I do not like to say anything is a sin unless it is explicitly stated in the Quran or hadith that it is a sin. But self-pity ultimately means that we feel God has wronged us, since God is in charge of the universe and nothing that happens to us happens without His knowledge and will. So thinking of it this way it does seem sinful, since we would be questioning God’s wisdom, mercy and power. The true Islamic attitude is the opposite of self-pity; it is to say to God, “Whatever you decree for me, it will never decrease my love for You.”
Hello brother, I fear the afterlife, the time when I'll be laying in my grave, and it scares me whenever I think of it, especially at night. But when the Sun is up I start to forget about it. and another thing is, I am afraid it is the fear that leads me to be a good muslim. But I want it to be out of love to the God rather than out of fear. I want to live Islam in a harmony and to fix my trust in God's Mercy. Yet I've sinned, and still find hard to leave some bad habits. What should I do?
Hello,
There is nothing wrong with worshiping God out of fear or desire. The Quran says:
And do not corrupt on earth after its reformation, and pray to Him out of fear and desire. God’s mercy is close to the doers of good. (The Quran, verse 7:56)
Those who think that God should only be served out of love are naively choosing one of the God’s attributes as if it is superior to His other attributes. God wants to be worshiped for all of His attributes. When you ask Him to give you something because you desire it, you are pleasing His attributes of power and generosity. When you worship Him out of fear, you are pleasing His attributes of power and majesty. God never tells us that some of His attributes are superior to others. We must take all of His attributes into consideration when we interact with Him.
A person who only relies on God’s attributes of love and forgiveness are in reality trying to set up a false god; they are creating their own god by picking and choosing some of His attributes over others. To truly know God, the real God, is to fear Him, to desire His generosity and mercy, to fear His retribution, and to want to be loved by Him.
Being a good Muslim is a daily struggle. No matter how faithful and spiritual you felt the day before, the next day you have to start the struggle from scratch. You will continue sinning as long as you live. The point is to always go back to God, ask Him for His forgiveness and guidance, and work to better yourself.
As for fearing the afterlife, there is nothing wrong with this unless it prevents you from enjoying a good and productive life. We are supposed to fear it. Any Muslim who does not fear it, who thinks they are now in such a good place spiritually that they will be safe if they die, has got it wrong and has become proud and has lost their true understanding of God. We are never safe as long as we live, and this feeling should always make us seek safety in God. This world is a testing hall. The only true safety we achieve is when we get the results in the afterlife and we are told that we passed the test.
Assalamualaykum brother. In this cashless era, many start-ups offer promotions like cash back for its customer. Is this considered halal? I personally use this cash back quite often, but I don’t know what Islam says about this kind of thing. Jazakallah khairan for your answer
Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,
There is no issue with cash-backs since they are (at least they are supposed to be) part of the profits that the company gives back to the customer in order to increase transactions.
assalamu aleykom wa rahmatullah wa barakatuhu, i'm still learning so much about my religion and i wish to know, if it is somewhat islamic as in if it's right thing to do as a muslim, as a seeker of Allah's mercy, to complain or to open up about our sorrows to our friends, i don't meant family or a therapist but strictly friends. would it be better to stop doing so and do so with Allah during salat? barakAllahu fik for your answer
Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah wa barakatuh,
I don’t see any issue with sharing your problems and sorrows with a friend as long as you do not do it in a self-pitying way as if God has wronged you. Self-pity is due to a lack of spiritual understanding (and it is also never attractive and makes people dislike us). A great thing about reading the Quran daily is that it makes self-pity impossible, at least for me.
Salam! Do you have advice on how to not pity oneself. I didn’t realize how much I actually do this and how it goes on to affect the way I interpret my daily life and past.
Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,
I believe the cure is to have a very firm belief in the fact that God is in charge of the universe, that nothing happens to us without His allowing it, and that He is just, kind and merciful and always gives us what we need for our growth and maturation. However merely recognizing these things intellectually is not enough. One also needs to keep the recognition alive in the heart, otherwise self-pity (and all kinds of other negative character traits) always creep back regardless of how wise and saintly we are at the moment. We need to do constant, daily work to maintain our balance, and the best way to do that is to read the Quran daily.
What are your thoughts on post-modernism and how do you handle living in its time?
