Ibn al-Hussain

Veteran Member
  • Content count

    32,179
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    9

Ibn al-Hussain last won the day on May 17

Ibn al-Hussain had the most liked content!

About Ibn al-Hussain

  • Rank
    [-Talib e Ilm-]
  • Birthday 12/24/1988

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.iqraonline.net

Profile Information

  • Location
    Toronto

Previous Fields

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

29,803 profile views
  1. Yes, these are what I have (some are fully translated, while some are partial): Tahara Salat Sawm Jihad Amr bil Ma'ruf Hajj Qadha Hudud Qisas Diyat Kaffarat Nikah Talaq Ghasb Wasaya Khul' & Mubarat Iqrar 'Atiyyah Hajr Hawalah Dayn Rahn Dhaman Kafalah Ijarah Luqata Ju'ala There are some others which were done from another book called Tahrir al-Rawdha which is a summary of Sharh al-Lum'ah, those books include: Shuf'ah al-Sabq wa al-Rimayah Mudharabah I believe there was one more or maybe not - will have to double check. Wasalam
  2. I did not study Kitab al-Bay' from Sharh al-Lum'a for a few different reasons and now will be going straight to Makasib of Shaykh al-Ansari, so I don't have the former translated. However, I do have Ijarah from Sharh al-Lum'a translated - is that what you are asking for? Wasalam
  3. 'Id Mubarak to you as well. I have Kitab al-Ijarah (leasing & renting) translated and likewise the rest of the books we covered in class - I believe just over 30 Kitabs in total. Since many of the principles of Bay' get applied in Ijarah, your post has encouraged me to perhaps do something similar with Kitab al-Ijarah if there is interest amongst the readers. All my translations are just sitting there on my computer (although of course they need heavy editing since they were being done quickly in-class). Wasalam
  4. Brother Jebreil, may Allah [swt] reward you for your efforts. I spent the time to read through all your posts and they have been excellent. Unfortunately have not been able to find enough time to participate in actual discussions and comments. Just a question regarding this specific post; I see that it is related to the general topic of economics, but am wondering if it had any relationship with your previous posts on Aquinas (re: interest) or is this something completely separate you will be covering. As I've studied a number of books on mu'amalat from Sharh al-Lum'ah, I will try to share any input I can. Wasalam
  5. Okay so we need to clarify two possible scenarios. One is that the father gave her permission, and it was not a conditional permission, rather it was a general permission and then a request for them to add a condition to their contract. In this case, we know there is no issue in her nullifying this condition from her contract after the marriage and it has nothing to do with his permission. In the second scenario, which seems to be the one you are proposing (but doesn't appear to be common practice), is that the permission of the father itself was conditional. So the question now is, is there such thing as a conditional permission when it comes to a marriage contract? Those who say that permission is required for the marriage, then yes the father can put conditions in his permission, however despite that, if the person goes against their condition, there is a difference of opinion on whether the marriage contract gets invalidated or not. Though they have sinned (as far as they have not abided by the condition of the guardian), many jurists say it does not invalidate the marriage contract (and subsequently neither was the intercourse fornication). Since we do not know who her marj'a is and let alone what his opinion is on this matter, there is no other option but to contact the marj'a and see what they have to say. Wasalam
  6. Which contract are you talking about? The only contract I am seeing here is the marriage contract. The father is not a party to this contract to begin with. He simply gave her permission to get married (which also implies he is fine with her marrying him as a person), but he asked her to ensure she puts this clause in her marriage contract. She listened to her father and placed that clause in her contract, and the husband agreed to it, but after the 'aqd has been recited she then had every right to nullify that condition and change her mind on it. Wasalam
  7. When it comes to the jurisprudential evidence for why hand-shaking is impermissible according to most jurists, there are a decent number of works written on it, but due to their technical nature I cannot explain all the evidence for it here. But as followers of these jurists, we really need to re-evaluate how we attempt to defend these laws - many of which are always open to interpretation and change (slight or major). In the realm of jurisprudence, where law is being derived through the Qur'an or narrations, there is a huge element of ta'abbud (obedience, albeit blindly, as long as one has interpreted and established evidence for themselves with regards to a ruling). In other words, a jurist looks at the textual evidence, and interprets it as per their understanding, and believes that there is a law here which establishes the impressibility of touching a na-mahram. As followers of these jurisconsults, we also accept their opinions blindly (i.e. whole concept of taqleed). Arguing over the justification for these rulings - as laymen - is very pointless, because: 1) We are not jurisconsults, we do not know the evidence used to establish this ruling. Coming across a hadith and quoting it is simply not enough - if it was, then we'd all be jurists. 