The following is a translation from Arabic.

Many people think that though death is the same, the causes of death are numerous. So death could be because of detrimental disease, such as the plague. It could also be due to stab by a knife, or a gunshot or burning by fire of beheading or heart attack or others. In their view, all of these are direct causes that lead to death, ie death occurs because of them. That is why it became common on their mouth the phrase, “The causes are many but the death is the same.”
The truth is that death is the same and its cause (sabab) is also the same, which is the end of ajal (life-term), and nothing else. As regards to these matters, which take place and due to them death occurs, they are cases in which death occurs and are not causes of death.

This is because the cause (sabab) produces the effect (musabbab) definitely; and that the effect (musabbab) can’t result save from its cause (sabab) alone. This is different to the case (halah), it is a specific circumstance within certain surrounding conditions in which death usually takes place. However, death could fail to happen. Thus, the case might exist but the death does not occur; and the death might occur while the case did not happen.

The one who examines many of the things in which death occurs, and the one who examines the death itself, finds that these matters might take place but the death does not occur. Death might also occur while these cases did not take place. As an example, a person might be fatally stabbed by a knife, and the doctors agree unanimously that it is fatal, but the stabbed person did not die, rather he healed and recovered. Death could also occur without an apparent cause, such as when the heart of somebody stopped suddenly and he died immediately without all the doctors being able to discover a reason for this heart attack after the painstaking examination.The incidents about this are many and are known by the doctors. The hospitals have witnessed thousands of these incidents; where a cause that usually leads certainly to death occurs, then the person does not die; and death occurs suddenly without the appearance of any cause that lead to it.

Therefore, all the doctors say that the so and so sick man has no hope (of life) according to the instructions of medicine, but he might recover, and this is beyond our knowledge. They also say that so and so person is beyond the danger (on his life), and he is healthy, and he passed the point of danger, then he suddenly suffers a relapse and dies. All of this is tangible reality sensed by the people and doctors; and it clearly indicates that these matters from which death occurs are not causes for death. For it they were causes they would not fail (in bringing death) and death would have not occurred, by other than them. The fact that they failed (to cause death) even once, and that death occurred by other than them, even once, definitely indicates that they are not causes; they are rather cases. The true cause of death that produces the effect is other than them and not them.

This actual cause could not be discovered by the mind, for it does not fall under sensation. So it is necessary that Allah (swt) tells us about it; and that it is proved by an evidence that is definite in proof and definite in meaning. Allah (swt) has informed us, in many ayaat that it is the ajal (end of life-term); and that Allah (swt) is the One Who causes death. Thus death occurs because of the ajal and the one who causes death is Allah (swt).

There are many verses that mentioned this. Allah (swt) says:

“No soul can ever die except by Allah’s leave and at a term appointed.” [TMQ Al-Imran:145]

“Allah receives (men’s) souls at the time of their death.” [TMQ Az-Zumar: 42]

“My Lord is He Who gives life and causes death.” [TMQ Al-Baqarah: 258]

“And Allah gives life and causes death.” [TMQ Ali-’Imran:156] “Wherever you are death reaches you, even if you were in lofty towers.” [TMQ An-Nisaa’: 78]

“Say (to them): ‘The angel of death, who has charge concerning you, will take you to death.’” [TMQ As-Sajda: 11]

“Say (to them): ‘The death which you are fleeing from will surely meet you.” [TMQ Al-Jumu’a: 8]

“We mete out death among you.’” [TMQ Al-Waqi’a: 60]

“Lo! The term of Allah when it comes can’t be delayed.” [TMQ Nuh: 4]

“When their term comes, then they can’t put it off an hour, not hasten (it).”
[TMQ Yunus: 49]

These and other verses are definite in proof that they are from Allah (swt), and definite in meaning that Allah is He Who causes death; and that cause of death is the end of life term (intihaa’ ul-’ajal), and not the case in which death occurred.Therefore, it is obligatory that the Muslim believes by mind and Shar’ that what he thinks of as causes to death are not causes, rather they are cases; and that the cause is other than them. It has been proved by Shar’ through the definite evidence that death is in the Hand of Allah, that Allah is He Who causes death and that the cause of death is intihaa’ ul-’ajal. Once the ajal came, it can’t be delayed or hastened; nor is there any person who can avert from death or to escape from it absolutely. Thus it will most certainly reach him.

As regards what man was ordered to avert and work to distance from himself, it is the cases from which death occurs. So, he must not submit himself to any of the cases from which death occurs usually. As for death, he should not be scared of, nor to flee from, because he can never save himself from it. This is because man does not die except after the end of his ajal, whether he died naturally, or by killing or burning or any other thing. So death is in the Hand of Allah (swt) and ajal is in the Hand of Allah (swt).

Extract from 'Al-Fikr al-Islami (The Islamic Thought) by Sheikh Mohammad Mohammad Ismael Abduh, Egypt.

The following is a translation from an Arabic leaflet.

During the time of Rasool Allah (saaw) and the Sahabah, the meaning of Qadr was well understood without any ambiguity and what it meant was very clear. There was no debate. inquiries, or differences in this issue, except the discussion between Abu Ubaidah and Umar (ra), when Umar decided not to proceed in his trip to as-sham, once the news came telling that there was a plague spreading there and decided to go back to Madinah, telling the people '' I'm returning back, thus you should return as well''. In this incident Abu Ubaidah did not attend Umar's consultation with the people and the result of the consultation.

However, when Abu Ubaidah heard of Umar's orders. he came to Umar telling him ''O Umar, are you running away from Allah's Qadr.'' By this he was objecting Umar's decision to return back to Madinah. Umar was amazed by this objection raised by Abu Ubaidah and Umar said to him, ''O Abu Ubaidah. I wish someone other than you would have said this. Yes. I am running away from Allah's Qadr to Allah's Qadr ''. He explained this by saying, if you see a man coming to a place where there are two areas, one area is lush and the other barren. Don't you see that if he takes his cattle to the lush area, he is doing so according the Allah's Qadr and if he take his cattle to the barren area, he is also taking it by Allah's Qadr.

This is the only report which talked about the difference in understanding Al-Qadr, amongst the Sahabah. Otherwise, Muslims in general understood Al-Qadr the way it is in the Qur'an and the Sunnah. This understanding is that everything is written in the preserved tablet (al-Lowh al-Mahfooz), from the very beginning (before creation) and there is no relationship for this in the man's actions or in the obligations Allah orders us to carry. This situation continued all the way till the second half of the second century Hijri or till the middle of the Abbasid era. Due to the translation of the Greek, Persian and Hindu philosophies, some misconceptions accumulated in the minds of some people and the question of al-Qada wal-Qadr emerged and over shadowed the concept of Al-Qadr.

After that, the issue of al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya (fatalism) became widespread among the people. It influenced them and shaped their behavior. It was one of the declining factor for the Muslim Ummah and when the decline became more obvious (during our time), it was one the most important factor, which prevented the Muslims form working for the revival. This situation continued till the beginning of the second half of the 20th century, Common Era (CE). At that time, a new Islamic culture emerged, clearing the issue of al-Qada wal-Qadr intellectually and presenting the Islamic point of view towards it. This culture also cleared the meaning of al-Qadr based on the Sharii text.

Thus, now the issue of al-Qada wal-Qadr became very clear for those who are involved in the Islamic work or Islam in general. Those who looked up to the western culture and the ones cultured by it, their interest in addressing Islam started decreasing (so they stopped attacking Islam through this perspective). The issue of al-Qada wal-Qadr was no longer an issue which occupied the mind of the Muslims or shaped their behavior. However, this did not affect al-Qadaria al-Ghaybiya (fatalism) and its place in the minds of the Muslims. All of the Muslims kept being influenced by it, the way it was in the past and those who are adhering to the Western culture, they started to get influenced by similar ideas carried by the West, which they call divine destiny. Thus, the issue of the al-Qadaria al-Ghaybiya is not solved and a question emerged about the difference in al-Qadr and al-Qadaria al-Ghaybiya due to the difficulty in distinguishing the difference between them. Before starting to address this question, we would like to pay attention to the fact that al-Qadr is a word which is different than ''al-Qada wal-Qadr'', the combined term.

The Qadr as the word is what Allah knows and wrote in preserved tablet (al-Lowh al-Mahfooz) at the very beginning (of creation). However, al-Qada wal-Qadr means the question of having the actions occur against man's will. This includes the characteristics of objects, which also occur against man's will. Thus, the real meaning of both are different. Although, the meaning which may come to the mind of the people once they hear both terms may be the same, which is the ability of man to stand and face what was written.

Since al-Qadr is different then al-Qada wal-Qadr, then a deep investigation of the issue leads us to realize that what needs to be addressed in al-Qadariya al-Ghaibiya versus al-Qadr. It should not be al-Qadariya al-Ghaibiya versus al-Qadr and al-Qada wal-Qadr. Because the issue is the written actions and not the free choice of man or having man being forced to carry out his actions. Now it is clear that al-Qadariya al-Ghaibiya emerged when people started mixing between al-Qadr and the meaning of al-Qadariya al-Ghaibiya without distinguishing them. In other words, it emerged as a result of mixing between al-Qadr and its results (submitting to it). While forgetting al-Qadr itself and being confined to its submission. Due to this mixing and the failure to define the fine line of separating both, al-Qadariya al-Ghaibiya emerged and spread and even over shadowed al-Qadr. Therefore, we need to understand the reality of both and the difference between them. Al-Qadr is all that Allah (swt) knows which is everything in al-Lowh al-Mahfooz. This taken from many Shani text (which are used as Daleel for the meaning of al-Qadr); for example when Allah (swt) says:

''(All) except the family of Lut. Them all we are surely going to save (from destruction). Except his wife, of whom We have decreed that she shall be of those who remain behind (i.e. she will be destroyed)''. [Al Hijr 15: 59-60]

Also

'..And the Command of Allah is a decree determined.'' [Al-Ahzab 33:38]

also,

Say: ''Nothing shall ever happen to us except what Allah has ordained for us..'' [At-Tauba 9:51]

and

And there is nothing hidden in the heaven and the earth, but is in a Clear Book (al-Lowh al-Mahfooz) [Al-Naml 27:75]
and

And no aged man is granted a length of life, nor is a part cut off from his life, but is in a Book (al-Lowh al-Mahfooz,) [Fatir 35:11]

and

And with Him are the keys of the Ghaib (all that is hidden), none knows them but he. And he knows whatever there is in (or on) the earth and in the sea; not a leaf falls, but he knows it. There is not a grain in the darkness of the earth nor anything fresh or dry, but is written in a Clear Record. [Al-An'am 6:59]

The meaning of all of these Ayat is that Allah knows everything in the universe and Allah wrote it in a clear book. Similarly, this is described in the following Ahadith:

The one which mentions that a woman should not ask for her sister's divorce in order to marry her sister's husband, because she will have what Allah wrote for her.

