Usool al-Ibaadah (Basic Principles of Worship)

Worship, obedience, uprightness, necessity of adhering to the Straight Path etc. are from the names by which one and the same is intended and which have two basic principles.

One of them is that nothing be worshipped except Allah.
The other is that He be worshipped by what He ordered and legislated, not with innovations.

Allah the Exalted says: "So whoever would hope for the meeting with his Lord – let him do righteous work and not associate in the worship of his Lord anyone." [al-Kahf (18):110]

"Yes, [on the contrary], whoever submits his face [i.e. self] in Islam to Allah while being a doer of good will have his reward with his Lord. And no fear will there be concerning them, nor will they grieve." [al-Baqarah (2):112] And He says: "And who is better in religion than one who submits himself to Allah while being a doer of good and follows the religion of Abraham, inclining toward truth? And Allah took Abraham as an intimate friend." [An-Nisaa (4):125]

Righteous deed is al-ihsaan, which is performance of good actions, and good actions are what Allah and His Messenger love, which, in turn, is what He ordered from obligatory and recommended matters. So whatever is from innovations in religion, i.e. that is not legislated, Allah and His Messenger do not love it, and it cannot be from good actions, and righteous deeds. Just as performing impermissible actions - such as acts of indecency and oppression - is not from good deeds and righteous actions.

As for His saying: "…and (let him) not associate in the worship of his Lord anyone" and His saying, "who submits his face [i.e. self] to Allah", it is being sincere to Him in religion. `Umar ibn al Khattab used to say: "O Allah, make all of my actions righteous, and make them sincere for your Face, and do not make in them anything for anyone [else]."

Al Fudayl ibn `Iyyad said about His saying: "To test you which of you is best in action." [al-Mulk(67):2], "Most sincere and most proper (action)" They said: "O Abu Alee, what action is most sincere and most proper?" He said: "Verily, an action that is done sincerely and is not proper is not accepted, and when it is proper and not done sincerely it is (also) not accepted. Sincere (action) is one that is [done] for Allah, and proper is one that is in accordance with the Sunnah."

Imam Ibn Taymiyyah

Islam for Our Times: How & Why?

What do we mean when we say Islam is good for all times? How could it be applied in our time?
Islam, exactly as it was revealed to Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu alayhe wa sallam, and without any changes or alterations, is the religion that Allah chose for all people from the time he sent His Messenger till the end of time.

Islam is thus for recent times just as it was for earlier times. But while the texts of this religion are immutable, people's conditions are not. What can we do? In answering this question, people these days have been, basically, divided into two main camps: the faithful and the revisionist.

THE REVISIONIST SAYS: Keep the religious texts as they are but give them meanings that suit contemporary culture just as those before you gave them meanings that suited their particular cultures. The texts are divine revelation, but their understanding is a human endeavor. Divine words are absolute, but their human understanding is relative.

THE FAITHFUL ANSWERS: But the Qur'an was revealed in clear Arabic words whose meanings are well known to Arabic speaking people, "we send it down as an Arabic Qur'an in order that you may understand." [12:2] The Prophet, sallallahu alayhe wa sallam, explained the Qur'an verbally and by example. All the Prophet's words and deeds are considered to be a living commentary on the Qur'an. The companions of the Prophet were better placed to do so than later generations because Arabic was their mother tongue, and because they had knowledge of the occasions on which the verses were revealed, and the situations in which the Prophet's words were uttered. Then came generations after generations of great leading scholars whose extant works are a living witness to the fact that they understood the basic meanings of the verses of the Qur'an in generally the same way as they were understood by the first generations. Your claim that each generation gave the words of the Qur'an and those of the Prophet meanings that suited their contemporary cultures is one that history belies.

REVISIONIST: Are you saying that they never differed?

FAITHFUL: They differed only slightly as far as the basic meanings of the verses and the ahadeeth are concerned. But they naturally differed sometimes on matters like what was to be deduced logically from the text or the way rules were to be applied to a new situation. What is important here, is that the differences, whatever they were, did not come as a result of differences in culture. They were individual differences that accurred even among contemporaries living in the same cultural milieu. True, there were drastic differences, but they were among those who adhered to the correct method as well as those who adopted irrational methods.

