————————————

Assalamu’alaikum

وَإِنَّكَ لَعَلى خُلُقٍ عَظِيمٍ القلم:4

وقد حث النبي صلى اللّه عليه وسلم على حسن الخلق، والتمسك به، وجمع بين التقوى وحسن الخلق، فقال عليه الصلاة والسلام: { أكثر ما يدخل الناس الجنة، تقوى اللّه وحسن الخلق } رواه الترمذي والحاكم

Al fadhil para pemimpin pemuda PAS,

Berkenaan isu di atas, adalah amat tidak bijak budaya tersebut diteruskan oleh para ilmuan dan pejuang agama di Malaysia untuk membakar bendera-bendera mana-mana negara sekalipun terdapat manusia biadap di negara tersebut yang membuat kerja-kerja bodoh.

Sebagai contohnya, pembakaran bendera Sweden di hadapan kedutaan Sweden tempoh hari adalah perbuatan yang kurang bijak dan sia-sia kerana ianya tidak memberikan apa-apa kebaikan pun kepada orang Islam, samada di Malaysia, atau di Sweden atau di mana-mana pelusuk bumi Allah ini. Para ilmuan dan pejuang agama di Malaysia membakar bendera di sana, orang-orang Malaysia dan Islam di sini pula yang menjadi mangsanya. Disebabkan perbuatan bodoh tersebut, yang terhasil hanyalah menambah susah dan masalah kepada saudara seagama di sini. Untuk pengetahuan tuan-tuan semua, ramai pelajar Malaysia yang majoritinya adalah beragama Islam yang sekarang bermastautin di Sweden atas tujuan mencari ilmu yang inshaAllah akan digunakan untuk memberi khidmat kepada anak bangsa Melayu dan Islam di Malaysia yang mungkin generasi tersebut adalah terdiri dari anak-anak tuan-tuan juga. Jadi kami berharap, pihak tuan dapatlah sekiranya berfikir dua tiga empat atau lima kali sebelum bertindak. Semangat dan takbir hanyalah satu pembohongan jika ianya dilebihkan dari istighfar.

Ia benar, bantahan dan kutukan mesti dibuat, akan tetapi, biarlah bantahan yang dibuat itu berakhlak. Kami masyarakat Islam di sini juga telah membuat bantahan terhadap isu karikatur tersebut. Tuan-tuan di sana pun boleh berbuat demikian, tetapi tidaklah perlu sampai membakar bendera. Bendera bermakna satu negara, dan bukanlah keseluruhan orang di negara tersebut yang biadab dan membuat perkara-perkara bodoh.

Islam itu adalah akhlak. Dan sebagai pemimpin Islam, dalam apa jua perkara, akhlaklah juga yang perlu diutamakan.

Jazakumullah.

Semoga Allah mengampuni kami dan kamu, dan semoga Allah memberi hidayah kepada para pembenci Islam.

Terima kasih.

here is a bit of discussion about the saying…

وهذا سؤال ورد إلى الشيخ الدكتور محمد راتب النابلسي :
السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته : لقد سمعت هذة الحديث في التلفزيون و لم أجده في موسوعة الحديث و لا المحدث قال رسول الله : (من أراد الدنيا فعلية بالقرآن و من أراد الأخرة فعليه بالقرآن و من أرادهما معاً فعلية بالقرآن )
إذا كان هذة الحديث صحيحاً نرجوا منكم أن ترسلوا لنا النص الكامل للحديث مع السند و لكم مني الشكر سلفاً ؟؟ .
الأخ الكريم السلام عليكم ورحمة الله وبركاته
إجابة على سؤالكم نفيدكم بما يلي :لايوجد لهذا الكلام أصل في كتب الحديث…!

دمشق الدكتور محمد راتب النابلسي

Allah knows best…

Here is a good article about Siyasah vs Politics, even though the author is quite an infamous fella in th UK but the content of the article is pretty righteous. So here you go…

Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Raheem

Siyasah – The Way of Islam

All Praise and All Thanks are for Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta’ala) to whom we shall all return to be judged on The Last Day.

We praise Him and ask Him for help and forgiveness; and ask His protection from the mischief of our souls and the bad results of our deeds; whomsoever Allah guides, none can misguide; and whom He declares misguided, none can guide to the right path; and I bear witness that there is none worthy of worship but Allah: He is Alone, without partner. And I bear witness that Muhammad (salla Allahu’alayhi wa sallam) is the Messenger and Servant of Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta’ala).

Siyasah is an Arabic word which is often wrongly translated as “politics”. Correctly understood, Siyasah is the way we can do our honourable duty to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and His Messenger, Muhammad (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). As I have written elsewhere in an attempt to explain the difference between the Way of Islam and the ignorant ways of the kuffar:

“Siyasah is defined as the application of the Quran and Sunnah in the world: the means whereby Muslims can live in a community according to the command of Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta’ala) . That is, it is the practical application of the knowledge of Islam. Siyasah basically means commanding the good, and forbidding the bad, defined as these are by Quran and Sunnah alone: that is, it means a community ruled by an Ameer, or Khalifah, who rules according to Shari’ah, and who is thus the representative of Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta’ala) in this mortal world. What is the aim of siyasah? To uphold, maintain and expand the Way of Al-Islam through such things as Shari’ah and Jihad. What are the fundamental principles of siyasah? Bay’ah and Shura.”

Siyasah neither means, nor implies, democracy, just as the there is not and can be no such thing as an Islamic State. Democracy is a kaffir term, a kaffir concept, a Taghut which the kuffar obey, and has no place in Islam, just as the State is a kaffir term, a kaffir concept. To use such terms – to try and understand Islam in such terms – constitutes an imitation of the kuffar.