And the one which says that Musa told Adam, ''O Adam, Allah has chosen you and wrote by His hand for you; how come you blame me for something Allah wrote before He even created me.''

And in the Hadith which mentions that Allah wrote the Qadr of everything 50,000 years before the creation of the universe while His throne was on the water.

And the Hadith which mentions that Allah (swt) created the pen and instructed it to write. The pen asked, ''O Allah, what should I write''. Allah said, ''write the Qadr of everything till the day of judgement.''

And the Hadith which mentions that writing is dried and you will meet what is written.

And the Hadith which mentions that if the Ummah gathered to benefit you in something, they will never be able to benefit you with something other than what Allah wrote for you and if the whole Ummah got together to harm you in something, they will never be able to do it. unless Allah wrote it for you. Pens are laid down, and the ink has dried. (Ibn Abbas)

When Rasool Allah (saaw) says all of this, he means that nothing happens, except what Allah destined and wrote for the human beings and nothing happens against that which Allah knows. This is the meaning of Qadr and this is the meaning which is included in the Sharii text.

The Sharii text gives the meaning in a clear way without any ambiguity. This is what a Muslim should believe in. A Muslim knows that he cannot do anything against what Allah has determined. He knows also that what he can and cannot accomplish are within al-Qadr. A Muslim knows that he cannot succeed, unless Allah determined this success for him (wrote in al-Lowh al-Mahfooz). A Muslim is aware of all this and believes in it, because this is what the different Ayat imply: such as:

''...Nothing will happen to us except for what Allah wrote for us [At-Tauba 9:51]

And what the different Ahadith tell us; such as the one which mentions that the pens are laid down and the ink has dried.

Based upon this understanding, Muslims believed in al-Qadr without any ambiguity. There was no doubt in a Muslim's Aqeedah, so long as no alien ideas were attached to this understanding. However, after Muslims got influenced by alien thoughts, a veil covered their minds, causing them to loose the clarity of their understanding of the Aqeedah. Muslims used to believe in the Qadr and keeping it in the realm of belief (Iman). But now, Muslims started noticing this Iman in the Qadr, before performing any action and they started to carry various actions shaped by this Iman in the Qadr. Thus, they surrounded themselves by what is predetermined. Muslims started to think that whatever Allah predetermined is going to happen, regardless if they became active or passive in carrying out an action. They started believing like this, despite the fact that they know for sure that, it is impossible for anyone to have access to Allah's knowledge. In other words, the Muslims do believe that it is impossible for anyone to know what Allah's knowledge is.

Muslims know all of this, yet they still link their actions with this knowledge of Allah. Thus, al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya (fatalism) emerged. It became something different than believing in al-Qadr. This is because, believing in the Qadr is to believe conclusively that nothing will happen in this universe, other than what Allah has predetermined everything and wrote in al-Lowh al-Mahfooz. However, al-Qadariya al-Ghaibiya means to surrender to what is predetermined. There is a difference between believing in the Qadr and surrendering to the predetermined. Surrendering to this predetermined is simply the result of believing in the Qadr with the absolute surrender; which is that what is predetermined is going to happen and nothing will happen if Allah did not predetermined it.


By the time, believing in the Qadr was over shadowed and now the Muslims have the total surrender. In other words, the belief in the Qadr is no longer restricted to the realm of belief. Now, the outcome alone (which is the total submission) became the issue. Al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya, inside ourselves is linked to the combination of Iman in the Qadr and absolute submission to it; but when it comes to the actions of a person who believes in it, it is no longer a combination of Iman in the Qadr and the total submission to it. Now it is just total submission. In the end. Muslims started saying (once they fail), this is Allah's predetermination and it is my Qadr. If he fails many times, and succeeds in the end, he will say, this is the predetermined time for my success and I succeeded just because it came in the time which Allah had decided. Thus, Muslims started linking the success or the failure to the Qadr in most of their actions. Muslims started saying that it is useless to overcome the predetermined because whatever is predetermined is going to happen and no power can stop it.

This is al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya. It is the absolute surrender to the predetermined without even looking at the belief in the Qadr. In other words, it is moving the issue from the belief to the surrender. As a result, all actions will be linked to the Qadr and to Allah. From this we see that al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya did not emerged from the belief in the Qadr. Rather, it emerged from surrendering to the Qadr or from observing al-Qadr when performing an action. This observation is the fine line and it is the pit fall. Thus, we have to understand it believing in the Qadr and understand that issue of this observation and recognize the fine line that separates believing the Qadr and al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya. We must know that believing in the Qadr is just a belief. It is a conclusive belief and must not produce a submission to the predetermined. The danger is from this surrender which was produced by this belief. In other words, it came form observing the Qadr while we perform an action or while we are just about to perform it. This danger cannot be prevented, except by keeping the Qadr totally and completely in the realm of Iman without linking to the actions. It is like any issue of the Aqeedah, we are asked to believe in it, while making it distinct from the actions. Mixing it with the actions and removing this fine line is what causes this pit fall. Al-Qadaria al-Ghaybiya spread amongst the Muslims during the decline era, because of the lack of clarity misunderstanding the Qadr and not separating this Iman in the Qadr from the actions. People started surrendering to the Qadr. Muslims started justifying their failure and successes to the Qadr. They started justifying their obedience and disobedience to Allah on the Qadr.

Consequently. Muslims no longer want to overcome obstacles facing them and no longer want to achieve the great achievements which they are supposed to, because they started surrendering themselves negatively to whatever happened to them, good or bad. Al-Qadaria al-Ghaibiya is to observe the Qadr in everything and in every action: whatever occurred and whatever did not occur. It is to believe and surrender to the Qadr in a negative way. It is one of the most dangerous and harmful dogma the Ummah can carry. It has grave consequences and it annihilates the individual, Ummah and the society, any society. Thus, it has to be countered and separated from the belief in the Qadr. We do believe that Allah knows or predetermined everything. This, however, should not be observed in our actions. We do not have access to Allah's knowledge. No one knows that there is going to be a failure or success. No one knows weather there is going to be obedience or disobedience. We do not have access to Allah's knowledge and consequently Allah's knowledge should not be observed and linked to our actions, because we do not know it and it is impossible for us to know. Thus, we do not surrender to it. Rather, we should put a thick barrier separating it (Allah's knowledge) from our minds. It should not be thought about, imagined or speculated before carrying any action. But, we should restrict ourselves to the issue, the hukm Sharii, causes of success, the factors of failure and keep this alone in mind.

The following is the translation of a Question and Answer from the archives:


Al-Bid’ah is every action that the Shar’a did not bring i.e. it is every action that is in opposition to the Shar’a. It falls under the statement of the Messenger of Allah (saw): “Every (any) matter which our matter is not upon is rejected” and therefore everything that is contrary to the Shar’a is Bid’ah. However there are actions for which the Shar’a came with a general Daleel (evidence) and therefore what falls under it is not called a Bid’ah. This is like studying Chemistry which is included under the evidences of knowledge, or it is like travelling for pleasure, making the Mahr (dawry) ten chickens, making a Minaret for the Masjid, the man uncovering his head in public, and lighting the Masjid by electricity or chandeliers. All of this is not called Bid’ah and even if the Shar’a did not bring these matters or if they did not exist at the time of the Messenger of Allah (saw). This is because they fall under the general evidences (Adillah ‘Aammah) and because new events arise as do actions in various forms and varieties.

Therefore not every action which the Shar’a did not bring is considered to be Bid’ah nor is any action that did not exist at the time of the Messenger (saw) considered to be Bid’ah. Rather the Bid’ah is the action that contravenes what the Shar’a has brought and it does not apply to all of the actions but rather it is only applies upon the actions which the Shar’a has defined (and specified) its Kayfiyyah (manner of doing/performing it). In respect to these the Muslim is Mukallaf (legally entrusted/obliged) to undertake the action in accordance to the manner that the Shaar’i has brought. If he was to contravene and go against that then he would have performed Bid’ah and this is the meaning of the Bid’ah.

Through examination it is seen that the Shaar’i (i.e. the Qur’aan and the Sunnah) did not specify the manner of how to undertake the actions (the Kayfiyah) except in the ‘Ibaadaat with the exclusion of Al-Jihaad. As for other than the ‘Ibaadaat and Al-Jihaad (which is from the ‘Ibaadaat) then the Shaari’ did not define and specify the conducts and the contravention in respect to the conduct (At-Tasarruf) is not called Bid’ah but rather it is called Haraam or Makrooh in accordance to the Daleel (that specifies that). As for the contravention of the Fi’l (action) then this is what the naming of Bid’ah can be applied to.

Therefore the share and stock companies are not called Bid’ah even though they contravene the Shar’a (Islamic legislation) but rather they are called Haraam because they are not in line with the Shar’iyah evidences that deal with companies. Similarly fighting the disbelievers before conveying the Da’wah to them is not called Bid’ah but rather it is not permitted and not valid to fight them before conveying the Da’wah to them. So fighting and Tasarrufaat (conducts/behaviours) are not described as being Bid’ah because they are not Af’aal (actions) but rather Tasarrufaat. In respect to Al-Jihaad, then even if it includes actions (Af’aal), the Shar’a has however not brought a specific Kayfiyyah (manner of performing it) for it but rather only brought a command related to it. For this reason Bid’ah or the absence of Bid’ah is not associated with it.

As for the ‘Ibaadaat then the Shaari’ has brought s specific Kayfiyah (manner of performing it) that it has commanded and so the contravention of this Kayfiyah is Bid’ah and it is Haram. So for example the Shar’a has brought specific actions for the Adhaan and it made the Adhaan and ‘Ibaadah (act of worship). Therefore it is obligatory to adhere to and be restricted by the worded expressions that the Shar’a has brought. Bringing other wordings is Bid’ah and adding an extra wording and even if only one is Bid’ah. As such adding the wording: ‘Come to the best of actions’, or adding the Salawaat upon the Nabi (saw) at the end of the Adhaan, or stretching out a wording in the Adhaan or some of its letters in a way that takes it out of what was laid down in the Arabic language, is all Bid’ah. This is because it goes against what the Shar’a came with whilst it is obligatory to approach the wordings of the Adhaan and its letters in accordance to what the Shar’a came with. As for singing the words of the Adhaan then this is not called Bid’ah because the Shar’a did not come with a specific manner for how the sound should be, so that it can be said that it has gone against and contravened what the Shar’a has come with. Rather a forbiddance (Nahiy) has come in respect to some of the Kayfiyaat (manners of performance) like singing. Therefore the action that the Shar’a has forbidden is Haraam or Makrooh in accordance to the Daleel related to that action. For that reason it is not said that the sound of the Adhaan and its manner of performance are Bid’ah but rather adding to the wordings of the Adhaan is Bid’ah.

