Ikram Hawramani's Blog, page 12

Are hadiths not in Sahih al-Bukhari and Muslim less authentic?

Assalamualaikum, if a hadith is not in the top authentic hadith books e.g Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi etc and instead says something like Sahih Ibn Khuzaymah should you feel comfortable in being especially doubtful of it?

Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,

Each scholar had their own way of verifying hadiths. Just because it is not in Sahih al-Bukhari and Muslim it does not mean the hadith is lower in quality. What many Muslims don’t know is that Sahih al-Bukhari and Muslim are not meant to be encyclopedias of hadith. They are handbooks for legal scholars, making it easy to quickly look up hadiths on questions like fasting or Hajj. They intentionally did not include many high-quality hadiths that were not relevant to their aims. A book like Sahih Ibn Hibban is perhaps as good as al-Bukhari. Also note that Sahih al-Bukhari contains many low-quality hadiths that were criticized by other scholars, and Sahih Muslim is perhaps five times as bad when it comes to including low-quality hadiths, because Imam al-Bukhari had higher standards and was more knowledgeable about the reliability of hadith transmitters.

Note that some collections intentionally include many weak hadiths, such as the Musnad of Imam Ahmad and al-Tirmidhi’s collection. If the collection’s title does not have the word “Sahih” in it then it is likely to contain weak hadiths too, because the scholars’ intention was simply to collect as many hadiths as they could for research purposes regardless of their authenticity.

Personally I do not differentiate at all between different hadith collections, I combine chains from all the collections in my studies, determining the hadith’s authenticity by looking up the reliability of each transmitter.

When does religious belief become toxic?

In what condition does a religious belief becomes dogmatic and toxic to its follower?

When a person thinks that Islam is meant to replace their humanity. Below is an excerpt from my book An Intelligent Person’s Guide to Understanding Islam and Muslims on this question.

George Orwell and George Eliot

George Orwell, in his Road to Wigan Pier, has relevant things to say about this discussion:

for the food-crank is by definition a person willing to cut himself off from human society in hopes of adding five years onto the life of his carcase; that is, a person out of touch with common humanity.1

In Orwell’s time, the food-crank was what the extremist vegan is today, someone picky about food and willing to inconvenience, insult and look down on those around them for the sake of their ideas about eating. His critique for the preference of ideology over common humanity among certain types of people extends to Catholics, in a passage that could equally apply to some Muslims today:

One of the analogies between Communism and Roman Catholicism is that only the ‘educated’ are completely orthodox. The most immediately striking thing about the English Roman Catholics – I don’t mean the real Catholics, I mean the converts: Ronald Knox, Arnold Lunn et hoc genus— is their intense self-consciousness. Apparently they never think, certainly they never write, about anything but the fact that they are Roman Catholics; this single fact and the self-praise resulting from it form the entire stock-in-trade of the Catholic literary man. But the really interesting thing about these people is the way in which they have worked out the supposed implications of orthodoxy until the tiniest details of life are involved. Even the liquids you drink, apparently, can be orthodox or heretical; hence the campaigns of Chesterton, ‘Beachcomber’, etc., against tea and in favour of beer. According to Chesterton, tea-drinking is ‘pagan’, while beer-drinking is ‘Christian’, and coffee is ‘the puritan’s opium’. It is unfortunate for this theory that Catholics abound in the ‘Temperance’ movement and the greatest tea-boozers in the world are the Catholic Irish; but what I am interested in here is the attitude of mind that can make even food and drink an occasion for religious intolerance. A working-class Catholic would never be so absurdly consistent as that. He does not spend his time in brooding on the fact that he is a Roman Catholic, and he is not particularly conscious of being different from his non-Catholic neighbours. Tell an Irish dock-labourer in the slums of Liverpool that his cup of tea is ‘pagan’, and he will call you a fool. And even in more serious matters he does not always grasp the implications of his faith. In the Roman Catholic homes of Lancashire you see the crucifix on the wall and the Daily Worker2 on the table. It is only the ‘educated’ man, especially the literary man, who knows how to be a bigot. And, mutatis mutandis, it is the same with Communism. The creed is never found in its pure form in a genuine proletarian.3

Many expect Muslims to act exactly like this minority of Catholics Orwell describes, seemingly eating religion for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Orwell contrasts this religion-obsessed mindset among certain Catholic intellectuals with the mindset of ordinary Catholics, who better represent real, embodied Catholicism.

