Wudu: Do we need to wash the feet?

In the Name of Allah,

All praise is due to Allah, the one whose hands is my life.

If I make a mistake, it is from my ego, and if I say something good it is from Allah.

After my last blog, I receive the following question. I will try to answer it with my limited knowledge. I know there are many readers who are more learned than I, so please correct me with evidence.

"Can you also read the aya of quran about the method of wudu and guide me if the word "wamsahu" is used for both feet and head, then why do we wash our feet. (please dont mention the bracket interpretation of the translator who have added the washing later. Please read the actual arabic language. I think whenever and for whatever reason hadeeth and quran conflict we have to go by quran. As authencity of quran is guaranteed by Allah but hadeets could be changed later by humans."

First, Quran has reached us through ahadith, so Quran is nothing but a hadith itself, because no one but Prophet (PBUH) received, and he conveyed. So, authentic ahadith that we have no doubt over it, are at the same level as Quran, except when there is a direct contradiction, which is very rare. If Allah wanted to provide just a 300 pages book to us, it was very easy to do without the trouble Prophet (PBUH) had to go through. In short, we cannot understand Quran without the explanation in the ahadith. It is true that some ahadith are weak or fabricated, which we should try to avoid, but an authentic hadith has the same binding on us as the Quran does.

 يَـٰٓأَيُّہَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓاْ إِذَا قُمۡتُمۡ إِلَى ٱلصَّلَوٰةِ فَٱغۡسِلُواْ وُجُوهَكُمۡ وَأَيۡدِيَكُمۡ إِلَى ٱلۡمَرَافِقِ وَٱمۡسَحُواْ بِرُءُوسِكُمۡ وَأَرۡجُلَڪُمۡ إِلَى ٱلۡكَعۡبَيۡنِ‌ۚ وَإِن كُنتُمۡ جُنُبً۬ا فَٱطَّهَّرُواْ‌ۚ وَإِن كُنتُم مَّرۡضَىٰٓ أَوۡ عَلَىٰ سَفَرٍ أَوۡ جَآءَ أَحَدٌ۬ مِّنكُم مِّنَ ٱلۡغَآٮِٕطِ أَوۡ لَـٰمَسۡتُمُ ٱلنِّسَآءَ فَلَمۡ تَجِدُواْ مَآءً۬ فَتَيَمَّمُواْ صَعِيدً۬ا طَيِّبً۬ا فَٱمۡسَحُواْ بِوُجُوهِڪُمۡ وَأَيۡدِيكُم مِّنۡهُ‌ۚ مَا يُرِيدُ ٱللَّهُ لِيَجۡعَلَ عَلَيۡڪُم مِّنۡ حَرَجٍ۬ وَلَـٰكِن يُرِيدُ لِيُطَهِّرَكُمۡ وَلِيُتِمَّ نِعۡمَتَهُ ۥ عَلَيۡكُمۡ لَعَلَّڪُمۡ تَشۡكُرُونَ

 O ye who believe! When ye rise up for prayer, wash your faces, and your hands up to the elbows, and lightly rub your heads and (wash) your feet up to the ankles. And if ye are unclean, purify yourselves. And if ye are sick or on a journey, or one of you cometh from the closet, or ye have had contact with women, and ye find not water, then go to clean, high ground and rub your faces and your hands with some of it. Allah would not place a burden on you, but He would purify you and would perfect His grace upon you, that ye may give thanks.

I think the following explanation from Muhammad ibn Sâlih al-'Uthaymîn is the best

There are two correct ways of reciting the saying of Allaah (wa Arjulikum) ‘and your feet’ having reached us from the Messenger of Allaah (SAW):

1. Reciting it as ‘wa Arjulakum’ with a fatha on the laam, hence linking it in meaning to ‘wa wujoohakum’ (and your faces), i.e. wash the feet.
2. Reciting it as ‘wa Arjulikum’ with a kasra on the laam, hence linking it in meaning to ‘bi ru’oosikum’ (your heads), i.e. wipe the feet.

And that which explains when one should wipe the feet and when one should wash them is the sunnah, for the Messenger (SAW) used to wash his feet when they were uncovered, and wipe over them when they were covered by khuffs.

Quran was not revealed or written down with  "fatha" or "kasra", and Uthman ibn Affan added these harakat to help non-Arabs to read properly. Similar to modern dictionary have pronunciation helpers. So, the fatha was selected for this word, and it attaches the feet to washing. If kasra would have been selected, it would have reflected the other meaning. We should accept the translation of "wash" and not wipe.

However, it does not make a big difference whether it was wiping or washing, because both are acceptable.  What people consider washing nowadays is bathing the feet with running water. If the word "Faghsilu" means pouring running water over that body part, then please try doing that to your face at any wudu place. "Faghsilu" here menas clean thoroughly. In the following hadith companions were wiping/washing their feet.

Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Amr:

Once the Prophet remained behind us in a journey. He joined us while we were performing ablution for the prayer which was over-due. We were just passing wet hands over our feet (and not washing them properly) so the Prophet addressed us in a loud voice and said twice or thrice: "Save your heels from the fire."  (Bukhari Vol 1, 3:57) 

Prophet (PBUH) did not say "wash your feet" or "save your foot from the fire". He said "save your HEELS from the fire", which means that companions were not wiping over heels and just wiping in the front of the foot in a hurry. What would make the wudu invalid is leaving any part dry on the foot up to the ankle.

