497. Can a non –Muslim be prayed for?

Verses (2:124, 2:126) of the Quran provide answers to the question, whether a non –Muslim can be prayed for his well-being.

Verse 2:124 of the Quran speaks of Prophet Ibrahim being appointed as the guidance for mankind where he in turn prayed not only for himself but also for his descendants to be granted the right path to which Allah responded by saying that He would accept his prayers by granting His favors in the case of the good among his descendants.

Here Allah points out the mistake in Prophet Ibrahim seeking a leadership role for all of his descendants consisting of the believers and non-believers. 

This verse seems to point out that prayer should be made only for Muslims, and this is what was supposed to be understood by Prophet Ibrahim through verse 2:126.

In verse 2:126 we find Prophet Ibrahim seeking fruits as food for all his descendants from Makkah. He did not make this plea for all his descendants. 

When it was pointed out in verse 2:124 by Allah that a general plea cannot be made asking to grant leadership roles from all his descendants, the next prayer made by Prophet Ibrahim was specifically only for the good amongst them. To this Allah responds by saying he would grant riches not only to the good but also to others and points out the prayers made only for the good to be granted with food and riches is wrong. Allah points out praying only for the good to be granted food and riches is wrong.

These two verses are not to be taken as contradicting each other because each prayer is different from the other. 

The first prayer made by Prophet Ibrahim is about entitling a person to goodness in the hereafter which is not granted by Allah because of his ancestry but given to those who believe in the Oneness of Allah and do good deeds for His sake, and this is the reason Allah makes Prophet Ibrahim realize his mistake in him making the first prayer. The second prayer by Prophet Ibrahim to Allah is about providing food, fortunes and riches to men. These are not granted based on vices and virtues performed by men. Allah provides food for Muslims as well as non –Muslims. He makes Prophet Ibrahim realize He is the provider of sustenance for all, and it was wrong on the part of Prophet Ibrahim to pray to provide sustenance only for Muslims.

When we have non-Muslims as our friends and relatives, we can pray for their well-being and for their deliverance from poverty, and for their right guidance, but we cannot pray for their place in paradise in the hereafter, because the Almighty has already declared those who have not accepted Islam as their ideology for life cannot enter paradise. These two messages convey the same.

496. The meaning of the phrase ‘some are aware of the number of cave people.

In verse (18:22) of the Quran Allah points out the difference of opinion among the people of those days regarding the number of people called the cave people.

Allah says there were three types of opinions among them expressed as:

1)Four, including their dog. 

2)Six including their dog. 

3)Eight, including their dog.

And says He alone is aware of their numbers and continues to say only a few others knew the number of persons in the group known as the people of the cave. Allah, having already declared the three different numbers expressed by the people of those days as wrong, says only a few knew about them, instead of saying no one knew their numbers giving rise to a question? May be during the period of Prophet Muhammad and people after him no one knew the numbers then, probably those at the days of cave people who established a house of worship over the dead bodies counted them being the reason for Allah saying so in the Quran. There might exist such a doubt in the minds of the people. 

Though people during Prophet Muhammad’s time and those after his period did not know the exact numbers, the chances of those who built a place of worship over their dead bodies knowing was better according to people who may raise questions regarding this. 

If the only declaration was, Allah alone knew the numbers then the awareness of the numbers by people who built a place of worship then comes into question. Allah has probably used the phrase ‘a few knew the numbers’ to avoid such a controversy. 

If only a few were aware of the exact number of the people in the cave, it would have spread to others as well.

Allah discloses in this way about the people who have lived and passed away having had knowledge of the numbers of these people in the cave. This can be taken as yet another evidence these are the words of God, where we find the greatest intelligence exhibited by Him saying the things known by the dead will be continued to be known to a very few.

495. Sorcery does not impact men.

People who believe that witchcraft can impact men cite verse 2:102 of the Quran to substantiate their claim.

The explanation to verse 2:102 of the Quran has been done in point No;28, If read and understood well would give a better understanding of the following.

We are to discuss here only whether a separation could be brought in between a husband and a wife. 

What does the verse convey and how to understand it? Does this verse convey the message sorcery can impact people or otherwise. These are points that need to be clearly understood.

Before going into knowing the meaning of the verse let's go through three prominent translations from Arabic to Tamil.

Translation:1

Moreover (those Jews) continued practicing witchcraft and sorcery they had learnt from the Shaitan who had given them lessons about Sulaiman’s reign.          But Sulaiman was not a disbeliever, those Shaitans were the ones who disbelieved because they taught people sorcery and things that were revealed to the two angels named Harut and Marut from Babylon. But the two angels warned those who came to learn sorcery from them by saying ‘We stand as witness of having become disbelievers, (on learning to practice sorcery you will also turn out to be disbelievers, hence do not learn to practice this, they warned others and refused to teach it. In spite of their warning, those willing to learn it (sorcery) learnt the skill of creating rift between a married couple from them. They cannot harm anyone without the Creator’s will, and they learn things from which they do not benefit but can harm. But those who have invested in sorcery instead of belief in God, very well know, they will not receive any blessings on the day of judgment. And they should realize whatever they have bargained for the act of selling themselves results in evil.

Translation 2) 

They followed the footsteps of Shaitans in matters regarding the reign of Sulaiman, but He (Sulaiman) was never a disbeliever, and the Shaitans were the ones who disbelieved; and they are the ones who taught witchcraft to men. And they taught what was revealed to the two angels named Haru and Marut from Babylon in a wrong manner. But they (the angels) said ‘We are a disastrous result of a trial ourselves, do not become disbelievers, (by learning sorcery) and refused to teach the same. But the two angels said ‘we are indeed the result of a trial, do not become disbelievers yourselves, and they refused to teach sorcery to anyone. In spite of this, these people learnt the craft of bringing a separation between married people, and however they cannot make anything happen without the will of Almighty Allah or bring harm to anyone with this. They learnt something that did not benefit them but harmed them. They very well knew that they had bargained for something that would not be of any use to them in the hereafter. They have bargained their soul for something bad, shouldn’t they realize”.

What we understand from these two translations is: 

Two angels came down to teach sorcery to people.

While teaching the same to people, they would say ‘Do not learn witchcraft, you will become disbelievers’ and begin to teach them sorcery/

 Despite the warning they preferred to still learn from them the skill of bringing in separation between a married couple. 

