Likewise this Madhab also led him to fall into what contradicts the creed of the Salaf. This is why Imam Ibn Abdul-Hadi, may Allah have mercy on him, when he wrote a biography, or when he spoke about him in his book <At-Tabaqaat> or elsewhere, he labelled him with being a “Jahmi”.

Ibn Hazm is a Jahmi regarding the attributes.

He restricted it in this regard to the attributes, because he does tread upon then Madhab of Ahlussunnah regarding attributes, but instead he misinterprets the attributes (away from the apparent), and he fell into something that contradicts the Madhab of the Salaf, which made Imam Ibn Abdul-Hadi, may Allah have mercy on him, label him with being a “Jahmi” this regard.

The point of benefit is that this Madhab has many observations, but what related to jurisprudence (fiqh) and jurisprudential rulings, the majority of scholars agree that they mention their statements in areas of differing. They consider their positions to be better than the positions of those who take solely intellectual based reasoning. Because they base upon evidence - the Dhaahiriyah. But their problem is in in what has preceded. But in general, they are better than the people of solely intellectual based reasoning, who base upon mere opinion without looking at the texts of the Qur’an and Sunnah.

This is why that which is correct, is that their positions are mentioned and taken into consideration as they are Muslims in general.

This is what many scholars have brought to attention, such as Sheikh Bin Baz, may Allah have mercy on him, and others. That the positions of the Dhaahiriyah take more precedence than the statements of the people of solely intellectual based reasoning, and that their positions and statements are mentioned in matters of jurisprudence.


📁س/ من هم الظاهرية ؟
____
Translated by:
Abu Ibraheem 'Abdullaah bin Ahmed Ash-Shingaani
www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn

For the Arabic click below:
www.tgoop.com/youssefalgazairi/2710

بســـم اللــه الرحــمــن الـرحـــيــم

335◾️Are the Hands of Allah extended or is the extending a metaphor for generosity?◾️

Answered by Fadeelatushaykh Abu Hatim Yusuf Al-'Inaabi Al-Jazaa'iree - may Allah preserve him -

📥Question:

There is a questioner asking about the statement of the most high:
(بَلْ يَدَاهُ مَبْسُوطَتَانِ يُنفِقُ كَيْفَ يَشَاء).
"Rather, both His hands are extended; He spends however He wills".
[Al-Ma'idah:64]

Do Ahlussunnah take this verse upon its apparent? Are His hands extended, or is there an affirmation for the hands and the extending is a metaphor for not being stingy and abundance of giving?

📤Answer:

Ahlussunnah wal-Jamaa'ah affirm hands for Allah the mighty and majestic in a manner which befits Him exalted is He, and befits His greatness and His majesty.

They affirm that the hands have descriptions. Among these descriptions of the hands of Allah the mighty and majestic, is that they are extended. They affirm hands which is an attribute of the essence of Allah the mighty and majestic. And they affirm its descriptions, which came in the Qur’an and Sunnah. And amongst these descriptions of the hand of Allah the mighty and majestic is: that the hand of Allah the mighty and majestic are extended.

To say that it is a metaphor is a false interpretation. But rather the extended is affirmed, and what this extending implies is that Allah the mighty and majestic is abundant in giving.

Pay attention to this if it is said that Allah the mighty and majestic, has hands affirmed to Him, but this extending is a metaphor. This is a mis-interpretation, because it is contrary to the apparent meaning of the text, but it is said that the extending of the hands of Allah the mighty and majestic is affirmed, and this extending implies that the meaning is that He is abundant in giving.

📁س/ هل البسط كناية عن عدم البخل وكثير العطاء؟
____
Translated by:
Abu Ibraheem 'Abdullaah bin Ahmed Ash-Shingaani
www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn

بســـم اللــه الرحــمــن الـرحـــيــم

336◾️What's the ruling of a 40 degree deviation away from the Qiblah in the Masjid?◾️

Answered by Fadeelatushaykh Abu Hatim Yusuf Al-'Inaabi Al-Jazaa'iree - may Allah preserve him -

📥Question:

In many of the Masjids here with us there is a 30 to 40 degree deviation away from the Qiblah, what is upon us to do?

📤Answer:

Forty degrees is not a small deviation. Being that they have these advanced means by which they are able to come to know of the precise direction of the Qiblah and its general direction, what's obligatory upon them is to turn to the Qiblah:

(فَوَلِّ وَجْهَكَ شَطْرَ ٱلْمَسْجِدِ ٱلْحَرَامِۖ)
"So turn your face toward al- Masjid Al-Haram".
[Al-Baqarah 2:149]

And they came to know of the direction of the Masjid Al-Haram, they should turn to this direction.

Contrary to if the direction, with them, wasn't precise, but rather they used an approximate direction, and they didn't have these [current] means.

