Q: I have read different translations of the Quran, 38:33, that suggest Prophet Solomon ordered the slaughter of horses because they distracted him from prayers. Is that true?
A: That is a mainstream interpretation, shared by Ibn Kathir and Sheikh al-Shawkani, Imam al-Tabari, quoting Ibn Abbas رضي الله عنهما, offers the best interpretation that Prophet Solomon, patted the horses out of love and affection. He writes,
“And this saying that we mentioned from Ibn Abbas is most the better interpretation of the verse because a Prophet of Allah, peace be upon him, would not, God willing, punish an animal by cutting its hamstrings, nor destroy property without cause because he was preoccupied from his prayer by looking at them, and it is not their fault that he was occupied by their beauty.” Tafsir al-Tabari
After sharing my insights on holding the Quran behind the Imam during Tarawih prayers, questions emerged about the use of translations.
This is permissible with two conditions:
1. Avoid reciting from it aloud. 2. Aim to deepen your reflection on the Quran.
Imam al-Nawawi states:
“If someone flips through pages during their prayer or looks at texts other than the Quran, reflecting silently, their prayer remains valid, even if this action is prolonged. Though generally disliked,” he states in “al-Majmoo” (4/95),
The validity of this practice is strengthened by the objectives of Shariah: the protection of faith, as well as the fiqh principle that the disliked changes to permissibility if there is a compelling need for its observance.
The effort to focus and comprehend the Imam’s recitations justifies this exception, as understanding the meanings behind the verses is crucial for deepening our prayer and contemplation. Additionally, in the absence of explicit evidence that prohibits this, it falls under a disputed ijtihad, and ijtihads that align with the objectives of the Shariah and the principles of fiqh are preferred.
Finally, an analogy (qiyas) could be made that a non-Arab speaker is encouraged to internally ponder the meanings of the prayer, and they will do so in their language, which is allowed, in fact encouraged, as long as they do not speak out loud. The same applies to a person using the translation to follow the Imam.
Did you know SWISS has in interactive, 24 hour question hotline? Ask your questions now at suhaibwebb.com and enroll in SWISS for only $9.99 a month.
A SWISS learner inquired about the deeper meaning behind the hadith, “Who does not avoid evil speech and actions while fasting; Allah has no need for that person to leave his food and drink.” Specifically, what does “need” mean?
In Islam, a fundamental belief is that Allah is entirely self-sufficient, highlighted by Quranic verses affirming His independence and our need for Him. This premise leads us to understand that Allah’s “need” in any context refers not to a deficiency on His part but to what He deems worthy of acceptance.
Al-Qadi, al-Baydawi, offers profound insight on this matter, stating, “
ليس المقصود من شرعية الصوم نفس الجوع والعطش، بل ما يتبعه من كسر الشهوات وتطويع النفس الأمارة للنفس المطمئنة، فإذا لم يحصل ذلك لا ينظر الله إليه نظر القبول.”
“The intended purpose behind the legislation of fasting is not merely the experience of hunger and thirst, but rather what it leads to in terms of breaking the desires and disciplining the commanding self towards the peaceful self. If this is not achieved, then Allah does not look upon it with acceptance. Thus, when it is said, ‘Allah has no need,’ it is a metaphorical expression for non-acceptance, denying the cause but intending the caused. And Allah knows best.”
This interpretation reminds us that the rituals we observe are pathways to greater self-discipline and spirituality, not ends in themselves, and that fasting layers to its observance.
Did you know SWISS has in interactive, 24 hour question hotline? Ask your questions now at suhaibwebb.com and enroll in SWISS for only $9.99 a month.
A big thank those who asked this question. It’s one of those questions that has an impact on community spaces and the aspirations of worshippers. And when those clash, things can get spicy!
Imam Al-Ayni shared an interesting piece of history about Anas رضي الله عنه asked a young boy to stand behind him during prayers and hold the Quran. Whenever Anas stumbled over a verse, the boy was right there to help him out by finding the right spot in the Mushaf and guiding him along. It’s a simple act, but it says so much about the spirit of support and community in our practice, and importantly it is a precedent that illustrates the allowance to hold the mushaf behind the Imam in tarawih.
