MUKHTASAR AL QUDURI PDF

adminComment(0)
    Contents:

Overview of fiqh. Mukhtasar al-Quduri. Mukhtasar al-Quduri - Introduction. WORSHIP. Ritual Purification (Taharah). Ritual Prayer (Salat). Purifying Charity ( Zakat). للعلامة الإمام أبو الحسين أحمد بن محمد القدوري الحنفي ه/ م. Identifier Mukhtasar-Al-Quduri. Identifier-arkark://t46q23k Mukhtasar Al Quduri. Topics qudoori, fiqh, dars e nizami, english. Collection opensource. mukhtasir qudoori. Identifier.


Mukhtasar Al Quduri Pdf

Author:WANETTA BRENER
Language:English, Arabic, Japanese
Country:Ghana
Genre:Health & Fitness
Pages:233
Published (Last):02.11.2015
ISBN:152-5-25607-147-4
ePub File Size:16.35 MB
PDF File Size:20.79 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Register to download]
Downloads:49160
Uploaded by: CLETUS

Mohd Sukur Su Abdullah on Quran Transliteration Pdf; A. K. M. Shamsuddin Ahmed on [PDF] The Fundamentals of Tawheed (Islamic. Muslim World Book Review, volume 33, issue 3, Spring , pp. Book review: The Mukhtasar al‐Quduri: A Manual of Islamic Law According to the. Mukhtaṣar al-Qudūrī (Mukhtasar al-Quduri) - Download as PDF File .pdf) or read online. The author of Mukhtaṣar al-Qudūrī, the Ḥanafī Jurist, Shaykh.

Mukhtasar al-Quduri (Hanafi Fiqh)

While one does not haveto use obscene words or even highly emotional expressions to convey hissentiments, the core of the letter should present the inconsistency in the USstand, rather than applauding the US for being the true and fair caretaker of thisworld. One might raise the issue that Prophets Musaa and Haroon were requested tospeak nicely quawlan layyinan to Fir'awn despite his tyranny. Where in the Qur'an do we findMoussa begging a'aouzou billah Fir'awn to let the Children of Israel leave withhim?

I am a messenger from the Lord of the Worlds. One forwhom it is right to say nothing but truth about Allah. Dear Fir'awn, you arethe establisher of justice in this world, don't stand in the way of freedom, etc.. Another justification to writing letters is to raise conflicts within the US system.

As I said before, while the kuffar as a nation will never be real protectors of themuslims, it is still possible that an individual here and there comes to support theislamic cause because he hates oppression. Writing letters to the congress andthe White house to exploit such people is totally acceptable, provided, again, thatno lies are involved.

For instance, instead of saying: Mr. The evidence to that is the story of the believer from the people of Fir'awn whohad tried to help prophet Mussa through exploiting any good person who could bein the Majlis of Fir'awn by pointing out to the unfairness and injustice involved inkilling Prophet Mussa. Even though there aremuslim nations in the UN, the real decision making is in the hands of the non-muslims. But it is obsolete to ask them to intervene to protect us.

It isobsolete because of the following:- We are giving the Kuffar a power in our land. Allah has informed us thatwhenever they get power over you they don't respect treaties with you.

You might also like: BEYOND THE DEEPWOODS EPUB

This lastpoint is the most fundamental. When referring to Seerah life of the prophet we find two events that apparentlyapprove seeking help from the Kuffar as a nation.

These events are :1 Hilful-Fadul, 2 Migration to NajasheeOn the other hand, there are two events that apparently approve seeking a favorfrom the Kuffar as individuals : These events are: 1 Principle of Jiwar, 2 borrowing arms from some kuffar. Finally, there are several events that apparently approve Hiring a Kafir duringthe struggle between the muslims and the non-muslims. Some examples are: 1 hiring the kafir Bishr bin sufyan from the tribe of Khuza'ah as a spy on the peopleof Quraysh.

On the other hand, some scholars like Imam Malik restricted the use of Kuffar inthe Muslim army to non-military jobs, such as janitors and the like. One evidence of the above is reported by Ahmad and the six save Bukharee thatwhen the Prophet went to the battle of Badr, a strong mushrik warrior followedhim.

