Letters to the Editor

It is not correct to say that the Hanafiyy Fiqh supports global sighting of the moon for religious purposes. Their ruling, coming down from the earliest times has been that moon-sighting of one city is good enough for another city. In earlier times, the distance between two cities was not very well-specified. Further, it has always been stressed in the Fatawaa that the first duty of the Muslims in this connection is to sight the moon themselves, and not leave it to specified people, or, depend entirely on sightings of other cities or states.

As for distances within which people of one city can accept the sighting of another city, it is not sighting of global level, but rather, within the time-difference of less than a day. If the distance is more than that of a day, then, the sighting of one city is not legally valid for people of another city.

Theoretically, yes, that if the sighting happens in Saudi Arabia , people of Egypt or India, could follow the sighting. But, another condition has been added. The sighting should be physical sighting and not calculated with the help of astronomical equations. If that is done, then the people of other cities or states ought not to follow them because the Prophet has said, “Start the fast with its sighting and end with its sighting.” He did not say, “Attempt some calculation.” The people should depend on their own sighting.

Further, mere news coming out of a city or country is not valid for another city or country. But rather, a couple of reliable scholars should bear witness before another group of reliable scholars that they sighted the moon with their eyes. Telephone, telex, fax, radio, TV communications are not sufficient in this connection (as also, messages through e-mail, text message, skype, WhatsApp, Twitter and so on), because one can never be too sure of who exactly is the sender or announcement, and whether it is a governmental announcement or that of the `Ulama’ of the country of announcement.

Moreover, if the distances are great, then the sighting of one country might not be enough for those on the opposite side of the globe. Finally, no Islamic month can be cut down to 28 days, or increased to 31 days on the basis of sighting in a city or country.

Thus, in the final analysis, it comes down to the sighting of the people of a land; and, if there are two `Eid days within a single country, because of different sightings in different areas, no harm done, no need to jump to retaliatory, or correctional action.

Now, if it is said that this leads to differences and quarrelling between groups, the answer is, let them fight. The days of their good hopes could be in shadows. They use moon-sighting as a pretext to quarrel. Remove this pretext, and give them freedom to disagree, and they will find another pretext to quarrel.

Allah has not given a blessing but Muslims of modern times have converted it into a curse. Telephonic talaq is one such curse.

At all events, telephonic talaq is illegal in Islam; as also mobile text message, WhatsApp, Skype, and so many other means of communication through the mobile or Net.

The reason the Fuqaha’ give is that one can never be sure of the genuineness of the sender. It could be the husband, it could be the mother-in-law, sister-in-law, or any other mischievous person.

In your case – sorry to say the truth in such a blunt style – the man is a coward, and does not, like millions of young men who do not, deserve a mobile.

A male has to be a man first and foremost. He should be bold, courageous, death-defying, and, most of all, empathic and kindly. He should take the challenge of living with a woman he does not love, does not like. If he has difficulties, he should sit before his wife, talk to her face to face, find what could be wrong, accept excuses, and win the heart, if her heart has failed, and not his.

Instead, if the wife is not immoral, but he chooses to send a text message, shutting the door which he opened, and betray after he said before a number of people that he accepts her in marriage, then, he is not only a coward, but also a wretched container of unworthy stinking mind and soul.

Worse come worse, good riddance.

Your wishful imagination about us notwithstanding, and, ruling out the answers you must have got on the Net, if you have discussed the issue with a goodly scholar but were not satisfied, then, it is not quite likely that we will be able to satisfy you. At all events, let’s give it a try.

Q. My question is about the Hijr-e-Aswad or the Black Stone located inside the Holy Ka’bah. 

YMD

Hajr al-Aswad is not located inside the Ka`ba. It is inbuilt into the wall of the Ka`bah, in a niche.

Q. What is the importance of this stone when the very base of Islam is not practicing idolatry?

YMD

Come on now. Kissing a stone is not idolatry. Idolatry is to carve a stone into something representing a deity, or molding one out of mud, plastic, copper, wood, or any substance, or just picking a stone as one of the best polished one, or naturally carved one, or simply a rock in a mountain, claiming that it represents god or gods, and then worshipping it. This is idolatry, whether one prostrates himself, or bows down before it, or not. If he actually prostrates himself to it, or bows down to it, then it is the worst case of idolatry.

With the spread of ignorance in our times, where every Jaahil thinks he is, in the least a semi-scholar, if not a scholar, and every man with a degree in his hand talks as if he is an expert in every known discipline, dictionaries are fast disappearing from homes. Reference to any common dictionary would reveal the meaning for idolatry. For example, the American Heritage Dictionary says:

i·dol·a·try:pl.i·dol·a·tries, worship of idols.

The Merriam Webster dictionary is a little more elaborate. Defining idolatry it says:

Idolatry: a: the worship of a physical object as a god; especially, worship of a made image,
b: the giving of absolute religious devotion and ultimate trust to something that is not God.

Is this applicable to any stone that is revered? Is reverence = idolatry?

But perhaps we know what the problem is. An idol-worshipper is stung by the description of himself in such words as in dictionaries. Then he comes across someone who believes in one God. He finds himself in an awkward, un-defendable position. He is smarting at the hurt because he believes that the man he is speaking to is inferior to him. He is not going to correct his religious attitude because of someone he thinks is actually inferior to him. So he shoots back: “You also worship stones; for example the Black Stone.” So, the Muslim jumps: “O my God,” he tells himself,”Why did Islam sanction stone-worship?”

