A MADRASAH APA’S LAMENT

A MADRASAH APA’S LAMENT
“I have seen in The Majlis your criticism of girls madrasahs. I have recently started at girls madressa and have experienced many ups and downs.
I hated the fact that there was no spirituality at my madressa, everyone spoke about birthdays. Proper Islamic dress code was not enforced, not even by the seniors. The male teachers would talk directly to the females even though from behind a screen. The conversation was not about work. During Ramadhaan there was no time allocated for ibaadat or so on. It really bothered me. I felt as though the little spirituality that I had worked so hard on was dying. Then I also had a friend who had disturbed my peace. As much as we were friends we were just not good for each other. We would engage in idle talk, despite both our efforts to be better Muslims. I then decided to rather leave madressa so that I could attend to my house and my husband and my family. I had hoped that I could continue learning at home, but it was very difficult. I left madressa for about 2 months and after not learning much I started to feel bad, so I decided to return to madressa. It’s been one week since I’m back. I love learning but I still don’t feel content with being at the madressa. It feels like it takes up too much of my time that could be spent doing other things for my home and ultimately for my Aakhirah. Please advise.” (End of the Apa’s lament)
OUR ADVICE

Just get out of the madrasah and stay at home where Allah Ta’ala wants you to be. Life is short. Maut stalks us at every moment. Don’t waste your time at these worldly, deceptive girls madrasahs. Shaitaan has carved out these institutions to divert Muslims from the Deen and to ruin the Haya of Muslim women. The only place for a Muslim woman is her home. You will gain the status of shahaadat by remaining at home occupied in your domestic duties.

FROM THE MAJLIS VOLUME 26 NUMBER 01

WEARING JEANS UNDER A JUBBA

QUESTION: IS IT PERMISSIBLE TO WEAR JEANS UNDER A JUBBA?

ANSWER BY MAJLIS ULAMA OF SOUTH AFRICA

Jeans are not Islamically respectable. It does not behove a Muslim conscious of Allah Ta’ala, conscious of the Aakhirah, conscious of the Sunnah and who desires the development of taqwa to wear jeans which are garments of low repute and even aligned to hooliganism. It is therefore not permissible to perform salaat with jeans even if a jubba is worn. Although the salaat will be valid, it will be makrooh to wear such offensive garments.

WOMEN TAKING OFF BURQA OUTSIDE OF HER HOME

Question: regarding the last issue of the majlis there is a hadith regarding a woman not taking off her burqa in any place that is not the home of her husband.
what should we take from this hadith?
does it mean that when a woman goes out with her husband and the husband is with the men in one room and the ladies are in another room the wife should still sit in burqa?
does it mean that women that work in hospitals or schools where there is purdah, they still have to wear their burqas while teaching etc.?
what should we understand from the hadith?

Answer: The fact that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) cursed the woman who removes her jilbaab in a place other than her home indicates the emphasis of maintaining hijaab. If a woman visits friends and relatives, there is the possibility of ghair mahram male relatives or her friend’s husband accidentally coming within view. This happens often in homes, especially small houses. The ghair mahram’s gaze is sure to fall on her gaudy or adorned dress which she wears under her jilbaab. The Fuqaha have explicitly ruled that it is not permissible for a man to look at any garment of a woman. Gaudy feminine garments also excite passion in man. For this reason it is Makrooh for a man to drink water from a glass if he is aware that a woman has drunk from it, and vice versa.
A man whose eyes accidentally fall on the beautiful dress of a woman even from behind, is sure to be passionately excited. Most men who lack Taqwa, instead of reciting Ta-awwuz and Wa La Houla, will begin fantasizing about the woman. As it is, his own wife is ‘stale’ for him. Even if he did not see the face of the woman, her dress is likely to influence his heart. It is therefore not permissible for a woman to be careless by removing her jilbaab when she visits other homes. She can remove her Niqaab, but she should not strut about in the homes of other people without her jilbaab. Rasulullah (sallallahu layhi wasallam) said: “A woman advances (comes forward) in the form of shaitaan, and retreats in the form of shaitaan.” In other words, whether a man sees a woman from the front or from behind, shaitaan is eveready to excite his nafsaani passion. Hence, as far as possible, a woman should not unnecessarily remove her outer-cloak when she is visiting relatives and friends.
In the first place, there is no hijaab in the hospitals and schools of today. It is not permissible for women to work in surroundings where they are unable to observe proper Shar’i hijaab. In a truly Islamic state, the authorities will make proper arrangements for correct observance of hijaab in such places where it is essential to have female staff, e.g. females-only hospitals. Furthermore, every law has exceptions. An exception cannot be cited to undermine the general law.