Similar to the Adhaan this applies to all of the remaining acts of ‘Ibaadah with the exception of Al-Jihaad. As for what has been commanded in a general manner (‘Aamm) like the Dhikr and Du’aa without Taqyeed (restriction) to a specific Kayfiyah then Bid’ah is not said in respect to them. Therefore the Du’aa of the Imaam on the day of ‘Eid in the Masjid or other than the Masjid, or the shaking hands those who have prayed amongst each other after the Salaah and their saying ‘Taqabballallah’ (May Allah accept it) or the one who says to the one who has performed Wudoo’ ‘Zamzam’, or making the Minbar of the Masjid more than three levels, or making it large, from wood or stone etc..., all of this and what is similar to this is not called Bid’ah because it all falls under the Du’aa and the Dhikr. It is included under the texts which have requested the Dhikr and the Du’aa because a specific Kayfiyah has not been specified for the Dhikr and the Du’aa. Similarly, what the Shar’a has brought in terms of types of Dhikr in respect to a specific timing or specific circumstance whilst not forbidding it in other than that time or circumstance, then performing it in other than that time or circumstance that the Shar’a has come with, is not Bid’ah. So Allah (swt) has commanded the Tasbeeh (to say Subhaanallah) before the rising of the sun and afters its setting, whilst doing it in the night or the middle of the day is not called Bid’ah.

If the Muslims make the Takbeer in ‘Eid ul-Fitr like they do it in ‘Eid ul-Adhaa then this is not called Bid’ah because the fact that the Messenger of Allah (saw) did not command it in the ‘Eid ul-Fitr does not mean that it has been forbidden. Making Takbeer in all times is permissible whilst in ‘Eid ul-Adhaa it has been reiterated because the command has come from it at that time. The collective Takbeer of the Muslims in the Masjid before the Salaah with raised voices whether in ‘Eid ul-Adhaa or ‘Eid ul-Fitr is not called Bid’ah because the Takbeer has not come with a specific Kayfiyah (manner of doing it) making it invalid or incorrect to undertake it in any other way apart from it alone. In addition the Messenger (saw) said: ‘ The Du’aa between the Adhaan and the Iqaamah is not rejected’ and the Messenger (saw) was asked about which Du’aa was heard the most and he said: ‘In the depths of the night and at the end of the obligatory prayers’. However this statement does not mean that what the people do after the Salaam of the Salaah in terms of staying to make Du’aa where the Imaam remains facing the Qiblah and those who have been led in prayer remaining behind them making Du’aa, can be called Bid’ah, using as an argument that this was not from the guidance of the Messenger (saw) and was not related from him. Because the Du’aa between the Adhaan and the Iqaamah is not rejected and because it is listened to the most in the depths of the night and the end of the obligatory prayers does not mean that it is not permissible for the Imaam and those following him to remain after the Salaah facing the Qiblah making one Du’aa after another. The meaning of Bid’ah means that it is not permissible and that it is Haraam, so how can the Du’aa in any form be considered as Bid’ah?

It is true that if a specific Kayfiyah had come for the Du’aa then going against that would be Bid’ah but this is not present in the like of this form. So for example it has been reported about the Messenger of Allah (saw) in the Hadeeth of al-Istisqaa (prayer for rainfall) and in other Ahaadeeth that he (saw) raised his hands in the Du’aa and the command to raise the hands in the Du’aa has been reported. This then represents a specific Kayfiyyah related to the Du’aa and the one who goes against it has performed Bid’ah. There are people who when they have finished the Du’aa then wipe their faces with their hands. This Kayfiyah (manner of doing an action) is therefore an addition to the action of the Messenger (saw) and there is no Saheeh Hadeeth to support it. It is therefore Bid’ah for the one who does not have a Saheeh Hadeeth in respect to it. However some of the ‘Ulamaa say that it is Sunnah using as evidence the Hadeeth recorded by At-Tirmidhi from ‘Umar (ra) who said: ‘The Messenger of Allah (saw) when he stretched out his hands in Du’aa would not return them until he had wiped his face with them’. They say that this Hadeeth has standing (or support) from that which Abu Daawood reported from Ibn ‘Abbaas (ra) amongst others, and collectively they said that the Hadeeth is Hasan (i.e. the Hadeeth by itself is not strong but by putting all of the weak Ahaadeeth together it raises the level to Hasan). Based upon that they deduced the permissibility of wiping the face with the hands upon completing the Du’aa. This therefore in their view would not be Bid’ah because they have a Shubhat ud-Daleel (semblance of an evidence). However those who do not consider these evidences to be Hasan because adding together a number of weak Ahaadeeth does not make the Hadeeth Hasan, would then view that wiping the face as being Bid’ah.

For example, raising the palm of the hands towards the sky in the Masjid and asking Allah for a matter or displaying them at the time of Isti’aadhah (A’oodhu Billahi Min Ash Shaytaan) or when making Du’aa for Allah to remove the trial, has been claimed to be Bid’ah by some. However the truth is that it is Sunnah due to what Muslim related from Anas (ra) that the Nabi (saw) made Du’aa for rainfall and pointed the back of his hands towards the sky and due to what Khilaad Bin As-Saa’ib related from his father that: ‘When the Messenger (saw) supplicated he would make the inside of his hands dace the sky and when he would seek refuge in Allah he would make the back of his hands face towards it’. This therefore is a Daleel for it being Sunnah and not Bid’ah. However if this was not done in this way by making all of one’s Du’aa’s with the palms of the hands facing the sky, the action would not be Bid’ah. However if there had not been a Hadeeth and he would have done it then his action in that case would be Bid’ah because he would have gone against and acted contrary to a Kayfiyah (manner of how an action is undertaken).

This applies similarly to all that the Shar’a has brought in terms of types of Dhikr and Du’aa for that which a specific Kayfiyah to perform it has been explained. So it is not said to the one who approaches it by way of any Kayfiyah that he deems fit that it is Bid’ah, whether it came in absolute (mutlaq) texts or specific times or circumstances, because the request to perform Dhikr has come in a general (’Aamm) form. The fact that he (saw) praised it in certain circumstances and reiterated or affirmed it in other circumstances does not mean that this represents a Kayfiyah for it. However if a specific Kayfiyah came for the Du’aa or Dhikr, that Kayfiyah is then adhered to and if it was contravened then its contravention would be Bid’ah. For example the Messenger of Allah (saw) raised his hands to the sky when making Du’aa to the extent that his armpits were visible. This then is a Kayfiyah so if someone raises his hands when making Du’aa he must raise them in the way that the Messenger (saw) raised them and if he contravened that it would be Bid’ah. However if he made Du’aa and did not raise his hands he would not have done Bid’ah because he would not have contravened the Kayfiyah rather he would not have done it. Not doing it is not Bid’ah but rather doing it in opposition to the Shar’iyah Kayfiyah is what is considered to be Bid’ah.

All of this is in relation to the ‘Ibaadaat (acts of worship). As for that which does not fall under the category of the ‘Ibaadaat like for example building a Minaret of the Masjid, setting up loudspeakers and lighting up the Minaret on the night of Jumu’ah amongst similar matters, are not considered Bid’ah because they do not go against and contravene a specific Kayfiyah that the Shar’a has come with. Finally Bid’ah is Bid’ah and as such there is no such thing as a bad Bid’ah and good Bid’ah (Hasanah).

Questions and answer about Bid’ah (following on from the above article):

The following sentence was not clear in the subject of Bid’ah: ‘As for singing the words of the Adhaan then this is not called Bid’ah because the Shar’a did not come with a specific manner for how the sound should be, so that it can be said that it has gone against and contravened what the Shar’a has come with. Rather a forbiddance (Nahiy) has come in respect to some of the Kayfiyaat (manners of performance) like singing. Therefore the action that the Shar’a has forbidden is Haraam or Makrooh in accordance to the Daleel related to that action’.
These sentences state that singing is not called Bid’ah and it is also stated that a forbiddance has come in respect to singing. Please explain these sentences and explain clearly the Hukm of singing and its reality.

1) In relation to what was mentioned in the answer to the question about Bid’ah, then what was intended in the sentence is that: If the Shar’a has come with a specific Kayfiyah like raising the hands at the time of Du’aa in a specific manner (Kayfiyah), then go against that would be Bid’ah. However if the Shar’a came with a Nahi (forbiddance) in respect to a specific Kayfiyah then its contravention would not fall under the word Bid’ah but rather it would be viewed in accordance to the forbiddance in terms of it being Makrooh or Haraam. Therefore the Tarteel (melodious) recitation of the Qur’aan in any manner is permissible because the Shar’a did not specify a Kayfiyah but rather requested the Tarteel. However Ahaadeeth have come that forbid singing in respect to the Qur’aan i.e. using the style of singing such as reciting the Aayaat with melodies and tunes which are similar to a certain style of singing like the Hijaaz Kaar style for example. If this was done it would fall within the category of singing and under the forbiddance (Nahi). This is like what Ash-Sheikh Mustafaa Isma’eel (famous Egyptian Qaari) amongst others used to do sometimes when he would recite in accordance to the Hijaaz Kaar style.

2) Not available.

3) Question: In the answer to question number 6 from the answer to questions about Bid’ah the following was mentioned:
However considering sleeping through at the time of the Subh (fajr) prayer and leaving it in a virtually permanent manner is not befitting for the Muslim. This is because, even if the Shar’a did not make upon him in the Daleel Al-‘Aamm (The general evidence), the Messenger (saw) nevertheless was strict upon the (performance) of the Subh prayer’.
What is not clear is the sentence: ‘Even if the Shar’a did not make upon him in the Daleel Al-‘Aamm (The general evidence)’. It appears to me that this sentence is not complete and some words are missing from it?