But reverence is not equal to worship. Objects do not become gods if they are revered.The Qur’an is revered, kissed. But it does not become an object of worship for that reason. The Ka`bah is revered, but is no god. The “Turin Shroud” does not become god because Christians revere it. Things become gods when you bow down to them or prostrate yourself before them – whatever your intention for bowing down and prostrating yourself.

Islam has taught us never to bow down to anyone with the intention to worship. It would not allow Muslims to bow their head before the Prophet’s grave. The Prophet did not allow his Companions, who had the deepest reverence for him, to bow their heads to him. His followers have remained quite strongly in the belief of a God who is alone, unique, the only one worthy of worship. It is reported that when a Muslim ruler was captured, and was being taken to some place, he was to pass through a door with low ceiling, he refused saying, “My head will not bow down to anything except God,” and the passage had to be broken.

It may be asked, “Why should the Black Stone be revered?” Answer: Why not? Allah does what He will. This is not a matter concerning civil law. He knows best the wisdom behind a sanction of such sort.

Why should we not ask? Why do the Jews revere a line of stones in Jerusalem? The reference is to what is called as “The Wailing Wall.” The Jews are so moved by the sight of it that they cling to it and weep. It is supposed to be part of a wall surrounding the Temple that David and Solomon had built. It is only supposedly so because the Temple, as history tells us, the whole of the Temple, its outer walls, and the entire surrounding area – indeed the whole of Jerusalem – were burnt and raised to the ground, in heaps of stones and mortar by the Romans. And they banned Jewish entry until Muslims allowed them in 500 years later, when the city fell to them at the time of `Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra). The city was so well leveled off by the Romans, because of Jewish rebellions, that that later, the Jews could not say for sure where the Temple stood. When `Umar (ra) inquired about where the Temple stood, not even the Christian Bishop accompanying him could answer. Hectic digging by the Jews after Jerusalem was conquered, has refused to offer any clue. Modern archeology says that a part of the wall perhaps belongs to the construction of Jewish King Herod. But there is no clear evidence for it. On the other hand there is evidence that some portions were built by Muslims of the Umayyad times, and then, later, additions were made during the Khilafah of the `Uthmani times (Ottoman).

So, you can ask the Jews, “Why do you revere the stones, which were perhaps laid there by Muslims?” You can question them, but you cannot call them stone-worshippers.

So, to the question: “Why do the Muslims revere the Black Stone at all?” The answer is, “Because the Prophet said about it that it was sent down from the heaven. It was originally as white as snow, but sins of mankind blackened it.

Now, there are two options. Take it in the physical sense. If you do that, chip a piece of it and give it to the scientists. They will determine its present chemical composition, to discover the chemical reactions that could have taken place over millions of years, and how such reactions could have changed its color from snow-white to black. This will have the effect of increasing Muslim faith in science and decreasing their faith in God. Alternatively, they might brush aside the idea of consulting scientists, but rather accept that since the Prophet has spoken about the change in color, it has to be true.This attitude – called as Eemaan bi al-Ghayb – is likely to cause increase to their faith. As for those stone-worshippers, who throw challenges, defending their worship and shooting back allegations, well, we need to leave them alone with their choices.

The Stone is also revered because it is reported that it is the second stone on which Ibrahim (asws) stood to build the Ka`ba. The other stone is known as “Maqamu Ibrahim.” The latter has also been preserved, and is also revered. Perhaps, this is another reason they are both revered: because a great Prophet, an iconoclast, and an idol-breaker stood on them.

It is said that Ibrahim stood on Black Stone to make his universal call to mankind for pilgrimage to the House after he had built it.

Does one stand on top of a stone-god?

The reverence is also because this is what the Companions did. When `Umar b. al-Khattab circumambulated the Ka`ba, he stopped at the Black Stone and said, “I know that you are a stone, incapable of harming people or benefiting them. If I had not seen the Prophet kissing you, I wouldn’t have kissed you.” Then he bent down and kissed the Stone. It was noticed that he merely placed his lips, sort of dispassionately.

The scholars have said that there is a lesson in the Prophet saying that the sins of mankind have blackened it, viz., if the sins of mankind can blacken stones, then, what about human hearts? Aren’t they liable to get blackened, if not physically, then, metaphorically?

The scholars have also added to the above that in the Stone’s blackening is the lesson that if the hands and kisses of the Messengers and Prophets could not whiten it, how does mankind imagine that they can whiten their hearts blackened by their crimes and sins, without true repentance, and return to One God?

Q. I am aware of the Hadith where Hazrat Umar (ra) proclaimed: “I would not mind spitting on this stone had the Holy Prophet not kissed this stone,” to which Hazrat Ali (ra) replied: “O Umar, be careful, as this stone possesses the power to do your Maghfirah.”

YMD

This is a fabricated report. No such report exists.

Q. Why did the Holy Prophet kiss this stone?

YMD

A Prophet knows of the religion he brings than anyone can ever boast to know. He knows the will of Allah. At times he is obeying a command revealed to him by Jibril. He did not kiss the Ka`ba itself. He did not kiss the other stone, the Maqamu Ibrahim, although the Qur’an mentions it. Yet he did not kiss it. But he kissed the Black Stone. So, it is Sunnah on our part to kiss it. But, may Allah keep the shelter of good `Ulama’ above our heads, none of them has said that it is an obligation to kiss it. If you did it, it’s alright. If you did not, it is alright; your pilgrimage is 100% complete.

Q. I also came across that this stone was sent from the Heaven by Almighty Allah. Why did Allah send this stone at all when all that Allah has commanded is to not worship the idols and to worship Allah and Allah alone? 

YMD