Post-modernism is just a rehashing of an idea that has been recycled over and over again. The idea is this: “Humans are helpless animals controlled by X.” In Marxism X is economic circumstances, in Freud it is sexuality, in the Frankfurt school it is social prejudice, in Betty Friedan’s feminism it is gender conflict, in post-modernism (Derrida and his followers) it is “dominant discourses”, in Wallerstein and A. G. Frank it is “world-systems”, in Jared Diamond and his followers it is environmental circumstances.
Once you see the pattern you will recognize what utter boring, unscientific and elitist rubbish all of these are. All of the thinkers of the above schools think they are God’s chosen people sent to take the ordinary, unwashed animals (us) out of the darkness and into the light. They all suffer from the delusion that they have been granted truths that no one (except those who agree with them) have access to. We are all supposedly controlled by factors that we are blind to, but somehow, magically, they are not blind like us.
If a person believes in God and follows Islam (or traditional Christianity) then they are automatically protected from these forms of mental illness.
Assuming this is a serious question, the problem of many of the religious when dealing with science is that they think there is an opposition between God and nature, so that if something is given a natural explanation, they think this takes away God’s involvement in it. So they have to talk about “guided evolution” because they cannot imagine how God could cause evolution to happen without guiding it day by day. Or they think that finding scientific explanations for rain or hurricanes means we can no longer attribute these phenomena to God’s agency.
As I explain in the following essay, we do not need guided evolution to attribute to God the creation of living things, and finding scientific explanations for phenomena does not take away God’s involvement in them because the whole universe is like a simulation controlled by God:
Assalamualaykum. How to slow down in this fast pace life? I mean, I rush with almost everything. I lost my consciousness and awareness about myself, what I’m doing, my surroundings, even with my prayer and my relation to Allah. I’ve realized time just passed by without barokah in it. I’m afraid I’ll die with such conditions 😢 naudzubillahimindzalik. Where should I start to fix this? Any advice? Jazakallah khairan.
Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,
I believe the best way to fix that is to dedicate a certain amount of time every day to reading the Quran (which is something I talk about often). The Quran helps you move outside the ordinary current of time and look at things from the point of view of eternity. It helps you live in the present moment; it offers forgiveness for your past mistakes, accepts you as you are, and tells you that the future is entirely in God’s hands so there is no need to worry about it. Merely recognizing these facts intellectually is not enough. The great thing about the Quran is that it helps you feel these things deep in your heart. It doesn’t just give you the facts, it makes you feel their reality.
Aslam Alaikum, I wanted to ask you if it's allowed to do dikhr on behalf of someone who lacks faith (non-Muslim) and pray to Allah tala to give them the reward of dikhr? Will Allah tala give them the reward? I know it's a very stupid question but I care about this person and I want them to go to jannat and I want Allah tala to be happy with them and not angry on the day of judgment.
Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,
I have not seen anything on the validity of performing good deeds for the sake of non-believers. But it would be a much safer choice if you pray for their guidance and forgiveness. A good deed done for them is just one good deed, while if they are guided that would be a lifetime of good deeds for them.
Salamalaikum, according to several hadiths, is all poetry that is not Islamic in subject matter not permitted or disliked? Esp regarding this hadith: "It is better for the belly of any one of you to be stuffed with pus rather than to stuff (one's mind) with poetry"?
Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,
The hadith you mentioned speaks against dedicating too much time and effort to poetry as was the habit of some Arabs (spending many hours on it daily). But I haven’t seen any hadith that declares a general prohibition on poetry. Ali b. Abi Talib RA, Imam al-Shafi`i and many other scholars composed poetry, and their themes weren’t always religious. The Quran speaks against poets for their boasting and false exaggeration. But it approves of poets “who believe, perform good deeds, remember God often, and do not humbly submit to oppression.” (paraphrasing 26:227). This does not mean that all poetry should be religious. It means that the type of poetry that God approves of comes from a person who has such a character. The poetry can be about anything, but the character of the poet determines whether it is wholesome poetry or otherwise.
And note that the Quran above is talking about the production of poetry, not its consumption. A person can read any type of poetry as long as they have a good reason to do so. But once they find that a particular poem or poet affects them negatively then it is better if they avoid it.
Salam! Is it permissible to do dhikr and recite durood internally (like in your mind) while showering? Worried that since you are in a bathroom, it is not allowed. Thank you!
Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,
Even reciting the Quran aloud in a bath/shower (not toilet) is permitted by many important scholars (Imam Malik, al-Nawawi). Reciting the Quran or doing dhikr in your mind only is permitted by even more scholars, and some say it is permitted everywhere (even in the toilet) if it is silent (Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibrahim al-Nakha`i). If the bathroom has a bathtub/shower and toilet, then once the shower curtain is opened then it seems to me that that part of the bathroom can be considered a separate place and would have that same ruling as a bath/shower lacking a toilet.
El Salamou alaykoum Can you please explain what are el kabaîr and saghaîr? And how to make taouba ?
Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,
There are different opinions on what constitutes major sins. According to Ibn Taymiyyah they are sins that are mentioned in the Quran or hadith as deserving the anger or curse of God or as deserving punishment in this world or the afterlife. Among such sins are shirk (associating partners with God), murder, adultery, bearing false witness, disowning one’s parents, falsely accusing chaste women of adultery, and consuming the profits of usury (i.e. consuming interest income). Everything that is not a major sin is a minor sin.
As for repentance, it depends on the type of sin. If it involves the rights of others, then those rights have to be restored (for example a person who gave false testimony should confess it and try to undo all damage caused by it). Apart from that, asking God for forgiveness is all that is needed. My view is that if God inspires someone to ask for forgiveness, it is because He wants to forgive them.
I really want to draw a form of comic books, A.KA. "manga". The genre would be fantasy, and it would have a certain amount of violence. Is that ok in islam?
Creating comic books and manga is neither good nor bad in itself from a mainstream Islamic perspective. It is similar to writing novels. The question to ask yourself is whether your art makes the world a better or worse place. What is the effect of your art on your readers? I do not mean that your art should contain obvious religious or moral messages. But some types of art create a sense of hopelessness, purposelessness and despair, all of which are harmful things. Other types of art create elevate and enhance people’s experience of life, and such art can be considered good.
I have feelings for this guy but he’s married. I do not think he feels the same way as I do. He’s also a non Muslim. I can’t stop thinking about him. What would you suggest I do?
You should treat it like any other temptation. We are generally not able to control how we feel toward others, but we can control our behavior and conduct. The best help toward avoiding all sins is developing a close relationship with God and working daily to maintain this relationship. For more on this please see: Guides on Getting Closer to God
There are numerous hadiths that tell us the Prophet Muhammad PBUH stoned a number of married adulterers. The most important hadith might be one where the Jews of Medina bring a cause of married adultery before the Prophet PBUH. The Prophet PBUH wants to deal with the adulterers according to Jewish law (probably because no Quranic verse had been revealed regarding the issue). The Jews try to ward off the punishment by saying there is nothing in the Torah about stoning adulterers. But Abdullah b. Salam, a Jewish scholar who converted to Islam, forces them to tell the truth:
Malik related to me from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar said, "The Jews came to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and mentioned to him that a man and woman from among them had committed adultery. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, asked them, 'What do you find in the Torah about stoning?' They said, 'We make their wrong action known and flog them.' Abdullah ibn Salam said, 'You have lied! It has stoning for it, so bring the Torah.' They spread it out and one of them placed his hand over the ayat of stoning. Then he read what was before it and what was after it. Abdullah ibn Salam told him to lift his hand. He lifted his hand and there was the ayat of stoning. They said, 'He has spoken the truth, Muhammad. The ayat of stoning is in it.' So the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, gave the order and they were stoned.
Muwatta Book 41, Hadith 1. Also in al-Bukhari, Muslim and others.
The fact that the Prophet PBUH ordered the stoning of some adulterers is uncontroversial. But the most important thing we need to know is whether he ever ordered stoning after Surat al-Nur was revealed, the chapter of the Quran where the issue of adultery is dealt with in some detail. The Quran does not mention stoning of adulterers anywhere, and if we only had the Quran to follow, it would have been clear that adulterers are only to be punished with flogging rather than stoning.
The great 20th century scholar of Islamic law Muhammad Abu Zahra found stoning so repulsive that he considered it impossible that Prophet Muhammad PBUH, sent as a “mercy to mankind”, would instate such a barbaric punishment in his law. (See my essay about his view).
To clarify the matter, I decided to collect all hadiths that mention stoning happening after the Islamic law on the issue was revealed in Surat al-Nur. As it happens, the strongest hadith we have actually tells us that a Companion was unsure whether stoning ever took place after Surat al-Nur was revealed.
