Showing off (riya) in worship

 

Is there any chance of getting blessings from an act ruined by riyaa if one's intentions change to please Allaah after the thought of riyaa has already come? For example, I finish reciting Qu'raan, and the thought of riyaa enters my mind. If I immediately fight this thought with thinking about Allaah, can I still get blessings for my recitation, or is it completely ruined forever because of riyaa, given that the act is over and the riyaa thought came after it was already over?.

Praise be to Allaah.
 

 

Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen said: 

Showing off may affect worship in three
ways: 

1 – When the basic motive for worship is to
be seen by others, such as one who stands and prays so that people will see him, and so that they will praise him for his prayers. This
invalidates the act of worship. 

2 – When it is a factor that develops during
the act of worship, i.e., if the worshipper is initially sincere in his intention towards Allaah, then the idea of showing off develops whilst he
is doing it. In this case one of the following two scenarios must apply: 

(i)               
There is no connection between the first part of his act of worship and the last part, so the first part is valid
in all cases, and the last part is invalid.

For example: a man has
one hundred riyals that he wants to give in charity, so he gives fifty of them in a sincere act of charity. Then the idea of showing off develops
with regard to the remaining fifty. So the first was a sound and accepted act of charity, but the last fifty was an invalid act of charity because
the sincerity was mixed with a desire to show off.

(ii)             
The first part of the act of worship is connected to the last part, in which case one of the following two scenarios must apply:

(a)    
He wards off the idea of showing off and does not give in to it, rather he turns away from it and hates it. This does not have any
effect on him, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Allaah has forgiven my ummah for what crosses their
minds, so long as they do not act upon it or speak of it.”

(b)   
When he gives in to this idea of showing off and does not ward it off. In this case the entire act of worship becomes invalid,
because the first part is connected to the last part. For example, he starts the prayer with a sincere intention towards Allaah, then the idea of
showing off develops in the second rak’ah, so the entire prayer becomes invalid because the first part is connected to the last part. 

3 – The idea of showing off develop after the
act of worship has ended. This does not affect it or invalidate it, because it has been completed soundly, so if showing off occurs after that it
does not affect it. 

It is not showing off if a person feels happy
that the people come to know about his worship, because this developed after he has finished the act of worship.  

It is not showing off if a person feels happy
because he has done an act of worship, because that is a sign of his faith. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:
“Whoever feels happy because of his good deeds and sad because of his bad deeds, that is the believer.” 

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) was asked about that and said:
“That is the first glad tidings of the believer.” 

Majmoo’ Fataawa al-Shaykh Ibn ‘Uthaymeen,
2/29, 30.

He made an amulet with Qur’aanic verses for his wife to wear

 

Two years ago, On my wife's request, I had prepared an amulet consisting of Quranic verses that she wore.I now looked at question
11788. The answer said that it is SHIRK to do so. Since I was not aware that amulets are considered SHIRK, am I still guilty of SHIRK? Please advise.

Praise be to Allaah.
 

 

If an amulet is made with something other than Qur’aan or
du’aa’s narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be
upon him), or if it contains symbols, mumbo-jumbo and strange words that
cannot be understood, then there is scholarly consensus that it is haraam
and constitutes shirk. But if the amulet is made with Qur’aan or du’aa’s
narrated from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him),
then there is a difference of opinion among the salaf, but the correct view
is that it is haraam. See question no.
10543. 

The scholars of the Standing Committee said: 

The scholars are agreed that it is haraam to wear amulets if
they are made with anything other than Qur’aan, but they differed concerning
those that are made with Qur’aan. Some said that it is permissible to wear
them and some said that that is not permissible. The view that it is not
allowed is more likely to be correct because of the general meaning of the
ahaadeeth, and so as to prevent the means that may lead to shirk. 

