[megatrendsZ]

as-salaamu 'alaykum,

can someone post the Fatawa of Abu Qaanit al-Hasani in this Forum?

I talk about this Fatawa:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24980198/A...-Hasani-Fatawa

I want to read this Fatawa, but my internet-connenction works to slowly. Therefore I can't read this Fatawa..

I hope someone can help me and can copy this Fatawa in this topic.

Barakallahu fikum

[Anypeny]

Its more that 500 pages.

[megatrendsZ]

salaam 'alaykum,

Doesn't this Fatawa exist as E-Book?

When it does not exist as E-Book, can someone of you copy at least some important Fatawa? Maybe the Fatawa about Fiqh.. for example: Fatawa about prayer, fasting, clothing-laws, purity etc.

So i want only read the Fatawa about Fiqh. I hope someone can help me and copy only a few Fatawa.

Jazaaka Allah khairan

[Anypeny]

I have attached the pdf file of the fatwas, its only around 3 Mb.

[megatrendsZ]

salamalaikum

Thank u very much akhee, but the attached file doesn't works, too (allahu alam why). Can u please post the Fatawa of the following categories?:

1. Formal Prayer Questions

2. Food Law Questions

The former is more important for me than the latter

May Allah bless you all

[Anypeny]

I have re uploaded the pdf file: http://www.2shared.com/document/gfov...-Hasani-F.html

Here is the questions you wanted:

