Jilbab and the Muslim Woman's Dress Code

The sources in Islamic law are primarily the Qur’an and Sunnah[1]. The Qur’an, the book held sacred by Muslims, contains approximately 500 verses dealing with diverse topics which are of a legal relevance. The Sunnah represents the repository of reports of sayings, acts and consent of the Prophet Muhammad. The role of the Sunnah is seen as an elaboration of the Quranic injunctions. There are other sources which derive from the two primary sources and they are the Ijma’ (legal consensus), Qiyas (analogical deduction) and other disputed sources but they are not relevant to the discussion at hand. The Notion of an Islamic Dress Code

Islamic law is comprehensive in its enunciation of a code of conduct with respect to an individual’s life and dealings with others. Part of this are the rules pertaining to dress and attire. The dress code includes rules for men and women. So for example, a man is obliged to cover a certain part of his body whilst in front of others and he is not allowed to wear gold and silk which women are allowed to do. On the other hand women are also obliged to cover a certain part of their person when going out of the family home wearing a headscarf (khimar) and an outer garment (jilbab) which men are not required to do. Thus, the jilbab is not a new innovation but part of the well known attire of the dress code for Muslim women.

Explicit Mention of Jilbab in Primary Muslim Religious Sources

The authority of the requirement for women to wear the jilbab is the Qur’an itself. In the chapter of al-Ahzab (The Confederates) the following verse instructs Prophet Muhammad:

'O Prophet! Say to your wives and your daughters and the women of the faithful to draw their jalabib (pl. of jilbab) close around them; that is better that they will be recognized and not annoyed. And God is ever Forgiving, Gentle.’ [2]

The divine wisdom for instructing women to wear the jilbab mentioned in the above verse is so that women be modestly attired and not be subject to the irreverent insults of the unscrupulous.

The obligation of jilbab is also derived from the Sunnah of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) which is the second primary source of law for Muslims.

Narrated Umm Atiyya: We were ordered to bring out our menstruating women and screened women to the religious gatherings and invocation of the Muslims on the two Eid festivals. These menstruating women were to keep away from the musalla. A woman asked, "O Messenger of Allah! What about one who does not have a jilbab?". He said, "Let her borrow the jilbab of her companion".[3]

The above understanding was practised by women at the time of the revelation of the above verse as the following reports indicate:

A report narrated Umm Salama,(A wife of the Prophet): When the verse, "That they should draw their jalabib close around them" was revealed, the women of Ansar (inhabitants of Madinah) came out as if they had crows over their heads by wearing jalabib.[4]

A report narrated by Aisha (Another wife of the Prophet): The wife of Rifa'a al-Qurazi came to Allah's Messenger while I was sitting...and she was showing the fringe of her jilbab.[5]

The Opinion of Reputable Experts in Quranic Exegeses

The classical experts of Quranic exegesis all support the legitimacy of the jilbab with only difference being whether it extends to covering that face. Here are some quotes from the most widely recognised Sunni sources.

Ibn Jarir At-Tabari (d.310[6]):

‘God Almighty said to His Prophet Muhammad (pbuh[7]): Tell your wives, daughters and the wives of the believers…that they should draw over themselves their jilbabs.’

Al-Qurtubi (d.671):

‘Jalabeeb is the plural of jilbab, and it is a garment larger than a khimar (headscarf). It has been narrated by Ibn ‘Abbas and Ibn Masud that it is a ridaa (large sheet of cloth). It is said that it is a qina’/veil but the correct view is that it is a garment which covers the whole body. It has been reported in Sahih Muslim on the authority of Umm ‘Atiyyah who asked; "O Messenger of Allah! What about one who does not have a jilbab?". He said, "Let her borrow the jilbab of her companion".

Fakhr ad-Din ar-Razi (d. 606):

‘In the days of Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic times) the free and women in bondage would go out uncovered and they would be followed by those intent on fornication and consequently allegations would be levelled against them. So that is why God ordered the free women to wear the jilbab.’[8]

Ibn Kathir (d.774):

‘God Almighty commands His Messenger (Muhammad) to command the believing women – especially his wives and daughters – to draw the jilbab over their persons’[9]

In Safwat at-tafasir, a modern work by Muhammad Ali as-Sabuni, which compiled the exegeses from most of the reputable works of Quranic exegesis, said that verse 59 of chapter Ahzab is saying to the Prophet to ‘tell the women that they should wear a wide outer garment.’[10] This is the consensus view of the traditional Sunni scholars.

This view is not confined only to Sunnis but is the view of the Imami Shia as well:

Al-Janabizi said:

‘The women did not cover their faces and chests with their jilbabs, hence God Almighty ordered them to cover their faces and chest with jilbabs so that they can be distinguished from other women. The woman’s jilbab is a wide garment worn over the normal clothes…’[11]

Views of Contemporary Scholars

The classical position that that the jilbab is obligatory is the view generally held by contemporary scholars as well. Like the classical scholars their difference was on whether the jilbab should cover the face or not and not on the conditions of the jilbab. As an example of the contemporary position the following are words of the deobandi Mufti Ibn Adam al-Kawthari which is representative of the general view: ‘The above and other interpretations of jilbab are clear that a jilbab is the outer garment that women must wear when emerging in front of strangers. This garment must be wide, loose, and modest and covers the body completely.’

Sheikh Muhammad Al-Hanooti:

‘The verse 59 of Surah Al-Ahzab urges a woman to wear a Jilbab. A Jilbab means the outer garment over her inner clothes to guarantee that everything of her body is covered and doesn’t show or shape any of her figures. That is the objective of Shari’a.’

What is a Jilbab?

The jilbab is an outer garment which covers the whole body. This definition is discerned from a lexical and textual basis:

Lexical description of jilbab as an Outer Garment:

The nature and description of the jilbab can be understood from the lexical definition of the word jilbab as explained in classical Arabic dictionaries. These sources also explain the function of the jilbab as an outer garment:
Ibn Manzur:

"The jilbab is the outer garment, mantle, or cloak. It is derived from the verb tajallbaba, which means to clothe. Jilbab is the outer sheet or covering which a woman wraps around her on top of her garments to cover herself from head to toe. It hides her body completely"[12]

Al-Fayruz abadi:

"The jilbab...is that which conceals the clothes like a cover"[13]

As for modern dictionaries it is worth citing from the monumental work of the 19th-century British scholar and lexicographer Edward William Lane (1801-76):

Arabic-English Lexicon: ‘jilbab: …one that envelopes the whole body: (TA) and a wide garment for a woman, less than the milhafah (sheet): or one with which a woman covers over her other garments…’[14]

This description has also been given in the Oxford Dictionary of Islam edited by John L. Esposito where it states:

Jilbab Generic term for women’s outer garment (shawl, cloak, wrap) in Arabian sedentary communities before and after the rise of Islam. The Qur’an (333:59) instructs Muslim women to cloak themselves as a mark of status and as a defensive measure against sexual harassment in public places.[15]
The textual definition as enunciated by the law giver is of jilbab as an outer garment.

