Previously Asked Questions
Miscellaneous Questions:

This page contains miscelleanous questions and answers.

> Are there dua/ibadah one can perform to help increase one's rizq?

Yes. There are many.  One we have seen that works the best is the
recitation of the entire Surah al-Waqi`ah (chapter 56 of the Qur'an)
in Arabic anytime after sunset and before dawn every single day.  After
one memorizes this surah, it should not take much more than 5 minutes
to read it at a fast pace.

The Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him peace) said, "Whoever
recites Surah al-Waqi`ah every night will never be afflicted with
poverty."  [al-Bayhaqi, Sha`b]


> Are there any supplications to cure diseases narrated from
> the Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him peace)?

You can pray to Allah to cure any ill person (including yourself)
by the doing the following:

   a) place your right or left hand on the forehead of the ill
      person and recite the last four verses of Surah Hashr
      in Arabic and then ask Allah to cure the person or make it better.

This cure is an established practice of the Prophet (May Allah bless
him and give him peace) that Ibn Mas`ud narrated and is recorded
in the history book of al-Khateeb and also mentioned in the
tafsir of Shawkani Fath al-Qadir.

You can use the above dhikr as a cure for many ailments both physical
and metaphysical.


> Jazak Allah Khairun! Your work is much appreciated
> and very valuable.
> I have a question, which is more about principles than rulings.
>
> It is well know that Imam Malik disapproved of musical instruments
> (other than a particular drum listed in the GH.)

First of all, we should realize that we live in a time in which music
via instruments has become omnipresent.  If you live in America
for instance, you will be faced with music in almost every part of
your public life (e.g., when you go to buy your necessities, at
school/college, while in a waiting-room/lounge, while riding a
bus, train, or a plane, etc.).

You will note that the strict ruling for music given in Guiding Helper
(and it is definitely one of the strictest given by the scholars of the
past) is listed in the Book for the Path to Allah.  The reason why
we narrated this strict opinion even though we full-well knew that
it would be difficult for most Westerners to follow is that it is directed
to those travelling the Path.  This is because those travelling the Path
to Allah must realize a few basic things in order to make progress:

    a) They are not even close to being perfect.  When they are
    faced with a ruling such as this which they can't seem to
    apply to their lives even after strenuous attempts, they will
    realize their imperfection sooner and be less likely to consider
    themselves "pure" and "good".
    b) Good deeds are good because Allah has commanded
     them and are bad deeds are bad because Allah has forbidden
     against them.   For example, most people alive today would
     not consider listening/playing musical instruments to be
     something for which one earns bad deeds even though
     most traditional Islamic scholars have at least spoken about
     most of them in a negative light.
     In other words, the person travelling the Path must realize that
     intrinsically speaking all acts are equal - and it is only Allah's
     arbitrary assigning of rewards and punishments to certain acts
     that gives them spiritual weight.
     The real reason why something is makruh or haram is not
     that it is intrinsically in and by itself wrong or leads to harmful
     consequences.  Rather, Allah has tied negative effects to acts
     labeled as haram as a further deterrent and as a mercy from Him.
     For example, He has tied painful headaches (a.k.a. hangovers)
     to getting drunk and has tied STDs (sexually transmitted
     diseases) to promiscuity.
    c) In order for the person travelling the Path to proceed fast, he
     must make continuous tawbah (repentance).  Applying this strict
     ruling to his life will give him ample opportunity to repeatedly
     repent and return to Allah.

References:
    [DT: volume 1: page 48: line(s) 17-20: {explanation of
    verse 30, near end}

With all that said and done, we would say that there are dispensations
available for the common man not travelling the Path within the Maliki
School of Jurisprudence.

The dispensations available within the Maliki school follow (each letter
is a separate dispensation and the latter ones are easier than the former
ones):

    a) The common may "overhear" music that he has no part in
    composing or playing.  However, he may not actively listen to,
    compose, or play instrumental music that consists of wind,
    percussion, string, or horned instruments.  [For example in
    this dispensation, he may not play a musical CD/tape nor
    play a piano keyboard.]
    b) The common man may actively listen to instrumental music
    but may not himself play wind, percussion, string, or horned
    instruments.  [For example in this dispensation, he may play a
    musical CD/tape but may not play a piano keyboard.]
    c) The common man may actively listen to instrumental music.
    He may also play musical instruments, but only if he does this
    once in a while and does not take playing musical instruments
    up as an occupation or a habitual exercise.  If he takes
    playing musical instruments up as an occupation or a daily
    exercise, there is agreement in the Maliki school that his playing
    the instrument is unlawful.

The popular opinion in the Maliki school of course is what we
have listed in the Guiding Helper Explanatory Notes.  However,
those that find difficulty with that opinion may follow opinion
(b) above [that is our recommendation].  Our recommendation
for them is that they however try their best to minimize the
amount of time listening to such music and search for more
productive or internally meditative exercises to engaged in.

References:

Here is a translated quote from the explanation of the Murshid by
Muhammad ibn Ahmad Mayyarah that contains these three
dispensations and also the popular opinion:

  "Listening to musical instruments is a general prohibition for both
  men and women.  Now if each gender is prohibited from listening to
  musical instruments when not with the opposite sex, then it is even
  more [prohibited] when the genders are gathered together...."

   "Now if [the player] has taken up musical instruments as a profession
   or is constantly returning to them, there is no difference in the
   Maliki school that it is unlawful.... and there is disagreement about
   the person who plays musical instruments not as a profession and only
   once in a while.  Some Maliki scholars say that it is still unlawful while
   others say it is mubah...."

   "Imam Malik's view is that listening to any and all musical instruments is
    unlawful except the one-sided tambourine (daff) in a wedding and the
    long drum (kibar); however, there is disagreement about the long drum
    [and other drums].  And likewise is treated playing them, selling them, and
    buying them..."

    "However, some Maliki scholars have said that it is permissible to listen
     to musical instruments."
 
[DT: volume 1: page 451: line(s) 19: {explanation of verse(s) 295-300,
 after first quoted stanza of poetry}}
  

> There is also a text
> I've seen where someone asked Imam Malik what to do if they heard
> the Flute while they were out. He recommends they leave if they can,
> if not just to finish their business.
>
> I also once read that Imam Malik had learned music as a child, but
> then his mother pushed him to study deen.

No comment.  You yourself seem to understand or have knowledge of
these texts.

> Now, my question is not so much about music, as I have heard
> many sides, and understand the dominant opinion (ie no strings and
> winds etc.) However my question is this:   If Islam was established in
> Medina, (and elsewhere) and instruments were actually Haram (as
> opposed to disapproved of as distractions from more important duties
> as Ibn Khaldun I think felt) why would they be openly used?

The fact of the matter is that the prohibition on music was not as clearly
laid down by the Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him peace) or the
early scholars in Madinah as, for instance, the prohibition on wine and
gambling.  This is why the issue of Music will never be properly resolved
on the whole by the scholars of our din unlike the issue for eating pork
for instance.