When it comes to the views on this, there’s a bit of a mix. Malik saw no problem with it during Ramadan, pointing out that there’s room for flexibility and understanding in our observances. Then you have scholars like Al-Shafi’i and Ahmad who were also on board with the idea, showing a consensus of sorts that it’s allowed. However, Abu Hanifa had his reservations, which just goes to show the diverse perspectives within our tradition, and why there is no to fight over this matter.
For me, in line with my madhab, I see it as perfectly fine. Added, specifically since there is no clear evidence against it.
Those who choose to hold the Quran behind the Imam have to be mindful not to disturb others during prayer, especially not the Imam by reading along with him. We’re reminded to keep silent during these moments, to respect the tranquility and sanctity of our collective worship.
In today’s world of gadgets and devices. They could easily serve the same purpose as that young boy behind Anas, but they come with their own set of distractions. So, if we’re going to use them, we need to be extra careful not to let them disrupt the peace of those praying beside us.
At the end of the day, one must follow silently, with a focus that’s inward and a heart that’s attuned to the divine. Let’s keep our prayers as moments of quiet connection, without even a whisper.
With Allah’s names: The Merciful, The Mercy giving, and with prayers and peace be upon His noble Prophet ﷺ .
This response is aimed to clarify that the former Mufti of Egypt should not mislead young Muslims about their faith.
The gravest stance a person can assume involves disseminating religious information to believers who trust him, while he is aware of the deceit in his words. This scenario, arguably the worst of its kind, was manifested by Ali Gomaa, the former Grand Mufti of Egypt and presently a member of the House of Representatives.
He convened a gathering of young people, who, enamored by his scholarly prestige, were predisposed to his influence. In this setting, he defied definite jurisprudential mandates from the Islamic faith, fully conscious that those commamds are unequivocally established within the religion, and cognizant that the scriptural verses directly refute his declarations.
This occurred when he discussed two theological issues: the destiny of non-Muslims on the Day of Judgment and the speculative negation of divine retribution against the disbelievers and the disobedient by potentially annulling hellfire.
Addressing the first matter, he referenced the verse from Allah Almighty: (Indeed, those who believe, and those who are Jews, and the Christians, and the Sabians – whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and performs righteous actions – shall receive their recompense with their Lord, and they shall not fear, nor shall they grieve)[Al-Baqarah: 62].
The consensus among scholars is that “whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and performs righteous deeds” necessitates belief in the Prophet ﷺ and adherence to his statutes, thus erroneously suggesting to his audience that non-Muslim deniers of the Prophet ﷺ, including Jews, Christians, and Sabians, are destined for paradise as are Muslims.
He concealed verses that explicitly clarify this issue, including the proclamation by Allah Almighty: “And whoever seeks a religion other than Islam, it will not be accepted from him, and he, in the Hereafter, will be among the losers.” [Quran 3:85], and the verse: “But those who disbelieve and deny Our signs – they will be companions of the Fire, dwelling therein eternally)[Quran 2:39], and the statement by Allah Almighty: “Indeed, those who disbelieve among the People of the Scripture and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, dwelling therein forever. They are the worst of creatures. [Quran 98:6]. There are also verses regarding the People of the Book: the Jews, and the Christians, Allah says about the Jews: “These are they who have exchanged the Hereafter for the life of this world. The punishment shall not be lightened for them, nor shall they be aided)[Quran 2:86], and regarding the Christians:: “They have certainly disbelieved who say, “Allah is the third of three.” There is no god but One God. And if they cease not from what they say, a painful torment will surely befall the disbelievers among them)[Quran 5:73].
Concerning the second topic, he informed them about the possibility of Allah Almighty annulling the fire and admitting everyone into paradise, emphasizing His ﷻ omnipotence and the quoting numerous Islamic theologians that such an event is plausible.