Here this is overlooked regarding this, because:

(لَا يُكَلِّفُ ٱللَّهُ نَفْسًا إِلَّا وُسْعَهَاۚ)
"Allah does not burden a soul except [with that within] its capacity"
[Al-Baqarah:286]

But being that they came to know the [precise] direction, we advise them that they lean a little in the Masjid, and this is what happened to us when we were in Dammaj. When Shaykh Yahya, may Allah preserve him, came across these advanced means. After this we came to know that there was some deviation in a masjid in Dammaj, the rows became slanted, meaning we turned towards the Qiblah.

This is what I advise them to do. I advise them to face the direction of the Qiblah. Because they know its precise direction.

📁س/ في كثير من المساجد عندنا انحراف عن القبلة بقدر ٣٠ إلى ٤٠ درجة، فماذا علينا؟

____
Translated by:
Abu Ibraheem 'Abdullaah bin Ahmed Ash-Shingaani
www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn

بســـم اللــه الرحــمــن الـرحـــيــم

337◾️Does something becoming prevalent and spreading amongst the Muslims make it exit from imitation of the Disbelievers?◾️

Answered by Fadeelatushaykh Abu Hatim Yusuf Al-'Inaabi Al-Jazaa'iree - may Allah preserve him -

📥Question:

Does something becoming prevalent and spreading amongst the Muslims make it exit from imitation of the Disbelievers, such as wearing trousers, for example?

Bearing in mind that there are clothing which the basis thereof originated from the disbelievers, such as what is called the tshirts or shirts, and this spread among the Muslims, but the scholars did not consider it to fall under imitation?

📤Answer:

It becoming prevalent alone does not affect the ruling on this issue.

How many impermissible things became prevalent amongst the Muslims, from the things which they imported from the lands of Disbelievers, and mere becoming prevalent did not prevent it from being declared impermissible.

If the affair which became prevalent of their clothing did not include anything which necessitates that it is prohibited; then it is permissible based upon the foundation of the rulings on things which are benefited from.

Like as tshirts, socks, and shoes..

And it will be impermissible if this thing, which became prevalent, contained:

A symbol, from amongst the symbols of the Disbelievers, or something that they use to worship in their religion, or it containing images of animate beings, or that the clothing shows the shape of the Awrah, or that it contains a style which a group of them became famous for, such as the trousers for the American cowboy (jeans), or the trousers of homeless in the streets. (Ripped trousers) and so on.

All of these scenarios fall under the evidence relating the prohibition of  imitating the Disbelievers.

Like the statement of Allah the most high:

(وَلَا تَكُونُوا۟ كَٱلَّذِينَ نَسُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ فَأَنسَىٰهُمْ أَنفُسَهُمْۚ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْفَٰسِقُونَ)
"And be not like those who forgot Allah, so He made them forget themselves. Those are the defiantly disobedient"
[Al-Hashr:19]

And He, exalted is He, said:

(فَٱسْتَقِيمَا وَلَا تَتَّبِعَآنِّ سَبِيلَ ٱلَّذِينَ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ)
"So remain on a right course and follow not the way of those who do not know".
[Yunus:89]

And His statement, exalted is He:

(وَلَا تَتَّبِعْ سَبِيلَ ٱلْمُفْسِدِينَ)
"and follow not the way of the mischief-makers".
[Al-A'raf:142]

And His statement, lofty and magnificent is He:

(وَلَا تَكُونُوا۟ كَٱلَّذِينَ تَفَرَّقُوا۟ وَٱخْتَلَفُوا۟ مِنۢ بَعْدِ مَا جَآءَهُمُ ٱلْبَيِّنَٰتُۚ وَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ)
"And do not be like the ones who became divided and differed after the clear proofs had come to them. And those will have a great punishment".
[Aal-e-Imran:105]

And it has come in the Hadith of Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, that the Prophet ﷺ said: "Whoever imitates a people is from them".

This it, and the discussion of this issue is extensive and has branches which branch out from this, and what I mentioned is a summary of what I see in this, and Allah knows best.