SALAAT NOT VALID

Once Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) saw a man performing Salaat with his izaar (lower garment) hanging below his ankles. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) instructed him to renew Wudhu and repeat the Salaat. When someone asked the reason for renewal of Wudhu, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that the Salaat was not valid. Allah Ta’ala does not accept a Salaat if the trousers is below the ankles. This is the rule applicable to all haraam acts perpetrated during Salaat. Salaat performed with the clothing of the kuffaar, with jeans, T-shirt, with logos inscribed on the garments, with short sleeves exposing the elbows, with such tight-fitting pants which display the form of the buttocks, etc. is NOT VALID.
Salaat in such a reprehensible manner has to be incumbently repeated. The offensive clothes should be discarded. If deficiency of Imaan does not allow the criminal to completely abandon the haraam western/kuffaar dress style, then at least he should ensure that when performing Salaat he is dressed correctly so that at least his Salaat is not flung back into his face from the heavens like a filthy rag as is mentioned in the Hadith.

REPEAT YOUR SALAAT
Wearing the trousers on or below the ankles is haraam at all times. The sin is aggravated if this haraam style is adopted in Salaat. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had ordered not only the repetition of the Salaat. He had ordered also renewal of Wudhu. The same command will apply to Salaat performed with the devil’s mask (i.e. the corona virus mask). In fact the stricture regarding this mask is more severe in view of the fact that it is accompanied by the kufr belief of disease being contagious, and also because it is in flagrant violation and rejection of Rasulullah’s prohibition of face covering during Salaat.


SALAAT WITH THE MOCK ‘BURQAH’
Question:
I usually wear a half burqah and pants when performing Namaaz. The burqah is just above the waistline. An Apa told me that my Namaaz is not valid with this burqah. She said that I should repeat my Namaaz. Is she correct? What happens with the Namaaz which I had performed in the past with such a burqah?
Answer:
The Apa is 100% correct. With the cloth which in terms of the Shariah is not a burqah, your Namaaz is not valid. For a Muslim female it is shameless for her legs to be exposed. Pants are not sufficient covering for the legs. You should make qadha of your past Namaaz.

JINNAH CAP THE SPECIAL DRESS OF THE FUSSAAQ

Question: Is it permissible to wear the Jinnah Cap, as some people say that young sheep are killed especially to make this cap?

Answer: It is not permissible to wear a Jinnah cap, and not because it is made from very young sheep, but because it is the special headdress of the fussaaq. A Jinnah cap is not an Islamic headdress. It is the headgear of the fussaaq politicians such as Mr. Jinnah. Even Molvis have adopted this item. Our senior ulama who were paragons of piety, detested the Jinnah cap. You should adhere to the simple cloth topi in which there is humility.

ULAMA WEARING WESTERN OR KUFFAR DRESS

Leave alone an Aalim, even an ordinary person – a non-Molwi—is not allowed to wear western or kuffaar clothes. Shirt and pants are kuffaar dress. In view of the fact that among laymen, this type of dress has become widespread, especially in the western world, we shall not brand every Muslim in the west who wears shirt and pants, a faasiq. But, undoubtedly, every Molwi, be he in the west or in a Muslim country, will be labeled a faasiq if he wears shirt and pants. Here in South Africa we never allow a man with shirt and pants to lead the salaat or to even stand in the Musjid to deliver a talk even if he is with the Tabligh Jamaat. He is a disgrace to the Ilm he has acquired. A Molwi who wears shirt and pants needs to be stripped of his molwiyyat. He is a disgrace to Ilm-e-Deen and to the lofty Office of Warathatul Ambiya which he is supposed to occupy. Would this Molvi have attended his dastaarbandi ceremony with a shirt and pants? Let him search his conscience and soul.