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah,
1/212 

So you and your wife who asked you for this amulet should
remove it straight away and burn it. You said that you did that and you did
not know that it was shirk, so you are not to be regarded as a mushrik or a
sinner because of this action, since you did not deliberately commit an act
of sin.  Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“And there is no sin on you concerning that in which you
made a mistake, except in regard to what your hearts deliberately intend”

[al-Ahzaab 33:5] 

“Our Lord! Punish us not if we forget or fall into error”

[al-Baqarah 2:286] 

And the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon
him) said: “My ummah is excused for their mistakes, what they forget and
what they are forced to do.” 

This evidence indicates that whoever commits a sin but does
not know it is a sin, is not to blame, and that Allaah has forgiven him. 

And Allaah knows best.

Ruling on referring to tribal customs for judgement

 

When a man commits zina with a woman, the tribe offers compensation to the girl’s family in the form of a payment, the amount of which is determined by tribal custom. It may be noted that the tribe helps the man to pay this money. What is the ruling on helping to pay this money if one belongs to the tribe of the one who did it? What is the ruling on taking this money if one belongs to the tribe of the girl? Please note that this town is ruled by a Christian and he does not rule it in accordance with that which Allaah has revealed (sharee’ah), hence the tribes resorted to tribal laws, which also involve ruling by something other than that which Allaah has revealed.

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly: 

With regard
to this financial compensation, there may be two scenarios: 

1 – When it
is paid only where a woman is forced into zina (rape), where the rapist is
made to pay the mahr to his victim, or to pay the mahr along with
compensation for loss of virginity – if she was a virgin – according to
those who say that this is required. The compensation for loss of virginity
is the difference between the mahr of a virgin and the mahr of one who was
previously married. 

This money
must be paid by the rapist, and the hadd punishment must be carried out on
him, and it must be given to the victim if it is proven that she was forced
into it. 

If that is
the case, then there is no problem with it, rather this is the ruling of
sharee’ah even if it is in accordance with customs. 

If we assume
that they are unable to carry out the hadd punishment, but they can force
the rapist to pay the mahr to his victim, then this is acceptable, because
if it is not possible to do everything, we should do as much as we can do.
Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“So keep
your duty to Allaah and fear Him as much as you can”

[al-Taghaabun 64:16] 

With regard
to obliging the tribe to pay the mahr or help in doing so, there is no basis
for that. Rather it must be paid from the wealth of the rapist, as stated
above. Helping him to pay it means letting the rapist off lightly and
encouraging rape. We will discuss the difference between the mahr and the
compensation (for loss of virginity) below.                         

2 – If that
is the procedure that is followed in all cases of zina, with no distinction
between cases where the woman is forced into it (rape) and cases where she
did it willingly, and the tribe is obliged to help the zaani pay this
compensation, and that is regarded as a general ruling that all the tribes
refer to, this is like a system of prostitution. The Prophet (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) said:  

“The price
of a dog is evil, and the earnings of a prostitute are evil and the earnings
of a cupper are evil.” Narrated by Muslim (1568). 

And he said:
“The price of a dog, the fee of a soothsayer and the earnings of a
prostitute are not permissible.” Narrated by al-Nasaa’i (4293). 

It is
obvious that this tribal law, which is known as saloom, is the ruling
of Jaahiliyyah which is it is not permissible to judge by or to refer to for
judgement, or to help with, because Allaah says (interpretation of the
meaning): 

“And so
judge (you O Muhammad) among them by what Allaah has revealed and follow not
their vain desires, but beware of them lest they turn you (O Muhammad) far
away from some of that which Allaah has sent down to you. And if they turn
away, then know that Allaah’s Will is to punish them for some sins of
theirs. And truly, most of men are Faasiqoon (rebellious and disobedient to
Allaah).