📁س/ هل اشتهار الشيء وانتشاره بين المسلمين يخرجه عن التشبه بالكافرين؟

____
Translated by:
Abu Ibraheem 'Abdullaah bin Ahmed Ash-Shingaani
www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn

Original fatwa:
www.tgoop.com/youssefalgazairi/96

Previous page ⬆️
www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn/1417

Imam Ibn-Ul-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy upon him, clearly clarifies this in <Madaarij As-Saalikeen> (4/509): "But here is another affair, which is that the punishment for leaving an obligatory affair is postponed until the legislation comes with it, like the statement of the most high points towards:

(وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ حَتَّىٰ نَبْعَثَ رَسُولًا)
"And never would We punish until We sent a messenger."
[Al-Isra':15]

And His statement:

كُلَّمَآ أُلْقِىَ فِيهَا فَوْجٌ سَأَلَهُمْ خَزَنَتُهَآ أَلَمْ يَأْتِكُمْ نَذِيرٌ  ۝ قَالُوا۟ بَلَىٰ قَدْ جَآءَنَا نَذِيرٌ فَكَذَّبْنَا وَقُلْنَا مَا نَزَّلَ ٱللَّهُ مِن شَىْءٍ إِنْ أَنتُمْ إِلَّا فِى ضَلَٰلٍ كَبِيرٍ
“Every time a company is thrown into it, its keepers ask them, “Did there not come to you a warner?” They will say,” Yes, a warner had come to us, but we denied and said, ' Allah has not sent down anything. You are not but in great error.' “
[Al-Mulk:8-9]

And His statement:

(وَمَا كَانَ رَبُّكَ مُهْلِكَ ٱلْقُرَىٰ حَتَّىٰ يَبْعَثَ فِىٓ أُمِّهَا رَسُولًا يَتْلُوا۟ عَلَيْهِمْ ءَايَٰتِنَاۚ وَمَا كُنَّا مُهْلِكِى ٱلْقُرَىٰٓ إِلَّا وَأَهْلُهَا ظَٰلِمُونَ)
"And never would your Lord have destroyed the cities until He had sent to their mother a messenger reciting to them Our verses. And We would not destroy the cities except while their people were wrongdoers".
[Al-Qasas:59]

And His statement:

(وَمَا كَانَ رَبُّكَ لِيُهْلِكَ ٱلْقُرَىٰ بِظُلْمٍ وَأَهْلُهَا مُصْلِحُونَ)
"And your Lord would not have destroyed the cities unjustly while their people were reformers".
[Hud:117]

This points to that they were oppressers before the sending of the Messengers, and that He didn't destroy them for this oppression before the establishment of the evidences". End of speech

What has become clear with this is that it's an evident mistake to use these verses as a proof for the lack of labelling the worshipper of other than Allah as a Mushrik and a Disbeliever outwardly, as these verses are regarding the penalty and the punishment of the Fire, as this was understood and clarified by the: Salaf, from the companions to those after them of the Imams, and there hasn't come any proof nor any speech from the Salaf that these verses negate calling the worshipper of other than Allah a Mushrik:

1. Here we find the Haafidh of the companions, one of leaders of their Jurists: Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him, after he mentioned the testing of the people of Al-Fatrah, and those that take their ruling, and then their end result being either in Jannah or the Fire, he said: "Read if you wish:

(وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ حَتَّىٰ نَبْعَثَ رَسُولًا)
"And never would We punish until We sent a messenger."
[Al-Isra':15]

As the Takhreej, and the establishment of it being authentic, preceded in the first volume.

2. And look at the valuable speech of Shaykh-Ul-Islaam -which will come in the tenth matter- in the clarification of the correct way of using these verses as a proof, and that it only applies to the negation of the punishment before the establishment of the evidences.

3. Ibn-Ul-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy upon him, also said: "What's obligatory upon the slave is to believe that all that take other than the religion of Islam as a a religion to be a disbeliever, and that Allah exalted is He doesn't punish anyone except after establishment of the evidences upon them through the Messenger, and this is generally, and what relates particulars is entrusted to Allah to the knowledge of Allah the mighty and majestic and His ruling, this is in what relates to the rulings of reward and punishment.

As for the rulings of the worldly life, then this is upon the outward of the affair, so the children of the disbelievers and their insane are disbelievers in what relates to the rulings of the worldly life, they take the ruling of their guardians ... Allah exalted is He doesn't punish anyone except after the establishment of the proofs upon them, as the most high said:

(وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ حَتَّىٰ نَبْعَثَ رَسُولًا)
"And never would We punish until We sent a messenger."
[Al-Isra':15].    End of speech from <Tareekul-Hijratayn> (2/900).

[Page 36]

4. Imam, Ibn Baaz, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: "The Hadiths from the Prophet ﷺ are authentic, regarding the testing of the people of Al-Fatrah on the day of Judgement, and they are the ones who the Da'wah of the Messengers didn't reach, and those who take their ruling like the children of the Mushriks, based upon the statement of Allah the mighty and majestic:

(وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ حَتَّىٰ نَبْعَثَ رَسُولًا)
"And never would We punish until We sent a messenger."
[Al-Isra':15]. End of speech