Hadith 1
Narrated Ash-Shaibani:
I asked Abdullah bin Abi Aufa about the Rajam (stoning somebody to death for committing illegal sexual intercourse). He replied, "The Prophet (ﷺ) carried out the penalty of Rajam," I asked, "Was that before or after the revelation of Surat-an-Nur?" He replied, "I do not know."
Sahih al-Bukhari 6840, also in Muslim and Mustakhraj Abi Uwana.
Below is a diagram of the chains of this hadith:
This hadith receives an authenticity score of 30.2%, which makes it authentic according to probabilistic hadith verification (which has much more stringent criteria compared to the criteria used by al-Bukhari and other scholars, see my essay about it).
Hadith 2
The following hadith is the strongest hadith we have that states that stoning was carried out after the revelation of Surat al-Nur. In it Umar b. al-Khattab (may God be pleased with him) defends stoning.
Narrated Ibn `Abbas:
Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way."Umar added, "Surely Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him."
Sahih al-Bukhari 6829, also in Muslim, Ibn Maja, al-Humaydi, Abu Uwana, Musnad Ahmad, Ibn Hibban, Musannaf of Abd al-Razzaq and al-Nasa'i.
Below is the hadith’s chain diagram:
This hadith receives an authenticity score of 27.79%, below the 30% needed for judging it authentic.
Hadith 3
The following is the second and last hadith we have that states stoning was carried out after Surat al-Nur:
Narrated Ash-Sha`bi:
From Ali when the latter stoned a lady to death on a Friday. Ali said, "I have stoned her according to the tradition of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)."
Sahih al-Bukhari 6812
Below is the hadith’s chain diagram:
This hadith’s fatal weakness is that al-Shaʿbī, according to the hadith scholars al-Ḥākim, Ibn al-Jawzī and Ibn Ḥazm, never heard anything from Ali, therefore there is at least one hidden transmitter before al-Shaʿbī. This makes the hadith receive an authenticity score of 11.08%, making it rather weak, since unknown transmitters are given half the authenticity score of known transmitters in the probabilistic method. But even if we assume the unknown transmitter is entirely trustworthy, the hadith’s score only increases to 22.16%, still below the needed 30%.
Putting Islamic law’s fate in the hands of two men
All of the chains of Hadith 2 above come to us through a single transmitter, Ubaydullah b. Abdullah (it has an alternative chain that is so weak as to be unworthy of consideration). As for Hadith 3, it too comes to us through a single, unknown transmitter.
What this means is that in order to decide whether Islamic law requires the stoning of married adulterers or not, we have to place our entire trust in two men, one of whom is unknown. The law of the Quran (which does not include stoning) has to be ignored because two men tell us, through relatively low-quality hadiths, that stoning took place after Surat al-Nur.
I believe we should require evidence that receives an authenticity score of at least 60% before we can consider anything controversial to be proven beyond doubt. Putting the fate of Islamic law in the hands of two men, and ignoring the Quran for their sake, seems extremely irresponsible to me.
Another piece of evidence in favor of stoning adulterers is Maliki law, which is not entirely derived from hadith, but also from the practice of the people of Medina at the time of Imam Malik (ʿamal ahl al-madīna, or ʿamal for short, which Shaykh Umar Faruq Adullah translates as “Medinan praxis”). But this can be explained as follows: Perhaps after Surat al-Nur was revealed, there were no more cases of adultery brought before the Prophet PBUH. And after he died, since people only remembered the cases where he had stoned adulterers, people assumed this was the right thing to do in such cases. The issue never received much analysis because of the extreme rarity of adultery cases. Islam requires four witnesses to the act, which makes it almost practically impossible to prove a case of adultery. People only remembered the fact that the Prophet PBUH stoned some adulterers, without worrying about whether these cases took place before or after Surat al-Nur. And since there were no cases of adultery judged according to Surat al-Nur in the present or the past, and since all cases of adultery before had been judged according to Jewish law, it was Jewish law that was accepted as the tradition of the Prophet PBUH.
Since stoning is a matter of life and death, and since the Quran’s various verses on the punishment of adulterers contradicts it (slave-women get “half” the punishment of free women in the Quran. How can stoning to death be halved?), I believe we are well-justified in considering stoning an unproven punishment, and well-justified in only carrying out the Quranic punishment.