50. Do
they then seek the judgement of (the days of) Ignorance? And who is better
in judgement than Allaah for a people who have firm Faith”

[al-Maa'idah 5:49, 50] 

“And
whosoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, such are the Kaafiroon
(i.e. disbelievers — of a lesser degree as they do not act on Allaah’s
Laws)”

[al-Maa’idah 5:44] 

“Have you
not seen those (hypocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has
been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they
wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taaghoot (false judges)
while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaytaan (Satan) wishes to
lead them far astray”

[al-Nisa’
4:60] 

“But no,
by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they make you (O Muhammad) judge
in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against
your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission”

[al-Nisa’ 4:65] 

And there
are other verses which indicate that it is obligatory to refer for judgement
to the laws of Allaah and to reject the rulings of Jaahiliyyah that go
against them. Allaah has decreed and prescribed that the zaani should be
flogged if he is a virgin and stoned if he is a non-virgin, and this applies
to both men and women. Every ruling that goes against this is a ruling of
jaahiliyyah, which must be rejected and we must strive to abolish it. 

The scholars
stated that referring to Bedouin laws and tribal customs that go against
sharee’ah is kufr. 

Shaykh
Muhammad ibn Ibraaheem (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The sixth (type
of major kufr with regard to referring to laws for judgement) is the law by
which many of the heads of Bedouin clans and tribes rule, based on the
sayings of their forefathers and their customs which they call their
saloom, which they inherited from them and they judge by it and refer to
it for judgement in the event of disputes, based on the rulings of
Jaahiliyyah or turning away from the rulings of Allaah and His Messenger.
There is no power and no strength except with Allaah. End quote from the
essay, Tahkeem al-Qawaaneen. 

Shaykh ‘Abd
al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in an essay entitled
“The ruling on referring for judgement to tribal customs and traditions”: 

From ‘Abd
al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz to whoever among the Muslims reads it: may Allaah help me
and them to find out the truth and follow it. 

Peace be
upon you and the mercy of Allaah and His blessings… 

The reason
for this is to answer some questions that have been asked by one of our
sincere brothers in the Kingdom. He says that in his tribe, and in some
other tribes, there are bad tribal customs for which Allaah has not sent
down any authority, such as not referring for judgement to the Book of
Allaah and the Sunnah of His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be
upon him), and turning instead to tribal customs and ignorant traditions. 

One of these
is the concealment of testimony and not bearing witness out of tribal
loyalty, or bearing false witness out of tribal loyalty also. And there are
other reasons that may lead some people to go against sharee’ah. 

Because of
our duty to be sincere towards Allaah and His slaves, I say – and Allaah is
the source of strength: 

The Muslims
are obliged to refer for judgement to the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of
His Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in all things,
and not to man-made laws or tribal customs. Allaah says (interpretation of
the meaning): 

“Have you
not seen those (hypocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has
been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they
wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taaghoot (false judges)
while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaytaan (Satan) wishes to
lead them far astray”

[al-Nisa’
4:60] 

“Do they
then seek the judgement of (the days of) Ignorance? And who is better in
judgement than Allaah for a people who have firm Faith”

[al-Maa'idah 5:50] 

No Muslim
should give precedence to the rule of anyone other than Allaah over the rule
of Allaah and His Messenger, no matter who he is. Just as worship is for
Allaah alone, so too is the judgement or decision, as He says
(Interpretation of the meaning): 

“The
decision [hukm] is only for Allaah,”

[al-An’aam 6:57]

Referring
for judgement to anything other than the Book of Allaah or the Sunnah of His
Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) is one of the
greatest of evils and the most abhorrent of bad deeds, but as to whether the
one who does that is a kaafir, that is subject to further discussion. Allaah
says (interpretation of the meaning): 

“But no,
by your Lord, they can have no Faith, until they make you (O Muhammad) judge
in all disputes between them, and find in themselves no resistance against
your decisions, and accept (them) with full submission”

[al-Nisa’ 4:65] 

So there is
no faith for the one who does not refer for judgement to Allaah and His
Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) with regard to
the fundamentals of religion and its minor issues and with regard to
disputes concerning rights and duties. Whoever refers for judgement to
anything other than Allaah and His Messenger has referred for judgement to
the Taghoot (false judges). 