Answer: As for the sentence then there is no doubt that a word is missing so place the word that should be clearly apparent which is ‘It did not place a sin (Ithm) upon him’ referring to the Hadeeth of the one who forgets the prayer or sleeps through it. This indicates that the one who left the Salaah due to being asleep has no sin and it is enough for him to perform the Qadaa. However in another Hadeeth which stated in meaning that the Messenger of Allah (saw) went to ‘Ali’s house and found him still sleeping with Faatimah and then asked them: Have you both not prayed Subh or are you still sleeping?’ ‘Ali (ra) replied: ‘We are in the hands of Allah’. The Messenger (saw) then began to strike his thigh with his hand whilst he turned to go and said:

وَكَانَ الْإِنْسَانُ أَكْثَرَ شَيْءٍ جَدَلًا

But man is ever more quarrelsome than anything (Al-Kahf 54).

He then repeated this as he left ‘Ali’s house.

This indicates that he did not approve of the sleeping and that he did not approve of any argument about it.

The following is a transcript of a talk delivered on this subject.

As da’wa carriers it is vital that we all adhere to the Shariah of Allah (swt) completely, as we are Muslims first and then da’wa carriers. Therefore we are all Ibadallah – slaves of Allah (swt) and are obligated to follow all of his commands and avoid all of his prohibitions.

As da’wa carriers we would be hypocrites if we were calling for the implementation of the shariah and not following the shariah ourselves.

The Muslim is commanded to conduct his actions according to the Shari'ah rules. Allah (swt) says:

"No by your God, they shall not have true belief until they make you judge in all disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against your decision, but accept it with the fullest conviction." [TMQ 4-65]

He (swt) also says: "Whatever the Messenger brought you take it and whatever he forbids you abstain from it and fear Allah." [TMQ 59-7]

Therefore, the Muslim should in principle abide by the Shari'ah rules. Besides the Shari'ah principle states: “Every action requires a shariah rule and every rule requires a daleel.” In other words, no matter should be given any rule whatsoever before the advent of the rule of Allah pertaining this matter. The Shariah rule is: “The address of the Legislator related to the actions of the servants.” Therefore, anything that has not been mentioned in the address of the Legislator cannot be considered a Shari'ah rule.

If a Muslim wanted to perform any action, it would be incumbent upon him to abide by the rule of Allah (swt) pertaining that action; thus, he must search for that rule until he recognises it and abides by it. This is what the verses and the Ahadith have indicated clearly. Therefore, it is forbidden for a Muslim to undertake any action or to act towards anything in contradiction to the Shari'ah rule; he should rather abide by the Shari'ah rule in every action he undertakes and in every matter. After Allah (swt) revealed:

"Today, I have perfected your Deen for you, completed my favour upon you and have chosen for you Islam as your Deen." [TMQ 5-3]

And after He (swt) revealed: "And We have sent down to you the Book explaining everything." [TMQ 16-89]

There is not any action left without a Shariah rule and evidences that establish it from the Quran and the Sunnah. It is forbidden for anyone, having perceived these two verses, to claim that some actions and some things or some situations are devoid of the Shari'ah rule, meaning that Shari'ah has completely ignored.

Every action has a hukm either Wajib/Fard, or Mandub, or Haram, or Makruh or Mubah.

In fact the meaning of Taqwa itself is to follow the commands and prohibitions of Allah (swt).

The son of ‘Ali (ra), Al-Hasan (ra) once said, “The people who have taqwa (al-muttaqoon) are the people who avoided whatever Allah (swt) has prohibited and have done whatever Allah (swt) has ordained.”

‘Umar ibn Abdul Aziz (ra) once said, “Taqwa is not by fasting the day and not by praying the night. And its not by mixing between the two of them. But taqwa is leaving what Allah (swt) has made Haram and by doing what Allah (swt) has made Fard. After one has done this, Allah (swt) will provide good things for that person.”

Sometimes it is possible that we may overlook the details of the shariah rules when it comes to our lives and may even be unaware of them. This is unacceptable for the Muslim and especially the da’wa carrier.

So today I want to give some examples which we think are relevant to us in terms of follwing the details of the shariah rules. As many of us come from backgrounds where we are not used to following the shariah rules in many areas. The areas I will focus upon are mainly to do with the social and economic rules.

Mixing between men & women
Islam has restricted the relationship between unrelated men and women and only allowed it in certain circumstances.

This separation is established by the overall Ahkam Shari'ah (divine rules) addressing the man separately, the woman separately, and both of them together. It is also established by the Qur'anic speech to women as women and men as men such as Allah's saying:

"The men and women who give charity and fasting men and women, and the men and women who guard their chastiity and the men and women who remember Allah much..." [Al- Ahzab: 35]and other verses. Such a segregated type of life is also reported as the actual practice in collective form since the days of the Prophet and throughout all the times of Islam.

In Islam, the basic principle of the interaction between men and women is segregation. This means that in all areas of life and in all places whether private or public, contact between men and women is generally prohibited. Many evidences establish the principle of not mixing between the sexes, and there are many ahadith which clarify that this is the case in both public and private areas:

Abu Daud narrated that the Prophet (saw) said, "The best row for men is the front row, (furthest to the women's row) and the best row for women is the back row and the worst is the front row (just behind the men)."

Ibn Umar said, "The Prophet prohibited men from walking between two women." Abu Daud.

Abu Daud narrated that the Prophet (saw) saw men and women outside the mosque moving side by side in the crowd. He stopped the women saying, "It is not proper for you to walk in the middle of the path, you had better walk along the walls."

This means that the Muslims should avoid contact with members of the opposite sex, whether Muslim or not, as a general rule. However, there are exceptions to this general rule, where the mixing or interaction between men and women is permitted in certain situations.

For example, it is permitted for men and women who are Mahrem to each other to mix freely for any purpose that Islam permits. As well, there are certain areas where it is permitted for non-Mahrem men and woman to interact with each other, such as for the purpose of Da'awa (invitation to Islam) or trade. However, the type of mixing that can occur here is not free, and is restricted by the shari'ah to be within certain guidelines and boundaries, and the Muslim must be sure to understand these before any type of mixing takes place. The ahkam (rules) to do with mixing also vary with regard to the kind of place in which the mixing takes place.

1) Medicine: It is allowed for men and women to mix for the purpose of seeking medical treatment. The Sahabiyat used to treat the Sahaba and the Prophet (saw) consented to that.

2) Da’wa: It is allowed for men and women to be present in the same class if the purpose of their mixing is learning about Islam or other types of education permitted by the Shari‘ah. The sister of Umar (ra) was being taught from the Quran by Khabab ibn Arrat (ra) with her husband when Umar entered upon them. It has been narrated that Umm Salamah and Aisha (ra) who used to do da'wa to men and women

3) Marriage: If a man is looking to marry a woman then he is allowed to talk to her about issues related to finding out about her and related to the marriage. A man came to the Messenger Muhammad (saw) to ask about marrying a girl and the Prophet (saw) told him to go and see her i.e. see her in her Mahram’s presence.

4) Duress or Compulsion: At times of absolute necessity or emergency, such as earthquakes, war or hurricanes, the necessary mixing is permitted for men and women in order to remove any danger or threat.

5) State arrest: The evidence for this is from Uthman and Umar (ra) said, "O women, cover yourselves we are entering" and he entered a house to arrest someone with his army and there was Ijma of the Sahaba (consensus of the companions) on this.

6) Eating: In Surah Nur Allah (SWT) says:

“The blind is not to be blamed, the crippled is not to be blamed, nor is the handicapped to be blamed, just as you are not to be blamed for eating at your homes, or the homes of your fathers, or the homes of your mothers, or the homes of your brothers, or the homes of your sisters, or the homes of your fathers' brothers, or the homes of your fathers' sisters, or the homes of your mothers' brothers, or the homes of your mothers' sisters, or the homes that belong to you and you possess their keys, or the homes of your friends. You commit nothing wrong by eating together or as individuals. When you enter any home, you shall greet each other a greeting from Allah that is blessed and good. Allah thus explains the revelations for you, that you may understand.” [TMQ 24:61]

For men and women to eat together is permitted in the places mentioned in the verse such as the home of your fathers or your friends as it says, “You commit nothing wrong by eating together or as individuals”.

However people should be careful that even though eating together with the women at a friends house is permitted that they should leave once they have eaten and beware of socialisation with the opposite sex which would be exceeding the permit.

7) Silat ar-rahm (maintaing the relationship between kith and kin): It is allowed for non-maharam relatives to sit with their non-maharam (people to whom marriage is permitted) for the sake of silat ar-rahm as long as it is without khalwah (privacy). There exist a number of hadith concerning the keeping of good relations with the relatives.

It was narrated by Anas b. Malik that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: "Whoever loves that he be granted more wealth, and that his lease of life be prolonged, then he should keep good relations with his kith and kin". It is narrated by Abu Hurayra that the Prophet (saw) said: "Allah created His creation, and when He finished it, the womb got up and said, I seek refuge with you from Al-qatia (ties being severed with me)". On that Allah (swt) said: "Don’t you accept that I bestow my favours on him who keeps your ties, and withhold My favours from him who severes your ties?" On that it said, "Yes, Oh my Lord!" Then Allah (swt) said: "That is for you".

However it is not allowed to mix for the purpose of entertainment or just to socialise. For example the Prophet (saw) used to leave when Aisha (ra) friends used to come as it is not allowed to socialise with your sisters or wives friends if they are not related. Another example which is common today is the mixed weddings.

The Mixed party in weddings is haram. This includes the entrance of the bridegroom to the women’s room, sitting on the bridal throne besides his bride, taking photos for and the celebration of the women with him, when they are usually uncovered particularly if they are not mahrem to him. All of such mixing is haram as it mixing for a purpose which Islam did not allow i.e. entertainment. There should be separate halls for men and women or there should be a partition which would stop the women being seen, this should be at least a shoulder height partition.

We know that in reality today many weddings contradict these ahkam and even before the weddings such as mixed mehndi parties where the women and her friends play tricks on the groom to be and his friends. I know many brothers look for the halal alternatives – so when they attend their relatives weddings they ask to sit in a separate room or place which is physically segregated from the women. This creates problems with some relatives and families who do not follow and understand the shariah rules. But as Muslims we must understand that life is a test – in these are part of the tests from Allah (swt).

In some places the da’wah carriers are tested with their lives through torture, removal from their jobs, arrest and harassment of their families and they stick to the Deen. So who are we, if we cannot stick to the shariah rules just due to upsetting some people or our relatives?

Khulwa - Seclusion
Khulwa relates to the presence of a non-Mahrem man and women being on their own together without the presence of a Mahrem or any other person. This could happen in a private place, or a public place. In either case Khalwa is forbidden from Islam, and both the man and women involved are sinful.

Khalwa in a private place: This could occur in any place that requires permission for entry, such as a house or bedroom in a residence building.

