For many non-Muslims, one of the most controversial aspects of Prophet Muhammad’s (saw) life and legacy is his marital life. No other issue is as much of a hot button topic when individuals, either willfully or incidentally ignorant of Islam, engage in debate with Muslims concerning the life of our beloved Messenger. In her e-book, Muhammad’s Wives, Aliya Anjum illustrates the lives of the Prophet’s 11 wives beautifully, while simultaneously debunking many of the allegations and misunderstandings surrounding the issue of the Prophet’s marriages.

In a brief, but thoughtfully researched book, Anjum defends the wisdom behind Prophet’s marriages against those who make false attributions about his intentions. This e-book is highly recommended for readers seeking a fast read on this controversial and highly relevant topic. The reader is able to walk away from Anjum’s book equipped with simple rebuttals to those who defame the character of the Prophet and his marital life.

In the prologue to her book, Anjum acknowledges that the Western world’s general and public perception of the prophet’s marriages is foundationally flawed in understanding. Anjum offers an explanation as to why predominantly Christian societies are predisposed to scoffing at the prophet’s plural marriages, pointing out that “perhaps due to the perceived bachelorhood of John the Baptist (Yahya in Islam) as well as Jesus the son of Mary (Isa in Islam), the 11 wives of Muhammad appear excessive.” Besides the fact that 11wives may seem like an anomaly to other religions, Anjum also cites the media portrayal of Arabs and Muslims, as associated with the harem culture, as a prime origin of this controversy. According to the author, the idea of the harem as a bastion of unrestrained male sexuality, as desiminated by Hollywood flicks such as Arabian Nights, has been successfully molded into the laymen perception of Muslim marital life. These stereotypes by default obscure any proper understanding of the Prophet’s marriages.

Chronologically ordered according to each wife that the Prophet married, Anjum begins with a case study of the Prophet’s marriage to Khadija. Anjum highlights the fact that the Prophet remained in a monogamous relationship with  Khadija until her death. The author emphasizes the nurturing and loving relationship between the couple within the context of Arabian society, where, had Muhammad been the oversexual man that some Western critics allege he was, he could have taken multiple wives. Furthermore, with his marriage to Khadija, the Prophet did not have sons who lived beyond infancy, but if he was so inclined “Muhammad could have easily taken another younger wife to sire him the much vaunted sons, but he remained monogamous.” As is illustrated in the Seerah of the Prophet, Khadija was a dutiful wife who stood by her husband during the difficult initial years of his prophecy.

While Khadija is often portrayed as the strong business woman, Anjum reminds readers that she was also a devoted housemaker, with “no record of [her] trading activities after her marriage to Muhammad.” Her influence remained upon the prophet long after her death, as he made clear to his wives that no woman could fill her shoes.

After lengthy commentary on the life of Khadija, Anjum also spends a significant portion of the book on Ayesha, the third wife.  The prophet’s marriage to Ayesha is the pinnacle of controversy in regards to his marital life. There is unnecessary confusion that arises concerning Aisha’s age at the time the marriage was consummated. Anjum devotes several pages to vigorously defending the prophet’s decision to marry Ayesha, as readers are encouraged to explore. Beyond the age controversy, Anjum illustrates why it is that Ayesha is a great role model for Muslim women. Ayesha was a trusted authority on hadith and other matters of deen. Of her childlessness, “she established the precedent of a woman’s worth for her intellect and personality over a women’s value being derived from childbearing alone.”

Although all of the Prophet’s wives are worth of mention here, I encourage readers to engage with Anjum’s rendition of the topic, as they will be sure to find nuggets of insight into the wisdom of the Prophet.

Due to the brevity of its content, Muhammad’s Wives may not be suitable for readers seeking an in depth biographical sketch of the Prophet’s wives. For example, individuals who would like to read more about the ahadith that were narrated by the wives, and the historical backdrop in which they occurred won’t be satisfied with this book, and will need supplementary sources. However; this book is a good starting point for individuals who are new to studying aspects of the live of the Prophet, such as new converts or young children. This book is also suitable for non-Muslim audiences who perhaps are not ready to deal with nuances of hadith history or seerah, but are in need of a brief introduction to this facet of the Prophet’s life that has been so misunderstood.

It is noteworthy that the author of this book is female. More than ever, it is important for Muslims to be actively engaged in producing Islamic scholarship, and we should applaud Muslim women who seek to defend the honor of Islam through their work.