Based on
this, the tribal Shaykhs must not judge among the people according to tribal
customs that have no basis in Islam and for which Allaah has not sent down
any authority. Rather they must refer any disputes among their tribes to the
sharee’ah courts. There is no reason why they should reconcile between
disputants in ways that do not go against sharee’ah, so long as they consent
to that and there is no compulsion, because the Prophet (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Reconciliation between Muslims is
permissible, except a reconciliation that forbids something that is
permitted or permits something that is forbidden.” And all the tribes should
not agree to anything but the rule of Allaah and His Messenger … End quote
from Majmoo’ Fataawa wa Maqaalaat al-Shaykh IbnBaaz (5/142). 

The Standing
Committee for Issuing Fatwas was asked: What is the ruling if two men argue
and refer for judgement to customary laws, and each of them chooses someone
they think is of good character, and they agree to whoever among the tribal
Shaykhs they choose to judge between them, and they sit before him and each
of them states his case against the other. If it is a simple case, he rules
usually rules that the one who is in the wrong should slaughter an animal
and invite his opponent to the feast; and if it is a serious case he gives a
judgement of al-janbiyyah, which in the past meant that they would strike
him on the head with a sharp instrument until his blood flowed. But nowadays
they pay the janbiyyah in money and they call this reconciliation. This is
something that is widespread among the tribes and they call it a madhhab,
and if you do not approve of what they do, they call you qaati’ al-madhhab
(one who has forsaken the madhhab). What is the ruling on this? 

Answer: The
Muslims must refer for judgement to Islamic sharee’ah, not to tribal laws.
What you have mentioned is not a reconciliation in the true sense, rather it
is referring for judgement to customary principles. Hence they call it a
madhhab, and they say of the one who does not agree with the ruling that he
has forsaken the madhhab. Their calling it a reconciliation does not alter
the fact that it is referring for judgement to Taghoot (false judges). The
ruling that they stipulate, of slaughtering an animal or striking the head
with a sharp instrument until the blood flows is not a shar’i ruling. 

Based on
this, the tribal Shaykhs should not judge between people in this manner, and
the Muslims should not refer to them for judgement, until they (the Shaykhs)
turn away from that to Islamic laws. Today – praise be to Allaah – the
authorities have appointed judges who judge between the people and resolve
their disputes in accordance with the Book of Allaah and the Sunnah of His
Messenger (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and who solve
their problems in ways that do not go against the laws of Allaah, may He be
exalted. So there is no excuse for anyone to refer for judgement to false
judges, after the appointment of scholars of Islam to whom they may refer
for judgment and who judge in accordance with the law of Allaah. 

And Allaah
is the Source of strength. May Allaah send blessings and peace upon our
Prophet Muhammad and his family and companions. 

The Standing
Committee for Academic Research and Issuing Fatwas. 

‘Abd-Allaah
ibn Qa’ood, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ghadyaan, ‘Abd al-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi and ‘Abd
al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz. End quote. 

As that is
the case, it is not permissible for you to take part in his judgement or to
pay the money or take it. Rather you must disavow yourself of that, and you
must advise these people and explain to them the seriousness of what they
are doing by passing judgements that are not in accordance with sharee’ah.
They have no excuse for that, even if their governor is a Christian who does
not apply the rulings of Allaah. They have to advise one another and strive
to apply the rulings of sharee’ah as much as they can; whatever they are
unable to apply, it is not permissible for them to invent rulings for it, no
matter what interests they think may be served by that, otherwise they will
be sinners who are introducing jaahili ways into Islam. 

Secondly: 

The majority
of Maaliki, Shaafa’i and Hanbali fuqaha’ are of the view that if a woman is
forced into zina (raped), then the rapist must pay a mahr equal to that of
her peers. 

If she was a
virgin, is she entitled to compensation for loss of virginity along with the
mahr? 

Some of the
fuqaha’ are of that view, and it was narrated from Ahmad (may Allaah have
mercy on him), but the well known view of the Hanbalis is that compensation
for loss of virginity is not required, and the one who is forced into zina
can only take a mahr equal to that of her peers. The Maalikis also pointed
out that this mahr is not to be paid collectively by the male relatives of
the rapist, because zina is a deliberate action, it is not something that
can happen by mistake.  