REVISIONIST: Are you claiming that there is a scientific method for the interpretation of Islamic text?

FAITHFUL: I am saying rather that there is a scientific method for the basic understanding of every text, Islamic or otherwise.

REVISIONIST: How?

FAITHFUL: If you want to understand a poem by say, Shakespeare, what do you do?

REVISIONIST: I consult the books that explain what Shakespeare meant by it.

FAITHFUL: Do you mean that you do not understand it in the light of your contemporary culture?

REVISIONIST: No, because my aim is to understand what Shakespeare meant by his poem.

FAITHFUL: Do you mean that you give his words and phrases the meaning that he meant by them at the time that he wrote his poem, even if they differed from what current English usage might suggest?

REVISIONIST; Of course; because my aim, as 1 said, is to understand what Shakespeare actually meant. If 1 give his words meanings that he did not intend by them, I would be attributing to him something that he did not say.

FAITHFUL: Do you follow this same method if you want to be, say, an Aristotle's expert? Do you try, for example, to learn ancient Greek in which he wrote his philosophy?

REVISIONIST: I certainly would, and would try not to confuse it with Modern Greek, because my aim again is to understand what Aristotle said.

FAITHFUL: Are there any ways, besides his language that you think would help you in understanding his philosophy?

REVISIONIST: Yes, I would, for example, try to see how his contemporaries understood it because they were better placed to do so than I am. I would also consult the works of the experts who preceded me, and so on.

FAITHFUL: Well, that is the method that we called scientific, and it is the method we advocate for understanding Islamic texts.

REVISIONIST: But you are now ignoring the great differences between ordinary texts and Islamic texts.

FAITHFUL: Would you please elucidate those differences for me?

REVISIONIST: One of them is that I can understand what humans like myself really mean because I am human being, and because they address me in words that are human; therefore limited. But God is absolute and what He means is absolute, and cannot therefore be couched in limited human words. But if every reader of Islamic text is given the right to interpret them the way the reader understands them, there will be a multiplicity of meanings which approaches the absolute.

FAITHFUL: Leaving aside your vague talk about the limited and the absolute, the gist of what you are saying is that while human beings have the ability to successfully communicate their meanings through a medium like Arabic, God fails to do so. This is despite the fact that He himself says that he used this human language so that those who speak it may under stand his message.

REVISIONIST: This looks like a good argument. But related to the difference we just mentioned is another important one. Islam, we say, is good for all times and places. If we give the words of its texts the same meanings that an earlier generation like the Prophet's companions gave, we would be limiting Islam to a particular age.

FAITHFUL: So, what is the alternative?

REVISIONIST: The alternative is what I propounded at the beginning of our dialogue. Every generation of Muslims should give them the meanings that suit their culture.

FAITHFUL: Is this the understanding of the principle of the suitability of Islam for all times and places?

REVISIONIST: It is, and I don't see how it can otherwise be.

FAITHFUL: If the characteristic of the suitability of a message for all times and places is what you take it to be, then any message, even one that is advocated by the most stupid of human beings can fit it.

REVISIONIST: / think you're exaggerating.

FAITHFUL: I am not, suppose that some one called Mr. Donkey formulated what he thought was a comprehensive ideology that consisted of many doctrines on different aspects of life. Suppose that, to make it suitable for all time and places Mr. Donkey concluded his ideology with this statement; I hereby give all believers in this world ideology the right to make any changes in it they deem necessary to make it suit their different times and circumstance.

REVISIONIST: Change will start to be made in donkeyanism soon after it is issued so much so that after a short lapse of time nothing remains of it except that concluding statement. But the Donkeyans will continue to boast of the suitability of their ideology to all times and places.

FAITHFUL: Is this how you conceive Islam to be?

REVISIONIST: Of course not. But then, what is your conception of this characteristic of the Islamic religion?

FAITHFUL: I conceive it to mean that Islam, as it was revealed to Muhammad, and without the slightest alterations, is good for all times and places. What makes this miracle possible is that Islam is not a manmade religion. It is a message of guidance from the Creator of mankind who knows who they essentially are, and who thus addresses them as human beings, and irrespective of their different cultures, colors, times, places, standards of living and so on.