Both the translations talk of people wishing to learn witchcraft ended with learning the art of separating married couples.

And cite this as authentication to prove sorcery can be used to separate a married couple.

They argue their belief in sorcery is sanctioned by the Quran.

Though both the translations are found to be grammatically correct they demolish the very edifice of Islam.

From these translations we get a message that by practicing sorcery we can impact the bond between a husband and wife and cause a rift between them.

If it is said a rift can be caused between a husband and a wife by pitting one against the other or by insinuation, though it is a sin, a possibility is real. But causing a rift between a husband and wife using sorcery, is a remote possibility And by saying this they make Allah being treated as sorcerer. 

The belief a married couple can be separated by sorcery pushes a man towards associating something else with the Creator, for this reason we find the translation wrong.

We have explained nothing can be achieved by sorcery in our explanation point No;357.

Verse 10:77 says the sorcerers cannot be victorious. Saying a rift can be created by sorcery amounts conveying the message that sorcerers can attain victory.

Verse 7:116 says witchcraft is nothing but trickery, and the concept that a rift can be created in between a husband and wife by sorcery is against this verse.

We find verses 7:118-120 of Quaran saying as ‘sorcery was defeated and the sorcerers were defeated, and the concept that a rift between a husband and a wife by sorcery is possible again goes against Quranic verses.

We find verse 20:66 of the Quran, saying the best of the sorcerers practicing the best cold only make the ropes appear like snakes and not transform them into real snakes. The above translations go against the Quran. 

 Verse 20:69 of the Quran says sorcery is nothing but trickery and maneuvering. Again, the belief in the concept that sorcery works is against the Quran.

In verses 52:13.14,15 of the Quran we find Allah using the word ‘real’ as an opposite to sorcery. When Allah has termed sorcery as non-existent and unreal, the concept that things can be achieved by it goes against the tenets of Islam. 

There are other sensible reasons to prove these translations are wrong. These translations convey the message

When the warning they would become disbelievers on learning sorcery did not have any bearing on them, there was no reason for them to learn a much less harmful witchcraft of creating a rift between a husband and wife.

1.    When it is obvious for them, learning sorcery either big or small is harmful to becoming a disbeliever. Where was the necessity to choose a smaller harm?

As per the beliefs of those who support sorcery, it is a form of art that encompasses a wide variety of practices, and people who in spite of the knowledge they would turn out to be disbelievers, would have opted to learn all forms of sorcery.

And not restrict themselves with learning a small component of it. When becoming a disbeliever is confirmed immaterial of one form or a thousand forms of sorcery, there is no reason for them not to learn much higher practices of it.

They would have learnt sorcery to make money and for worldly benefits, and by learning a single way of practicing the same they could make only small benefits, whereas learning a wide variety would bring more. When those who want to learn sorcery are not worried of becoming disbelievers, they would have opted to learn all its forms, hence we find an expression of wrong opinion in this translation.

Hence we need an understanding of this verse that does not go against the Quran and Islami beliefs.

The reason we have translated this verse as follows: 

They followed the footsteps of the Shaitans during the reign of Sulaiman, who was not a disbeliever The two angels Jibril and Mikhail were not taught sorcery. And the two Shaitan Harut and Marut who taught the same in the city of Babylon to these people not without warning about the consequences of learning the same. “We ourselves stand witness to what has happened to us. Hence do not become a person to have refuted God by learning it.” Hence, they learnt from them the ways to create a rift between a husband and wife, though no harm can be done to anyone without the will of God. And they learnt something that would be of no benefit to them but in turn harms them. “And for those who had bargained for it, there are no returns for them in the hereafter”. They knew of this for certain. Should they not realize that what they bargained in return for themselves is evil?

What does the phrase ‘They learnt from the two to bring about a rift between a husband and wife.

Here we need to be aware of the usage of the word ‘hence’ in place of ‘fa’ by us. Let’s look at for example the context in which this word can be used.

E.g., This person is a deceiver hence I will not lend him money. In this sentence the word ‘hence’ is used to conclude the decision money will not be loaned to him because he is a deceiver. The word structure is similar in the above said phrase.

It’s been understood they learnt the ways to create a rift between a married couple because of the reason they understood they would turn to be disbelievers.

From the usage of the word ‘hence’, we understand the warning thrown prevented them from learning the art of witchcraft.

It is similar to teaching karate with a caution that learning karate needs bowing down to the master, (bowing to any mortal is against Islam) hence people learnt wrestling. The reason they were warned about the harmful consequences of learning karate made them learn wrestling, is the similarity drawn here.

It would be meaningless to say they were warned about the ill effects of karate and they chose to learn it. The word hence can be used only when another is sought in place of something for a certain reason.

It is meaningful when it is said the son gave up smoking because of his father’s warning. 

And it becomes meaningless, when it is said the son enjoyed smoking after the father’s warning.

Having this in mind let us peruse the above phrase.

The two warned about the harm created because of learning sorcery, hence people chose to learn from them the skill to separate married couples, a much less harmful art than sorcery. We have translated the word ‘fa’ in Arabic to ‘hence’. On these lines let’s consider a few more verses of the Quran

Verse 2:144 of the Quran says “We observed you looking up towards the sky often, hence we are making you turn your face towards the Qibla that satisfies you. Here the word ‘fa’ is used to refer to ‘hence’ The reason to effect a change in the direction of Qibla is already mentioned ahead (i.e.) the prophet often looked up at the sky. We understand the usage of the word ‘hence’ here with the prophet looking up to the sky.

The word ‘fa’ is found in verses 36:49,50 of the Quran. They will be destroyed with a big explosion while they are in debate among themselves. Hence, they will not be able to execute a testator. The reason they could not execute the testator is already cited. Here the message conveyed is, since the day of judgment is said to arrive unexpectedly, they will not be in a position to execute a testator.

In verse 17:48 of the Quran it says “Do observe the example they quote for you; hence they are the ones who are misled. The reason they are misled is their quoting of examples not at all suitable to what the prophet stands for.

Verse 18:105 of the Quran says “their deeds are destroyed; hence we will not bring forth the determining weighing balance in their case. Hence their deeds went dead the determining weigh balance will not be brought forth is the message that needs to be realized here          Similar is the word structure here that says hence the people learnt the art to separate married couples because they were warned of becoming infidels if they learnt sorcery.