Khalwa in a Public Place : This could occur in any public place whose nature is that no other person people would be likely to pass by or come there. Such a place would be in a forest or an isolated room in a university or at work.

Muhammad (saw) said, "If a man and a woman are alone together in an isolated place, then the third is Shaitan."

Responsibility to family
Allah (swt) says: ‘Ward off from yourselves and your families the Fire...’ [TMQ At-Tahrim: 6].

This Ayah makes it obligatory upon us to maintain ourselves and our direct family such as our children, wives, brothers and sisters abide by the ahkam shariah and avoid the hellfire.

There are different shariah rules dealing with the different types of direct relations. I will address some aspects of these rules which we feel are relevant:

Children: It is our Fard to culture our children with the understanding of the Deen and to encourage them in following the shariah rules.

Reported by Ahmad, Abu Dawud that the Prophet (saw) said: ‘Order your children to pray at the age of 7 and beat them when they are 10 (if they do not pray) and separate their beds.’

This means that we have to order our children to pray – we are responsible for this. They should pray at 7 years old and if they do not by 10 years we should beat them lightly, this does not mean that we beat them heavily in a haram way. The scholars said that the beating meant here is by a miswak and not harshly – it is more for the psychological effect.

It is not allowed to leave our children to be cultured by the Kufr society around us such that they are left for ours absorbing the corruption from Zee TV and the bollywood movies – without refuting such corruption and working to build the Islamic personality within them. It is not acceptable for them to start imitating the practises of the Kuffar while we do nothing, for example – when children participate in school events like Valentines day or celebrating the festivals of the Mushriks and Kuffar. The Prophet (saw) said, “Whoever imitates a people is one of them”.

If we spend so much time trying to ensure that our children get good education then how can we ignore their culturing with Islam?

How do we fulfil this duty? The Prophet (saw) said, “Each one of you is a guardian and he is responsible…The man is a Shepard and he is responsible over his family”. The Prophet (saw) also said, “If you see a munkar change it with your hand, if you cannot then with your tongue and if you cannot then hate it in your heart and that is the weakest of Iman”.

So if we are capable and the shariah has given us the right to stop a munkar by our hand then we are obliged to do so. So for example for our daughters we can prohibit them from leaving the house if they do not wear the Hijab and Jilbab as we are their fathers and shariah has given us this right. Also we can make our children pray.

However the meaning of changing the munkar means that we should attempt to change their thinking and behaviour – not just to prohibit them in a robotic manner but to change their concepts and criterion for action. This means we must make the attempt to engage in da’wa with them.

Ibn Majah narrated that the Prophet (saw) said, “Teach your children and teach them properly”. Ibn ‘Abbas narrated that the Prophet (saw) said, “Act upon the obedience to Allah and avoid the prohibitions of Allah, and order your children to abide by the commandments of Allah and to avoid the prohibitions of Allah, and by that you protect yourself and them from the Hellfire.” [Ibn Jurayr]

Allowing children (under the age of puberty) to be sent to schools where Kufr is taught to them is haram.

There are general texts regarding seeking knowledge. He (saw) said: ‘Seek knowledge’. This is general (‘aam) and includes all types of knowledge. So it is allowed for the Muslim to learn any discipline/science but if these sciences lead to a harm (Darar) then learning such sciences would be forbidden and the other sciences would remain permitted in accordance with the Shari’ah principle which states: ‘If any aspect of a permitted thing leads to a harm, then that aspect is prohibited, but the thing remains permitted’. Hence learning something, which causes one to deviate from the beliefs (‘aqaa’id) is considered a harm and learning such harmful ideas will weaken and effect children easily. Therefore, it is forbidden to send children to schools of the Kuffar, which teach the Kufr thoughts and beliefs on the primary level. This is because children are affected by what they learn at this level, and the family is ordered to protect its family members from the Fire of hell. Allah (swt) says: ‘Ward off from yourselves and your families the Fire...’ [TMQ At-Tahrim: 6]. Protecting their children from the fire would be by not sending them to the schools of the Kuffar that teach Kufr beliefs and thoughts.As for the existing schools of the Kuffar in the Muslim lands which teach the same curriculum taught in Muslim schools, it is not forbidden to send ones children to them. This is because their reality differs from the schools of the Kuffar in Kafir countries, which teach Kufr beliefs and thoughts. Also, just because one of the teachers is a Christian does not mean it is forbidden to study in this school, because the education is linked to the curriculum taught. So if Kufr beliefs and thoughts are not taught in a primary school and the lessons are from the general sciences then it is allowed for children to study there, whether the teachers are Muslims or if one of them is a Christian. If the one who teaches Kufr beliefs and thoughts is a Muslim it is Haram for the children to learn this from him. The fact that the teacher is a Muslim does not make the children’s study of Kufr thoughts and beliefs from him Halal.

Wives:
Allah (swt) said: “The man is the guardian of the woman”

This means that the man is the Amir and guardian of the household but not the master as people conventionally portray. Guardianship means responsibility. Similar to our children we have a duty to embed Islam within our wives. When many of us came into the da’wa we may have already been married for a number of years and our wives may not have been practising Islam fully. However this does not mean that we become da’wa carriers and we leave our wives as they are and make minimal attempts to change them and make them Islamic personalities and da’wa carriers as well.

We are not absolved from the duty to build Islam within our wives and making them adhere to the shariah rules just because we are da’wa carriers. We cannot just leave our wives to be cultured by the Bollywood movies and kufr propagated in the media and society. We should aspire to make our wives like Aisha (ra), Khadija (ra) and the other wives of the Prophet (saw).

Economic issues
We have to be careful of being affected by secularism such that we separate Islam from our lives such as our economic dealings. We must seek the hukm shari before undertaking any actions.

In this area there are many issues which can be overlooked. I will not go into the issue of Riba as it is well known that it is haram in all its forms whether giving, taking or being part of the transaction of Riba even as a witness. I have selected issues that sometimes may be overlooked.

Rishwah (Bribery)
The system of Rishwah or bribery is very common in most of the third world for example bribing the police, government officials such as for getting planning permission for building or maintaining electricity or water supplies, education officers and the like.

Bribery is basically when someone in any position takes an action which is not obliged upon him by his contract in exchange for money or another benefit. So as an example you get stopped by police for something and you pay them to let you go. Bribery is not a wage, as the wage is defined according the legitimate shariah contract.

Bribery is forbidden by the explicit texts. Ahmad and Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi and ibn Majah narrated from Abdullah bin Amur who said: The Messenger of Allah (SAW) said: “Allah cursed the briber (rashi) and bribe-taker (murtashi).” Ahmad narrated from Tawban who said: “The Messenger of Allah (SAW) cursed the briber, bribe-taker and the mediator meaning the one who walks between the two.” These ahadith are general covering all bribery whether it is seeking a right or something null whether it is seeking to repel a harm or gain a benefit, to remove imposing injustice; all are forbidden. There is no illah or shariah reason for why bribery is haram. It is haram in all its forms, full stop as the texts are absolute on this issue.

Insurance
Today many forms of insurance exist such as insurance on property such as houses, life insurance, vehicle insurance and the like.

Insurance whether on life, goods, property or any of its numerous types is a contract. It is a contract between the insurance company and the insuring person in which the latter asks the insurance company to give him a promise (ta’ahud) that it will compensate him for that thing (‘ayn) which is spoilt or destroyed or for its price with regard to goods or property, or a certain sum of money with regard to life and the like. This takes place if the specified accident/incident (haadith) occurs within a defined period, in exchange for a certain amount of money (premium); and the (Insurance) company accepts this.

All forms of insurance are haram. Insurance is haram due to different reasons. One of the main reasons is:

It is a contract because it is an agreement between two parties, and it includes offer and acceptance, where the offer is from the insuring party and the acceptance is from the company. So in order that this contract be legitimately valid from the Shar'a (divine revelation) point of view, it must contain the Shar'a conditions of the contract. If it contains such conditions it becomes valid, otherwise not. From the Shar'a point of view, the contract should apply upon an object (‘ayn) or a benefit. So if it did not apply upon either a thing or benefit it would be invalid, because it would not apply upon a matter that makes it a legitimate contract. This is so because the legitimate (Shar'a) contract applies either to a thing/object in exchange (for something else) as is the case with selling, company and the like, or it applies upon a thing without an exchange like the gift. Or it applies upon a benefit in exchange for compensation like leasing, or to a benefit without compensation like lending. Thus the legitimate contract must apply upon something.

The insurance is not a contract that applies upon an object or a benefit; rather it is a contract that applies upon a pledge i.e. guarantee (dhamana). The pledge or the guarantee does not represent an object for it cannot be consumed (istahlak) nor its benefit used; nor does it represent a benefit, because no benefit derives from that guarantee itself either by leasing or by lending. As for obtaining money based upon this pledge/promise, this is not considered its benefit; rather it is a result of a transaction. Therefore, the insurance contract is not considered to apply upon a thing or a benefit, and it does not include all of the conditions required by the Shar'a in a legitimate contract, so it is void.

Public Limited Companies (PLC)
Today many Muslims are involved in buying and selling shares in PLC companies on the stock markets. PLC companies are basically companies which float on the stock exchange to generate capital by selling shares, however when people buy these shares they do not have any liability on the company such as being liable for its debts or the business it engages in.

Islam prohibits Public limited companies and prohibits the stock market. There are many evidences from the Quran and Sunnah for this. E.g. Islam does not allow people not to pay their debts and if they are partners in a company they must repay the debts which the company owns therefore having the current share system is prohibited because the owners of the shares and not liable for any of the debts of the company. The Prophet (saw) said:

“He who takes money from people with the intention of paying it back, Allah will pay on his behalf, and he who takes it with the intention to waste it Allah will waste him.”

Other examples
There are many other economic ahkam that we may break due to ignorance, I will not go into their details – however we can read about them in our culture like in the book the Economic system of Islam and you can ask about them in the question and answer session.

For example:

Prohibition of transporting haram goods

If the prohibited goods which one wants to transport is alcohol then moving it is Haraam due the hadeeth mentioned regarding it. If its other goods such as canned meat of animals not slaughtered according to the Sharee’ah way or pork; if one is moving them to destroy them or discard them in refuse containers then it is allowed. However, if they are moved in order to benefit from them or take a wage for doing that such as the worker in shops. If he is hired to stack them or move them then this would be Haraam because this comes under benefiting from the Haraam.

