against very harsh injunctions of the Qur’an. Allah said, “Indeed those who conceal what We have sent down of clear proofs and guidance after We made it clear for the people in the Scripture – those are cursed by Allah and cursed by those who curse,”(Qur’an, 2:159). There are numerous more Islamic and practical ways to deal with the political frustration we all face.

Before concluding, I will have to clarify a couple issues to our readers who, like me, were brainwashed with this un-Islamic anti-Western rhetoric that keeps us segregated and reclusive and not “Western.” We should be seen as a unique, integrated (not assimilated), positively-contributing identity in Western society. The hadith that says “whoever acts like or imitates a people is one of them” is not usable in this context because the Prophet ﷺ “Islamicized” al-Ateerah by making the slaughter for Allah alone. The fact is that the explanation of this hadith, according to the consensus of commentators, is that we are prohibited from looking like or imitating the disbelievers in matters that represent shirk (associating partners with Allah) or sin or that specifically identify them as disbelievers.  This does not include what clothes you wear or how you eat, as the Prophet ﷺ did these things just like any other polytheist of his time. Another hadith relates, “Whoever innovates something in this affair of ours (Islam) something that is not from it then they will be rejected.” Again this hadith, according to all the commentaries, means a religious matter, not a secular one that is common to all peoples of faith and atheists alike.

In conclusion, I stand with our Shaykh, the distinguished Abdullah ibn Bayyah, by saying that according to these texts, there is nothing wrong with celebrating occasions and holidays which are customary and are not representing a certain religion. This is as long as Muslims conduct themselves in an Islamic manner and do not participate in acts that can lead to sinful behavior.

America was indeed built as a melting pot of different cultures. That said, throughout our history there have become some universally accepted cultural practices. There is a famous and often misunderstood hadith (narration) which I would like to discuss as it has been understood by various scholars.

This hadith is found in the authentic collection of Abu Dawood. “Whoever imitates or resembles a people is one of them.” Coming from a background of an Islamic state where the Muslims were the dominant majority, many scholars said that this means that Muslims must completely look and act different than disbelievers in every facet of life. In that context it makes sense. In our context here in the west in 2009 it is a mistaken interpretation. This is due to the well-known reality that the Prophet ﷺ (peace be upon him) was an Arab and had many cultural norms including his dress and eating style that were known for Arabs in his time whether they were Polytheist, Jew, Christian or Muslim. So the hadith is true that the Prophet ﷺ imitated and resembled the Arabs of his time so indeed he was one of them. So general non-religious culture is definitely not what is prohibited by the hadith.

According to the commentary of many scholars, past and present, the hadith is warning Muslims from imitating the non-Muslims in practices which indicate their religious beliefs like wearing something with a cross on it or celebrating Christmas. Similarly we must not follow culture in matters which are prohibited in our religion like men wearing gold or women plucking their eyebrows.

So to be crystal clear I will make an analogy. What is the difference between a Muslim and a non-Muslim doctor? They both wear similar clothes – maybe with a stethoscope around their necks. What makes them different is that the non-Muslim man may be wearing a cross or gold necklace whereas the Muslim will not be. The female Muslim doctor will be covering her hair while the non-Muslim won’t. The Muslim will take breaks for his or her obligatory prayers whereas the non-Muslim will not.

So let’s make a list of clothes, eating habits, and actions that are deemed permissible in the west by many scholars:

Wearing pants and shirts for men and women which do not reveal the `awrah (nakedness) as defined by our scholars. A dress might be best in concealing the beauty of a woman, but that doesn’t mean she cannot conceal her beauty with loose pants and a blouse. Men are not expected to wear hats whether in public or in the prayer. If a man is accustomed to wearing a hat and sees it as completion of common dress, then according to some scholars it would be makrooh (inadvisable) to come in the mosque without wearing it. Men may wear their pant leg below their ankles since this is not a sign of arrogance here.

