SHAIKHUL MASHAAIKH SHAH ABDUL QUDDUS GANGOHI
(rahmatullah alayh)
The author Nuzhah depicts his ancestral tree as follows: Shah Abdul Quddus Bin Ismail Bin Safi Bin Nasirul Hanafi Radoli Gangohi. Some say that his name was Ismail while his title was Shah Abdul Quddus. He is, however, known by only his title. He was apparently born in 860 Hijri. He excelled in both, Uloom-e-Zaahiriyyah and Baatiniyyah. His obedience to the Sunnat was the loftiest standard.
Although he, among the Khulafaa of Hadhrat Shaikh Aarif (rahmatullah alayh), the perfection of his excellences was by the direct Faidh-e-Roohaani (spiritual emanation or spiritual attention) of Hadhrat Shaikh Abdul Haq Radoli (rahmatullah alayh). Hadhrat Abdul Quddus Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) thus writes in his book, Anwaarul Uyoon: "Among the tassarufaat (spiritual actions) of Hadhrat Ahmad Abdul Haq is that 50 years after his demise he attended to the tarbiyat (spiritual training) of this insignificant entity (i.e. Shaikh Abdul Quddus) by means of his Roohaani Faidh."
Hadhrat Abdul Quddus Gangohi's son writes: "It was my father's intention to become bay't somewhere else. However, Hadhrat Shaikh Ahmad Abdul Haq Radoli instructed from Aalam-e-Kashf (the Realm of Spiritual Revelatioin): 'Don't contemplate bay't at any other place. I shall attend to your accomplishment (takmeel)." Since Hadhrat Shah Abdul Quddus cherished the idea of becoming physically bay't, Hadhrat Ahmad Abdul Haq Radoli (rahmatullah alayh) referred him to his grandson, Shaikh Muhammad Bin Shaikh Aarif (rahmatullah alayh).
Thus, Hadhrat Shaikh was initiated into the Silsilah both physical and spiritual bay't, his Roohani Shaikh being Hadhrat Shaikh Abdul Haq Radoli (rahmatullah alayh). Beside this Shaikh of his, he had also gained the mantle of khilaafate from Shaikh Qaasim Oodhi (rahmatullah alayh) who was among the Akaabir of the Suharwardiyyah Silsilah.
He was a born wali. He was a Saahib-e-Karaamaat from childhood. In the beginning he did some farming. From the yield of the farm he would first spend on the Fuqaraa. Hadhrat Gangohi's Matubaat (letters) are famous. His Maktubaat brim with Ma'aarif (Divine Knowledge of Subtleties). Since the Maktubaat arein the Farsi language, they are not reproduced here. Those who are versed in Farsi should study these Maktubaat in kitaabs such as Anwaarul Aafireen. They will derive immense benefit there from. Hadhrat Maulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) said: "Whenever I experienced any uncertainty regarding Sulook, I would ascertain the answer by reference to the Maktubaat."
Among the works written by him is Anwaarul Uyoon which is divided into seven chapters in which the realities, subtleties, and mysteries of Sulook have been compiled. The first chapter is predominantly devoted to the excellences of Hadhrat Abdul Haq (rahmatullah alayh). The following too are his works: Ta'leeqaat ala Sharhis Sahaa-if which is in the subject of Ilm-e-Kalaam (Islamic Philosophy) and Haashiyatut Ta'arruf is a voluminous exegesis of Anwaariful Ma'aarif. Much of his life is discussed in Lataa-if-e-Quddusi which is the works of his son and Khalifah, Shaikh Ruknud Deen. Many anecdotes of his life are also recorded in Mir'atul Asraar, Iqtibaasu Anwaar and Anwaarul Aarifeen.
Since this brief treatise lacks the scope for a detailed presentation of Hadhrat Gangohi's life, I shall narrate a few anecdotes..
A waswasah (stray thought) occurred to a Mureed of Hadhrat Shah Abdul Quddus Gangohi. He thought that he had already gained whatever knowledge (of Sulook) there was here (i.e. by Hadhrat Gangohi). He thought that there are also other famous Mashaaikh and there was nothing wrong in seeking divine knowledge elsewhere, hence he should visit the other Mashaaikh as well. But he felt in improper to reveal this thought to his Shaikh. Hadhrat Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) realised this either by way of kashf or some other signs. Hence, he told the Mureed: "Brother! Allah Ta'ala says: "Travel in the earth...". Therefore, if you for some time wander a bit here and there, you will obtain some relaxation as well as be honored with the ziyaaraat and barakaat of different Mashaaikh and then it will not be wrong to enquire from anyone about Allah's Name (i.e. Divine Knowledge)." In his heart the mureed felt pleased at this coincidence. He took leave and began his visiting spree. Every Shaikh whom he visited, instructed him the same shaghl of Paas Anfaas which he had been given to practice in the very initial stage. He was extremely perplexed, thinking to himself: "Everyone to whom I go, begin me off with Alif, Baa, Taa. Whatever else I had hitherto practiced has become futile." Ultimately, feeling very embarrassed, he returned to Hadhrat Shaikh Gangohi and repented. Hadhrat said: "Brother, are you now satisfied? Now sit in solitude and with undivided attention take Allah's Name."
Muhammad Gauth Gawaaliyaari, the author of Jawaahir-e-Khamsah, was an aamil. He was apparently a contemporary of Hadhrat Abdul Quddus Gangohi. Once he sent some jinns to bring Hadhrat Gangohi to him. Hadhrat Shaikh on this occasion was engrossed (in thikr) in the masjid. The jinns arrived, but could not muster up the courage to go to Hadhrat. When the Shaikh noticed someone, he asked: "who is it?" The jinns replied: "Muhammad Gauth wishes to see you, hence he has sent us. If you consent, we shall take you without causing any inconvenience." Hadhrat said: "I order you to bring Muhammad Gauth here." The jinns obeyed. Taking hold of Muhammad Gauth they set off to Hadhrat Gangohi. Muhammad Gauth said to the jinns: "What is wrong? You were in subjection to me. Why this disobedience?" The jinns responded: "With regard to others, we are obedient to you, but not in regard to the Shaikh. As far as he is concerned, we cannot obey you. They delivered him to Hadhrat Shaikh who said: "Have you no shame?" Hadhrat severely reprimanded him. Finally he became bay't to Hadhrat and attained a lofty sprirtual status of divine proximity (i.e. he became a Saahib-e-Nisbat). His grave is in Gawaaliyar.
