Mujaddid Alf Thānī Imām Rabbānī Aĥmad ibn Ábdu'l Aĥad al-Fārūqī al-Sirhindī al-Naqshbandī al-Ĥanafī [971-1034 AH / 1564-1634 CE] writes in one of his Maktūbāt regarding necessary guidelines for women and on the meaning of the verse,
“O Prophet! If Muslim women com to you to take oath of allegiance that they will neither ascribe any partner to Allāh, nor steal, nor commit adultery, nor kill their children,
nor bring the lie that they carry between their hands and feet, nor disobey you in any rightful matter - then accept their allegiance and seek forgiveness from Allāh for them; indeed Allāh is Oft Forgiving, Most Merciful.”
[Mumtaĥanah, 60:12]
Explaining the second condition he writes:
“And the second condition that was introduced during the bayáh of women is the prohibition of theft as it is from the major sins,
and because this negative trait is found in most of the women folk and very few are the women who are [truly] aware of the nuances of this evil. Therefore, the prohibition from this evil is incorporated into the conditions of their bayáh.
Those women who spend from the wealths of their husbands without seeking their permissions and spend and destroy [the husbands’ wealths] with impunity, it is included in [the ruling of] theft and attributed to the major sin of theft. This can be said in regards to common women,
as this habit is proven amongst them and this khiyānah is prevalent in almost all of women folk except those whom Allāh táālā has protected.
Alas! They should consider this deed as evil and sinful. The fear of them considering this evil as ĥalāl is excessive, and [therefore,]
there is more fear of kufr due to considering of this evil as halal.
Ĥakīm al-Muţlaq jalla shaanuhū [Allāh táālā] forbade women from theft after forbidding them from shirk,
as this evil is eventually an open pathway to kufr for them, by means of being perceived as ĥalāl [by those who do perceive it as ĥalāl/“ok”], and therefore is much worse for them compared to other major sins.
Also, as women develop khiyānah by time and again taking from the husbands’ wealths, the ugliness of spending from other peoples wealths [without their permission] also diminishes from their eyes,
and it may well become possible that they (such women) unjustly spend out of other people’s wealths too, who are not their husbands, and betray other people’s trust too and steal from their wealths too with impunity.
The meaning of this emphasis will be clear and manifest by just a little contemplation. It is proven then, that stopping women folk from theft is from amongst the most important jobs of Islām and for them, after shirk, this evil has been deemed the ugliest.”
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Many Muslims incorrectly assume slavery is not a "good" thing. It is, and if it was not, then Allāh would not have permitted it, and His Beloved Rasūl ﷺ would not have engaged in it.
They erroneously assume that because freeing one's own slaves can be rewarded, that this somehow means slavery as a whole is evil and ought to be abolished.
Firstly, not all instances of freeing slaves are rewarded, it is only rewarded if done sincerely for the Pleasure of Allāh, otherwise if a person frees a thousand of his slaves without this sincere intention, then though it is valid, there is no reward.
Moreover, if a kāfir does so, there is no reward for him, regardless of his intention.
Secondly, a person is rewarded for giving charity if he does so purely for the sake of Allāh, but does this now mean private property is evil and must be abolished? Must governments take all wealth of individuals by force? Of course not.
In reality, this is modern-day apologetics designed to suit 21st century sentiment regarding slavery and has no basis in traditional Islam.
Today marks the day that one of the greatest Sunni scholars of India left this world: Alahazrat Imam Ahmad Raza Khan Hanafi Qadiri Baraylawi [1272-1340 AH / 1856-1921]
Here is a thread of some of my threads regarding him ad translations of his writings
His detailed definition and discourse regarding worship:
So yes, "Anti-slavery fight is a modern idea, Islam unanimously agreed with this this practice, this is the consensus", this is correct.
I don't know why people struggle with the historical fact that wholesale demonisation of slavery and opposition to slavery in the Muslim world is a recent occurrence thst began in 19thC and that for centuries nobody of any group or sect had any issue with slavery in of itself.
The first who conceptualised an identity was German lawyer, jurist, journalist Karl Heinrich Ulrichs [1825-1895].
Prior to this, the focus was on the act of the individual, whereas activists such as Ulrichs shifted the focus towards the nature of the individual.
In 1867 he attended the Congress of German Jurists in Munich and argued for the repealing of laws which prohibited sodomy, mentioning that nature had implanted this inn them, and thus such laws are discriminatory against them.
The one deserving of Khilāfat is he who possesses the seven conditions of Khilāfat, that is:
1. Man,
2. Sane,
3. Pubescent,
4. Muslim,
5. Free,
6. Capable,
7. Qurashī
These seven conditions are necessary such that if even one condition is missing then the Khilāfat shall not be sound. The elucidation of this is in all books of creed.
Imām Taftāzānī says in Sharh al-Aqā’id:
“{He ought to be from Quraysh, and it is not permissible from other than them} meaning, it is stipulated that the Imām be a Qurashī due to his saying, upon him be blessings and salutations, ‘The Imāms are from Quraysh.’
Muslims ought to remember that Allāh has created cattle for the benefit of mankind, and they are a great blessing and favour from our Lord.
There are numerous explicit verses in the Qur'ān which clarify this, and to oppose this is detrimental to one's faith.
It is necessary not to fall prey to modern ideas of veganism, environmentalism, etc, which claim that benefitting from animals is immoral, harmful, unjust, and is destructive for the environment.