“After the birth of our Master Jesus, the Word of Allāh [kalimatullāh], upon our Noble Prophet and upon him blessings and peace, too the Virgin [batūl], the Pure [tayyibah, tāhirah], our Lady Maryam was a virgin, a virgin she remained,
a virgin she shall be raised, and a virgin she shall enter Paradise until she shall be honoured with sacred marriage to the Illuminated Master of the Prophets, may the blessing and peace of Allāh be upon him and upon them all.
Her noble rank:
‘No man has touched me, nor I am an unchaste.’
It is apparent that it holds true even after childbirth, and this is the meaning of virginity.
There remains the matter of virginity with the meaning of the perishing of the membrane [i.e. hymen].
Firstly, why is it necessary in this miraculous birth, and where is the evidence for it? The one who can cause birth without a father, He is also able to cause birth without the perishing of virginity.
A virgin also has an orifice from which blood flows,
and supposing it is broken, then that is not negating virginity. This membrane of many virgins is lost due to some blow or strength of menstrual blood and other things, however they do not change from virgin to non-virgin, from unmarried to married,
in fact in reality too they are virgin, and in the ruling of the sharīáh too they remain virgin. Their marriage is performed as that of virgins, and are included in the will left for virgins.
It is in Tanwīr al-Abşār:
‘The one whose hymen is broken due to jumping,
or menstruation, or injury, or old age, she is in reality a virgin.’
It is in Fatāwā Żahīriyyah and Radd al-Muĥtār:
‘Virgin is the term for the woman who has not had intercourse in nikāĥ or other than it.’
It is in Baĥr and Shāmī:
‘What is understood from their words is that
in these matters, where the hymen is broken, meaning that membrane which is upon the private part, then she is a virgin in terms of reality and ruling, and for this reason she is included in the will left for the virgins of a certain tribe.’
And Allāh táālā knows best.
[Fatāwā al-Riđawiyyah, vol. 26, pp. 460-462]
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Imām Nawawī on seeking intercession of RasūlAllāh ﷺ at his blessed grave
The famous scholar Imam Yaĥyā Ibn Sharaf al-Nawawī al-Shāfiýī [631-676 AH / 1233-1277 CE] encouraged visitors to seek intercession of RasūlAllāh ﷺ, something considered Shirk and Bidáh by Najdī Wahābīs.
He writes in Kitāb al-Majmūú:
Then he should return to his first standing place, facing the direction of RasūlAllāh ﷺ and make tawassul by him with regard to himself, and seek intercession by him to His Lord subhānahū wa táālā, and from the best of what he can say is what was
reported by Māwardī, Qādī Abū Tayyib, and all of our companions from Útbī, considering it good, he said:
“I was sitting near the grave of RasūlAllāh ﷺ, then came a bedouin, he said, ‘Peace be upon you Yā RasūlAllāh, I heard Allāh saying, “And if they, when they have wronged
A question was posed to Alahazrat Imām Aĥmad Riđā Khān al-Ĥanafī [1272–1340 AH / 1856–1921 CE] dated 26 Rabīý al-Ākhir Sharīf 1338 AH, which corresponds to 18 January 1920 CE.
The question was sent from Gondal, Kathiawar by one Qāđī Qāsim Miyāñ Sāhib and read as follows:
“What do the scholars of the dīn regarding this issue, that what is Freemasonry, and what is the ruling regarding those who enter it? Make clear and be rewarded.”
The reply to this by the Imām was:
“Freemasonry is magic [sihr], and to the extent I was able to find out, it has been formed in order to take away belief in the Prophets, upon them be blessings and peace, for this reason they only accept a Muslim or a person of the Book,
On 22nd January 1842, in Tangier, a letter was written by the British Consul General Drummond Hay [1816-1893 CE] to the Sultān of Morocco, Moulay Ábd al-Rahmān ibn Hishām [1204-1276 AH / 1789-1859 CE], asking him what action he had taken for abolishment/curtailment of slavery.
The Sultan responded in a letter dated to the 23rd Dhu'l Hijjah 1257 AH which corresponded to the 4th February 1842 CE.
After beginning with the name of Allāh, the Sultan states:
“Be it known to you, that the traffic in slaves is a matter on which all sects and nations have
agreed from the time of the sons of Adam, on whom be the Peace of God, up to this day, and we are not aware of its being prohibited by the Laws of any sect, and no one need ask this question; the same being manifest to both high and low and requires no more demonstration than
However, this opinion of Imām Nawawī was a minority position. The majority of scholars, even of his own madh'hab, held that it was only impermissible when the look was one of desire.
“{It is not permissible to look at it [i.e. the face of a woman] with desire, similarly the face of an amrad} Looking at her face and the face of an amrad is prohibited when
there is doubt of desire, as for in the absence of it, then it is permissible [to look at an amrad], even if he be beautiful.”
“Similarly, it is impermissible for a man to look at the face of an amrad [i.e. beardless youth] if he is beautiful, whether his look is out of desire or not, whether safe from fitnah or there is fear of it.
This is the correct and chosen position according to the virtuosic scholars. This was the opinion of Shāfiýī and proficient ones among his companions, may Allāh have mercy upon them. The evidence is that he [i.e. the beautiful amrad] enters the import of the woman;
for indeed he is desired as she is desired, his appearance in beauty is like the appearance of a woman, perhaps many of them are of more beautiful appearance than many women. Rather, they are foremost in impermissibility due to another reason,