Quran does not go into details of implementation of the rules, rather Prophet (PBUH) was charged with that task, and he clarified by his tongue and his action. Taking water in the hand and wiping the feet with water is enough, as long as there is no dry portion of the feet up to and including the ankle. Bathing the feet under running water is the best way to clean them, but not fardh.

Arabs didn't have enough water to bath the feet in running water like us, so we can't take washing the feet in that meaning. If there is someone who believes that Prophet (PBUH) used running water on his feet regularly for wudu, please contact me with evidences.

Moreover, face is washed by taking water in our palms and rubbing the surface, and not by spraying water on our face. It is hard to believe that the Prophet (PBUH)  "washed" the feet with running water, because it would have been waste of water to try to bath the feet.

So, if one has running water, it is better to bath the feet in it, but it is not fardh to bath the feet. It is however fardh to make sure the feet is free of dirt and filth and everything is wet below ankle, and that could be easily done with taking water in the palm and rubbing vigorously over the feet all over.

I have stopped using sink for a while now, because it does not suite a civilized person to put their feet in the sink, unless it is below waist height. My feet are clean when I am done "washing" them (taking water in my hand and rubbing all over).

One brother got hurt recently washing his feet in the sink, and another had issue with his private parts for stretching the leg for years to wash in the sink.

If you think, it is necessary to bath the feet with running water, please go ahead and do it, and Allah will judge you for your intentions, but there is no Sunnah where Prophet (PBUH) bath his feet in running water.

Please do not make things difficult for yourself. Purity is the intention of the wudu and not water wash, because wudu is even allowed with dirt, if water is not available. So, if running water is not available at a lower height, do your best to clean your feet.

It is acceptable to wipe the feet with water, but it is forbidden to leave any portion of the feet dry. So, if one can remove the filth (not dirt) from the feet with several wipes, then washing is not necessary. However, if washing is not possible, why not wash (bath) the feet?

Narrated Humran

(The slave of 'Uthman) I saw 'Uthman bin 'Affan asking for a tumbler of water (and when it was brought) he poured water over his hands and washed them thrice and then put his right hand in the water container and rinsed his mouth, washed his nose by putting water in it and then blowing it out. Then he washed his face and forearms up to the elbows thrice, passed his wet hands over his head and washed his feet up to the ankles thrice. Then he said, "Allah's Apostle said 'If anyone Performs ablution like that of mine and offers a two-rak'at prayer during which he does not think of anything else (not related to the present prayer) then his past sins will be forgiven.' " (Bukhari 1:161)

And Allah knows best.

JazakAllah Khairin

A person who clean the feet with any means necessary.

Abu Arman

Wudu: Wiping over cotton socks.

In the Name of Allah,

All praise is due to Allah, the one whose hands is my life.

If I make a mistake, it is from my ego, and if I say something good it is from Allah.

A few days ago, a good friend of mine was making wudu with me, and pointed out that I was wiping over the cotton socks, which were not leather. I told him that it is permissible. He quoted me his Imam that only leather socks are allowed for this purpose. I would like to present the supporting evidence for what I said.

'God desires to lighten things for you, for the human being has been created weak' (Quran 94:28).

First, Prophet (PBUH) has asked us to make Islam easy for others, and we should always keep this command in mind, when analyzing any ruling.


Narrated Ja'far bin 'Amr:  My father said, "I saw the Prophet passing wet hands over his turban      and Khuffs (leather socks)." (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 4, Number 204)

Ibn Mughira narrated it from his father: The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) wiped over his socks and over his forehead and over his turban.  (Muslim Book 002, Number 0532)


There are many ahadith like above, which clearly permits wiping over the socks during wudu, but some scholars will put a condition that the socks have to be leather and any other material would not be acceptable.

One reason given is that Prophet (PBUH) wore only leather socks. Of course, there were no cotton socks, because it was a desert, and they needed better protection. Another reason is given that leather doesn't allow dirt to pass, but cotton sock does. Why would dirt touching our feet would be an issue, since wudu is not affected by dirt?

There is no evidence for disallowing cotton socks for this permissibility. On the contrary, the evidence is for general permissibility, because there is no mention of a reason from the Prophet (PBUH).

In fact, he wiped over his turban in the hadith above, which was not made of leather, and that gives clear evidence that we are allowed to wipe over the cloth as well as leather in this case.

Narrated 'Urwa bin Al-Mughira: My father said, "Once I was in the company of the Prophet on a journey     and I dashed to take off his Khuffs. He ordered me to leave them as he had put them after performing ablution. So he passed wet hands or them. (Bukhari Volume 1, Book 4, Number 205)

From, the above hadith, there is one condition that need to be met is that we were in the state of wudu when the socks were put on. Also, if we enter an state of major impurity, then we have to wash our feet.

Here is an ideal case. A Muslim man gets up and makes wudu, then put on cloths socks, and shoes, then visits the Masjid for Fajr, then put on the shoes and goes to work. He goes to the washroom at work to make wudu for Duhar salah, and remove feet from the shoe and wipe over it. It will be acceptable, because he had wudu before putting on the covering. On top of that, he was wearing shoe all the time, so the oppotunity for feet to get filth is almost none.

Now, I would like to bring attention to a tradition that I think is dangerous. Many muslims buy leather socks from the Islamic store and wear them to masjid with the sole intention to avoid washing their feet. Leather socks are not used in normal circumstances anymore, and this act of buying leather socks to create an artificial scenario where one can wipe instead of wash, is very strange. I would just leave at that.