Once a wealthy and prominent personality of the community, who was also Hadhrat's khaadim had invited the wealthy and the poor of the city to attend the Walimah of his son. Hadhrat Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) presented himself in order to test the khaadim. He went incognito. He changed his attire and arrived at night and sat among the poor. Hadhrat Shaikh observed that the khaadim was treating and attending to the rich and poor in the same way. Hadhrat Shaikh remained seated among the poor, but the khaadim did not have the remotest notion of his presence. Afterwards when the khaadim came to Hadhrat (i.e. at the khaanqah), Hadhrat displayed his displeasure. When the khaadim enquired the reason of his displeasure, Hadhrat said: "I was at your gathering of feasting, but you did not recognize me." The khaadim presented the excuse of his inability to have recognized Hadhrat because of the circumstances, which preludes recognition. Hadhrat Shaikh said: "Why did you not perceive my fragrance? If you could have perceived the fragrance, you would certainly have recognized me in spite of the different garb. Since you could not perceive the fragrance, it is clear that you lack love for me." (The spiritual rationale of this attitude may not be comprehensible the those who are barren - bereft of spiritual insight and divine love. The spiritual bond with the Shaikh for the sake of developing the Love of Allah produces Roohani fragrance in the relationship. Such fragrance becomes spiritually perceptible according to the degree of truth in the mutual love of the spiritual partners in this celestial bond.)
Once Hadhrat Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) came to Delhi. Shaikh Haji Abdul Wahhab Bukhaari who was a descendent of Sayyid Jalaalud Deen Bukhaari, sent the written manuscript of his tafseer to Shaikh Abdul Quddus. When Hadhrat opened the manuscript his eyes fell on the aayat pertaining ot the tahaarat (purity) of the household members of Rasulullah (s.a.a.w). In its tafseer, Shaikh Abdul Wahhab stated that the successful end (Khaatimah bil Khair - death with Imaan) of all descendents of Rasulullah (s.a.a.w.) is assured. Their death will most certainly be beautiful. Shaikh Abdul Quddus wrote in the margin: "This view is in conflict of the view of the Ahlus Sunnah was Jama'at." He then returned the manuscript. Meanwhile, the Ulama of that place deliberated many days on this question. Finally, all accepted the ruling by Shaikh Abdul Quddus Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh).
Once the Imaam of the Musjid did not arrive on time, hence his nephew, Shaikh Abdul Ghani went forward and became the Imaam. He paused slightly beween Lazeenaa and An-umtaa. Hadhrat Shaikh repeated the Salaat and furiously said: "Young men should be prevented from Imamate and invalidating the Salaat of the people. Does he not know even that the mousul and silah (these are terms of Arabic grammer) join to form a single word; hence it is improper to create an interruption between the two. Waqf between them is not permissible.
Hadhrat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi (rahmatullah alayh) narrates several anecdotes of Hadhrat Shaikh Abdul Quddus Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh), in his book, Assunnatul Jaliyyatu fi Chishtiyyatil Ulyah.
Hadhrat Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) had seven sons who all were men of virtue and excellence. They were educated in Delhi. Whenever they wished to meet their father, he (Hadhrat) would himself go to Delhi to avoid any disruption to their education.
Shaikh Ruknud Deen (rahmatullah alayh) states in Lataa-if-e-Quddusi that Hadhrat Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) passed away on the 11th Jamadil Ukhraa 977 Hijri. On Sunday, Hadhrat became feverish and started to shiver. On Friday his condition improved, enabling him to perform Salaat comfortably. After Salaat, the fever resumed. Even during his maradhul maut (the last illness) his ibaadat did not undergo any change. He remained fully engrossed in ibaadat despite his illness. At the very end, he signaled for wudhu and he performed two raka'ts Salaat. He made Ruku' and Sajdah by means of signs. On the ninth day, on Monday, while performing Salaat, he passed away. After the demise of Hadhrat Shaikh Abdul Quddus Gangohi, Shaikh Ruknud Deen after completing the ghust, placed his hand on the blessed breast of Hadhrat. He felt the movement of Thikr-e-Qalbi (Thikr of the heart).
Some people record the year of his demise as 945 Hijri. Hadhrat's age was 84 years. For 35 years he had lived in Radoli. In 896 Hijri, he settled in Shahaabad on the request and insistence of Umar Khan Kaahi who was a minister of Sultan Sikander Ludhi. He also lived for 35 years in Shahaabad. In 893 Hijri, during the reign of Zahirud Deen Babaa, Hadhrat Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) settled in Gangoh and lived 14 years there. Although there are different versions regarding the year of his demise, the most reliable view is 944 Hijri.
Presently, Gangoh is divided into two areas. The one area commonly known as Gangoh is the city. The other area is to the west of the city and is known as Seraa-e. This area at the time of Hadhrat's arrival was a complete forest. It is here where Shaikh Gangohi took up residence. The development of this area commenced about this time. It is here where the three Pillers of the Chishtiyyah Silsilah (Hadhrat Abdul Quddus Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh), Hadhrat Shah Abu Saeed Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh), and Hadhrat Imaam-e-Rabbaani Maulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohi) are lying in rest.
Hadhrat Shah Abdul Quddus Gangohi (rahmatullah alayh) had many khulafaa. The well-known ones are Shaikh Bhooru, Shaikh Umar, Shaikh Abdul Ghafoor A'zampoori, Shaikh Ruknud Deen and Shaikh Abdul Kabeer who is better known as Balaa Peer. The latter two are his sons as well as his spiritual offspiring. Hadhrat Shaikh Jalaalud Deen Thaanesri (rahmatullah alayh) is also his senior khalifaah.
Friday, December 11, 2009
Thursday, December 10, 2009
THE STYLE OF RASULULLAH’S GARMENT
THE STYLE OF RASULULLAH’S GARMENT
By Mujlisul Ulama of South Africa
When a modernist Muslim criticizes the dress style and appearance of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah, we in this age in which kufr preponderates, are not surprised. Immersed in the kufr concepts and liberalism of the western kuffaar, it is just natural and logical for modernists to denigrate every teaching of the Sunnah which conflicts with the tastes and hues of western culture. In fact, even Ulama have become so terribly desensitized with the kufr of the modernists as a consequence of their mutual association and their dubious and baseless policies of ‘hikmat’ and diplomacy, that they (the Ulama) too have become chronic victims of the maladies of kufr and liberalism.
So while we cannot be surprised when modernists criticize, mock and sneer at the dress styles and appearance of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his Sahaabah, there is not only surprise but shock when molvis —products of Darul Ulooms - who purport to be followers of the Ulama of the Sunnah, resort to labyrinthal arguments in order to justify styles which are in conflict with not only the practical example of the Nabi, but in diametric opposition to his explicit statements of prohibition pertaining to certain dress styles.
THE TROUSERS
Every molvi is aware or should be aware that ALL the Books of Hadith contain many authentic ahadith clearly explaining the style of Rasulullah’s izaar. There is absolutely no difference of opinion among any of the innumerable authorities of the Shariah from the very inception of Islam that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his Sahaabah always wore their izaar and trousers above their ankles.
In addition to their practical example, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah verbally propagated in explicit terms the prohibition of wearing the trousers below the ankles. This style is completely unrelated to age and time. There was no incumbency of the era to wear the trousers in this manner nor were there any physical or geographic restraints or factors which compelled the adoption of this style. on the contrary, the age and the people of the time demanded that the trousers be worn below the ankles in exactly the same way as modernists, kuffaar and Muslims ashamed of the Sunnah Culture are advocating today.