General Prayer Questions
> What is the basic form of the prayer in Maliki fiqh?
This is described in detail in the Explanatory Notes for Song 12,
lines 12:409 to 12:452.
> I have learned to pray with the language of (I believe) Hanafi fiqh,
> and I am asking about Maliki fiqh
Please note that all past traditional scholars (e.g., Hanafi,
Shafi`i, Hanbali, Maliki, Ja`fari, `Awza`i, Dhahiri, Thawri, etc.) basically
agree on most of the necessary/wajib parts of prayer. Thus if you prayed
exactly like a Hanafi, your prayer would be totally correct
according to the Maliki school.
Thus, the essentials/wajibs of the prayer in the Maliki school do *not*
include leaving hands to the side, moving one's finger while testifying,
nor making only one salam; these are only weaker mandub acts. One may
omit such details if one feels that doing such may cause confusion for the
unlearned people around one. Alternatively, one may pray with a sheet
wrapped around one's shoulders and then the position of one's hands
and body will remain concealed.
In summary, the differences between the schools in prayer
are mostly about makruh/mandub details and about specific
detailed rulings for the case when something goes wrong
in your prayer. Thus, the schools sufficiently agree such that
a Shafi`i, Hanafi, or Hanbali prayer are all correct even for
followers of the Maliki school. [Please note that this is also
due to the less rigid and more flexible nature of the
Maliki school. Sometimes, a correct Maliki prayer is incorrect
in one of the stricter schools.]
> In my local mosque, the vast majority of people are
> followers of Imam Malik's school. However, I have noticed
> that the way in which they perform their prayers does not
> conform to the guidelines of the Guiding Helper. Thus, none of them
> hang their hands at their sides; they raise their hands to their
> shoulders several times during prayer, instead of once; they
> prostrate on their knees first instead of their hands; just before
> standing up to complete the first (or third) unit of prayer, they
> perform an additional sitting posture for a few seconds; they
> (including the Maliki imam) say the salam twice to terminate
> the prayer.
We would say that our official opinion about their prayers according
to what you have described is:
a) Their prayers are definitely correct and acceptable in the
Maliki school.
b) For some of the acts that you mention above, you will find
authentic Maliki scholars who have given such opinions.
c) None of the acts you mention are the popular or mash-hur
opinion in the Maliki school about that act.
Since the Guiding Helper is intended for a large audience, we have
stuck closely to the popular opinions in close to 95% of the issues
for the unified dissemination of knowledge except the issues that are
very difficult to practice or are hard to learn (in which case we have
narrated easier authentic Maliki opinions).
References:
GH Songs 14, 15, 16, and 17 and associated entries in the Notes of
Sources.
> The Guiding Helper does say that it is specific to a section
> of scholars, so it is understandable if other people are
> sometimes doing different actions, but are the above mentioned
> differences from the Maliki school?
Please refer to the sections above. We would say that we do not
know about every single valid opinion in the Maliki school but are
aware of the popular opinions on most issues.
> Are they manners performed by the Prophet (Peace and Blessings
> upon him)?
We believe the reason why people perform the actions that you mentioned
above is because they have read isolated hadith which state that
such is recommended. However, we have not found that to be an accurate
way of learning how to perform an act in the din for the common man.
> I ask this question because when I try to pray in the manner
> detailed in the Guiding Helper, some of these people start looking
> at me as if I am praying incorrectly, and sometimes they even tell
> me not to pray in such a way.'
Your prayer is absolutely correct and accepted we pray. And we expect
the tables to flip in the next few years such that it will be odd that
a Maliki/Muslim is not praying with his hands to the side as more and
more learned people review our Notes of Sources.
For now, you may pray with your hands crossed (or wear a wrap around
sheet so people are unaware of the positions you adopt in your formal
prayer). But, that is your choice.
> Since it is sometimes difficult to pray with the hands at the sides
> in certain masjids, I was wondering if there are any mosques in either
> CT, NJ, or NY where the imam and/or followers are maliki?
We expect this to be less and less of a problem in the coming years as
knowledge of the Maliki school spreads and tolerance is developed.
For now, there is nothing to prevent you from praying with your hands
crossed (or not moving your finger) while in your local masjid to avoid
arguments and confusion.
Knowledgeable scholars do not consider these small physical postures
and movements in prayer as significant, but consider them merely
recommended.
As a side note, if anybody is afraid of adopting the Maliki positions
for practicing the din just because of the differences in prayer, we
would recommend that they adopt the Maliki positions anyway in all
of their lives (e.g., purification, Zakat, fasting, Hajj, Marriage, etc.) and
pray in public in ways that will not draw undue attention to them.
If they do this, soon a time will come when differences such as
these will cease to be an issue as enough people will be around that
know and understand the Maliki positions.
References:
Line 562 of the Main Text of the Guiding Helper and
associates entries in the Notes of Sources.
> Are there any tips/duas for one who wishes to reduce his sleep,
> or wants to wake up earlier for Subh prayer?
You will find that if you sleep earlier (e.g., before 10 pm), you will need
less sleep and can wake up as early as 5-6 am without feeling drowsy the rest
of the day.
We feel that most human beings need about 7-8 hours of sleep everyday just to
keep healthy. Some people can survive on less, but they are rarer.
People who perform tahajjud regularly will notice that they need to take a
short nap during the day sometime to keep their energy level up.
As for du`as that make one wake up earlier, none come to mind right now
with that specific purpose in mind. I think most Muslims in the old days
were aroused by the adhan of Subh prayer or the adhan of tahajjud (as is
made in many places in the Arabic world).
Since in most places in the West there is no audible adhan, we
would recommend using an alarm clock that is out of the reach of
either you or your spouse. You should set the alarm at the exact
time you wish to wake up and not (1 hour) in advance of this time.
Train yourself to get up and close the alarm and then sit down
on the floor, a chair, or the edge of the bed (but, do not let
your spouse pull you back into bed). Sit upright for about ten
minutes and then go to bathroom and wash your face and arms with
semi-cold/cool water. If you do this, sleep will no longer be
a problem for you.
One of the hard things for newly married couples is training
themselves to wake up earlier (since it feels very warm and
nice to stay in bed along with one's partner in the morning);
however, they will both find that they are happier and able to
get more done during the day if they stick to an early-to-rise
schedule.
If one has a baby that has kept one awake at night, then it is still
better to wake up early; but, one may sleep earlier the next day or
take a short nap sometime after the morning.