How can people justify using the Kuffar ascommanders on the muslims?

WhileImam Shafei's Ijtihad was that it is up to the Imam to accept the help of a Kafiror not, and in the above case, the Prophet chose not to, hoping that this mushrikwill embrace Islam. Indeed, this is what happened. Another evidence for ImamShafei is that Quazmaan, who was a mushrik, fought with muslims in Battle of Uhud. In case a kafir fights with muslims, he does not get the same share ofGhaneemah war spoils as a muslim would. Instead, he gets Radkh bonus before distribution of Ghaneemah in such a way that his share would be strictlyless than a typical muslim share.

The evidence for that is that the Prophet borrowed arms fromSafwan bin Umayyah in the battle of Hunayn. Even though Safwan was anindividual, he was the leader of a tribe. Furthermore, there is a clear differencebetween having the kuffar people fighting with us, and the kuffar arms andammunition fighting with us. In the second case, there is no possibility that theAK, for example, will refuse to shoot the enemy and start instead shooting themuslims.

The evidence for that is trivial. Concerning the principle of Jiwar, i. This principlewas widely known among the arabs. If one wanted to pass in the land of hisenemy and feared on himself, he could seek the protection of a strong leader ofthat land. In that case, no one will touch him. Prophet Muhammad was reportedto have once asked the Jiwar of Mut'aam bin Adiyy. People refer to this as ajustification for begging US for help. As we have commented before, the verses of Surah Ma'idah are the finaljudgment in any issue pertaining to muslim-kafir relations.

The Prophet asked forJiwar after he had returned from Ta'if, i. Hence, surah Ma'idah takes precedence. Nevertheless, byexamining the story closely, we find lots of overlooked details: The Prophet madelots of attempts for Da'wah in Makkah. He didn't get any considerable publicresponse.

He decided to go Ta'if. There, people met him with stones and thorns. He was forced to go back to Makkah. However, by that time, the people ofMakkah decided to prevent him from entering Makkah! He was stuck. He wantedto deliver the message of Islam and there was no way to do it except by goingback to Makkah. He talked first to Akhnas bin Shurayk.

Akhnasrefused to sponsor the spread of Islam. He then talked to Suheil bin Amr whoalso refused to take the risk. So, the Jiwar of Mut'aam was really aprotection for Da'wah by a Mushrik who liked the prophet and decided to helphim. The same explanation applies to the protection provided by the Kafir AbuTalib, the uncle of the prophet. He liked the prophet and knew he was right anddecided to protect his Da'wah for that purpose.

There remains the issues of Hilful-Faduul and the Hijrah to Najashee. Beforeproceeding, however, I would like to comment on an ayah that a brother oncementioned to me in the context of begging the Kuffar for help.

Masail Al Quduri Pdf 11

I hope that itis clear that Prophet Yusuf was not begging at all. If he was ready to beg for thesake of leaving the jail, he would not have simply interpreted the king's dreamwithout asking for anything in return.

He was simply telling the prisoner that hewas detained unjustly, and requested him to mention that to his master. His maininterest was to spread Da'wah, as can be seen from his discussions with theprisoners. Clearly, there are more chances to spread Da'wah outside the jail thaninside it!!

Finally, there is no clear cut evidence that the master was a kafir. He inquiredabout is and was told that it is a battalion of jews who were willing to help themuslims in their battle. Imam Sarakhsee said and its interpretation is that they were forming anindependent battalion and were not fighting under the flag of muslims. For us i. If, however, theywanted to fight independently then we don't accept their help. On the other hand, people constantly refer to Hilful-Faduul and the story ofNajashee as a justification for seeking the help of Kuffar.

What is the story of Hilful-Faduul? A man from Zubayd tribe once came toMakkah for trade. Al'aas bin wa'el, a famous Quraysh leader bought everythingthe Zubaydee man had but refused to pay him any money! The Zubaydee manwent to several leaders of Makkah but they refused to listen to him. He went tothe top of a mountain close to Makkah mountain Abu Kubays and started yellingand complaining. The leaders of Quraysh gathered and decided in Thul-Qu'dah to unite and be one hand with the oppressed.