2) Even if we know the evidence for the existence of a law, we do not - in majority of the cases - know what was God's Wisdom behind this law - let alone the cause for it (please read my post explaining the difference between cause vs. wisdom in fiqh). The problem occurs when you have just as much of a qualified jurist, working within the same methodological framework, coming and giving a ruling saying that in certain cases shaking hands with a na-mahram is permissible. What happens if this ruling becomes a popular view amongst the next generation of jurists? Of course, anyone with a little reading into history of Fiqh & Ahkam will know that we have had such drastic changes in many, many crucial rulings (well-water, najasah of Ahl al-Kitab, formless selling & buying etc.). In the case of hand-shaking, the most obvious example is that of Ayatullah Montazeri, who very explicitly argued that if there is a necessity in one's 'Urf (meaning if local customs dictate that in a certain scenario it is necessary to shake hands) then it is permissible to shake hands with a woman who is not muhtaram (i.e. is a non-Muslim, or a Muslimah who is negligent towards Hijab). Ayatullah Montazeri writes (28th Urdibehesht, 1381) - translations are mine and done relatively quick just to get the point across: Firstly: From many narrations that pertain to looking, it can be understood that the impressibility (of looking at na-mahram) is due to the Ihtiram (respect) of that person, and thus if one believes that looking towards them is not disrespectful to them and they do not cover themselves up, then looking at them is naturally permissible - unless it results in a Haram and Fasad. More specifically, non-Muslim women do not believe in the impressibility of looking at them, and rather consider it disrespect to not look at them. It is not far-fetched that criterion (of respect) also exists when it comes to hand-shaking and the narrations that pertain to (the impressibility of) shaking-hands are concerning Muslim women. Yes, if hand-shaking results in moral vice, or it is for lust, then it is not allowed in any case. Secondly: If looking or hand-shaking in a certain environment and under certain conditions has an 'Urfi necessity, and abandoning it is seen as a weakness (of religion), then due to the presence of these necessities, impermissible acts will become permissible to the extent necessary. Unless they result in moral vices or it is being done out of lust. Yes, if it is possible to do this from behind a cloth or glove, then this precaution is good (i.e. Ihtiyat Mustahabb). In a follow up to the response above, he writes in a message published a year later (9th Aban, 1382): Firstly: Not touching and looking at a stranger (na-mahram) is for their sanctity and respect. If the person does not believe in this sanctity for themselves, rather considers not looking or hand-shaking as a sign of disrespect for themselves, then in this scenario - without the intention of lust and without lust itself - handshaking is not a problem. Secondly: Looking and hand-shaking (in a case where a woman does not believe in wearing the Hijab), is allowed without lust and its intention. Thirdly: In determining what constitutes 'Urfi necessity in the permissible cases of looking or hand-shaking, the 'Urf of one's vicinity is the standard. I personally know some jurists who also allow it (in a similar fashion explained above), but have not come out and given an explicit fatwa on it. Shaykh Haider Hobbollah also has written a 60-page paper on this topic investigating the evidence for it, and has critiqued its impressibility very strongly. His argument can be read in Volume 5 of Dirasat fi al-Fiqh al-Islami al-Mu'asir [ http://hobbollah.com/books/دراسات-في-الفقه-الإسلامي-المعاصر/ ]. Direct download link: http://hobbollah.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/BookTDerasat-Fi-Alfiqh-Alislami-Almoase5.pdf (page 389 of PDF). I only highlighted this to show that our job is to follow the ruling of our Marja' and that most reasoning given for the wisdom behind a law is not perfect, they are flawed in many cases, and even inconsistent. Thus arguing over it (both those defending it and those going against it) becomes utterly useless since those defending it can only really appeal to authority, and the person arguing against it is essentially arguing with their own weak understanding of how law works and their opinions have no real value, so their only other valid response should be that they are either a jurist themselves (and will be answerable on the day of Judgement), or they appeal to another authority to back them up. Jurisprudence is an arena of ta'abbud (mere obedience), in a way where we will have justification for it (if the law in reality was incorrect) on the day of Judgement. Wasalam
  8. For those who quoted me and asked a question, please give me some time. I have final exams and will be travelling back for the summer in the next few days, so I am a bit short on time. There is a lot of information that is not being presented correctly here regarding Tab'eedh (which is something that only concerns someone who is beginning Taqleed for the first time, not someone who has already begun doing taqleed - for them the discussion concerns 'Udul). When I get time I will try to write up a lengthy and comprehensive response. Wasalam
  9. Yes - 100%. Wasalam
  10. Well for starters, the English translation of Mantiq al-Muzaffar isn't even half the book (the Shaykh who was translating it passed away before he could complete it). So it is only very partially translated. Furthermore, I think before doing Muzaffar it is good to get an overall structure of the discussions in Mantiq (and even in hawzah many schools will do much smaller introductory books before doing Muzaffar). This is why I was suggesting Sayyid Sadiq Shirazi's work (there isn't much else online in English unfortunately), because it will give you a general map of what and where the discussions in logic take place. Wasalam