THE REASON
In order to accomodate the liberal fancies of the western kuffaar, molvis in this age of corruption, have hooked onto a legless and baseless argument to justify, propagate and even praise the kaafir style of wearing the trousers below the ankles—a style which is in clear opposition to the style and command of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
The modernist molvis of the liberal cult of westernism are arguing that the reason for the prohibition to wear the trousers below the ankles was pride. Their argument goes that on account of pride, the style was prohibited. But if there is no pride then wearing the trousers below the ankles is permissible, in fact commendable by implication of their baseless and satanic arguments which they voice over their radio channels.
Why is it haraam for a Muslim to wear a crucifix around his neck or arm? Why should it be haraam for a Muslim to keep a small idol of Bhagwan or Buddha in his pocket or display it in his home. Why should this be haraam if the Muslim concerned has no beliefs of shirk or kufr. He simply regards these items as ‘artifacts’ and symbols of ‘history’. He does not believe in these idols. He does not worship them. But we can claim without fear of contradiction that even the modernist molvis have as yet not descended to the level of corruption which will constrain them to say that keeping such idols is permissible if the reason is not shirk/worship. Although this is still the case presently, we know that there will soon come a time when keeping and admiring even these instruments of shirk and kufr will be justified and made legal by the presentation of the argument that the reason for the initial prohibition was the belief of shirk which had not yet been completely eradicated from the hearts of the new converts to Islam.
CATEGORIC PROHIBITION
When the Shariah categorically prohibits an act or practice, the prohibition will endure regardless of the reason for which it was initially prohibited. Reciting the qira’t jahran (aloud) in Zuhr and Asr was prohibited initially on account of a particular reason which soon after the prohibition no longer existed. But inspite of the disappearance of the reason for the prohibition, the hukm of Sirri (silent) recitation will endure until the day of Qiyaamah.
Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam) said that he who plays chess is like one who has dipped his fingers in the blood of a swine. Surely there was a cogent reason for this stern prohibition. Now, regardless of whether that reason exists in some cases or not, the prohibition of playing chess will remain until the day of Qiyaamah. In fact, the prohibition has been taken further by the Fuqaha (the Authorities of the Shariah). This prohibition has been extended to all similar games of the kuffaar.
THE AHADITH
We shall now present the relevant authentic Ahadith on the issue of the trousers below and above the ankles and then proceed to further refute and negate the utterly baseless and devious arguments tendered by modernists molvis to beguile the Ummah.
(1) Abu Hurairah (Radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: "Whatever of the garment is below the ankles will be in the Fire (of Jahannum).(Bukhaari)
(2) Ibn Umar (Radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: "Verily the Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: Whoever hangs his garment in pride, Allah will not look at him (with mercy) on the day of Qiyaamah." (Bukhaari and Muslim)
(3) Abu Saeed al-Kudri (Radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: "I heard Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) saying: The izaar of the Mu’min is halfway on the forlegs (i.e.midway between the knees and the ankles). There is no sin on him in that which is between it and the ankles. And, whatever is below this is in the Fire (of Jahannum). He (Rasulullah —sallallahu alayhi wasallam) repeated this statement) three times, And, he said: Allah will not look (with mercy) at the person who hangs his izaar in pride." (Abu Dawood and Ibn Maajah)
(4) Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: "I passed by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) while my trousers was hanging (i.e.below the ankles). He then exclaimed: O Abdullah! Raise your izaar. I then raised it (a bit). Then he (Rasulullah- sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: Raise it more! I then raised it more. Thereafter I was always concious of it." Some people asked: Until where (did you raise it)? He (Ibn Umar) said: Until midway of the forleg." (Muslim)
(5) Ubaid Bin Khaalid (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: While I was walking in Madinah, (I heard) someone behind me say: "Raise your izaar! Verily it (raising the garment) is better for piety and preservation (of the garment)." I then looked behind and observed that it was Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). I then said: O Rasulullah! It is a simple (of inferior quality and price) garment. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) commented: "What,is there not for you in me an example (to follow)?" When I looked (at Rasulullah’s garment), his izaar was midway on his forlegs." (Tirmizi)
(6) Salmah Bin Akwa’ (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: "Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhu) would wear his trousers midway on his forlegs, and he would say: ‘So was the izaar of my Companion, i.e.Nabi -sallallahu alayhi wasallam)." (Tirmizi)
(7) Huzaifah Bin Yamaan (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) took hold of the flesh of my forleg (or of his forleg) and said: ‘This is the location for the izaar. If you are not satisfied (with this position), then a bit lower. And if you are still not satisfied, then know that the izaar has no right in the ankles." (Tirmizi)
COMMENT
Commenting on these Hadith narration, Hadhrat Shaikh Muhammad Zakariyya (rahmatullah alayh) writes:
"Severe warnings have been recorded for wearing the lungi, trousers, etc. below the ankles. That section (below the ankles) on which the garment hangs will be burnt in the Fire (of Jahannum). In view of this type (of severe) warnings (of punishment) in the ahadith, special attention should be paid to this matter. But, on the contrary in our age, the garments are specially (i.e.intentionally) worn below the ankles. To Allah does the complainer (register his complaint)."
Inspite of the many unambiguous ahadith explicitly prohibiting the kuffaar style of wearing the trousers below the ankles, molvis in this age are devoting special time on their radio channels to negate what Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has commanded.
THE THRUST
Any level-headed and unbiased Muslim in search of the truth will understand after a perusal of the aforementioned ahadith that wearing the trousers below the ankles is haraam.
In Hadith No. 5, Ubaid Bin Khaalid (radhiyallahu anhu) was wearing his garment below his ankles. He was walking in the streets of Madinah when Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) ordered him to raise his izaar above the ankles. In this Hadith, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) presented two reasons for wearing the trousers above the ankles.In this style (of the Sunnah) is greater piety in view of the fact that it firstly is in conflict with the style of the kuffaar. Secondly, when a Muslim conciously abstains from emulating the style of the kuffaar, he rises in rank of taqwa. Following the method of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is an incumbent requirement of Taqwa, hence he said that wearing the trousers above the ankles is ‘atqaa’ (more pious). It thus flows from this reasoning presented by Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) that wearing the the garment below the ankles is not in conformity with taqwa. Whether we understand the relationship between this style and taqwa is of no significance. Since Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has offered this explanation, it is the fardh duty of every Mu’min to blindly accept it.
The second argument which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) presented for his command to wear the garment above the ankles is that this style is ‘abqaa’ for the garment. In other words the garment will be better preserved against the dirt and filth of the road and in this way be better protected. The Mu’min’s trousers should not serve the function of the street-sweeper.
It is significant that in this Hadith, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) did not tender the argument of pride. Since he was aware that the Sahaabi was not wearing his garment below the ankles on account of pride, he did not mention pride on this occasion. However, when the Sahaabi did not understand the argument, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) broached the subject from another angle. He asked: Is my example and way not sufficient? In otherwords, for the Mu’min the acts, practices and example of the Rasool are more than adequate. There is no need to search for reasons and wisdoms for the ahkaam (laws of the Deen). The example of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is compulsorily imposed on Muslims by the Qur’aan Majeed. There is no need to look elsewhere and further than this. It thus does not behove a Muslim, least of all a learned man, to dig out technicalities and by distortion present these in justification of the endeavour to negate the style and custom of Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam).