Food Law Questions
Most of your questions about this topic will be answered by reviewing the Explantory Notes for
Song 34 of the Guiding Helper.
> What is the ruling on eating gelatin?
Under the opinion we are narrating: if it is taken from an unslaughtered dead
animal, then it is *not* permissible to eat.
We have not delved into the branch ruling for gelatin whose chemical structure
has changed, but we would expect that there is disagreement about it in the
Maliki school. Thus, one opinion would permit it while another will
prohibit it.
You may ask a another source about this or take our simple first ruling above.
References:
Footnote 2137 of the Guiding Helper Explanatory Notes
and associated entries in the Notes of Sources.
> Can the sacrifice of an animal (e.g., For `Id or an Aqiqah) be made in
> a country other than the one in which the family lives?
Yes. There is no specific place mandated for the sacrifice as there is no
real difference between the `Aqiqah sacrifice and that of `Id al-Adha.
Reference:
[QF: volume 1: page 166: line(s) 11]
> Is Jewish Kosher meat mubah?
If it is prepared according to the guidelines mentioned in
Song 34: Food Laws. Our best estimation is that kosher meat
in most parts of the world is permissible to eat (which means it is
allowed but may be disliked in certain circumstances).
> Another thing is in connection with the slaughtering of an animal
> by a kitabi in order to make it halal. As you know in Sidi Khalil and
> its commentaries the slaughtering made by a kitabi should be done
> according to the Islamic way and it should be witnessed by a Muslim
> who knows how the way should be performed. Nevertheless, I chose -
> after consulting some people of knowledge - to put in the commentary
> of the Risala the position of Qadi Abu Bakr Ibn al-Arabi as stated in
> his Tafsir Ahkam al-Qur'an and reported in the Mi'yar by al-Wansharisi.
> I found it easier for the people living in the West. The position of
> Ibn al-Arabi is that it is not important the way how the kitabi performs
> the slaughtering providing that the Christian or Jewish priest considers
> that the meat is allowed according to their law. Al-Wansharisi also says
> that it is not to us to investigate which is the situation of the law according
> to the Christians or Jews, what we have to be concerned with is only if
> they consider the meat of the animal slaughtered as halal for them. If it
> is halal for them, then it is halal for us regardless of the way how the animal
> has been slaughtered.
>
> I have taken this position and reported this in the commentary
> of the Risala because I found it easier for us living in the West
> and because I really disliked the obsession some Muslims have
> with "Halal" meat up to the point of inviting them to your house
> and asking you if the meat is "halal" or not.
>
> I would really appreciate your opinion in this matter.
I don't have the reference right now, but I believe it is against
proper manners to ask a Muslim at his house whether or not the
food is halal. Such questioning can cause trouble and discord.
As for the position you narrate, we are aware of it and are aware
that the `arif billah and wali ullah ibn al-`Arabi has narrated it.
Having studied our Law system deeply, we refrain from taking
dogmatic (strict closed-minded) stances on most side issues
(furu`) of Fiqh.
The opinion we have narrated in the Guiding Helper is that
a monotheist may perform the sacrifice but according to our
three wajibs and one stressed sunnah.
As for what the Maliki school says in totality about this issue, it
includes what we have narrated in the Guiding Helper, it includes
what Sidi Khalil has said, and it includes what you have narrated.
This is evident from Ibn Rushd's summary of this subject as
narrated by Ibn Juzayy al-Kalbi in al-Qawanin al-Fiqhiyyah:
Ibn Rushd says: It is agreed that six types of people cannot
sacrifice the animal: (1) the small child who does not have
cognizance, (2) the person in a crazy-fit / posessed-by-a-jinn,
(3) the drunkard who is drunk, (4) the Fire Worshipper [and also
an idolist/polytheist], (5) the person who has left Islam (murtadd),
and (6) the zindiq (this term may be applied to an atheist).
There are six types of people whose sacrifice is disliked: (1) the
young child who has cognizance, (2) the woman, (3) the effeminate
man (khuntha), (4) the castrated man, (5) the uncircumcised man,