The reasons for concluding that the jilbab is an outer garment are textual as well as linguistic. What is meant by textual in this context is the primary corpus of Islamic legal text obligated by the law giver i.e. the Qur’an and the practise of Prophet Muhammad. So for example in chapter 24 the following verse gives elderly women the option to set aside their outer garment:

‘And as for women past child-bearing who do not expect wed-lock, it is no sin on them if they discard their (outer) clothing in such a way as not to show their adornment. But to refrain (i.e. not to discard their outer clothing) is better for them. And Allâh is All-Hearer, All-Knower.’ [24:60]

The garment mentioned must be an outer garment as the verse could not possibly be saying they should discard their normal everyday clothing. That is why companions of Muhammad, such as Ibn ‘Abbas and Ibn Mas’ud, both understood the garment to refer to the jilbab, since that is the outer garment that is worn by women.[16] Both of whom are considered experts in Quran exegesis.
Authority for it as an outer garment is also to be found in the Sunnah. The above report of Umm ‘Atiyyah is clear in its indication that the jilbab is an outer garment. This is because the Prophet stipulated that before going out she needs to wear a jilbab and if she does not have one she must ‘…borrow the jilbab of her companion".[17] The fact that she was not allowed to go outside without it indicates its function as an outer garment.

Also Abu Dawud records a report on the authority of Umm Salama (a wife of the Prophet) which indicates that jilbab is an outer garment. It is reported that she asked the Prophet: "Can a woman pray in a long dress and a headscarf without wearing an izar (a type of jilbab)?" He (pbuh) replied, "If the long dress is ample and covers the surface of her feet." (Abu Dawud[18]) The fact that Umma Salmah asked if she can wear a long dress and headscarf without the izar (jilbab), this indicates that the izar (jilbab) is normally worn on top of the regular clothes.

This is supported by the view of companions who said that the clothing of women during prayer is the above three items, which means the izar (jilbab) must have been worn above the normal clothes. So for example it is narrated that Umar (ra) said: ‘The woman should pray in three items of clothing: long dress, headscarf and izar (jilbab).’ It is also reported that his son Abdullah b. Umar said: ‘The woman should pray wearing long dress, headscarf and milhafa[19] (jilbab).’[20]

It is due to the above narrations that Al-Shirazi took the view that the jilbab is the outer garment as the following excerpt shows: ‘It is recommended that when a woman prays that she wears three items of clothing: a headscarf by which to cover the head and neck. A dress to cover the body and feet and a milhafa (jilbab) by which to cover her clothes. This is due to the report that Umar (ra) said: ‘The woman should pray in three items of clothing: dress, headscarf and izar (jilbab).’ It is also reported that Abdullah b. Umar who said ‘The woman should pray wearing dress, headscarf and milhafah (jilbab).’ Also, it is recommended that her jilbab is thick so that it does not describe parts of her body and does not move away when she assumed the bowing and prostration positions so that it does not describe her clothes.’
An-Nawawi (d.676)[21], a commentator of Al-Shirazi’s Muhazzab explained the latter’s comments and attributed it to Shafi’i (the founder of the Shafi’i school of thought): ‘This ruling has been stated by ash-Shafi’i and the scholars of the school are agreed on this.’ Then he quotes the view that the jilbab: ‘is a sheet worn over the clothes i.e. that it is an outer garment)’ saying: ‘This view is correct and it is the view of ash-Shafi’i (i.e. that the jilbab is worn over the ones clothes).[22]

Ibn Hazm stated in his al-Muhalla: ‘In the Arabic language of the Prophet, jilbab is the outer garment which covers the entire body. A piece of cloth which is too small to cover the entire body could not be called jilbab.’[23]

Thus, the fact that the jilbab is an outer garment is established by the Qur’an and Sunnah and it is the same meaning understood by the companions of Muhammad (pbuh) and attested by the scholars.

Other conditions:

There are other conditions which are not specific to jilbab but generally applicable to all clothing when women go before non-mahrams (close relations to whom marriage is impermissible) whether inside or outside the home. They are the following:

i. It must be loose-fitting
ii. Should not be semi-transparent
iii. Should not become an attraction (tabarruj)
iv. Should not resemble the clothing of men.

These conditions are well known and accepted and there is no need to dwell on them, for further discussion of their evidences one can consult the relevant books of Islamic jurisprudence. [24]

Is Selwar Kameez Sufficient?

The question that needs to be answered is that does it fulfil the key requirements of a jilbab i.e. is it a loose fitting outer garment which covers the entire body? The Selwar Kameez normally does not cover the whole body but leaves some parts exposed and nor is it always loose fitting and provided even these are met it is certainly not an outer garment. It is not worn over ones normal clothes; rather it is an every day garment worn by south Asian women. An outer garment by definition is worn over the home clothes and outside the home whereas the Selwar Kameez is the normal home clothes worn inside the home. Therefore, the Selwar Kameez fails the first basic criteria of being an outer garment before one looks at the other criteria’s that have been mentioned.

Is modest clothing enough to fulfil the requirement of Jilbab?

The answer to the question depends whether one includes the conditions mentioned above as part of what constitutes modest clothing. It is valid that the outside garments do not all have to be uniform in their design but they nevertheless have to fulfil the criteria set down by Islamic law. Modesty is not left to the subjective interpretation of individuals but rules have been laid down governing the requirements of modesty i.e. modesty cannot transcend the conditions but must incorporate them. Hence, it is not enough that the garments cover the whole body but is tight fitting and not is it enough that it is loose fitting but not an outer garment. In this respect, the outer garment can be of diverse forms as long as the individual conditions have been met.

Juristic Difference and the Muslim Individual

Those not familiar with Islamic law wonder why certain Muslims insist on following a rule which other Muslims do not follow and consequently assume that the one insisting is extreme or un-necessarily strict. So for example, a particular Muslim scholar might say a certain dress as acceptable, but this does not mean others are bound or even allowed to follow this view. The reason for the difference is that like any other legal tradition Muslim jurists differ on the details of law and it is up to the individual to follow the verdict of the jurist s/he regards as the most trustworthy and competent. The criterion for following a particular ruling is not self interest and expediency but the competence of the jurist who derived it. Having followed a particular verdict this becomes God’s law for that individual and cannot be changed for considerations of public approval or disapproval. This because not following the rule is an abandonment of a religious obligation which has to be accounted for in the Hereafter. Thus, in the context of the jilbab for a Muslim woman who follows a particular jurist’s understanding of what is required by Islamic law, she is obliged to follow that even if others hold different views simply because she believes that view to be sound. In this respect, it does not matter what contrary views exist out there as the obligation on her is to follow the jurist she trusts and not what is expedient. Particularly in this case as the view that jilbab is necessary is something that is expressed in both the letter of the law and in harmony with the spirit of the law. In fact it is a rule that traditionally has not been a matter of dispute amongst early jurists both Sunnite and Shiite.

Religious Duty or Political Statement?

Jilbab is essentially a religious duty first and foremost. The authority for it is derived directly from Islamic sources and not the political writings of contemporary Muslims. It was advocated by the classical jurists who expounded its requirement a thousand years before the phenomenon of resurgent Islam. The jilbab predates the current political controversies and therefore the motivation for adhering to it is born of a feeling of religious obligation and not a political statement. The legislative wisdom behind the jilbab dress code is for women to be modestly attired as mentioned in the aforementioned verse and commentary of the Qur’an. The motivation is religious. Had the motive been other than religious then it would not be accepted as an act of worship which requires that the act be of exclusive devotion to God. Wearing it as a political statement or even a fashion statement and not a religious obligation will still be considered as sinful act because the motivation was not adherence to the religious obligation which is the only motive that is acceptable in matters of obeisance to God.

Is Jilbab a symbol of Oppression?