For the average Catholic living in a Catholic society, religion is not something to bring into every discussion. It is, in fact, something that is very rarely talked about. Real Catholics embody Catholicism as humans, rather than ignoring common humanity, things like politeness and decency toward others, in the name of religion. A religion-obsessed Catholic, similar to a recent convert to an extremist form of Islam, tries to make their religion replace their humanity, making it explain everything and be everything to them. This causes them to join a class of bigots that are out of touch with the rest of society.

A Catholic like that, instead of enjoying the loving atmosphere of Christmas morning at a relative’s house, uses the occasion to lecture the family about how Christmas is really pagan. A Muslim extremist, too, if one makes the mistake of inviting her to a birthday party, will likely end up giving her friend a lecture on how a true Muslim should not celebrate such heathen practices. In this way, those who make religion replace their humanity insult many other people around them due to their belief that their being religious exempts them from common decency and make themselves a nuisance in society. This is not merely a problem of the religious; the same scenario is repeated whenever a person embraces any ideology strongly enough. A “true believer” in Marxism is going to be perfectly happy to offend everyone around them in the name of fighting capitalism.

Orwell contrasts the self-conscious, recently converted Catholic intellectuals with the millions of Catholics who have been practicing this religion for centuries. The first is a tiny minority that has a total view of religion as a replacement for common decency and culture. The second group forms the actual representative group of Catholicism, which very much respects common decency and culture. The first group is radical and wants to abolish everything in the name of religion. The second group is conservative and is happy enough to enjoy life as it is. The first group thinks mankind is raw material that can be remade. The second group understands that humans by and large remain the way they are no matter what one tries to make out of them.

The majority of Muslim men and women are like that Catholic majority. Tell any educated Muslim that their love for science fiction films makes them less “Muslim” and they will either be insulted or laugh at the foolishness of the statement.

Many Western writers about Islam are unfortunately often incapable of conceiving of a faithful Muslim who is as intelligent and independent-minded as themselves, believing that a proper Muslim is one who is a nuisance in polite society just like an extremist vegan. It is inconceivable that a man or woman of their own caliber could enter into a covenant with God to abide by His commandments and ethics, acting as His steward while maintaining a fierce individuality and independence of mind. To them, being a devout Muslim is always associated with some sort of sickness of the mind; the most devout is the most stupid because he or she is going to be the one who is best at acting like a scripture-controlled robot. They think that the only reason a Muslim can be intelligent and independent-minded is if they abandon parts of Islam.

Thus in books like Lost Enlightenment by S. Frederick Starr4, the writer does his best to stretch the evidence so that all Muslims who accomplished some great work are dismissed as actually freethinkers who did not take their faith seriously, while also having a rather snarky attitude toward great Muslim thinkers like al-Ghāzalī who were clearly orthodox. A Muslim must supposedly first give up the stupidity-promoting total religion that is Islam in order to become partly human and achieve something of human worth. Al-Ghāzalī, despite his great achievements, is worthless because he made the unforgivable sin of defending orthodoxy, which to Starr is proof that he was subhuman and twisted, since no proper human could ever be fully religious in his view.

1 George Orwell, The Road to Wigan Pier, New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1958, 136.

2 A popular communist publication at the time.

3 Ibid., 209-210.

4 See S. Frederick Starr, Lost Enlightenment: Central Asia’s Golden Age from the Arab Conquest to Tamerlane, Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press, 2013. See Frank Griffel’s devastating review in Die Welt des Islams 56, no. 2 (2016): 272-278.

Will all disbelievers go to jahanam for eternity?

Will all disbelievers go to jahanam for eternity?

Please see this article where I discuss that question: There are billions of non-Muslims, so how can Islam be the one true path?

Are selfies sinful or haram for women?

Salam, people say posting selfies is a sin (they tend to focus this exclusively on females tho) is this accurate? And is it a sin for the person who liked the picture? Thank you jzk

Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,

There is nothing inherently sinful about that. Women are allowed to show their faces and hands in public, whether in pictures, videos or real life. If there is anything wrong with selfies then it fully applies to men too.

My opinion on the site IslamQA.info

Assalamualaikum What is your opinion of the website Islamqa.info?

Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,

IslamQA.info represents a brand of Islam that’s not followed by the majority of Sunni Muslims in the world. It’s often called Wahhabism. It often has good answers when it comes to questions on the very basics of Islam, such as rulings on the prayer and fasting. But when it comes to issues such as dealing with non-Muslims or women’s status in Islam, then it often reflects the xenophobia and misogyny of Saudi culture.

I’m actually a big fan of the piety and kindness of many great “Wahhabi” scholars. I love Ibn Uthaymeen, al-Albani and Ibn Baz. But I also disagree with them on many things. I also love Ibn Taymiyya possibly more than I love any other scholar, when he is supposed to be the greatest inspiration behind Wahhabism. Ibn Taymiyya is far greater than many Wahhabis appreciate, and his thinking on many questions can be integrated into a mainstream and pluralistic Islam (for more on him see my article: Ibn Taymiyya and His Times).

The problem with Wahhabism is that it turns Islam into an ideology. It believes that Islam should be a replacement for our common humanity and for our cultures. And this leads to their extreme black-and-white thinking where non-Muslims are automatically treated like enemies and where Muslims who disagree with them are considered evil and misguided. Wahhabism is unable to appreciate the possibility that two equally pious and knowledgeable people can reach very different conclusions on the same question. They start by deciding if you agree with them before they decide whether you are a proper Muslim or an evil and misguided person. To them the only proper kind of human is a fellow Wahhabi. You have to be Wahhabized before they treat you with the kindness and empathy that I believe all of humanity deserves. To them it’s as if everyone is a non-human until they are humanized by Wahhabism. Note that this is exactly how radical Marxists, radical feminists, and many other followers of radical ideologies also think. You either agree with them and become a part of them, or you are treated as something less than human. It’s an extremely tribalist way of thinking where only those who belong to your “tribe” are considered real humans, and it is very interesting that the world’s greatest radicals have often been either Arabs coming from extremely tribalist areas, or Jews who are also extremely tribalist in their way of thinking (Marxism and radical feminism have both always been Jewish-led ideologies). In tribalist culture, as that of the Bedouins (especially before Islam), non-tribe-members are considered non-human; they consider it perfectly right and justified for them to rob and kill strangers, because their whole way of thinking is based on the fact that to them the only real human society is that of the tribe, and all outsiders are subhuman objects that can be put to use just as animals are put to use. So they strongly believe in morality, loyalty and honor … as long as they are dealing with tribe members or allies. But, and this is a very important but, all of these concepts completely lose their relevance when they deal with strangers. It is an “us vs. them” mentality taken to the very extreme, to the point that “them” are not even considered human.

This can also help you understand how Israeli settlers treat Palestinians. Settler Jews are extremely moral, honorable, kind and loving as long as it comes to their tribe. It feels perfectly natural to them to rob and kill Palestinians because in their tribalist mentality, Palestinians are not even human. They are objects, parts of the landscape, they view them as exactly the same as the rest of the animals and plants of Palestine. The same also applies to most “Islamic” terrorist organizations, which almost always follow Wahhabism. The ideology teaches them that non-Wahhabis are not really human, that Islamic morality only applies when dealing with fellow Wahhabis, so nothing is evil as long as it is done to those outside the Wahhabi tribe.

Note that I’m not saying all “Wahhabi” scholars think that way. But the tribalist mentality is deeply integrated into Wahhabism. The founder of modern Saudi Arabia, Ibn Saud (1875 – 1953 CE), said he was not ashamed of the 1801 CE Wahhabi slaughter of 5000 innocent Shia men, women and children in Karbala that was committed by his ancestors, because in his tribalist way of thinking non-Wahhabis are not really human. In fact he wrote that he would happily do it all over again if he had the chance.

So Muslims reading IslamQA.info are going to be exposed to that kind of tribalist mentality. For this reason I do not recommend this site to anyone.

My approach is the complete opposite of Wahhabism. I start by finding out whether a person has a good heart, and I’m willing to forgive all their mistakes as long as I know it comes from a place of piety and humility. So I love scholars coming from various different traditions, including Wahhabi scholars, as long as I know they have good hearts. For more on my version of Islam please see: Is Islam really pluralistic? An Islamic defense of pluralism

Why can’t Muslim women lead prayers?