So, Islam has been placed upside down in this ruling by the scholar, where practicing muslim men, who are working, are being discouraged from praying salah at work, but artificially dressed men are being encouraged to buy more leather socks, which no one uses in real life, to avoid washing their feet.

I urge every muslim with a little fear of Allah and a little common sense to re-evaluate this, and follow the correct path. If you are bound by the chains of slavery of Taqleed, there is no hope. Otherwise, please make wudu before putting on cotton socks, and wipe over them at work, so we don't repel non-muslims, if they see us washing our dirty feet in the sink.

And Allah knows best.

JazakAllah Khairin

A person with no fake socks. Alhamdulilah!
Abu Arman

Who is allowed to do Ijtihad?

In the Name of Allah

All praise is due to Allah, to whom we all depend upon.

If I make a msitake it is from my ego, and if I say something good, it is from Allah.

Last night was the best setting for learning about din during the tafsir. It reminded me of the classes of Abu Hanfia where his students can bring up dissenting views, and are allowed to argue for them. I had two goals. First, to challenge the evidence for Taqleed, which is prohibited in Islam. Second, to spark interest in muslims towards learning their din.

Following is the definition of Taqleed from Mufti taqi Uthmani.Alhamdulilah! both goals were achieved. Imam repeated the creed of Shah Waliullah, Abu Hanfia, Malik bin Anas, Ahmed bin Hanbal, and all the other scholars that is "If you know din follow it, if you don't know ask a knowledgable person, if evidences are clear against a fatwa, it is nullified, regardless of the school of thought either scholar belongs to. Hadith overrules Taqleed" which refutes the above statement.

Even if Taqleed wasn't clarified, there were twice as much brothers as usual, and the brothers who never been to tafsir class were present and active. Also, the brothers of local Jamaat were present and geniunly interested in the tafsir of the Quran. I hope they steadfast on this and attend tafsir regularly to benefit themselves, and benefit others from the blessing comes with their piety. This was a good start of building an Islamic community in Orlando.

One point that Imam made was very good that it requires ijtihad to overrule a fatwa or ruling of a madhab. I think no reasonable person can disagree with this. However, it is not clear who is qualified to do such analysis. There are many opinions but none have any evidence attached to it. Most of the opinions are personal reasoning without support of evidences. Following is what Mufti Taqi Uthmani says about a "lay person".

http://www.cometoislam.com/fiqh/legal/66-67.htm

So, a lay person can not do ijtihad. Why? If a person who is educated, and has good skillset of logic, and understand reading and writing, he or she can comprehend an explaination of the evidences for the ruling (may be not extract their own ruling). This may be a difference in the definition of the word ijtihad. For example, if a lay person asks why Masajid in Pakistan prohibit women from attending, a hanafi scholar should be able to provide the proofs, and if not, should surrender the opinion and open the Masjid for women.

Are you telling me that if I live in Pakistan, and my wife wants to go to masjid, I can't challenge the local masjid on this preposterous restriction that goes against the command of Allah which has a strong proof? If that is true, then this Taqleed of a lay person in of itself is an opression, and no opression can be part of Islam.

In the absence of evidence, default prevails. Any sane Muslim (scholar or not), can do ijtihad, because Allah has given him or her brain. In this definition of ijtihad we just look at facts or even fatwas of scholars, and follow it. Of course, no one is binded to follow anyone's opinion (scholar or not). If I don't trust the opinions of Ibn Baaz, I will not follow it. It doesn't mean that ibn Baaz has to be stopped from forming an opinion. In essence, no one is suggesting that we would create anarchy, but saying that we shouldn't create monarchy either. Both are extreme views and baseless in Islam.

Another point Imam made last night was that these four madhaib survived because they are the best opinions, and Allah helped preserved. This is not true. We know that these madhaib gained popularity because the Muslim Kings wanted to control lay person and the Islamic law and establishing a madhab was the best way.

Besides, there are more than four madhaibs. Basic claim in support of Taqleed is that there can only be four madhabs, and Hanafi is one of them. Deoband and barelvi do not agree on ijithad of each other's scholars. There is no such thing as hanafi madhab, because there is no single authority providing guidance. Within Shafiie madhab many sub schools of thought are present, and so on and so on.

So, when someone use the word Taqleed, they are not truly asking us to follow one of the four madhabs, but they are asking us to follow their narrow version of that schaool of thought, and it gets narrower and narrower as we go closer. It is called a Mirage, which looks like water from far away, but as you walk close there is nothing but sand. It is absurd to think that there is a single set of rules for hanafi madhab, because there are so many sects within Pakistan alone that are ready to cut each other's throat, and have issued fatwas of shirk against each others.

For example, one person approached another brother I know, and asked him, why he attended the Masjid where Shafii Imam lead the salat. He also pointed out that this brother's father was a hanafi, and he should follow the madhab of his father, and should not attend the certain masjid. This is where Taqleed becomes the danger to Islam, as it is applied to rein in everyone to a certain opinion, regardless of personal freedom to select madhab.

It is upto the people who follow the opinion to decide which opinion and scholar that they find it more knowledgable and trust worthy. No one should force someone to follow a certain madhab, because ther is no compulsionn in Islam.