The Muslim woman’s attire are viewed by some non-Muslims as oppressive because, it is claimed, the jilbab represents the inferior status of woman, that they are compelled against their will or that it inhibits their participation in public life. This view is not born of an understanding of the divine wisdom for legislating the dress and nor from the positive effects that accrue from its adherence. Rather, the origins of such thinking are the abuse of women by some Muslim men which Islamic law itself denounces or the stereotypical perceptions of role of women in Islam[25]. Islamic law views men and women the same in their worth and religiosity before their Lord. The disparity in the rules arises not from a discriminatory view of any one gender but the fact that Islamic law recognises that there is a gender difference and hence prescribes rules accordingly. The great majority of rules apply equally to men and women due to their identical nature and but differ in a few cases due to the gender dissimilarity. Thus, Muslim women wear the jilbab to remain modestly attired in public life and feel that it enhances their worth rather than diminish it. Its practical effects are also appealing to women who feel they can confidently[26] participate in the outside activities such as work and study free from the disrespectful glances of men. So far from obstructing women’s social participation the jilbab actually facilitates it by empowering and liberating her from unwanted sexual advances and thereby promoting an atmosphere which is conducive to the social interaction of men and women.


Appendix I: legal verdict (fatwa) of Mufti al-Kawthari[27]:

In the name of Allah, Most Compassionate, Most Merciful,

Allah Most High says:

“O Prophet! Tell your wives and daughters and believing women that they should cast their outer garments over their persons. That is most convenient that they should be known (as such) and not molested. And Allah is Most Forgiving and Most Merciful”. (Surah al-Ahzab, 59).

The above verse is clear in determining that it is obligatory (fard) upon a woman to cover herself with a jilbab. This leaves us with a question, what is a jilbab?

It is stated in Lisan al-Arab:

“Jilbab, plural of Jalabib: an outer garment or a cloak with it a woman covers her head and chest. And it is said: It is a long cloak that covers a woman completely”. (Ibn Manzur, Lisan al-Arab, 2/317).

Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) states:

“Jilbab is long cloak that covers a woman from her head to her feet”. (Ruh al-Ma’ani, 22/88).
The above and other interpretations of Jilbab are clear that a jilbab is the outer garment that women must wear when emerging in front of strangers. This garment must be wide, loose, and modest and covers the body completely.

After the revelation of this verse, many female Companions (Allah be pleased with them all) used to emerge outside their homes with complete reticence as though birds were sitting on their heads. They used to cover themselves with long black cloaks. (See: Ruh al-Ma’ani, 22/89).

Therefore, a woman must cover her self with a loose and modest cloak when emerging in front of strangers. This may be a traditional veil (burqa) or some other garment.

And Allah knows best

Appendix II: Biographies of Scholars:

Contemporary Scholars:

Muhammad Ali as-Sabuni: a professor at the College of Sharia and Islamic Studies, Mecca. Author of Safwat At-Tafasir (Beirut: Dar Al-Qur’an Al-Karim, 1402 a.h., 1981).

Mufti Muhammad ibn Adam al-Kawthari: Mufti Muhammad ibn Adam al-Kawthari completed the Dars-e-Nizami curriculum of Islamic studies under traditional scholars in Britain, after which he completed a specialization in hadith, in which he covered the 9 major works of hadith, and culminated this with the attainment of a 2-year specialization in the science of giving legal verdicts (ifta’), under Mufti Taqi Usmani and other top scholars in Pakistan. He then went to Syria, where he completed a Master’s in Advanced Fiqh through al-Azhar (Cairo), and studied under top Arab scholars. One of these scholars, Shaykh Abd al-Latif Farfour said that Mufti Muhammad ibn Adam has a tremendous future, and seems destined to become one of the top scholars of our times. He presently teaches at a Darul Uloom in Leicester, and answers people’s questions at Darul Iftaa.[28]

Sheikh Muhammad Al-Hanooti: Born: March 12, 1937 in Haifa, Palestine. Education: Learned Shari’a from his father, Sheikh Ali Hanouti, and in Al-Azhar he studied Hadith at the hands of Sheikh Muhammad Said Azzawi from 1953-1958. Previous Positions: Was an imam, teacher and khatib in Baghdad from 1962-1965. Was an imam, teacher and khatib in Kuwait from 1965-1978. He has served as the head of various Islamic centers in the United States since 1978, including Jersey City, NJ, and Dar Al-Hijra, in Virginia. He is a member of the North American Fiqh Council.

Classical Scholars:

Ibn Hazm: born November 7, 994, Córdoba, Caliphate of Córdoba died August 15, 1064, Manta Lisham, near Sevilla in full Abu Muhammad 'Ali ibn Ahmad ibn Sa'id Ibn Hazm Muslim litterateur, historian, jurist, and theologian of Islamic Spain, famed for his literary productivity, breadth of learning, and mastery of the Arabic language. One of the leading exponents of the Zahiri (Literalist) school of jurisprudence, he produced some 400 works, covering jurisprudence, logic...[29]

Ibn Jarir At-Tabari (d.310): born c. 839,Amol, Tabaristan [Iran]died 923, Baghdad, Iraq in full Abu Ja'far Muhammad Ibn Jarir At-tabari Muslim scholar, author of enormous compendiums of early Islamic history and Qur'anic exegesis, who made a distinct contribution to the consolidation of Sunni thought during the 9th century. Major works. His life's labour began with the Qur'an Commentary and was followed by the History of Prophets and Kings. At-Tabari's History became so popular that the Samanid prince Mansur ibn Nuh had it translated into Persian (c. 963).[30]

Fakhr ad-Din ar-Razi (d. 606): born 1149, Rayy, Iran died 1209, near Herat, Khwarezm. Abu 'abd Allah Muhammad Ibn 'umar Ibn Al-husayn Fakhr Ad-din Ar-razi Muslim theologian and scholar, author of one of the most authoritative commentaries on the Qur'an in the history of Islam. His aggressiveness and vengefulness created many enemies and involved him in numerous intrigues. His intellectual brilliance, however, was universally acclaimed and attested by such works as Mafatih al-ghayb or Kitab at-tafsir al-kabir (“The Keys to the Unknown” or “The Great Commentary”) and Muhassal afkar al-mutaqaddimin wa-al-muta'akhkhirin (“Collection of the Opinions of Ancients and Moderns”).[31]

Ibn Kathir (d.774): was an Islamic scholar born in Busra, Syria in 1301 CE. He was taught by the Islamic scholar Ibn Taymiyya in Damascus, Syria and Ibn al-Qayyim. Ibn Kathir wrote a famous commentary of the Qur'an named Tafsir ibn Kathir which linked certain Hadith, or sayings of Muhammad, and sayings of the Sahaba (companions of Muhammad) to verses of the Qur'an, in explanation. Tafsir Ibn Kathir is famous all over the Islamic world and among Muslims in the Western world, and is one of the most widely used explanations of the Qu'ran today.[32]

An-Nawawi (d.676): (born 1233 - 1278), author on Fiqh and Hadith, was born at Nawa near Damascus. In the latter city he studied from his eighteenth year, and there, after making the pilgrimage in 1253, he settled as a private scholar until 1267, when he succeeded Abu Shama as professor of hadith at the Ashrafiyya school. He died at Nawa at a relatively young age, having never married.[33]

Al-Qurtubi (d.671): Imam Abu 'Abdullah Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Abu Bakr al-Ansari al-Qurtubi, was born in Cordoba, Spain, at the summit of its great period of Islamic civilization. He was an eminent Maliki scholar who specialized in fiqh and Hadith. The breadth and depth of his scholarship are evident in his writings. The most famous of then is his twenty-volume tasfir al Jami' li-ahkam al-Qar'an.[34]

ash-Shafi’i: born , 767, Arabia died Jan. 20, 820, al-Fustat, Egypt Muslim legal scholar who played an important role in the formation of Islamic legal thought and was the founder of the Shafi'iyah school of law. He also made a basic contribution to religious and legal methodology with respect to the use of traditions.[35]