It may be prudent to add that I believe Islamic law should only be applied when people freely choose to live under it. The question of forcing Sharia law on people should never arise among civilized Muslims.
The issue of whether making pictures or paintings of living things (taṣwīr) is permitted in Islam has led to a great amount of controversy. Mainstream scholars (such as those of al-Azhar University) have chosen to permit it due to considering the evidence for the prohibition not strong enough, while those who consider themselves true followers of hadith have chosen to accept the prohibition. There are also important exceptions, such as the Syrian Shaykh Muhammad b. Amin, a follower of Ibn Tamiyya, who also considers the evidence for the prohibition unsatisfactory and contradictory. See my translation of an important article by him: A Traditionalist Critique of the Islamic Prohibition on Taṣwīr (Making Drawings and Statues of Humans and Animals).
I decided to conduct a study of the existing hadith evidence to find out its strength using the probabilistic hadith criticism method. The result, as I expected, is that none of the hadiths are strong enough to establish the prohibition, and there is one hadith among them that demolishes the rest. Unfortunately this hadith too is not very strong, although this can be explained by hadith scholars choosing to ignore it and not transmit it due to conflicting with their own views. But the hadith’s content happens to be the most believable compared to the rest due to the way it mentions a very realistic scenario. The quality of the hadith’s content is very similar to the strongest hadiths we have.
I ignored hadiths that merely mention that al-muṣawwirūn are punished by God due to the fact that these hadiths could simply be referring to those who make icons and statues meant for worship. The hadiths I included are those that seem to clearly imply that all picture-making is prohibited regardless of the intention behind making them.
Hadith 1
Narrated Ibn Umar:
Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) said, "Those who make these pictures will be punished on the Day of Resurrection, and it will be said to them. 'Make alive what you have created.'
Sahih al-Bukhari 5951, also in Musnad
Below is a diagram of the hadith’s chains:
The hadith receives an authenticity score of 16%, which is far below the 30% needed for ruling it ṣaḥīḥ (authentic) according to the probabilistic verification methodology. (This article contains a guide on how to do these calculations).
Hadith 2
I heard [Prophet] Muhammad saying, "Whoever makes a picture in this world will be asked to put life into it on the Day of Resurrection, but he will not be able to do so."
Sahih al-Bukhari 5963, also in Muslim, Musnad, al-Tabarni, Musnad Abi Ya`la, al-Bayhaqi and al-Nasa'i.
Below is the diagram of its chains:
This hadith, despite its convoluted chains, receives an authenticity score of 19.44%.
Hadith 3
I heard from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ). I heard him say: All the painters who make pictures would be in the fire of Hell. The soul will be breathed in every picture prepared by him and it shall punish him in Hell ...
Sahih Muslim 2109 c, 2110 a, Musnad
Below is the chain diagram:
This hadith has a score of 8.6%, making it rather weak.
Hadith 4
Narrated `Aisha:
I purchased a cushion with pictures on it. The Prophet (came and) stood at the door but did not enter. I said (to him), "I repent to Allah for what (the guilt) I have done." He said, "What is this cushion?" I said, "It is for you to sit on and recline on." He said, "The makers of these pictures will be punished on the Day of Resurrection and it will be said to them, 'Make alive what you have created.' Moreover, the angels do not enter a house where there are pictures.'"
Sahih al-Bukhari 5957, the strongest chain is in al-Muwatta
Chain diagram:
This hadith has a score of 21.6%, again below 30%.
Hadith 5
Narrated `Aisha:
Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) returned from a journey when I had placed a curtain of mine having pictures over (the door of) a chamber of mine. When Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) saw it, he tore it and said, "The people who will receive the severest punishment on the Day of Resurrection will be those who try to make the like of Allah's creations." So we turned it (i.e., the curtain) into one or two cushions.
Sahih al-Bukhari 5954, also in Muslim
Chain diagram:
This hadith gets a score of 10.1%.
Hadith 6
Narrated Abu Zur'a:
l entered a house in Medina with Abu Huraira, and he saw a man making pictures at the top of the house. Abu Huraira said, "I heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) saying that Allah said, 'Who would be more unjust than the one who tries to create the like of My creatures? Let them create a grain: let them create a gnat.' "Abu Huraira then asked for a water container and washed his arms up to his armpits. I said, "Abu Huraira! Is this something you have heard I from Allah's Messenger (ﷺ)?" He said, "The limit for ablution is up to the place where the ornaments will reach on the Day of Resurrection.'