The word ‘fa’ which gives the meaning ‘hence’ is known as safafiya. But some scholars who call themselves as Arabic intellects argue this word ‘fa’ does not belong to the type termed as safafiya

In case the ‘Fa’ belonging to the safafiya type had been used, Ya-tallamuna would have to be shrunk as Yat-allamu. the letter noon would disappear. Their argument is that since ‘noon’ is present here the ‘fa’ does not belong to the safafiya type. 

There are two types of ‘fa’ belonging to the safafiya group. There is no connection between the ‘fa’ used in verse 2:102 of the Quran along with the others that we mentioned and the ‘fa’ that is cited by these people. Their inadequate knowledge about Arabic grammar can be easily seen here.

They can go through various exegesis of the Quran the ‘fa’ that we claim as belonging to the safafiya type being proved. The safafiya they refer to is different from what is used here and should be realized by them so that they can get rid of their ignorance. They also cite the phrase ‘no harm can be brought on anybody without the will of God’ to support their argument. 

They contend that sorcery can be cast on anyone with the will of God, and they can be harmed, and this phrase is a substantiation of the same they say. 

Of course, it is a fact, with the will of Almighty harm can take place to anyone, but that cannot be construed because of sorcery.

When it is said through which they learnt the art of creating a rift means through which they learnt and that does not necessarily mean sorcery. What was said before? It was said by learning sorcery one would become an infidel and fearing the consequence they turned to learning the skill of separating married couples. The term ‘through which’ does not refer to sorcery here. 

This phrase reveals a message that harm can be brought between a husband-and-wife through this rift and not through sorcery.

“They learnt something that did not bring any benefits to them rather harmed them. For those who entered such a bargain, there is no good luck for them in the hereafter, and they were aware of it, should not they realize they entered a bad bargain for themselves.” What is the message conveyed here through these phrases?      These phrases warn nothing good would result for these people (who learn to create a rift between married couples) in the hereafter, although no harm could be done to anyone without the will of God Almighty.

On keenly observing this verse, we come to understand these people learnt something other than sorcery that could bring harm in the form of creating a rift between married couples.

It is not at all said here that sorcery can bring harm to people.

If there is a question as to why a rift cannot be affected through sorcery? It is wrong for two reasons. 

If the art of sorcery had been learnt by these people after being warned by the two, the word ‘hence’ would not have found a place in the phrase.

Moreover the warning they would turn infidels on learning sorcery can be found thrice in this verse. Though creating a rift between married couples amounts to being a sin committed, it does not come within the aim of being called an act of infidelity, neither we nor those who believe in witchcraft disagree on this point. If the skill they learnt did not turn them to be infidels, means they learnt something that does not come under the ambit of sorcery.

This verse says they did not learn sorcery, but the art to separate a husband and wife, which is not guaranteed 100% unless willed by God.

 Translating this does not entail committing the sin of infidelity and does not contradict the Quran which terms sorcery as a trick, a maneuver, and an unsuccessful act Moreover, we need to take note of the way Allah has structured the phrase. 

Where it cannot be found to say they learnt sorcery that brings a rift between the husband and wife, but something else that could create such a rift.

Let us go through another translation by a different scholar. 

They followed what was read out to them by the Shaitans during the reign of Sulaiman. but he was not an infidel, rather the Shaitans were the ones who refuted the Almighty. They taught people the art of sorcery believing it was handed down to the two angels going by the names Harut and Marut.

But these two said ‘we are a testimony ourselves having been sent by the Almighty,’ hence without warning the people of becoming disbelievers they would not teach sorcery to them. They learnt from them the skill of separating a married couple. They cannot harm anyone without the will of God, learnt something which does not benefit them but causes harm to them. They were also very aware that what they have earned for themselves in the bargain is something evil. They should have realized this. Please note this translation is different from the previous one. 

It has been translated in a way not to be pushed into the trap of infidelity as we have pointed out earlier. 

They said they learnt from the two something that could create a rift between a married couple. 

The message they learnt to create a rift in a married couple is not that of God Almighty, but the Jews were of the opinion is what is conveyed here in brackets. The translation conveys the message the jews were of this opinion as pointed out by God Almighty. 

If a rift can be created between a couple by sorcery as a matter of their belief, it cannot be treated as evidence for the supporters of sorcery. The message nothing more than the Jews said this as per their belief is sought to be conveyed here. The translation by this scholar is done because of fear of Allah, that it might earn the wrath of Him for going against the tenets of the Quran. Thus, if translated in a manner that does not go against the Quran or creates equals to the Almighty there is no objection.

Please refer to points 28, 285, 357, 468, 499 to know more about what the Quran says about sorcery.

494. Are the women undergoing their monthly menstrual period prohibited to enter masjids.

Masjids are revered places of worship. The Quran and Prophet Muhammad have set out certain norms that need to be followed once inside. We are required not to behave in the same way once inside the masjids as we do in other places. 

One of the norms that needs to be maintained is cleanliness, men or women on whom there is a mandatory duty of bathing is imperative should clean themselves before entering masjids.

Women during their period of monthly menstruation are strictly barred from entering the precincts of masjids. But some scholars differ in their opinions regarding the evidence offered and let women undergoing their monthly woes to attend masjids.

And whatever arguments they put forward to substantiate their stand, do not conform to their beliefs. On the contrary their arguments are found to be weak. Let us go through them; 

People with the opinion that women undergoing their monthly menstrual cycle are prohibited from entering masjids present as their evidence verse No; (4:43,) of the Quran. 

4:43 O you who have believed, do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated until you know what you are saying or in a state of janabah, except those passing through [a place of prayer], until you have washed [your whole body]. And if you are ill or on a journey or one of you comes from the place of relieving himself or you have contacted women and find no water, then seek clean earth and wipe over your faces and your hands [with it]. Indeed, Allah is ever Pardoning and Forgiving. 

In this verse the word masjid is not found, but we have added, ‘do not go to the masjids’ in brackets. The direct translation of this verse is : Oh, You! who are believers, when you are in an intoxicated condition, and till you understand what you speak, and when a bath is mandatory upon you, do not go to the masjid but as a passer by.