Ibn `Ajibah writes in his explanation of al-Mabahith al-Asliyah:

    "This issue [of musical instruments] is one of [much] disagreement
     as no clear primary text has come from the Legislator - and all
     affairs are mubah by default until a [clear] prohibition is found.  And
     [the fact of the matter is that] listening to musical instruments was
     not declared unlawful until the idle [wrong-doing] folk took it up
     and linked it with drinking wine and fornicating...

     [It has been narrated that] a scholar (who condoned [certain] musical
     instruments) in the presence of Caliph Harun Rashid said, 'I
     attended a wedding feast in Madinah in which the scholars attended. 
     [There were so many singers at this wedding] that if the house were
     to collapse, no singer would remain in Madinah.  And the smallest
     of the [condoning] scholars present was Imam Malik ibn Anas.  So,
     they sang [and a man] had a mizhar [i.e. a musical instrument (probably
     a tambourine)]; so, they sang [with it] and uttered nasheeds."

     [IH: volume 1: page 287: line(s) 28-29: {explanation of verse 202
     of the Mabahith}]

Now in the above excerpt, other Maliki scholars could have interpreted
mizhar as applying to other than a tambourine.

> i.e. If the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) covered his ears when
> he heard the Shepard's flute (I think this is in Ghazali's 'letter to a boy')
> and Malik's students were to get up when they heard the flute, it implies two
> things (to this  ignorant man writing to you):
> 1) continued usage of the flute during and after the Prophet's (peace and
> blessings of Allah be upon him) time in lands where Islam was established.
> 2) disapproval for some to hear it and not others.

Yes. What you say above has been said by authentic scholars.

> If #2 is the case, it seems that Haram would not be a suitable term,
> since Haram is not just for some to follow and not others (unless we
> presume the shepard and the other flute player were non-muslim, which
> would still I assume necessitate that they play privately, and we would
> need proof that this was the case.)

The logic is o.k.; but, the *popular* opinion in the Maliki school still labels
it explicitly as "haram" even after the advanced vocabulary of the Jurists had
developed.  [Refer to the first quote above].

Now if you are confused about what this word mash-hur/popular
actually means, a brief explanation is listed in the addendum to this
letter.

> So, are we in fact discussing something forbiden by a command,
> or are we discussing a thing strongly recommended against because
> of an implied action and statement from the Prophet (peace and
> blessings of Allah be upon him,) who's actual ruling on the matter
> was ambiguous (as in Abu Baker's thinking that 'Aisha and the girls
> playing Daff were sinning, when in fact the Prophet (peace and
> blessings of Allah be upon him) was present)?

Before the advanced vocabulary of the jurists developed, this was
a big issue.  In the early centuries of Islam (e.g., first two centuries),
people would say that something is mamnu` (prohibited) without
qualifying whether this was just a recommendation to leave it or
a strict prohibition. Even al-Mudawwanah al-Kubrah has this problem
of ambiguity in certain places;  it was the task of the later scholars
(mostly Ibn Rushd (not the philosopher)) to straighten things out
so that such ambiguities would cease to be an issue.  And they stated
in the case of musical instruments that the popular opinion was that
they are unlawful to play or listen to (you can refer to the excerpt
above or other trusted Maliki sources.

> Are there any rukhsas or minority opions from the Maliki jurists?

Three dispensations are listed above.  For the common man that finds
difficulty with the opinion in the Guiding Helper, we would recommend
dispensation (b).

> Thank you very much for your time, and May Allah reward you
> for your efforts. I love the book!!

> The Notes of Sources discusses the disagreement amongst the 'Ulama with
> regards to music (cf. notes to GH 42:1755). Bearing in mind the hadith quoted
> in the Primary Proof section, in support of Imam Malik's position, how have
> the Maliki 'Ulama who have permitted musical instruments explained hadith like
> that mentioned and other hadith, such as:
>
> "This Community will experience the swallowing up of some people by the earth,
> metamorphosis of some into animals, and being rained upon with stones."
> Someone asked, "When will this be, O Messenger of Allah?" and he said, "When
> songstresses and musical instruments appear and wine is held to be lawful."
>
> "There will be peoples of my Community who will hold fornication, silk, wine,
> and musical intruments to be lawful..." (both hadiths taken from the Shafi'i,
> Ibn Hajar Haytami, as translated in Reliance of the Traveller, pg. 775)

The explanation given is that almost all of these hadith mention multiple
unlawful acts performed together with music and not only music.  For example,
the hadith you quote mentions fornication, silk, and wine while others also
mention idol worship, etc.

You can refer to al-Qardawi's al-Halal wa l-Haram fi l-Islam about this
topic since he has narrated many minority Maliki opinions throughout his
book and he has listed the rationale for such minority Maliki opinions.

> Q2. Does the Maliki School permit women to sing for strange men if the lyrics
> are not lewd and the manner not similar to bedroom voices; such as 'religious'
> songs (qasaa'id) or just other inspirational songs with lyrics, for example,
> about honour and courage, etc? (this is a query regarding explanatory note
> 2628)

The popular opinion in the Maliki school does not allow men to listen to
unrelated adult women's "singing" voices (e.g., popular song or qasa'id). 
However, the popular opinion allows men to listen to conversational tone
voices of unrelated women.  We have narrated the popular opinion in the
Maliki school in footnote 2628 of the Explanatory Notes.

There are minority opinions which would allow singing women's voices
as long as the voices are not purposely "seductive" (e.g., in a qasa'id)
and are closer to the conversational tone.

As for "seductive" and "sensual" singing carried out by adult females,
there is no disagreement among our scholars (inside and outside the
Maliki school) that such is unlawful to listen to by unrelated men who
are not the spouses of such singing women - as it is recorded in many
authentic hadith that the Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him peace)
prohibited female singing girls.

[As a side note, one of the reasons why a minority opinion is called
 a "minority" opinion is that the evidences for it are generally
 weaker than that of a popular opinion.]

Reference(s):
  [QF: volume 1: page(s) 370: line(s) 8: {book 21, chapter 6, 12th
   prohibited act of the tongue, 4 types of unlawful singing}]
  [KH: volume 1: page(s) : line(s) M17-27: {formal prayer, loudness
   in recitation for women, `adawi's explanation of whether or not
   women's voices are part of their "nakedness", explanation of
   Sidi Khalil's words "And loudness the minimum of which is that
   he makes oneself hear and the one next to one hear..."}]

> The note in the Notes of Sources for GH 41:1726 quotes Ibn Juzayy saying that a woman without a husband or male
> relative can travel with a group of women if she 'must' travel. What would be defined as a 'must'? And how many
> women constitutes a group? Are there any criteria that such a 'group' must satisfy (i.e. how would 'small', as
> mentioned in explantory note 2577, be defined?)?

There would be disagreement (even within the school) about the exact requirements of 'must' and also
about the size of the 'rifqah' (group of women or men with which there is safety).