Goma’s intention was to convey to them that the tenets of heaven, hell, and all matters pertaining to the Day of Judgment are within the realm of possibilities (Allah could or could not), subject to Allah Almighty’s omnipotence, thereby introducing a spectrum of outcomes and suggesting that the specifics of the Day of Judgment remain undetermined until we witness Allah Almighty’s final will!
He deliberately misled them, despite teaching students in is books and lessons on theology this agreed upon principle: intellectual possibilities are treated equally in their essence, but when divine revelation confirms their occurrence, they transition to being logically obligatory, immutable facts because Allah Almighty does not deceive, nor does His proclamation fail.
His discourse led the youth and his followers to assume that Allah has not preordained the events of the Day of Judgment, suggesting a flexibility in His actions – an assertion far removed from the exalted nature of Allah.
He stated, despite existing scriptural affirmations regarding heaven and hell, and the Quranic revelations to Muhammad ﷺ detailing divine promises and threats, that Allah Almighty might opt – transcending such notions – to annul the fire. He claimed this perspective is shared by many Muslim scholars, regrettably without specifying any.
His speech included a segment of the verse emphasizing that He is Almighty (effector of what He wills), elucidating in his theological studies that what Allah Almighty has revealed about the unseen signifies His definitive will has eternally determined the existence of those predestined events, and when Allah Almighty decrees a matter, it inevitably occurs. Allah Almighty has disclosed certain matters His will has ordained, including the eternal damnation in Hell for those who deny the prophethood of Muhammad ﷺ among the polytheists, Jews, and Christians, as elucidated in the aforementioned verses.
Additionally, concerning the believers who commit grave sins, Allah Almighty has decreed to punish those who perish without repenting for their major transgressions, while also stating they fall under His merciful will should He choose to forgive them. Thus, it becomes an integral part of the creed that the promise of punishment must be realized for certain groups committing major sins, harmonizing the verses on divine threats with those concerning divine will.
Allah Almighty, in His scripture, has declared the establishment of Paradise and Hell as a means to execute justice among His creation, stating: “And We will set up the scales of justice for the Day of Resurrection, so no soul will be treated unjustly in the least. And if there is even the weight of a mustard seed, We will bring it forth. And sufficient are We as reckoners.” [Quran 22:47]. And he ﷻ says,: “To Him is your return all together. The promise of Allah is true. It is He Who begins the creation and then will repeat it, that He may reward those who believe and work righteousness, with justice. But those who disbelieve will have a draught of boiling fluids and painful punishment because they used to disbelieve)[Quran 10:4], and he ﷻ said, “If every soul that had wronged had all that is on earth, it would offer it in ransom. They will confess their sins when they see the punishment; Nobe judged in fairness, and they will not be wronged)[Quran 10:54].
These verses underscore that in the balance of divine justice, there is no equivalence between good and evil, truth and falsehood, disbelief and faith. Allah Almighty says: “Then, are those who believe and perform righteous deeds like those who cause corruption in the earth? They are not equal! To those who believe and perform righteous deeds, there will be Gardens of bliss, in hospitality for what they used to do. But as for those who were defiantly disobedient, their abode is the Fire. Every time they wish to get out of it, they will be returned to it, and it will be said to them, “Taste the punishment of the Fire which you used to deny”)[Quran : 18-20]. And Allah Almighty says: “And not equal are the blind and those who see; nor are those who believe and perform righteous deeds and the evildoer. Little do you remember)[Quran 40:58]. And He states, “Not equal are the companions of the Fire and the companions of Paradise. The companions of Paradise, they are the achievers) [Quran 59:20]. And He asks: “Then, do We treat the Muslims like the criminals? What is [the matter] with you? How do you judge?)[Quran 68: 35-36].