· Selling things you do not have is haram
· The 5 types of company structures in Islam
· The rules of currency exchange
· The rules of contracts

In conclusion, we must stick to the Shariah of Allah (swt) and not deviate from it at all:

The Prophet (saw) said: “Any action done not in accordance with what I have brought it is rejected”

May Allah (swt) give us the strength to fulfil his commands and be of the Mutaqoon.

The following is a draft translation from Arabic.

As for the issue of rizq, most of the ayaat, of definite meaning, do not leave any scope for any body that believes in Qur’an but to believe that rizq is in the Hand of Allah, where He gives to whom He wants. The issue of rizq is different from the issue of al-qadar (knowledge of Allah). This is because al-qadar is that Allah knows so and so matter will happen before it happened, so it would have been written and ordained. As for the rizq, it is not only Allah knew so and so person will be given rizq, so the rizq would then be written and ordained, but beside the fact He ordained the rizq is that Allah (swt) is the Razzaq (Sustainer) and not the servant. This is what the ayaat indicated.

Allah (swt) says:

وَأْمُرْ أَهْلَكَ بِالصَّلَاةِ وَاصْطَبِرْ عَلَيْهَا لَا نَسْأَلُكَ رِزْقًا نَّحْنُ نَرْزُقُكَ وَالْعَاقِبَةُ لِلتَّقْوَى

“We ask not of you provision. We provide for you, and the end is for taqwa(righteousness).” [Taha: 132]

وَكُلُواْ مِمَّا رَزَقَكُمُ اللّهُ حَلاَلاً طَيِّبًا وَاتَّقُواْ اللّهَ الَّذِيَ أَنتُم بِهِ مُؤْمِنُونَ

“And eat of the things which Allah (swt) has provided for you, as lawful and good, and keep your duty to Allah in Whom you believe.” [Al-Ma’idah: 88]

للَّهُ لَطِيفٌ بِعِبَادِهِ يَرْزُقُ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَهُوَ الْقَوِيُّ الْعَزِيزُ

“Allah is gracious to his servants. He provides for whom He will, and He is the Strong, the Mighty.” [Ash-Shura: 19]

وَمِنَ الأَنْعَامِ حَمُولَةً وَفَرْشًا كُلُواْ مِمَّا رَزَقَكُمُ اللّهُ وَلاَ تَتَّبِعُواْ خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ إِنَّهُ لَكُمْ عَدُوٌّ مُّبِينٌ

“Eat of what Allah has bestowed upon you, and don’t follow the footsteps of the devil. Lo! Allah does not love the prodigals.” [Al-An’am: 142]

فَكُلُواْ مِمَّا رَزَقَكُمُ اللّهُ حَلالاً طَيِّبًا وَاشْكُرُواْ نِعْمَتَ اللّهِ إِن كُنتُمْ إِيَّاهُ تَعْبُدُونَ

“So eat of the lawful and good food that Allah has provided for you, and thank the bounty of Allah if it is Him you worship.” [An-Nahl: 114]

لِيَجْزِيَهُمُ اللَّهُ أَحْسَنَ مَا عَمِلُوا وَيَزِيدَهُم مِّن فَضْلِهِ وَاللَّهُ يَرْزُقُ مَن يَشَاء بِغَيْرِ حِسَابٍ

“And Allah provides without stint to whom He will.”
[An-Noor: 38]

فَتَقَبَّلَهَا رَبُّهَا بِقَبُولٍ حَسَنٍ وَأَنبَتَهَا نَبَاتًا حَسَنًا وَكَفَّلَهَا زَكَرِيَّا كُلَّمَا دَخَلَ عَلَيْهَا زَكَرِيَّا الْمِحْرَابَ وَجَدَ عِندَهَا رِزْقاً قَالَ يَا مَرْيَمُ أَنَّى لَكِ هَـذَا قَالَتْ هُوَ مِنْ عِندِ اللّهِ إنَّ اللّهَ يَرْزُقُ مَن يَشَاء بِغَيْرِ حِسَابٍ

“Verily, Allah provides without stint to whom He will.”
[Aali-‘Imran: 37]

تُولِجُ اللَّيْلَ فِي الْنَّهَارِ وَتُولِجُ النَّهَارَ فِي اللَّيْلِ وَتُخْرِجُ الْحَيَّ مِنَ الْمَيِّتِ وَتُخْرِجُ الَمَيَّتَ مِنَ الْحَيِّ وَتَرْزُقُ مَن تَشَاء بِغَيْرِ حِسَابٍ

“And You provide without stint to whom You will.”
[Aali-‘Imran: 27]

فَإِذَا بَلَغْنَ أَجَلَهُنَّ فَأَمْسِكُوهُنَّ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ فَارِقُوهُنَّ بِمَعْرُوفٍ وَأَشْهِدُوا ذَوَيْ عَدْلٍ مِّنكُمْ وَأَقِيمُوا الشَّهَادَةَ لِلَّهِ ذَلِكُمْ يُوعَظُ بِهِ مَن كَانَ يُؤْمِنُ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ وَمَن يَتَّقِ اللَّهَ يَجْعَل لَّهُ مَخْرَجًا

وَيَرْزُقْهُ مِنْ حَيْثُ لَا يَحْتَسِبُ وَمَن يَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى اللَّهِ فَهُوَ حَسْبُهُ إِنَّ اللَّهَ بَالِغُ أَمْرِهِ قَدْ جَعَلَ اللَّهُ لِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدْرًا

“And whosoever keeps his duty to Allah, Allah will make a way out for him. And He will provide for him from where he has no expectation.” [At-Talaq: 2-3]

وَكَأَيِّن مِن دَابَّةٍ لَا تَحْمِلُ رِزْقَهَا اللَّهُ يَرْزُقُهَا وَإِيَّاكُمْ وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ

“And how many there is an animal that bears not its own provision! Allah provides for it and for you. He is the Hearer, the Knower.” [Al-‘Ankaboot: 60]

اللَّهُ يَبْسُطُ الرِّزْقَ لِمَن يَشَاء مِنْ عِبَادِهِ وَيَقْدِرُ لَهُ إِنَّ اللَّهَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ

“Allah makes the provision wide for whom He will of His bondmen, and straitens it for whom (he will). Lo1 Allah is aware of all things.” [Al-‘Ankaboot: 62]

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ اذْكُرُوا نِعْمَتَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ هَلْ مِنْ خَالِقٍ غَيْرُ اللَّهِ يَرْزُقُكُم مِّنَ السَّمَاء وَالْأَرْضِ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا هُوَ فَأَنَّى تُؤْفَكُونَ

“O mankind! Remember Allah’s grace toward you! Is there any creator other than Allah Who provides for you from the sky and the earth? There is no God save Him; how then you turn away?” [Fatir: 3]

أَمَّنْ هَذَا الَّذِي يَرْزُقُكُمْ إِنْ أَمْسَكَ رِزْقَهُ بَل لَّجُّوا فِي عُتُوٍّ وَنُفُورٍ

“Or who is he that will provide for you if He should withhold His providence? No, but they are set in pride and forwardness.” [Al-Mulk: 21]

قُلْ تَعَالَوْاْ أَتْلُ مَا حَرَّمَ رَبُّكُمْ عَلَيْكُمْ أَلاَّ تُشْرِكُواْ بِهِ شَيْئًا وَبِالْوَالِدَيْنِ إِحْسَانًا وَلاَ تَقْتُلُواْ أَوْلاَدَكُم مِّنْ إمْلاَقٍ نَّحْنُ نَرْزُقُكُمْ وَإِيَّاهُمْ وَلاَ تَقْرَبُواْ الْفَوَاحِشَ مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَمَا بَطَنَ وَلاَ تَقْتُلُواْ النَّفْسَ الَّتِي حَرَّمَ اللّهُ إِلاَّ بِالْحَقِّ ذَلِكُمْ وَصَّاكُمْ بِهِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ

“And do not slay your children because of penury/poverty. We provide for you and for them.” [Al-An’am: 151]

وَلاَ تَقْتُلُواْ أَوْلادَكُمْ خَشْيَةَ إِمْلاقٍ نَّحْنُ نَرْزُقُهُمْ وَإِيَّاكُم إنَّ قَتْلَهُمْ كَانَ خِطْءًا كَبِيرًا

“And do not slay your children, feraing a fall to poverty. We shall provide for thm and for you.” [Al-Israa’: 31]

وَيَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِ اللّهِ مَا لاَ يَمْلِكُ لَهُمْ رِزْقًا مِّنَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالأَرْضِ شَيْئًا وَلاَ يَسْتَطِيعُونَ

“And they worship beside Allah that which owns no provision whatsoever for them from the heavens or the earth, no have they any power.” [An-Nahl: 73]

ضَرَبَ اللّهُ مَثَلاً عَبْدًا مَّمْلُوكًا لاَّ يَقْدِرُ عَلَى شَيْءٍ وَمَن رَّزَقْنَاهُ مِنَّا رِزْقًا حَسَنًا فَهُوَ يُنفِقُ مِنْهُ سِرًّا وَجَهْرًا هَلْ يَسْتَوُونَ الْحَمْدُ لِلّهِ بَلْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ لاَ يَعْلَمُونَ

“Allah coins a similitude: (on the one hand) a (mere) chattel slave who has control of nothing, and (on the other hand) one on whom We have bestowed a fair provision from Us, and he spends from it secretly and openly. Are yhey equal? Praise is to Allah! But most of them do not know.” [An-Nahl: 75]

وَلَوْ بَسَطَ اللَّهُ الرِّزْقَ لِعِبَادِهِ لَبَغَوْا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَلَكِنْ يُنَزِّلُ بِقَدَرٍ مَا يَشَاءُ إِنَّهُ بِعِبَادِهِ خَبِيرٌ بَصِيرٌ

“And if Allah were to enlarge the provision for his servants they would surely rebel in the earth, but He sends down by measure as He wills. Lo! He is Aquainted, a Seer of His bondmen.” [Ash-Shura: 27]

وَأَمَّا إِذَا مَا ابْتَلَاهُ فَقَدَرَ عَلَيْهِ رِزْقَهُ فَيَقُولُ رَبِّي أَهَانَنِ

“But when He tries him by straitening his means of life, he says: My Lord despises me.” [Al-Fajr: 16]

وَمَا مِن دَآبَّةٍ فِي الأَرْضِ إِلاَّ عَلَى اللّهِ رِزْقُهَا وَيَعْلَمُ مُسْتَقَرَّهَا وَمُسْتَوْدَعَهَا كُلٌّ فِي كِتَابٍ مُّبِينٍ

“And there is not a beast on earth but its provision is due on Allah. He knows its habitation and its repository. All is in a clear record.” [Hood: 6]

إِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الرَّزَّاقُ ذُو الْقُوَّةِ الْمَتِينُ

“Lo! Allah is that who gives livelihood, the Lord of unbreakable might.” [Adh-Dhariyaat: 58]

These ayaat are of definite indication that Allah is the Razzaq (Provider), He provides to whom He will, and He is the one who expands the rizq to whom He will, and straitens it. In all these ayaat the rizq is ascribed to Allah, and there is no Raziq other than Him. This indicates that Allah is the one who provides, and ascribtion of rizq to Him is real, which means the action of giving rizq rather than creation of rizq. This is because ascribtion in origin is real, and it is not diverted to metaphoric except with the presence of a concatenation (qareenah); and there is no a concatenation to allow that. Thus, the ascribtion of rizq to Allah is real. Furthermore, it was not mentioned that rizq is ascribed to man, where he provides rizq for himself, neither in an ayah or a hadeeth. Rather, in all the texts, the ascribtion of rizq came to Allah (swt). As regards of ascribtion of rizq to man, where he gives (rizq) to another, it means handing to them the funds and not the action of (giving) rizq. As an example to this is His (swt) saying:
وَلاَ تُؤْتُواْ السُّفَهَاء أَمْوَالَكُمُ الَّتِي جَعَلَ اللّهُ لَكُمْ قِيَاماً وَارْزُقُوهُمْ فِيهَا وَاكْسُوهُمْ وَقُولُواْ لَهُمْ قَوْلاً مَّعْرُوفًا

“Do not give to the foolish (what is in) your (keeping of their) wealth, which Allah has given you to maintain; but feed and clothe them from it.” [An-Nisaa’: 5]

وَإِذَا حَضَرَ الْقِسْمَةَ أُوْلُواْ الْقُرْبَى وَالْيَتَامَى وَالْمَسَاكِينُ فَارْزُقُوهُم مِّنْهُ وَقُولُواْ لَهُمْ قَوْلاً مَّعْرُوفًا

“And when kinsfolk and orphans and the needy are present at the division (of the heritage) bestow on them from it.” [An-Nisaa’: 8]

What the first ayah means is to hand over food to them, and the second ayah means to hand to them from the rizq that you got. So in both verses, it is an order to give to them from the rizq, and there is no ascribtion of rizq to them. Ascribtion of rizq, in the sense of doing the rizq, did not come except to Allah (swt). You find that in the verses that say:

قُلْ تَعَالَوْاْ أَتْلُ مَا حَرَّمَ رَبُّكُمْ عَلَيْكُمْ أَلاَّ تُشْرِكُواْ بِهِ شَيْئًا وَبِالْوَالِدَيْنِ إِحْسَانًا وَلاَ تَقْتُلُواْ أَوْلاَدَكُم مِّنْ إمْلاَقٍ نَّحْنُ نَرْزُقُكُمْ وَإِيَّاهُمْ وَلاَ تَقْرَبُواْ الْفَوَاحِشَ مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَمَا بَطَنَ وَلاَ تَقْتُلُواْ النَّفْسَ الَّتِي حَرَّمَ اللّهُ إِلاَّ بِالْحَقِّ ذَلِكُمْ وَصَّاكُمْ بِهِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ

“We provide for you”, [Al-An’aam: 151]

وَلَا تَمُدَّنَّ عَيْنَيْكَ إِلَى مَا مَتَّعْنَا بِهِ أَزْوَاجًا مِّنْهُمْ زَهْرَةَ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنيَا لِنَفْتِنَهُمْ فِيهِ وَرِزْقُ رَبِّكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَبْقَى

“ The provision of your Lord”, [Taha: 131]

وَإِذِ اسْتَسْقَى مُوسَى لِقَوْمِهِ فَقُلْنَا اضْرِب بِّعَصَاكَ الْحَجَرَ فَانفَجَرَتْ مِنْهُ اثْنَتَا عَشْرَةَ عَيْناً قَدْ عَلِمَ كُلُّ أُنَاسٍ مَّشْرَبَهُمْ كُلُواْ وَاشْرَبُواْ مِن رِّزْقِ اللَّهِ وَلاَ تَعْثَوْاْ فِي الأَرْضِ مُفْسِدِينَ

“Eat an drink from the rizq of Allah”. [Al-baqarah: 60]

In all of these ayaat, rizq is ascribed and attributed to Allah; and this gives the meaning that does need interpretation that Allah alone is the Razzaq, and that rizq is in his Hand.

Therefore, it is obliged to believe that Allah is that Who provides to the creatures, because the evidence is definite in proof and definite in meaning. So, belief in it is fard, and disbelief in it is kufr. Thus, whoever does not believe that Allah is the Razzaq would have disbelieved, good forbids.

This is the issue of rizq regarding the belief, and the evidence. However, Allah (swt), beside that He commanded the belief in that He is the razzaq, He ordered man to strive to obtain this rizq. He (swt) says:

هُوَ الَّذِي جَعَلَ لَكُمُ الْأَرْضَ ذَلُولًا فَامْشُوا فِي مَنَاكِبِهَا وَكُلُوا مِن رِّزْقِهِ وَإِلَيْهِ النُّشُورُ

“He it is Who has made the earth subservient to you, so walk in its paths and eat of His providence.” [Al-Mulk: 15]

فَإِذَا قُضِيَتِ الصَّلَاةُ فَانتَشِرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَابْتَغُوا مِن فَضْلِ اللَّهِ وَاذْكُرُوا اللَّهَ كَثِيرًا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تُفْلِحُونَ

“And when the prayer is ended, then disperse in the land and seek of Allah’s bounty.” [Al-Jumu’ah: 10]

He (swt) ordered, in these two verses, the strife for earning the rizq. If this order of strife for earning the rizq is linked with the ayaat that state Allah is the Razzaq, then the meaning of that Allah is the Razzaq becomes clear, and the meaning of belief in that Allah is the Razzaq is explained. The first ayaat, all of them decide firmly that Allah is the Razzaq, ie He is the One Who gives the rizq, and not man. While these two verses command the work to earn the rizq of Allah.

Accordingly, the meaning of that Allah is the Razzaq is that He alone gives the rizq, and nobody else. However, the way of earning this rizq is that people walk in the paths of the land, and spread in it, ie they work to earn this rizq. Thus, Allah is the Razzaq, and He is the One Who gives the rizq to that who strives for it. This is because He said:

إِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الرَّزَّاقُ ذُو الْقُوَّةِ الْمَتِينُ

“Lo! Allah is the Razzaq.”
[Ath-Thariyat: 58}

هُوَ الَّذِي جَعَلَ لَكُمُ الْأَرْضَ ذَلُولًا فَامْشُوا فِي مَنَاكِبِهَا وَكُلُوا مِن رِّزْقِهِ وَإِلَيْهِ النُّشُورُ

“Aso walk in its paths and eat of His rizq.”
[Al-Mulk: 15]

And He as well said:

فَإِذَا قُضِيَتِ الصَّلَاةُ فَانتَشِرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَابْتَغُوا مِن فَضْلِ اللَّهِ وَاذْكُرُوا اللَّهَ كَثِيرًا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تُفْلِحُونَ

“then disperse in the land and seek of Allah’s bounty.”
[Al-Jumu’ah: 10]

Thus, the two verses explain and manifest the meaning of the fact that Allah is the Razzaq; and accordingly, the meaning of Allah is the Razzaq is that rizq is in the hand of Allah, but the way of obtaing it is the strive.

Thus, the issue includes two matters: The rizq, and the way of obtaining it. The matter that is obliged to believe in is the rizq, and not the way of obtaining it. What is commanded to strive for is the way of obtaining the rizq, and not the rizq itself. Therefore, the belief in that Allah is the Razzaq does not mean that He pursues supplying the rizq to the creatures so as to earn from it. It rather means that the rizq, which the creatures btain, they earn it from Allah, and not from anybody else. So, they do not provide to themselves, in terms of originating the rizq for themselves, but rather Allah alone is the One Who generated it to them, and He is the One Who provided to them. They only undertook the way by which they obtained their rizq from Allah. So, when the businessman pursues trading and obtains wealth, he would have undertook the way by which rizq is obtained. As regards the rizq, which is the profit, he did not originate it; he rather undertook the way by which he can reach to it, while the one who gave him the profit is Allah (swt).

This is what is indicated by the ayaat of Qur’an, which are dfinite in proof and definite in meaning. They are ayaat regarding belief (in rizq) and ayaat of work. They are ayaat in which Allah commanded us to believe that He is te Razzaq, and there is no at all a Razzaq other than him; and other ayaat in which He commanded us to obtain His rizq by walking in the paths of land and spread in it, ie to strive.

Thus, He showed us that there is rizq, and there is a way to obtain it; so the rizq is from Allah, and the way to obtain it is that man stives. What is commanded to believe in is that rizq is from Allah, which is from the ‘aqaa’id. The fact that the way to obtain it is that man strives is not commanded to believe in; it is rather commanded to undertake, for it is from the ahkaam shar’iyyah and not from the ‘aqaa’id. Since belief (iman) is the decisive conviction that agrees with reality and based on evidence, the issue of rizq became confused to many people. This is because they did not distinguish between the rizq and the way of its earning, and also because they observed, from the reality of the rizq, that it does not come except through the strife for it. Therefore, the proper understanding of the issue became confused to them. Consequently, Muslims who believe that rizq is from Allah only submitted with that, so they believed in it the same way they believe in the Day of Judgment, being one of the unssen/transcendental matters (mughayyabat). So, they could not comprehend the reality of rizq being in the hand of Allah, and not in the hand of man. Instead, they had the reality of rizq being in the hand of man; so they rejected this reality, and believed in what the ayaat indicate.

As for the Muslims that belief did not penetrate deep in their hearts, they pretended to have submitted that rizq is in the hand of Allah. However, their conduct indicated they believe that they bring the rizq, for they could not comprehend the reality of rizq being in the hand of Allah, and not in the hand of man. They were rather firmly convinced that the reality, which they have, confirms that man is the one who provides himself. Thus, the issue of iman in rizq lacked the comprehension of reality that must be convinced of it decisively, whether with the believers (mu’minoon) or with Muslims. That led to this mixing and confusion in understanding the meaning of rizq being in the hand of Allah, and consequently to the mixing and confusion in the iman in rizq.