If a person has been wearing Islamic garb since childhood as is the case in Pakistan, and then he abandons such garments to adopt kuffaar dress, he will be a faasiq. But if he grew up with shirt and pants, he will not be labeled a faasiq. Nevertheless, the error of such garb will still be pointed out to him and he should be encouraged to switch to Islamic dress.

The fatwa of the mufti who declared shirt and pants jaa-iz is incorrect. The mufti sahib has grievously erred. Instead of bringing people nearer to the Deen, he opens up avenues of fisq and fujoor with such miserable fatwas. May Allah Ta’ala save us from the deceptions of shaitaan.

JANUARY 2, 2005

Wearing nike clothing

Q: Is it permissible to buy and wear Nike products? I know that Nike once put the name of Allah on a shoe, but it was unintentional and they apologized. Also, although Nike represents a Greek god, people don’t believe in the god and only buy the shoe for the style. Bearing this in mind, what is the ruling on Nike products?

A: Before addressing the issue in question, it is necessary for you to understand the parameters and limits of Shari’ah in regard to the topic of preserving one’s Islamic identity as a believer and refraining from imitating the ways of the kuffaar.  Below we will discuss the details which govern this mas’alah.

In Shari’ah, we are commanded to refrain from imitating the ways of the kuffaar and adopting their lifestyle. Imitating the ways of the kuffaar refers to one abandoning his Islamic identity and adopting the identity which is exclusive to the kuffaar. In other words, all those aspects of life (be it religious or worldly related) through which a believer is identified and clearly distinguished from a disbeliever – for a muslim to abandon that and to adopt the ways of the kuffaar amounts to imitating the ways of the kuffaar. Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar (radhiyallahu anhuma) reports that Nabi (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) said:

عن ابن عمر قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من تشبه بقوم فهو منهم (سنن أبي داود، الرقم: 4033)

The one who imitates a people will be counted among them (in the court of Allah Ta’ala)

Imitating the kuffaar is of different levels.

1. Imitating the kuffaar in their religious beliefs is haraam and amounts to kufr e.g. for a Muslim to subscribe to the belief that Nabi Isa (alaihi salaam) was crucified on the cross.

2. Imitating those signs or symbols that identify with kufr is haraam and amounts to kufr e.g. wearing a cross.

3. Imitating the kuffaar in their religious ceremonies, celebrations or festivals is haraam e.g. for a Muslim to celebrate Diwali, Christmas, Easter, etc. If one participates in the celebration of the kuffaar out of respect for such days, he will become a kaafir. If one participates in a celebration without respecting and honouring their celebration, he will not become a kaafir. However, this action will be haraam.

4. Imitating the kuffaar in their religious attire which is not a symbol of kufr is makrooh-e-tahreemi e.g. for a Muslim to wear an attire that is exclusive to a religious cult (e.g. wearing a saari in our country).

5. Imitating the kuffaar in their culture and lifestyle is also impermissible e.g. imitating them in their tight-fitting and revealing clothing, women wearing men’s clothing and vice versa, men wearing ear-rings, celebrating birthdays, tattooing, women and men freely intermingling, etc.

Wearing such clothes that are not exclusive to the kuffaar, but are instead used by all and sundry e.g. wearing jackets, socks, men wearing formal clothes and women wearing unrevealing dresses is permissible and does not amount to imitating the kuffaar.

Similarly, carrying out those actions or using those items which are not exclusive to the kuffaar but are instead commonly used by all e.g. driving cars, eating and drinking in cups and plates, etc. does not amount to imitating the kuffaar. However, one should refrain from drinking in wine tumblers as this resembles people who drink wine (fujjaar and fussaaq).

As for the clothing that a Muslim should wear, it is preferable that he wear such clothing which has some type of Islamic connotation or is known to be clothing exclusive to Muslims i.e. the clothing of the pious and respectable Muslims.