and (6) the perpetually disobedient person (fasiq).
Then there are six people whose sacrifice there is disagreement about:
(1) the person who does not pray, (2) the drunkard who is not very drunk,
(3) the person who engages in blameworthy innovations (bid`ah in `aqidah)
about which there is disagreement concerning takfir, (4) the Arab
Christian, (5) the Christian who slaughters at a command of a Muslim,
and (6) the non-Arab who becomes Muslim before puberty.
[QF: volume 1: page 157: line(s) 18-24: {book 9, chapter 5, summary (talkhis)}]
Ibn Juzayy al-Kalbi mentions earlier that there is disagreement about whether
the Christian must be Arab or not. Additionally, there is no total agreement
or details given about exactly how the animal must be sacrificed by the
Christians. Ibn Juzayy al-Kalbi notes:
"...And there is no disagreement in the meat's permissibility of the
Christian/Jew who slaughters for himself except for their holidays...."
[QF: volume 1: page 156: line(s) 21: {book 9, chapter 5, section 1, 1st fourth}]
Again in the above excerpt, no exact description is given of how the
sacrifice must be performed.
Thus, the conclusion is that the popular opinion
in the Maliki school states that the kitabi must
follow our three wajibs and one stressed sunnah; however,
valid minority opinions in the school exist that
encompass much easier views such as the one you
narrate in the Risalah.
Again, one must look at one's society and a
minority opinion may be more suitable to it due
to the conditions of the Muslims at that place.
We would say the following:
a) In a society where the majority of the
people are Muslim, the popular opinion should
be followed.
b) In a society where Muslims only make up a
small minority, it is permissible to follow
the easier opinions narrated by the authentic
Maliki scholars, such as being able to eat
any meat slaughtered by a kitabi without delving
deep into the exact means of slaughter used.
> 307
> The animals that we can eat are of two types:
> a) Those that are mubah to eat (i.e. all animals besides, humans, pigs, predatory land
> mammals, and domesticated ones with hooves)
>
> b) Those that are disliked to eat (i.e. predatory land mammals and domesticated ones with
> hooves)
> ____________________________________
>
> So what I understand form part a) is that all animals are halal to eat except those:
>
> 1) Human
> 2) Pig
> 3) Predatory land mamals (which is what we call in Arabic Si'ba ie Lions, Tigers etc is that
right?)
Yes. These are actually called "sabu`" (pl. sibaa`) in Arabic and are predatory
animals.
But, you must realize here that dogs and cats are also sibaa` - since both are
predatory.
> 4) Domesticated hooves (like cats? is that right?)
No a cat does not have a hoof. A hooved animal is an animal of burden which resembles
a horse, pony, donkey, or a mule. These animals have a very thick shoe which can
and is usually supplemented with a metal shoe.
Now the fact that we state that the animal is domesticated (i.e. is tamed and used
for burdens), excludes wild hooved animals such as wilder-beast and deer.
As for cows, buffalo, ox, and camels, they do not have the thick type of hooves
which is spoken of here - which is shared by horses, ponies, donkeys, and
mule. As a clarification, cows, buffalo, ox, and camels are *mubah* to eat
after a valid sacrifice as is clearly stated or implied throughout the Guiding
Helper and Explanatory Notes.
> Ok now this is where I am confused Sidi and need clarification,
The definition of predatory and hooved animals as used in the GH
is further clarified in footnotes 2140 and 2141 of the Explanatory Notes.
Reference(s):
al-Qawanin al-Fiqhi-yyah, Book 9, Chapter 1, concerning
Food Laws when one is not in dire hunger
> in part B) it says:
>
> b) Those that are disliked to eat (i.e. predatory land mammals and domesticated ones with
> hooves)
>
> but arnt predatory land mammals and domesticated ones with hooves included in the
> > exception in part A) ?
Yes. (A) states that all animals besides predatory land animals, humans, pigs, and hooved
domesticated animals of burden (like horses, donkeys, mules, and ponies) are *mubah*.
This leaves the possibility that some of these excluded animals are not *haram* but
*makruh* to eat.
As the Explanatory Notes are written without self-contradictions, you can better understand
discussed issues by comparing different parts of the Explanatory Notes. For example, the