Which madhab should I follow? One which prohibits women from masjid, or the one which worships graves, or the one which teaches only from Fazail-e-Amaal, or the one that calls for hatred towards peaceful non-muslims? Wait! they all belong to the same madhab (Imam Abu Hanifa).

Thanks, but no thanks. Let us learn din enough to select the correct scholars and follow them. If we chose fatwas to fit our desires, we will be the ones who will answer to Allah and not the scholars. We should be sincere and seek the truth, do ijtihad, and follow the scholar our ijtihad tells us to be trust worthy. Allah is asking a lay person to follow this method. Evidence is the tafsir of ibn Kathir where this verse was revealed to allow Muslims to go against a Companion leader's order, and the lay person took the case to the Prophet (PBUH).

“O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Apostle, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Apostle, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.” (Quran 4:59)

JazakAllah Khairin
A struggling Muslim
AbuArman (Adnan Jumani)

Is it possible to prove Taqleed?

In the Name of Allah,

All praise is due to Allah, the owner of the day of judgement.

If I make a mistake, it is from my ego, and if I say good, it is from Allah.

Last night, we had our tafsir of Quran class, and some of you took initiative to join it, and May Allah forgive the sins of who came for the sake of Allah, and enter them into Jannah without the accounting. "Wassabiqoon -as- Sabiqoon" (Surah Waqia) which means the foremost, the foremost was the way of the companion. They use to compete with each other to take intitiatives in the din of Allah. Second attribute that they had was to be consistent or "istiqamat". So, May Allah help us learn the meaning of Quran consistenly.

One of the most improtant verse of the Quran that we discussed was the verse below. Imam will InshAllah be spending more time next week on this subject, and we hope to learn more.

"And before thee also the messengers We sent were but men, to whom We granted inspiration: if ye realise this not, ask of those who possess the Message. " (Quran 16:43)

This is the verse that is referenced by the supporters of Taqleed -as - Shaksi (Blind following of a single person other than the Prophet (PBUH)) to establish the proof from the Quran and Sunnah for blindly following a madhab or school of thought. However, true tafsir of this verse has nothing to do with Taqleed, as proven already from ibn khattir.

What if there are ahadith that we have not read, which can prove that we are being commanded by Allah to ask scholars if we don't know?

Of cource, it is possible. Since our knowledge on din is limited to what we have learnt so far, and it is certainly possible that we have got many things wrong, and will accept it if the proof is presented.

Again, if you pay attention to the verse above, if their claim is true about a second tafsir of this verse telling Muslims to ask a scholar when THEY DON'T KNOW. I think everyone knows that fact that it is a fardh upon muslims to ask someone with knowledge, if they themselves are not capable of knowing the answer of a question. If we know ourselves, this verse doesn't force us to ask the scholar, so this verse cannot be use to prove Taqleed.

For example, can we find out on our own, if Life Insurance is halal?

Of course not. It is a new situation that wasn't present at the time of the Prophet (PBUH) and Abu Hanifa (my favourite of all) dealt with new cases like these all day long. And, we should continue his work with these new cases. So, one sound opinion is that life Insurance is halal, because everything outside worship is halal, unless it is prohibted directly or indirectly. There is no prohibition regarding willing to provide for the family after death. As long as there is no interest or other prohibited clauses in the life insurance. Some find it prohibited, because one doesn't know the date of the profit disbursment (gharar). However, death is guaranteed, so gharar can not be applied here, and statistical models are used to ensure the increase in the profitibility, just like in any other business, where marketing analysis is used before product is sold.

Lets Assume that someone brings the ahadith and sayings of the companions to prove that this verse was not only referring to people of the book, but to Muslims also. If that happens, and someone proves that, they will be doing ijtihad, which is the opposite of taqleed. So, automatically, it will prove that taqleed is not binding on everyone.

Hence, any effort to prove Taqleed from the Quran and Sunnah will be only disproving Taqleed as defined by the most scholars today. In essence, it is impossible to prove Taqleed, because it requires one to follow without asking for proof, which is a violation of the condition of Taqleed-as-shaksi.

Does that mean every dick and harry can issue fatwas from their homes?

No, that will be following ones desire in the matter of din, and will be a sign of hypocrisy. We don't have to go to either extremes, but live in the practical world, where our Prophet (PBUH) asked us to live in.

Rule of thumb is if we don't know, ask someone who knows. If we don't trust the person, don't ask. If we have a little knowledge about Quran and hadith, ask for a proof from the person of knowledge. If there is a disagreement among the people with knowledge, revert to the most trusted opinion, if we can't decipher the proofs ourselves. If someone proves it to us with sound sources, accept the mistake, and follow the new opinion.

What is happening today is that muslims are being asked to surrender their wills to four Imams who have died a long time ago. People are asking us to blindly follow Imams who came within 100 years of Prophet's (PBUH) life, whereas they are asking us not to follow sound, clear, and easy to understand proofs that dates back a few years before these Imams. So, somehow these four Imams settle the fiqh for us 1300 years ago, and nothing need to be debated now, which Prophet (PBUH) himself couldn't do it 100 years before them. What a wonderful logic!

Most of the authentic ahadith compilation that scholars learn today were not present during the time of these four Imams, and they themselves ordered us to not follow them, if there was a contradictory evidence.

This is what I disagree with the most. They do not consider someone as a Muqallid (a follower of the Madhhabs) unless he adheres to the following conditions (as summarized from various books and articles on the subject):

1. Of all the exemplary scholars, the Muslim Ummah has been blessed with; Taqleed is restricted to just four scholars or Imams.