There is nothing wrong with eating at a table with a spoon or fork. According to many scholars there is nothing wrong with eating the meat slaughtered by the people of the book. Others prohibited it based upon different principles. You may follow whichever you are convinced with, but you should not rebuke others for what they follow. Holidays and celebrations which do not represent religions and are not a gathering with worship overtones or un-Islamic activities are permissible. These are acceptable celebrations according to many great scholars: personal birthdays, marriage anniversaries, Independence Day, Mother’s or Father’s day on condition that we observe special love and respect for them every day, and Thanksgiving.

Things which would be forbidden are:

Wearing clothes which have a cross, Star of David, or other religious symbols of other faiths; wearing clothes which do not cover the `awrah; wearing clothes which represent immorality (i.e. Budweiser ad); wearing clothes with detailed pictures of living beings; women uncovering their hair or plucking their eyebrows; men wearing gold or silk; eating pork or foods fried or grilled without being cleaned after frying or grilling pork; eating or drinking with the left hand intentionally; shaking hands with a non-mahram (unrelated person of the opposite gender) in general (although with the condition of safety from desire some have allowed it); and celebrating Christmas, Easter, Valentine’s Day, St. Patrick’s day, April Fool’s day or Halloween.

For anyone thinking that Halloween is just a harmless secular tradition for kids to have fun, please keep in mind the following:

The consensus of our scholars have prohibited taking part in the activities or selling the items specifically related to celebrating holidays representing religions other than Islam. This is due to the hadith we mentioned, “Whoever imitates or resembles a people is one of them,” (Bukhari).

Among these is Halloween which is an ancient polytheist pagan tradition of Europe that was switched to All Souls Day once Roman Catholicism had spread throughout Europe. It gained back its pagan roots with the capitalist venture of profit in those polytheist rituals. The current practices are almost identical to those done by the Polytheist originators of this holiday. If you are truly a follower of the Qur’an and Sunnah – not someone who follows their desires, or someone who simply wishes to fit in even when it compromises their religion – then read this thoroughly.

We must not take part in this celebration. Instead, we should try to organize mosque activities on this night, or try and go somewhere that doesn’t celebrate it, or at least just keep your lights off outside of your house.

Becoming the Servants of the Most Merciful Series

Part I | Part II | Part III | Part IV | Part V | Part VI | Part VII | Part VIII | Part IX | Part X | Part XI | Part XII | Part XIII | Part XIV | Part XV

Any mature and intellectually-conscious person seeks purpose and meaning out of life. Thanks to the evolvement of our world in the last couple of centuries, we have embraced the concept of general education as the pillar in life; many people think that achieving the best education possible and earning a respectable status fulfills one’s purpose. Undoubtedly, education is extremely important for human progress, and Islam highly encourages it. The problem is we often see education as an end in itself. Our ultimate goal in life becomes obtaining a degree and then working toward a reputable career – Islam is a distant third. As Muslims, we should not see our lives in this way. Seeking knowledge, just like anything else we do in this life, is a means to an end: worshipping our Creator and making our way back to Him.

Our Prophet ﷺ has taught us that we should live as travelers. He ﷺ taught us that this life is not our permanent residence. Indeed, we are passing through this life in transit to eternity; the purpose of this transit lies with the test of the great trust (al-amanat al-kubra). This test is about having full authority and responsibility over our choices. It is a matter of how we spend our limited time with our intelligence and creative abilities. Will we, who are innately aware of our Creator, use our time and abilities to make choices that obey Him? Or will we use that potential to serve our own desires?

This last article of the “Becoming Servants of the Most Merciful” series is about those obedient souls who truly know their Lord and His message and thus fulfill a life of servitude to Him. All the previous articles combined provide a detailed description of the last verse of Surat al-Dhariyat,

“I have merely created Jinn and Man to worship Me.” (Qur’an, 51:56)

This brings us to the final verse of the series.