What made the people not understand the reality of rizq being in the hand of Allah is that they did not understand the reality of the way of obtaining rizq. This led to not understanding the reality of the fact that Allah (swt) is the Razzaq. They have observed by themselves, and touched by their hands, that strife for rizq is the one that brings the rizq, and without strife (sa’y) for rizq there would be no rizq. So, they thought strife for rizq is the cause (sabab) of rizq. Since the cause produces the effect (musabbab), then rizq comes from strife for it, and not from Allah. This is what they witness, and this is what they concluded through observation and sensation. Therefore, they believed in that, because it agrees with the reality. Their belief in that Allah is the Razzaq remained theoretical, because they witnessed the reality is different to it. All of this is because they thought that strife (sa’y) for earning the rizq is the cause (sabab) of the rizq. This is the reason of the mixing and confusion in the people’s understanding of the meaning that the Razzaq is Allah, and consequently this is the reason of mixing and confusion in the iman in rizq.

In reality, the strife (sa’y) is not the cause of the rizq. This is because the cause (sabab) produces the effect (musabbab) definitely; and the effect (musabbab) does not result except from its cause (sabab). So, the knife is the cause of cutting, for it is the one that cuts. Similarly, fire is the cause of burning, for it is the one that makes fire. Thus, there would be no cutting without a knife, ie a sharp tool, and there would be no burning with a fire, ie a material that makes burning. This is the cause (sabab). If the strife (sa’y) for earning the rizq were the same, then it would have been the cause (sabab) of rizq, and the reality would have shown that strife is the one that bring rizq, the same as the knife makes cutting and the fire makes burning. However, strife for obtaining rizq is not like that. In other words, strife for rizq is not like the knife in relation to cutting, and nor like the fire in relation to making burning. This is because there might be strife for obtaining rizq, but rizqdoes not come; and rizq might come without strife for obtaining it. In other words, the cause might happen, but the effect does not; and the effect might happen, but from other than its cause, even without any cause. This definitely indicates that strife (sa’y) is not the cause (sabab) of the rizq.

There are abundant examples in life that indicate this. A businessman might strive for profit, but his trade might lose or do not profit. Here there was strife, but there was no rizq, ie there was a cause, but it did not produce the effect. Since it did not produce, then it is not a cause, because the cause produces the effect definitely. Likewise, an industrialist might build a factory to earn wealth, but his goods might become unsalable in the market, so he either loses or does not profit. This is a strife that did not produce rizq. If the stife were the cause of the rizq, then it would have produced rizq, because the cause produces the effect definitely. An oil exploration company might drill for oil for many years, and spend huge funds, but does not find oil, or does not find it in commercial quantity; so it does not produce oil, and its strife fails. This is a strife that did not produce rizq. Thus, there are many examples in which the strife did not produce rizq. Therefore, strife for rizq is not cause for rizq, because the cause produces the effect, and it does not fail to do so at all; if it failed to produce the effect, even for once, then it is not cause.

On the other hand, an inheritor would have rizq without striving for it. If stife were the cause of rizq, then rizq would have not come without strife, because the effect does not result except from the cause that produces it. So, production of wealth by inheritance, and without strife, is evidence that strife is not the cause of rizq, for rizq happened without strife. Similarly, the person who takes the luqtah (article found in the road), the gift, the zakah or the charity, he got rizq without strife. Likewise, the one who gets a verdict of nafaqah (financial maintenance) to his advantage against whom is responsible about the nafaqah, and he collects it, would have rizq without strife. This is the same case of the disabled, infirmed and decrepit people, when the State looks after them; or those whom the State grants land. All such people obtained rizq without strife. There are more examples, where rizq happened without stife.

This proves in a definite way that strife for rizq is not cause of rizq, ie it is not the one that brought rizq. This is because it is not like the knife, which is the one that made the cutting, and nor like the fire, which was the one that made burning. Therefore, strife is not the one that brought rizq, because it is not its cause.

That is why it appeared to the people that strife is what brought rizq when they have observed in many incidents that strife produced rizq, and they observed there would be no rizq without strife; so they thought the strife is the cause of rizq. Hoever, the fact of the matter, there are many incidents in which there was strife, but there was no rizq from it; and there are many incidents in which rizq happened without strife. This definitely indicates that strife is not the cause of rizq, and accordingly it is not the one that brought rizq. This fact removes the obscurity, and the doubt ceases, because it was proved by the definite evidence that strife is not the cause of rizq. Once strife is negated from being the cause of rizq, then it is disproved that it brought it, and becomes understood that stife is not what brought the rizq.

Two questions arise: Firstly: If strife is not the cause of rizq, though it was observed from most of life incidents that strife produces rizq, and without strife there would have been no rizq, then what does stife represent? Secondly: If strife is not the one that produced rizq, and rizq does not come by itself, then who brought it?

The answer to the first question is that strife is one of the cases in which rizq comes; rizq might come through it or might not. Thus, they are circumstances and situations in which rizq happens, but it does not definitely happen. They are situations, the one who undertakes them usually obtain rizq, but they do not produce rizq definitely. The case might take place, but the rizq does no result; and the rizq might come without the occurrence of any of the cases in which rizq happens. It is like the army regarding taking of power, it is one of the cases in which power is siezed. However, the army could give the power but the power does not exist; and the power could be obtained without an army. Another example is when the weak seeks the help of the powerful; this is one of the cases by which the weak obtains his need. However, he might seek the help of the powerful but his need is not fulfilled, and his need might be fulfilled without seeking the help of the powerful. Superiority of the force of an army over another in war is one of the cases in which victory is reached; however there might be superiority (in force), but victory does not take place; victory might even be for the less powerful army. As Allah (swt) says:

فَلَمَّا فَصَلَ طَالُوتُ بِالْجُنُودِ قَالَ إِنَّ اللّهَ مُبْتَلِيكُم بِنَهَرٍ فَمَن شَرِبَ مِنْهُ فَلَيْسَ مِنِّي وَمَن لَّمْ يَطْعَمْهُ فَإِنَّهُ مِنِّي إِلاَّ مَنِ اغْتَرَفَ غُرْفَةً بِيَدِهِ فَشَرِبُواْ مِنْهُ إِلاَّ قَلِيلاً مِّنْهُمْ فَلَمَّا جَاوَزَهُ هُوَ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ مَعَهُ قَالُواْ لاَ طَاقَةَ لَنَا الْيَوْمَ بِجَالُوتَ وَجُنودِهِ قَالَ الَّذِينَ يَظُنُّونَ أَنَّهُم مُّلاَقُو اللّهِ كَم مِّن فِئَةٍ قَلِيلَةٍ غَلَبَتْ فِئَةً كَثِيرَةً بِإِذْنِ اللّهِ وَاللّهُ مَعَ الصَّابِرِينَ

“How often a small group has defeated a mighty group by Allah’s leave.” [Al-Baqarah: 249]

This applies to all cases, which are situations and circumstances that are made available to achieve a matter; but because they are not causes, they might be obtained but the matter is not achieved; even the matter could be achieved without obtaining such cases. So, these cases are not the cause of the matter, therefore they are not what brought the matter and executed it.

Stife for earning rizq is one of the cases, and not a cause. Observation focused on one of the incidents, but judgment was on all incidents, so it was wrong. This is because, in reality, there are many incidents in which strife did not produc erizq, and there are incidents in which rizq results without strife. This constitutes evidence on the error of the judgment that comes from incomplete observation.

Therefore, the proper understanding of the reality of the way of obtaing rizq, which is the strife, is that this way is not the cause of rizq; it is rather one of the cases of (obtaining) rizq. This is the reality of the way of obtaining rizq, ie the reality of strife for rizq.

The answer to the second question is that, from the following and examination of all the types of the cases in which strife produced rizq, the cases in which the srife did not produce rizq, and the cases in which rizq occurred without strife, it is observed that there is behind these cases some one other than these cases that controls the rizq, because these cases are not the causes. Thus, the one that controls the rizq is that which gives rizq and prevernts it.

The existence of the one that controls the rizq is realised by sensation, from the existence of its effect. This is like the realisation of the existence of Allah from the existence of His creatures. Control in rizq is sensed and observed in the difference of results despite the presence of the same cases. This is like strife for obtaining the rizq, and the occurrence of rizq without strife, which is sensed and observed. Thus, the results of obtaing rizq by strife, not obtaining it by strife, and obtaining it without strife, all of this is obvious control of the rizq; therefore, the control (of rizq) is sensed through observation and realisation.

This control did not definitely result from the cases, and nor it result from itself. This is because it is an action, so it needs a doer/actor. This doer of the control over the rizq is the one that gives rizq and prevents it. Accordingly, the reality of that which gives rizq is not the way of obtaining it; rather there is some one behind these cases that control of rizq.

As regards that which controls rizq, the ayaat of Qur’an, definite in proof and definite in meaning, state that the Razzaq is Allah (swt). This is the reality of the fact that the Razzaq is Allah (swt): It is sensed and observed there is control over rizq, that comes behind the cases in which rizq is obtained; and that which controls of rizq gives it and prevents it, who is Allah (swt), as indicated by the definite evidence. Thus, the belief in that Allah (swt) is the Razzaq is a decisive conviction, which agrees with reality, and based on evidence.

This is the issue of rizq, this is its reality, and this is its definite evidence. Belief in it must be in this manner. This belief is what broadens the vision regarding the rizq, and strengthens the resolve for obtaining it, without being tied up by any of the cases. A quick look at the reality of life shows that belief in that strife is what brings rizq has a great effect on the rizq, and it leads to narrowing the vision regarding it, and makes it scarce for those who have such belief. On the other hand, it shows that belief in that Allah (swt) is the Razzaq, and that stife is just one of the cases of (obtaining) rizq has a great effect on the rizq, and it leads to widening the vision regarding the rizq, and making it abundant for those who have such belief.

The employees are most of people who believe that strufe is what obtains rizq. This sort of belief makes them believe that if they left their jobs they would die out of hunger. Therefore, they live with narrow vision regarding the earning of wealth, and they live a striatened life irrespective of their high jobs.

While, on the other hand, the merchants, farmers, industrialists and their likes are most of the people who understand that their strife is just one of the cases by which rizq comes. Even if they did not believe in that the Razzaq is Allah (swt), they realise that, behind the cases by which they obtain the rizq, there is a power that controls their provisions. Therefore, we find them of broader in vision regarding the rizq. Regardless of their little means, we find them of better rizq than the employees and those who believe their strife is what brings rizq.

Therefore, existence of belief in that the Razzaq is Allah (swt), beside the work according the way that Allah explained for obtaining the rizq, would not call for laziness or complacence; on contrary it broadens the vision regarding the rizq, and makes wealth abundant in the hands of these believers.