The Principle of Bayah:

Islam means bayah – this implies personal honour and its application. This allows for, and means, a person is responsible, before Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala, for themselves – that a person follows an Ameer to whom they have given their loyalty because that Ameer is understood as a representative of Allah. Such loyalty has the important condition that it is only valid so long as the person given loyalty is Muslim and is seen to uphold the word of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam): seen to judge everything by the Quran and Sunnah and seem to do his duty as a Muslim by obeying Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wasallam).

“Honour is with, and from, Allah alone.” 3: 139 Interpretation of Meaning An Ameer also gives bayah – to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), to be responsible for those whom he leads. It is a sacred trust. This bayah, and the honour upon which it is based, allow for the exercise of personal judgement in practical matters – that is, the Ameer-ul-Mumineen, the Khalifah, and the Khilafah in general, are human; they do not allow themselves to be governed by too many rules and regulations, for it is their Islam, their submission to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and His Messenger (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), their honour, their loyalty, and the judgement which arises from these, which are important, not human-made rules and regulations. That is, an official, a representative, of the Khalifah is expected to be an honourable individual, devoted to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), who is allowed, even expected, to use their own judgment, always basing that judgment on the Quran and Sunnah and always aware of how they will be called to account, by Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala, for their actions.

This principle of personal judgment – this lack of over-burdening rules and regulations – this humanity, is evident, for example, in the rule of Umar ibn al-Khattab (Radhiallahu ‘anhu) as recorded in the many Ahadith concerning him (see also Tarikh al-Khulafa by Jalal-uddin As-Suyut). It is evident in the Hadith regarding Mu’adh ibn Jaba (narrated by Abu Musa):

When Allah’s Messenger (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) sent him and Mu’adh bin Jabal to Yemen, he said to them: “Make things easy for the people rather than difficult; provide them with reports of good, and do not let them turn away [from what is honourable]. You should both work together, with mutual respect, understanding and loyalty.”Bukhari, Vol 8, Book 73, Number 145

Thus, Muhammad (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) – after entrusting them with the duty of ruling Yemen – did not go into great detail about what they should do, or provide them with detailed plans or burden them with regulations. Instead, he trusted them to act, to behave, as Muslims – with honour, fairness, and with the knowledge that they would be held accountable by Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala for their deeds.

This makes the practical implementation of Siyasah – the Khilafah – very different from the Western State with its abstract loyalty, its bureaucracy, its ever more powerful Police forces, its ever-increasing human-made, fallible, laws, and its remote politicians who pander to some passing idea, some trendy philosophy, or some human-made, fallible, ever-changing, “political programme” and who often lie, and use propaganda, in order to manipulate people, and secure their vote in some election.

For Islam, the supreme authority, the supreme judge, is Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala, and representatives of the Khilafah – from the Khalifah (Ameer-ul-Mumineen), to each and every Qadi, to each and every Ameer who has given bayah to the Khalifah – are only intermediaries, striving to do their honourable duty, and allowed to do their duty by virtue of the trust that has been placed in them. As intermediaries between Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and the Muslims, they are expected to act in accordance with the Quran and Sunnah, and with honour, with fairness, and often with mercy, with forgiveness, for as Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala says:

“Remember that Allah is The Most Merciful, He Who Often Forgives.” 5:34 Interpretation of Meaning

“Hukm is for Allah alone.” 6:57 Interpretation of Meaning

What this means in the practical sense is that the justice of Islam – the justice of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala – is the justice of honour, the justice seen to be honourable, and seen to be administered by honourable individuals who have no affectation, no remoteness from their fellow Muslims, no personal agenda. This makes it very different from the inflexible, abstract, fallible, so-called “justice” of the modern State.

You who believe, be firm in being fair – as a witness for Allah – even though it is not to your own advantage, nor to the advantage of your kin, and whether the matter concerns the rich, or the poor. For Allah is the best protector (of all).

Do not just follow your own desires, for you may deviate, and turn away, and Allah is always knowing of all that you do. 4:135 Interpretation of Meaning

Thus, the Khilafah embodies the virtues of the Muslim. There is no abstract loyalty to some Institution – but only personal loyalty (bayah) to Muslims who represent Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and that loyalty is, as stated above, dependant on those representatives being Muslim, remaining Muslim, and being seen to be Muslim: being seen to uphold, and judge by, the Quran and Sunnah and these alone; being obedient to the word of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu’alayhi wa sallam).

“Be loyal and do your duty to Allah; fear Him and always speak with honour. He will direct you to do honourable deeds and will forgive your mis-deeds. And whosoever obeys Allah and His Messenger will achieve the greatest achievement of all.” 33:70-71 Interpretation of Meaning

The Principle of Shura:

Shura means and implies consultation – but with those who have knowledge and experience of the matters under consideration. Thus, in the strict, Shariah, sense Shura means consulting Ahl al-hal waal-’aqd: the people of knowledge; those who are honourable and who have shown by their way of life that they are Muslim, fearing Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala. Shura does not mean, or imply, consulting “the people” in general, or asking them to vote on some issue, or vote in some “election”.

Thus, the Ameer-ul-Mumineen – the Khalifah – should consult with those who have knowledge and experience of a matter under consideration. But the decision – the responsibility for the decision – is his, alone. This is exactly what al-Khulafaa’ al-Raashidoon did, as evident, for example, in the Hadith narrated Maymun ibn Mahran in relation to Abu Bakr (Radhiallahu ‘anhu):

“When Abu Bakr encountered a problem, he would turn to the Book of Allah. If he found the answer, there, he would follow it; if not, he would ask those who knew the Prophet (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) if they knew what he had done in a similar situation. Thus, he might be informed what the Prophet (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) had done. If he was not, then he would consult with the leaders of the people. Umar also did this.” (See al Dahlawi, Hujatullah al Balighah, I, 315)

What matters for us as Muslims is compliance with the commands of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala – obedience to the Book of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala, and following the perfect example of the Prophet, Muhammad (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam). What does not matter are our fallible ideas, our views, our personal desires, our whims, or the views, desires, ideas and whims of the majority. Only through such obedience, such submission to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala, can we achieve the goal of this brief mortal life..