In Hadith No. 6 Hadhrat Uthmaan (Radhiyallahu anhu), the third Khalifah, long after the demise of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) commented on the practice of wearing the trousers above the ankles. Everyone knows and accepts that he had no pride. If the order to wear the trousers above the ankles was based on pride, Hadhrat Uthmaan and all the Sahaabah would not have been so meticulous in observing this injunction. They would have worn their trousers below their ankles since they were bereft of pride. They had attained the loftiest heights in the reformation of the nafs. There were no better, no more pious and no humbler community on earth than the Sahaabah who were thoroughly purified of all spiritual maladies by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Yet, inspite of their high stage of humility, they adhered meticulously to the style of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
Everyone who has studied a bit of the history of the Sahaabah, is aware that Hadhrat Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) was such a staunch and ardent follower of the minutest details of the Sunnah, that people believed that he would become insane. Pride was never the reason for him having worn his trousers below his ankles. When Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) saw this, he commanded him to raise his garment midway between the knees and the ankles. The issue of pride never featured in his wearing his trousers below his ankles nor in the argument of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) on the occasion when he issued his instruction to this devotee of the Sunnah.
PRIDE
In some narrations the reason for wearing the trousers below the ankles is stated as pride. While this was the actual reason in those times for this prohibited style, it was not always the case with everyone who would wear his trousers below his ankles. Hence, we find Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) issuing stern warnings and threats of the punishment of the Fire for those who wear their trousers in the fashion of the proud people. So whether one wears the trousers below the ankles for the sake of pride or not, one is undoubtedly, imitating the style of the proud ones and the style of the kuffaar. Imitating the kuffaar by itself is a factor of prohibition.
THE HIDDEN DISEASE
Now the question to be asked is: Why would a molvi advocate a style which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had prohibited. He did not only present pride as the reason for the prohibition. So why is there so much concern to negate a Sunnah style? Leaving aside the technical questions and academic rulings, it can be simply understood that the permanent practice and style of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his Sahaabah were to wear their garments above the ankles, not below their ankles.
That wearing the trousers above the ankles is an irrefutable Sunnah practice, will be acknowledged by all Muslims, even the modernists and the liberal molvis. on the assumption that it is not haraam to wear the trousers below the ankles, then too, why should Muslims who claim to love Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam) have a desire to scuttle this Sunnah practice and in its place follow the style of the kuffaar? Whose style is it to wear the trousers above the ankles? And, whose style is it to wear it below the ankles? What does the Imaan of a Mu’min demand? Follow the style of Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam) or the style of the kuffaar? Why is there such a strong aversion in the ranks of the Muslims for the style of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)?
What goes on in the heart of a molvi who advocates a style abhorred by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)? Surely there must be some hidden disease (mardh) lurking somewhere in such a heart. It is inconceivable that a Mu’min of healthy Imaan will ever stoop so low as to scrape the very bottom of the barrel of spiritual corruprion. Remember that to negate a preference of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), to feel ashamed of the style of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and to present devious arguments to distort and deny what Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had commanded, are worse than consuming liquor, worse than fornication and worse than all the major sins put together. Such attitude is kufr.
HADHRAT ABU BAKR
The solitary narration which the denigrators of Rasulullah’s practice are able to produce as ‘evidence’ is the Hadith in which it is mentioned that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) allowed Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu anhu) to wear his garment below his ankles. To present this Hadith in substantiation of the claim, the aim of which is to negate the style of Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam), is ludicrous and utterly baseless. The Hadith in question is very clear as for the reason of the permission granted to Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu anhu) who was highly perturbed by his inability to maintain his garment above his ankles. He therefore, discussed this matter with Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Hadhrat Abu Bakr (Radhiyallahu anhu) was a man with a big stomach. Inspite of all his efforts to keep his garment in place, he failed. His garment would repeatedly slide down over his ankles. The Hadith in question, explicitly mentions this fact. In view of this condition and his inability to retain his garment in position above his ankles, he was exempted from the prohibition. But he had a valid reason. What valid reason do the modernists and the liberal molvis have? There are always exceptions to general rules. But the exceptions do not cancel out the law or the rule. The rule remains in place. Furthermore, why do the scoffers of Rasulullah’s style cast a blind eye to all the ahadith of prohibition and cling onto this solitary narration which in no way negates the prohibition stated so emphatically in the other narrations?
IMAAM SHAAFI
Like a drowning man, the modernist molvi tries to cling to every floating straw that passes his way. Entirely bereft of proper Shar’i arguments to bolster his corrupt view and enmity for Rasulullah’s dress style, the molvi claims that according to Imaam Shaafi (Rahmatullah alayh) it is permissible to wear the trousers below the ankles.
Let us for a moment assume that what the molvi tendered is correct. The question now is: Why does the Hanafi molvi resort to a view of Imaam Shaafi (Rahmatullah alayh), especially on an issue for which there is absolutely no need to adopt the view of another Math-hab? If it was a critical issue or an emergency or some urgent need, then in terms of the principles of the Hanafi Math-hab, a pious and experienced Mufti will have the right to issue a Fatwa on the basis of one of the other Math-habs among the Four Math-habs. But in this case of wearing the trousers, there is absolutely no such expediency.
When a Hanafi molvi ignores the views and fatwas of the authorities of his own Math-hab and clings to an opinion of another Math-hab, it follows that there is no flexibility for his baseless view in his own Math-hab, hence he had to look elsewhere for aid. His act in itself is sufficient testimony for the claim that according to the Hanafi Fuqaha and Ulama and Auliya, wearing the trousers below the ankles is haraam.
THE ACTUAL POSITION
The liberal molvi claims that according to Imaam Shaafi (rahmatullah alayh) wearing the trousers below the ankles is permissible. His claim is baseless. Imaam Shaafi does not say that "it is permissible". According to the Shaafi Math-hab there are different degrees of prohibition for the style of wearing the trousers below the ankles. Explaining this, Imaam Nawawi (a Shaafi authority) states in his Sharhul Muslim
"It is not permissible to hang the garment below the ankles if it is for pride. If it is for a reason other than pride, it is Makrooh.
The Mustahab requirement is midway of the calfs (the forlegs) as it is stated in the Hadith of Ibn Umar.
Midway of the forlegs is Mustahab. Below this limit until the ankles is permissible without it being Makrooh. What descends below the ankles is Mamnoo’ (prohibited). If it is for pride, then the prohibition is of the haraam category (i.e.Makrooh Tahrimi). And, if it is not for pride, the prohibition is of the tanzihi category (i.e.Makrooh Tanzihi)."
Makrooh Tanzihi does not mean ‘permissible’. It remains a detestable act in the Shariah. In fact, persistence on a Makrooh Tanzihi act transforms it into Makrooh Tahrimi which is sinful and a punishable offence. It makes a man a faasiq. Clutching at straws is not Shar’i evidence for a claim.