The Hanafis
differed from that and did not impose a mahr for a woman who is forced into
zina, whether she was a virgin or not. 

This was
also narrated from Ahmad (may Allaah have mercy on him), and was the view
favoured by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, who said concerning the mahr:  it
is khabeeth (evil). 

Thirdly: 

If he forced
her to commit zina and he destroyed the barrier between the urethra and
vagina, then he must pay the mahr and also compensation, but there was a
difference of opinion as to the amount. The Hanafis and Hanbalis say that it
is one-third of the diyah, and the Shaafa’is say that it is the full diyah.
The Hanafis agree with them if he destroys the barrier between the urethra
and vagina and she can no longer control her urine.  

See
al-Mabsoot (9/53), al-Muntaqa by al-Baaji (7/77), al-Taaj
wa’l-Ikleel (8/342), Mughni al-Muhtaaj (4/75), al-Mughni
(7/209, 8/373), al-Insaaf (8/306-308), al-Mawsoo’ah al-Fiqhiyyah
(5/297, 21/95). 

Conclusion:
The mahr which is paid to the woman who is forced into zina (raped), and the
mahr and compensation for loss of virginity which is paid to a virgin who is
forced into zina, must be paid from the wealth of the zaani and not by his
male relatives, and it must go to the woman who was forced into zina, not to
her relatives. As for the woman who willingly commits zina, she is not
entitled to anything. 

All of this
comes after zina has been proven and the hadd punishment has been carried
out. This makes clear the difference between what is narrated in sharee’ah
and the ruling of tribal customs. 

And Allaah
knows best.

How can we respond to those who say that tawaaf is like worshipping idols?

 

How can we respond to those who say that tawaaf is like worshipping idols?.

Praise be to Allaah.

First of all it is essential to define the essence of the
message to which Islamic sharee’ah calls, and how it differs from the
idolatry of Jaahiliyyah. Then we will be able to understand whether tawaaf
around the Ka’bah is a manifestation of idolatry or of Tawheed and Islam.  

If we refer to the Book of Allaah, may He be exalted, we will
see that the essence of the Islamic religion is submission to the commands
of Allaah and taking Him as our only Lord and God, and rejecting all others
who are worshipped unlawfully. 

Allaah, may He be glorified and exalted, says (interpretation
of the meaning): 

“But no, by your Lord,
they can have no Faith, until they
make you (O Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم)
judge in all disputes between them,
and find in themselves no resistance against your decisions, and accept
(them) with full submission”

[al-Nisa’ 4:65] 

“And whosoever submits
his face (himself) to Allaah, while he is a Muhsin (good doer, i.e. performs
good deeds totally for Allaah’s sake without any show-off or to gain praise
or fame and does them in accordance with the Sunnah of Allaah’s Messenger
Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم), then he
has grasped the most trustworthy handhold [Laa ilaaha illAllaah (none has
the right to be worshipped but Allaah)]. And to Allaah return all matters
for decision”

[Luqmaan 31:22] 

 “And turn in
repentance and in obedience with true Faith (Islamic Monotheism) to your
Lord and submit to Him (in Islam) before the torment comes upon you, (and)
then you will not be helped”

[al-Zumar 39:54] 

As for ignorant
idol-worship, it means submitting to something other than Allaah, and
turning to something other than Allaah, be it a rock, an idol or a “wali”
(“saint”), as a weak and humble slave filled with hope and fear. These
things – in Islam – can only be for Allaah, may He be glorified and exalted.