“Say, ‘What would my Lord do with you if it wasn’t for your worship and obedience?’ Yet you disbelievers denied and your punishment is inevitable!” (Qur’an, 25:77)

The scholars of Qur’anic exegesis have explained the meaning of the phrase “Qul ma yaa’abao bikum rabbee low laa du`aaokum.” The translation warns us of what might happen to us if we do not lead a life of obedience and servitude to God. We depend on God’s Mercy, which is increased when we pray to Him alone. If we abandon our worship, God will abandon loving us. Another translation is, “Say: my Lord is not concerned with you unless you live a life of servitude.” Here, God is clearly confirming the purpose of life as only being to serve Him. Those who do sincerely worship Him will receive His mercy, forgiveness, blessings and ultimate companionship. That is why they are called ibad ar-Rahman, the Servants of the Merciful. On the other hand, we should beware of a life which is lived according to our own priorities, and in servitude of ourselves, and thus falling under the category of those who are not under the care and protection of the Merciful One.

We pray the Merciful, Forgiving, Loving, Kind, Gentle, Gracious and Beneficent One guides us to a life of eternal bliss. We pray we fulfill the purpose of life and earn His contentment and companionship. We ask Him to protect those who take this path from the plot of Satan. Ameen.

Becoming the Servants of the Most Merciful Series
Part I | Part II | Part III | Part IV | Part V | Part VI | Part VII | Part VIII | Part IX | Part X | Part XI | Part XII | Part XIII | Part XIV | Part XV

The distinguishing characteristics of the true Servants of the Merciful have been laid out for us by our Most Merciful Creator. They are humility, forbearance, praying the vigil, seeking the guidance and support of God from sins, fearing the possibility of going to Hell for one moment, balance in spending wealth, avoiding the major sins, protecting the major objectives of Islam, repentance, not witnessing the glorification of falsehood, avoiding useless speech, submitting to scripture, building one’s family on piety and seeking the help of God while doing so.

After guiding us to these most noble characteristics, our Beloved Creator than told us the reward of working to attain them:

“These Servants of the Merciful will be rewarded with a high position in Heaven as a result of their perseverance.  They will be greeted therein with the glad tidings of eternal life free of enmity, discontent or any other defects.” (Qur’an 25:75)

Surely life is a test and it is not easy. The guidance has been facilitated and the path to the eternal bliss in the pleasure of our creator is clear. Now it is upon us to work for it as God said,

“How excellent is the reward of those who work for it.” (Qur’an 3:136)

In the verse about the reward of the Servants of the Merciful, the qualifying clause was “as a result of their perseverance”. This is the translation of “bi maa sabaroo”. God is telling us that the whole of life and the test therein is about perseverance in showing Him our devotion, loyalty, and gratitude.  Our scholars have defined for us the three types of “sabr” that we all face in life. Basically our test is in disciplining ourselves to rise above our carnal egotistical instincts to become spiritual servants of our Creator. There are basically three aspects of perseverance that we are facing.

The first of these is persevering by fulfilling all of our religious obligations. The fact is we value our time and we incline towards instant gratification of our desire to enjoy our time. We must regulate our time so that we do everything we possibly can to fulfill whatever God has commanded us to do (i.e. practicing the 5 pillars of Islam).  In doing this we make the divine obligations the most important thing in life. If they weren’t important then God wouldn’t have obligated us to do them. If we don’t feel the importance of them then we need to strengthen our faith by reading about the miracles of the Qur’an, the biography of the Prophet ﷺ and his companions and the previous prophecies about the coming of our Prophet. After building a strong faith, we must increase our knowledge so we can understand why we have been obligated to perform these acts of worship. After completing these steps we are on our way to a fruitful life of service to the Almighty. In today’s secular world we are brainwashed from a young age that worship is a matter of choice and not a requirement whereas our scripture treats intentionally leaving obligatory worship as even more sinful than committing acts prohibited by God.

