True, when talking to people sometimes it is best to fall back on scientific explanation because they are not of the same view with us on religious aspect. they may not accept religious arguments, but are willing to accept scientific facts (or what they perceive to be facts).

But really, for people who are more cognizant of religion, we should be talking based on dalil.

Ali R.A. once said:
"Seandainya agama dengan logika, maka tentu bagian bawah khuf (more or less like kasut) lebih pantas diusap daripada atasnya. Sungguh aku pernah melihat Rasulullaah shallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam mengusap bagian atas khufnya"
(narrated by Abu Daud. Ibnu Hajr stated in his Bulughul Marom that the tsanad is hasan. Sy. Al Albani stated that this hadeeth is sohih)

my translation:
"If only this religion is founded on logics (equaivalent with science), then surely the bottom part of the khuf deserves to be wiped more than the top. However, indeed I have seen Rasulullaah shallallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam wiping the bottom part of his khuf"

Ali R.A. has reconfirmed that our religion is not based on science. If we talk about religion, we talk based on dalil (Quran, Hadeeth, and things derived from either or both). Science is a by-product. If it happens to match the dalil, then it matches. no other meaning to it. it was not the main intention for Quran to reflect science (quote from Ust Abdul Hakim), but it may be the intention of Allah that science reflect Quran (this part is my take on it).

and I'm rambling, if only a little.

Found two articles with similar content. One of them can be found here...

https://firanda.com/532-bila-suami-melarang...-orang-tua.html

TLDR versyun (a.k.a. my personal take on the article)
The opinion that the husband's right (in this case) is superior to the right of the sick/dying parent is based on a weak hadeeth (another similar hadeeth to the one quoted above was ranked very weak). As such, it cannot be upheld.

In urgent/emergency condition the wife MUST disobey the husband's words (that prevent her from visiting) as the husband in this case is adjudged to disobey Allah.

This post has been edited by abu.shofwan: Nov 5 2018, 05:16 PM

So, do people wipe the hair separately then the ear?

Just sharing experience

Sheeps need shepperd
Camels no need

Met a whole bunch of camels in the desert, long ago... Like maybe 7 or 8 years ago. No "shepperd" at all. Camels have leader camel and that leader camel walked in front.

They were domesticated camels for sure, even allowed us to pet them and take pictures with them.

On the other hand, never saw a group of sheep without their shepperd here in the deserts.

So yeah, camels can survive on their own in the desert, goat/lamb/sheep wont.

Just sharing.
Went to halaqoh in Doha yesterday evening, with Malay speaking people from Singapore, Indonesia and of course, Malaysia. The group (or actually, the ustadz) was discussing the book Al Kabaair and the topic was Stealing.
I already knew that stealing is one of the crimes that is covered by “had” (specific punishment under the syariah), where stealing something worth ¼ of a dinar would be punishable by the cutting of the limb (right hand first, second time left foot, third time no more had but local law will apply). However, what I didn’t know was that the word stealing (the English word, I mean) covers many types of “stealing” words in Arabic. Me being unable to speak Arabic obviously couldn’t pick up all the examples the ustadz described, but the following stood out to me:
1) Mugging openly (in front of other people), taking something unlawfully from someone
2) Stealing something valuable (see limit of value above) that is protected or guarded, and (this part is hard to describe accurately) away from view or doing so discretely  this is the one that is considered as stealing that will attract the “had” or “hudud”
3) Pickpocketing, no explanation needed  had/hudud cannot be applied
4) Corruption, also no explanation needed *cough*politician*cough*  had/hudud cannot be applied
5) Stealing something that is left in the open  think of someone snatching your phone off your dining table in a restaurant, also no had/hudud
6) Families stealing from one another  no hudud
7) Mugging in a secluded place (away from people’s view), will attract had/hudud based on the severity. If only taking something, iirc the had is exile (Ibnu Katheer described this as chased away from the land of Islam, i.e. hunted down if he is captured, he will be punished, but if he manages to flee from the borders of his homeland, he will not be chased any further - and yes, I am re-reading the passage for writing this. I don't wish to be seen as well versed in the tafseer), if taking something while threatening (causing severe fear on the part of the victim), then the had is different… the maximum penalty/had is death/crucifixion. Please refer to Al Maedah verse 33 for this one, which of course has other meanings. What I described above was only what was being discussed in relation to the topic at hand last night.
So not ALL “stealing” can be punished by had/hudud. The ustadz explained that this is because of syubhat (and I cannot recall for every example above). For corruption, the syubhat is if the culprit is a citizen of that country. By right/law he has a claim to some of the country’s wealth (yes, money included), and thus what he steals by corruption may be at least partially his. This is the same case as ghulul (taking something being part of the ghanimah – spoils of war – before it is being accumulated and distributed by the amir). It is also the same for families stealing from family – the culprit may have a claim to the item - like the child is supposed to be taken care of by the father, etc.
For snatching, the syubhat is the owner is reckless for leaving something unattended or blatantly in the open, as if inviting people to commit crime. For mugging and pickpocketing I cannot remember, but it had something to do with it being done in the open, where a lot of people can be witnesses.
To be clear, even though there is no had to these crimes, local laws (read: punishment under the law) will still apply. Also, they are still considered al kabaair (major sins) punishable in the afterlife. It is just that no hudud will be applied.
For the stealing and mugging that are covered by the had/hudud, the had can only be applied under certain conditions: (1) somehow 2 men (women not accepted) bore witness to the crime, (2) the value is above the limit, etc. (can’t remember them all)
Had will not be applied if the thief was stealing due to hunger (refer the case of the caught thief during the famine which happened in one of the caliph’s rule – iirc), or if the owner does not report the stealing to the authority for whatever reason (maybe he/she forgives the thief out of compassion, who knows) etc. I think there was a brief mention also about the stolen goods being a halal goods for the owner, too. But I was actually busy taking notes when this was spoken about so I didn't catch it.
Once it is reported to the authority, there is no u-turn and the had will have to be carried out.