We would offer the opinions that the need not be life threatening (but may be considered major by
the woman; but, she must have her non-abusive husband's permission if married) and a group of
three or more women is enough (given that they are all experienced and
'tough' women and not naive and innocent).

> Q. The explanatory note 2195 permits a man or woman to dye their hair 'any color'. Now this question might seem
> stupid bearing in mind the very clear wording of the note, but is it permissible to colour one's hair black? (Ibn Juzayy
> in the Notes of Sources does not mention black or 'any color')

There is disagreement about black.  The popular opinion states that black hair color is
disliked for 'old' people who are trying to trick people into thinking they are young.

Reference(s):
[QF: volume 1: page(s) 383: Line(s) 23-24: {Book 21, chapter 17,
issue 3}]

We have not mentioned this in the Explanatory Notes due to the disagreement
surrounding this issue. 

Please note here that every young scholar has to realize that after a certain level
of detail, we can no longer state that everyone in the Maliki/`Ash`ari/Shadhili school
agrees on this point.  And in such a case, know that it is possible in only 90-95%
of the cases to come up with a popular opinion.  What this means is that in about 5%
of the cases, we cannot even prove that one of various opinions is popular since we
cannot fulfill all of the requirements for declaring that an opinion is popular (e.g.,
those listed in footnote 196 of the Notes of Sources).


Sorry we did not answer your other questions.

But from we remember, you asked about the Maturidi and `Ash`ari basis's
for responsibility of those ignorant of a divine message.  The answer is that
qualified scholars do not derive their conclusions from isolated verses in the
Qur'an nor from isolated hadith.  Rather, they derive their conclusions from a
broad study of the subject from both primary, secondary sources, and tertiary
(qiyas and ijtihad) sources.

As for the `Ash`ari view, it can also be backed up with isolated verses in the
Qur'an such as:

   "And we do not punish until we send a Messenger"  [al-Qur'an 17:15]

> Other issues which confuse me include certain aspects of the
> Prophet (PBUH). I have written enough already, so I don't want
> to go into any detail because it means you have to write more if
> you answer my questions, and I don't really like asking in the first
> place because I feel like I am bothering you, even if you welcome
> questions from the public. I don't understand things like the
> marriage to A'isha at her early age, and subsequent consummation.
> I read in a booklet that this is evidence that a girl who hasn't reached
> puberty may be married by her father without her permission. Is this true?

The majority of traditional scholars of our din are of the view that
the father has a major say over the first marriage of his unmarried
daughter.

References:
    [QF: volume 1: page 173: line(s) 13-14: {book 11, chapter 3,
     talkis/summary}]

> Although A'isha is beloved to all of us, especially to the Messenger
> (PBUH), wasn't she a bit young for marriage at 6 or 7, and subsequent
> consummation a few years later? I think this is something I am
> just going to have to accept, but I can't rid my feelings of dislike for
> a marriage without consent, or before puberty.

One of the basic things you must realize is that all cultures have
inherent biases built into them.  The people who grow up in
these cultures are affected by these biases.  You should also
understand that these biases are mostly arbitrary.  For example,
in the United States, most people believe that thirteen is an unlucky
number but in the United Kingdom, most people think that
thirteen is actually a lucky number.

Our scholars claim:  One's abhorrence or liking of an act cannot
serve as a sufficient guide for reaching specific legal rulings
for our din.  In other words, this claim states that all physical
acts are arbitrary.  There is no goodness or badness in any physical
act.  It is only Allah's arbitrary assigning of rewards and
punishments to certain physical acts that make them good or bad.

References:
    [DT: volume 1: page 48: line(s) 17-20: {explanation of
    verse 30, near end}
    [al-Qur'an, chapter 2, verse 216}]

There are many rational proofs for the above, among which are:

  i) By examining the different cultures of the past and
     present, we see that humans do not universally share
     the same ideas of good and bad.
  ii) If different intelligent humans can honestly label
      the exact same act in the exact same circumstances
      as either good or bad, then these acts cannot be
      intrinsically good or bad.  Or if they are indeed
      intrinsically good or bad, then the human intellect
      cannot determine which act is good and which act is
      bad.

There are many illustrative examples for the above proof.
Among which are:

   a) alcohol - In the United States in the 1920s-1930s,
      alcohol was declared illegal and as a detriment to
      society.  Today in the United States, alcohol is an
      acceptable social drug.
     
   b) fornication -  One hundred years ago in most places in
      the West, fornication was viewed as an evil and looked
      upon with abhorrence.  The current view in the West
      is that fornication is o.k. if both partners love
      each other and mutually consent.

   c) robbery - Today stealing from anybody even a poor person
      from a rich person is punishable by all law statutes
      in almost all countries.  However, in Medieval England
      in the folktale "Robin Hood" is looked upon with esteem,
      although he is nothing but a thief for the poor.

   d) homicide - In many intelligent cultures in the past (e.g.,
      the Aztecs), human sacrifice of innocent people was looked
      upon as a good act.  Today in the same places in the world
      (South America), human sacrifice is looked upon with
      abhorrence.

      Additionally in India, until this day, many intelligent
      people kill their daughters or burn the former wife of
      a dead husband along with him as a "good" act.

   e) usury - In the West up until the nineteenth century, taking
      high rate interest on financial assets was considered an
      abhorrence.  Today, it is common and an accepted practice
      for many credit companies to charge 17-20% (what would before
      be considered usury).

There are many other examples, but the general conclusion is:

   i) If different intelligent people in the exact same
      circumstances can come up with different conclusions
      about an act according to their abhorrence and liking
      of that act, then that act cannot be found to be
      intrinsically good or bad.

The last point above is why the West is in big trouble currently.
They have adopted a sort of moral relativism which translates
into no values at all (nihilism).  The reason they got into
this trouble is because they made the following base
misjudgment:

   i) The intellect alone can serve as a sufficient guide
      to determine whether an act is good or bad.

> Likewise, I can't switch
> of my feeling's of surprise when I read that the Prophet (PBUH)
> ordered the death of many men rather than showing them mercy,
> even if mercy might have not been appropriate.

You must realize that your feelings have been biased by your
environment.  If you travel the world enough and read enough
human history, you will realize this.

As for why the Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him peace)
punished certain people and showed mercy to others.  It was
in order to demonstrate how the criminal justice system of
our din operates.

Please note that once it is established without a doubt that
a person has committed a crime for which there is an inscribed
punishment, it is wajib for the imam to carry it out regardless
of his emotions.