Classical Arabic Lexicographers:

Al-Fayruz abadi: Abu-t-Tahir Ibn Ibrahim Majd ud-Din ul-Fairuzabadi (1329-1414) was an Arab lexicographer born at Karazin near Shiraz (in modern Iran) and educated in Shiraz, Wasit, Baghdad and Damascus. He lived in Jerusalem for ten years and then travelled in western Asia and Egypt, before settling in Mecca in 1368. He remained there for the bulk of the next three decades, spending some time in Delhi in the 1380s, and finally leaving Mecca in the mid-1390s to return to Baghdad, Shiraz (where he was received by Timur), and finally travelling to Ta'izz in modern Yemen. In 1395, he was appointed chief qadi (judge) of Yemen and married a daughter of the sultan. During the later years of his life, Fairuzabadi converted his house at Mecca into a school of Maliki law and established three teachers in it. He also wrote a huge lexicographical work uniting the dictionaries of Ibn Sida, a Spanish philologist (d. 1066), and of Sajani (d. 1252). An abridgement of this last work was published as Al-Qamus Al-Muhit (Comprehensive Dictionary) and has over the centuries itself served as the basis of some later dictionaries.Ibn Manzur: Period: 1230 – 1311. Full name: Jamaluddin Muhamad Bin Mukkaram Ibn Manzur, was born in Tunis and died in Cairo. The author of the most comprehensive dictionary of Arabic called Lisan ul Arab, in twenty volumes.[36]

[1] For a good over view see: Sources of Islamic Law: An Overview by Yasin Dutton. http://www.muhajabah.com/docstorage/dutton.htm
[2] Qur’an: (33:59)
[3] Sahih Bukhari Book 8/347
[4] Sunan Abu Dawud 32/4090
[5] Sahih Bukhari Book 72/684
[6] Date of death according to Hijri calendar.
[7] pbuh is abbreviation for ‘peace be upon him.’
[8] ar-Razi, Fakhr ad-Din, at-Tafsir al-Kabir, p.231.
[9] Ibn Kathir, Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘Azim.
[10] as-Sabuni, Muhammad Ali, safwat at-tafasir, p.538.
[11] al-Janabizi, Tafsir bayan al-sa’adah fi muqaddimat al-ibadah, see commentary of verse 59 of surah Ahzab.
[12] Ibn Man.zur, Mu.hammad ibn Mukarram, Lisan al-`Arab, (Bayrut : Dar .Sadir, 1955-56). Vol.7, p. 273.
[13] Al-Fayruzabadi, al-Qamus al-Muhit,
[14] Lane, Edward William, An Arabic-English lexicon, (London 1863-1893) under the relevant root verb.
[15] Esposito, John L. (ed.), The Oxford Dictionary of Islam, (Oxford University Press, 2003).p.160.
[16] al-Qurtubi, Jami li-ahkam al-Qur’an, verse 60 of sura Nur.
[17] Sahih Bukhari Book 8/347
[18] This narration is mawquf and is attributed more correctly to Umm Salama, the wife of the Prophet.
[19] Milhafa is a synonym of jilbab. Notice here Abdullah b. Umar uses the word milhafa (jilbab) instead of izar, indicating that izar here is the jilbab. See al-majmu’ sharh al-muhazzab, p.259.
[20] Al-Nawawi, al-majmu’ sharh al-muhazzab, (Beirut, 2002), pp.258.
[21] A major reference for Islamic law who’s interpretation of law is canonized in the Malaysian legal code.
[22] An-Nawawi, al-majmu’ sharh al-muhazzab, (Beirut, 2002), pp.258-9.
[23] Ibn Hazm, Al-Muhalla, vol. 3, p.217
[24] For a contemporary source see Badawi, Jamal, The Muslim Woman’s Dress According to the Qur’an and Sunnah, (Ta-Ha Publishers Ltd,1980) or http://members.tripod.com/iaislam/TMWD.htm
[25] Bullock, Kathrine, Rethinking Muslim Women and the Veil: Challenging and Historical and Modern Stereotypes, (Herndon, VA: International Institute of Islamic Thought, 2002).p.73.
[26] Ali, Sayyid, ‘Why Here, Why Now? Young Muslim Women Wearing Hijab,’ The Muslim World, vol.95, (2005), pp.515-530.
[27] http://sunnipath.com/resources/Questions/QA00002148.aspx
[28] http://www.sunnipath.com/aboutTeachers.aspx?sectionid=5&teacherid=12
[29] http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9041918?query=Ibn%20Hazm&ct=
[30] http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-7063
[31] http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9033610
[32] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Kathir
[33] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nawawi
[34] http://www.bysiness.co.uk/quran/qurtubi.htm
[35] http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9067053?query=shafi%27i&ct=
[36] http://www.salaam.co.uk/knowledge/biography/viewentry.php?id=812

Imperialism = Capitalism

Is this Capitalistic ideology really the solution for us? It is based on separation of Church from state, such that religion is only confined to personal belief. While the western intellectuals themselves are pointing out the obvious flaws, what excuse do we have as Muslims to abandon Islamic ruling system over this man made ideology.

How are we to justify the following verses:

"Indeed, we have revealed to you the book with the truth so that yo may rule between mankind by that which Allah has show you" (Quran 4:105)

"So rule between them by that which Allah has revealed, and follow not their desires, but beware of them in case they seduce you from just some part of that which Allah has revealed to you" (Quran 4:49)

"Whosoever does not rule by that which Allah has revealed, they are disbelievers (Kafiroon)....the thaalimoon(Oppressors) .... the fasiqoon (evil doers)" (Quran 4.5:44-47)

Is It Good For The Rest Of Us?
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25483.htm

The Financial Crisis As A Game Of 3 Card Monte http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25485.htm

"Imperialism the Highest Stage of Capitalism" http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20946.htm

Who are the Beloved?

"Some people will come on the Day of Judgement and their Imaan will be outstanding, it's light will shine from their chests and from their right hands.

So it will be said to them,

'Glad tidings for you today, Assalamu 'alaikum and Goodness for you, Enter into it (Jannah) forever!'

So the Angels and the Prophets will be jealous of the Love of Allah for them."
So the Sahabah asked, "Who are they, Ya Rasoolullah?"

He [sallahu 'alayhi wasalam] replied,

"They are not from us and they are not from you. You are my companions but they are my beloved. They will come after you and will find the Book (the Qur'an) made redundant by the people, and a Sunnah which has been killed by them. So they will grab hold of the Book and the Sunnah and revive them.

So they read them and teach them (the Qur'an and the Sunnah) to the people and they will experience in that path a punishment more severe and more ugly than what you (O Sahabah) have experienced.

Indeed the Imaan of one of them is equivalent to the Imaan of forty of you.

The Shaheed of one of them is equivalent to forty of your Shuhadaa'. Because you found a helper towards the truth (the Prophet) and they will find no helper towards the truth.

So they will be surrounded by tyrant rulers in every place, and they will be in the surroundings of Bait-ul-Maqdis (Al-Quds, Masjid al-Aqsa). The Nussrah (Help and Victory) of Allah will come to them, and they will have the honour of it on their hands."

Then he [sallahu 'alayhi wasalam] said,

"O Allah, give them the Nussrah and make them my close friends in Jannah."