THE FACTORS
From the aforegoing explanation it will be understood that there are several factors for the prohibition of wearing the garment below the ankles:
(a) It is the style of the kuffaar. Whoever imitates the kuffaar becomes of them.
(b) It is the way of the mutakabbireen (proud people). So whether one has pride or not, is immaterial. The fact that the mutakabbireen’s style is adopted in itself is a grave sin.
(c) The opposite style (wearing above the ankles) is ‘atqaa’ and abqaa’ according to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
(d) Wearing the garment above the ankles is part of the Uswah-e-Hasanah (Beautiful Life Pattern) of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The Qur’aan commands adoption of this Sunnah.
(e) The trousers has no haqq (right) on the ankles according to the explicit pronouncement of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
(f) What is below the ankles will be in the Fire of Jahannum.
In view of all these factors of prohibition, the arguments of the modernist and liberal molvis have absolutely no validity. These molvis should also understand that in airing their liberal, modernist and baatil views, they do not have the support of a single one of our Akaabir Ulama. Our advice is that they should utilize their radio channels constructively to aid the Deen, not to breakdown Islam and its Culture, for then, there will be absolute justification for branding their organs of transmission as radio shaitaan and channel shaitaan.
By Mujlisul Ulama of South Africa
When a modernist Muslim criticizes the dress style and appearance of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah, we in this age in which kufr preponderates, are not surprised. Immersed in the kufr concepts and liberalism of the western kuffaar, it is just natural and logical for modernists to denigrate every teaching of the Sunnah which conflicts with the tastes and hues of western culture. In fact, even Ulama have become so terribly desensitized with the kufr of the modernists as a consequence of their mutual association and their dubious and baseless policies of ‘hikmat’ and diplomacy, that they (the Ulama) too have become chronic victims of the maladies of kufr and liberalism.
So while we cannot be surprised when modernists criticize, mock and sneer at the dress styles and appearance of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his Sahaabah, there is not only surprise but shock when molvis —products of Darul Ulooms - who purport to be followers of the Ulama of the Sunnah, resort to labyrinthal arguments in order to justify styles which are in conflict with not only the practical example of the Nabi, but in diametric opposition to his explicit statements of prohibition pertaining to certain dress styles.
THE TROUSERS
Every molvi is aware or should be aware that ALL the Books of Hadith contain many authentic ahadith clearly explaining the style of Rasulullah’s izaar. There is absolutely no difference of opinion among any of the innumerable authorities of the Shariah from the very inception of Islam that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his Sahaabah always wore their izaar and trousers above their ankles.
In addition to their practical example, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah verbally propagated in explicit terms the prohibition of wearing the trousers below the ankles. This style is completely unrelated to age and time. There was no incumbency of the era to wear the trousers in this manner nor were there any physical or geographic restraints or factors which compelled the adoption of this style. on the contrary, the age and the people of the time demanded that the trousers be worn below the ankles in exactly the same way as modernists, kuffaar and Muslims ashamed of the Sunnah Culture are advocating today.
THE REASON
In order to accomodate the liberal fancies of the western kuffaar, molvis in this age of corruption, have hooked onto a legless and baseless argument to justify, propagate and even praise the kaafir style of wearing the trousers below the ankles—a style which is in clear opposition to the style and command of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
The modernist molvis of the liberal cult of westernism are arguing that the reason for the prohibition to wear the trousers below the ankles was pride. Their argument goes that on account of pride, the style was prohibited. But if there is no pride then wearing the trousers below the ankles is permissible, in fact commendable by implication of their baseless and satanic arguments which they voice over their radio channels.
Why is it haraam for a Muslim to wear a crucifix around his neck or arm? Why should it be haraam for a Muslim to keep a small idol of Bhagwan or Buddha in his pocket or display it in his home. Why should this be haraam if the Muslim concerned has no beliefs of shirk or kufr. He simply regards these items as ‘artifacts’ and symbols of ‘history’. He does not believe in these idols. He does not worship them. But we can claim without fear of contradiction that even the modernist molvis have as yet not descended to the level of corruption which will constrain them to say that keeping such idols is permissible if the reason is not shirk/worship. Although this is still the case presently, we know that there will soon come a time when keeping and admiring even these instruments of shirk and kufr will be justified and made legal by the presentation of the argument that the reason for the initial prohibition was the belief of shirk which had not yet been completely eradicated from the hearts of the new converts to Islam.
CATEGORIC PROHIBITION
When the Shariah categorically prohibits an act or practice, the prohibition will endure regardless of the reason for which it was initially prohibited. Reciting the qira’t jahran (aloud) in Zuhr and Asr was prohibited initially on account of a particular reason which soon after the prohibition no longer existed. But inspite of the disappearance of the reason for the prohibition, the hukm of Sirri (silent) recitation will endure until the day of Qiyaamah.
Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam) said that he who plays chess is like one who has dipped his fingers in the blood of a swine. Surely there was a cogent reason for this stern prohibition. Now, regardless of whether that reason exists in some cases or not, the prohibition of playing chess will remain until the day of Qiyaamah. In fact, the prohibition has been taken further by the Fuqaha (the Authorities of the Shariah). This prohibition has been extended to all similar games of the kuffaar.
THE AHADITH
We shall now present the relevant authentic Ahadith on the issue of the trousers below and above the ankles and then proceed to further refute and negate the utterly baseless and devious arguments tendered by modernists molvis to beguile the Ummah.
(1) Abu Hurairah (Radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: "Whatever of the garment is below the ankles will be in the Fire (of Jahannum).(Bukhaari)
(2) Ibn Umar (Radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: "Verily the Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: Whoever hangs his garment in pride, Allah will not look at him (with mercy) on the day of Qiyaamah." (Bukhaari and Muslim)
(3) Abu Saeed al-Kudri (Radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: "I heard Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) saying: The izaar of the Mu’min is halfway on the forlegs (i.e.midway between the knees and the ankles). There is no sin on him in that which is between it and the ankles. And, whatever is below this is in the Fire (of Jahannum). He (Rasulullah —sallallahu alayhi wasallam) repeated this statement) three times, And, he said: Allah will not look (with mercy) at the person who hangs his izaar in pride." (Abu Dawood and Ibn Maajah)
(4) Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: "I passed by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) while my trousers was hanging (i.e.below the ankles). He then exclaimed: O Abdullah! Raise your izaar. I then raised it (a bit). Then he (Rasulullah- sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: Raise it more! I then raised it more. Thereafter I was always concious of it." Some people asked: Until where (did you raise it)? He (Ibn Umar) said: Until midway of the forleg." (Muslim)
(5) Ubaid Bin Khaalid (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: While I was walking in Madinah, (I heard) someone behind me say: "Raise your izaar! Verily it (raising the garment) is better for piety and preservation (of the garment)." I then looked behind and observed that it was Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). I then said: O Rasulullah! It is a simple (of inferior quality and price) garment. Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) commented: "What,is there not for you in me an example (to follow)?" When I looked (at Rasulullah’s garment), his izaar was midway on his forlegs." (Tirmizi)
(6) Salmah Bin Akwa’ (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: "Uthmaan (radhiyallahu anhu) would wear his trousers midway on his forlegs, and he would say: ‘So was the izaar of my Companion, i.e.Nabi -sallallahu alayhi wasallam)." (Tirmizi)
(7) Huzaifah Bin Yamaan (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates: Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) took hold of the flesh of my forleg (or of his forleg) and said: ‘This is the location for the izaar. If you are not satisfied (with this position), then a bit lower. And if you are still not satisfied, then know that the izaar has no right in the ankles." (Tirmizi)
COMMENT
Commenting on these Hadith narration, Hadhrat Shaikh Muhammad Zakariyya (rahmatullah alayh) writes:
"Severe warnings have been recorded for wearing the lungi, trousers, etc. below the ankles. That section (below the ankles) on which the garment hangs will be burnt in the Fire (of Jahannum). In view of this type (of severe) warnings (of punishment) in the ahadith, special attention should be paid to this matter. But, on the contrary in our age, the garments are specially (i.e.intentionally) worn below the ankles. To Allah does the complainer (register his complaint)."