The treaty they signed was calledHilful-Fadul in the memory of 3 good people each of which was named Fadl. Theprophet was very happy when he attended that meeting and commented laterafter prophethood that if he were called for a similar meeting in Islam he wouldanswer the call. What can be concluded from this event? Compare between this event and the history of the United Nations. No one cares about the massacres of Kashmir, tajikstan, etc. France wasgiven Morocco as a prize to forget about egypt.

Italy has conquered Libya andcaused its people various types of torture. Spain still controls Ceuta and Melillaand some other Moroccan islands till now. When Imam hassan Banna wasnominated for the egyptian parliament, a coup d'etat was organized by theamericans to allow Jamal al-abd alkhaser to become the president of egypt andsmash the Ikhwan.

When Sudan started expressing its attempt to apply Shari'ah,Sadik AlMahdee prime minister received a call from US that americans areready to support the economy of Sudan with wheat etc. Pakistan is now considered aterrorist country because it is a muslim country developing nuclear arms for selfdefense, while at the same time India is being blessed for its nuclear programs.

When Iraq showed the possibility of producing some arms that can be a goodresource for the muslims later in the future, there was a near Ijmaa' regardingcrushing the resources of Iraq and Saddam Hussein was kept as a leader.

Beforethat Iraq was helped intensively in his battle with Iran, only to make sure that noone claiming islam should ever survive. It is such as turn tothem in these circumstances , that do wrong. After all of the above, how can we dare making a comparison between UN andHilful-Faduul, wa la hawla wa la kuwwata illa billah. Muslims were oppressed in Makkah. They were not able to perform their daily practices. They were told by theprophet that Najashee - being a JUST ruler - would not prevent them from livingtheir Islam freely.

They only migrated to another land. They didn't evengo to visit Najashee or meet him with white costumes. They only settled in thenew area which was less dangerous for them. It was only when two people fromQuraysh Amr bin 'Aas and Abdullah bin Abee Rabi'ah went to Najashee to askhim for the muslims that some sahabah representatives Jaafar bin Abee talib etal had to go to him to defend their case.

After doing so, Najashee confessed thatthe messages of Muhammad and Jesus came from the same source. Indeed, theprophet declared publicly that Najashee has converted to Islam and prayed onhim when he died. Because amongst them these are men devoted to learning. And men who haverenounced the world, and they are not arrogant. Compare that case with the americans's:a- Ultimate in oppression by vito-ing every attempt to return the Palestiniansback, I would leave it to a black muslim brother to cite the various kinds ofoppression they have faced in this country , etc.

The jewsare not terrorists, but Hamas followers who are trying to get back their rights areterrorists. Egypt is no exception. When no-mubarak asked for somegood muslims to be punished, they were delivered to him via express. They are all dying forthe sake of this world, and have displayed the most disgustful forms ofarrogance. After that comparison, is it fair to say: the Najashee and his company were amirror image to the american system we have nowadays?!?!

The hunting of a Zoroastrian, apostate or idolater may not be eaten. It is permissible to hunt those animals whose meat may be eaten, and also those which may not be eaten.

If one slaughters that whose meat may not be eaten, its flesh and skin become pure, except for the human and the pig, for slaughter does not have any effect on them [for the purpose of useability]1. It is permissible to hunt with a trained dog, panther, falcon, or any other trained predatory animal or bird. The training of a dog is : that it refrain from eating three times. The training of a falcon is : that it return when you call it.

So, if one sends his trained dog, or falcon, or hawk, and mentions the name of Allah, the Exalted upon it at the time of sending, and then [the animal] seizes the prey and wounds it such that it dies, it is permissible to eat it. If the dog eats from it, it may not be eaten, but if the falcon eats from it, it can be eaten.

If the dog strangles [the prey] and does not wound it, it may not be eaten. If the sender reaches the prey alive, it is obligatory upon him to slaughter it, and so if he refrains from slaughtering it until it died, then it may not be eaten. If a man shoots an arrow at prey, and mentions the name of Allah at the time of shooting, he may eat what he strikes provided the arrow wounded it so that it died [as a result].