issue
you mention is again repeated in different words for the Explanatory Notes of lines 1355-1356
of the Guiding Helper Main Text.
> What is the ruling on addittives to food referred to as
> E-numbers? Is one obliged to find out about them(which
> is often a long process)or is it suffecient to refrain from that
> which is known to be haram and not go into too much detail?
As footnote 2638 of the *Explanatory Notes* hints, one should not
delve too deeply into food ingredients (especially now a days) as
such will make life too difficult.
So for example if you see the European Union assigned E-number:
E309 Delta-tocopherol
You need not look up what Delta-tocopherol is unless it is *clearly*
and *commonly* known that such an ingredient is *always* taken from
an unslaughtered land animal.
In other words if you read in the ingredients "contains animal fat" or
"contains pork", then you should refrain from that food product. Otherwise,
delving too deeply will make life very hard and make the din very hard to
practice.
The Prophet (May Allah bless him and give him peace) said, "Indeed the
din is easy. And no one tries to make the din hard [for himself]
except that [this extremity in practice] overwhelms him."
[{Bukhari}]
As a side note, one should also know that a very famous trick of
Shaytan is to make the person lop-sided in his practice of din by
giving too much emphasis to any particular aspect of the din (and we
see so many such unfortunate souls today). As the person only has
limited resources and energy at his disposal, if he gives too much
emphasis to any one aspect, it will most certainly detract from other
necessary aspects and he will fail to achieve the well-rounded
character of the Prophet (May Allah bless him and give
him peace) and most of the Companions.
And this is the reason why we have mentioned so many subjects
in the Guiding Helper, so that people will not give too much emphasis
to purification and salat (for example) - as they will expend their remaining
resources and energy on making their marriages work, raising their children,
resolving family conflicts, dividing up their inheritances, conducting
honest business transactions, etc.
> In GH you write that smoking is Haram. I have heard that
> in Hanafi fiqh it is mubah. I was wondering if there was
> a difference between cigarettes (which have many additives, and extra
> nicotine etc.) and the water pipes that are used in
> the Middle east (i.e. apple, honey, tobacco, glycerine.) I admit my Nafs
> is involved in this question, but also because I
> sometimes visit a Sheikh who smokes the water pipes (because it is a
> valid Rukhsa from the Hanafis) and he offers
> one pipe to me since I am a guest. I know it is a valid rukhsa, but I'm
> wondering if there is a difference in ruling btwn
> the two manners of smoking in the Maliki school.
>
First of all realize that there is a minority opinion in the Maliki school
which allows cigarette smoking and use of tobacco products.
The popular opinion (taken from Ibn `Ashir's Sharh called
al-Habl al-Matin) states that cigarette smoking and use of tobacco
products (e.g., tobacco gum) is not permissible.
Now if the pipe cigarette does not contain tobacco (or only contains
trace amounts of tobacco) but contains other mubah-to-intake ingredients
(e.g., apple, honey, glycerin, etc.), then such smoking is
mubah in the Maliki school which generally allows one to intake smoke
and gases (Ref: `Adawi's commentary on Khurashi's commentary of
Sidi Khalil's words "that ashes and smoke is pure" in book of
taharah).
One reason that we have not noted the easier opinion on this matter
is that it is now an accepted scientific fact that there is a
direct link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer and a direct
link between tobacco chewing and cancer growths in the mouth. Thus,
we figured that those young people who are thinking about using such
products would be encouraged to live healthier lives.
As for old people who have become addicted to such, then they
may follow the minority opinion on this matter - when they
are not fasting.
Reference(s):
"And our Maliki teachers have disagreed about inhaling smoke
of a plant which is called 'tobacco' (tabah). Some of them have strictly
prohibited it while others have allowed it."
[DT: volume 1: page 458: line(s) 17-18: {explanation of
verses 294-300, }]