5. The Allaamah, Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Abdulwahaab, may Allah have mercy upon him, said in <Ad-Durar As-Saniyyah fil Ajwabit-najdiyyah> (7/145): "As for those that were worshipping idols and died before the appearance of this religion, then this one their apparent is disbelief, even though it could be possible that the evidences of the Message haven't been established upon them, due to their ignorance and the lack of there being who can notify them, because we rule upon the apparent, as for the rulling relating to the inward - then this is for Allah the most high, He will not punish anyone except after the establishing of the evidences upon them, as the most high said:

(وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ حَتَّىٰ نَبْعَثَ رَسُولًا)
"And never would We punish until We sent a messenger."
[Al-Isra':15]. End of speech

6. The Allaamah, As-Si'di, may Allah have mercy upon him, said in his Tafseer, on the verse in Al-Isra': "Allah the most high is the most just from those that are just, He doesn't punish anyone until the evidences of the Message is established upon them, then they stubborn against the evidences, as for those that submit to the evidences, or those that the evidence of Allah the most high didn't reach, then Allah the most high won't punish them. This verse was used as a proof for that the people of Al-Fataraat, and the children of the Mushriks, won't be punished by Allah, until a Messenger is sent to them, as He is exalted and absolved from oppression". End of speech

7. The Allaamah, Saalih Al-Fawzaan, may Allah preserve him, said regarding the ignorant of Tawheed who is not negligent: "This one is excused, and they will be regarding the people of Al-Fatrah, they are not declared to be Muslims, but they will be from the people of Al-Fatrah - their affair is left to Allah:

(وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ حَتَّىٰ نَبْعَثَ رَسُولًا)
"And never would We punish until We sent a messenger."
[Al-Isra':15]. End of speech from his explanation of "Ad-Dur An-Nadeed" by Shawkaani.

8. Shaykh Saalih bin Abdulazeez Aali Shaykh, may Allah grant him success, said: "So then have affairs connected to the outward, and other affairs to the inward: the inward is followed by some affairs in the Dunya like being fought - and the likes - after the establishing of the evidences.

And the inward is followed by rulings relating to the Hereafter, based upon the statement of the most high:

(وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ حَتَّىٰ نَبْعَثَ رَسُولًا)
"And never would We punish until We sent a messenger."
[Al-Isra':15].

For this reason the people of knowledge have unanimously agreed upon that the people of Al-Fatrah being disbelievers and Mushriks, and they are not labelled with Islam". End of speech from the tape entitled <Al-Eemaan>.

And this is the way of the Imams in their usage of what they use this verse as an evidence for, and their establishment in the clarification of this is many, as a mention of a number of this has preceded in the first volume.


▪️▪️◾️▪️▪️

[Page 37]


Next page ⤵️
www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn/1427

بســـم اللــه الرحــمــن الـرحـــيــم

338◾️The ruling of picturing the deceased◾️

Answered by Fadeelatushaykh Abu Hatim Yusuf Al-'Inaabi Al-Jazaa'iree - may Allah preserve him -

📥Question:

The questioner is also asking about the ruling on taking pictures of the dead.

📤Answer:

If the intention is to photograph the deceased because they are dead, then this is an evil in addition to the evil of picture making.

Making pictures of animate beings is forbidden, and what is meant by picturing animate beings isn't that the soul has to be presented therein.

But what is meant is that this is a creation from creations of Allah in which He has placed a soul therein; Whether the souls are still present therein or if they have been taken. This is forbidden. And the evidences for this are many: "Indeed the most severest of the people punished on the Day of Judgement will be the picture makers". And similarly in the other hadith, it will be said to them: "Give life to what you have created".

The reasoning behind this also comes in other Hadiths: "Those who imitate Allah's creating".

And other affairs which point that impermissibility of picture making is not only that it's a means to Shirk and other than this, rather also it in and itself being impermisible. Because it contains a competing with the imitating of Allah's creation. This is why Imam Al-Najdi, may Allah have mercy on him, made a chapter in his book: "Kitaabut-Tawheed" entitled "The chapter on the prohibition of picture making", or the likes of this.

He placed it in "Kitaabut-Tawheed" due to the connection of picture making to Tawheed. And not just because it is a means to Shirk. Rather because it involves Shirk.

This is because picture making is from the affairs specific to Allah, and that those who falls into picture making of animate beings, has imitated Allah's creating, and picture making is from the affairs which are specific to Allah.

Now if we added picture making of the deceased, then this is an additional prohibition in addition to mere picture making, this is because the condition of a deceased person is not the same as that of a living person, such as there being changes in his facial features, colour, etc. This exposes the deceased which are being picture to being humiliated. And similarly they are also affecting their family, because the deceased has a right in what relates to themselves. And they have a right which is connected to their families, and before this there is also a right connected to Allah exalted is He.