Of the most vivid memories of Ramadan from childhood is the whole khandan [family, extended family] piling into Ammi’s 1995 White Dodge Caravan for Isha Prayer and Taraweeh with my two brothers, Ammi, Abbu, and two Mamoos [maternal uncles] after downing yummy iftaari (meal to break the fast).  Of course, in the beginning, there were the amazing Qaris (Quran reciters)from overseas, ours being my late Quran Teacher and amazing reciter, Hafidh Obaid ur Rahman [may Allah have mercy on him].  As years went by and local madrasahs (Quran academies) began emerging, we were blessed with young qaris who Allah had given the honor of preserving the Quran in their hearts.

What amazes Muslims and non-Muslims worldwide of these young preservers of the Quran is that they’re American. I know because my cousin went to one of these local academies, and our relatives overseas were shocked that after living in “Amreeka”, our communities were able to give birth to, what I call, Young Qari Superstars.  After completing hifdh (memorizing the Quran), most of these kids go on to excel academically and succeed in their professional lives as well. Who woulda “thunk” it?

So what’s a young hafidh to do after years of hard work, sometimes getting caught up with school life and little to no time to review regularly? What better place to keep his memory in check than taraweeh?

During late 90s and early 2000s, many masaajid‘s Taraweeh Starting Line-Ups included local hufaadh on a trial-basis, and the Taraweeh fans loved it!

One Islamic center I absolutely fell in love with was Clear Lake Islamic Center.  It was only a 5-7 minute drive from our house, versus the 20 minutes it took us to drive to the veteran Masjid Abu Bakr As-Siddiq on Old Galveston Road.  It was in a strip mall at the time, not yet even given the title of masjid, “just” a musallah. The hypocrite’s description aside, it went along with Shaykh Muhammad AlShareef’s “Leaky Masjid Theory”, if ya get my drift. SubhanAllah, the sisters’ side could fit maybe 8-10 sisters comfortably for prayer, yet, 10 years later, those few sisters are still dear to my heart today. I still make dua for them. And, the best part, we had a Superstar Qari, our very own Shaykh Waleed Basyouni, lead half of the taraweeh. Who read the other half, you ask? Our emerging, young qari Superstars.

That is the miracle of the Quran. In a country where the history of Muslims is so fresh and new, we have Young Qari Superstars raising the roof, leading the ummah in taraweeh prayers in homes, musallahs, masajid, college & university MSAs, schools, storefronts, and many other venues you can think a Muslim can find.

It brings me much joy to share with you a Young Qari Superstar from my home town–Fatih Seferagic, a honorable member of the Taraweeh Starting Line-Up at my alma mater then musallah, now masjid–Clear Lake Islamic Center. May Allah (SWT) make his talent a means for him to come closer to Him, ‘azza wa Jal, and continue to make him a torch-bearer of the Quran, and a beacon of Islam. May Allah (SWT) bless his parents and make him a coolness of their eyes. Ameen.

Fatih Seferagic leads Taraweeh at Clear Lake Islamic Center in Texas

Click here to view the embedded video.

Who are your Young Qari Superstars? Please share them with us here!

Share

by Khalid Yahya Blankinship

Crossposted from Lampost Productions

Question:

Didn’t the Muslim caliphate or khilâfah end in 1342 AH/1924 CE, when Turkey abolished the office? Didn’t the khilâfah have a continuous existence up to that point?

Answer:

These questions are two-sided, as they deal with fiqh and with history. The fiqh of the khilâfah is important, and perhaps that can be dealt with in a future article. In this article, however, I will be exclusively concerned with the history. In revealing historical facts, it is not my purpose to challenge any point of fiqh regarding the necessity of having a leader. Therefore, I am not disputing here that from the time of the death of the Prophet (SAAS) there was an amîr, and that the amîr had to be obeyed, and that the amîr also had the title of khalîfah. Most of what I would amend concentrates on the idea that the khilâfah was abolished in 1342/1924, which is an event whose significance has often been misconstrued by Muslims.

The early khilâfah had a more or less continuous history from Abu Bakr (RA), despite the civil wars of 35-40/656-661 and 64-73/683-692, until the coup that overthrew al-Walid ibn ‘Abd al-Malik in 126/744. That led to the Third Fitnah or Civil War (126-134/744-752), during which the ‘Abbâsids came to power in 132/749-750. This history is detailed in my book, The End of the Jihâd State: The Reign of Hishâm ibn ‘Abd al-Malik and the Collapse of the Umayyads, available from SUNY Press.