This verse says not to approach the masjid except as a by-passer.

It is found to be saying ‘not even to approach the masjid’ leave alone worship in the masjid.

Most of the scholars are of the opinion, the verse says (the unclean and the intoxicated) not to enter the masjids but allows passing by the masjid. We also subscribe to the same view.

But some argue this verse has a different meaning other than what is presented. Anyhow there is got to be only one correct understanding of a verse of the Quran. Now let’s analyze the opinion expressed by those who say there is no bar on women in their periods entering masjids.

Oh! Believers when you are in an intoxicated condition, and unless you understand yourself what you speak, do not approach to worship, and those of you on whom taking bath is a mandatory duty, do not approach for worship without cleaning yourself, except those wayfarers.

The word we have translated as ‘passersby’ is replaced with ‘wayfarers’ by others.

Lexicon allows us to make use of the word ‘wayfarer’ in place of ‘passerby’. If the usage of a word is inappropriate in a particular place though there is a provision to use it, we need to use the appropriate word.

And before using a word that is considered as appropriate, we need to take into account the laws that are derived from the meaning of the word that is used.

The meaning that is considered appropriate by these people for the phrase ‘Upon those who have a mandatory duty of bathing and cleaning oneself, not to enter the places of worship’ leads to a belief that there is a law for one set of people, and another for a different group. 

Way farers or travelers are permitted to worship after performing ‘Daya-mm am’ in place of ‘Wudu’ at a time of water scarcity, this is a concession offered to the wayfarers in Islam. The understanding according to these people is, if people do not happen to be wayfarers, it is imperative they take bath and then perform worship and are not supposed to perform worship on dayammam.

In other words, this is said to convey the message that, people other than wayfarers on whom bathing, and cleaning is mandatory before worship cannot perform dayammam to carry on their worship.

In brief this means the law of dayammam is exclusively for wayfarers. 

People thus arguing should have enacted a law accordingly, but this did not happen; but when questioned whether a person can worship on performing dayammam, they consent to it.

We find the word wayfarers inappropriate and, hence we consider the usage of the word ‘by passers’ as appropriate, and conclude it refers to the passing by of unclean people through the masjids onto adjacent streets.

It strongly conveys the message that, whomever bathing is mandatory are allowed to pass through the masjids but prohibited from offering any form of worship or entering, or staying, within its premises, at the same time passing through (Masjids) is not considered a crime.

The stance of Islam is, people on whom bathing is mandatory immaterial of them being passersby or residents of the place, they can go ahead with their worship after performing dayammam, in case of non- availability of water, clean themselves necessarily with water on availability to offer worship.

The position of Islam being thus clarified, offering an explanation the law on performing dayammam applies only to wayfarers is misleading. Hence giving a meaning for the Arabic word ‘Abiri Sabil’ as passersby and not wayfarers or travelers is upheld.

Here a question arises about the non-mention of words relating to women in their throes of monthly menstrual periods, but we find the word ‘junoob’ that includes women of this category. The word Jana fat refers to ‘staying away’, ‘unclean’, ‘semen’, and also refers to indulging in sexual acts, ejaculating with sexual intention, monthly periods undergone by women. And it also refers to postpartum mothers.

Book : Mujmu Lugathil Fuka Hayee. 

People who support the opinion that women undergoing a monthly menstrual cycle can enter masjids cite the following hadith related to Ayesha (RA). 

Ayisha (RA) said:

The messenger of God asked me to handover the prayer mat from the masjid to him, I replied by saying, ‘I am undergoing my monthly periods’ to which the prophet shot back ‘your monthly periods have nothing to do with your hands.

Book: Muslim 502, 503 

Abu Huraira (RA) narrates the following: 

When the prophet was inside the masjid he called out “ Ayesha bring me that mat,” Ayesha replied by saying “my monthly periods have started”, the prophet retorted “ Your hands do not have anything to do with your monthly periods, then Ayesha took the prayer mat and handed it over to Ayesha.

Book:Muslim 504 

People who support the opinion that women can enter masjids present the above-mentioned two hadiths as proof.

In the first hadith it is being mentioned as the prophet wanted Ayesha to hand over the prayer mat to him, from this it can be understood the prayer mat was inside the masjid, and the prophet was also at home in the adjacent room with Ayesha (RA).

Nobody would ask for a thing from a place while remaining in the same. The prayer mat remained inside the masjid and the prophet was also in the same place, and Ayesha (RA) present there was asked by the prophet to hand over the prayer mat from the masjid, Ayesha (RA), either could have entered the masjid to bring the mat or could have just stretched her hand inside the adjacent room apportioned as masjid to fetch the same.

Ayesha (RA) narrates: When Prophet Muhammad remained in the masjid during the period preforming Ithikaf, he used to pass on to my room to the extent leaning on to the door, when I would wash his head remaining inside my room, while the rest of his body was inside the masjid.

Book: Ahmed 24608 

From this incident it can be seen, the masjid and the house of the prophet were the same, but demarcated by a partition.

Even otherwise if Ayesha (RA) had entered the masjid to fetch the prayer mat, the act does not go against our stand as per the Quran, that allows unclean women to pass through masjids but prohibits them from staying inside.

The second hadith mentions that Prophet Muhmmad while remaining inside the masjid had asked Ayesha (RA) to handover the prayer mat to him. Even if it is understood as the task was carried out by her, it still is not against our stand and as per the Quran, that can be understood as that carrying an object by an unclean woman to the inside of the masjid is not a taboo is proved by the action of Ayesha (RA).

This does not anyway substantiate the concept that unclean women can stay in masjids. They are allowed only to pass through, and this remains our stand.

We need to ponder over the reason why Prophet Muhammad told Ayesha (RA) that ‘hands have nothing to do with monthly periods of women’. We can surmise Ayesha (RA) could have just stretched her hand to fetch the prayer mat without entering the masjid, was the reason the prophet said hands have nothing to do with monthly menstrual cycles, and this also remains a proof that Ayesha (RA) stretched just her hands without entering the masjid.

Ayesha (RA) could have hesitated to fetch the prayer mat because, may be of the belief, touching a prayer mat could also be a taboo for a woman experiencing monthly periods for whom worshipping of Almighty is prohibited. The prophet would have said the words ‘Hands have nothing to do with monthly periods experienced by women’ for Ayesha to come out of the hesitation.