REVISIONIST: What do you then mean by the phrase 'Islam for our times'?

FAITHFUL: I am saying that though the religion does not change, people's circumstances and problems do change. And so, to make the immutable religion relevant to their special circumstances, we need to present it in a language that our contemporaries understand, evaluate, in the light of it, any new ideas or ideologies that have a bearing on it, refute any claims that throw doubt on it, find in it solutions for new intellectual problems.

Finally it is important to make use of scientific discoveries to strengthen the faith of its adherents, and to use them as means of invitation to Islam. And many other things, all of which are made possible because though the texts are limited, what can be deduced and learnt from them is not

The Prophetic Family

The family of Prophet Muhammad [pbuh] is called the Hashimite family after his grandfather Hashim bin ‘Abd Munaf. Let us now speak a little about Hashim and his descendants:

1. Hashim: As we have previously mentioned, he was the one responsible for giving food and water to the pilgrims. This had been his charge when the sons of ‘Abd Munaf and those of ‘Abd Ad-Dar compromised on dividing the charges between them. Hashim was wealthy and honest. He was the first to offer the pilgrims sopped bread in broth. His first name was ‘Amr but he was called Hashim because he had been in the practice of crumbling bread (for the pilgrims). He was also the first man who started Quraish’s two journeys of summer and winter. It was reported that he went to Syria as a merchant. In Madinah, he married Salma — the daughter of ‘Amr from Bani ‘Adi bin An- Najjar. He spent some time with her in Madinah then he left for Syria again while she was pregnant. He died in Ghazza in Palestine in 497 A.D. Later, his wife gave birth to ‘Abdul-Muttalib and named him Shaiba for the white hair in his head,[Ibn Hisham 1/137; Rahmat- ul- lil'alameen 1/26,2/24] and brought him up in her father’s house in Madinah. None of his family in Makkah learned of his birth. Hashim had four sons; Asad, Abu Saifi, Nadla and ‘Abdul- Muttalib, and five daughters Ash-Shifa, Khalida, Da‘ifa, Ruqyah and Jannah.[Ibn Hisham 1/107]

2. ‘Abdul- Muttalib: We have already known that after the death of Hashim, the charge of pilgrims’ food and water went to his brother Al-Muttalib bin ‘Abd Munaf (who was honest, generous and trustworthy). When ‘Abdul-Muttalib reached the age of boyhood, his uncle Al-Muttalib heard of him and went to Madinah to fetch him. When he saw him, tears filled his eyes and rolled down his cheeks, he embraced him and took him on his camel. The boy, however
abstained from going with him to Makkah until he took his mother’s consent. Al-Muttalib asked her to send the boy with him to Makkah, but she refused. He managed to convince her saying: "Your son is going to Makkah to restore his father’s authority, and to live in the vicinity of the Sacred House." There in Makkah, people wondered at seeing Abdul-Muttalib, and they considered him the slave of Muttalib. Al-Muttalib said: "He is my nephew, the son of my
brother Hashim." The boy was brought up in Al- Muttalib’s house, but later on Al-Muttalib died in Bardman in Yemen so ‘Abdul-Muttalib took over and managed to maintain his people’s prestige and outdo his grandfathers in his honourable behaviour which gained him Makkah’s deep love and high esteem. [Ibn Hisham 1/137,138]

When Al-Muttalib died, Nawfal usurped ‘Abdul-Muttalib of his charges, so the latter asked for help from Quraish but they abstained from extending any sort of support to either of them. Consequently, he wrote to his uncles of Bani An- Najjar (his mother’s brothers) to come to his aid. His uncle, Abu Sa‘d bin ‘Adi (his mother’s brother) marched to Makkah at the head of eighty horsemen and camped in Abtah in Makkah. ‘Abdul-Muttalib received the men and invited
them to go to his house but Abu Sa‘d said: "Not before I meet Nawfal." He found Nawfal sitting with some old men of Quraish in the shade of Al-Ka‘bah. Abu Sa‘d drew his sword and said: "I swear by All? that if you don’t restore to my nephew what you have taken, I will kill you with this sword." Nawfal was thus forced to give up what he had usurped, and the notables of Quraish
were made to witness to his words. Abu Sa‘d then went to ‘Abdul-Muttalib’s house where he stayed for three nights, made ‘Umra and left back for Madinah. Later on, Nawfal entered into alliance with Bani ‘Abd Shams bin ‘Abd Munaf against Bani Hashim. When Khuza‘a, a tribe, saw Bani An-Najjar’s support to ‘Abdul-Muttalib they said: "He is our son as he is yours. We have
more reasons to support him than you." ‘Abd Munaf’s mother was one of them. They went into An-Nadwa House and entered into alliance with Bani Hashim against Bani ‘Abd Shams and Nawfal. It was an alliance that was later to constitute the main reason for the conquest of Makkah. ‘Abdul-Muttalib witnessed two important events in his lifetime, namely digging Zamzam well and the Elephant raid. [Mukhtasar Seerat Ar-Rasool, p.41,42; Ibn Hisham
1/142-147]