Inspite of the many unambiguous ahadith explicitly prohibiting the kuffaar style of wearing the trousers below the ankles, molvis in this age are devoting special time on their radio channels to negate what Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has commanded.
THE THRUST
Any level-headed and unbiased Muslim in search of the truth will understand after a perusal of the aforementioned ahadith that wearing the trousers below the ankles is haraam.
In Hadith No. 5, Ubaid Bin Khaalid (radhiyallahu anhu) was wearing his garment below his ankles. He was walking in the streets of Madinah when Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) ordered him to raise his izaar above the ankles. In this Hadith, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) presented two reasons for wearing the trousers above the ankles.In this style (of the Sunnah) is greater piety in view of the fact that it firstly is in conflict with the style of the kuffaar. Secondly, when a Muslim conciously abstains from emulating the style of the kuffaar, he rises in rank of taqwa. Following the method of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is an incumbent requirement of Taqwa, hence he said that wearing the trousers above the ankles is ‘atqaa’ (more pious). It thus flows from this reasoning presented by Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) that wearing the the garment below the ankles is not in conformity with taqwa. Whether we understand the relationship between this style and taqwa is of no significance. Since Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has offered this explanation, it is the fardh duty of every Mu’min to blindly accept it.
The second argument which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) presented for his command to wear the garment above the ankles is that this style is ‘abqaa’ for the garment. In other words the garment will be better preserved against the dirt and filth of the road and in this way be better protected. The Mu’min’s trousers should not serve the function of the street-sweeper.
It is significant that in this Hadith, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) did not tender the argument of pride. Since he was aware that the Sahaabi was not wearing his garment below the ankles on account of pride, he did not mention pride on this occasion. However, when the Sahaabi did not understand the argument, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) broached the subject from another angle. He asked: Is my example and way not sufficient? In otherwords, for the Mu’min the acts, practices and example of the Rasool are more than adequate. There is no need to search for reasons and wisdoms for the ahkaam (laws of the Deen). The example of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is compulsorily imposed on Muslims by the Qur’aan Majeed. There is no need to look elsewhere and further than this. It thus does not behove a Muslim, least of all a learned man, to dig out technicalities and by distortion present these in justification of the endeavour to negate the style and custom of Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam).
In Hadith No. 6 Hadhrat Uthmaan (Radhiyallahu anhu), the third Khalifah, long after the demise of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) commented on the practice of wearing the trousers above the ankles. Everyone knows and accepts that he had no pride. If the order to wear the trousers above the ankles was based on pride, Hadhrat Uthmaan and all the Sahaabah would not have been so meticulous in observing this injunction. They would have worn their trousers below their ankles since they were bereft of pride. They had attained the loftiest heights in the reformation of the nafs. There were no better, no more pious and no humbler community on earth than the Sahaabah who were thoroughly purified of all spiritual maladies by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Yet, inspite of their high stage of humility, they adhered meticulously to the style of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
Everyone who has studied a bit of the history of the Sahaabah, is aware that Hadhrat Ibn Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) was such a staunch and ardent follower of the minutest details of the Sunnah, that people believed that he would become insane. Pride was never the reason for him having worn his trousers below his ankles. When Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) saw this, he commanded him to raise his garment midway between the knees and the ankles. The issue of pride never featured in his wearing his trousers below his ankles nor in the argument of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) on the occasion when he issued his instruction to this devotee of the Sunnah.
PRIDE
In some narrations the reason for wearing the trousers below the ankles is stated as pride. While this was the actual reason in those times for this prohibited style, it was not always the case with everyone who would wear his trousers below his ankles. Hence, we find Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) issuing stern warnings and threats of the punishment of the Fire for those who wear their trousers in the fashion of the proud people. So whether one wears the trousers below the ankles for the sake of pride or not, one is undoubtedly, imitating the style of the proud ones and the style of the kuffaar. Imitating the kuffaar by itself is a factor of prohibition.
THE HIDDEN DISEASE
Now the question to be asked is: Why would a molvi advocate a style which Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had prohibited. He did not only present pride as the reason for the prohibition. So why is there so much concern to negate a Sunnah style? Leaving aside the technical questions and academic rulings, it can be simply understood that the permanent practice and style of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his Sahaabah were to wear their garments above the ankles, not below their ankles.
That wearing the trousers above the ankles is an irrefutable Sunnah practice, will be acknowledged by all Muslims, even the modernists and the liberal molvis. on the assumption that it is not haraam to wear the trousers below the ankles, then too, why should Muslims who claim to love Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam) have a desire to scuttle this Sunnah practice and in its place follow the style of the kuffaar? Whose style is it to wear the trousers above the ankles? And, whose style is it to wear it below the ankles? What does the Imaan of a Mu’min demand? Follow the style of Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam) or the style of the kuffaar? Why is there such a strong aversion in the ranks of the Muslims for the style of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)?
What goes on in the heart of a molvi who advocates a style abhorred by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)? Surely there must be some hidden disease (mardh) lurking somewhere in such a heart. It is inconceivable that a Mu’min of healthy Imaan will ever stoop so low as to scrape the very bottom of the barrel of spiritual corruprion. Remember that to negate a preference of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), to feel ashamed of the style of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and to present devious arguments to distort and deny what Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had commanded, are worse than consuming liquor, worse than fornication and worse than all the major sins put together. Such attitude is kufr.