Allaah says
(interpretation of the meaning): 

“They
(Jews and Christians) took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords
besides Allaah (by obeying them in things which they made lawful or unlawful
according to their own desires without being ordered by Allaah), and (they
also took as their Lord) Messiah, son of Maryam (Mary), while they (Jews and
Christians) were commanded [in the Tawraat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)]
to worship none but One Ilaah (God — Allaah) Laa ilaaha illa Huwa (none has
the right to be worshipped but He). Praise and glory be to Him (far above is
He) from having the partners they associate (with Him)”

[al-Tawbah 9:31] 

“(It
will be said): This is because, when Allaah Alone was invoked (in worship)
you disbelieved (denied), but when partners were joined to Him, you
believed! So the judgement is only with Allaah, the Most High, the Most
Great!”

[Ghaafir 40:12] 

“They
have no Wali (Helper, Disposer of affairs, Protector) other than Him, and He
makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule”

[al-Kahf 18:26] 

Once this is established,
we will be able to differentiate between the Muslim who affirms the Oneness
of Allaah and the idolatrous mushrik in matters which may appear outwardly
to be similar. For example: 

The Muslim who affirms
the Oneness of Allaah loves the Messenger of Allaah (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him); he venerates him, respects him, sacrifices
himself and his wealth in support of him and obeys his commands, and all of
that is in obedience to the command of Allaah in the verse (interpretation
of the meaning): “So
those who believe in him (Muhammad صلى الله
عليه وسلم), honour him, help him, and follow the light (the Qur’aan)
which has been sent down with him, it is they who will be successful”
[al-A’raaf 7:157]. 

As for the idolatrous
mushrik, you see him coming to the grave of the Messenger (peace and
blessings of Allaah be upon him), asking him to meet his needs and seeking
his aid to relieve his worries, and calling upon him with utter humility,
regarding him as something divine. He may believe that in his hand are the
stores of the heavens and earth, and that al-Lawh al-Mahfooz is part of his
knowledge, and other things that are said or believed by some of the
ignorant. In this case the mushrik is not following the command of Allaah
and he is not submitting himself to Allaah, rather he is submitting to
something other than Allaah and obeying the shaytaan in that.

 Another example: 

The Muslim who affirms
the Oneness of Allaah obeys the commands of Allaah in submission to His
greatness, may He be glorified and exalted. If He were to command him to
prostrate to a human being, or to venerate a human being or a rock, then he
would obey that as an act of worship to Allaah and in submission to His
command and wisdom, as the angels did when Allaah commanded them to
prostrate to Adam (peace be upon him), and they prostrated. 

As for the idolatrous
mushrik, he prostrates to a human being or a rock out of respect for the
person or rock itself, and in submission to what he imagines they possess of
the power to benefit or harm, turning to them with hope and fear and
humility. In doing that he is not paying any attention to the command of
Allaah, or to His rulings, rather he is directing his submission and worship
to something other than Allaah on the basis of his own whims and desires. 

Hence Shaykh al-Islam Ibn
Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: 

As for submission,
devotion of the heart and acknowledgement of divinity and Lordship, these
can only be directed towards Allaah alone, and if directed towards anyone or
anything else they are utterly false. As for prostration it is connected to
the commands of Allaah, because Allaah has commanded us to prostrate to Him,
and if He had commanded us to prostrate to any of His creation other than
Him, we would have prostrated to that one in obedience to Allaah if He
wanted us to venerate the one to whom we were prostrating. As He has not
commanded us to prostrate, then we should not do it at all. The prostration
of the angels to Adam was an act of worship to Allaah, obedience to Him and
a means of drawing closer to Him, and it was a way of honouring and
respecting Adam. And the prostration of Yoosuf’s brothers to him was a
greeting. End quote. 

Majmoo’ al-Fataawa
(4/360, 361). 

Thus we may differentiate
between many cases in which actions may appear outwardly to be similar, but
in fact one is Islam, Tawheed and faith, whereas the other is shirk, kufr
and idolatry. 

That includes tawaaf
around the Ka’bah: 

The Muslim who affirms
the Oneness of Allaah obeys the command of Allaah in all matters, great and
small. When he hears the words of Allaah (interpretation of the meaning),
“and
circumambulate the Ancient House (the Ka‘bah at Makkah)”
[al-Hajj 22:29],
he cannot help but obey them, so he circumambulates the sacred House out of
love for Allaah and in obedience to Him, hoping for mercy from Allaah and
fearing His punishment. And he does not go beyond what he has been commanded
to do of tawaaf, so he does not touch the stones of this House or think that
it can bring benefit or cause harm. 