Sekian. And in the words of our TS: bincangkan…
If you wish.

This post has been edited by abu.shofwan: Dec 8 2018, 02:38 PM

Guys...

In your view/knowledge

Who are the habaib? What is their significance?

I see some habaib from Indonesia and feel like there is something wrong... "some" only, not all...

Bincangkan...

That goes without saying

But the question was specific to Habaib (I believe this is the plural form of Habib, right?)

I myself don't really understand who they are.

How about this?

https://islamqa.info/id/answers/106541/memb...pada-non-muslim

We can only guess. The only one who can answer that definitively would be the One who gave us the Quran. It's like analyzing why Snape acted the way he did. Everyone gave this theory and that theory, but only when the author told us why, we can know for sure.

So, building on that analogy, it may be that it is meant as a way to make us accept that for many things, there are detailed explanations found in the hadeeth. And If everything is detailed out, then we would have volumes of the Quran (i.e. not fit in one handbook size mus-haf).

It may be that it needs a certain degree of flexibility. For example, there are at least two ways of how you can sit between the two prostration. Also, the way that you point your finger during the tahiyaat. When you reverse the question, why did Allah make detailed explanation for the faraidh and mahrom? For faraidh, we know that it is a very sensitive matter to MANY people. There cannot be flexibility outside of what is written. For mahrom, well… no one wants to make that mistake. There cannot be flexibility in this case, too.

wallaahu a'lam...

ps.
curious to know what "hak-hak wanita" that you are talking about.

I searched for this before. IIRC, there are two conditions:

1) if the giver earns money from haram and halal actions, then he is entitled to the benefit of the doubt and the gift can be accepted. however, some scholars also differentiate based on % - meaning if more haram than halal, not acceptable. this can be traced back from when our Prophet PBUH accepted gifts from the Jews. we know that Jews practice Riba, so at least some of their possessions would be earned from that. this also applies if you know for sure that the gift was obtained through halal ways.

2) if the giver earns only from haram, of if you know for sure that the gift itself was obtained from haram action, then it is not acceptable.

In your example, if the giver has other halal income, and you cannot determine whether the gift was obtain through haram means, then it is acceptable. our Prophet PBUH did not ask the Jews whether the gift was from halal or haram source (read: there is no record of it being asked), so you should not ask.

the second part of your question is different.

when talking about gifts, then it is only a (small) part of everything that the giver has in his possession. therefore, benefit of the doubt is given. however, when talking about inheritence, we are talking about the complete possession (everything he had). therefore, we know for sure that there is part (or maybe even all) was obtained from haram dealings.

I will try to research this first and update later.

Turns out, it is mostly similar.

1) The waris knows that there is no haram income (of the deceased) - halal
2) The waris knows that there is no HALAL income (of the deceased) - haram
3) The waris knows it is mixed - at the very least, to estimate how much is the haram and how much halal. give out the haram as sedekah and take the halal. if it can be ascertained how much is haram, then to give away that portion and keep the rest. however, scholars recommend to give away ALL to be safe. this is according to several scholars, including Seiferal... errr... I mean, Syaikhul Islam
4) It is not known whether it is halal or haram - halal according to an Nawawi this is based on ijma'

read more in pengusahamuslim.com - topic : "Harta haram, bolehkah diwariskan?"