This is in conformity to Allah's statement "wa la takudhkum bihima
rafatun fi dini llahi in kuntum tu'minuna billahi wa l-yawmi
l-akhir."  "And do not let pity/mercy overtake you concerning
[those to be punished] according to the din of Allah if you believe
in Allah and the Last Day." [al-Nur, verse 2]

> I think that I should be honest and say to you that the
> origin of my worries were not truly from me. Sadly, a
> couple of years ago I tried to find out more about the
> Qur'anin recitations and about Maliki Fiqh from the
> Internet, because I cannot speak Arabic to a degree well
> enough to understand traditional sources of Islam.
> Alhanduliah I came across the Guiding Helper, which contains
> more Maliki teachings, in English, than I could wish for
> at this stage! But unfortunately, prior to finding the
> GH, I could only find anti-Islamic websites, which used
> some of the above statements I have made to discredit
> Islam. Although I understand their evil intentions mean
> they won't stop at anything, so they automatically attack
> the Qur'an and Sunnah because they are our foundations,
> I still find their comments confusing, and I regret
> reading them.

After reviewing the criticisms of anti-Islamic "scholars",
we have found them issuing forth from unqualified people
who have no right to talk about such details of our din.

For example, the biggest non-Muslim scholar of Islam that
has ever lived "Bernard Lewis" (used to teach at Princeton
University in U.S.) is still very unqualified when compared
to even the smaller scholars of our din such as `Abd al-Rahman
al-Akhdari or the contemporary scholar Ustadh Zweetan (the
biggest scholar at Qarawayeen Mosque currently).

These critics do not have extreme mastery over the Classical
Arabic language.  These critics have not memorized the Qur'an
with its seven recitations.  These critics have not memorized
tens of thousands of ahadith with their chains of transmission.
All of which is a *pre-requisite* for talking about the details
of our din.

Thus, we do not give much weight to their arguments as they
issue from ignorance.

Know that the truth of the matter is that our din is superior
to anything that has come before it and anything that will
come after it.  And deep within their hearts, those who learn
much about our din know that this is true (even if they are
outwardly opposed to it).  But out of arrogance and out of
defending their baseless systems, they try to attack our din.


> The second opinion is about plastic surgery. I have been asked about that.
> As far as I know, if it is done to correct an obvious physical deformity it
> is acceptable. But if it is only for the propose of enhancing physical beauty
> (as, for example, to make the breasts bigger, etc) then it is tagyir khalqillah,
> and it is not acceptable. Can you please, give me some references about
> this point.

Plastic surgery like many other things in our din would have five legal
rulings depending on the circumstances of the person.

a) Wajib - very rarely, almost never- "For example if plastic surgery was
mubah/mandub in some case and one's parents made one take an oath to
carry it out, then it would be wajib because it is wajib to carry out oaths."
b) Mandub - also very rare - "For example if a person had a very deformed
and ugly face or body (e.g., from birth or from a horrible accident) and
believed he could do good public work for the din (e.g., as a da`iyy) if
only people were not repulsed by him, then it may be mandub for him
to have his deformation corrected (this is of course if he could afford it
and there was nothing else unlawful involved)."
c) Mubah - For a very prominent and repulsing physical deformity (not just
a "beauty" enhancer) for a person who believes that he will be able to
do kasb al-halal much better if he undergoes corrective plastic surgery.
This is mubah because choosing a certain line of kasb is mubah for most
people. And even people with repulsing deformities can find at least
some work in today's world (that is why it is not mandub in this case).
d) Makruh - For a prominent physical deformity (but not a repulsing one)
And the person has no kasb al-halal objectives in his operation.
(The reason why this is makruh is that it makes one lose reward for
not being patient with what Allah sent.)
e) Haram - For "beauty"-enhancing plastic surgery as this is what the
Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him peace) described as taghayyur
khalqi l-llah as you have mentioned.

So the from the above, you see as you will have to examine the person's
life situation and give him the appropriate ruling.

References:
[QF: volume 1: page 384: line(s) 1-7: {book 21, chapter17, issue 4}]

> And in connection to the second question, in which category falls the
> dental correction devices that many children and adults put in order to
> correct dental deformities.

It would appear to us that dental corrective devices should not be grouped
together with plastic surgery.  It would seem that that Maliki view on
dental corrective devices is that they are generally mubah.

There are many proofs for this, among which is that gold teeth and
dental insertions are declared mubah by the Maliki scholars.

In al-Khulasah al-Fiqhiyyah it states that gold teeth can be considered
lawful jewelry.

[KF: volume 1: page 122: line(s) 26-27: {Zakat, after start of explanation of
 Zakat al-`Ayn, question 30 "hal uzakka al-halyu l-ja'iz"}]

As a primary text proof, we see that the Prophet (May Allah bless him
and give him peace) must of had minor dental alterations done after
one of his teeth (lower right ruba`iyyah) broke in the battle of Uhud
from a stone thrown at his face by `Utbah ibn Abi Waqqas. [{Sirah ibn
Hisham}]

As for tafrij bayna l-asnan that the Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him
peace) and the Maliki scholars  have prohibited, it would appear to us that it is
only true when the person is trying to *alter* the natural teeth formation that
humans normally have and does not apply to people who are trying to
*rectify* their teeth to the natural formation that humans normally have.

We should also remember that the reason why teeth grow crooked is because
children press on their gums with their tongue and thereby *alter* the natural
teeth formation.  The corrective devices are aimed at reversing this induced
alteration.


> 1) That there are rijal ul ghiab, including Khidr, who
> is still alive, and meets people (esp. if one does a
> particular wird or dua for 40 days.)

This is actually the view of most traditional scholars. You can
check a detailed Quranic tafsir of the story of Musa and Khidr in Surah
Kahf for verification and the proofs for this statement.

We have also hinted at the fact that Khidr and Ilyas will
remain alive until the end of the world in footnote 223, section 20.
Some scholars are of the view that Khidr is a human prophet
who is otherwise known as al-Yasa`.

Ibn al-`Arabi in his Futuhat mentioned about four such individuals that
continue to live, one of them being Khidr. Ibn al-`Arabi calls these four,
the four qutbs of the world. This "qutb" is not to be confused with what the
those of a Tariqah refer to as the leader of the abdal (most authentic
scholars are of the view that there are seventy men (forty in Sham (Syria)
and thirty elsewhere) that have a special spiritual duty and role given
to them by Allah. The leader of these seventy abdal is known as the "qutb"
and serves as the spiritual axis for the world. When one of them dies, he
is replaced with another person who is alive (that is why they are known as
abdal (substitutes/replacements))

If you do enough research, you will find supporting authentic primary
text evidences for the above statements. Finding authentic secondary text
evidences for such statements is even easier.


> 2) That Ibn Arabi quoted a hadith that Allah created 100,000 Adams
> (alaihi selam.)
> Are there hadiths in the traditional Fiqh books that include these details,
> or are they from different sources.

One can find commonly-known supporting primary text evidences that
hint at the above facts, but most of these facts are not in the commonly known
books of hadith (e.g., Bukhari, Muslim, Nisa'i, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah,
Tirmidhi, Malik, and Darami).