As for the idolatrous
mushrik, he is the one who circumambulates rocks or shrines, venerating
them, hoping that they will relieve his distress and answer his prayers,
weeping out of fear of them, beseeching them, and seeking to draw closer to
them by means of different acts of worship such as prostration, sacrifices,
circumambulation and supplication. In doing so he is not obeying the command
of Allaah or the laws of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be
upon him), rather he is obeying his own whims and desires and the shaytaan. 

So there is a great and
clear difference between the actions of those who believe in Tawheed and
Islam, and the manifestations of idolatry and shirk. The one who does not
pay attention to this difference will become confused, and will no longer be
able to differentiate between kufr and faith.

We hope that the
difference between the two is now clear. 

And Allaah knows best.

Is it permissible to seek treatment with one who claims that he has dealings with a doctor from among the Muslim jinn?

 

If I seek treatment with a man who has with him Muslim doctors from among the jinn, will that invalidate my fast?.

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly: 

It is not
permissible to seek the help of the jinn for medical treatment or anything
else, and it is not permissible to go to one who claims to do that. 

The Muslim
should not be deceived by the success of anyone’s treatment or seeing the
effects of that, for the Dajjaal will tell the sky to rain and it will rain,
and he will tell the earth to bring forth its treasure and it will do so.
Should the Muslim be deceived by him and believe his claims? It may be a
test or a gradual punishment from Allaah. “We shall gradually seize them
with punishment in ways they perceive not” [al-A’raaf 7:182].  

Shaykh ‘Abd
al-‘Azeez ibn ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Baaz (may Allaah have mercy on him) was asked
about the ruling on using the services of Muslim jinn to treat disease if
that is needed. He replied: 

The sick
person should not use the services of the jinn for treatment or ask them for
anything, rather he should ask well known doctors, but he should not turn to
the jinn, because that is a means that leads to worshipping them and
believing them. Among the jinn are some who are kaafirs and some who are
Muslims, and some who are innovators, and you do not know about them. So you
should not rely on them or ask them for anything, even if they appear to
you. Rather you should ask the people of knowledge and human doctors. Allaah
condemned the mushrikeen as He said (interpretation of the meaning): 

“And
verily, there were men among mankind who took shelter with the males among
the jinn, but they (jinn) increased them (mankind) in sin and transgression”

[al-Jinn 72:6]  

And it is a
means that leads to dependence upon them and shirk, and it leads to seeking
benefit from them and seeking their help, and all of that is shirk. End
quote. 

Majallat
al-Da’wah (no. 1602, Rabee’ al-Awwal 1418AH, p.
34) 

Shaykh
Saalih al-Fawzaan (may Allaah preserve him) said: 

The help of
the jinn should not be sought, whether from the Muslims among them or those
who say that they are Muslim, because he may say that he is Muslim but he is
lying in order to interfere with people. This should be prevented from the
outset. It is not permissible to seek the help of the jinn even if they say
that they are Muslims, because this opens the door to trouble. 

It is not
permissible to seek the help of one who is absent whether he is a jinni or
otherwise, and whether he is a Muslim or not. Rather we should seek the help
of one who is present and is able to help, as Allaah said of Moosa
(interpretation of the meaning): 

“The man
of his (own) party asked him for help against his foe”

[al-Qasas
28:15] 

Moosa was
present and able to help, and it was possible for him to help as this was an
ordinary situation. End quote 

Al-Sihr
wa’l-Sha’wadhah, p. 86, 87 

Secondly: 

With regard
to fasting, it is valid in sha Allaah and is not invalidated by that,
although the reward for fasting may be reduced and may be erased altogether
by the commission of sin. See the answer to question no.
50063. 

And Allaah
knows best.