“It is not for the believer – man or woman – when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter, that they should have any option in their decision. For whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has indeed strayed into plain error.” 33:36 Interpretation of Meaning

“And this (Islam and the Quran) is the straight path of your Rabb. For those who take heed of Our clear revelations there shall be that dwelling which is peace (Jannah). 6:126-7 Interpretation of Meaning

Shariah:

Shariah is only a means – its purpose is to lead people to Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala, to help them remember Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam), and thus to prepare them for the judgement of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala.

The Khalifah – and thus the Khilafah – are bound by the Shariah, and their duty is to implement it. The Shariah details what is good, honourable, and what is bad, dishonourable, and is thus a guide to what we should do, and should not do. The Shariah prescribes certain punishments – Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala has clearly set the limits (hudood), the boundaries which we are warned not to cross, for the insolence of such disobedience has consequences.

“Observe the limits which Allah has set.” 9:112

“And over you are Watchers – just, honourable – who know and record [write down] all that you do. Thus shall those who do what is commanded be in bliss while the disobedient will be in the blazing Fire. ” 82:10-14 Interpretation of Meaning

As Muslims, we should recognize and accept the wisdom of Shariah, as we should strive to place acceptance of it – and acceptance of its prescribed punishments – before our fallible personal ideas, before our personal desires, before our personal views. We should especially distance ourselves from the views, and the ideas, the concepts, of the kuffar in relation to Shariah, and Hudood.

“Judge between them by what Allah has revealed: do not give in to your own desires, and beware, for they will try to lead you astray, away from some of that which Allah has revealed. And if they turn away, there is the knowledge of their punishment by Allah for some transgression of theirs – and, indeed, there are many disobedient, rebellious ones [Fasiqun]. Do they seek to judge according to the ways of Jahiliyyah? The judgement of Allah is best – for those who sincerely believe.” 5:49-50 Interpretation of Meaning

“If you believe in Allah and The Last Day do not let pity deter you from administering the punishments which Allah has ordained, and let a group of those who believe witness such punishment.” 24:2 Interpretation of Meaning

Conclusion:

Siyasah – the Way of Al-Islam – is implemented by bayah and Shura. Bayah means an Ameer, a Khalifah – a leader who is obeyed, and to whom Muslims give a pledge of loyalty, because that leader is considered to be a representative, in this life, of Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala, so long as he is seen to obey Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala and His Messenger (salla Allahu ‘alayhi wa sallam) and is thus seen, and known, as an honourable Muslim. An Ameer rules by striving to follow the guidelines of the Quran and Sunnah, by Shura, and by implementing the Shariah. This is quite different from the ways of the kuffar, who judge according to their own fallible ideas, according to their own desires, according to their own fallible human-made laws, and who, in their arrogant disobedience, insist that we Muslims must abandon the Way of Islam for their ways of ignorance, and accept their idols, the Taghut, of “democracy”, of “the State”, and of “the nation”, idols which they have set up to compete with Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala.

“Allah never forgives those who ascribe anything as equal to Him – even though he can forgive other things. For whomsoever ascribes anything as equal to Allah has indeed established extreme dishonour.” 5:48 Interpretation of Meaning

“How could I seek a Rabb other than Allah, for He is the Rabb of everything.” 6:164

“In truth We have sent Messengers to every people with a warning for them to submit only to Allah and so reject the Taghut.” 16:36 Interpretation of Meaning

We Muslims must distance ourselves from the ways, the Taghut, of the kuffar – evident in their “democracy”, their “State”, their “politics” – and commit ourselves to upholding the Way of Al-Islam. Thus must we speak, and write about, Siyasah, bayah, the Khilafah, Shariah, accepting the superiority of our Way, given to us by Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala, over and above the ways of the kuffar.

May Allah (Subhanahu wa Ta’ala) protect us from all forms of Al-asabiyyah Al-Jahiliyyah, forgive us for our mistakes, and guide us to and keep us on the Right Path.

Abdul-Aziz ibn Myatt

26 Safar 1427

“There is no believing servant except that he has a sin which he commits from time to time, or a sin in which he persists in and does not abandon until he leaves this world. Indeed the Believer was created as one who is frequently tried and tested, who often repents (then) forgets. When he is admonished he accepts the admonition.” Reported by at-Tabaraanee in al-Mu’jamul Kabeer (no. 11,810); hasan.

The question:

2. Some people have quoted from Habib ‘Ali (he was just here on his first ever trip to Syria) that according to the Shafi’is, the beard is only that which grows on the chin so [? to be deleted I think] and so there is no karaha in shaving everything else. My sheikh for Shafi’i fiqh does not agree with this, and he said that several of the Yemeni Shafi’is that he has met disagree with what is being quoted from Habib ‘Ali. One of the proofs for this is something that Imam al-Nawawi quotes from Imam al-Ghazali in Al-Ihya, quoted from Qut al-Qutulub [al-Qulub; by Abu Talib al-Makki] regarding several things that are disliked with the beard. They include taking too much or leaving too much, which is explained to mean shaving the head and taking too much of the beard with it or leaving too much of the beard. These two scenarios can only be understood if the sideburns (‘aridan) are included as part of the beard.