The real reason for this is that the knowledge of these "non-essential"
facts was not conveyed by hadith, but was conveyed by teacher to student
within the circle and discipline of a Tariqah. The Prophet (May Allah bless
him and give him peace) had his own Tariqah and he taught the members
of his Tariqa "non-essential" facts and methods like these which were not
conveyed by his hadith (which center around external fiqh and beliefs). Among
the members of his Tariqah were, Abu Bakr Siddiq, `Ali ibn Abu Talib,
Ja`far ibn Abu Talib, and Abu Dharr al-Ghaffari,

As for the fact whether Allah created 100,000 Adams or only one at this
particular time, we would say that it is a very hard judgement to make solely
from primary text evidences as there are contradictory statements found about
this matter. Additionally, we do not know about the source of such a hadith.

However, if in fact Ibn al-`Arabi stated this, we would give some weight
to his opinion knowing about his extreme qualifications and knowing about the
fact that he, himself, was a hadith scholar. So, a hadith he narrates is as good as
a hadith that someone else (of the lesser-known hadith scholars) narrate. In other
words, he had his own chains of transmission for the hadith he knew.

Now in analyzing this matter from other than solely primary text evidences,
we would say that it is quite probable that Adam is not the only creation
Allah has created to place in a world (similar to ours (perhaps in another
galaxy)) and to eventually judge them for placement in eternal reward
or pleasure.

Whether or not such facts are true will not affect our basic beliefs.


> My wife would like take karate. The instructor is a
> Muslim woman, but she still includes bowing to the opponent in
> the classes. Is it permissable to take these classes and bow to the opponent
> or teacher? Here is what the teacher wrote:
>"Thank you for your interest in our club. As a Muslim myself, I understand
> your concern, but let me try to explain to you what we actually do. Bowing in
> karate, comes from the Japanese culture where instead of shaking hands
> and saying hello verbally, they bow to each other. It is nothing but a form of
> hello or respect to the other side. We do not put our foreheads on the ground,
> we merely bow to a 45 degree angle and put our hands on the ground.
> It is a show of respect for the people who brought us this art, and a show of
> appreciation from students to teacher and teacher to students - that's all. It is
> not a form of worship or anything else." end quote.

From our best estimation, the general ruling for practicing such a
custom is that it is makruh - in that one loses reward by performing it
but is not threatened with a punishment for performing it.

The first time our Muslim nation came across this practice was during the
time of the Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him peace) when he
sent emissaries to the East in the West inviting the leaders of the lands to
Islam. 

It is recorded that the emissaries did not bow to the Eastern leaders
even though all the other non-Muslims at the gathering bowed.  The
explanation given by the emissaries was that they do not bow (perform
ruku`) except to Allah.

Reference:
   This is recorded in the famous books of Seerah and also depicted
    in the Anthony Quinn movie "The Message".

However, we would not say that bowing as such is an unlawful
act (but it still is a makruh).  The reason for this is the Qur'an mentions
such bowing as an accepted and mubah practice of even the prophets.
And we do not have a clear strict prohibition (as outlined by the Maliki
scholars of Usul) for the act in the primary texts.

For example, the mufassirin interpret the words "fell prostrate"
in verse 100 in Surah Yusuf:

   "And he raised his parents on the throne and they all fell
     prostrate to him.  He then said, 'O father, this is the interpretation
     of my vision before.  Indeed Allah has made it true...' "

as meaning "bowing in respect". 

Additionally, the mufassirin say that Allah instructed the angels
and Iblis to bow in respect to Adam (this is what prostrate in the
verses mean).

Reference:
    Tafsir al-Jalalayn (al-Suyuti)

Our advice to your wife would be that if the instructor seems
stubborn and will not change her own practice, your wife should explain
to her that she feels uncomfortable bowing.  In such a case,
your wife can continue her classes but omit the bowing (for example,
she can look straight ahead with her arms crossed instead).


> Recently I went to a wedding where the silverware
> was made of silver (as opposed to steel.) Since there
> was no other means of eating, and it would have been rude
> not to, we had to eat with them.
>
> In general, most of the time I'm looking for Rukhsas, they are
> for the benefit of others (i.e. not offending people (esp. non-Muslims,)
> or not wanting to push someone too much in lesser matters (i.e. people
> who need to focus on Iman and Prayer.)
>
> I noticed in a book of Hanafi Fiqh I have from Turkey (although I'm
> not sure of the qualifications of the author) that Silver eating utensils
> (like forks and knifes) were permissable, but not cups and plates. Is
> there a rukhsa I can take if it's for someone elses benefit (as mentioned
> above.) My Nafs could care less about silverware, it's offences are
> elsewhere.

There are no common rukhsas available within the Maliki school about
this particular point.

Others schools (e.g., Hanafi) for instance are a little more lenient. For
example, the Hanafi popular opinion allows possession of gold and
silver vessels as long as one does not eat with them.  As you note in the
book you read, minority opinions may exist in the Hanafi school which
allow using utensils but not vessels (that which hold volume) made of
precious materials.

In general we would recommend Averroes's book (that's Ibn Rushd,
the Philosopher, grand child of the Ibn Rushd who set the popular
opinions in the Maliki school) "Bidayat al-Mujtahid wa Nihayat al-Muqtasid"
to learn of the various rukhsas that are available in the din.  He does a pretty
comprehensive job of listing the various opinions that the great mujtahidin
of the past have held.

References:
   [QF: volume 1: page 32: line(s) 18-22: {book 1, chapter 5, section 3,
    issue 3}]


> 2)
> Are there any English writitngs about the Muthbitah? Was Kullabi
> or Hasan Al-Basri related to them?

Most of the early learned pious scholars such as Hasan al-Basri
and `Ali ibn Abu Talib would be classified as Muthbitah.  However, it
was not until the dominance of the Mu`tazilah in Baghdad that this pre-existing
group of scholars were referred to as the Muthbitah, which means:
"those who affirm what others deny" - since they affirmed many things
that the Mu`tazilah were denying.

Reference:
   [DT: volume 1: page 16: line(s) 19-20: {explanation of verse 5,
   explanation of "al-`Ash`ari"}]


It is sad that this part of our history has not been well-preserved.  And the
real reason for this is that our huge libraries in Baghdad were destroyed
by the Mongols during the height of the Mu`tazilah-Muthbitah face-off.

It is recorded that the Mongols dumped so many books into the Tigris river that
the books formed a bridge over which horses trotted.  That means tens of
thousands of volumes were lost for ever.  Additionally, many learned scholars
were among the one million that died at the Mongols hands.  Thus, much knowledge
was lost forever in this invasion by the will of Allah.


I have a strange question:
 A brother I know has very vivid dreams.
 In addition to this, he sometimes dreams events
 that come true in the future. I am aware of the hadith
 about 1/46th of prophecy being true dreams, and that
 they are all that remains of prophecy. However it raises
 some questions.

 This brother is currently in a very bad emotional state
 because he has vividly seen dreams about the past, present,
 and future of one of his coworkers.