In some messages Ayesha (RA) it seems, when asked by Prophet Muhammad to hand over the prayer mat, feigned her inability because she was experiencing her monthly throes rendering her unfit for worship. This reply of Ayesha would convey some to believe that handling of prayer mat by women undergoing menses is wrong.

The following message is presented by people to substantiate the view that women experiencing menses, are not prohibited to enter masjids: 

Ayesha (RA) narrates: 

A dark colored female slave belonging to an Arab family (A long narration) had a small tent made out of wool in the precincts of Masjid-un-Nabavi.

Book: Bukhari 429 

In the above message it is found that Prophet Muhammad had ordered a small dwelling be made for a dark colored woman in the precincts of Masjid-un-Nabavi in spite of the knowledge she will experience her monthly menses. People who support the entry of unclean women into Masjids cite this message asking how Prophet Muhammad could allow a dwelling to be made for a woman, knowing very well women experiencing menses are not allowed inside the masjid. Hence, they conclude that women passing through their menses are not prohibited to enter the masjids.

But in the above message we do not find anything that suggests women undergoing menses can enter masjids. There is an issue in the way they seem to have understood the message. The word masjid is used to denote place of worship inclusive of places where worship does not take place. They fail to understand the difference between these places of the masjid. 

We present below some hadiths as examples:

We were with Prophet Muhammad when a person came riding a camel, he dismounted and then tied the camel inside the masjid and laid it down to rest.

Book: Bukarii 63 

We don’t understand as the camel was tethered and laid to rest inside the place of worship but would be understood as the camel was secured within the precincts of the masjid.

Nobody would present this hadith as proof to tie up a camel inside the masjid where worship takes place. 

Abyssinians were playing valor games in the masjid and the Prophet shielded me while I was watching the same.

Book: Bukhari 455, 988 

We wouldn’t understand this as Abyssinians exhibiting their prowess in archery, but as the event taking place within the precincts of the masjid.

The Jewish man and the woman who indulged in prostitution were stoned to death at the place in the masjid where coffins with the dead are usually placed for final prayers.

Book: Bukhari 1329, 3332, 4556 

We would understand the event as having taken place in an open space within the masjid premises and not in a place in the masjid, where worship takes place and neither we will take this as punishment can be carried out inside the masjid where worship is conducted.

During the trench war a tent was made in masjid-an-Nabawi to accommodate Sa’ad (RA) injured in the war, and help Prophet Muhammad attend him to his wounds while blood was flowing out of the wounds he had received.

Book: Bukhari 463, 4122 

Here we understand the moment a particular place belonging to the masjid is allocated to be used as a spot for treatment of the wounded, it ceases to be used as a spot for worshipping.

Prophet Muhammad carried out his worships inside the masjid in a tent made from mats., and people followed him in worship. Once the worship was completed, people waited for the prophet to emerge from the tent, since he did not come out, as a sign to remind him they snorted lightly. The prophet then emerged and told them to leave and continue their non-obligatory worship in their homes.

Book: Bukhari 731, 7290 

Prophet Muhammad advised people to carry out their surplus worships at homes, and their obligatory worships in Masjids. Prophet Muhammad was the first person to implement restrictions and laws imposed by Islam, as can be seen when he treated the tent inside the masjid as his own dwelling and carried out his surplus worships within it. From this we come to understand that areas demarcated for uses other than worshipping within the masjid are not bound by laws that apply to places used for worshipping in masjids.

When a tent is made within the precincts of the masjid as a residence for a woman, it becomes her private property, and not everyone is free to enter. But in a masjid everybody's free to enter at all times. Hence presenting this hadith as evidence to substantiate that menstruating women can stay inside masjids is wrong. 

When one says I went to the masjid to urinate, it won’t be understood as the person went to urinate in the place of worship in the masjid. It is understood as he went to the urinals in the masjid to urinate.

They also present the evidence of the prophet's comrades having stayed in the Masjid-un-Nabavi without having taken the mandatory bath. This is also similar to the above quoted message about a woman staying inside the demarcated area of the masjid. 

The comrades of Prophet Muhammad were allowed to use a part of the masjid as a house, and ejaculation in a place not part of the place of worship in the masjid is of no consequence.

Abu Huraira (RA) narrates :

‘The messenger of Allah sent a division of horse men to the Najd area to bring a person by the name of Sumama Bin Usaal of the Banu Haneefa tribe, when he was brought to Masjid-un-Nabawi, he was tied to one of its pillars.

Book: Bukhari 469. 

This is yet another similar message to the one quoted above, regarding the various uses of parts of masjid put to different uses, and likewise a provision for tying up prisoners existed, where he was tethered to a pillar.

In hadiths of Bukhari 462, 2422, 4372, it is mentioned that he was tied up to the pillars of the masjid, and the prophet advanced towards him on his arrival shows he was tied up outside the area of worship and not inside the masjid.

The following hadith is also presented as evidence by people who believe otherwise.

Ayesha (RA) narrated : 

We set out of Madina with the intention of performing the Hajj, and when we were nearing a place known as Shariff, I started experiencing my periods, and began to cry. At that time the prophet came there and wanted to know the reason for my sobbing. I replied by saying ‘I swear in the name of Allah, I will not be able to perform the Hajj this year’. The prophet asked me whether I started experiencing my monthly periods I replied in the affirmative, to which the prophet said, ‘this is a condition that Allah has made it a fate on the women descendants of Adam, and he asked me to perform all that was required by people on Hajj, except circumambulating the Kaaba until you are clean enough.

Book:Bukhari 305 

A section of people cite this hadith and argue, since Prophet Muhmmad has allowed Ayesha (RA) to perform Hajj without the Tawaf, women experiencing their menses can very well stay inside masjids. This contention of theirs is completely wrong. 

Prophet Muhammad permitted Ayesh (RA) to carry on with performing all the other acts other than tawaf needed to perform the Haj. While this being clearly made known, it does not augur well for questions like can worshipping and fasting at Kaaba by unclean women be carried out.

Since there are numerous other proofs that prohibit unclean women from either worshipping or fasting, it can be understood these two acts do not fall into the category of other acts mentioned here.