But, if he reaches it alive, he [must] slaughter it, and so if he refrains from slaughtering it until it died, then it may not be eaten. If the arrow strikes, and the animal struggles [and moves] so that it disappears from him, but he continues to pursue it until he overcomes it dead, it may be eaten. But, if he sat back from pursuing it, and then came upon it dead, it may not be eaten.

If he strikes quarry which then falls into the water and dies, it may not be eaten. Similarly, if it falls on an inclined surface or mountain, and then tumbles down to the ground, it may not be eaten, but if it falls to the ground initially, it may be eaten. If someone shoots a quarry, and strikes it without incapacitating it nor preventing it from escaping, and then someone else shoots it and kills it, it is his and may be eaten. But, if the first one incapacitates it and then the second one kills it, it may not be eaten, and the latter must reimburse the former for its price less its wound 2.

That which a featherless arrow strikes with its breadth may not be eaten, but if it wounds [the quarry] it may be eaten. That which is struck by a pebble may not be eaten if it dies from that. If one shoots at quarry and severs a piece from it, [the animal] may be eaten, but the piece may not be eaten. But, if he cuts it in thirds, and the major portion is adjacent to the rump, then it may [all] be eaten.

If the major portion is adjacent ot the head, the larger portion may be eaten, but the lesser one may not. The slaughter of a Muslim or a Kitabi is permissible [to eat]. The slaughter of a Zoroastrian, apostate, idolator or [Muslim] in ihram may notbe eaten. If the slaughterer omitted the pronouncement of the name [of Allah] deliberately, then the slaughter is carrion which may not be eaten. But, if he left it out forgetfully, it may be eaten. The vessels which must be severed in slaughtering are four : the trachea, the oesophagus and the two jugular veins.

So, if he cut [all] these, eating [from the animal] is permissible. If he cut most of them, then similarly [it is valid] according to Abu Hanifah. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said : it is essential to cut the trachea, the oesophagus and one of the two jugular veins. If one reaches spinal cord with the knife, or severs the head, that is repugnant for him [to do], but the slaughter may be eaten. If one slaughters a ewe from the back of its head, then if it remains alive until he severs the [required] vessels it is valid but repugnant.

But, if it dies before the cutting of the vessels it may not be eaten. It is permissible to slaughter with sharp reed or stone, or anything which causes the blood to flow out, except for an intact tooth or an intact nail. It is recommended that the slaughterer sharpen his blade.

An animal with severed ears or [severed] tail does not suffice, nor one from which the major part of the ear has gone. But, if the major portion of the ear or tail remains, it is permissible. It is permissible to immolate hornless, castrated, mangy or insane animal.

Immolation is [only] from amongst camels, cows and sheep [or goats]. If one pierces a camel, or slaughters a cow or sheep, and then finds in its belly a dead fetus, it may not be eaten, whether its features are discernible or not. Domesticated game must be slaughtered, and wild livestock may be wounded [as in hunting]. The recommended [technique] for camels is piercing, but if one slaughters them, it is valid but disliked. The recommended [technique] for cows and sheep is slaughtering, but if one pierces them, it is valid but disliked.

It is not permissible to eat any canine-toothed beast of prey, nor any taloned [predatory] bird. There is no objection to [eating] the agrarian crow, but the speckled one which eats corpses may not be eaten.

It is repugnant to eat the hyena. It is not permissible to eat the flesh of the domesticated donkey or mule. The meat of the horse is repugnant according to Abu Hanifah. There is no objection to eating the rabbit. Nothing may be eaten of the animals of the water except fish.

It is repugnant to eat floating [fish which died on their own]. There is no harm in eating the jirrith and eel 8. What can be concluded from this event? Compare between this event and the history of the United Nations. No one cares about the massacres of Kashmir, tajikstan, etc. France wasgiven Morocco as a prize to forget about egypt. Italy has conquered Libya andcaused its people various types of torture.

Spain still controls Ceuta and Melillaand some other Moroccan islands till now. When Imam hassan Banna wasnominated for the egyptian parliament, a coup d'etat was organized by theamericans to allow Jamal al-abd alkhaser to become the president of egypt andsmash the Ikhwan.