As far as the issue of Nike is concerned, you should ask yourself whether any Muslim will wear a garment which has the cross emblazoned on it. Obviously, a Muslim will never wear a garment which has a cross on it, whether the cross is on his clothing or on his shoes. The reason why a Muslim will not wear a cross is that he understands that the cross is a sign of kufr and is exclusive to a particular creed (i.e. Christianity). The cross identifies the one who wears it as being part of the same creed.

While the cross is a very obvious sign, there are many other signs which though less obvious are also signs of kufr and identify the one who wears it as being part of the same creed. These symbols have significance for its followers and they are respected and honoured just as the cross is honoured by the Christians.

Among these religious symbols is the symbol of Nike. Encyclopedia Britannica describes Nike in the following words: “Nike, in Greek religion, is the goddess of victory.” It also states that in Rome “she was worshipped from the earliest times. She came to be regarded as the protecting goddess of the state.” The Nike symbol, the swoosh, embodies the spirit of the winged goddess who inspired the most courageous of warriors.

Not long ago, Nike Incorporated apologised in the face of severe protest for putting the name of Allah on sports shoes. First they put the name of Allah on a shoe so that it will be trampled and soiled. Imagine the name of Allah Ta’ala being trampled and kicked around (May Allah Ta’ala save us). Even before the shoe affair, Nike had once erected a billboard which depicted a basketball player. The picture was headlined with the words “They called him Allah.” It is naive to think that these occurrences are mere coincidences. Yet Muslims still feel proud to be associated with Nike and its products.

Why is a basketball player headlined “ALLAH”? Why the name of Allah on shoes? Is it a deliberate attempt to sacrilege and desecrate the name of Allah Ta’ala? The name of Allah Ta’ala on a shoe will surely be trampled, kicked, become soiled with mud or even filth. Allah Forbid! The Qur’an has long ago declared: “…The enmity has become apparent from their mouths, and what their hearts conceal is worse” (3: 118). Often the hatred of the Kuffaar for the Believers becomes manifest from their words and actions. However, we should consider to what extent we support the very people who openly desecrate the name of Allah Ta’ala. If our parents were greatly insulted by any person, will we still support him and add to his coffers? Then what about the name of Allah Ta’ala ? Would we give publicity to those who desecrate our name? Then what about the name of Allah Ta’ala?

And Allah Ta’ala (الله تعالى) knows best.

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَتَّخِذُوا بِطَانَةً مِّن دُونِكُمْ لَا يَأْلُونَكُمْ خَبَالًا وَدُّوا مَا عَنِتُّمْ قَدْ بَدَتِ الْبَغْضَاءُ مِنْ أَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَمَا تُخْفِي صُدُورُهُمْ أَكْبَرُ  (آل عمران: ١١٨)

وَلَا تَرۡکَنُوۡۤا اِلَی الَّذِیۡنَ ظَلَمُوۡا فَتَمَسَّکُمُ النَّارُ ۙ وَمَا لَکُمۡ مِّنۡ دُوۡنِ اللّٰهِ مِنۡ اَوۡلِیَآءَ ثُمَّ لَاتُنۡصَرُوۡنَ  (سورة هود: 113)

عن ابن عمر قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم من تشبه بقوم فهو منهم.  (سنن أبي داود، الرقم: 4033)

أي من شبه نفسه بالكفار مثلا في اللباس وغيره أو بالفساق أو الفجار أو بأهل التصوف والصلحاء الأبرار فهو منهم أي في الإثم والخير قال الطيبي هذا عام في الخلق والخلق والشعار ولما كان الشعار أظهر في الشبه ذكر في هذا الباب (مرقاة شرح مشكاة 8/ 155)

عن عمرو بن الحارث ، أن رجلا دعا عبد الله بن مسعود إلى وليمة ، فلما جاء ليدخل سمع لهوا ، فلم يدخل ، فقال : ما لك رجعت ؟ قال : إني سمعت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقول : من كثر سواد قوم فهو منهم ، ومن رضي عمل قوم كان شريكا في عملهم. (إتحاف الخيرة المهرة، الرقم: 3297)