The answer:

II. As for the beard:

Any Shafi’i fiqh students, who have studied the Fath al-Qarib, Fath al-Mu’in and Fath al-Wahhab (the 3 most important manuals that are usually taught in a systematic Shafi’i curriculum and school) should know the definition of a beard [lihya; not with a fatha, since 'lahya' are the jawbones and is one of the technical terms used when defining the areas of al-fard, namely that which is included in the washing of the face during the wudu']. The lihya is: “that which grows on the chin” [a famous phrase from the Fath al-Mu'in: wa-lihyatin wa-hiya ma nabata 'ala al-dhaqani; I'anat al-Talibin, 1:50]. Indeed, according to the well-established technical vocabulary of our school, the lateral hairs ['aridan] are not considered to be part of the lihya (as the matn of the Fath al-Mu’in, for example, continues to make it unequivocally clear such as when it goes on to define the sideburn or ‘arid, anew, and being clearly different from the definition of the beard or lihya above: “the ‘arid [whiskers at the side of the face, or for lack of a better term, "lateral hair" or "side hair" of the face which will include "jaw hair" (and including, of course, any "cheek hair" - if it grows genetically that high) or I suppose, another English term maybe sideburns - if this term can accommodate all of these facial hair] is that [of the facial hair] which goes down to [meet] the beard.” [Ibid.]). The only thing in common between the lateral hairs and the beard in our school, is that the lateral hairs are treated like the beard in their hukm of washing the face during wudu’: if it is khafifa [thin], then, its inner and outer hair and skin beneath must be washed; if it is kathifa [thick], then, it is only obligatory to wash the outer hair but only Sunna or recommended to do takhlil [to comb it with one's wet fingers].

Given that the Qawl Sahih [Sound Position] of Imam al-Nawawi (al-Nawawi, al-Majmu’, 1:357-358) which is also the Qawl Mu’tamad [Relied Upon Position] in our school (I’anat, 2:386; this, despite when the author of the Fath al-Mu’in followed the weaker opinion, Sayyid al-Bakri immediately makes known the well-accepted position), that shaving the lihya is only Makruh, and not Haram, the statement made by Habib ‘Ali of Dar al-Mustafa, Tarim, is completely justified and free from any blame. Indeed, there is no karaha or dislikedness in shaving the lateral hairs or anything else that is not included to be part of the lihya, defined by our jurists. There is no where more clearer than what can be found in the Fatwa of Imam al-Ramli, one of the principal late figures of the Shafi’i school:

“Question: Is it Haram to shave and trim the [hair of the] chin [dhaqan; i.e., what is meant here is of course, the 'hair of the chin,' that is to say, the beard; notice that Imam al-Ramli purposely used the phrase, 'dhaqan' in the question (and not 'lihya') but used 'lihya' in his answer--this is to prevent any ambiguity arising from what is meant by the word 'beard']? Answer: To shave and trim the beard [lihya] of a man is Makruh, and not Haram. Whereas the statement of [Qadi] al-Halimi [a predecessor of Imam al-Ghazali, a Shafi'i Qadi and Muhaddith in Bukhara; d. 403 H/1012] in his Minhaj [fi Shu'ab al-Iman, (note, not a work of fiqh) that] ‘it is not permissible for anyone to shave off his beard and eyebrows’, is a Weak Position [Dai'f].” [al-Ramli, Fatawa, 4:69].

The text of the Ihya’ (which is not a fiqh work, but a work on adab and tasawwuf, that usually presents rulings stricter than the official Shafi’i positions – for reasons following the way of Wara’ and scrupulousness out of piety, taking the way of caution and leaving the rukhsa and dispensations), in this case, does not, in the end, depart from the minimum legal position that shaving the beard is Makruh. In fact, al-Ghazali, caused a stir amongst our jurists when he presented a more lenient ruling such as when he said that it is permissible [Mubah; in that, it is not Makruh] to trim the beard for the sake of ‘keeping up appearances’ (while the position of our school is still, shaving or trimming the beard in any way, is Makruh):

“The directive here [of Ibn 'Umar and a group of the Tabi'in, which al-Sha'bi and Ibn Sirin consider good [meaning Mandub or recommended], that there is no harm in a man grasping his beard with his hand, and whatever exceeds that, he cuts] is more accurate [qarib; as opposed to the opinions of al-Hasan al-Basri and Qatada (may Allah be pleased with all of them, notwithstanding their khilaf!) (which is the position of the Shafi'is) that it is unconditionally Makruh to trim the beard, even if it is longer or lesser than what some say to be the minimum, that is, a 'handful'] if* it does not lead to cutting off the beard [completely] and rounding it off the sides [i.e., a clean-shaven face]. Because [read "fa'-ta'lil" here because of "inna"] [the resulting] excessive length may make the appearance ugly, and may incite backbiters with ridiculing him, then, there is no harm [if the beard is trimmed] in accordance with this intention, [that is] to guard against (the excessive length that may make the appearance ugly). [al-Ghazali, Ihya', 1:168].

* “if” is understood as “when at the same time,” because the conditional particle, “in-shartiyya” is read like “idh-zarfiyya” or “idha” here.

For this reason, al-Nawawi (in the Majmu’, above) and Ibn Hajar, immediately corrected al-Ghazali and reaffirmed the well-accepted Shafi’iyya position, that is, to remove the beard in any way, even if a little, is Makruh. That is why Ibn Hajar says in the Tuhfa: “Whereas the claim [i.e., made by al-Ghazali], then, that ‘it makes the appearance ugly’ [and therefore it is not Makruh to trim the beard for this reason] is rejected [mamnu']. On the contrary, what is ugly [mushawwah] is to abandon its maintenance by [not] washing and oiling.” [Ibn Hajar, Tuhfa, 12:303].