Likewise, the words ‘do all other acts other than Tawaf’ by Prophet Muhammad does not necessarily include entrance of unclean persons because there is already a prohibition on them from entering the masjid as already pointed out in this verse. And since Prophet Muhammad has said these words with regard to performance of Haj, it cannot be considered to fit into all other aspects of Islamic jurisdictions.

In matters other than Haj, women experiencing their menses are free to act as per their general necessities, this is on basic common requirements for an ordinary woman.

There is permission for the husband to hug his wife without entering into a sexual intercourse and also to lie in her lap. But these acts are prohibited between a husband and wife when they are on Hajj pilgrimage. Hence it needs to be understood that these words of the prophet relate only to activities during Hajj, where only Tawaf is barred by women passing through their menses, and not to all activities pertaining to their normal everyday life. And the prophet’s words cannot be taken as a sanction permitting everything at all times

Hence staying in Kaaba by an unclean woman is not permitted because of the various evidence that is available. 

The following hadith is also presented by those who support the view that unclean woman can remain in the Kaaba:

Abu Huraira (RA) narrates : 

‘I was standing in one of the streets of Madina without having cleaned myself with the mandatory bath I was required to, at that time,

Prophet Muhammad wished to meet me, and I avoided him because of being unclean and slipped out to take a bath at home and returned to the spot, when the prophet asked me where I had been all the while. I said I needed to go in for a mandatory bath without which I hated to be in your company. To that Prophet Muhammad said, Subanallah (Allah is the cleanest) A Muslim does no turn out to be unclean because he faulted on his cleanliness.

Book :Bukhari 283 

Since this hadith conveys the message that no Muslim becomes unclean because he faulted on his cleanliness, these people argue that there is no harm in unclean people and women during their periods entering masjids.

Verse 5:6 of the Quran states, on whom mandatory bath is a duty to clean themselves, this does not necessarily translate that unclean people can worship without cleaning themselves, just because it is said by the prophet that a believer can never turn out to be an unclean person.

Islam has prohibited unclean people from performing worship, entering masjids, circumambulating the Kaaba etc. By holding on to the words ‘A believer cannot turn out to be unclean’ no one can argue that doing all these acts is allowed, neither can they.

There is no direct evidence to prove that women during their menses can enter masjids, hence it can be concluded that unclean women are barred from entering masjids, and if there is a dire necessity to pass through its precincts, they can do it and exit at the earliest

493. Prophet Muhammad the sinned and Jesus the innocent.

Verses (4:106, 9:43, 23:118, 48:3, 110:3) of the Quran say Prophet Muhammad is a sinner and Jesus not been influenced by Shaitan. Verse (3:36) of the Quran says Jesus was not influenced by Shaitan,

Christians cite these verses and argue Jesus is a better example than Prophet Muhammad for mankind and create a confusion among Muslims. Christians place this perverse argument and do not take into confidence the Quran as a scripture.

When they argue a certain aspect or contents of the Quran, they are required to take the whole Quran into confidence as a scripture. They do not accept facts in the Quran that say, Jesus is a slave of Allah and not the son, that he was not killed by anyone, nor resurrected, and one soul cannot shoulder the sins of another.

 The answer to their argument lies in their faith in the Quran. Their belief is Quran is the imagination of Prophet Muhammad. Had Prophet Muhammad been the author of the Quran, what would have stopped him from portraying himself as a sinless person? And it would have been much easier for him to add a verse saying Jesus was a sinner. 

But in the Quran it is being mentioned that Prophet Muhammad is a human bound to commit mistakes. They need to realize the Quran is the word of God, and that these verses stand testimony. 

The fact that Prophet Muhammad was bound to make mistakes and commit a sin remains a reality, so does with the same reality applying in the case of Jesus also.

They (the Christians) are of the opinion that only acts like murder, robbery, whoring and theft constitute sin. Prophet Muhammad did not commit such acts nor did Jesus. 

The word sin includes a wide range of acts and words against the commands of the Almighty

Muslims and Christians believe Adam, the first human being committed sin But the Christians believe the sin committed by Adam continues to be shouldered by generation after generation of humans till today.

The act considered as sin committed by Adam does not come under the title of murder, robbery, or prostitution, it is mere tasting of a fruit from a tree prohibited by the Creator.

In the light of the Bible, Jesus has also committed sin because it says the soul that commits sin dies. (Eziekiel 18:20)

As per the tenets of the Bible whoever commits a sin dies, accordingly Jesus is also sinner because he died. And even as per Islamic belief Jesus is yet to die, and not immortal.

Man commits sin due to the influence of an evil force called Shaitan, the Christians addressed by the name Devil.

(Matthew 4:1-10) of the Bible talks of Jesus being tempted by the devil.

The fact Jesus was tempted by the devil confirms he also sinned. 

Refuted a person who addressed him as a sinless personMark 10:18 New International Version 18 “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone. 

Does not the words of Jesus confirm that no human including him can be totally good and perfect and are prone to commit mistakes and sins.

John 9:31, We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if anyone is a worshiper of God and does his will, God listens to him. 

But Jesus pleaded with the Almighty to save him when he was nailed on the cross, (Matthew 26:38-45 Mark 14:36, Luke 22:44) his prayers were not answered. 

Matthew 26:38 Then He said to them, “My soul is swallowed up in sorrow —to the point of death. Remain here and stay awake with Me.” 

Matthew 26:39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, “My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will.” 

Matthew 26:40. And he cometh unto the disciples — Unto the three from whom he had withdrawn himself a little way; and findeth them asleep — Notwithstanding the distress they saw him in, and the strict command that he had given them to watch. It seems a supernatural heaviness had fallen upon them. 

Matthew 26:41 "Watch and pray so that you will not enter into temptation. For the spirit is willing, but the body is weak. 

Matthew 26:42 He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, you will be done. 

Matthew 26:43, When he came back, he again found them sleeping, because their eyes were heavy. Matthew 26:43, ESV: And again he came and found them sleeping, for their eyes were heavy.

 Matthew 26:44 So he left them and went away once more and prayed the third time, saying the same thing.

Mattew: 45 Then he returned to the disciples and said to them, “Are you still sleeping and resting? Look, the hour has come, and the Son of Man is delivered into the hands of sinners.