When Sudan started expressing its attempt to apply Shari'ah,Sadik AlMahdee prime minister received a call from US that americans areready to support the economy of Sudan with wheat etc. Pakistan is now considered aterrorist country because it is a muslim country developing nuclear arms for selfdefense, while at the same time India is being blessed for its nuclear programs. When Iraq showed the possibility of producing some arms that can be a goodresource for the muslims later in the future, there was a near Ijmaa' regardingcrushing the resources of Iraq and Saddam Hussein was kept as a leader.

Beforethat Iraq was helped intensively in his battle with Iran, only to make sure that noone claiming islam should ever survive.

For Allahloveth those who are just. It is such as turn tothem in these circumstances , that do wrong. After all of the above, how can we dare making a comparison between UN andHilful-Faduul, wa la hawla wa la kuwwata illa billah. Muslims were oppressed in Makkah. They were not able to perform their daily practices. They were told by theprophet that Najashee - being a JUST ruler - would not prevent them from livingtheir Islam freely.

Up to 80 people migrated including Othman ibn Affan and hiswife Ruqayyah: They only migrated to another land.

They didn't evengo to visit Najashee or meet him with white costumes. They only settled in thenew area which was less dangerous for them. It was only when two people fromQuraysh Amr bin 'Aas and Abdullah bin Abee Rabi'ah went to Najashee to askhim for the muslims that some sahabah representatives Jaafar bin Abee talib etal had to go to him to defend their case.

After doing so, Najashee confessed thatthe messages of Muhammad and Jesus came from the same source. Indeed, theprophet declared publicly that Najashee has converted to Islam and prayed onhim when he died.

More than that, the Qur'an describes the reaction of thenajashee companions the bishops as follows: Because amongst them these are men devoted to learning. And men who haverenounced the world, and they are not arrogant. And when they listen to the revelation received by the Messenger, thou wilt seetheir eyes overflowing with tears, for they recognise the truth: They pray: Compare that case with the americans's: The jewsare not terrorists, but Hamas followers who are trying to get back their rights areterrorists.

Mukhtasar Al-Quduri

Egypt is no exception. When no-mubarak asked for somegood muslims to be punished, they were delivered to him via express. They are all dying forthe sake of this world, and have displayed the most disgustful forms ofarrogance.

After that comparison, is it fair to say: The hunting of a Zoroastrian, apostate or idolater may not be eaten. It is permissible to hunt those animals whose meat may be eaten, and also those which may not be eaten.

If one slaughters that whose meat may not be eaten, its flesh and skin become pure, except for the human and the pig, for slaughter does not have any effect on them [for the purpose of useability]1. It is permissible to hunt with a trained dog, panther, falcon, or any other trained predatory animal or bird.

The training of a dog is: The training of a falcon is: So, if one sends his trained dog, or falcon, or hawk, and mentions the name of Allah, the Exalted upon it at the time of sending, and then [the animal] seizes the prey and wounds it such that it dies, it is permissible to eat it.

If the dog eats from it, it may not be eaten, but if the falcon eats from it, it can be eaten. If the dog strangles [the prey] and does not wound it, it may not be eaten. If the sender reaches the prey alive, it is obligatory upon him to slaughter it, and so if he refrains from slaughtering it until it died, then it may not be eaten.

If a man shoots an arrow at prey, and mentions the name of Allah at the time of shooting, he may eat what he strikes provided the arrow wounded it so that it died [as a result].

But, if he reaches it alive, he [must] slaughter it, and so if he refrains from slaughtering it until it died, then it may not be eaten. If the arrow strikes, and the animal struggles [and moves] so that it disappears from him, but he continues to pursue it until he overcomes it dead, it may be eaten. But, if he sat back from pursuing it, and then came upon it dead, it may not be eaten.

If he strikes quarry which then falls into the water and dies, it may not be eaten. Similarly, if it falls on an inclined surface or mountain, and then tumbles down to the ground, it may not be eaten, but if it falls to the ground initially, it may be eaten. If someone shoots a quarry, and strikes it without incapacitating it nor preventing it from escaping, and then someone else shoots it and kills it, it is his and may be eaten. But, if the first one incapacitates it and then the second one kills it, it may not be eaten, and the latter must reimburse the former for its price less its wound 2.