Allah exalted is He said:
(وَلَقَدْ كَرَّمْنَا بَنِىٓ ءَادَمَ)
"And We have certainly honored the children of Adam".
[Al-Isra':70]

And exposing the dead to taking pictures with them is not honoring them, rather it is what contradicts honoring human beings.

This is the summary of the answer to this, in that this is impermissible.

Due to impermissibility of picture making, and due to the impermissibility of subjecting the deceased to humiliation, and also affecting the right of his family, and also - before this - the right of Allah exalted is He.


📁 س/ ما حكم تصوير الميت؟

____
Translated by:
Abu Ibraheem 'Abdullaah bin Ahmed Ash-Shingaani
www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn

Original fatwa:
www.tgoop.com/youssefalgazairi/2706

The previous page ⬆️
www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn/1425

The tenth matter: Is there a difference in this subject matter  between the rulings of the Dunya and that of the Aakhirah, and between Disbelief -or Disbeliever- outwardly, and Disbelief -or Disbeliever- outwardly and inwardly, which of the two contains stipulation of the establishment of the evidences upon particulars?

I say seeking aid with Allah:

The clarification of this preceded in the first volume, in that the evidences made a difference between the two:

▪️As for the ruling of the Hereafter, and what relates to reward and punishment, then there is no punishment nor any torment except for those the evidences have been established upon, the most high said:

(وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ حَتَّىٰ نَبْعَثَ رَسُولًا)
"And never would We punish until We sent a messenger."
[Al-Isra':15]

So whoever had the evidences established upon them, then Shirk is ruled upon them, and they are declared disbelievers outwardly and inwardly, as the clarification of this preceded.

As for those that died whilst ignorant of Tawheed without negligence or turning away - then they take the ruling of the people of Al-Fatrah, those that will be tested by Allah.

And the Shuyuukh of Islam, Ibn Taymiyyah - Ibn-Ul-Qayyim - Muhammad bin Abdulwahaab - Ibn Baaz, similarly other Imams of the Da'wah and those that tread their way, when they negate disbelief from particulars in this area and stipulated the establishing of the evidences - they only intend with this the outward and inward disbelief, which puts the application of the punishment into effect in the worldly life, and the ruling of torment in the Hereafter.

Shaykh-Ul-Islaam, may Allah have mercy upon him, clarified that the negation of Takfeer by the people of knowledge from those that new to Islam and those that are living in far remote places, who are thought to be truly ignorant, that they only intend with this the Disbelief which one is punished for. So this is not applied to particulars except after the establishment of the evidences, and that the verses which contain the negation of the punishment before the establishment of the evidences are only applied to this type of person.

Not what became confusing upon the opposers, who opposes the way of the people of knowledge in this subject matter, and put forth these verses for the establishment of evidences upon those that worship other than Allah to label them a Mushrik!!

Also in the clarification of this Shaykh-Ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, may Allah have mercy upon him, in <Sharh Umdatul Fiqh> (2/35) says: "topic: whoever rejects its obligation due to their ignorance - are to be told, and that rejecting it out of stubbornness is disbelief". This is a continuous basis is the five pillars of Islam, and in all the agreed upon manifest rulings of those who are culpable, if the rejecter is excused for this - like those new to Islam or those that are living in far away remote places, this is due to it thought that they could be ignorant due to this - they are not declared disbelievers until they are made to know that this is the religion of Islam, because the affairs of Disbelief and punishment are not affirmed except after the reaching of the Message, especially in what isn't known by just having intellect, Allah the most high said:

(وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ حَتَّىٰ نَبْعَثَ رَسُولًا)
"And never would We punish until We sent a messenger."
[Al-Isra':15]

And the most high said:

(لِئَلَّا يَكُونَ لِلنَّاسِ عَلَى ٱللَّهِ حُجَّةٌۢ بَعْدَ ٱلرُّسُلِۚ)
"in order that mankind should have no plea against Allah after the Messengers".
[An-Nisaa':165]

And the most high said:

(وَلَوْ أَنَّآ أَهْلَكْنَٰهُم بِعَذَابٍ مِّن قَبْلِهِۦ لَقَالُوا۟ رَبَّنَا لَوْلَآ أَرْسَلْتَ إِلَيْنَا رَسُولًا)
"And if We had destroyed them with a punishment before him, they would have said, "Our Lord, why did You not send to us a messenger".
[Ta Ha:134]

And the most high said:

(وَمَا كَانَ رَبُّكَ مُهْلِكَ ٱلْقُرَىٰ حَتَّىٰ يَبْعَثَ فِىٓ أُمِّهَا رَسُولًا يَتْلُوا۟ عَلَيْهِمْ ءَايَٰتِنَاۚ)
"And never would your Lord have destroyed the cities until He had sent to their mother a messenger reciting to them Our verses".
[Al-Qasas:59]

And the most high said:

(لِأُنذِرَكُم بِهِۦ وَمَنۢ بَلَغَۚ)
"that I may warn you thereby and whomever it reaches."
[Al-An'am:19]

So the warning is by the Qur'an reaching in its wording or meaning, so if the Message reaches them through an intermediary or without an intermediary: then the evidence have been established upon them, and their excuse has been removed.