يكفر بوضع قلنسوة المجوس على رأسه على الصحيح إلا لضرورة دفع الحر والبرد وبشد الزنار في وسطه إلا إذا فعل ذلك خديعة في الحرب وطليعة للمسلمين وبقوله المجوس خير مما أنا فيه يعني فعله … وبخروجه إلى نيروز المجوس لموافقته معهم فيما يفعلون في ذلك اليوم وبشرائه يوم النيروز شيئا لم يكن يشتريه قبل ذلك تعظيما للنيروز لا للأكل والشرب وبإهدائه ذلك اليوم للمشركين ولو بيضة تعظيما لذلك لا بإجابة دعوة مجوسي حلق رأس ولده وبتحسين أمر الكفار اتفاقا حتى قالوا لو قال ترك الكلام عند أكل الطعام حسن من المجوس أو ترك المضاجعة حالة الحيض منهم حسن فهو كافر كذا في البحر الرائق. (الفتاوى الهندية 2/ 276)

كما أن الإتيان بخاصية الكفر يدل على الكفر فإن من سجد لصنم أو تزيى بزنار أو لبس قلنسوة المجوس يحكم بكفره (الاختيار لتعليل المختار 4/150)

ومن تشبه بالكفار عمدا أو باللعب أو تزيى بزي النصارى أو تزنر بزنار النصارى أو تقلنس بقلنسوة المجوسي أو دخل بيعة أو كنيسة لزيارتها والتبرك بها أو يتبرك ببعض كبار الكفار لتنسكه بزيادات عبادتهم أو بشيء من خواص دينهم يكفر ومن قطع لأئمة الهدى بالجنة كأبي حنيفة ومالك والشافعي فقد أخطأ وكذا الجنيد وأبو يزيد الشبلي ونحوهم من الصالحين (معين المفتي على جواب المستفتي للتمرتاشي 1/219)

وبيع المكعب المفضض للرجل إن ليلبسه يكره لأنه إعانة على لبس الحرام وإن كان إسكافا أمره إنسان أن يتخذ له خفا على زي المجوس أو الفسقة أو خياطا أمره أن يتخذ له ثوبا على زي الفساق يكره له أن يفعل لأنه سبب التشبه بالمجوس والفسقة اهـ (رد المحتار 6/392)

Answered by:

Mufti Zakaria Makada

Checked & Approved:

Mufti Ebrahim Salejee (Isipingo Beach)

is permissible to wear a tie in a place where both Muslims and nonMuslims are wearing it

Q. A Mufti says that it is permissible to wear a tie in a place where both Muslims and nonMuslims are wearing it, and that it will not be permissible in a place where only the kuffaar wear it. Is this right? Please comment in detail. The fatwa seems very confusing.

A. It is very confusing because it is a forked tongue fatwa of a fencesitting mufti. Zina, liquor and riba will be haraam in all places whether in a place only kuffaar indulge in these acts of abomination or whether both Muslims and nonMuslims perpetrate these acts of immorality. The mufti has grievously erred.

Instead of bringing Muslims closer to Allah Ta’ala by emphasizing the incumbency of Sunnah attire, and the abomination of kuffaar dress style, the mufti renders the Ummah and Islam the great disservice of widening the gulf between Muslims and their Creator. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said that the one who emulates a people is one of them. One enters the fold of the kuffaar by emulating their useless and superfluous styles. On the other hand, one becomes Allah’s beloved by emulating the Sulaha/Auliya even if one is not among them. A Buzrug said: “I love the Sulaha although I am not one of them. Perhaps by virtue of this love, Allah will reform me.”

The function of a mufti is not to indulge in mental gymnastics and create unnecessary and futile latitude in the ahkaam thereby weakening further the extremely deficient bond which Muslims of this era have with the Deen and with Allah Ta’ala. The obligation of the mufti is to draw Muslims closer to Allah Ta’ala and to cultivate in them a realization of Maut, the Qabr and Qiyaamah. These goals cannever be achieved by encouraging Muslims to adopt the ways, styles and customs of the kuffaar.