Given that the Shafi’i school has the most lenient fiqhi position regarding the beard (in that it is not Haram to shave it off, even completely (but like leaving the khuff, above, it becomes Haram when one does this, intending to go against the Prophetic Example or thinking that the sunna of the non-Muslims is superior to ours), unlike the Hanafis, for instance, that to trim the beard when it is less than the minimum is Haram), our Imams stress the ‘unconditional’ nature of the dislikedness in trimming the beard; and because of the absolute Makruh, our school does not strictly set a minimum limit for the beard. This explains why scholars like al-Nawawi and Ibn Hajar, consider the opinions of those setting a minimum limit for the beard (such as al-Ghazali and later on, the Mufti of Zabid, al-Ashkhar (d. 903 H/1497), who followed one of Imam al-Adhra’i's conflicting opinions, set the minimum limit of the beard to be the throat or the ‘handful’, which basically means that what grows beyond the ‘handful’ or the ‘minimum limit’, so to speak, is no longer considered Makruh to cut off [Ba 'Alawi, Bughya al-Mustarshidin, 20]) to be even more lenient than what is already a lenient position vis-a-vis the four schools of fiqh. That is why the position of the school remains that it is unconditionally Makruh to trim or shave the beard in any way.

As from your statement, “They include taking too much or leaving too much, which is explained to mean shaving the head [? - this explanation, I'm sure, is not what was meant] and taking too much of the beard with it or leaving too much of the beard. These two scenarios can only be understood if the sideburns (‘aridan) are included as part of the beard,” the explanation and the inference made that the beard includes other than that which grows on the chin, is, I am afraid, wrong (mamnu’; for reasons that will be made clear below, but most important of all is, what is found in the Ihya’ is not a hukm fiqhi or legal judgement). Al-Ghazali goes on to say (this is the point where Imam al-Ghazali begins to selectively borrow from the Qut al-Qulub of Abu Talib al-Makki):

“Al-Nakha’i (may Allah be pleased with him!) said: “I am amazed at why a reasonable man whose beard is long does not cut it off, and make it ‘between two beards’ [i.e., a majaz or figurative expression to mean 'a beard that is not too long and not too short'], for moderation is good in everything.” For this reason, it is said: “The longer the beard, the smaller the mind.”" [Ihya', 1:168; cf. al-Makki, Qut, 3:361].

The ‘taking too much or leaving too much’ from the beard or more appropriately, the ‘avoiding its being too long and its being too short’ scenario appears only in this metaphor of al-Nakha’i, still, not, as you thought, in the Qut al-Qulub part VIA al-Ghazali’s Ihya’, which discusses the ten Makruh (note, still not Haram) practices relating to the beard. Instead, what appears in that latter part, contradicts the ‘avoiding its being too long and its being too short scenario’, since there, al-Ghazali was actually saying: to exceed (ziyada) the beard (and no mention of naqs or reduction here, in spite what was originally written by al-Makki) beyond ‘its limit’ is what is in fact Makruh (and incidentally, there is already mention of lateral hairs here):

“The seventh [practice that is Makruh concerning the beard] is: allowing it to exceed [ziyada; notice al-Ghazali kept the verb 'zada yazidu ziyadatan', and did not replace it with tawfir (to let grow) or i'fa (to keep or leave it alone), while ziyada has also the meaning of to add or make addition of something to something else]. That is to say, to exceed the lateral hairs [growing out] of the temples [in fiqh, this is technically known as the 'idhar], namely, [that it grows] from the hair of the head until it goes beyond the jawbones and reaching ultimately to halfway down the cheeks. This [to allow the 'excesses' of the 'beard'], is inconsistent with the state of the people of righteousness [i.e., the Pious Predecessors or the Salaf].” [Ihya', 1:170]. (This circumstance can be seen clearest when the head is shaved and if that person is genetically able to grow the lateral hairs and the ‘idhar; in the published version of this answer, there will be an illustration, insha’ Allah!)

It should be mentioned here (without, I hope, making it complicated, or ‘surprising’), that al-Ghazali had, in fact, edited the original words of Abu Talib al-Makki. Al-Makki, for example, originally mentions that among the disliked practices relating to the beard, is to exceed it and to be deficient of it (in other words, defining the maximum and what is less than the minimum limits of the beard, according to al-Makki (whose tariqa in fiqh was not Shafi’i, but Hanafi):

“Among this [from the 12 Makruh (not the 10 like in the Ihya') practices relating to the beard] is its deficiency [nuqsan] and excess [ziyada]. That is to say [the excess is], to exceed the lateral hairs [growing out] of the temple [bones] from the hair of the head until it goes beyond the jawbones, and that is the limit [hadd] of the beard. Or, the deficiency of the beard, is to be deficient [by omitting, not letting it grow, or trimming it] from the jawbones to halfway up the cheeks, and that is similar to (the hukm of exceeding the beard).” [al-Makki, Qut al-Qulub, 3:357].

So it should be clear to us by now that the words of al-Makki’s Qut al-Qulub have been carefully and purposely emended by al-Ghazali, and in the edited version (which we can now say, al-Ghazali’s own words), al-Ghazali does not define the lateral hairs to be a part of the beard. (In particular, the absence of al-Makki’s original words, wa-dhalika huwa haddu l-lihyati [and that is limit of the beard], is telling.) That is why al-Ghazali does not mention his source here (that it is from the Qut al-Qulub), and specialists on Ghazalian studies will be able to confirm that this is the usual practice in almost all of al-Ghazali’s works: not to mention the source when the carefully edited portions of the source text makes subtle but crucial departures from the original author. The fact that al-Ghazali’s emended discussion is now about the dislikedness of letting the ‘beard’ grow (not to mention the conspicuous omission of al-Makki’s ‘nuqsan’), should, for Shafi’is, be a clear indication that he is not talking about the ‘conventional’ beard (i.e., that which grows on the chin); because the alternative would mean that it will not be Makruh to trim off the beard. This is the removal of your obstacle [zawal al-mani', Amin]! Moreover, even if one wanted to push the boundaries of Arabic majaz, of al-Nakha’i's ‘between two beards’ to include the lateral hairs as a part of the beard, then one must remember that this still does not amount to a legal definition [hadd] of lihya, for neither the Ihya’ nor the Qut are works of fiqh. In fact, rhetorical and figurative devices (found aplenty in works like the Ihya’) are not a normal feature of fiqhi literature. Rather, fiqhi works are supposed to be ‘sober’ and ‘dry’ so that it should be crystal clear in order to leave no room for confusion, since the ‘minimum’ legal rulings are what are sought for from these works, as any beginner students of Fiqh who are familiar with the Mawdu’ [subject-matter] of ‘ilm fiqh, knows that it concerns “the actions of the Mukallaf [legally responsible person] in which the [five] legal rulings are presented to them.” Failing that, we have the shuruh [commentaries] and the hawashi [super-commentaries] to shed light upon anything that seems unclear in the matn [main text]. (We can already see that the style of al-Ghazali’s works on ‘proper’ fiqh like the Wajiz and Wasit differs considerably from the style of the Ihya’ and his other popular works.)