As for those that are living in the lands of Islam, from those that it's known that these rulings have reached them, then their statement: "I didn't know if this", isn't accepted from them, and they would be from those who rejected its obligation after knowledge has reached them, making them a disbeliever with a Disbelief which expels from the religion". End of speech

▪️As for the rulings of the Dunya, then they are upon the outward - by unanimous agreement, as will come.

So whoever was attributing to Islam or didn't attribute to Islam, from those that are ignorant of Tawheed, then they are rules upon with outward Disbelief, and they are called a Mushrik, and given the rulings of the Mushriks outwardly - in not eating what they slaughter or seeking forgiveness for them or inheriting from them or praying over them, and the likes of them.

And if they remain upon their Shirk after the establishment of the evidences upon them, then the punishment of permitting their blood and wealth is made applicable by the ruler.

▪️▪️◾️▪️▪️


[Page 38-39]

Next page ⤵️
www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn/1430

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

Many questions have reached us from our brothers the students of knowledge, enquiring regarding the promise of the book of our Shaykh Abu Hatim -may Allah ease him from his worries- surrounding the topic of "The excuse of the ignorant of Tawheed".

A delay has occured in printing due to various reasons but we give glad tidings that soon the book will come out printed complete in a one volume form.

With addition of many important topics and replies on doubts and defective usage of proofs, and clear statements from some of the Salaf and Imams in the establishment of this subject matter.

And Allah is the granter of success.

Your brothers in the administration of the group.

البينات الزاخرة

The previous page ⬆️
www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn/1428

So the ruling upon the outward is a fundamental principle in the legislation, unanimously agreed upon amongst the people of knowledge, whoever rules contrary to this - then they opposed the Book and the Sunnah and the way of the believers. As the Hadith of Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, in "the Sahih" points to wards, wherein he said: "The people were held to account by the revelation during the era of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, but the revelation has discontinued, so now we only hold people accountable with what appears to us from their actions, whoever shows good to us we grant him safety and draw them close, and nothing of their private affairs is to us, Allah will hold them to account for their private affairs, whoever manifest bad to us then we don't give them safety nor will we trust them, even if it's said: "Their private affair is good".".

I said:

And the scholars [all of them unanimously agree upon that the rulings relating the Dunya are upon the outward affairs, and Allah is the caretaker over the private affairs]. As stated by Al-Haafidh Ibn Hajr, may Allah have mercy upon him, in "Fathul-Baari" (12/273).

And Ash-Shaatibi, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: "The basis of the ruling with the outward is that it's agreed upon in legislative rulings specifically, and in relation to creed of others generally". "Al-Muwafaqaat" (2/467).

Ibn-Ul-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: "Whoever rules upon people with contrary what shows from them, using as a proof that they manifested is contrary to what they have inwardly, by indication from them or with no indication: isn't free with me of being in contradiction to what's revealed and the Sunnah". "I'laamul-Muwaqi'een" (2/84).

So with this Hadith and other than it of proofs, it has become clear that those that manifest major Shirk are called a Mushrik, as this their action which they manifested, so how can they be a Muslim - when a Muslim can not be except someone who is a person of Tawheed?!

As Islam is submitting to Allah with Tawheed, and compliance to Him with been obedient, and being free from Shirk and its people.

And this individual is perpetrating the opposite, which is major Shirk, so how can these two things come together?!

▪️In the establishment of what preceded of the differentiation, Imam Ibn-Ul-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy you him, said: "A. Allah will rule between His slaves on the day of judgement with His wisdom and His justness, and he won't punish except those His evidences have been established upon through the Messengers, this is declared regarding the creation as a whole, as for Zaid or Amr individually, have the evidences been established upon them or not, this you can't come between Allah and His slaves in this, rather what's obligatory is that the slave believes:
- Whoever takes on a religion besides Islam, that they are a Disbeliever.
- That Allah exalted is He and the most high doesn't punish anyone except after the establishing of the evidences upon them through the Messenger. This is generally stating, as for particulars then this is left to the knowledge of Allah and His ruling, this is regarding rewards and punishment.
B. As for the ruling in the Dunya - then this upon its apparent affair, so the children of the disbelievers and their insane, are disbelievers in the ruling of the Dunya and they take the ruling of their caretakers, by way of this elaboration the confusion departs in the subject matter". <Tareeq Al-Hijratayn> (p.608).