Ali Gomaa, in his discourse, misleadingly equated believers with disbelievers, the oppressed with oppressors, murderers with victims, and those adherent to obedience with those engulfed in sinfulness. Was he cognizant that in doing so, he was negating Allah Almighty’s clear pronouncements on establishing justice and non-equivalence, thereby eroding a foundational principle of Islamic creed? Was he aware that he was influencing these young individuals and all his audience to perceive adherence to the Islamic faith as futile if the final destinies of all religious adherents are deemed equivalent, enticing them towards sinfulness under the pretext that everyone will ultimately reside in Paradise, with Hell being non-existent?
Should the former Mufti have sought to obscure a truth of Islam, irrespective of his motivations—be they political, sectarian, or aimed at promoting an appealing form of dawah—he unmistakably acknowledges that Jews deem Christians apostates destined for Hell, just as both Jews and Christians collectively view Muslims as apostates bound for the inferno. He is also aware that these truths are not concealed from adherents of these faiths, given the accessibility of Allah Almighty’s scripture to all humankind, rendering it impermissible to obscure any aspect of it or to mislead regarding its contents.
Moreover, if his intent was to endear the youth to Allah Almighty by emphasizing His merciful disposition towards His servants, would the youth then accept a conception of divine justice so skewed as to amalgamate the righteous and the wicked, the oppressor and the oppressed, under a uniform dispensation of mercy, notwithstanding Allah Almighty’s affirmation: (Inform My servants that I am indeed the Forgiving, the Merciful (49) And that My punishment is indeed the painful punishment)[Quran 15:: “49-50]?
The venture undertaken by Ali Gomaa, the former Grand Mufti of Egypt, transcends the bounds of ijtihad (independent reasoning) wherein an error might be excusable. Instead, it represents a grave deviation that threatens to undermine the very foundations of Islamic creed.
Such a serious matter cannot be overlooked or ignored. This situation demands a forthright response from the scholars of Al-Azhar Al-Sharif, who are obliged not to shirk their responsibility towards Allah, nor to fear the criticism of any critic. Similarly, a response from scholars throughout the Muslim Ummah is imperative, for this represents an instance of misguidance that must be corrected. Among the most egregious forms of misguidance is the distortion of divine words from their intended contexts.
We implore Allah Almighty for steadfastness and unwavering conviction.
You’re allowed to read from the Quran in Tarawih prayers, and in other supererogatory prayers, if you start doing so at the beginning of the prayer. However, it’s frowned upon to pick up the Quran for reading during the prayer due to the excessive movement it involves. Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri, a respected figure, noted that the most devout among us would read from the Quran during Ramadan. He mentioned that Dhuwan, who was a servant of Aisha (one of the Prophet Muhammad’s wives), would lead her in prayer using the Quran during Ramadan. Imam Malik, another revered figure, stated it’s okay for an Imam to lead people in prayer with the Quran during Ramadan and in voluntary prayers (as cited in Al-Mudawwana: 1/194).
This does not apply to obligatory prayers, where reading from the Quran is discouraged, whether done at the beginning or during the prayer. The leniency in voluntary prayers about movements does not extend to obligatory ones.
References include Al-Mudawwana: 1/194, Sharh Jami’ al-Ummahat: 2/391, Al-Tawdih: 1/572, Al-Sharh al-Kabir: 1/496, Sharh al-Zarqani: 1/1/286, Sharh al-Kharshi: 2/11, and Al-Fiqh al-Maliki wa Adillatuh: 1/261.
The Question: After the obligatory prayer, is it better to perform voluntary prayers or to recite Al-Fatiha?
The Answer: Performing voluntary prayers after the obligatory ones, except for Asr and Fajr, is better than reciting Al-Fatiha; because performing voluntary prayers after the obligatory prayers, other than those two, is Sunnah, and it includes reciting Al-Fatiha along with additional prayers.
As for after Fajr, it is recommended to engage in remembrance, glorification, supplication, and reading the Quran, including Al-Fatiha, until sunrise.
As for after Asr, the ruling on recitation and supplication for those not occupied with seeking knowledge or the like is the same as their ruling at other times.
It is not appropriate to adhere to reciting Al-Fatiha immediately after the congregational prayer because people may think that this act is among the sunnahs of the prayer.