HADHRAT ABU BAKR
The solitary narration which the denigrators of Rasulullah’s practice are able to produce as ‘evidence’ is the Hadith in which it is mentioned that Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) allowed Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu anhu) to wear his garment below his ankles. To present this Hadith in substantiation of the claim, the aim of which is to negate the style of Rasulullah (sallalahu alayhi wasallam), is ludicrous and utterly baseless. The Hadith in question is very clear as for the reason of the permission granted to Hadhrat Abu Bakr (radhiyallahu anhu) who was highly perturbed by his inability to maintain his garment above his ankles. He therefore, discussed this matter with Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Hadhrat Abu Bakr (Radhiyallahu anhu) was a man with a big stomach. Inspite of all his efforts to keep his garment in place, he failed. His garment would repeatedly slide down over his ankles. The Hadith in question, explicitly mentions this fact. In view of this condition and his inability to retain his garment in position above his ankles, he was exempted from the prohibition. But he had a valid reason. What valid reason do the modernists and the liberal molvis have? There are always exceptions to general rules. But the exceptions do not cancel out the law or the rule. The rule remains in place. Furthermore, why do the scoffers of Rasulullah’s style cast a blind eye to all the ahadith of prohibition and cling onto this solitary narration which in no way negates the prohibition stated so emphatically in the other narrations?
IMAAM SHAAFI
Like a drowning man, the modernist molvi tries to cling to every floating straw that passes his way. Entirely bereft of proper Shar’i arguments to bolster his corrupt view and enmity for Rasulullah’s dress style, the molvi claims that according to Imaam Shaafi (Rahmatullah alayh) it is permissible to wear the trousers below the ankles.
Let us for a moment assume that what the molvi tendered is correct. The question now is: Why does the Hanafi molvi resort to a view of Imaam Shaafi (Rahmatullah alayh), especially on an issue for which there is absolutely no need to adopt the view of another Math-hab? If it was a critical issue or an emergency or some urgent need, then in terms of the principles of the Hanafi Math-hab, a pious and experienced Mufti will have the right to issue a Fatwa on the basis of one of the other Math-habs among the Four Math-habs. But in this case of wearing the trousers, there is absolutely no such expediency.
When a Hanafi molvi ignores the views and fatwas of the authorities of his own Math-hab and clings to an opinion of another Math-hab, it follows that there is no flexibility for his baseless view in his own Math-hab, hence he had to look elsewhere for aid. His act in itself is sufficient testimony for the claim that according to the Hanafi Fuqaha and Ulama and Auliya, wearing the trousers below the ankles is haraam.
THE ACTUAL POSITION
The liberal molvi claims that according to Imaam Shaafi (rahmatullah alayh) wearing the trousers below the ankles is permissible. His claim is baseless. Imaam Shaafi does not say that "it is permissible". According to the Shaafi Math-hab there are different degrees of prohibition for the style of wearing the trousers below the ankles. Explaining this, Imaam Nawawi (a Shaafi authority) states in his Sharhul Muslim
"It is not permissible to hang the garment below the ankles if it is for pride. If it is for a reason other than pride, it is Makrooh.
The Mustahab requirement is midway of the calfs (the forlegs) as it is stated in the Hadith of Ibn Umar.
Midway of the forlegs is Mustahab. Below this limit until the ankles is permissible without it being Makrooh. What descends below the ankles is Mamnoo’ (prohibited). If it is for pride, then the prohibition is of the haraam category (i.e.Makrooh Tahrimi). And, if it is not for pride, the prohibition is of the tanzihi category (i.e.Makrooh Tanzihi)."
Makrooh Tanzihi does not mean ‘permissible’. It remains a detestable act in the Shariah. In fact, persistence on a Makrooh Tanzihi act transforms it into Makrooh Tahrimi which is sinful and a punishable offence. It makes a man a faasiq. Clutching at straws is not Shar’i evidence for a claim.
THE FACTORS
From the aforegoing explanation it will be understood that there are several factors for the prohibition of wearing the garment below the ankles:
(a) It is the style of the kuffaar. Whoever imitates the kuffaar becomes of them.
(b) It is the way of the mutakabbireen (proud people). So whether one has pride or not, is immaterial. The fact that the mutakabbireen’s style is adopted in itself is a grave sin.
(c) The opposite style (wearing above the ankles) is ‘atqaa’ and abqaa’ according to Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
(d) Wearing the garment above the ankles is part of the Uswah-e-Hasanah (Beautiful Life Pattern) of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). The Qur’aan commands adoption of this Sunnah.
(e) The trousers has no haqq (right) on the ankles according to the explicit pronouncement of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
(f) What is below the ankles will be in the Fire of Jahannum.
In view of all these factors of prohibition, the arguments of the modernist and liberal molvis have absolutely no validity. These molvis should also understand that in airing their liberal, modernist and baatil views, they do not have the support of a single one of our Akaabir Ulama. Our advice is that they should utilize their radio channels constructively to aid the Deen, not to breakdown Islam and its Culture, for then, there will be absolute justification for branding their organs of transmission as radio shaitaan and channel shaitaan.
Tuesday, December 08, 2009
THE EXERCISE OF PAAS ANFAAS
THE EXERCISE OF PAAS ANFAAS
Taken from theMajlis.net
For presence of mind, increase in eagerness and improvement of memory the exercise known as Paas Anfaas is most efficacious while it is the simplest of exercises (ashghaal). This exercise is a breathing exercise and its method is as follows:
Take a deep breadth. While inhaling concentrate on the word اَلله. Exhale vigorously. While exhaling concentrate on هُوْ. Do this repeatedly.
In the beginning practise this exercise in solitude and do it until one feels a warm sensation. Thereafter, this exercise should be carried out at all times while walking, sitting, etc. In all states endeavour to establish this concentration. In the beginning some effort is required. However, after a short while one’s breathing will be so conditioned that it (the breathing) will be along this pattern without one consciously resorting to it.
Taken from theMajlis.net
For presence of mind, increase in eagerness and improvement of memory the exercise known as Paas Anfaas is most efficacious while it is the simplest of exercises (ashghaal). This exercise is a breathing exercise and its method is as follows:
Take a deep breadth. While inhaling concentrate on the word اَلله. Exhale vigorously. While exhaling concentrate on هُوْ. Do this repeatedly.
In the beginning practise this exercise in solitude and do it until one feels a warm sensation. Thereafter, this exercise should be carried out at all times while walking, sitting, etc. In all states endeavour to establish this concentration. In the beginning some effort is required. However, after a short while one’s breathing will be so conditioned that it (the breathing) will be along this pattern without one consciously resorting to it.
Sunday, December 06, 2009
THE DEVOTIONAL PRACTICES OF THE SAALIK
THE DEVOTIONAL PRACTICES OF THE SAALIK
by Majlis.net
The ma’mulaat or devotional practices which the Saalik has to adopt are vastly beneficial in this Path. These ma’mulaat are listed hereunder.
TAHAJJUD: The Saalik should perform four, eight or twelve rak’ats in the latter part of the night. If he is unable to do so in the latter part of the night then as the last resort he should perform at least four raka’ts (with the intention of Tahajjud) at the time of Ishaa.