The second aspect of perseverance in life is in avoiding all of the things prohibited by scripture. We have certain carnal desires as animals that we are inclined to. A big test in life is in breaking down our ego and our desires so that we may protect our souls. Again weak faith is a reason for committing sins so we must seek to feed and nurture our faith as mentioned previously. Similarly, we should seek the knowledge of the wisdom behind prohibitions so that we may see the big picture and how God is protecting us from great harm by prohibiting us from things we incline to egotistically and materialistically. One of the biggest means in avoiding sins is the environment we choose. If we choose friends and surroundings which facilitate piety then we will be much more likely to stay free of major sins. God almighty commanded us,

“Train yourself to persevere with the company of those who live in sincere servitude to their Lord throughout the day… “ (Quran 18:28)

Our beloved Prophet ﷺ said, “A person is influenced by the ways of his close friends. So pay close attention to those who you take as close friends.” (Abu Dawood 4833)

Finally, we have the last aspect of the perseverance required to pass the test of life. This is the way we deal with hardship and difficulty that we face. One of the main arguments of atheism is that if God is good and in control of everything then why does He decree so much violence, evil, and corruption.  The fact is that this argument doesn’t hold up to a day in court with Islamic theology. It is crystal clear in Islam that this life is a test. We have been blessed with life, intelligence, creativity and all our sustenance at our finger tips. We are asked to persevere through life by disciplining ourselves through knowledge and human struggle to be spiritual entities who are not content as a result of material gain or worldly attachments, but through submitting to our Creator’s divine plan for us. If we fulfill this trust then we will attain eternal bliss. On the other hand, if we allow our ego and desires to get the best of us we will live and die as animals until the hereafter where we will be responsible for our rebellion against our Creator. The hardships and calamities we face in this life are one of two things for a believer. It is either a means of purifying ourselves from sins in this life or a means of pleasing God through showing our pure submission to His will even when it doesn’t serve our desires. The Prophet ﷺ said,

“If God has goodwill towards his servant, He hastens his punishment in this life. If He has bad will for His servant who is deserving of it, He leaves him to pay for his sins on the Day of Judgment.”(Tirmidhi)

“Verily the greatness of reward is according to the greatness of the trial. Surely if God loves a people then he tests them with hardship. So whoever is content with God’s decree then God is content with him and whoever is displeased with it then God will be displeased with them. (Tirmidhi)

We pray the Almighty Merciful One facilitate our struggle with perseverance that we may indeed be counted as His servants! Ameen

Becoming the Servants of the Most Merciful Series

Part I | Part II | Part III | Part IV | Part V | Part VI | Part VII | Part VIII | Part IX | Part X | Part XI | Part XII | Part XIII | Part XIV | Part XV

A true believer stands for something greater than his or herself.

The modern secular approach to morality has greatly plagued our society over the last half century. Hearts are hardening and people are not concerned with moral values anymore. People stand by en masse and watch the blatant spread of debauchery, lewdness, and other forms of widespread societal corruption without apprehension. We promote and entertain ourselves with corruption in our movies, television, music and video games. It has gotten so bad that social iniquity is accepted as normal in mainstream American and European society. With the globalization of western values, this iniquity is an international reality. The question is – how do the true servants of the Merciful react?

This brings us to our next characteristic of the servants of The Merciful.

“Do not give witness or credence to falsehood or immorality and if they happened to pass by vain or harmful speech they pass by with honor and dignity.” (Qur’an, 25:72)

Since the early generations our scholars have differed slightly over the meanings carried in this verse. The above translation attempts to lump them all into one general category. The first underlined part is the translation of the word ‘yash-hadoona Az-Zoor.’ Our scholars tell us that what is meant here is that the servants of the Merciful do not attend, give witness to, affirm or give credence to any falsehood. Al-Zoor is specifically referring to falsehood which has been made to look good or desirable. All sin and immorality basically falls under that category. Some of the great scholars from the early generations said Al-Zoor specifically refers to polytheism, which means that a Muslim would not go to, take part in or support a polytheistic ritual. Similarly we would never show acceptance to or validate polytheistic beliefs.