In the fiqhi literature, we find for example, Sayyid al-Bakri confirming that al-Ghazali followed the majority [Jumhur; Shafi'i] opinion, in that it is Makruh to shave or trim the beard. [I'anat, 2:386]. (Al-Ghazali’s two surviving works on fiqh, the Wajiz and Wasit, the Short and Middle Abridgement of his teacher’s massive commentary on the Mukhtasar of Imam al-Muzani, al-Juwayni’s Nihaya al-Matlab, do not have a discussion on the beard; his Longest Abridgement, the Basit, is not extant in full and as far as we know today, only fragments of this work survives in manuscript form–and it is in the interest of Shafi’i scholars worldwide to seek out this lost treasure! His shortest work on fiqh, the Khulasa (al-Ghazali’s own abridgement on al-Muzani’s al-Mukhtasar), which fortunately survives, but unfortunately, the 100 folios of handwritten manuscript remains unedited in the Sulaymaniyya Library at Istanbul (MS Sulaimaniye 442; for which the author has a copy of it), too, does not discuss the beard. As for his earliest ‘work(s)’ on fiqh, the Ta’liqa fi Furu’ al-Fiqh al-Shafi’i – which is lost – was never published by him.)

Furthermore, unlike the khilaf whether it is Makruh or Haram to shave the beard in the first place, there is no khilaf in our school regarding the definition of the beard that includes other than ‘what grows on the chin’; otherwise we will have to find in places where the hukm of trimming the beard is discussed (either in Bab ‘Aqiqa or Siwak), a qualification saying that the lihya also includes the ‘aridan (for which there is no such precedent). Imam al-Ramli’s unequivocal fatwa above is the standard qawl used by any Shafi’i teachers to dispel the notion that the lateral hairs are a part of the beard. So with all due respect to your Shafi’i teachers, their objections to Habib ‘Ali’s statement that “there is no karaha in shaving everything else [other than what grows on the chin]“, is either:

(a) with the hukm of Makruh or dislikedness for shaving the beard itself, or

(b) with the definition of a beard that includes other than what grows on the chin.

If it is with the latter, then their objection has to be off the mark, since that understanding of the beard, as such, is alien to our school, and if they were teaching the Fath al-Mu’in, for example, they would surely know this fact. If it is with the former, then your teachers are following the Qawl Marjuh or the alternative position (in fact, strictly speaking, it is the Qawl Da’if or the Weak Position) of the school in saying that it is Haram to shave the beard (which only a minority of Shafi’i jurists adopted this position such as, the most cited one was Qadi al-Halimi above; and even with this stricter hukm, it is only what grows on the chin). (Normally, one is not allowed to follow the weak position, except if it is for personal practice [li-'amal nafsih], and if it is not for taking rukhsa–in fact, in this case, it is leaving a rukhsa in view of adopting the more strict or ‘azima position.) Despite this, the relied upon fiqhi opinion for the Shafi’is, for ‘amma (public) as well as khassa (scholars), by living (such as Habib Zayn Ibn Sumayt al-Madani) as well as those recently moved-from-this-world authorities (such as, the well-known Musnid al-Waqt, Shaykh Muhammad Yasin al-Fadani al-Makki) is still that it is Makruh (all four Tawa’if of the school, al-Nawawi and al-Rafi’i, Ibn Hajar and al-Ramli, including Shaykh al-Islam Zakariyya al-Ansari, concur on this hukm)–and if someone wants to follow the qawl and position which says that it is Haram to shave, then yes by all means please do so, but know that that person is following the ‘alternative position’, and one must not, therefore, censure others for following the well-accepted position of the school. Furthermore, that when one does that, one is intending to follow the stricter position, and doing so out of Wara’ and doing what is better (and better still to keep to oneself), but, the minimum fiqhi position for ‘amal and ta’lim, for practice and instruction, is still, as far as the Shafi’is are concerned, that I’fa’ wa Tawfir al-Lihya [leaving or keeping the beard] is Sunna or recommended, not Wajib, while Halq al-Lihya [shaving or removing the beard] is Makruh, not Haram. The fiqh ruling is always easy, the difficulty is always with its adab; fiqhi works and judgements are always dry save with its close companion, Tasawwuf. It could be, therefore, that one may be conflating the minimum ruling (its fiqhi ruling) with the optimal ruling (its adab/tasawwuf judgement).

In the case that your teachers have raised those objections, then it would only be appropriate for us as students to think the best of our teachers in return (and hasten to remember the service they have rendered to us – no matter how small – and the big debt we will owe them in the hereafter), and to assume (without asking them) that they are in fact taking the way of caution that is beyond the fiqhi ruling; after that, if any conflicting issues remain, then as students, it is only right that we make ta’wil and interpret their confusing statements in order to do what students are expected to do in this situation, to prevent mukhalafa al-qulub (between the student and teacher)–doing all of this on account of acknowledging our ignorance, iftiqar and weakness on our part, and our inability to understand the wisdom behind what they were saying.

