In our country different groups have their separate mosques according to their schools of thought. Strict followers of one school do not pray in a mosque, which belongs to a different school of thought. Can we join the prayer in any of these mosques or should we offer our separate prayers? I admit that if we arrive in the mosque and the congregation is already in progress then we have to join the congregation. But do we have to repeat our prayer if the Imam belonged to an unacceptable group? From another point of view, is it permissible that a person who commits innovation or “fisq” leads prayers?
I have written at length and repeatedly on the question of having different schools of thought. I explained that the very existence of such schools is a testimony to the richness of Islamic scholarship. I also explained that there are no differences among these schools of thought with regard to the principles of faith or the essentials of worship. What differences exist relate more to matters of detail.
It is indeed a matter of pride for us that over the centuries the existence of different schools of thought has not only enriched our scholarly heritage but has also been a factor enhancing the unity of the Muslim community. For generations after generations, Muslims prayed side by side without ever the thought of belonging to one school of thought rather than another having any bearing on their mutual relationship or their dealings with one another. That is not to overlook the fact that in certain period of history and in particular places we find rigid adherence to different schools of thought who advocate a total boycott of the followers of others.
But it does not take a great deal of research to determine that such trends existed in periods of backwardness, when scholarship lost its creative aspect and concentrated merely on imitation. The truth is the greater the understanding a person has of the principles of Islam and the scholarly methods employed by different Imams and scholars the greater his tolerance. It is only inward-looking, narrow minded and rigid students who advocate total adherence to a particular school and a rejection of every thing else. Such an attitude is alien to Islam. You can judge a period of history according to prevailing attitudes toward this particular issue. If tolerance prevails then it is a bright period in the history of Islam. If intolerance takes over, then it must be a period of backwardness. Perhaps the worst manifestation of rigidly and narrow-mindedness is the total refusal by the followers of one school of thought to join the followers of another in prayer. Let me say, straightaway, that this is against the practice and the teachings of the Imams who founded these schools of thought.
We read with interest that Imam Al-Shaf’ie, for example, offered his prayers according to the manner followed by the Hanafi school of thought when he prayed in the mosque or Imam Abu Hanifah in Baghdad. He did that out of respect to the great scholar who had preceded him. Those who refuse to join an imam who belongs to a different school of thought are not only rigid and narrow-minded; they are ignorant as well. Had they known what exactly differentiates one school from another, they would have realized that what unites them is much greater than what divides them. They would have known that they all worship in an acceptable manner. Hence they would not allow their differences to affect their unity.
To establish mosques for different schools of thought is a sad reflection on the state of Muslims nowadays. It shows that matters of very secondary details take precedence over fundamentals. Who can allege that God would not be pleased with a worshiper who keeps his hands in prayer by his sides rather than put his right hand over his left one, joining them together his navel or over his chest? Who can allege that the prayer of a person who offers the Witr in three joined Raka’ah will have his prayer accepted while one who offers it in two separate beginnings and ends will have it rejected? It is only such matters of detail that separate such schools. Nevertheless some ignorant people want us to believe that there is a real difference between them, which calls for the establishment of different mosques.
Having said that, may I ask how does a person know to which school of thought he belongs? The great majority of people do not have enough knowledge to distinguish one school of thought from another, either in the methods of deduction it follows or in the way it weighs up evidence in support of a particular ruling. Indeed they cannot distinguish their own school of thought and the basis of the rulings it gives in different matters. They only know few details of form and appearance and they tend to think that these are most important when only little significance is attached to them. They further think that by adhering so strictly to their schools of thought, they serve the cause of Islam better or they earn more reward from God. Indeed they do not. They earn God’s displeasure by dividing the Muslim community. It is also sad that they receive encouragement from Imams whose knowledge of Islam is only scanty.
The questioner raises the point of what to do when we are coming to a mosque with a congregation having started. The answer is simply we join the prayer, without allowing the idea of which school of thought the Imam follows to cross of minds. Our prayer is valid and acceptable if we pay enough attention to it. But the questioner asks whether we should repeat our prayers if the Imam belongs to “an unacceptable group.” Let me ask: “Who defines which group is unacceptable? And to whom it is unacceptable? I do not expect an answer and I accept none. What we should be concerned with is whether our prayer is acceptable to God. We do not pray to any person, and we do not subdivide Muslims into classes on the basis of which branch of Islamic scholarship they follow. That is a thought, which is repugnant to the Islamic sense. Let me say very clearly that if we repeat our prayers only because the Imam belongs to a school of thought with which we differ then we are making a judgement that our first prayer is unacceptable to and the prayers offered by the congregation is also unacceptable. To say this, or to imply it is to assume a position of judgement, which does not belong to us. That is very presumptuous indeed. We should remember that God accepts worship when it is devoted purely to Him. All schools of thought teach us how to make our prayer dedicated to God alone.
In recent days a new group has emerged which tries to reject all schools of thought claiming that following any of them is an innovation. This is again a terrible idea, which results in further disunity of the Muslim community. What makes matters even worse is that this new group gives disproportionate importance to certain matters of detail and define their relationship with others on the basis of these details and how they approach them. For example, wearing a beard, refraining from smoking, standing astride in prayer so as to ensure that our feet touch the feet of other people standing on our right and left, looking in one direction after we finish prayer so as not to shake hand with those who sit next to us and similar matters are given such importance. This gives an impression that unless these matters are handled exactly as this group says, a person stands to incur God’s wrath and receive grievous suffering in the Hereafter. If you ask them what they have left to God’s forgiveness, they look puzzled, as if you are talking in the ancient Greek language.