  11. After having spent 3 terms (1 and half school years) studying this text, I can tell you that most of you will have no tolerance to study it the way it is studied in the Hawzah. General Hawzah classes are very book-focused, rather than topic-focused and most of us who have studied in Western educational systems have no experience studying this way. In fact it is a huge turn off from studying and learning anything. You want to learn logic, not a book on logic or a certain scholar's views on logic - remember that. If you really want an introduction, then it is better to go with an even easier work like A Summary of Logic by Sayyid Sadiq Shirazi [https://www.al-islam.org/file/summary-logic-sayyid-sadiq-shirazi]. Coincidentally, I am spending this summer reviewing certain discussions from Mantiq (especially after you realize that you can't do any real philosophy without logic) and will also be doing mubahatha with some friends on Skype. If you guys want I can share some material on the forum as well and guide the discussion here. --- Logic topics I have narrowed down for myself for the summer are: - Tasawwur/Mafhum and its divisions - 'Unwan & Mu'anwan - Taraduf/Tabayun/Taqabul - Different meanings and discussions on Dhaati & 'Aradhi - Qadhiya and its divisions - Ahkam of Qadhaya (Tanaqudh, 'Aks etc.) - Qiyas (Iqtirani & Istihnayee) Complicated Discussions: - Kulli - what is it and do we even have such a thing - Predication and its Divisions - Burhan Inn & Limm - and their divisions These topics in logic have serious implications in philosophical discussions. Also since logic is based on a certain epistemology, you should make it clear what epistemological premises are being taken for granted before you do logic. Wasalam
  12. While this may have been a popular opinion amongst older jurists, Sayyid Khoei didn't accept this ruling. I am not sure where this translation is from, and the website really doesn't make it clear which book of his they are translating or where they are compiling the rulings from (I have a CD of Sayyid Khoei and I was not able to find anything similar to what the English is saying - so it would be good to know where the translators got this ruling from). However, on the other hand, not only does Sayyid Khoei say this is not allowed, but in his Fiqhi discussion on this ruling he has pretty much torn apart the evidence used for establishing the validity of this ruling. I would translate portions or all of the discussion, but it will go over the head of most readers, and those who can understand Usuli/Fiqhi discussions can look it up themselves. You can see his ruling prohibiting this in his تكملة المنهاج‏ - pg. 76, ruling # 89, and you can see his jurisprudential discussion on it in his مباني تكملة المنهاج - القصاص و الديات, pg. 102. Wasalam
  13. The one fallacy people seem to constantly make when comparing the spiritual status or struggle of people in the West with that of the East is in sexually related matters (which are very apparent in Western societies). Even if these things are less apparent in certain countries (like Iran), we must know that this isn't the only vice that prevents people from enjoying a spiritual life. Sexuality may be one apparent vice in the West that one has to work harder to abstain from, but in the East (or in Iran as an example you were citing) there may be some completely other vices in society, but with very similar or worse consequences. Vices such as racism, hypocrisy, theft, and various other forms of oppression (on one's self, on one's family, on society etc.) and many other ills that are rampant in society. Wasalam
  14. A statement from His Eminence Sheikh Zaid Alsalami regarding the recent Media allegations against him. Message from Sheikh Zaid Alsalami. Sydney/Australia Thursday 4/5/2017 7th of Sha'ban 1438 "O you who believe, if a profligate person (fasiq) should bring you some news, verify it..." [Quran 49:6] I have chosen to stay away from FB for a while, until Islamophobic bigots settle down a bit. I apologise for wasting the valuable time of others for this petty insignificant issue that didn't need any attention, but the agenda and motive of those attacking is clear. This low grade, far from reliable, Islamiphobic media-outlet mixed everything together, portraying me as a misogynist womeniser, and other things only for one purpose of trying to defame me. I will be pursuing legal action against them and all parties involved. My dear brothers and sisters, Islamophobia comes in many shapes and sizes, and unfortunately this time targeted my family and I. It's clear that the Islamophobic media have an agenda to promote liberal, compromising, deviant personalities and are pushing them at us as role model Muslims, whilst they work tirelessly to malign and character assassinate scholars who are working effortlessly in the community. It's easy to become a target of vilification. Living in the age of technology and social media it is very easy for things to be manipulated, and this has become a common avenue when trying to defame individuals and groups. Very sadly in the case of some Muslims, the source needs no verification, and is automatically thrown into the grapevine. My activities have always revolved around my community, especially my involvement with the youth, and I pride myself on the relationship I have formed over the years with the developing young community in Sydney. I have strived to keep myself approachable, but at the same time upholding a level of respect, reverence whilst keeping within the boundaries of Shar'. Throughout my involvement, I have helped guide the community to the best of my ability which has helped me advance and develop not only my scholarly skills, but my personal dealings with others. But not all my relationships have ended positively. Unfortunately, sometimes serving others comes at a cost..... Betrayal is the worst. These screenshots were released in an obscure manner to potray a deceptive illustration as a part of a personal attack by certain individuals whose goal was to diminish my image in the community. Anything can be taken out of context, misconstrued and falsified for the purpose of ruining one's personality, and the more public the figure is the more devastating the reaction can be. Things were put together, images were altered, comments were mixed into each other to better incriminate me. Accusations were thrown in, and sly evil cunning Islamophobic journalism was used. Sadly, my children were also targeted and have been deeply affected by this article. My humble request is to avoid discord, and let everything settle down so we can all get back to our work and anticipate towards being the best in what we do; united and as one. Haq will prevail.