To sum up, yes, for us, legally, “the beard is only that which grows on the chin and so there is no karaha in shaving everything else.” It is well-known that the Shafi’is hold the most lenient position concerning the beard. Dhaqan or what grows on the chin is the real or ‘legal’ beard, while what grows on the ‘aridan or lateral hairs is the pseudo-beard. (That explains why the pseudo-beard is to be treated like the lihya during the wudu’, despite the fact that they are, legally, two different things.) The fiqhi ruling that it being Makruh to remove in any way, applies only to what is the legal minimum, namely, the lihya and not to any of the ‘arid.

On this note, I think it appropriate that we end with the following wisdom of our ‘ulama al-’amilin:

rahmatu l-ummati fi ikhtilafi l-a’immati [The Umma's mercy is in the khilaf of the Imams].

May this be of benefit, wallahu wa-rasulu ahkam bi-s-sawab!

Your weak brother,

Muhammad Afifi al-Akiti ©
Oxford
16 Rabi’ II 1424
17 VI 2003

Assalamu Alaykum

If Allah permits I will clarify some issues regarding Imam Nawawiys position on the beard and its relation to the Shafi’iy mathab.

One must understand that when it comes to the Shafi’iy school, Imam al-Nawawiys position is held in the highest esteem. Imam Nawawiy, Imam Rafi’iy, Shaykh Ibn Hajar al-Haytami, Shaykh al-Ramli, Shaykh Zakariyah al-Ansari all agreed that it is makruh. Anyone with some knowledge of the school are well aware of that this couldn’t be anything but the established position of the school, as it is known that Imam Nawawiy and Imam Rafi’iys positions are the strongest, and when they disagree Imam Nawawiy comes first. To understand the Shafi’iy school one should go through Shaykhayn (Nawawiy and Rafi’iy). Imam Ibn Hajr al-Haytami says in Tuhfat al-Muhtaj that if Imam al-Shafi’iy held such an opinion, if it can’t be interpreted in a different manner, then his opinion is contrary to the established position of the mathab. I am sure that if Imam Nawawiy changed his opinion, then Imam Ibn Hajr and Imam Ramli would have known this. But they said that the relied-upon opinion of the mathab is that it is makruh, following the fatawa of Imam Nawawi and Rafi’i.

There is an even more lenient position within the mathab which says that as long as one keeps a short beard, one has fulfilled the Sunnah. Hujjat al-Islam Imam Ghazali he held it to be mubah to shorten it. He said that excessive beard may look ugly, and there is no harm to shorten it to make sure one has a good appearance. In matter of fact it would be concidered makruh to have an excessive beard.

Ibn Hajr rejects this in Tuhfa [12:303] saying what makes it appear ugly is that one does not take care of it. It is to be known that Imam Nawawi concidered it makruh to take anything from the beard, and did not set a minimum nor a maximum length for the beard. So it would be concidered makruh for Hisham Kabbani to trim his beard a bit, just as it is makruh to be clean shaven.

Imam Ghazali quoted Abu Talib al-Makkiys Qut al-Qulub [3:361]:

“Al-Nakha’i (radiallahu anhu) said: “I am amazed at why a reasonable man whose beard is long does not cut it off, and make it ‘between two beards’ [i.e. a beard that is neither too long or too short], for moderation is good in everything.” For this reason, it is said: “The longer the beard, the smaller the mind.””

If one wants to look into Imam Ghazaliy said one can refer to “Ihya” – 1:168.

There is also a position in the Malikiy school stating that a short beard fulfills the Sunnah.

Al-Hafeth Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani quoted Qadiy Iyad as saying that it is makruh to shave, cut, or trim the beard. (Fathul Bariy – under hadith ‘Trim the moustache and leave the beard)

Yes, some scholars concidered it unlawful to shave the beard.
Among them is Qaffal ash-Shashiy, Adhra’iy, and Qadi al-Halimiy. But this is concidered a weak opinion within the mathab, and is rejected.
One would be allowed to follow a weak opinion as personal preference, but not try to enforce it on others. One can never blame one for following the relied-upon opinion, which is that it’s mandub to grow a beard and makruh to trim it.

There is also misconceptions regarding what is concidered part of the beard. Fath al-Mu’in, Fath al-Qarib, and Fath al-Wahhab all defined the liyha (that which we were told to keep – note: different from layha – meaning jawbone) to be “that which grows on the chin”. The vocabulary of the Shafi’iy mathab says that other facial hair such as sideburns, what grows on the cheeks and under the lips, are not concidered to be from the lihya.

wassalam

husayn

jag ber till Gud så Han ska välsigna mitt förhållande till dig, min fästmö. Jag ber också till Gud att vårt förhållande ska hålla och på att Han ska välsigna vårt bröllop nästa år insyaAllah. Jag hoppas vi ska leva ett långt och lyckligt liv insyaAllah. Min vän, Jag älskar dig i all oändlighet!

Med vänliga hälsningar,

/din Bemi

jag ber till Gud så Han ska begåvar med mitt förhållande till dig, min fästmö. Jag också ber till Gud så ditt förhållande ska att hålla på välsigna bröllop nästa år insyaAllah. Jag hoppas vi ska leva ett långt och lyckligt liv insyaAllah. Min vän, Jag älskar dig i all oändlighet!

Med vänliga hälsningar,

/den Bemi

one day this beautiful charming cute princess asks a question to her prince… “abang why do you love me? could you please tell me why? my friends told me that their husbands has told them thousand of reasons why they do love them… and that’s so romantic and has made them feel so happy. So i really wanted to hear that from you, could you my prince? “

Then the husband answers “oh abang really don’t have any particular reasons why do i love you sayang and I really don’t know how to explain that to you either. However what I do know is that I reaaaaally love you”

The wife then said in a disappointment “oh abang say that abang love me, but abang don’t know why? How come abang could ever love me if abang don’t know the reasons why abang love me? Then that’s not a true love I could say”

“Oh my dear, I told you the truth that I love you! I love you with all my heart and might!”