THE THIRTEEN TASBEEH: Either at the time of Tahajjud or after Ishaa Salaat, the following should be recited:
لآ اِلَهَ اِلاَّ الله
a. Laa ilaaha il lal laah (Two Tasbeehs) i.e. 200 times). This is called the Tasbeeh of Nafl (negative) and Ithbaat (positive).
b. Il-lal laahu (Four Tasberhs–400 times) اِلاَّ اللهُ
c. Allaahu Allaah (Six Tasbeehs–600 times) اَللهُ اَللهُ
d. Allaahu (One Tasbeeh - 100 times) اَللهُ
Between the Sunnat and Fardh of Fajr, 41 times Surah Faatifiah, beginning each time with Bismillaah.
AFTER FAJR SALAAT: Surah Yaaseen Shareef, some tilaawat of the Qur’aan Shareef, at ]east a quarter Juz; those who have memorized Surahs should recite all such Surahs (if they are unable to make tilaawat); whenever opportunity affords, one Manzil of Munaajaat-e-Maqbool together with Hizbul Jiryaa; and 41 times the following:
This should also be recited at least three times before making Thikr.
ISHRAAQ: Perform two or four raka’ts Ishraaq Salaat.
CHAASHT: Immediately after Ishraaq or a bit later perform two, four or six raka’ts.
AFTER ZUHR: Recite Surah Innaa Fatahnaa laka (Surah Fatah) and make Thikr of the word, ا لله as much as time permits, or recite اَ للهُ اَلله (Allaahu Allah) five hundred times.
AFTER ASR: Recite Surah Amma Yatasaa aloon (Surah Nabaa) and one Tasbeeh, the Aayat:
AFTER MAGHRIB: Four raka’ts Salaatul Awwaabeen or six raka’ts. If time permits make Thikr of Allaah اَلله. Recite Surah Waaqiah.
AFTER ISHAA: Recite Surah Mulk and Surah Alif Laam Meem Sajdah. Recite Istighfaar in the following way:
Recite the Istighfaar 100 times or 70 times. If one feels very sleepy or tired then recite it 41 times.
MUHAASABAH: i.e. to take stock of one’s deeds: At the time of going to bed reflect about your deeds. When recalling a righteous act, be thankful (make shukr), and when recalling a sinful act, be regretful. Remind your nafs of the rebuke and punishment of Allah Ta’ala for sins and pledge not to approach sin in the future. During the day recall this pledge.
CONSTANT THIKR: While reclining, sitting, walking, etc., always recite the Kalimah. Recite
لآ اِلَهَ اِلاَّ الله
constantly and whenever the breadth breaks, add:
مُحَمَّدٌ رَّسُوْلُ ا للهِ صَلَّى ا للهُ تَعَا لى عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمْ
After every Salaat recite Aayatul Kursi and Tasbeeh Faatimah, i.e. Insert Arabic سُبْحَانَ الله 33 times; اَلْحَمْدُ الله 33 times and اَلله اَكْبَرُ 34 times. If time allows, recite the following Tasbeeh a hundred times after Zuhr, Maghrib and Ishaa:
سُبْحَانَ الله وَ اَلْحَمْدُ الله وَ لآ اِلَهَ اِلاَّ اللهُ وَ اَلله اَكْبَرُ
If one has the opportunity it is more efficacious and beneficial to fix one or two times daily for the Thikr of Isme Zaat instead of spreading the Thikr over a period or time. If the Isme Zaat is recited six or twelve thousand times, its beneficial effect will expedited.
by Majlis.net
The ma’mulaat or devotional practices which the Saalik has to adopt are vastly beneficial in this Path. These ma’mulaat are listed hereunder.
TAHAJJUD: The Saalik should perform four, eight or twelve rak’ats in the latter part of the night. If he is unable to do so in the latter part of the night then as the last resort he should perform at least four raka’ts (with the intention of Tahajjud) at the time of Ishaa.
THE THIRTEEN TASBEEH: Either at the time of Tahajjud or after Ishaa Salaat, the following should be recited:
لآ اِلَهَ اِلاَّ الله
a. Laa ilaaha il lal laah (Two Tasbeehs) i.e. 200 times). This is called the Tasbeeh of Nafl (negative) and Ithbaat (positive).
b. Il-lal laahu (Four Tasberhs–400 times) اِلاَّ اللهُ
c. Allaahu Allaah (Six Tasbeehs–600 times) اَللهُ اَللهُ
d. Allaahu (One Tasbeeh - 100 times) اَللهُ
Between the Sunnat and Fardh of Fajr, 41 times Surah Faatifiah, beginning each time with Bismillaah.
AFTER FAJR SALAAT: Surah Yaaseen Shareef, some tilaawat of the Qur’aan Shareef, at ]east a quarter Juz; those who have memorized Surahs should recite all such Surahs (if they are unable to make tilaawat); whenever opportunity affords, one Manzil of Munaajaat-e-Maqbool together with Hizbul Jiryaa; and 41 times the following:
This should also be recited at least three times before making Thikr.
ISHRAAQ: Perform two or four raka’ts Ishraaq Salaat.
CHAASHT: Immediately after Ishraaq or a bit later perform two, four or six raka’ts.
AFTER ZUHR: Recite Surah Innaa Fatahnaa laka (Surah Fatah) and make Thikr of the word, ا لله as much as time permits, or recite اَ للهُ اَلله (Allaahu Allah) five hundred times.
AFTER ASR: Recite Surah Amma Yatasaa aloon (Surah Nabaa) and one Tasbeeh, the Aayat:
AFTER MAGHRIB: Four raka’ts Salaatul Awwaabeen or six raka’ts. If time permits make Thikr of Allaah اَلله. Recite Surah Waaqiah.
AFTER ISHAA: Recite Surah Mulk and Surah Alif Laam Meem Sajdah. Recite Istighfaar in the following way:
Recite the Istighfaar 100 times or 70 times. If one feels very sleepy or tired then recite it 41 times.
MUHAASABAH: i.e. to take stock of one’s deeds: At the time of going to bed reflect about your deeds. When recalling a righteous act, be thankful (make shukr), and when recalling a sinful act, be regretful. Remind your nafs of the rebuke and punishment of Allah Ta’ala for sins and pledge not to approach sin in the future. During the day recall this pledge.
CONSTANT THIKR: While reclining, sitting, walking, etc., always recite the Kalimah. Recite
لآ اِلَهَ اِلاَّ الله
constantly and whenever the breadth breaks, add:
مُحَمَّدٌ رَّسُوْلُ ا للهِ صَلَّى ا للهُ تَعَا لى عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمْ
After every Salaat recite Aayatul Kursi and Tasbeeh Faatimah, i.e. Insert Arabic سُبْحَانَ الله 33 times; اَلْحَمْدُ الله 33 times and اَلله اَكْبَرُ 34 times. If time allows, recite the following Tasbeeh a hundred times after Zuhr, Maghrib and Ishaa:
سُبْحَانَ الله وَ اَلْحَمْدُ الله وَ لآ اِلَهَ اِلاَّ اللهُ وَ اَلله اَكْبَرُ
If one has the opportunity it is more efficacious and beneficial to fix one or two times daily for the Thikr of Isme Zaat instead of spreading the Thikr over a period or time. If the Isme Zaat is recited six or twelve thousand times, its beneficial effect will expedited.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