Since I accepted Islam, I have noticed a trend towards questioning Islam’s legal tradition, quickly dismissing long-held, rigorously debated, truths.
Rejecting Consensus It seems quite popular, especially among some of today’s Islamic content providers and “religious” exhibitionists, to doubt the consensus of Islamic jurists as a valid evidence in Shariah law. This skepticism, while perhaps cool and appealing on the surface, overlooks the deep importance of Ijma (consensus) in Sunni Islam, which stands alongside Qiyas (analogical reasoning) as a cornerstone of faith and practice; as well as the fierce debates that scholars engages in over centuries.
You Need A Method To Be Peer Reviewed By Colleagues Not Your Followers Those quick to write off Ijma often lack a solid basis-a merhod-for their arguments, revealed through their scattered thoughts and a failure to recognize the systematic approaches normative scholars have used to sift through ideas with precision. Ironically, not only do they fail to sift through the discussions on the issue, but outside of platitudes, they fail to produce any research or method-usul- for scholars to examine their ideas. Living in an era is not enough to discredit those who proceeded it.
A Classic Hot Debate, Not A Novel Idea The necessity and authority of Ijma sparked intense discussions among early Sunni legal theorists, who largely agreed that when consensus is backed by a sanad (a chain of transmission), it’s to be dogma. This insight was something I learned from Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi years ago.
Two Opinions Within the ancient sunni, scholarly works on Islamic legal theory, a key question has been whether this consensus necessarily requires a sanad. This debate, often missed by those dazzled by the new and the need to be revivee, fails to grasp the depth and complexity of the discussions held by scholars long ago. Ignoring these nuanced debates shows a gap in thorough critique—it’s far easier to remain quiet or admit one’s lack of knowledge, as it is to talk out the side of one’s mouth.
Some scholars, as noted by Al-Amidi, one half of the mutakalimin, argue that a sanad isn’t always needed, suggesting that divine inspiration can lead scholars to the right conclusions. They believe that if consensus required a sanad, then it would be the sanad itself providing the proof, not the consensus.
The majority view among usulis is that a reliable sanad is a condition. To claim ijma’ without it is seen as flawed, like talking about religious matters without fully understanding them or issuing a fatwa without it supported by evidence. This approach ensures the community is protected from error, with decisions based on either solid or more speculative, yet acceptable, evidence, keeping the faith grounded and informed.
There is a lot to say here, but moving forward, we should probably look back.
“From the blessings that Allah, Blessed and Exalted be He, has bestowed upon me is my ability to distinguish my own happiness from the His rights.
So, I feed myself knowing that I am a servant of Allah, Mighty and Majestic, not for the pleasure I find in eating, and I quench my thirst and clothe myself with that attitude. If I observed those things with a mix of piety and my pleasure, that would be negligence of Allah.
loving What He ﷻ Loves Similarly, I do not wish that Allah, the Exalted, pardons me merely because of the comfort it brings to myself, but rather I love His pardon because He, Glorified and Exalted, informed us that He loves it. Were it not for the love of Him, the Exalted, for pardon, I would not have loved it. If a small part of me does desire His pardon for the sake of bodily comfort, it is a very weak desire. And this is a state I have observed; I have found few of my contemporaries who taste this except a minority.
Adversity & Ease Reveal States The pain from the cold I felt begrudgingly observing proper wudu during winter benefited me so that when the I observed it properly on hot summer days, enjoying the refreshing cold water and feeling relief, I check my soul, ‘Your enjoyment now in this proper wudu is due to its alignment with your own desires-cooling off, not in compliance with the lawgiver’s command for thorough ablution (because he disliked it in discomfort, but in a state of comfort he likes it). There, my soul’s, if its intention is false; its argument collapses because of the contradiction. Were it not for its suffering with the water during winter, I would not have recognized the distinction between the command of Allah and my subtle desire.