“No abang don’t really love me. abang lied that abang love me. If abang love me then tell me why. you know that my friends said that their husband even wrote them a poetic romantic song to express their love” now she started to shed tears and cry.

The husband feels guilty to make his lovely princess cried and he quickly hugs his princess and asks for apologies. While stroking the princess hair, the husband whispers “sayang I do love you sooo much. I love you in the past, now and forever, and I love you for so many reasons which I am not capable to tell you every single one of it but believe me that I love you soooo much. Sayang you are so beautiful which my heart will feel so happy to just look at you and that by looking at you I feel calm and strong. Sayang you are so kind to me that there’s no other woman has treated me like that. Sayang you are not only beautiful and kind, but you are also smart and brilliant. You are so bright and you always remind me of something I have forgotten or something I did wrong. You always share with me your bright ideas and you are willing to listen to mine at the same time. Oh I like to listen to you talking this and that, your voice are so beautiful and sexy, you know I can spend hours to just to listen to you… You are so considerate and you are so tolerate. Sayang you are so gorgeous and elegant, you are hot and sexy and I enjoy looking at you in no matter what you do: walking, sleeping, eating you name it. Sayang you are the cutest girl I have ever met. Oh you know sayang, you have made me feel like I am the most luckiest guy in this world. I am so happy… I love you…” and the husband gives a kiss to the princess lips which makes her happy again. The princess gives a reply kiss to her prince, she smiles widely and she whispers “thank you my prince”

Then they live their life together as husband and wife. They live happily… until that day arrives…

it is the 1^st anniversary for the prince and the princess and it is supposed to be a very meaningful day that they will celebrate together, and the night is supposed to be a very romantic night just like their first night together… but that’s all human can do, their plan is inferior to the God’s plan. On that day the bright skies has turned to be so gloomy, as the happiness has turned into sadness. it is such a tragedy…

The princess is hit by a car in a very tragic accident, on her way back to prepare her husbands’ favorite meals. Together with her is an anniversary gift to her beloved husband, a blue shirt which is wrapped together with a love letter… The princess is severely injured and she becomes paralyze and has gone into a state of coma.

The husband is so sad. He sheds tears day and night. He takes a long leave from his job just to take care of his princess at the hospital. He spends his day and night with her, and patiently waiting to her to wake up from coma…

Yeah the time goes fast… day and night keeps rotating one after another… days become weeks… weeks become months… the princess still in coma… after a few months at the hospital she’s finally been discharged as doctors have no more means to treat her anymore… so the prince takes the princess back to their house which is located in a bit rural area… close by the sea… it’s such a tranquil place… so peaceful… where the husband spends his life to look after and to take care of his dearly princess…

One year has passed, and the day has arrived again… the day of anniversary… also the day of tragedy… so today the husband is working alone to prepare some dishes… those of favorites foods of his princess… he arranges red roses prepared in a vase which is the princess favorites flowers… and he prepared a gift for her… a pink gown… that she really dreamed for… before… last year…

After everything has done… the husband takes a sit beside his princess who were peacefully sleeping in bed… he is wearing a blue shirt, a gift from his love on the day of tragedy last year… and the shirt is still stained with blood color on it… but he doesn’t care about all those stains… he open up the envelope of the letter that her wife wrote to him on that day of tragedy last year… he read it slowly till the end… and he couldn’t hold his tears anymore… he cries… he cries… and he cries… he is so tired… but with a bit of strength that still left intact he tries to get a pen and a piece of paper and starts to write… it’s a love letter to his princess… upon completing the last word in that letter… he lies down in bed and he falls asleep beside the princess… while holding her hand firmly… and with tears still drop in…

In his hand is a letter… that he grabs tightly… heartily… the letter that he writes to his princess… his wife… his heart and his soul… the one that he really loves so much…

Sayang,

Abang would like to wish you happy anniversary…it’s our 2^nd anniversary remember? Oh sayang, do you still remember on that night… when you ask me about the reason why I love you and you were crying because I didn’t know what to answer… but then finally I tell you some of the reasons which later has made you really happy

Oh sayang, to be frank… abang still don’t know what to answer… and I don’t know why I love you… the only reason why I love you… is because I REALLY LOVE YOU…

Sayang, on that night I told you that I love you because you are so beautiful… before you have a very beauty face… really looks like a princess… but now… there are scars on your face… yeah before you have beautiful long hair but now your hair has been cut short because the doctor said it’s easier to clean the bleeding on your head… so now you are not beautiful anymore… that’s what people say… so should I love you no more? should stop loving you? just because one of the reasons to love you has gone?

Sayang, I told you that you are so kind to me. before you take care of everything at home, you cooked for me, you washed my clothes, you fulfilled my desire and so many more things that you had treated me so kindly… but now, what can you do for me? you cannot cook for me now, you cannot wash my clothes, we cannot making love anymore… so should I not love you anymore? because one more reason to love you has gone?

Sayang, I told you that you are so brilliant and smart. You help me solve my problems… you share your bright ideas with me… but now, what can you do? You cannot think anymore… so should I still love you? and now you cannot even speak, you cannot even walk, you cannot do anything… you can do nothing… even to move your fingers… u can’t… so should I not love you anymore? coz all those reasons that I told you have gone?…

No sayang! No! I love you… and I still love you… If I ever need reasons to love you, then yeah I really shouldn’t love you anymore by now… but as I told you I don’t have reasons to love you, I don’t know why I do love you… the only answer I have is because I REALLY LOVE YOU!…

Sayang I love you in the past… I love you now… and I will love you forever… sayang, do you know… LOVE is something that cannot be touched, cannot be seen and cannot be heard of… because LOVE is something that only can be felt in your heart… it’s so pure and it is eternity.

Your love,

/abang