To these people and to those who follow rigidly their schools of thought, elevating them to status of separate religions, I say: This is not the way the Prophet, peace be upon him, has taught us, nor is it the way the companions of the Prophet, peace be upon him, practiced. He has taught us tolerance and they practiced the perfect standard of tolerance. Rigidity was alien to their nature.
I am worried by the way you have phrased the second part of your question equating innovation with “fisq”. Fisq means transgression. Innovation means to add or invent something, which is not there. The two are not synonymous. As far as a person who practices certain innovations is concerned the matter really depends on what sort of innovation he practices. If it is something related to the principles of faith, and he invents something new, then we have to look at that very carefully. He may be guilty of something, which takes him out of the fold of Islam altogether. Suppose that a person believes that one or more dead persons may be of benefit to him in this life or in the life to come. And he elevates such people to a degree, which makes people go to their graves in order to seek help from the deceased then that action is tantamount to disbelief in Islam altogether. If we know that the Imam has such beliefs then we better not join him in prayer because he may be a disbeliever.
On the other hand, if the invention or innovation relates to a matter of detail then that represents no more than a slip or a mistake or even committing something forbidden. Every one of us commits mistakes and is liable to commit even a grave sin. No one suggests that a person who has committed a sin and then repented could not lead a congregational prayer. If after committing something, which has declared to be forbidden, a person prays for forgiveness he is treated as if he has never committed that sin. How can we brand him as committing fisq? The point is that we do not judge people, no matter how far they go astray, if they declare that they genuinely believe in the Oneness of God and in the message of Muhammad, peace be upon him, and if he leads the prayer, we simply join him. Our prayer is valid and acceptable to God even though the Imam may have a few minutes earlier committed a grave sin or is about to commit another one a few minutes later. Having said that, I should perhaps add that a person who realizes that he has wronged himself by committing a grave sin should not come forward to lead the prayer. Even if he is the regular Imam in a mosque, he should perhaps invite someone else to lead the prayer to allow himself a chance of expressing his repentance and praying for God’s forgiveness. ~
Smoking: Upgraded From Reprehensible to Forbidden
1. An increasing number of scholars are endorsing the ruling that smoking is forbidden in Islam, pointing out that it is the responsibility of every Muslim to look after his or her own health. They also mention the fact that smoking is addictive, though not mind-altering. But many smokers are angry because they feel that it is a matter of personal choice. Please comment.
2. What were the reasons that caused the ruling concerning smoking to be upgraded from reprehensible to forbid?
1. The first ruling on the prohibition of tobacco smoking is more than a hundred years old. However, it was not based on health reasons, because the health risks of smoking were not known at the time. More than 20 years ago, a group of prominent scholars in Saudi Arabia issued a Fatwa making tobacco smoking, growing and selling forbidden under Islamic law. Later, ten leading scholars from Al-Azhar in Cairo, the oldest Islamic university in the world, issued a series of ten fatwahs, with eight making it clear that smoking was strictly forbidden, while the other two saying that it is close to being forbidden.
More and more scholars have come to the same conclusion. It should be said that the Al-Azhar scholars based their Fatwahs on reports submitted to them by the World Health Organization explaining the health risks of tobacco smoking. Sheikh Al-Qaradawi says: “On such matters, when doctors say that something is certainly harmful, Islamic scholars have no option but to pronounce it as forbidden.”
The health risks of tobacco smoking are too clear to be overlooked. It is the direct cause of more than 25 killer diseases. Its harmful effects are not limited to the smoker, but include his family and colleagues at work as well as those who are in close proximity to him. Besides, it is an addiction, which is very difficult to break. You say that it is not mind altering. I have my reservations about that statement. It works very slowly and gradually, but it certainly alters the smoker’s mind. This is why smokers consume more cigarettes in both states of sadness and joy.
There is no doubt in my mind that smoking is forbidden. Muslim countries should adopt health policies that aim to make their territories tobacco free over a period of time. This will be a great service to their populations.
2. The ruling on smoking has not changed over the last few years, except for the fact that scholars are increasingly coming in support of a verdict of complete prohibition of smoking on the basis of the great harm it causes to the smoker, his family, colleagues and neighbors. This is the correct verdict beyond any shred of doubt.
The World Health Organization sent scientific reports to Al-Azhar, the oldest Islamic University in the world, requesting a verdict on smoking. In response, ten scholars have issued a clear verdict of prohibition. This is published in a book by the World Health Organization [WHO} under the title, “the Islamic Ruling on Smoking.” You may write for a copy in Arabic or English to The regional adviser, Tobacco-Free initiative, WHO-Eastern Mediterranean Region, P. O. Box 1517, Alexandria, Egypt. ~
A friend of mine says that he does not make any requests to God on his own behalf but only on behalf of his family. He argues that God knows his situation best, and He would give him whatever he needs without him asking for it. Please comment.
Prayer to God demonstrates a person’s real awareness of his need of God. He knows that he faces a situation, which only God can deal with. And he turns to Him with an earnest appeal to help him.
That is indicative of real faith. Hence, the Prophet, peace be upon him, describes supplication to God as the “essence of worship.” This shows that your friend’s attitude is wrong, because he refrains from demonstrating his need of God and appealing to Him for help. His argument that God’s Knowledge of his need should be sufficient is wrong. It assumes that he has an inherent right to have his needs fulfilled. The fact is that God has showered on us favors in plenty, and we do not thank Him enough of them.
To assume that He is aware of our needs is rather impudent. Besides, why does your friend pray to God for his family? Is God not aware of their needs? Why pray Him to fulfill those and not for our own needs? We should remember that it is God Himself who enjoins us to pray Him so that He would respond to our prayers: “Your Lord says: Pray Me and I will respond to you’” (40: 60)