[Page 40]

بســـم اللــه الرحــمــن الـرحـــيــم

339◾️The ruling of giving out Zakaat outside of the country where one resides◾️

Answered by Fadeelatushaykh Abu Hatim Yusuf Al-'Inaabi Al-Jazaa'iree - may Allah preserve him -

📥Question:

What's the ruling of giving out Zakaat outside of the country where one resides, to a student of knowledge who migrated out of their country, for example to the Yemeni students of knowledge outside of their countries.

📤Answer:

It has come in the "Two Sahihs" on the authority of Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, that the Prophet ﷺ sent Muadh, may Allah be pleased with him, to Yemen [and it contains]: "If they obey you in this then inform them that Allah has obligated Zakaat upon them from their wealth, which is taken from their rich and given to their poor".

The apparent of this Hadith points to that the Zakaat is given to the poor of the country which the one who is giving the Zakaat resides in.

As [the neighbour of the money has more right to their Zakaat].

And through this all those that are in that land are sufficed with what they have of Zakaat, and through exporting it -without need or a legislative benefit- the people of that land remain being in need.

If there is a need in exporting it like, those deserving Zakaat being rare in the place of resident, or due to their relatives in their country of origin being in need, then they will have the quality of kinship alongside eligibility of the Zakaat, or due to the presence of Muslims who are more severe in need and being harmed in other than the place of residence, and other than this of legislative benefits.

Shaykh-Ul-Islaam, may Allah have mercy upon him, said as found in "Al-Ikthiyaaraat" (p.99): "If the Zakaat was transferred to those eligible in a ruled country, for example: for someone from Cairo was to be given what was collected in Egypt, then what's correct is that this is permissible. As the residents of that country are to be assisted from their farms, contrary to transferring from a province whilst the people of that place being in need of it.

And the Salaf said: [the neighbour of the money has more right to their Zakaat].

And they disliked transferring the Zakaat to the country where the ruler resides and elsewhere, so that all areas are sufficed with what they have of Zakaat, for this reason it was in the letter of Muadh bin Jabal: "Whoever moved to a province from another province then what he collects is in the province of his neighbours".

Provinces have what's called: Al-Mu'aamalah, and this is a person in charge and a judge, and they are who the ruler puts in charge to collect the Zakaat from their rich to give to their poor, and he didn't restricted it to the distance of two days, and there is no proof for the restricting the preventing of transfer of Zakaat to the distance of the shortening [of the prayer], and it is permissible to transfer the Zakaat and what takes its ruling for a legislative benefit". End of speech


📁 س/ ما حكم اخراج الزكاة خارج البلد المقيم فيه؟

____
Translated by:
Abu Ibraheem 'Abdullaah bin Ahmed Ash-Shingaani
www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn

Original fatwa:
www.tgoop.com/youssefalgazairi/95

بســـم اللــه الرحــمــن الـرحـــيــم

340◾️The ruling of eating snails◾️

Answered by Fadeelatushaykh Abu Hatim Yusuf Al-'Inaabi Al-Jazaa'iree - may Allah preserve him -

📥Question:

What is the ruling on eating snails?


📤Answer:

The basis regarding things that are benefited from is that they are allowed, unless there is evidence that transfers away from this basis.

Based upon the statement of the most high:

(هُوَ ٱلَّذِى خَلَقَ لَكُم مَّا فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ جَمِيعًا ثُمَّ ٱسْتَوَىٰٓ إِلَى ٱلسَّمَآءِ فَسَوَّىٰهُنَّ سَبْعَ سَمَٰوَٰتٍۚ وَهُوَ بِكُلِّ شَىْءٍ عَلِيمٌ)
"It is He who created for you all of that which is on the earth. Then He directed Himself to the heaven, [His being above all creation], and made them seven heavens, and He is Knowing of all things".
[Al-Baqarah:29]

And the most high said:

(قُل لَّآ أَجِدُ فِى مَآ أُوحِىَ إِلَىَّ مُحَرَّمًا عَلَىٰ طَاعِمٍ يَطْعَمُهُۥٓ إِلَّآ أَن يَكُونَ مَيْتَةً أَوْ دَمًا مَّسْفُوحًا أَوْ لَحْمَ خِنزِيرٍ فَإِنَّهُۥ رِجْسٌ أَوْ فِسْقًا أُهِلَّ لِغَيْرِ ٱللَّهِ بِهِۦۚ)
"Say, "I do not find within that which was revealed to me [anything] forbidden to one who would eat it unless it be a dead animal or blood spilled out or the flesh of swine - for indeed, it is impure -  or it be that which is slaughtered as a sacrifice to other than Allah".
[Al-An'am:145]

The land snail is an animal that does not have a nafs saail, as it has no blood. And it is not considered a Mustakbath (bad despicable), such as for it to be aligned to what is considered Khabaaith and then be prohibited. Rather, it has numerous benefits.