That being said, we are still obliged to not offend or insult people’s beliefs as the latter part of the above verse indicates, “if they happened to pass by vain or harmful speech, they pass by with honor and dignity.” This is a general rule for preserving one’s faith and setting a strict standard in favor of monotheism. Note that taking part in interfaith dialogue is a specific exception which has its benefits and can be discussed in a separate article.

Another explanation for the word Al-Zoor is lying. A true servant of God would not be in the company of people who often lie and they definitely would not lie themselves, particularly when giving their testimony over a disputed matter. Others contend that Al-Zoor means “the party scene” – the bar or dance club. They say that the gatherings where music and alcohol are found fall under Al-Zoor. So according to this interpretation it is definitely not appropriate for a true servant of God to be at a place where alcohol, drugs or un-Islamic music is prevalent.

The second underlined part of the verse “if they happened to pass by vain or harmful speech” is the translation of ‘Itha marroo bil-laghwi.’ We have translated it as “if they happened to pass by” rather than “if they passed by” because as the commentators mentioned the linguistic connotation of this verse is that they did not or would not intend to witness ‘Al-Laghw,’ which we translated as vain or harmful speech. The exegetes mentioned that Al-Laghw refers to the rude and disrespectful attacks of the disbelievers upon the believers. Others said that it refers to all foul language and evil talk such as lying, backbiting, evil poetry, evil songs and slander. The later commentators kept with the basic linguistic meaning of al-Laghw which is vain or foul talk.

The last underlined part of the verse “with honor and dignity” is a translation of ‘kiraamaa’, which means noble, honorable and dignified. Our scholars said this verse means that if we happened to be verbally abused – as is quite common these days – we should exercise wisdom, kindness and pardon others. So we should either be silent (if that is best), respond with a clear non-antagonistic refutation or outright forgive and show kindness to the ignorant person who has bad character. Similarly if we hear lies, backbiting, slander or other foul speech we should advise the people against it in a kind, yet unyielding manner and be on our way.

This verse carries a lot of guidance and teaches us how to deal with social iniquity with honor and wisdom. When we look at the meaning of the last part of the verse “[pass by] with honor and dignity,” we see how many Muslims are clearly not in-line with this Islamic behavior. An example of this is the rioting, burning of flags or effigies of politicians as a response to anti-Islam campaigns in western media. This is not how we stand for something greater than ourselves.

This verse is about hearts with spiritual life that stand against all forms of evil, especially when it comes to evil that is made beautiful, appealing and acceptable. When the Prophet ﷺ told us that Islam came as a stranger and it will return strange, he was informing of us of the very reality we find ourselves in. In the time of the Prophet ﷺ, sin and corruption were norms which he and his companions stood against. They embraced these divine set of morals – self-respect, honesty and integrity – that put their human desires in check and regulated them for something better in the long run.

We pray God Almighty bless us to be like those strangers who revive spiritual and moral integrity as a societal standard. May we do this so that we may earn His pleasure and become true Servants of the Merciful! Ameen.

The world we live in today has brought many tests to the Muslims. Undoubtedly, it has also brought many blessings to us. One new reality—the fact that the knowledge of our religion has become readily available through mass media—can be either a test or a blessing depending upon the scholar you speak to. As a result, we find two extremes. Some who declare that everyone must follow one juristic school or preferred scholar to be the authority without exception. Others declare that they may follow whatever opinion they like and therefore spend much of their time searching for opinions which suit their desires. In this article we beseech the support and ultimate success only granted by Allah subhanahu wa ta`ala (exalted is He) to bring the proper attitude to the availability of knowledge and scholarship in the modern world. This must be done by balancing the two extremes. In order to be witnesses upon mankind, Allah has made us a balanced nation. (Qur’an, 2:143)

Some scholars and schools of thought teach that all laymen must follow a particular juristic school of thought without exception. They remind us of the verses in which Allah enjoined us all to ask someone of knowledge if we were confused or unaware. They also cite how the Prophet ﷺ would designate some of his more knowledgeable companions to be specific references for others. Their points are all true reports, but still do not justify the claim that we should attach ourselves to one juristic school and never seek knowledge outside of it. This is like making that school of thought a legislator with the same authority as the Prophet ﷺ — which is wrong.