Assalamu walaikum. I have a debt, I read here, that for important reasons a woman can lead prayers at home to her family members, but why can't she in mosques? Why aren't there women leading prayers inside mosques? (I know there are many men guiding prayer, but wanted to know about women on this spiritual side) jazak Allah

Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,

The Islamic social system is designed in such a way that men are the caretakers and protectors of women, so in things like prayer it is more natural for the men to be the leaders. For more on the Islamic social system regarding gender please see: A new approach to the Quran’s “Wife-Beating Verse” (al-Nisa 4:34)

As for the spiritual reason: Men and women have the same souls as far as we know. But they have different brains and genetic instincts, which requires the religion to treat them differently. This is why women have to cover their hair while men don’t have to. The way men experience their interactions with women is different from the way women experience their interactions with men.

As for the exact scientific reason why it’s better for men to lead prayers, I cannot say exactly what it is. To fully find out we’d need studies of communities where men lead the prayer and communities where women lead the prayer so that we can compare the results.

But since this is what the Prophet PBUH recommended, we are happy to go along with it. It is similar to accepting the ban on eating pork even though there are no detailed reasons for the ban in the Quran or hadith. If God commands us to do something, we obey, because we know He has our best interests at heart. We read the Quran and can see that it is really from God because of the intelligence and beauty in it. Once we are convinced that the Quran is really from God, then we don’t need proofs for everything in it (such as the ban on pork), we accept it based on the fact that we have agreed that the Quran is really from God and that God wants us to avoid pork.

Is reciting the 3 quls and making dua obligatory before sleep?

Selam new Muslim, So I like to say 3 ajets before sleep Kul huveallahu ehad, Kull euzu bi rabbi and kul euzu rabbi n nas. So I like to use English version of it because I understand it and can better relate to it. So some one was telling me that it has to be in Arabic and I got to blow/whisper in my hands? But I don't have it memorized so I use copy that I hold in my hand. So was I wrong what I was doing can I do it in English and is this is mandatory to do before sleep? thank you

Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,

Welcome to Islam and may God make things easy for you. None of that is obligatory. You can read the Arabic transliteration followed by the English instead of saying it from memory, as this is allowed.

What are the best duas?

What are some of the best duas?

What are some things to ask god for?

Below are my favorite duas which I try to make after every prayer:

To forgive your sins. Allahumma innaka affuwwun tuhibbul afwa faafu anni (O God, you are the Most Forgiving, and You love forgiveness, so forgive me.)To guide you and increase your knowledge and wisdom. Allahumma zidni ilman wahdini li aqraba min haza rushdan (O God, increase me in knowledge and guide me to a better state of maturity than what I currently possibly)To support you: Allahummanasurni wa anta khairun nasireen (O God, support me, and You are the best of supporters.)To bless your time and works: Allahumma baarik fi aamali wa awqati (O God, bless my works and my times/moments.)To make things easy for you: Allahumma yasir li amree (O God, make the matters of my life easy for me.)

A friend is suffering from mysterious night chills and aches

Assalamo alaikum. I have question regarding my friend. Last month she got ill. She had fever with chills. Flu and cough. Then a something at night bit her toe. There was lot of bleeding. It was dark. By the time she switched on light, she saw a mouse running away. She got treatment. She found her clothes in the wardrobe torn and shredded. Then she again got ill. 3 days back she recovered. Last night on her way back from university she passed a graveyard. She woke up at 3 am at night choking with chills, sweat and bodyache. Still she has chills, sweating and bodyache. This might be a superstion. 2 years back she had kala jadu done to her. What is going on? And please tell what to do.

Alaikumassalam wa rahmatullah,

May Allah make her condition better. I would prefer to give her condition a natural, medical explanation. As long as she prays regularly then inshaAllah she will be protected. Please also see the articles on this page: Islam and Magic

Women may attend distant universities without a mahram

What about a muslim woman who moves out of town far from her mahrams to attend university?

Note that the restriction on women traveling without mahrams only applies to traveling. A woman is allowed to go to another city or country to attend university without a mahram going with her if she is able to safely reside there (for example among fellow Muslim women) and there are no great moral hazards to her religion.

References:

Fatwa from Mufti Shaykh Khalid Abd al-Munim al-Rifai (Arabic PDF)