Had Jesus been sinless his prayers would have been answered. 

The Bible (Proverbs) (23:29-35) says consuming liquor is a sin, but the same Bible (Matthew 11:19) says Jesus was a lover of liquor.

When a woman was accused of prostitution and asked by people to be killed by stoning, Jesus replied by saying let the one who has not indulged in prostitution punish her. (John 8:3–11)

If Jesus was not a sinner, at least he should have punished her.

Violating edicts, statutes, and laws is also a sin. When law demands stoning of a prostitute, the punishment should have been carried out. Over and above the non–implementation of an edict, trying to justify the crime is another sin.

The Bible (Matthew 3:6) says those who have sinned need to be baptised.

And the Bible (Matthew 3:13) says Jesus was baptised like all others. 

Reviling and talking low of others is also a sin, but when Jesus was asked to perform miracles by some people, he reviled them by calling them heirs of immoral women.

Instead of preforming miracles or refusing, calling people who requested for a performance as heirs of prostitutes, (Matthew 12:39, Mark:16:4,) can’t be justified by Christians?

When a woman from another race asked Jesus to preach to her, Jesus replied to her by saying only the Israelites are humans while others are dogs, and in a gesture to confirm the same he uttered. It is not good to feed dogs with bread meant for children. (Matthew 15:26, Mark 7:27). Is this not sin?

Isn’t cursing the fig tree for not bearing fruits a sin? (Matthew 21:19) 

Browsing the Bible, one can find Jesus having committed many sins. If one has belief in the Bible, he also needs to believe Jesus did commit sin.

If any one cites a proof from Islam saying Jesus was not influenced by Shaitan, he neds to find the understanding of what is being said from Islam. It has already been explained by Prophet Muhammad what is meant by ‘not being influenced by the Shaitan’.

Prophet Muhammad said, any newborn child at birth is influenced by Shaitan, and this is when it starts crying at birth, except in the case of Maryam and her son. 

Book : Bukhari 4548 

Islam says any child at birth is influenced by the Shaitan and starts crying at birth, but Jesus was protected from such a happening and Islam didn’t say Jesus wouldn't commit any sin, and it never said he would not further commit any sin. And Islam’s fundamental is that all humans are bound to commit crimes and sins.

Please refer to explanation no;459 of this compilation to know more. 

492. Is the Quran the narrative of Jibril or Allah?

Verse (81:19) of the Quran seems to portray itself as the narrative of archangel Jibril.

Also verses (2:97, 16:102, 19:64, 26:193, 53:5) of the Quran convey the same idea.

Citing above quoted verses of the Quran some propagate a counter message saying Quran is not from Allah.

This kind of argument exposes their ignorance. For instance, when a chief minister of a state promulgates an order through a district collector it can be said to be the order from the chief minister or from the district collector. But everyone has an understanding that the order is from the chief minister. 

Though the district collector has the freedom to promulgate certain orders himself, archangel Jibril or for that matter any angel does not have the liberty to do things or convey messages to any one can be seen from the verses (7:206, 16:50, 21:19, 21:27, 66:6) o the Quran. 

Hence even if the Quran is said to be the narrative of archangel Jibil, the wise will understand it to be the narrative from that of the Almighty. 

Verse (2:97) of the Quran clearly states Jibril carried the messages of the Quran to Prophet Muhammad on the explicit command of the great God.

Had these people understood the method of revelation of the Quranic messages to Prophet Muhammad, they will refrain from confusing others and themselves in the procedure.

 Allah does not summon archangel Jibril each time to deliver a revelation. Prior to creating everything on this earth, Allah had everything registered in a book, up to his last creation yet in this world, and the whole universe is functioning as per His recording till now and will continue to function till the end of this world.

And in the book (that is with the Almighty with the entire records) will also be found details about Prophet Muhammad to be sent as the messenger of Allah with the Quran being revealed as a guidance to him for the entire mankind.

Please refer to explanation points 291 , 157, of this compilation to know more on this subject, and also to verses (6:38, 6:59, 9:36, 10:6, 11:6, 13:38,39, 17:58, 20:52, 22:70, 23:62, 27:75, 34:3, 35:11, 43:4, 50:4, 56:77,78, 57:22, 85:21,22) of the Quran. 

An incident that takes place at a certain period in history will relate to the revelation of a certain verse brought down by Jibril, on Allah’s command is all registered in the book. A view of creations and their functions on these lines will point out to the message being from Allah, and the voice rendered to the message is that of the archangel Jibril.

The message being from Allah, can be said to be the scripture of Allah and narrative since by the voice of the archangel can be termed as that of Jibril. Hence the Quran is a narrative of Jabril and message from the Almighty.

There ought not to be any confusion regarding the same. 

There is another reason for attributing the voice of Jibril as narration of the Quran. 

The reason can be seen spelt out in the verses of the Quran starting from 81:19 till the end of the surah.

When Prophet Muhammad conveyed to the people about the archangel Jibril delivering messages from Allah, they trusted his words and did not say he is lying, because they have not come across him lying at least once. They suspected him of having been duped by Shaitan.

Since they doubted the part played by Jibril a need arose to mention the name of Jibril to them.

These are the verses that follow 81:19

And your companion is not [at all] mad.

And he has already seen Jibril in the clear horizon. 

81:24Nor is he miserly (with knowledge) of the unseen. 

And the Quran is not the word of Shaitan the accursed.

Prophet Muhammad was not duped by the Shaitan, but he was delivered messages by the one who is close to the Almighty. Hence the need to divulge the name of Jibril the archangel and the words of the Quran as that of Jibril’s.

491. Is the Bible a combination of Torah and Injeel put together?

The verses (3:4, 3:48, 3:50, 3:65, 3:93, 5:43, 5:44, 5:46, 5:47, 5:66, 5:68, 5:110, 7:157, 9:111, 48:29, 57:27, 61:6, 62:5) of the Quran say the people of the earlier days were bestowed with scriptures known as Torah and Injeel, and the Quran confirms the teachings of these books.

It should be misunderstood that the New Testament and the Old Testament of today are the same as the Torah and Injeel of the yesteryears.

The New Testament is not as same as the Injeel nor is the Old Testament the Torah.

Let’s know the details clearly. 