In brief, ‘Abdul-Muttalib received an order in his dream to dig Zamzam well in a particular place. He did that and found the things that Jurhum men had buried therein when they were forced to evacuate Makkah. He found the swords, armours and the two deer of gold. The gate of Al-Ka‘bah was stamped from the gold swords and the two deer and then the tradition of providing Zamzam water to pilgrims was established.

When the well of Zamzam gushed water forth, Quraish made a claim to partnership in the enterprise, but ‘Abdul-Muttalib refused their demands on grounds that All? had singled only him out for this honourable job. To settle the dispute, they agreed to consult Bani Sa‘d’s diviner. On their way, All? showed them His Signs that confirmed ‘Abdul-Muttalib’s prerogative as regards the sacred spring. Only then did ‘Abdul-Muttalib make a solemn vow to sacrifice one of his adult children to Al-Ka‘bah if he had ten.

The second event was that of Abraha As-Sabah Al-Habashi, the Abyssinian (Ethiopian) viceroy in Yemen. He had seen that the Arabs made their pilgrimage to Al-Ka‘bah so he built a large church in San‘a in order to attract the Arab pilgrims to it to the exclusion of Makkah. A man from Kinana tribe understood this move, therefore he entered the church stealthily at night and
besmeared its front wall with excrement. When Abraha knew of that, he got very angry and led a great army – of sixty thousand warriors – to demolish Al-Ka‘bah. He chose the biggest elephant for himself. His army included nine or thirteen elephants. He continued marching until he reached a place called Al-Magmas. There, he mobilized his army, prepared his elephants and got ready to enter Makkah. When he reached Muhassar Valley, between Muzdalifah and Mina, the elephant knelt down and refused to go forward. Whenever they directed it northwards, southwards or eastwards, the elephant moved quickly but when directed westwards towards Al-Ka‘bah, it knelt down. Meanwhile, All? loosed upon them birds in flights, hurling against them
stones of baked clay and made them like green blades devoured. These birds were very much like swallows and sparrows, each carrying three stones; one in its peak and two in its claws. The stones hit Abraha’s men and cut their limbs and killed them. A large number of Abraha’s soldiers were killed in this way and the others fled at random and died everywhere. Abraha himself had
an infection that had his fingertips amputated. When he reached San‘a he was in a miserable state and died soon after. The Quraishites on their part had fled for their lives to the hillocks and
mountain tops. When the enemy had been thus routed, they returned home safely. [Ibn Hisham 1/43-56; Tafheemul-Qur'an 6/462-469]
The Event of the Elephant took place in the month of Al-Muharram, fifty or fifty five days before the birth of Prophet Muhammad [pbuh] which corresponded to late February or early March 571 A.D. It was a gift from All? to His Prophet and his family. It could actually be regarded as a Divine auspicious precursor of the light to come and accompany the advent of the Prophet and his family. By contrast, Jerusalem had suffered under the yoke of the atrocities of All? ’s enemies. Here we can recall Bukhtanassar in B.C. 587 and the Romans in 70 A.D. Al-Ka‘bah, by Divine Grace, never came under the hold of the Christians – the Muslims of that time – although Makkah was populated by polytheists. News of the Elephant Event reached the most distant corners of the then civilized world. Abyssinia (Ethiopia) maintained strong ties with the Romans,
while the Persians on the other hand, were on the vigil with respect to any strategic changes that were looming on the socio- political horizon, and soon came to occupy Yemen. Incidentally, the Roman and Persian Empires stood for the powerful civilized world at that time. The Elephant Raid Event riveted the world’s attention to the sacredness of All? ’s House, and showed that this
House had been chosen by All? for its holiness. It followed then if any of its people claimed Prophethood, it would be congruous with the outcome of the Elephant Event, and would provide a justifiable explanation for the ulterior Divine Wisdom that lay behind backing polytheists against Christians in a manner that transcended the cause-and-effect formula. ‘Abdul-Muttalib had ten sons, Al-Harith, Az- Zubair, Abu Talib, ‘Abdullah, Hamzah, Abu Lahab, Ghidaq, Maqwam, Safar and Al-‘Abbas. He also had six daughters, who were Umm Al-Hakim – the only white one, Barrah, ‘Atikah, Safiya, Arwa and Omaima. [Rahmat- ul-lil'alameen 2/56,66; Talqeeh Fuhoom Ahl Al-Athar, p8,9]