Musnad al-Imaam Ahmad, chain no. 77, Hadeeth no. 17561.

Evidence for Khilfah

Though the evidences for Khilafah are many, we start with a daleel that perhaps better than any other describes our reality today, a time when no Khaleefah exists. The hadith was reported by Imam Muslim on the authority of Nafi’ (via ‘Abdullah b. ‘Umar) that the Messenger of Allah (saw)
من نزع يداً من طاعة لقي الله يوم القيامة لا حجة له، ومن مات وليس في عنقه بيعة مات ميتة جاهلية

"The one who removes his hand from obedience he will meet Allah without a proof for himself' and whosoever dies without a bay'ah (oath of allegiance) on his neck dies the death of Jahiliyyah (pre-Islamic times, ignorance)."

From this hadith can be deduced the Hukm Shar'i for a situation when Muslims die without the presence of a Khaleefah to rule over them. Perhaps, it is the unusual nature of such a situation that explains why so few Fuqaha (jurists) addressed this hadith while the numerous other evidences which establish the obligation of Khilafah have received greater attention and scrutiny. They could not have imagined a situation when a Muslim would die without the presence of a Khaleefah. Hence, most of their discussions tended to centre on the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah after the death of the previous Khaleefah; or that it was obligatory to obey the existing Khaleefah and so having a Khaleefah must be obligatory. Yet, the unthinkable happened, the Khilafah was destroyed in 1924, and consequently generations of Muslims have died while having no Khaleefah over them. This noble hadith of the Messenger of Allah (saw) assumes a relevance that those scholars did not envisage.

The process of extraction

What is the Manaat (reality) of the text?

The hadith is describing not one but two types of people since it came in two parts as indicated by the waw al-isti`naaf or ibtidaa` (in English the word ‘and' is used) (i.e. the disjunctive syntax where the waw ( و ) begins a new sentence).
In the first part it says: ‘The one who removes his hand from obedience he will meet Allah without a proof for himself' This is when the Khaleefah exists and someone withholds his obedience to the Khaleefah.

In the second part it is not describing the same person since the waw al- isti`naaf indicates it is beginning a new sentence to make a different point. This time he (saw) says: And (waw al- isti`naaf) the one who dies without a bay'ah on his neck he dies the death of Jahiliyyah. This is further confirmed by the fact that he repeats the personal pronoun ‘man' (the one who or whosoever). This also indicates the hadith discusses two types of people in two different situations.

To appreciate this point better it helps to look at another hadith where exactly the same thing happens. He (Sallalahu Alaihi Wasallam) said:

من مات في سبيل الله فهو شهيد، ومن مات بالطّاعون فهو شهيد

"The one who dies in the Path of Allah he is shaheed and (waw al- isti`naaf) the one who dies in a plague he is a shaheed" [Sahih Muslim].

The death here occurs in two states separated by the waw al-isti`naaf. So the first death is feesabilillah (in the path of Allah (swt) whilst the second death occurs in a plague. It would be absurd if someone claimed here that the hadith is talking about the same situation.

Thus, the hadith in question is talking about two different situations. The first situation as we said is when someone withholds his obedience to the existing Khaleefah. The second part is about ‘the one who dies without a bay'ah on his neck.' The waw al-Haal (waw of condition) in wa laysa fi 'unuqihi bay'ah clarifies the state in which the person dies, and in this case it is when he dies ‘without a bay'ah on his neck'.

So, what is that state when someone dies without a bay'ah on his neck? It cannot mean giving the bay'ah because the hadith did not say ‘wa lam yu'til bay'ah' (and he did not give the bay'ah). Giving the bay'ah (pledge) is a kifayah duty (sufficiency) and not an individual obligation as indicated by the Ijma' as-Sahabah (consensus of the Sahabah). The contractual bay'ah does not require every single person to physically give it, rather it is enough for the Ahlul Halli wal 'Aqd (those who represent the Muslims) to give the bay'ah on behalf of the people. The result of this contracting by the representatives of the Muslims ‘Aqd is that every Muslim, even those living outside the Islamic authority, would have a bay'ah on his neck.


Thus, the hadith is very precise in its description. It is not talking about giving bay'ah to a Khaleefah but rather having a ‘Bay'ah on the neck for a Khaleefah' which describes a situation when someone dies without the presence of a Khaleefah having been contracted. Also there is nothing in this hadith that specifies this situation to a selected few so it cannot be said that the hadith is addressing the only representatives of Muslims e.g. Scholars or others in positions of authority. Rather it addresses all Muslims.

Finally, the use of the expression 'man maata' deserves a further comment. The reference to the point of death indicates that the hukm (rule) must exist throughout his life. There cannot be a point in his life when he is in a state without a bay'ah on his neck i.e. without the presence of a Khaleefah. So the hukm is continuous unlike the ahkam of obeying parents where the hukm ends upon their death or the hukm of giving to the poor which ends when poverty ceases. But the obligation of having a Khaleefah over you never ceases because text says ‘the one who dies' indicating the continuity of the hukm throughout the life of a person for he is not allowed to die in situation where the Khaleefah is not present.

What is the Hukm Shari'i on this issue?

The above discussion allows us to extract two ahkaam: That it is Fard ‘Ayni (individual obligation) to have a Khaleefah present and that it is Fard Kifayah (obligation of sufficiency) to appoint a Khaleefah.


The first hukm is deduced from the request (talab) in the hadith that a Muslim should not die without a Khaleefah present. As we said before ‘bay'ah on the neck' is not possible to have without the presence of the Khaleefah. So, if it is not allowed to die without a bay'ah on the neck, this means it is not allowed to die without the presence of a Khaleefah. This type of indication (dalaalah) in Usul al-Fiqh is known as Dalaalat al-Iqtidaa (the required meaning of the text). i.e. this is when the truthfulness or correctness of a statement (sidq al-mutakallim wa sihhatul malfooz bihi) cannot be established unless one understands the lafz (expression) in a certain way.

The mafhoom (implied meaning) of 'bay'ah on the neck' is the presence of the Khaleefah by the required meaning (Dalalaat al-Iqtidaa). Thus, for the expression ‘bay'ah on the neck' to be truthful we must understand it to mean presence of the Khaleefah.


Thus, the one who dies without the presence of the Khaleefah would be sinful due to the Qaraa'in which makes the request decisive. The preposition ‘fee unuqihi' actually means 'ala unuqihi i.e. obligation to have on one's neck much like when we say in English someone has ‘a debt on his neck' i.e. he has a debt he has to pay.

In addition to this is the explicit Qareenah (indication) ‘dies the death of Jahiliyyah'. The attribution of a death occurring in the Days of Ignorance establishes beyond any doubt the decisiveness of the request. This means the command is a Fard which if neglected would entail sin and punishment. Also, since the personal pronoun ‘man' is general this means it includes every single Muslim i.e. every individual faces death and therefore the indefinite term ‘maata' i.e. dies, coupled with the negation is clear that every single individual is addressed and hence it is a Fard ‘Ayni (individual obligation) to have a Khaleefah present.


Further proof can be found in other supporting daleel. It is narrated on the authority of Abdullah b. 'Umar by al-Hakim who records in his al-Mustadrak the following version:
من خرج من الجماعة قيد شبر فقد خلع ربقة الإسلام من عنقه حتى يراجعه قال ومن مات وليس عليه إمام جماعة فإن موتته موتة جاهلية


"He who abandons the Jamaa'ah by even so much as a hand span is as if he has taken the knot of Islam off his neck, until he returns.' And he (saw) said: "whoever dies while there was no Imam of a Jamaa'ah ruling over him, his death would be that of the days of Jahiliyyah." Al-Hakim stated this hadith is Sahih according to the criteria of the two Shayukh, i.e. al-Bukhari and Muslim.