As for the way it's slaughtered.
Imam Ibn Abu Zayd Al-Qayrawani, may Allah have mercy on him, said: "Ibn Habib said: "Maalik permitted the eating of snails, and he said: “It is slaughtered with the same action that kills locusts, which kills it, and what died from it without action is not to be eaten, and you mentioned Allah's name when you do that action to it, from boiling, or stabbing it with a needles, thorns, or other than this".". End of speech.

So based on the above, it is permissible to eat snails, and Allah knows best.

📁 س/ ما حكم أكل الحلزون؟

____
Translated by:
Abu Ibraheem 'Abdullaah bin Ahmed Ash-Shingaani
www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn

Original fatwa:
www.tgoop.com/youssefalgazairi/117

بســـم اللــه الرحــمــن الـرحـــيــم

341◾️The ruling on a woman working outside from home out of dire necessity◾️

Answered by Fadeelatushaykh Abu Hatim Yusuf Al-'Inaabi Al-Jazaa'iree - may Allah preserve him -

📥Question:

The last question is regarding the ruling on a woman working outside her home if there’s no one to take care for her, her children, and their provisions.

📤Answer:

This the Salaf have repeated speech on it. Which is that a woman working outside her home; if it was out of dire necessity, such as being without an up-keeper for her and her children, due to the passing away of her husband, or an illness, and the like (of what legislatively falls into dire necessity), then it’s permissible in this case to work out of necessity.

However, on the conditions that when going out she covers to what Allah Aza wa Jal has commanded with, and also avoiding all types of scents which would draw her to great sorrows, such as perfumes and the like.

Likewise, from the types of clothes that lures (and is susceptible) to looking, that’s in relation to clothing. Furthermore, in relation to the work, is that it doesn’t involve Haram such as free-mixing, or the essence of it in itself is prohibited. So, if the work itself is permissible and alongside that her going out is not accompanied by anything of evil, then in this case it’s permissible for her to work out of necessity.

____
Translated by:
Abu Mālik Nāsir bin Rāshid Al-Ma’mary

www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn

Original fatwa:
www.tgoop.com/youssefalgazairi/2720

(3) Reported by Ad-Daarimi in his "Muqadimmatus-Sunan" (No. 411), and our Shaykh said in "Al-Urf Al-Wardi" (p. 181): It is authentic, and it was reported by Al-Aajuri No. (62).
(4) It was reported by the authors of Sunan, and it is in "Sahih Al-Musnad" (No. 270) by Allaamah Al-Waadi’i, may Allah have mercy on him.
(5) Reported by Bukhari (432) and Muslim (777) on the authority of Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with them both.
(6) Reported by Bukhari (731) and Muslim (781) on the authority of Zaid bin Thabit, may Allah be pleased with him.
(7) Reported by Bukhari (999) and Muslim (700) on the authority of Ibn Umar, may Allah be pleased with them both.

____
Translated by:
Abu Ibraheem 'Abdullaah bin Ahmed Ash-Shingaani
www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn

Original fatwa:
www.tgoop.com/youssefalgazairi/2806

بســـم اللــه الرحــمــن الـرحـــيــم

343◾️The ruling on accepting financial support from disbelieving governments◾️

Answered by Fadeelatushaykh Abu Hatim Yusuf Al-'Inaabi Al-Jazaa'iree - may Allah preserve him -

📥Question:

Is it permissible to accept financial aid and concessions given by disbelieving governments?

📤Answer:

It’s appropriate to be above that unless it was out of necessity or an urgent need, such that there’s not for them an act of favour over the Muslims, or it becomes a pathway to watering down Al-Wala wal-Bara.

For verily, the disbelievers do not give out aid for the Muslims except they have by way of that or behind it a particular intention (or motive).

Wallahul-Musta’aan.

____
Translated by:
Abu Mālik Nāsir bin Rāshid Al-Ma’mary

www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn

Original fatwa:
www.tgoop.com/youssefalgazairi/12

بســـم اللــه الرحــمــن الـرحـــيــم

344◾️The ruling regarding health insurance◾️

Answered by Fadeelatushaykh Abu Hatim Yusuf Al-'Inaabi Al-Jazaa'iree - may Allah preserve him -

📥Question:

What’s the ruling regarding health insurance?

It works by paying a little amount (on a monthly or so basis), then if a person becomes sick of an illness, the governing body pays out financial aid?

📤Answer:

Voluntary insurance is prohibited as it’s a form of gambling.

____
Translated by:
Abu Mālik Nāsir bin Rāshid Al-Ma’mary

www.tgoop.com/AbuHaatimEn

Original fatwa:
www.tgoop.com/youssefalgazairi/12