Sahih al-Bukhari 5953, also in Musnad Ishaq b. Rahawayh
Chain diagram:
This hadith gets a score of 11.5%.
Hadith 7
This is the hadith that refutes the others, in which Aisha (may God be pleased with her) denies having said that angels do not enter a house in which there is a picture (Hadith 4 above).
Abu Talha Ansari reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying:
Angels do not enter the house in which there is a picture or portraits. I came to 'A'isha and said to her: This is a news that I have received that Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) had said: Angels do not enter the house in which there is a picture or a dog, (and further added) whether she had heard Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) making a mention of it. She said: No (I did not hear this myself), but I narrate to you what I saw him doing. I bear testimony to the fact that he (the Holy Prophet) set out for an expedition. I took a carpet and screened the door with it. When he (the Holy Prophet) came back he saw that carpet and I perceived signs of disapproval on his face. He pulled it until it was torn or it was cut (into pieces) and he said: God has not commanded us to clothe stones and clay. We cut it (the curtain) and prepared two pillows out of it by stuffing them with the fibre of date-palms and he (the Holy Prophet) did not find fault with it.
Sahih Muslim 2106 f, 2107 a
Chain diagram:
This hadith gets a score of only 3.25% due to the lack of supporting chains, although the first three transmitters are all Companions. If we assume that all three transmitted the hadith with complete authenticity, the hadith’s score rises to 9.03%, which is still not very good.
Hadith 8
We also have the following hadith (considered authentic by al-Albani) in which we find Aisha had toy horses that had wings.
Narrated Aisha:
When the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) arrived after the expedition to Tabuk or Khaybar (the narrator is doubtful), the draught raised an end of a curtain which was hung in front of her store-room, revealing some dolls which belonged to her.
He asked: What is this? She replied: My dolls. Among them he saw a horse with wings made of rags, and asked: What is this I see among them? She replied: A horse. He asked: What is this that it has on it? She replied: Two wings. He asked: A horse with two wings? She replied: Have you not heard that Solomon had horses with wings? She said: Thereupon the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) laughed so heartily that I could see his molar teeth.
Sunan Abi Dawud 4932
Chain diagram:
This chain gets a score of 1.4%, again due to the lack of supporting chains. But again its contents seem extremely realistic. My heart is much happier with this kind of hadith that mentions a lot of contextual and seemingly unnecessary details than with hadiths that merely transmit a statement of the Prophet PBUH.
What we can conclude
It looks like the instinct of the Azhar scholars is correct in not taking the prohibitory hadiths too seriously. Real prohibitions in Islam have extremely strong support behind them, with hadiths easily reaching 80% or 90% authenticity. The strongest prohibitory hadith only reaches a score of 21.6%.
The question is why the Prophet PBUH failed to impart this prohibition to his followers like normal prohibitions. Why did it have to come to us through isolated and rather low-quality hadiths? The most likely answer is that because he never taught such a prohibition. It seems very likely that the culture of the generation of Imam Malik began to confuse the hadiths in which the Prophet spoke strongly against picture-making meant for worship (i.e. idol-making), so that the context was lost and only the part where he mentioned picture-making survived. A prohibition on making religious idols became generalized in people’s minds to a prohibition on all picture-making.
Shaykh Ibn Amin’s study (that I linked earlier) adds further support to this theory. The Companions seem to have had a very casual attitude toward pictures and statues. We also know that Prophet Sulayman had statues built for him as the Quran tells us. The evidence of the Quran is always much stronger than hadith (due to the Quran’s far better transmission process), so the Quranic verse can be taken as strong evidence for the permissibility of picture-making (and even statues). The hadiths mentioned above are rather low-quality to be able to override what the Quran tells us.
We also know that one of the most respected early scholars of Islam (from the generation before Imam Malik) approved of picture-making (al-Qasim b. Muhammad).
The two hadiths of Aisha are also highly suggestive. In both of them the Prophet PBUH does not criticize the pictures/statues. In the first one he criticizes using cloth to cover walls, and in the second one he laughs at the toy horse without criticizing it.