The truth is that the science of Islamic law can be quite complicated and not everyone can deduce a sound understanding from just reading the Qur’an and hadith (report of the sayings and actions of the Prophet ﷺ). This requires you to seek a qualified jurist to clarify to you the ruling regarding matters you don’t know about or are unclear to you. That being said, there is nothing in Islam which says that we must follow only one juristic school of thought or only one scholar. Two of the previous scholars of al-Azhar, Shatloot and al-Sayis, wrote in their curriculum about comparative jurisprudence, “This opinion was developed by some juristic schools in the recent centuries when the spirit of difference had become dominant and juristic partiality reigned. So they made up rules that prevent laymen from taking an opinion outside of the school they grew up with. This caused the reality of juristic schools of thought to go from opinions which can be discussed and either accepted or denied by anyone to become obligatory religious truths that one who started with them must always adhere to and can never look into others. By these rules, those scholars prevented the masses from looking into the Qur’an and Sunnah for guidance! (Which all believers were commanded to do in the Qur’an.)” (Muqaranah al-Madhahib fil-Fiqh, 30)

Jad al-Haqq, one of the great scholars of al-Azhar in its prime, says in his book about the flexibility of Islamic Law: “The truth which is the opinion of the majority of scholars is that it is not an obligation to follow a certain juristic school with exception to others. Any follower (muqallid) may follow whichever school or juristic scholar he likes. This is because since the time of the companions people would follow different jurists from time to time and compare what one said with another on a given issue. This opinion was taken by al-Aamidee, Ibn al-Hajib, al-Kamel ibn al-Hamam, and al-Rafi’ee and many others from our great predecessors. This is because obliging someone to follow one juristic school over the other is like claiming for them a distinguished right to legislation whereas Islam is clear that the only obligation in obedience is to the Qur’an and authentic Sunnah. Ibn Ameer al-Hajj said in his commentary on al-Tahreer by al-Kamel al-Hamam, ‘In the foundations (usool) of Ibn Muflih and others from the Malikiyyah, Hanabilah and Shafi’iyyah, it is not an obligation upon anyone to follow a specific jurist or juristic school.’(Muroonah al-Fiqh al-Islami, 134-135) That opinion is confirmed by the many scholars based in different juristic schools who researched for the Encyclopedia of Fiqh of Kuwait (see vol. 13, p.163).

This brings us to the crux of this article. The Holy Qur’an is crystal clear in encouraging all of us to learn about our religion and to spend as much time as we can doing so. So if we find answers and clarification by reading through the Qur’an and Sunnah then that is a good thing. The problem is that there will be many texts that we don’t understand. There will also be many issues of which we aren’t aware. Finally, there will be many other issues which we simply can’t find an answer to at all. So this is why we must seek a sound understanding of Islamic law from a person who is qualified to give a legal ruling. We must go to someone who is a jurist (faqeeh/mujtahid) or has been trained in the Islamic sciences enough to give us the ruling from a qualified jurist.