 He believes them without doubt (due to his previous
 experiences with dreams coming true.) The problem is,
 these events that he is dreaming are very troublesome
 and terrible. He is confident that this person will suffer
 through a terrible lifestyle (of her own choosing,) and
 then come out ok.
 What concerns me is that he has tried, in an indirect way,
 to warn this person of the problems that she is putting
 herself into, and that she should get out. However, she
 doesn't appear to be heeding this advice. I am concerned
 because if everything he is dreaming is true several
 problems arise:

1) He would be informing her of info that she never told
 him or anyone, and that could be psychologically troubling
 for her (i.e. where did he learn this from.)

 2) It implies something about destiny. He is certain that on
  a particular day and month, of an unforseen year, that she
 will finally leave this problematic situation, for a better life.
 This implies however that he knows that he, she, and other
 people in the dreams will still be alive then, that Yawm al Qiyaam
 will not have come before this date, etc. To what degree should
 one trust dreams of the future, esp. when one has experienced
 so many dreams come true?

Answer:

The first thing you must understand about this is that destiny has two
faces: (1) one face towards us and (2) one face towards Allah.
What this means is that Allah has a true "Mother of Books'" that describes
all events with 100% accuracy.  And He does not let *anyone* read
this Book (including the angels, prophets, friends of Allah, spiritually
inclined humans, jinns, etc.).  This face of destiny is reserved
exclusively for Him.  The other face which faces His creation is not 100%
accurate.  Rather, it contains much information that is apt to change.
And it is this face that humans, jinns, and angels can peek upon (e.g., by
reading the Preserved Tablet or using another means).  Thus, anything
a person (excluding the Prophets) sees of the future in a dream cannot be
taken as 100% accurate; rather, it is apt to change.  [And the advanced
spirituals of our Ummah can actually facilitate this change by pushing away
the images of the unpleasant things that they discover - in effect praying
to Allah to erase the bad destined event and replace it with a good one
(and this pushing away works quite often from their experience).]

References:
   This is the conclusion that the scholars have
   come to by interpreting Qur'anic verses such as:

   Yamhu l-lahu ma yasha'u wa yuthbit wa `indahu ummu l-kitab.
   ├„nd Allah erases what He wants [from the Preserved Tablet] and
   affirms [by not erasing] what He wants and He possesses the
   [unchanging] Mother of All Books [of Destiny].
   [al-Qur'an 13:39]
 
   The scholars that have interpreted this verse as such include:
   `Umar ibn al-Khattab, Ibn Mas`ud, Ibn `Abbas, Abu Wa'il,
    Qatadah, Dhahhak, Ibn Jurayj, etc.

   [FQ: volume 3: page 126: lines(s) 16-17: {explanation of 13:39}]
 
   Also the verse:

     `Alimu -ghaybi fa la udh-hiru `ala ghaybihi ahadan.
      He is the knower of the Unseen and does not let *anyone*
      become disclosed of His Unseen [Secrets].
      [al-Qur'an 72:26]

   clearly implies that there are aspects of the unseen which no one
   can find out.  And the Mother of All Books of Destiny is among these
   things according to the scholars.
 

 3) He tells me that he hears a voice in some of his dreams that
 gives him certain bits of this info. He says that in Ibn Sirrin's book
 it says that the words of a voice without a body should only be
 understood literally, as the truth (ie. not metaphorically signifying
 something.)
 How can he be certain though that shaytan is not whispering
 into his dreams? He prays Istikhara before going to sleep, and I
 think he is scrupulous about cleanliness and prayer.

Dreams of the future are not 100% accurate; Additionally, just because a
dream comes true does not mean it was not from Shaytan.  The jinn like humans
also have the ability to peek at the Preserved Tablet.  A jinn could have
peeked at the Preserved Tablet and then shown the dream to the brother.
Now the brother, in his gullibility and lack of experience saw that the dream
came true and automatically assumed that he (being so gifted) received
1/46 of prophet-hood.  The jinn all this time may have been planning a
big psychological break-down for the brother.  Thus, he will lead him on
until he trusts his dreams - and when the time is right the jinn will show
a false terrifying dream to the brother - and the brother in his gullibility
and lack of experience will believe it leading to chaos in his worldly life and
diminishment of his din.  This is what the jinn wanted all the time - and this
is a common trick that the shaytans use for people who consider themselves
"spiritually talented".

In other words, there is really no sure way to verify the truth of the dream.
Yes it is true that advanced spirituals can tell which source the dream has
come from and whether it is a first-hand or a second-hand (e.g., though
a jinn) peek at the Preserved Tablet.  However, advanced spirituals realize
the error-prone nature of this avenue of knowledge and thus do not assign
much weight to such dreams (except of course as token spiritual
experiences).

 I am worried too, because, he is so certain. But I'm worried
 that maybe he is wrong, and that instead he is in a sense
 accusing this person of doing things she did not. I mentioned
 that he shouldn't talk of this anymore, and we agreed not to, as
 it became apparent that it might be backbiting (if it were true,) and
 calumny if untrue.
 If he is wrong, then I am concerned for his mental health.
 However, due to his past dreams, and knowing that it is not
 impossible for one to obtain this sort of info, I am not convinced
 he's wrong.

Our advice to him would be:

   a) Do not take any concrete actions based solely upon your
        terrifying dreams (this is how many lives are ruined and how many
        marriages end in divorce).
   b) Understand that the side of destiny that you see has ability
        to fluctuate - and as such ask Allah to push away the terrifying
        events that you see.  For example, you may spit/blow three times
       on your left shoulder and then say the Post-Nightmare du`a that
       the Prophet taught us and which we have listed in Appendix 2.4
   c) Understand that dreams are from three main sources:  (1) Allah
       via angels, (2) Shaytan via jinn, and (3) your own self via your
       anxieties and experiences.  Learn to distinguish between these
       by the feeling that is left after you wake up.  For example, if you
       feel terrified, scared, panicky, unrestful, etc. then it was
       most definitely from Shaytan.  If it leaves you with a pleasure-full
       spiritual feeling full of light - it was most probably from Allah.  If
       none of the previous two are true, then it was probably from
       your own self.
    d) Understand that Shaytan may be making you into a dream junky
        in order to mislead you at some future point in time.  Almost all
        people who have claimed prophet-hood sincerely (or some other
        misguidance) after the Prophet Muhammad have done so on the
        basis of dreams.  It is the in the nature of the bad jinn that
        they love to mix lies in with truths.  The truths are mixed in to
        maintain credibility and the lies are mixed in to ruin you as the
        Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him peace) has told us:

        The Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him peace) said, "The angels
        speak of the matters to come on the earth while they are in the clouds.
         So, the Shaytans overhear their talk and then fill the ear
        of a fortune-teller with words like a cup is filled.  But, they add one hundred
        lies to what they heard."
         [{Bukhari, beginning of creation, description of iblis and his army, hadith #3045}]

       e) Understand that the cleanliness of your bed sheet has a major role in
           allowing the shayatin into your dreams.  Make sure that you wash
           wash your bed sheet, pillows, and covers often (e.g., once a week or
           once every couple of weeks).  From experience, we see that most people
           who see bad dreams are the people who sleep on impurities, even if their
           own bodies and clothes are clean.
       f) Before going to sleep, make sure you read the Nightmare Avoidance
          du`a the Prophet taught us that we have listed in Appendix 2.3



> I have a quick question about copyrights and software.
> I'm assuming that it is a violation of contracts to copy software
> since most software have agreements at the beginning that you
> click to agree to saying that you won't make any copies except for
> your own use.