2. The follower of the Madhhab (way) of one Imam has to compulsorily follow the Madhhab in all matters of the religion.

3. The Muqallid does not need to know the proof from the texts, behind the ruling he is supposed to follow, and it is sufficient for him to know that Imam could never have said anything without proof. The saying of the Imam is itself proof for the Muqallid.

4. The Muqallid cannot follow the other three Madhhabs even in minor issues. To follow the other Madhhab is a punishable offence. Even if a Muqallid finds a verse of the Qur’aan or an authentic Hadeeth, which rules different from the ruling of his Madhhab, he still has to stick to his own Madhhab.

We cannot claim to follow the madhab of our forefathers, and reject the truth, because whoever did that in the past ended up in a very painful state. Mushrik of Makkah claimed to be following the madhab of Prophet Ismail, and they pressured Abu Talib to do Taqleed on his deathbed.

Messenger of Allah (PBUH) came to break to chains of submition to creation, and to teach us how to submit to the creator directly. No confessions on Sundays. No Popes making sharia. No Imams decreeing the absolute ruling that can never be challenged. Let us not start chaining ourselves to the creation of Allah, and look away from the commands of Allah that are CLEAR. Whole point of protecting Quran for us was that we can refer to it, if someone misinterprets, original knowledge is not lost. If we are not allowed to examine any rulings done 1300 years ago, then how are we different then Jews?

Following is what we should be following, which people of yemem followed with Muaath. Follow the scholars in the matter of things we don't know, but if something becomes clear for us, and our scholar will not accept, we should not follow the scholar in that matter.

“O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Apostle, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Apostle, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.” (Quran 4:59)

JazakAllah Khairin
A struggling Muslim
AbuArman (Adnan Jumani)

Skipping Allah's speech.

In the Name of Allah,

All praise is due to Allah, one who holds my life in his hand.

“Have you considered those who were asked to accept judgement from Allah’s Book? When they are asked to accept judgement from Allah’s Book, some of them turn their backs and walk away!” (Qur’an 3:23)

Every week, I look forward to Sundays tafsir class after Maghrib in Islamic Center of Orlando. It saddens me to see 150 Muslims walk out after Maghrib without staying for 5 minutes of tafsir.

Some of them include Hafiz of Quran. Some are pillars of the community. Some are trustees of the community. Some are activists who gather people after Salat for hadith readings. Some are passionate muslims ready to fight. Some have beards reaching their chest. Some lives so close to the masjid that literally they can throw a stone to their homes. Some visit Muslims home, inviting them to Masjid, but walk out of the most important part of being in the Masjid LEARN THE MEANING OF THE WORD OF ALLAH

Do they have so much knowledge that they do not require any more understanding of Quran? Do they despise the Imam so much that they can't tolerate him for 30 minutes? Do they find Quran as a chant that is read to cast spells on each others?

Honestly, I am confused, and I am sad to see that.

Some of them I have invited personally to stay back, but they will not stay back.

I think there is a misconception about Quran that is very common, and a reason for this behaviour. Many memorize the Quran literally assuming that this will give them the benefits promised by Prophet (PBUH). So, a memorizer of Quran will be given power of intercession? Lets look at that hadith.

Hazrat Ali relates that our holy Prophet said “Whoever recites the Qur'an, memorizes it, accepts its halal (lawful things) as halal and haram (forbidden things) as haram (i.e. his beliefs in these matters are correct), Allah, the Exalted, will enter him to Paradise and accept his intercession on behalf of ten such persons of his family upon whom entry into Hell has become incumbent (i.e. Allah will forgive them because of his intercession). (Tirmidhi, Fadailu'l-Quran, 13; Ibn Majah, Muqaddima, 17.)

If we look closely to the definition of the person mentioned in this hadith. One has to recite a part of Quran, memorize the part of Quran, and then live that part of the Quran. After fulfilling all three conditions, will he be given the honor that is mentioned.

Hafiz of Quran is not the person who memorize the letters of Quran, and read them in Taraweeh. If a person has memorized the whole quran, but doesn't understand what he has memorized, and doesn't follow in his life. He will not be given any such benefits. Islam is not a system of chants and magical spells, but a practical way of life. No benefit without practice. Even Salat includes actions.

My son is going to hifz program, and memorizing the Quran. I will not consider him Hafiz until he understand the meaning of what he memorized, and live according to that meaning. Solely memorizing the words doesn't benefit in anyway, unless there is an effort to follow those words.

Now, every Masjid in the Muslim communities have such programs of Tafsir of Quran, and so does the Masjid in my community. Imam will announce about the tafsir in the Friday sermon, where 500 people will be there, and there will be 150 people in the Maghrib on Sundays, but only 15 - 20 people present during the tafsir.

Wallah! tafsir class is the call towards speech of Allah, and we skip it, intentionally, every single week like a clock work. This is the value of Allah in our lives? Is this the answer we give to Allah, and his messenger, when he invited the humanity towards Islam?

Quran is the direct speech of Allah, not a paraphrased or summarized version. We are skipping the only chance provided to understand that speech. What is more important in our life that we have to rush towards? Is that the NFL game? Is that the sweet our wives are cooking? Is that the dinner you are invited to?

I urge all who gets this message to please attend the tafsir class or similar to learn about the verses of the Quran. If you are "Hafiz" of Quran, you are more resposible to understand what you memorized, and teach others. Short of that will strip of any benefits of the memorization, InshAllah.