It should be understood that kuffaar attitudes accompany kuffaar styles and customs. The one who will wear a tie, will think and behave like a kaafir. There is takabbur and riya in the kuffaar tie whilst there is tawaadhu (humility) in the simple dress style of the Ambiya (Alayhimus salaam), adoption of which is Waajib for Muslims. The mufti should confine technicalities to his Madrasah students during academic discussion, and emphasize to his pupils that the objective of technicalities which appear to provide leeway is never to water down the ahkaam and to eliminate Taqwa. Cultivation of Taqwa is a Qur’aanic and a Sunnah imperative. Minus Taqwa a Muslim is a vagabond, and this is the category into which the molvis and muftis of this era have cast the Ummah with their flapdoodle and flotsam fallacious arguments which are nugatory of the Maqaasid of the Deen.

Adoption of haraam by Muslims does not equate to halaal. Thus, if the crucifix loses its religious significance and both non-Muslims and Muslims wear chains with crosses around their necks, this practice of shirk is not transformed into permissibility. It will forever remain haraam for Muslims to wear crosses around their necks or keep it even concealed in their pockets.

This is the status of the kuffaar tie. It is the symbol of the cross – of the Christian deity hanging on the cross. This was the origin of the tie regardless of the religious significance being divested. E. Quraishi Sabri commenting on the origin of the necktie, said: “Towards the end of the 19th Century, the Europeans omitted from dictionaries and Encyclopaedias the introductory phrase about the necktie being a symbol of the cross … A glance of Encyclopaedias printed before 1898 will confirm this point.” In another report, it is said that the practice of the necktie started on the insistence of the Pope in the year 1790 and that by 1850 all Christian nations had accepted and implemented this order of the Pope.

Regardless of the tie no longer having religious significance, and regardless of the assumption that it never symbolized the cross, the fundamental fact is that it is a superfluous item of kuffaar dress exhibiting stupidity, ujub (self-esteem), takabbur (pride) and riya (show). There is absolutely no goodness and no worldly benefit in wearing this moronic dress atrocity of the kuffaar. It is a glaring example of Tashabbuh Bil Kuffaar (emulating the kuffaar) which is haraam, and which even has the effect of kufr. Preferring any specific custom/practice of the kuffaar is also kufr.

Tashabbuh bin nisaa’ (emulating females) is haraam for men. Men who imitate women in any manner are maloon (on whom settle the curse of Allah) according to the Hadith. Even if a man emulates the dress style of a Muslim woman, he will be mal-oon. Will the mufti condone Muslim men wearing abayas/ burqahs? What if in a place most Muslim men begin wearing abayas because it has developed into a kuffaar fashion? And, this is not farfetched. Men are nowadays even walking in public with female panties. Will it then be permissible for Muslim males to wear burqahs? Allah’s la’nat is on such men who perpetrate Tashabbuh bin nisaa. To a greater degree will the la’nat settle on Muslim men committing Tashabbuh bil kuffaar. After all, Muslim women have Imaan whilst the kuffaar are bereft of Imaan.

The attitude of halaalizing kuffaar dress styles and other superfluous and stupid practices on the basis of the dress style having gained popular acceptance by both nonMuslims and Muslims is absolutely putrid and satanic. With the passage of time the entire Sunnah becomes eroded and even displaced for the adoption of kuffaar culture which brings along with it all the attitudes, thinking and concepts of the kuffaar. It is this creeping disease which has made praying in churches and standing in the ranks with kuffaar priests and pundits acceptable. That is why there are characters of the ilk of reverend Bham and MJC carrion halaalizing sheikhs who accept and participate in kuffaar acts of worship.

Will a Muslim with his kurtah on wear a tie? There is consensus of all and sundry, including the mufti who halaalizes the tie, that no Muslim wearing a kurtah will put on a tie while dressed in a kurtah. But if he is dressed in western attire or a suit, then without hesitation he will don the kuffaar tie? Why this difference? Why will he wear a tie with a western shirt, but not with a kurtah? There is no need to even answer this question. Western dress comes with its effects and attitudes of kibr, ujub and riya. It is an acceptable dress for a man who wants to visit a casino, a brothel, a gambling den and any evil haunt. On the contrary, Islamic dress prevents a Muslim from frequenting these dens of Iblees. Wearing the kuffaar tie of shirk is haraam. The mufti has grievously erred in providing leeway for its adoption.