There is also a place for human reason in this debate. It seems ridiculous to consider paintings of birds and animals as some sort of insult against God when in our daily lives we feel absolutely no compunction about things like children’s picture books filled with such paintings and drawings. The Quran tells us that the creation of the heavens and the earth is a greater accomplishment than the creation of humans (verse 40:57), so why should God feel jealous about painting humans and animals but not about painting stars and landscapes (which are God’s greater creation)?
All of Islam’s prohibitions seem to have some sense behind them, or they have very strong Quranic evidence. But in this case the evidence for the prohibition is rather weak and contradictory, and our own reason and conscience find no good justification for it.
Unfortunately we are stuck in this position where we have many low-quality hadiths creating a taboo against paintings and statues, and some (also weak) evidence going against the taboo. We also have the Quranic statement approving of Prophet Sulayman’s statues. So it seems that Muslims will forever have to deal with the ambiguities and uncertainty surrounding the issue, with mainstream scholars taking a tolerant attitude and a minority taking an extreme position in support of the taboo.
My conclusion
My own stance is to fully approve of drawings and paintings of living things, and as for statues, I consider them at worst to be in a gray area. I see no strong Islamic justification for speaking against those who make them.
Is having a boyfriend haram? But you don't do anything haram with him. You just label each other as boyfriend/girlfriend but treat each other as best friends without doing anything haram
The right question to ask is: “Does it please God and my family to have a boyfriend/girlfriend, is it beneficial to my own soul, and is it good for my future?” If you read the Quran and the books of hadith, you will not find anything that explicitly forbids such a relationship. But there is a lot more to it than that.
First, note that I would be willing to accept the excuses of a person who involves themselves with such relationships. But that is the problem; such relationships have to be excused. They are not noble and admirable things to participate in, and all pious and self-respecting Muslims would do their best to avoid them except under the most extreme circumstances.
Imagine an irreligious culture where there is no marriage and all relationships are boyfriend/girlfriend relationships. Then imagine that the people convert to Islam. What would happen next? If you think about it, you will realize that such relationships will quickly go out of fashion because people will start to demand more from their mates. Instead of randomly getting into relationships with whoever seems to be able to love them back, they will start to have a long-term mindset about relationships. A woman will not just want a random man’s love. She will want a man who doesn’t just love her, but who is also pleasing to her family, and whose family is pleasing to hers. Rather than acting on her animal instincts by jumping into relationships, she will act like a princess. Not a Disney princess, but a real princess who cannot just marry anyone. Her marriage is a very significant decision that affects the future of her country, so she has to choose someone who fits in within her very long-term plans. She doesn’t just think of her own desires, she has to think of how her relationship will affect the future of her dynasty. She has to think carefully about how being with a particular man will affect her future, the future of her family, the future of her country, and the future of her children and grandchildren.
If you think about it, a boyfriend/girlfriend relationship is a very primitive, what we may call a barbarian, type of marriage. Religion comes to civilize it by changing relationships from something casual to something extremely serious. People go from wanting to please their immediate appetites to wanting to build a civilization through their relationships.
Muslims who are attracted by the boyfriend/girlfriend system are actually being attracted to something primitive and barbarian. It is like wanting to abandon civilization to join the simple life of a tribe that lives in the jungle where there is no marriage and everyone is free to love whomever they want. It may seem like an attractive and paradisaical arrangement, but it is not civilized. You cannot build a civilization where casual romantic relationships are the norm, and any civilization that is degraded enough to make that the norm will quickly suffer decay. We see this in the West where people are extremely irresponsible about their relationships and couldn’t care less about how these affect their families and societies. The result is extremely low-birth rates because everyone is too busy seeking their own satisfaction to think about the future of their families and civilizations. Countries like Portugal and Japan today are going through slow-motion collapse as villages and towns are abandoned because people do not think that continuing their families and civilizations are worth the effort. By embracing a primitive and barbarian system of romantic relationships, the result is that the countries become more and more primitive and barbarian. Nature starts to reclaim land that was in the past filled with homes and schools.
To a young person who is simply seeking to be loved, such concerns are of little importance. Religion, however, cares very much about these things, and it is for this reason that it creates a system of marriage that forces people to take their romantic relationships very seriously.
Religion wants to build civilization. The boyfriend/girlfriend system is out of place in civilization and it takes the country back to a primitive stage. And for this reason no one who has truly understood religion and who takes it seriously will want to participate in that system. For a faithful Muslim woman to jump into such relationships is similar to a princess from a royal family getting into a relationship with some random man and throwing away the future of her dynasty and country.