I understand that you may have commitments, or may have some disagreement with Imam, but come for Allah, and come to learn his speech. If you have no excuse, please come and hear what Allah has to say to you. Lets make the masjid our center of learning, not our homes privately where only a few can benefit.

I invite everyone to the following, and will be witness on the day of judgement that this call was made to all of us.

Sisters are invited as well to attend these, since Islam is an equal opportunity system.

Speech of Allah with meaning (Tafsir - e - Quran)

Sundays After Maghrib
Islamic Center of Orlando,
11543 Ruby Lake Road Orlando, FL 32836-6159


JazakAllah Khairin
A struggling Muslim
AbuArman (Adnan Jumani)

Is Islam Din(way) or Madhab (religion)?

In the Name of Allah,

All praise is due to Allah, the owner of the day of judgement.

If I make a mistake, it is from my ego, and if I say good, it is from Allah.

Recently, I realized that there is a disconnect between the two extreme spectrum of Muslims. One extreme has made Islam as a cult, where you follow rituals, but no one cares if you are following Islam beyond that, and they would invite people to their madhab (religion). Other extreme is repelled by the idea of madhab (religion) and rituals, and they would like to follow Islam without being labelled as madhabi (religuous) person.

Finally, I figured it out that there is a great misconception that has created this polarization. Both sides consider Islam as a madhab, and want to impose their methods on each other. In fact, Islam is neither a cult where focus is the membership, nor a club that you can participate on Friday afternoons or Sunday evenings.

Islam has two sources i.e. Quran and Sunnah, and neither sources use the word "Madhab" to describe Islam. Allah has used the word "Din" to describe Islam, and I have yet to see a hadith where Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) use the word "Madhab". So, humans have created madhab, whereas Allah has provided din.

ٱلۡيَوۡمَ أَكۡمَلۡتُ لَكُمۡ دِينَكُمۡ وَأَتۡمَمۡتُ عَلَيۡكُمۡ نِعۡمَتِى وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ ٱلۡإِسۡلَـٰمَ دِينً۬ا‌ۚ

"This day I have perfected your religion for you, completed my favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion." (Quran 5:3)

In the above translation, the word religion is used for the word "din", but a better word to describe din is "way" or "lifestyle". Person translating Quran is usually trying to present a meaning of the sentence, so it can reflect the meaning in English. Hence, the word religion suffice as a translation, to convey the meaning of the sentence. However, the root meaning of the word is lost in translation.

Lets look at these two words in the light of usage among the scholars of Islam. Scholars will refer the word "Din" or "Deen" to mean the way of life shown to us in Quran and sunnah, which is chosen by Allah. On the other hand, scholars will refer the word "Madhab" to mean the interpretation of a "Mujtahid" (e.g. opinion of Imam Abu Hanifa) in the matters where there is a conflict of interpretation. So, it is clear that Islam as a whole is not a madhab, but a din.

Let me give you an example of what I saw today. I met one of the Muslim brothers in the masjid at Fajr time, but on the way back home, I saw a young man from this brother's house taking the pet dog out to have him releive. I didn't see him at the masjid, so he may or may not be there. For the sake of explaination, I will assume that he wasn't there. So, this young man probably his son, obeying the will of a pet and walked outside, but couldn't obey the will of Allah to come to the masjid for fajr. It is not because he doesn't want to obey Allah, but it is beacause he sees the pet's need as his lifestyle and his duty, and sees going to masjid at Fajr as a religious matter.

Islam is NOT a religion. Islam is NOT a religion. Islam is NOT a religion.
Islam is a way of life, so consider it as such. We can't be a Muslim on Friday afternoon, and leave Islam to shake our bottoms at night club, or sip from wine, or backbite over dinner, or miss maghrib while visiting someone's home, or deal in interest, or walkout after Maghrib on Sundays when tafsir starts, or waste money on weddings, or be mean to the wife, or park the car on the street outside the masjid when the parking lot is empty, or shave our face, or socialize with non-mahram, or go out naked head for men to absorb our beauty, or urine while standing, or lsiten to music, or speak filth from the mouth, or break the promise, or lie for small things like jokes, or not speakup against sin, or stay quite in family when transgressions are taking place...

"O ye who believe! enter into Islam whole-heartedly; and follow not the footsteps of the Evil One; for he is to you an avowed enemy. If ye backslide after the clear (signs) have come to you, then know that Allah is Exalted in Power, Wise. Will they wait until Allah comes to them in canopies of clouds, with angels (in His train) and the question is (thus) settled? But to Allah do all questions go back (for decision)." (Quran 2:208-210)

A beleiver does not take off Islam as we take off loose clothes after coming home from masjid, but he wears Islam for the rest of his life until the Angel of death visits him. An unbeleiver does not wear Islam for the rest of his life. A hypocrite wears Islam for religous days and time, and takes it off for worldly matters.

These are the only 3 choices Allah has created, and this will be the 3 main groups on the day of judgement. There will be no group called "kalma go" (muslim by tongue), and there will be no group called Namazi (muslim by appearance).

Shake off the ego of being a religious person, and shake off the ego of being a moderate muslim. Be sincere to Allah, and he will be sincere to you. Islam is not a cult, so don't join for rituals, and Islam is not a club, so don't join for optional benefits.