It well known the scholars of hadith permitted the narration of hadith by meaning (Riwayah Bilma'na). So, in the above hadith the raawi (transmitter) narrated the meaning of the saying of the Prophet (saw). So whilst the extraction of the hukm from the man maata hadith in Sahih Muslim is from the implicit meaning (Mafhoom), the above two ahadith however are even more explicit as they make the same point in the uttered meaning (Mantooq). Incidentally, the hadith in Sahih Muslim and the one above from al-Hakim are both narrated by Abdullah b. 'Umar. The first says ‘bay'ah on the neck' while the second says ‘while there was no Imam of a Jamaa'ah ruling over him'. The meaning is same but the difference is that the former is understood from the implicit meaning (Mafhoom) while the latter is taken from the uttered or pronounced meaning (Mantooq).

As for the second hukm which is that it is Fard to appoint a Khaleefah, this is deduced from the Dalalaat ul-Ishaarah (the alluded meaning of the text). The ishaarahis a hukm derived from the text which was not intended directly from the speech. The ‘man maata' hadith establishes the obligation of having a Khaleefah present; this means by ishaarah that it is an obligation to appoint a Khaleefah. Therefore, when the text says it is Fard to have a Khaleefah present it also alludes to the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah such that he is present over us.

CONCLUSION

Thus, this hadith clearly establishes the obligation of having a Khaleefah over us and the obligation of working to appoint a Khaleefah.

On WHOM does the Hukm Shar'i apply? Is it an individual (Fard ‘Ayni) or collective obligation (Fard kifa'i) and what does that mean for the Muslim?

The obligation of having a Khaleefah present is an individual duty. This is because the personal pronoun ‘man' (which means whoever) is from the general expression (seeghatul 'umoom) and it encompasses all people. Its nature is such that if the Khaleefah is present then he is present for all and if he is absent then he is absent for all thus the obligation covers all people. It is well known in Usul that the general remains general until there is another evidence to specify it. The insane, non-baligh are excluded from this generality because there is a text to say they are not legally responsible (ghayr mukallaf) and hence they cannot be held responsible for duties they did not have capacity for.

He (saw) said: "Three types of people are exempted from accountability, the one who sleeps until he wakes up, a child until he reaches the age of puberty and the insane until he is cured." [Reported by Abu Dawood]

Thus, the general remains in its generality unless another text comes to specify it. And in this case the obligation of having a Khaleefah present is on every legally responsible (mukallaf) Muslim whether man, woman, layman or scholar.


As for the obligation of appointing a Khaleefah this is Fard Kifaayah (obligation of sufficiency). However this should not be taken as an excuse for inaction. This is because in terms of obligation (wujoob) and removal of the sin (isqaat) the Fard 'Ayn and Kifayah are the same. This is because Fard means the Legislator has demanded in a decisive form the performance of an action which if neglected will result in sin. Thus the obligation to fulfill the command is on all. Only if the command has been fulfilled by some then the sin is removed from the rest. This is because the consideration is for the accomplishment of the Fard and not the undertaking of the Fard. Until and unless the Fard is accomplished it continues to be an obligation on all no matter how many people undertook it. That is why the definition of Fard kifayah is: ‘What some have accomplished then the rest is absolved from sin' (maa aqaamuhul ba'd saqata 'anil baaqeen) not ‘what some have undertaken ...' (maa qaama bihil ba'd). There is a big difference between undertaking an action and accomplishing it. So until the Fard is accomplished the obligation remains on all. That is why if the kifayah obligation is neglected everyone are sinful and not just a few people.


For example it is Fard Kifayah for a group to respond when salaam is given to them. The obligation remains on all of them until the obligation is fulfilled. If one responds with the salaam and the Fard is accomplished then all are saved from sin because the consideration is the accomplishment of the Fard but if no one respond then all are sinful. Thus Fard kifayah and 'Ayn are the same in obligation and removal of the sin.


So, in our view, it would be incorrect for someone to say the duty to re-establish the Khilafah is Fard kifayah - so let some people do it and we will be saved - because the Fard has not been accomplished and hence the obligation remains on every single neck. The Ummah has only three days and two nights to choose a Khaleefah, if they fail to do this after this time the obligation continues on all and those who undertake the Fard are saved from the sin. But those who neglect will be sinful for not fulfilling their Lord's command and they will have to explain themselves to Him on the Day when His Account (Hisab) is swift.

3. A'isha Siddiqa bint Abu Bakr

The third wife of the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) was Aisha Siddiqa bint Abu Bakr. What follows is a very short biography for her and her marriage to the Prophet (PBUH), since most of the information we as Muslims have probably come across regarding any of the Prophet's wives was probably about her, so I assume we all know a lot about her, insha allah. My reason for starting the series of posts on all the wives of the Prophet are in the hopes that we all learn something new about one of his lesser famous wives, inshallah, but because of Aisha's (may Allah be pleased with her) great importance both to the Prophet (pbuh), and to Islam and all Muslims; no series of his wives would be complete without mention of her.

Aisha was born in Mecca in 614 CE to Umm Ruman and Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq. Most accounts report that Aisha was six years old at the time of her marriage and nine when the marriage was consummated. Although the bridal age of Aisha sometimes draws criticism, child marriages in 7th century Arabia were culturally and morally acceptable, just as they were in Biblical times.
The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was known to have an impeccable character, and his marriage to a child bride was an exception to his other marriages. Aisha was the only child and one of only two virgins to marry the Prophet (pbuh). His other wives were all widowed or divorced. And some already had children.


A Strategic Marriage


Aisha’s marriage to the Prophet (pbuh) represents another cultural norm of her time – marriages which solidified family, tribal or political ties. Aisha’s father, Abu Bakr Al-Siddiq, was an early follower of Islam, close personal friend of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and a prominent figure in Mecca. Marriage to Aisha allowed the Prophet (peace be upon him) and Abu Bakr to establish a public alliance, while the young bride received honored status as wife of the Prophet (pbuh).


The Prophet’s Favorite Wife

Although the marriage was strategic, historical accounts report genuine affection between the two, and Aisha became known as the Prophet’s (pbuh) favorite wife. It was in her lap that he rested his head when he died, and under the floor of her house that he was buried. The Prophet's Mosque (Masjid Nabawi) now stands on that site in Medina, Saudi Arabia.
Aisha was reported to have been very beautiful, but it is her piety, intelligence and remarkable memory that make her a notable figure in Islamic history. She absorbed vast religious knowledge from the Prophet (pbuh) – including memorizing the entire Qur'an – and was witness to much of the early history of Islam. She helped preserve the details of those events, as well as the details of the private and public life of Muhammad (pbuh), by narrating more than two thousand hadith.
Aisha was only 18 when the Prophet (pbuh) passed away, but she was already regarded a religious scholar. Over the next four decades, until her own death, Muslims consulted Aisha for her extensive understanding of Qur'an, Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), Islamic teachings and traditions (Sunnah). She helped educate Islamic scholars and took custody of children – some orphans – to raise then in Islam.

The Battle of the Camel

The first violent division among Muslims occurred when the third caliph, Uthman, was killed and some suspected that Ali, his successor, conspired in the murder. The battle which ensued, and which Ali won, became known as the Battle of the Camel because Aisha gave directives from a howdah on the back of a camel.