That which a featherless arrow strikes with its breadth may not be eaten, but if it wounds [the quarry] it may be eaten. That which is struck by a pebble may not be eaten if. If one shoots at quarry and severs a piece from it, [the animal] may be eaten, but the piece may not be eaten. But, if he cuts it in thirds, and the major portion is adjacent to the rump, then it may [all] be eaten. If the major portion is adjacent ot the head, the larger portion may be eaten, but the lesser one may not.

The slaughter of a Muslim or a Kitabi is permissible [to eat]. The slaughter of a Zoroastrian, apostate, idolator or [Muslim] in ihram may notbe eaten. If the slaughterer omitted the pronouncement of the name [of Allah] deliberately, then the slaughter is carrion which may not be eaten. But, if he left it out forgetfully, it may be eaten.

The vessels which must be severed in slaughtering are four: So, if he cut [all] these, eating [from the animal] is permissible. If he cut most of them, then similarly [it is valid] according to Abu Hanifah.

Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said: If one reaches spinal cord with the knife, or severs the head, that is repugnant for him [to do], but the slaughter may be eaten. If one slaughters a ewe from the back of its head, then if it remains alive until he severs the [required] vessels it is valid but repugnant.

But, if it dies before the cutting of the vessels it may not be eaten. It is permissible to slaughter with sharp reed or stone, or anything which causes the blood to flow out, except for an intact tooth or an intact nail.

It is recommended that the slaughterer sharpen his blade. An animal with severed ears or [severed] tail does not suffice, nor one from which the major part of the ear has gone. But, if the major portion of the ear or tail remains, it is permissible.

It is permissible to immolate hornless, castrated, mangy or insane animal. Immolation is [only] from amongst camels, cows and sheep [or goats].

If one pierces a camel, or slaughters a cow or sheep, and then finds in its belly a. Domesticated game must be slaughtered, and wild livestock may be wounded [as in hunting]. The recommended [technique] for camels is piercing, but if one slaughters them, it is valid but disliked.

The recommended [technique] for cows and sheep is slaughtering, but if one pierces them, it is valid but disliked. It is not permissible to eat any canine-toothed beast of prey, nor any taloned [predatory] bird. There is no objection to [eating] the agrarian crow, but the speckled one which eats corpses may not be eaten. It is repugnant to eat the hyena.

It is not permissible to eat the flesh of the domesticated donkey or mule. The meat of the horse is repugnant according to Abu Hanifah. There is no objection to eating the rabbit. Nothing may be eaten of the animals of the water except fish. It is repugnant to eat floating [fish which died on their own]. There is no harm in eating the jirrith and eel 8. It is permissible to eat locusts, and there is no slaughter [needed] for them.

The [unanimously] prohibited beverages are four: Wine, which is the juice of grapes when it ferments, becomes intoxicating and emits froth. Fermented juice of dates and raisins, if each of them is cooked [with] the slightest cooking, is permissible, even if it is intoxicating, provided one drinks from it [such an amount] that one is reasonably sure that it will not intoxicate him, [and provided it is not drunk] for fun or amusement. The fermented juice of honey, fig, wheat, barley and corn is permissible even if it has not been cooked.

Grape-juice, if it is cooked until two-thirds of it disappears and one third remains, is permissible even if it is intoxicating. Muhammad said: There is no objection to preparing juice in gourds, earthenware, pitch-coated vessels, or hollowed wooden vessels. When wine turns to vinegar, it becomes permissible, whether it turned to vinegar on its own, or because of something cast into it.

It is not repugnant to make it into vinegar. Prohibition and Permissibility According to the Qur'an and Sunnah, as extracted and inferred by scholars of the Hanafi school. Abu Yusuf andMuhammad said: It is repugnant to recline on it. There is no harm in decorating the mushaf, engraving mosques and decorating them [on the outside] with gold-water. It is not permissible to eat, drink, use oil or perfume from vessels of gold or silver, for men and women.