By calling someone your boyfriend/girlfriend, you mean that you have an exclusive romantic relationship with them. It is like pretending to be married without actually marrying and without intending to do the physical acts associated with marriage. The intention is to get the companionship and sense of being loved and supported that we get from a romantic partner without going through the difficult process of finding out if your life circumstances will enable you to be together, and finding out whether your family approves of the person and whether their family approves of you. You cut out their involvement, and the involvement of the rest of reality in order to jump right into the romance part.
It is almost needless to say how foolish and dangerous that is. If you are a woman, a husband is forced to be nice, kind and considerate toward you even when he does not feel like it, even when you do not deserve it, because he is not only responsible to you but to your family and his family. He has to live up to the image of a husband. But a random male with whom you develop a romantic relationship is not answerable to anyone but himself. Many people in the West who enjoy the freedom of being able to jump into romantic relationship after relationship end up being scarred for life by the extreme maltreatment (I do not mean physical abuse, but emotional abuse and negligence) of their partners, or end up being the abuser themselves without intending it, because there is nothing to humanize their relationship and control it as it happens in marriage.
An intelligent, self-respecting and wise Muslim woman will consider it extremely beneath her to grant her love to a man who has not gone through the process of proving himself to be a worthy husband. She would be giving something away for free that is meant to be extremely valuable and precious; a foolish decision that shows her lack of understanding. It is a sign that there is a serious problem with her that is making her desperate. Sometimes, maybe often, the blame is with her family. By depriving her of love and sense of having an honored status in her family, she is forced to seek that in men outside her family. But even in such cases part of the blame is on her; a better woman would put up with her family’s failings and lack of love and endure patiently until God enables her to have something better.
The same of course applies to some men who seek such romance.
I know such relationships can be a great temptation. But our task is to resist them the way we resist all other temptations until God changes our situation and we are able to enjoy the pleasures of romance in the normal way through marriage.
I sometimes masturbate my self and something like urine comes out is that the mani or Madi and most I perform guhsul jazakallah kairan
If it is manī then this requires ghusl. Manī (semen) is ejaculated in spurts and there is usually a feeling of pleasure when it happens. But if it is madhī then this requires no ghusl. Madhī is a mucus-like fluid that comes out slowly and continuously during sexual arousal.
Note that both manī and madhī are pure (see this article for references to scholarly opinions), so if they fall on clothing, one can still pray in those clothes without washing them, according to the scholarly opinions I prefer. But like I said, even though manī is pure, its ejaculation necessitates ghusl.
Sir, mostly sins make me feel disturbed but what influences me most is the relationship between boys n girls outside marriage. I feel disgusted hearing the terms 'boyfriend/girlfriend'. I'm part of certain Facebook groups where sometimes posts about one's relationship comes up… Sometimes they talk about their boyfriends. It makes me sad and angry. I consider it self harm and desire to advise them, but sometimes stop myself because they might not want it. I want to leave those groups, but I think I might help or guide them somehow by commenting. Can you please guide me what is better to do? Should I leave them and feel easy or should I keep striving? Can we advise someone if they are not asking for it?
There are countless ways to serve God. Advising others to avoid sinful behaviors is just one kind. I believe that it is far more beneficial to try to call people to be better in ways that pleases them and is likely to succeed rather than intentionally going into circles where the advice is disliked or laughed at. So I recommend that you do not waste your time with such groups. Advice generally works once a loving relationship has been built between you and the person. Giving advice on the Internet to a random audience that does not like you and admire you seems to be a waste of time. You would do much better to develop a talent that attracts people to you, then once relationships have been built, you can use them to try to influence them to be better. You can do that by becoming a novelist, artist, teacher, instructor, blogger, video maker, and so on. You should do something that benefits people and makes them like you. Do anything that makes the world a better place for people and you will get countless opportunities to influence them to be better. Giving advice without first working to be an admirable and lovable person is not going to do much good.
Salam I just wanted to know if you forget to pray tahujaad namaz Can you still continue reading them..Because I was told that you have to constantly read them…
Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,
The tahajjud prayer is a voluntary prayer that you can do whenever you are able. There is no requirement to do them constantly, and if you do not do it for a while you are always free to start again.
