Letters to the Editor

There is no doubt about it that Imam Razi was an outstanding scholar. But to say that he was one of the best among Mufassirin would be a hyperbole. On the other hand, the word `Aqeedah seems to have become a catch-word for condemning, or reducing the status of any scholar of the past or present.

Such statements as you mention should not be made by ordinary scholars. They create unnecessary doubt. After all, far from the common people, even scholars hardly know the intricacies that `Aqeedah involves, especially when complex issues are discussed by a scholar of Razi’s stature. Why poison minds of the simple folks, to whom what Nu`man `Ali Khan says is, perhaps, weightier than what Razi said?

In addition, Razi’s Tafsir is in Arabic, and filled with discussions over issues of dialectical theology (`Ilm al-Kalam), which requires specialists to understand. What’s the point in making remarks over a topic whose word-meaning is not understood in English, let alone in Arabic?

As for Razi being influenced by Ghazali, we have no opinion and no definite information. The minds of the two were seas apart. To say that he was influenced by the other is another big opinion to express. Suffice for us simple Islam.

Although it is unthinkable that a believer would ignore all the Fara’id, yet, Eeman is something that a man will only be thought of as free of it, if he repudiated that which brought him into Islam in the first place. That is, a man cannot be declared an unbeliever, so long as he declares his faith in the two Shahadah. It is by declaring faith in the two testimonies that a man becomes a Muslim, and it is by repudiating one of the two testimonies that he becomes a non-Muslim.

Both Fard and Wajib are terms, primarily, of Fiqh postulates, for application in Law rather than in doctrines. To many Fuqaha’, the two are interchangeable, except the Ahnaf, who are responsible for introducing the concept of differentiation between the two. To them, Fard is an act in the absence, or corruption of which, rituals are not acceptable, requiring a repeat; while Wajib, is that act, which, if forgotten, or unintentionally corrupted, but not intentionally ignored, entails some sort of expiation (Kaffarah), the nature of which depending on the nature of the ritual; without requirement of repetition.

It is obvious that since you are not an authority, you will have to look for one to follow. That one will have to be, as you have already reached the conclusion, an authority. Internet sites are no authority. Your colleagues are no authority. The `Ulama’ around you are no authority. Your dilemma is, you have to practice Islam; and, without an authority, you will have Shaytan as your authority. We understand why you are worried and sympathize with you.

Well, the authority is given to the Fuqaha’ in general by the Qur’an and Sunnah. The Qur’an said:  “O those who have believed! Obey Allah, obey the Messenger, and those of authority among you.” By authority, the allusion could only be to religious authority since it is common knowledge that political authorities are corrupt.

Now, after obedience of religious “authorities” stands confirmed, obedience of the most learned among them is by default a greater religious obligation. Each of the four schools have had scholars of such standing in their group, that the like of whom have not appeared after them. Most of them got whipped in public for refusing to obey the political authorities. When Ibn Hanbal died, the entire Baghdad market was closed. The funeral of these modern-day self-made, self-declared “I-know-all” breed is attended by 20 people, who discuss business while accompanying the bier.

Should the Ummah follow one of the four schools of law, or vagabonds on the Net, or those Fuqaha’ who sold their souls for fat salaries from oil-money, or those who do not know how to pronounce the word Fiqh if given in Arabic, nor know its meaning? You will have no difficulty in answering.

We also feel assured that you must be thinking: “Now. If I choose to follow all of the four, choosing from any one at any time, I would be actually following my base desire, since I cannot distinguish between right and wrong. I don’t want to follow my base desires and land into Hell.” And, “I may be downright ignorant, but not a fool at the same time. I’m not risking Paradise.”

If you are thinking on those lines, surely, you are on the right track and we congratulate you for adopting this course.

Influenced by street preachers, pamphlet distributors, and ignorant egotists, some people are wont to say, “Look! George Bernard Shaw knew English. Now, I too know English. So, if Shaw had the right to express his socialistic ideas in his dramas, I too have the right to air my humble opinions in Islam.”

We advise that you stay away from this humble humbug. The head-on clash of this humbug’s vocabulary of 150 words against that of 50,000 of Shaw, will smash his head. Allow him some time, can you?

The hadith is Sahih, but not found in Bukhari and Muslim. In our times, it has been popularized more than it deserves.

You need to distinguish between a sect and a group. The street drummers for instance – the fastest rising group – is steadily developing into a sect, but it still remains a group and not yet a sect. The hadith speaks of sects and not of groups.

That is because some people are so far away from the true spirit of Islam, that they do not know where truth lies. Today, perhaps, these are the only four groups in India who can be identified as good folks, against the street drummers.

It is right for the groups that they should not be deceived, but wrong for those who would like to stay away from these four groups.

Hopefully, by now you have found a bride.

When the separation of mosques is complete, like the separation of the Shi`ah and Sunni (meaning the Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama`ah – let us call them the Tahawi group), the street drummers would have become a sect. Until then we have time to work and save them from perdition.

You should, although it is very likely that they will immediately become three groups: for, against and neutral.

We are in agreement with you.

If the money earned as interest is being used for paying out against one’s Zakah, then, that is disallowed. But if it is being given away to the deserving simply for the reason of getting rid of it, without hopes of reward, then, according to some, that could be allowed.

Islam is a religion of decency. Protecting the individual, his or her modesty, honor and dignity are its main concerns. It respects the individual to the highest degree. Present-day materialistic civilization has little regard for individuals. It believes that humans are animals, and, accordingly, people are treated like animals by it. It would say for instance, “Have you seen an animal hiding its private parts?”

No, Islam does not allow a male doctor, whatever his specialty, to examine the `Awrah of female patients, nor a female doctor examining the `Awrah of male patients. If men and women insist that they will be examined by the right gender, hospitals will be forced to provide facilities. Excuses are offered such as, there are no female gynecologists available. But that’s not correct. In most cases of women’s diseases, a gynecologist is not required at all; so that all females who do require to be examined by a gynecologist alone, can be directed to them, while others can be examined by male doctors who use female nurses as assistants.

Muslims often quote that dire needs disregard the general rules of prohibition. But, in actual practice, the needs are never dire; but rather, lack of modesty.

The above also applies to female doctors who should avoid attending to male patients. If the circumstances in a hospital enforces it, they should change the hospital: Whoever fears Allah, He makes a way out for him or her.

When you said that you are discontinuing subscription to the magazine, we thought the next sentence would be a promise that you would raise funds for a separate magazine for the children altogether. The late Mawlana `Ali Miyan had expressed his desire that we should bring out such a magazine.

So far as raising the doubt that the reader raised, we do not believe it was a stupid thing to do. Although there is no dearth of the stupid, to get doubts cleared is not a stupid but rather a necessary thing to do.

As regards talks about pregnancy, intercourse, etc. we all live in different worlds of our own. The world we – the staff of this magazine – live in, talks more on these things, through its print as well as screen media, than anything else. You are lucky that you are able to escape this media to preserve the innocence of your children. Without this magazine or others of this type, you’ll need more and more of luck.