The general Maliki ruling would be:

    Although it may be permissible to make a personal copy (especially of
    a written work), one may not distribute freely or for profit
    multiple copies of any material that is copyrighted without the
    copyright holder's explicit permission.

A detailed Maliki ruling would cover the different types of copyrighting
(e.g., written book versus software, etc.) and declare copying permissible
in certain cases and unlawful in others (e.g., when the person explicitly
agrees in a software license agreement not to copy).

Here is a reference for a qualified Shafi`i opinion on this subject:

   http://www.bouti.net/bouti_lecture5.htm

Our view about this is Sheikh Buti has correctly hit the crux of the matter
in separating the rights of the originator (writer), authorized publisher/duplicator,
and those of the buyer.  The only other qualification that one must add (in
addition to defining the number of copies the publisher/duplicator is allowed to
make per contract) is the time limit from the copyright date in which the
originator will be able to excercize his ownership rights.  This time limit cannot
exceed the average remaining life span of a middle-aged man (e.g., 30 years).  But
our recommendation for an Islamic government that enforces patent/copyright laws
(for purposes of encouraging invention) is to reduce the time period of the
copyright to even a smaller length (e.g., varying from 10 to 20 years depending
upon the type of material being copyrighted) to allow new individuals to spread
the invention after the originator has been given an exclusive priviledged head
start.

And here is a reference for a qualified Hanafi opinion about this subject:

    http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=949


> Who and where to find the Maliki ulema in our time?
> Is there a sort of commmittee for the Maliki fiqh?

There are only two hubs in the world for large numbers of Maliki
scholars currently:

    a) Makkah in the Arabian Peninsula (The main people in charge of the
         Funeral Processions and maintenance of the Sacred Masjid are all
         Malikis.  It is quite easy to find Arabic-speaking Maliki scholars
         in Makkah; Madinah however currently is "La Madh-habiyyah" territory
         unfortunately (e.g., you will *not* find many qualified Malikis in
         the University of Madinah).).
    b) Northwest Africa (Morocco and Mauritania (mainly))

If you are looking for a Maliki fiqh committee, then the head of
Qarawayeen University in Fez, Morocco is as qualified as anyone
else claiming Maliki leadership in our times.  Qarawayeen has
a Dar al-Ifta' from which you can obtain legal rulings on subjects.


> What is the duties of a muslim living in our time apprt from the
> personally obligatory things and softening the heart. It seems that Da┬┤wa te
> be personnally obligatory -because we do not have enough people calling
>  to islam. However, there are so many muslim groups that do not follow
>  any madhhab and who don't care much about the things they do (are not
>  careful about the methods they use for. e.g)?

After the Fard al-`Ayn, the number one Fard al-Kifayah in our times is
struggling to establish the systematic and regular practice of din in
your life, family, and surrounding society.

Specifically speaking, it is the top fard al-kifayah in our times that one
devote some time to form one of the ten institutions listed in the r_khlft
document (in directory www.guidinghelper.com/pdf/). 
Our lacking a large number of those ten institutions is the main external
reason for our current weak and fragmented situation as Muslims.

> Regarding spending from ones wealth. What the priorities in
> general. And particularly if someone is living
> in a strange land where he does not have relatives. What should be
> the proiorities for spending ones welth?

If one has parents, a wife, or children (even if residing abroad in another
country), one should look after their needs first (e.g., by sending them
financial help).  After which, our din allows us to choose which charitable
cause to donate to.  You may choose to help the starving in your local
home town or help the starving people in a famine somewhere (e.g., East
Africa).  Or you may choose to sponsor an orphan or a poor student for
an extended period of time.  Or you may choose to help finance one of the
ten institutions mentioned above which are designed to make practice of
the din a reality in our world in our time.

And whatever you do, do it for Allah.

References:
   Footnotes 2298 to 2301 of the Explanatory Notes of the Guiding Helper
   and associated entries in the Notes of Sources.

> What is the ruling on being/becoming a lawer/advocate i.e.
> is it a halal source of income?

The ruling for this matter is not simple:

But, you can understand the positions as follows

  1) If the law of the land is Islam, then it is mubah to
     pursue a legal career as either a judge or a legal counselor
     or advocate (which is what a lawyer is). [But of course, we had
     much fewer lawyers in our history than currently are in the
     West.]

   2) If the law of the land is not Islam then complications arise.
       You will find that there is disagreement of the scholars on this
       issue (some allow while others forbid it).

   We would give the following dispensation to those living in
   a land ruled by other than Islam:

   It is permissible to pursue a legal career in a land ruled by other
   than Islam if either of the following is true:

   a) One intends to try to avoid giving legal advice that conflicts with
        the laws of our din and intends to try to promote legal advice
        that conforms to the laws of our din

   b) One intends to do some sort of community service by becoming
      a lawyer/judge.  For example, one intends to become an expert
      at the non-Muslim legal system in order to help simple people
      obtain their rights and avoid abuses on their bodies, properties,
      and honor.

However, if a Muslim does pursue a legal career in a non-Muslim land,
he should first become an expert at our own traditional system of
Jurisprudence and realize that his profession in a non-Islamic system
is more of a compromise than the fulfillment of an ideal job role.

By becoming an expert at our din's system of Jurisprudence, he will
avoid becoming arrogant by considering the secular law training he has
received to be superior to what our din holds - as any person with
insight into both systems will realize:

a) Our system is more complete, more perfect, and less outdated
by the passage of time.
b) That the non-Muslim system has stole/borrowed many of its
techniques, methods, and laws from the practices of the erudite
Maliki Jurists in Muslim Spain. [However, it has introduced
certain problems of its own doing by the misinterpretation /
mis-adoption of what our erudite scholars were teaching (as is
the case for most of the branches of knowledge the non-Muslim West
mis-learned from us)].

References:
   al-Qawanin al-Fiqhiyyah, Laws of the Islamic Court System



> What is the ruling regarding taking part in parliamentary
> and municipal elections in a non-muslim land? To
> whom should be given the voice of muslims?

One should first understand that the Maliki school like all the
other madha-hib in our din are designed to function as independent
authorities with total jurisdiction over the entire area in question.