Aisha Remembered

Aisha passed away in 678 at the age of 65. Her scholarly contributions to Islam, as well as her pious example, have earned her special status among the “Mothers of the Believers,” a term of honor given to all the wives of the Prophet (peace be upon him).

Al-Qadaa wal Qadr ( Fate and Destiny)

When mentioned separately either one means the other, but when stated together these two terms differ in their meanings, hence when generalised Al-Qadr encompasses both Al-Qadr and Al-Qadaa in meaning and vice versa. But when it is stated Al-Qadr wa Al-qadaa (or Al Qadaa wal Qadr) then Al-Qadaa refers to the decision of Allah concerning a specific matter, the knowledge of which is revealed to the angels, whereas al-Qadr refers to the predestined decree of Allah as recorded in the Preserved Tablet, and the knowledge of this is only with Allah.

Put another way, when mentioned together as Al-Qadaa wal Qadr, al-Qadaa is subject to change at Allah’s discretion whereas al-Qadar is that which is maintained in the Preserved Tablets written before the Creation and will never change. The matters of al-qadaa are recorded with their respective changes in the Preserved Tablets.

To give an example let us review the hadith of the Prophet wherein he states,

"A man might be deprived of a provision (that was written for him) because of a sin that he commits; only supplication changes Al-Qadar (Predestination); and only Birr (righteousness) can increase the life span." An-Nasai and ibn Majah collected this Hadith.

Here the Messenger of Allah states that du’a (supplication) can change the Qadr, whereas above we stated that al-Qadr can in no way change as this is what Allah has written in the Lawh al-Mahfooth (Preserved Tablet). But if we look closer we will notice that al-Qadr is here mentioned separate from al-Qadaa and thus the ruling is: when mentioned separately either one means the other.

So in this case we understand that the word qadr in this hadith takes on the meaning/understanding of qadaa, and this is why supplication, sinning, and righteousness all may effect the Divine decision, but nothing can affect what Allah has already written and decreed.

"No calamity befalls you on the earth or in yourselves but it is inscribed in the Book of Decrees (Al Lawh Al Mahfooth) before We bring it into existence. Verily, that is easy for Allah" [al-Hadeed 57:22]

And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said:

"The pens have been lifted and the pages have dried." Narrated and classed as saheeh by al-Tirmidhi (2516), from the hadith of Ibn ‘Abbaas.

Al-Mubaarakfoori said:

"The pens have been lifted and the pages have dried" means, What has been decreed has been written in al-Lawh al-Mahfooth (the Book of Decrees), and nothing else will be written after that is finished. " Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi, 7/186

The Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) explained that

"Allah had written the ordained measures (and due proportions) of the creation, fifty thousand years before the creation of the heavens and the earth and His Throne was on the water" (saheeh Muslim v4 pg. 1397)

Allah ordered The Pen (Al-qalam) to write the records of all preordained measures and qualities until the hour would be established.

Narrated Abee Hafsah: Ubaadah bin Saamit said to his son:

"Oh son! You shall not get the true sense of Imaan (faith) until you know that what has befallen you was not going to miss you and what missed you was not going to befall upon you.

I heard the Prophet (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) saying:

"As soon as Allah created the pen, he commanded it saying: “Write!” It said: "what should I write my Lord?" Allah said: "Write the record of all things to happen till the establishment of the Hour". Oh my son I have heard Allah's Messenger (sallallahu alaihi wa sallam) saying: "He who dies believing other than this is not from me"(i.e. is not upon the Prophet’s belief) (Abu Dawud).

Understanding these points, we must further know that the writing is of two types: one kind which cannot be altered or changed, and that is what is contained in al-Lawh al-Mahfooth (Preserved Tablets); and another type which may be altered or changed, which is in the hands of the angels (al-Qadaa). And the ultimate outcome is what is written in al-Lawh al-Mahfooth. This is one of the meanings of the words of Allah when He says:

"Allah blots out what He wills and confirms (what He wills). And with Him is the Mother of the Book (Al Lawh Al Mahfooth)" [al-Ra’d 13:39]

Hence we can understand what was narrated in the Sunnah, that upholding family ties increases one’s lifespan or increases one’s provision; or that du’a (supplication) can alter the divine decree (as explained above). For Allah knows whether His slave will uphold the ties of kinship or make du’a, so He writes in al-Lawh al-Mahfooth that this person will have more provision or a longer life span.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah was asked:
Can provision increase or decrease? Is provision what a person eats or possesses?

He replied: Provision is of two types:

1 – That which Allah knows He will provide, which cannot be changed.

2 – That which He has prescribed and told to the angels. This may increase or decrease depending on causes. If Allah commands the angels to write provision for a person if he upholds the ties of kinship, Allah will increase his provision because of that. It was proven in the authentic hadith that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Whoever would like his provision to be increased and his life span to be extended, let him uphold the ties of kinship."

Similarly the life span of Dawood was extended by sixty years and Allah made it one hundred years, after it was originally forty. This is as ‘Umar said:

"O Allah, if you have decreed that I am to be doomed, then erase that and make me one of those who are to be blessed, because You blot out whatever You will and confirm whatever You will."

And there is a great deal of corroborating evidence. The means of acquiring provision comes under the heading of that which Allah has decreed. If it has been decreed that a person will earn his provision by means of his work and efforts, then Allah will cause him to work and strive, and that which is decreed for him by means of his work will not come to him without him working to earn it. And what has been decreed for him without his having to earn it, such as an inheritance, will come to him without him working for it.

Work or striving is of two types:

striving in work for the sake of earning a living, such as industry, farming and business; and striving in du’a, putting one's trust in Allah, treating others kindly, and so on. Allah will help His slave so long as His slave helps his brother.
Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 8/540, 541.

Moreover, it is part of the Sunnah to ask from Allah when supplicating to Him that he be Merciful to us concerning the Divine decision (al-Qadaa) and to change it if it is not so.

Hence Imam al-Bukhaari (may Allah have mercy on him) entitled a chapter in his Saheeh "Whoever seeks refuge with Allah from having an evil end to this worldly life and from having a bad decree, and the verse:

"Say: I seek refuge with (Allah) the Lord of the daybreak, from the evil of what He has created" [al-Falaq 113:12]."

Then he quoted the words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him):

"Seek refuge with Allah from the difficulties of severe calamities, from having a bad end and bad decree." (al-Bukhaari, 7/215, Kitaab al-Qadar).

Free Will and the Decree of Allah

The next matter we shall turn to is the understanding of the Decree as it relates to Allah’s Foreknowledge of all matters. Many people believe that there is no such thing as free will (Jabriya) due to their lack of a correct understanding of this point. How can it be that Allah knows what we shall do and has written it, and yet we still have free will?

It is beneficial to remind ourselves of a very similar example in our own lives that can help us better understand this point. Undoubtedly anyone who reads this article now has at some point studied in a classroom of some sort, under the instruction of a teacher or a professor. Many of you also probably have attended a course along the years where on the first day of the class the teacher stated during the introduction to the course that routinely a certain percentage of the course will get an A, another relatively specific portion will get a B, and so on and so forth until he informs you – or rather threatens you – with the portion of people who fail the course.

Now do you think it would be fair, or that it would get you anywhere, to argue with this instructor at the end of the semester if you turned out to be among those that failed? Could you tell him that it was indeed his fault that you failed because he said a certain percentage would fail at the beginning of the term?