The scholars have differed on the matter of taking rulings from different scholars. Some scholars allow Muslims to choose any scholarly opinion according to what is easier for them. They cite the major objective of Islamic Law in facilitation and Allah’s compassion for the believers. The well-known authentic hadith says, “When the Prophet ﷺ was faced with two options, he always chose the easier of the two as long as there is no sin in it.” (Bukhari) These scholars remind us that in the time of the companions and thereafter people would seek rulings from different scholars and there was never any blame on them for doing that. Shaikh al-Tayyib Salamah says, “There is no doubt about the fact those who have permitted the follower (muqallid) to choose opinions because he or she finds them easier upon them are not permitting it if it corrupts their religion. They are saying that as long as a qualified jurist has made a ruling then whosoever chooses to follow them is not blameworthy because facilitation is a well-known founding principle in Islamic Law.” (Al-Akhth bil-Rukhas wa Hukmuhuh, 533)

Some scholars who prohibited taking rulings from different schools of thought weren’t doing so because they believe that it isn’t permissible according to their understanding of the Qur’an and Sunnah.  They did so in order to block the means to sinful behavior. They hold that allowing Muslims to pick whichever opinion they want will lead them to picking opinions based upon their desires which they say is sinful. Thus Islamic Law would be serving their desires when the people were meant to serve Islamic law.

The majority of scholars have said that this application of blocking the means is invalid since it would be putting that juristic school on the level of Prophetic legislation when in reality it is just a human’s educated attempt to represent Islamic Law. The correct way to deal with it is teaching the people how to choose an opinion regardless of which juristic school or scholar it comes from. In this approach, the majority has said that it is permissible to follow any qualified jurist or juristic school, but according to a condition. The world-renowned scholar Yusuf Al-Qaradawi said, “Some scholars allowed following any opinion from a qualified jurist even if it is just to suit one’s desires and because they find it easiest without even looking into the proofs and thinking about which one makes sense and is rooted in the texts. I say that this is impermissible because the early generations of Muslims were narrated to have said, ’Whoever seeks the easy opinions amongst jurists has rebelled (fasaq).’ That is because that is simply following one’s desires and playing with our religion which is a mockery… In this case it is as if the believer wants the truth to follow him around whereas it is the believer that should be searching for the truth even if it goes against his desire.” (Fatawa al-Mu’asarah, vol .2, 128-129). Their strongest proof in prohibiting seeking opinions simply because they agree with their desires is in verse 59 of Surah an-Nisaa: “And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger.” (Qur’an, 4:59)

This verse supports the need to compare rulings according to that which seems closer to the Qur’an, Sunnah, and sound logic rather than the opinion that seems easier to you. The esteemed Wahbah Zuhaily said, “My opinion is that it is permissible to look for the facilitations in the juristic schools in the case of dire necessity or pressing need. This is as long as the intention behind it isn’t playing around with the religion to suit one’s desires.” (Al-Rukhas al-Fiqheyyah fi Dow’i al-Kitab wal-Sunnah, 80)

Now some might have the wrong idea of what the scholars mean in serving one’s desires. The following example was given by Shaikh Mustafa al-Taarizee: “Someone wants an illicit relationship. To escape fornication [adultery], he sleeps with her by secret marriage whereby there is no Guardian as in the school of Abu Hanifa and no witnesses as is narrated in the school of Malik…playing around with Islam in this manner makes a mockery of it and no spiritual person of reason would allow it.” (Al-Rukhas al-Fiqheyyah fi Dow’i al-Kitab wal-Sunnah, 81).

Now we must summarize the opinions of the scholars on this matter and set out the guidelines for taking easier opinions so that we don’t fall into sinful behavior.

1. From the established principles of Islamic Law is “إذا ضاق الأمر اتسع” which means roughly, if a situation becomes hard to withstand, then the law accommodates. So you may follow an established opinion which makes your general life easier. An example of this is for people who live in the west and find it difficult to take off their socks to make Wudhu. They may take the Hanbali opinion for the case being permissible and not related to the type of foot covering because there is a حاجة or pressing need.
2. When making such a move, one has to follow an established opinion within the major schools of thought which has been validated by the great scholars throughout history. It is preferred to be an opinion of one of the 4 juristic traditions, but if not it must be at least well documented and recognized by the authoritative juristic works or represented in the modern councils of jurisprudence and committees dealing with new issues.

God willing the next research will cover strange isolated opinions and the rules for dealing with them.

And Allah (swt) knows best.