Join Islam as your heart is joined to your body. Protect your faith 24 hours a day, and never let your heart or Islam stop beating, until you suppose to die.

JazakAllah Khairin
A struggling Muslim

AbuArman (Adnan Jumani)

Taqleed, the greatest fitnah!

In the Name of Allah,

All praise is due to Allah, the owner of the day of judgement.

"As for those who divide their din (religion) and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did." (Quran 6:159)

One question that I get the most is "What madhab do you follow?". What people are trying to figure out is what school of thought I am working for, so they can either categorize me or attack the weak points of that madhab. Following is my answer.

“O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Apostle, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Apostle, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.” (Quran 4:59)

So, I believe in every command of Allah, then, I believe in every command of The Prophet (PBUH), then I believe in every scholar of Islam, but if there is a difference among them, I refer to Quran and Sunnah to settle it.

This is what Allah selected for me, and I believe him when he tells me that this is the best method for final determination on Sharia law.

However, The method that most Islamic Scholars use today is called “Taqleed”. It is not proven through Quran and Sunnah that Taqleed is allowed or suggested.

On the contrary, following Ibn Khatir tafsir is very tough about following the tradition of forefathers, and other books for Sharia law, when Quran and Sunnah provides the answer.

http://tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=4&tid=11545

Here is what Mufti Taqi Usmani believes in. He says that a person should follow one of the 4 Imams hundred percent of the time, even when he knows the ruling is incorrect, because his actions will not be approved by the Imam or that school.

http://www.cometoislam.com/fiqh/legal/48-49.htm

Linguistically, taqleed means: Placing something around the neck, which encircles the neck. Technically it means: Following he whose sayings is not a proof (hujjah). Animals when demosticated are given a collar so the master controls their actions. So, the concept in following a school of thought is similar, where a person removes his or her inclination towards the possible truth, and surrenders to the will of the scholars, but we suppose to only surrender to will of Allah.

"Indeed the people of Truth and the Sunnah do not follow anyone [unconditionally] except the messenger of Allaah SAW, the one who does not speak from his desires - it is only revelation revealed to him." [by Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmoo'ah al-Fataawaa, vol 3, page 216,
Daar Ibn Hazm Print, Trans: Aboo 'Abdis-Salaam]

Abu Haneefah (d. 150H) (rahimahullaah) said: "Adhere to the athar (narration) and the tareeqah (way) of the Salaf (Pious Predecessors) and beware of newly invented matters for all of it is innovation" [Reported by As-Suyootee in Sawn al Mantaq wal-Kalaam p.32]

Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, rahimahullaah, said:

"And the four Imaams, may Allaah be pleased with them, all forbade the people from blindly following them in all that they may say; and this was an obligation upon them [to do]."

Abu Haneefah (rahimahullaah) said:

"When a hadeeth is found to be saheeh, then that is my madhhab." [Ibn 'Aabideen in al-Haashiyah (1/63) and in his essay Rasm al-Mufti (1/4 from the Compilation of the Essays of Ibn 'Aabideen), Shaikh Saalih al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p. 62) and others. Ibn 'Aabideen quoted from Sharh al-Hidaayah by Ibn al-Shahnah al-Kabeer, the teacher of Ibn al-Humaam]

Imaam Maalik ibn Anas (rahimahullaah) said:

"Truly I am only a mortal: I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct (sometimes). Therefore, look into my opinions: all that agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, accept it; and all that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah, ignore it." [Ibn 'Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'Ilm (2/32), Ibn Hazm, quoting from the former in Usool al-Ahkaam (6/149), and similarly Al-Fulaani (p. 72)]

Imaam Shaafi'i (rahimahullaah) said:

"The sunnahs of the Messenger of Allah (saaws) reach, as well as escape from, every one of us. So whenever I voice my opinion, or formulate a principle, where something contrary to my view exists on the authority of the Messenger of Allah (saaws), then the correct view is what the Messenger of Allah (saaws) has said, and it is my view." [Related by Haakim with a continuous sanad up to Shaafi'i, as in Taareekh Dimashq of Ibn 'Asaakir (15/1/3), I'laam al-Mooqi'een (2/363, 364) & Eeqaaz (p. 100).]

Ahmad ibn Hanbal (rahimahullaah) said:

"Do not follow my opinion; neither follow the opinion of Maalik, nor Shaafi'i, nor Awzaa'i, nor Thawri, but take from where they took." [Fulaani (p. 113) & Ibn al-Qayyim in I'laam (2/302).]

"Whoever rejects a statement of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) is on the brink of destruction." [Ibn al-Jawzi (p. 182)2)]

In Islam, we accept Allah's word, and Prophet (PBUH) commands as the truth, and it doesn't require evidence or logical explaination. This is called Ita'at and Taqleed of Allah and Rasool (PBUH). Since we know that Allah is all wise, and whatever he tells is good for us, we don't have to verify it or explain it. Similarly, in matters of din, Prophet (PBUH) did not say anything from his own, and whatever he told us was from Allah, so we accept it as a law.

Once I presented the argument to one of the local scholar on the format of the Friday Sermon. After many arguments and counter arguments, finally, he agreed that the format needed rectification. I asked him to support me in changing the format, he refused. I asked why. He said he is not capable of doing that. Wow! I was shocked. Here I present the truth, and ask to come to straight path, and the taqleed of others against Prophet's Sunnah prevented him from following it.