So, my brother, act upon this character, for every act whose intentions and sayings are not for the sake of compliance with the command of Allah, Glorified and Exalted be He, is ruined. So base your dislikes for anything except on the motivation induced by the love of entering Paradise.
I pray Allah take care of your guidance, and all praise is due to Allah, Lord of the worlds. Pure actions follow the truth, Glorified and Exalted be He, and nothing undermines that even if by chance.”
In a time when comfort is easily found in worship, we must examine our worship and comforts. A teacher years ago told me: “Three things are easy today, so examine your intentions: Hajj, learning and people saying such and such is a guide or pious. Fear Allah by loving what He ﷻ loves. You will stay safe.”
A number of new-Muslims inquired how they should navigate relations with their family, especially their parents. I recall years ago; I prayed from the pulpit for the parents of people who embraced Islam. An older person came to me saying, “In twenty-six years as a Muslim, this is the first time someone prayed for my parent’s guidance.” Allah make it easy and guide our parents to Islam.
The answer bellow if from an normative legal manual, with the explanation of an incredible giant of Islamic-law.
In discussing the obligations towards parents, Ibn Abi Zayd, may Allah have mercy upon him, states. Honoring one’s parents is compulsory, irrespective of their moral or religious standing. This includes parents who may be sinners or even polytheists. In such situations, one is advised to speak to them with kindness, treat them with respect, and live with them in a manner that is recognized as good. However, one should not comply with them if they encourage sin, aligning with Allah’s guidance.
Commenting. al-Qadi Abd al-Wahab, may Allah have mercy upon him, elaborated on this principle by referring to the Quranic injunctions: Allah has ordained that one must show excellence towards their parents (Quran 29:8). This directive is reinforced through various verses, including prayers for parental forgiveness (Quran 14:41), commands for good treatment (Quran 6:151), and gratitude for the favors bestowed upon oneself and one’s parents (Quran 46:15). Furthermore, Allah Almighty emphasizes the importance of speaking respectfully to one’s parents, especially in their old age, and showing them humility and mercy (Quran 17:23-24). Then he added,
“This guidance serves as a reminder of the virtue in treating parents with honor and prohibits causing them any harm, offering the most emphatic means of severing any inclination towards disrespect. Additionally, the Quran explicitly mentions the reward for those who are dutiful to their parents. The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, when asked about engaging in jihad, highlighted the significance of serving one’s parents as a form of striving in their cause, demonstrating the paramount importance of filial piety in Islam. And the Prophet ﷺ was asked, “Who deserves the most kindness?” The reply was: “Your mother,” which was repeated three times, followed by “then your father.”
And be ﷺ said, ‘Shall I not inform you of the greatest of major sins?’ which included associating partners with Allah and disrespect towards parents.
Ibn Mas’ud asked the Prophet ﷺ about the best deeds, to which he replied: ‘Prayer at its appointed time, kindness to parents, and Jihad in the way of Allah.’
It was narrated by Hamid al-Tawil from Hasan bin Muslim from Mujahid, who attributed it to the Prophet ﷺ: ‘Everything between a servant and Allah has a veil except the testimony that there is no deity but Allah and the supplication of a parent.’
Even if the parents are sinners or polytheists, their right to kindness does not diminish because this is a right of Allah, as the general evidence covers the case with the sinner, and because the reason for which one is commanded to be kind to them, their parenthood, remains. However, one should not obey them in matters that involve disobedience to Allah, and such refusal is not considered undutiful. Similarly, if they prevent him from something that is of benefit to him, which he cannot do without, or if his abandoning it or doing it would result in harm. The basis for this is Allah’s statement: ‘But if they endeavor to make you associate with Me that of which you have no knowledge, do not obey them. Yet accompany them in this world with appropriate kindness.’ (Quran 31:15),
Regarding those who prefer Allah’s right over the parents’ right, “You will not find a people who believe in Allah and the Last Day having affection for those who oppose Allah and His Messenger” (Quran 59: 22), a verse revealed about Abu Ubaidah ibn Al-Jarrah and the verses about parents are numerous.”