Ahhh... If you are wrong, then the sin is on the Mufti. But if you knew you were wrong (or the Mufti was wrong) yet you still do it anyway, then the sin will be on you, bro.

Take care where you set your foot next. May Allah bless you.

Wa'alaykumussalaam warohmatullaahi wabarokaatuh

Please be clear... Samak from what?

at least for me, i read the translation and try to distinguish which word is translated into what. i believe that if you do this long enough (read: years) - even on your own - you will gradually understand bits and pieces of what you read/hear.

but never rely on your own interpretation, as we are not qualified to interpret. need to at least rely on Tafsir Ibnu Katsir. Investing money on these books are worth it. If got official e-book version, I will definitely buy (already have the free version, but not sure if it is 100% accurate... free is sometimes corrupted with unknown things...)

I wasn't there when you family said those things, so I'll take your word for it. Just know that the way you wrote it, it didn't really sound like "looking down" on them... concerned maybe, but in a good way.

You cannot choose how people live their live. Nor are you responsible for it. So you cannot expect your family to change. As long as you are doing good things (not going against syariat) just carry on. Rely on the Quran and the Sunnah always. If you feel a clash, again, revert to the Quran and Sunnah (An Nisaa 59). In the very end, what matters is whether you enter heaven, or hell... not how many house you have, or what car you drive.

So her quote is very true in that respect. the word "kebahagiaan" refering to "bahagia" in the afterlife (i.e. in heaven, the only place where you can be "bahagia") can be found in Hud 10 and al Qoshosh 77 (this is my own search in the translation, not the actual words of wisdom from ulama...)

Also, to have some sort of envy is human nature. We are not angels, so we have negative emotions. The important thing is how we control the negativity. Don't act on it. If it's there, deny it or reject it, divert your attention on other things - things that are actually useful for you. If people talk this way and that, which offend or raise the envy in you, just smile and shrug it off. Just think of it as "nice to have" but not "must have" - you won't die without it and it sure isn't going to be asked in the afterlife.

Btw, am curious... why is the Yassin the only soothing surah for you? for me it has always been Ar Rahman... especially the first few ayat...

aaah.... enjoy OZ ramadhan...

Qatar ramadhan currently overstretched daytime...

Last time, during Qatar winter, also got "pushed" as Imam for maghrib (sun sets before we go home... so, yeah... need to pray magrib at the office). This despite me definitely looking like a chinese (sepet eyes... what to do) and got some arab looking guys in the crowd. got a feeling that because i was the client, so i have to lead... thing is, i get easily nervous when leading the prayers where you recite out loud. Dhuhr and Asr are no issues... hehehe...

Surah Al-Hujraat, Verse 12:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اجْتَنِبُوا كَثِيرًا مِّنَ الظَّنِّ إِنَّ بَعْضَ الظَّنِّ إِثْمٌ وَلَا تَجَسَّسُوا وَلَا يَغْتَب بَّعْضُكُم بَعْضًا أَيُحِبُّ أَحَدُكُمْ أَن يَأْكُلَ لَحْمَ أَخِيهِ مَيْتًا فَكَرِهْتُمُوهُ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ تَوَّابٌ رَّحِيمٌ

O you who believe! avoid most of suspicion, for surely suspicion in some cases is a sin, and do not spy nor let some of you backbite others. Does one of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? But you abhor it; and be careful of (your duty to) Allah, surely Allah is Oft-returning (to mercy), Merciful.
(English - Shakir)

via iQuran

Was conversing with some friends from Indonesia, about the election last week. Seems like many not happy and suspect there is efforts to cheat by the encumbent, or at least by his team. Thing is, from my perspective, an outsider, I see their allegations are just that... Allegations (bro seiferalmercy, can check if this is the correct word or should use accusation instead?)

Unfounded by concrete facts... If any, they are mostly based on words or perception of facts. What facts they have also cannot be determined to be free from interference or influence/bias. So I though the above ayat is appropriate foe their condition. Unfortunately, being an outsider, I have not a voice to be heard.

Ramadhan tents for ifthar already popping up here and there... One of the joys of fasting...


Attached thumbnail(s)

If the official/government is using the hilal sighting method, then follow. If they use hisab, then follow the people who use hilal.

Brunei also start tomorrow. Despite the neighbouring countries starting today. This was probably because it was cloudy there.