3. ‘Abdullah: The father of Prophet Muhammad [pbuh]. His mother was Fatimah, daughter of ‘Amr bin ‘A’idh bin ‘Imran bin Makhzum bin Yaqdha bin Murra. ‘Abdullah was the smartest of ‘Abdul-Muttalib’s sons, the chastest and the most loved. He was also the son whom the divination arrows pointed at to be slaughtered as a sacrifice to Al-Ka‘bah. When ‘Abdul-Muttalib had ten sons and they reached maturity, he divulged to them his secret vow in which they
silently and obediently acquiesced. Their names were written on divination arrows and given to the guardian of their most beloved goddess, Hubal. The arrows were shuffled and drawn. An arrow showed that it was ‘Abdullah to be sacrificed. ‘Abdul-Muttalib then took the boy to Al-Ka‘bah with a razor to slaughter the boy. Quraish, his uncles from Makhzum tribe and his brother Abu Talib, however, tried to dissuade him from consummating his purpose. He then sought their advice as regards his vow. They suggested that he summon a she-diviner to judge whereabout. She ordered that the divination arrows should be drawn with respect to ‘Abdullah as well as ten camels. She added that drawing the lots should be repeated with ten more camels every time the arrow showed ‘Abdullah. The operation was thus repeated until the number of the camels amounted to one hundred. At this point the arrow showed the camels, consequently they were all slaughtered (to the satisfaction of Hubal) instead of his son. The slaughtered camels were left for anyone to eat from, human or animal. This incident produced a change in the amount of blood-money usually accepted in Arabia. It had been ten camels, but after this event it was increased to a hundred. Islam, later on, approved of this. Another thing closely relevant to the above issue goes to the effect that the Prophet [pbuh] once said: "I am the offspring of the slaughtered two," meaning Ishmael and ‘Abdullah. [Ibn Hisham 1/151-155; Rahmat- ul-lil'alameen 2/89,90]

‘Abdul-Muttalib chose Amina, daughter of Wahab bin ‘Abd Munaf bin Zahra bin Kilab, as a wife for his son, ‘Abdullah. She thus, in the light of this ancestral lineage, stood eminent in respect of nobility of position and descent. Her father was the chief of Bani Zahra to whom great honour was attributed. They were married in Makkah, and soon after ‘Abdullah was sent by his father to buy dates in Madinah where he died. In another version, ‘Abdullah went to Syria on a trade journey and died in Madinah on his way back. He was buried in the house of An-Nabigha Al-Ju‘di. He was twenty-five years old when he died. Most historians state that his death was two months before the birth of Muhammad [pbuh] . Some others said that his death was two months after the Prophet’s birth. When Amina was informed of her husband’s death, she celebrated his memory in a most heart-touching elegy. [Ibn Hisham 1/156- 158; Fiqh As-Seerah p.45]

‘Abdullah left very little wealth —five camels, a small number of goats, a sheservant, called Barakah – Umm Aiman – who would later serve as the Prophet’s nursemaid. [Muslim 2/96; Talqeeh Fahoom Ahl-Athar p.4; Mukhtasar Seerat Ar- Rasool p. 12]