In verses (5:46, 57:27,) of the Quran, Allah says Prophet Esa was bestowed with Injeel by Him.

If the scripture revealed in the past to Prophet Isa, was Injeel, accordingly it should be the same New Testament, but Christians neither believe nor accept the same.

The texts written by Mathew, Mark, Luke, John and the Gospels by Paul after Prophet Isa’s time are mentioned by Christians as the New Testament, this can never be called as Injeel that was revealed to Prophet Isa. Verses (Mathew 4:23, 9:35) of the Bible say Jesus spread the Gospel of The Kingdom.

From this we come to understand, Jesus spread a scripture which he had during his time. And that was not the Bible (Injeel) of today.

The scripture revealed to Jesus remained with the Christians till the time of Prophet Muhammad. Messages of that Injeel and that of the Quran were more of less similar, and this was the reason the Christians of those days accepted Islam leading to complete disappearance of Christianity from the Arab soil.

The Christian church concluded, though they had Injeel as guidance, it was only a symbolic presence for them, whereas Prophet Muhammad put into practice the similar scripture known as the Quran and converted Christians to Muslims, hence they altogether got rid of Injeel itself, thinking the riddance would stop the flow of Christians into the Islamic fold. They feared the presence of Injeel would prompt the Muslims to move the Christians to Islamic fold just by comparing Injeel to the Quran.

That the Injeel remained with the Christians till the advent of Prophet Muhammad can be seen from the verses (5:47, 5:66, 5:68) of the Quran. 

Only after this did the Christians declare those written by other people as scriptures.

Similarly, Prophet Muhammad has said the scripture of Torah was revealed to Prophet Musa. There is no logic in finding the history of people who had come after Prophet Musa in a book that was revealed to him. But in the Old Testament we find messages about people who appeared after Prophet Musa’s time, proving The Old Testament can never be the Torah.

At the time when the Quran was revealed Injeel remained with the Christians and the Torah was with the Jews respectively, both the communities were conveyed the Quran confirmed what they had in their hands. And only after confirming the messages of the Quran were like those from their scriptures they turned towards Islam.

Since the Jews feared Prophet Muhammad would destroy Judaism by comparing the Quran and Torah pinpointing the similarities, they got rid of the Torah too.

For example, The Quran pointed out to the Christians and Jews, certain facts that were prevalent among the Jews and Christians of those days but at the same time not found either in the New Testament or Old Testament.

Had the verses pointed out by the Quran were not found in the Torah and the Injeel, the Jews and Christians of those days would have raised a hue and cry to prove the Quran wrong.

They accepted Islam because they found in their scriptures what was conveyed by Prophet Muhammad.

We present below few verses from the Quran that are like those found in their scriptures: 

The Quran 9:111 Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah, so they kill and are killed. These are promises that God has made on Himself in the Torah and Injeel.

The Quran talked to the people about this verse who were in possession of the scriptures containing the same. Had there been no such verse in those scriptures, the Jews and Christians would have not missed the opportunity to prove the Quran wrong.

This fact found in the Torah and the Injeel is not to be found anywhere in the New Testament of today nor is found in the Old Testament. Hence it needs to be concluded neither Torah is the Old Testament nor Injeel the New Testament. 

Let us look at another message! 

The Quran 48:29Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and prostrating [in prayer], seeking bounty from Allah and [His] pleasure. Their mark is on their faces from the trace of prostration. That is their description in the Torah. And their description in the Gospel is as a plant which produces its offshoots and strengthens them so they grow firm and stand upon their stalks, delighting the sowers – so that Allah may enrage by them the disbelievers. Allah has promised those who believe and do righteous deeds among them forgiveness and a great reward. 

In this verse of the Quran, a message about Prophet Muhammad and his community is said to be conveyed in the Torah and Injeel, and definitely it would have found mention in the scriptures of the Jews and Christians. There is no chance for the absence of this verse that addresses them in their scriptures.

But such a message is not found in the New Testament of today or in the Old Testament of the earlier days. 

Torah and Injeel remained in the hands of Jews and Christians during the time of Prophet Muhammad, since they spawned the development of Islam, the churches decided imperative, the destruction of these scriptures to for their own survival. For more details regarding this topic please refer to explanation point no;271 of this compilation. 

490. Why does ‘the incomparable compassionate’ God refuses to forgive?

In verses (4:48, 4:116, 4:137, 4:169, 47:34, 63:6) of the Quran, we find the Almighty keeping away some from the purview of His forgiveness.

This is being questioned by those who are bent upon finding drawbacks and faults in Islam, saying a God who is limitlessly compassionate cannot keep anyone away from His compassion.

Such people who question the compassion of the Almighty are those who fail to understand the meaning of the phrase ‘God with limitless compassion’ Just as the attribute ‘the Almighty of limitless compassion is given to God, so is the attribute ‘the God who punishes severely’. 

The attribute ‘the God with limitless compassion’ means He blesses those whom He wills limitlessly.

And the attribute ‘A punisher with all severity’ means He punishes severely whom He finds deserving. 

Just because he is attributed with ‘severity while punishing’ nobody will understand Him as the One who punishes innocents.

 Similarly, one should not misunderstand that just because He is being attributed with ‘limitless compassion’ He will shower his blessings on unqualified people.

The meaning of the phrase ‘God with unlimited compassion’ remains true to its word as long as it is reflected appropriately, if not it turns out to be a farce.

For instance, we say fathers of some children have limitless love towards their children. Their children were not reprimanded by the father at any point of time, and we also believe that he would never do that in future. 

No one would call this kind of a parent a very loving person, on the contrary he would be named as a simpleton. He never reprimanded his children at any time or for any crime, this kind of a person will not be known as a kind one but a simpleton and a good for nothing fool.

Those who enjoy the benefits and blessings from Allah every second of their life, and are thankful to Allah’s servants for these gifts and after enjoying the things and organs from the great God, if they refuse to utilize the things, organs, power and an intelligence in the way required by Him can be tolerated for a few days, few months, but not endlessly, this would send a wrong message portraying Him as a good for nothing.

Because those who have accepted Allah as the only God and worshipped Him exclusively may have second thoughts if the evil doers are not punished, and follow the way others took in staying away from thanking the Almighty. Hence leaving people without any punishment for following the wrong path and spreading it is not love and blessing