It is permissible to drink from a silver-decorated vessel according to Abu Hanifah, and [similarly] to ride on a silver-decorated saddle and to sit on a silver-decorated bed. There is no harm in using vessels of glass, crystal or cornelian. It is not permissible for a man to look at a stranger-woman, except at her face and hands. But, if he did not consider himself safe from lust, he may not look at her face except out of need. It is permissible for the doctor to look at the place of affliction on her.

The [regulation] of a eunuch regarding looking at a stranger-woman is like [the regulation for] a non- eunuch. A slave may not look at his mistress, except at that [part] of her which it is permissible for a stranger-man to look at.

A man may look at his mahram female relatives' face, head, chest, shins and arms, but he may not look at their back or belly. There is no harm in touching what it is permissible to look at [of the mahrams]. A man may look at that [much] the slave-girl of someone else as he may look at of his mahrams. There is no harm in him touching that if he intends to download, even if he fears he may experience lust. A man may look at his slave-girl who is lawful to him, and at his wife, [entirely, even] upto her genitals.

One may practise coitus interruptus with his slave-girl without her permission, but he may not practise it with his wife except with her permission. A woman may look at that [much] of another woman that a man may look at of another man. A man may look at all of the body of another man except for what is between his navel to his knee.

It is permissible for a woman to look at that [part] of a man which another man may look at. It is disliked to employ the service of eunuchs. There is no harm in castrating cattle, nor in mating a donkey with a horse. It is permissible to accept, in [the matter of] a gift or permission, the word of a child or slave. The word of a transgressor is accepted in transactions. Only the word of a reliable person is accepted in religious matters. Hoarding is repugnant in staple-foods of humans and cattle, if that is in a land in which hoarding harms the inhabitants.

One who hoards the produce of his [own] estate, or what he has imported from another land, is not [termed] a hoarder. It is not appropriate for the authority to regulate prices for people.

It is repugnant to sell weapons in times of sedition.

There is no [judicial] objection to selling juice to someone whom it is known will produce wine from it. On the Prohibition of PorkSomeone enquired about the prohibition of pork, saying: As far as health reasons are concerned, there are a number of things that arenot entirely good for you such as fatty food, even beef in large quantities , but theyhave not been declared haram. So what is it about the pig thatmakes it so revolting, and has been specifically mentioned in the Quran as the forbiddenanimal?

Hence, the correctview is that smoking is indeed prohibited, due to its scientifically proven harmful effects. As for the harmful effects of beef, and the like, in large quantities, we may commentthat: Hence, there is not a direct link between beef and ill-health; rather it is acombination of numerous factors. Now, as for pork's prohibition: The Qur'an clearly prohibits pork, and informs us of itsuncleanness.

As believers, we believe and affirm, with conviction and submission, thatthe pig is unclean. It is possible that this includes sanitary uncleanness it is said thatpigs eat their own excrement, for example , and the presence of microbes, etc in pork,but this does not rule a spiritual uncleanness, such that even if one hypotheticallypostulates a pork free of all microbes, that would not justify making it permissible.

Allah's knowledge is greater and deeper than ours, and perfect and all-embracing,whereas science is incomplete and constantly changing -- new discoveries are made, oldtheories are abandoned. Hence, even if we cannot discover the wisdom behind aparticular divine injunction, this does not exempt us from following it.

After writing the above paragraph, I came to learn that pigs contain viruses 'built into'their genes, and such viruses would not disappear merely through clean breedingconditions and the like. Keeping animals isolated from infection may not be enough. Some viruses scientists are concerned about aren't caught; they're inherited. They're just part of being a pig, for example. That's because, eons ago, these viruses infected the ancestors of modern pigs and planted their DNA in sperm and egg cells.

As a result, the virus genes mingled with the pig genes and are now passed on through the generations. Reuter quotedJonathan P. It may be noted, that the Bible too, condemns swine-flesh. You must not eat their meat or touch their carcasses; they are unclean for you. You are not to eat their meat or touch their carcasses. Paul claims to 'know and be persuaded': For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.

Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

In any case, even if, for the sake of argument, one were to postulate thatJesus peace be upon him had allowed pork which, incidentally, is a shaky postulation, given the medicalevidence of its harmfulness , it should be realized that the Law of Jesus, like the Law of Moses, is nowabrogated.

And, when Jesus, son of Mary, returns to this world, he will observe the Law of Muhammad peaceand blessings upon him , and will therefore affirm the prohibition of pork. Furthermore, he will slay pigs, amonghis other activities, as testified to by the authentic hadith literature.

All praise is dueto Allah, the Lord of the Universe. Peace and blessings be upon TheFinal Prophet and Leader of the God-fearing, Muhammad, and uponhis virtuous Household, his righteous Caliphs and noblecompanions, his heirs from among the practising scholars, and uponall who follow them in goodness upto the Day of Judgement. Some clarification is in order here. It is not strictly true that a wajibis based on a hadith whose authenticity is doubtful.

In fact, a weakhadith cannot, generally, be used in legislation of rulings aHkaam. Nevertheless, for purposes of action, a wajibis treated like a fard, in that it should not be deliberately discarded,and it must be made up if it was missed for some reason. I will illustrate the meaning of the Hanafi term wajib by reference tothe 2 examples cited above.

WitrThere is no dearth of authentic ahadith about the Witr prayer, the. There is evidence indicating that the Witrprayer is obligatory, e. However, Imam Abu Hanifah refrainedfrom pronouncing witr as fard, due to the existence of counter-evidence, e. Whenthe Prophet told him about the 5 daily prayers, he asked, 'is thereanything in addition to this? Thus, witr is wajib according toImam Abu Hanifah. Incidentally, witr is also considered one of the most important non-fard prayers by the other schools, and it can be made up later if itwas missed for some reason.

It has been reported that ImamAhmad ibn Hanbal said that if a person who used to be regular inperforming witr gives it up, he loses his respectability andcredibility, so that his testimony will not be accepted in an Islamiccourt.

The Hanafi view is that iswajib rather than fard, and their reasoning is as follows: Theapplicability of this verse to salah is confirmed by the hadith,reported by Bukhari and others, of the man who was performing hissalah badly, and was told repeatedly by the Prophet to repeat it.

Now, one of the principles of the Hanafi. However, in this case, the hadithabout reciting the fatihah have been claimed to be at the level ofmutawatir. The Hanafi response is that even if the ahadith are mutawatir, theyare still not absolutely definitive and conclusive, because they donot necessarily mean that the Fatihah is Fard. However, inthis instance, such intepretation is made in the light of conflict withanother mutawatir evidence, namely the verse of the Qur'analready cited.

For reference, we may mention that the wajib constituents of thesalah are at least 12 in number: This is a point often neglected by people. Sitting calmly between the 2 sajdah prostrations , as opposed to rushing the sitting in a manner reminiscent of a pecking rooster.

The final sitting is fard. To perform the constituents of the prayer in their correct sequence. To perform all the constituents of the Salah with tranquility and calmness, and not to rush. To recite the tashahhud in the final sitting 9. To end the prayer with at least one verbal Tasleem. To perform the additional takbeers in the Prayers of the 2 Eids. This is for the imam. To perform sujood-as-sawh Prostrations of Forgetfulness if any of the wajibs other than 7 are omitted unintentionally.

Some have included among the wajibs:Bookwright In the name of Allah, the All-Merciful, the Most Merciful and may Allah bless His slave and messenger Muhammad and his family and companions and grant perfect peace. They only help each other againstyou. One who hoards the produce of his [own] estate, or what he has imported from another land, is not [termed] a hoarder. HoustonCalling says add the following too: A woman may look at that [much] of another woman that a man may look at of another man.

Prophet Muhammad was reportedto have once asked the Jiwar of Mut'aam bin Adiyy. A man may look at his mahram female relatives' face, head, chest, shins and arms, but he may not look at their back or belly. I hope that itis clear that Prophet Yusuf was not begging at all.

RUTHE from Syracuse
I do love exploring ePub and PDF books colorfully . Look through my other posts. I have only one hobby: acting.
>