Now, Ita'at and Taqleed (follow unconditionally) of anyone else except Allah and Rasool (PBUH) is not permissible, because they are fallable, and can make mistakes. Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik, Imam Shafii, Imam Hanbali, Imam Muhammad, Imam Yusuf, Mufti Taqi Usmani... They all are great scholars, and we should learn from them, and follow their opinion if they don't contradict Quran and Sunnah. However, it is ok to challenge their opinions (fatwas), with sound ahadith and Qiyas (logical reasoning).

Some scholar use the following ayah to support taqleed.

"Then ask the People of Knowledge if you do not know" (Quran 16:43)

However, this is completely out of context. This ayay in full reveals that Allah was refuting the claims that the Messengers could not be human, and Allah is asking us to check with the scholars of Judiasm and christianity, if we were not sure.

"And before thee also the messengers We sent were but men, to whom We granted inspiration: if ye realise this not, ask of those who possess the Message. " (Quran 16:43)

"(So ask the people of the Reminder if you do not know.) meaning, ask the people of knowledge among the nations such as the Jews and Christians and other groups: `were the Messengers who came to you human beings or angels' Indeed they were human beings. " (Tafsir ibn Kathir)

Another evidence used is the hadith below.

"Aswad bin Yazid narrates, "Mu'aath came to us in Yemen as a teacher and commander. We questioned him regarding a man who had died leaving (as his heirs) a brother and sister. He decreed half the estate for the daughter and half for the sister. This was while the Rasulullah sallallahu alaihe wasallam was alive." [Kitaabul Faraa-idh: Bukhari and Muslim Shareef]

Of course, following a scholar in the absence of clear and authenticated evidence is always allowed, and is an obligation from the verse above, but taqleed requires that one must not question the rulings of a single fiqh school, regardless of the mistakes present in the rulings, which is what in question here.

In fact, these Imam themselves rejected taqleed, and encouraged debate in their sessions. Imam Abu Hanifa is famous for having lengthy contested debates with his students and other Imams, and if there was one person disagrees, he would not write his opinion. In fact, He sent his son to study under Imam Malik, so he can diversify his education.

After the famous meeting with Imam Abu Hanfia, Imam Malik asked for his books and changed his many rulings based on them. And, Imam Shafii was the student of Imam Malik, but Imam Malik used to visit him, and respected his opinions.

So, Is it wrong to follow a single scholar?

No. It is permissible to follow a single scholar for all Sharia ruling for the whole life, if needed, but if a clear evidence is presented from Quran and Sunnah against the ruling of that scholar, then it becomes fardh upon us to not follow that Scholar. If we follow the scholar, and his ruling is wrong, but no one points it out to us, we will not be responsible for it, as long as we are making an effort to learn din, and tried our best to find the truth.

Wait, how would a laymen know the difference between the opinions of the scholars?

Many scholars who claim to follow "Salaf" ignore this question, but lets try to answer this. Allah has created humans with different abilities, and they grow in their understanding as time passes, so it is not fair to consider everyone at the same level of skills to analyze opinions (fatwaas).

Some are at below minimum level of undestanding the din, and they should follow a scholar without looking for evidence, because evidences won't make much sense.

Some are starting to learn the din, and have some knowledge of major topics, and they can follow a scholar without looking for evidence, or demand evidence to verify, if they like.

Some are reaching basic understanding of the science of fiqh, and are able to interpret the opinions, and they could try to explain others the meanings.

In this fashion, there are many levels of understanding, and there should be no restrictions on someone to try to reach the next level. However, the golden rule of proof with authenticated evidence has to be followed. One can do Ittib'a (following with condition) of the scholars, but should avoid taqleed (followed unconditionally).

In essence, there are two extremes that exists today. One prohibits any question against the opinions of the scholar, even if the refuting evidence is so clear that they agree it to be correct, but they will ask everyone to keep the collar and keep moving with the herd. Other extreme questions everything, and claims to follow the way of the salaf by taking literal meaning to be superior to the logical meaning, and they would refuse to accept the opinions of certain scholars, even if the Quran and Sunnah is quite on the subject.

How to avoid sects (firqa) in Islam?

First, understand that labels like "Hanafi", "Maliki", "Salafi", "DeoBandi", "Barelwi", "Ahl-e-Shunnah wal Jama" ... are all names of firqa or sects, because they require people to follow their beleif system blindly, and any evidence that contradict their opinion is ignored.

Then, learn your din. It is Fardh upon us. Follow the sunnah. If someone contradicts Quran and Sunnah, do not follow that opinion. If you don't have time, follow the most trusted opinion, and ask for evidence. If the opinion links to Quran and Sunnah, follow it.

Islam is not a religion (madhab), but it is "the way" (din). Allah uses the word "din" to describe Islam not madhab, and madhab is cerated by humans, so make your choice.

For Non-Arab brothers, please spent sometime listening to Arab Scholars, and verify what they say, and if they say the truth, follow it. Just diversify your knowledge.

For Arab brothers, don't walk away when they are doing tafseer of Quran, or reading ahadith in the corner of the Masjid, just because the reader is not an Arab. Listen to any Muslim who is willing to teach. If you don't agree verify it, and if there is evidence, follow it.

"Verily, this is My way, leading straight: follow it: follow not (other) paths: they will scatter you about from His (great) path: thus doth He command you. that ye may be righteous." (6:153)

JazakAllah Khairin
A struglling Muslim

AbuArman (Adnan Jumani)