This teacher knows by his experience that there are those who take the class seriously and thus they routinely do well. Whereas others procrastinate and lack the necessary motivation and thus they fail. At the end of the day it was you that decided to either do what was necessary to pass or you that lazily procrastinated until it was too late and thus failed. You have the freedom to choose your path.
Another example illustrates the same point, but in a different way. Those of you that have younger siblings or those of you that are parents develop a unique and intimate knowledge of your siblings or children over time. It may even sometimes appear that you know them better than they know their own selves. Many of you can actually predict with an amazingly high degree of accuracy what they would do in any given situation.
Is it not then so difficult to understand that Allah, the All-knowing and Aware who knows what is in your hearts and minds; that He knows what you will do in the situations he places you in even before you do them – even before you are created? Is not the One who fashioned you and created you and then guided you unable to know what you shall do from His infinite knowledge and ability?

If you yourself can predict the behavior of students, or your siblings, or your own children that you raise through difficulty upon difficulty; is not then Allah, to whom belongs al-Mathal al-‘Alaa (the Most Supreme Example) able to predict your behavior through His knowledge even though there are no factors driving you beyond your own self to do whatever you choose to do? And moreover, He in His great and infinite Mercy does not bestow upon you a burden greater than that which you are capable of handling as he states,

“Allah does not burden any soul with more than it can bear” 2:286

as truly he knows you and your ability better than you know yourself.

Lastly, we do not know what has been decreed until after the fact. Allah has given us free will and freedom of choice, but we do not move beyond the framework of the will and decree of Allah.

To sum it up, there is no contradiction between freedom of our will and the idea that Allah decrees all things, which we do not know until after they happen. And Allah knows best, and to Allah belongs all the Praise.

References:
The Four Levels of the Belief in al-Qadr, Dr. Saleh as-Saleh
Tafseer ibn Kathir

Finance 202: How We Became Debt Slaves

Finance 202: How We Became Debt Slaves
(And Learned to Love It)

By Gordon Arnaut

May 14, 2010 ""Information Clearing House" --- Who is in charge of these United States?

If you guess that it’s the people with the money, then you are correct. Not the elected representatives of the people. Not the men and women in uniform, not the factory workers, or farmers, or teachers, or bus drivers and pilots. Just the guys and gals with the moneybags.

Right now, the US Congress is holding hearings about bank wrongdoing. It is very entertaining kabuki theatre, but nothing will change. The Goldman chief (thief?) and his cohorts may take a bit of a grilling, but behind the scenes his bagmen are funnelling millions of dollars into the campaign trunks of every representative, senator (or likely hopeful) in the land. Real, meaningful financial reform is a certain impossibility.

Let’s look at some hard numbers. The financial sector in the US and other Western nations is about a third of the total GDP right now. That is more than any other industry and is about equal to total government expenditures—on military, social services (such as they are), education and health care (such as it is), infrastructure, R&D, etc.

If you look at corporate profits, the financial sector takes an even bigger slice of the pie, about 40 percent overall. The financial “industry” is in control of this country. It makes the most money, it contributes the most grease to the machinery of politics, and it has a stranglehold on that vital commodity we call money—deciding who can have it and who can’t.

Now the average Joe or Jane might ask what is wrong with having a prosperous financial industry? Well, the problem is that finance is not an industry, by any definition of the word. Finance does not create wealth; it actually takes out wealth from the real economy, by means of interest. So if the financial sector is one third of the GDP, it means the rest of us are one-third poorer than we need to be.

“You can think of the financial sector as being wrapped around the real economy… like a parasite, says Michael Hudson, an economics professor at the University of Missouri. “Now the key thing about parasites is that it's not simply that they extract nourishment from the host. The parasite takes over the host's brain, to make it think it's part of the economy, to make it think it's part of the host's own body, and, in fact, that it’s almost like a child of the host, to be protected. And that's what the financial sector has done today.”

That would explain why so many ordinary people continue to act in the banks’ interests, and opposite to their own financial well-being. Many teabag commentators say they are opposed to taxes. But they do not seem to mind the 33 percent tax they are paying to the financial industry, far and away the biggest tax bite of all.

Consider for example the house in which you live, which, if you are like myself and most people I know, was bought with money borrowed from the bank. If you borrowed $150,000 from the bank to buy your home, you will have paid back to the bank about $400,000 by the time you pay off your mortgage, many many years from now.

If you go and buy a new car for $20,000 about half of the price of that car is the built-in cost of interest payments that the car manufacturer and his suppliers have had to pay to the bank in order to build that car and bring it to market in the first place.

Now it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see the direction in which the money is flowing. And the means by which this money transfer is accomplished. The bottom line is that the 33 percent of GDP that is the financial sector’s slice of the pie (about $5 trillion dollars), comes directly out of the pocket of you and me and every other “consumer” that buys any product in this economy, or makes use of any credit provided by the banks and other players.

One has to ask the question: At what point does the financial parasite drain so much from the host, that the host becomes sick and dies?

The answer to that question is playing out right now. The so-called Financial Crisis is the first convulsion of an unsustainable system that is buckling under the stress of a finance sector grown way too big for the real economy to carry. The real economy has been flattened. Jobs, especially good jobs, are scarce and getting scarcer all the time. Industry has been outsourced. Even the professional-managerial-small business class (which is only about 20 percent of the population), is in decline.

It is useful to look at history to put the present situation in context. One hundred years ago, the entire financial sector was in the low single digits of GDP. Even by 1990 it was just over 20 percent. In just the last 20 years, the finance sector has grown by half! At the same time, many economists tell us, real earning and spending power has declined. Is there any doubt why? As the parasite monster grows, our household finances collapse.

How did we get to this situation? When did finance stop becoming a helper of the real economy, and start becoming a drain on our lifeblood? Even Hitler provided virtually interest-free home loans to new families, and a maximum loan term of 10 years, with payments not more than 1/8’th of the average worker’s wage. But we in this “free” society, have a lifelong debt burden and 50 year mortgages! In the middle ages, we called that serfdom. Or indentured labor.

The problem is easy to see. We have built a society whose ideological foundations are made of quicksand. We need to reappraise everything we have been told about our system, before the system collapses for good. Not all economic activity is equal, as we are led to believe. It is useful to go all the way back to Aristotle, who had some interesting things to say about the relative merits of various kinds of economic activity:

“There are two sorts of wealth-getting, as I have said; one is a part of household management, the other is retail trade: the former necessary and honorable, while that which consists in exchange is justly censured; for it is unnatural, and a mode by which men gain from one another. The most hated sort, and with the greatest reason, is usury, which makes a gain out of money itself, and not from the natural object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange, but not to increase at interest. And this term interest, which means the birth of money from money, is applied to the breeding of money because the offspring resembles the parent. Wherefore of all modes of getting wealth this is the most unnatural."

Looking at these wise words, it seems we have strayed a long, long way from the true path. We worship money as god almighty, and the hustlers of Wall Street are held up as role models. How have things changed? Is the toil and industry of the household no longer the honorable way? Notice that even retail trade comes in for “censure” and necessary oversight because it is about gaining at the other man’s expense.

And then what of the money trade? That most “unnatural” of all ways of getting wealth. Should these hucksters and flim-flam men be left to do whatever they please? As they do now. Should this activity even exist? Why? And for whose benefit?

Maybe our wise leaders in congress and elsewhere should sit down in their fancy chairs and take a good long look at these ancient words. And think about where this unnatural road that they are leading us down will ultimately end up.

Gordon Arnaut is an aerospace engineer in the civilian sector and a freelance writer. He lives in Ontario, Canada - goarnaut@yahoo.com