Thus, our goal is not integration or to become a minority player in
a nation's political structure.  Rather, our din was sent for domination
and subjugation of other ways of life.  This is evident from the tone
of our previous scholars in discussing this subject and from various
tafsir of the ayah:

   "And He is the One Who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the
    True Din so that it may overcome all other dins - even if the polytheists are
     averse to such."  [al-Qur'an 9:33]

This sets our general attitude towards the subject of political rule - that we
should be in charge and be the major player in designing the system and
running it.

As for the ruling to register to vote and joining the political process
in a non-Muslim land, we would say that it is permissible for the achievement
of short-term goals - especially on the local and provincial level.

You can do research on the subject of musta'minin (those ensured safety)
in non-Muslim lands according to the Maliki school to find justifications
for partial involvement in the political process in non-Muslim lands.

Also, we have the example of the Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him
peace) in Madinah (before it was totally Muslim) taking part in some political
events (e.g., signing treaties, helping in making local laws, helping settle
political disputes, etc.).

References:
   Seerah Ibn Hisham

However, there are many detriments to the approach (of becoming involved in
a non-Muslim nation's political process) if it is full-blown.  Some of these detriments
are:  (1) possible further fragmentation of the Muslims on debated political issues,
(2) draining of the Muslims resources in costly political campaigns and lobbying, (3) loss of
true independent representation (as one will become one of many voices trying to
influence a particular political leader), (4) compromise of key values for harmonious
integration with the non-Muslim system, (5) being perceived as more of a threat
by staunch non-Muslim political activists (who control the nation's police and military)
who feel threatened by the dominance of Muslim activists (in a xenophobic country, this
would lead to laws which further restrict Muslim political activism), etc.

We would recommend the essay "Muslim Participation in the American Political
Process" by, Mr. Shaakir.  It is a written pamphlet, but its audio is available here:

   http://islamicbookstore.com/a933.html

It basically outlines the pros and cons of political participation.

> I was told by muslims of the
> neo-salafiyya mentally that the attribute of Allah ta'ala AR-RASHID was not
> really an attribute of Allah Ta'ala

Please realize that Allah's names are of three types:

   a) Those names that point to His attributes.
   b) Those names that point to His actions.
   c) That name (i.e. "Allah") which points to His Entity

References:
   English:  Guiding Helper Explanatory Notes, footnote 220
   Arabic: [QF: volume 1: page 11: line(s) 3-4:
            {book 0, chapter 3 near beginning}]

Please also note that there is a general prohibition
in our din to name someone with one of Allah's known
names (without the `Abd prefix) regardless of whether
the name is derived from His attributes, His actions,
or is the name of His Entity.  This prohibition is
taken from the Qur'an stating that there is no
similitude to Allah and the Prophet disapproving of
likening people to Allah.

Please also note that scholars inside and outside of
the Maliki school have declared certain exceptions
to the above prohibition for some names that point to His
actions (e.g., Kareem).  However, you will find
disagreement among them as to exactly which names
are permissible and which are not.  Most of these
scholars prove their exceptions by stating that the
names were in common usage during the Prophet's time
and during the early generation of Muslims and no
major objections were made back then.

As for Rasheed (which is a name that points to Allah's
action of guiding His creation), we have had a Khalifah
named Harun al-Rasheed and there were no major objections
to his name by the scholars of his time (e.g.,
Imam Malik).

> and can be use as a a given name and can be used
> without ABDUL or ABDUR if you will, and that the dalil
> in the hadith by At-tirmidhi and if this so could you
> please me give me the dalil

We don't know exactly which hadith they are referring to.

But, in Tirmidhi, you will find that a narrator named
Dawud al-Rasheed is noted in one of the chains for hadith
90 (about wiping over socks).

Also, we have the instance of using al-rasheed as an adjective
of other than Allah in a Du`a of the Prophet (May Allah
bless him and give him peace) where he says "al-amr al-rasheed"
meaning rightly guided matter.  This is in al-Tirmidhi hadith
3341 in the chapter of supplications (da`awat).

Also, Tirmidhi is the location of the hadith of Abu Hurayrah
in which 99 names of Allah are narrated.  al-Rasheed is one
of the names narrated. This is in al-Tirmidhi hadith
3429 in the chapter of supplications (da`awat, counting
tasbeeh with the hand).


> I asked a question a week ago and I left something out of
> my question and that is could i leave my family and move to
> muslim populated country without the permission of my parents?
> I have mentioned it to my mum and they say that i cannot go. and i
> no longer want to live in country where they give orders to soldiers
> and they go and start killing muslim brothers and sisters and i live in
> a family who hardly practice Islam they are more into cultre than
> Islam everytime i tell them somthing about Islam they say:'ok thats
> what Islam says know listen to me'. they want me to be more into
> cultre to so i want to know would Islamic teachings allow me to leave
> my family and go to a muslim populated country? i dont want to be
> living in here by the time i am 18 because at that time i will
> be paying tax and they use the tax money to kill muslims

Now since you are a female that has never been married,
in order for you to disobey your parents in leaving, you must
fulfill at least one of the following two preconditions:

  a) Your residing at your current location forces you to *directly*
    commit a major misdeed (refer to footnote 244 of the Guiding
    Helper Explanatory Notes, section (c) for the list of major
    misdeeds in our din) *and* you are confident that if you move
    you will be able to avoid this major misdeed.
  b) Your parents or someone residing at the house is abusing
     you either physically abusing you (e.g., hitting, pushing, or beating),
     or verbally abusing you (e.g., reviling you and degrading your
     honor and dignity as a human being), or violating your chastity
    (e.g., committing incest).

[Please note that males however may freely leave their non-Islamic
parents after puberty (as long as their parents are not
old or disabled and their parents have other children to take
care of them).]

As for paying taxes, it is not a direct cause for the wrongs committed
by your government.  This is because your tax money is deposited in
a national treasury fund, which is used to fund many activities
(e.g., welfare programs, roads, dams, public works, education, etc.)
and also is used to fund the national defense.  Additionally, not all
military activity that the government engages in is directed against
Muslims (e.g., some money goes to protect borders and give relief
in natural disasters.).

References:
   Footnote 2561 of the Explanatory Notes and Associated
   Entries in the Notes of Sources.

   The proof for precondition 1 is that the Prophet (May Allah bless
    him and give him peace) said, "There is no obedience to someone
    who [calls one to] disobey(s) Allah." 

  [{al-Nisa'i, bay`ah, he who commands to disobey Allah, hadith #4134}]
  There are similar hadiths in Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, and Ibn Majah

   The proof for precondition 2 is that the Prophet (May Allah bless him
   give him peace said), "There is no incurring harm nor causing harm
   [concerning one's divinely given rights in the din]."

  [{Ibn Majah, Ahkam, he who build on his property that which causes
    harm to his neighbor, hadith #2332}]-




Notice from the New Site Maintainer (Monday 26 May 2014 )
  Comments  |  Teachers  |  Online Lessons  |  Merchants  | Terms of Use - Diclaimer  |  FAQs