Contrary to most popular belief, the ‘Abbâsids’s position was weak, not strong, because the disordersof the Third Fitnah had undermined the khilâfah. The ‘Abbâsids never ruled in Algeria (except briefly in the extreme east of that country), Morocco, and Spain, so that the unity of the state had decisively ended. This actually first happened when the rebelling Berbers of Morocco set up their own khalîfah in 122/740, and it never happened after that year that all the Muslims ever were under one single khalîfah again. Although it has been mentioned that the Umayyads in Spain did not claim the title of khalîfah until the 4th/10th century, they were in a constant state of hostile relations with the ‘Abbâsids, who never ruled or even exerted any influence in Spain.

The North African Berbers, whose revolt had actually broken the back of the earlier Umayyad khilâfah in 122/740, had plenty of justification for their revolt, and it is really unfair merely to treat them as followers of a deviant sect of “Khawârij,” as has often been done. Even though their presence gave rise to the separate sect or madhhab of the Ibâdîs who still exist in the Algerian city of Ghardâyah and also in villages in Jabal Nafûsah in Libya, their initial impetus was purely political. All they did was to rebel against an Umayyad khilâfah which had lost all legitimacy except among the Syrians and which soon collapsed and disappeared. Remember that Sunnis have historically never validated the rule of the khalîfahs apart from the four Râshidûn and, often, ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Azîz (99-101/717-720). While Mu‘âwiyah occurs in hadîth and might be defended as a Companion, that does not apply to the later Umayyad rulers. ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Marwân’s viceroy of the East, al-Hajjâj ibn Yûsuf (d. 95/714), even executed Sa‘îd ibn Jubayr (d. 95/714), the great muhaddith and authority of al-Bukhârî and other hadîth collections, sarcastically berating him for having thrown off his oath of allegiance by joining the ill-fated rebellion of Ibn al-Ash‘ath much earlier and then hiding out. This episode is documented in detail by al-Dhahabî in his huge biographical dictionary, Siyar a‘lâm al-nubalâ’, Vol. IV.

From the time of its first proclamation in 132/749, the ‘Abbâsid khilâfah continued to disintegrate through most of its history. It is quite notable that Abû Hanîfah (80-150/699-767), the putative founder of the Hanafî legal school and an outstanding jurist of the Muslim metropolis of al-Kûfah, after he had supported the ‘Alid rebel Muhammad al-Nafs al-Zakiyyah, spent the last four and a half years of his life (145-150/763-767) in the prison of Abu Ja‘far al-Mansûr (ruled 136-158/754-775), the ‘Abbâsid khalîfah. Indeed, Abu Hanifah was imprisoned in Baghdâd in the very year of the founding of that city and thus broke in the new prison. Further undermining the claim of the ‘Abbâsids to universal rule, a separate Fâtimid Shî‘î khilâfah was set up that lasted 297-567/909-1171 in North Africa and Egypt, and the surviving Umayyads in Spain also claimed the title of khalîfah 317-422/929-1031, when they fell. After that, many small princelings in Spain and North Africa claimed to be khalîfahs, so that a poet stated that they would take up big names like al-Mu‘tasim, just like housecats pretending to be lions. The Hafsid dynasty of Tunis claimed the title of khalîfah 651-977/1253-1569 and adopted ‘Abbâsid-sounding reign titles. When Islam spread to West Africa, so did claims to the office of khalîfah or amîr al-mu’minîn. This became part of the titles of ‘Uthmân ibn Fûdî (or dan Fodio) of Sokoto and his successors in Nigeria to this day. Since the khilâfah of the Ottomans was remote and made little pretense of being a real office, ‘Uthmân ibn Fûdî ignored it. The continuity of the use of such titles in the Muslim West also extends down to the present in Morocco, where Muhammad VI is still to this day amîr al-mu’minîn, just like ‘Umar ibn al-Khattâb, and that is taken with deadly seriousness in Morocco. Thus, the Moroccans, having their own continuous succession of the title, do not at all now and never before did recognize the Ottoman Turkish sultâns’s claim to the title of khalîfah. Indeed, since the sultâns of Morocco claimed descent from the Prophet (SAAS) and were thus Qurashîs, while the Ottomans were not, it might be held against the Ottomans rather that they did not recognize the Moroccan ruler as khalîfah and submit to him.

Meanwhile, in the East, the ‘Abbâsid khalîfahs exercised no personal power in 247-279/861-892 and again 295-334/908-945, when they were under the control of military dictators, and then lost all power completely with the capture of Baghdâd in 334/945 by the Shî‘î Bûyids or Buwayhiyyûn, who kept the ‘Abbâsid khalîfahs under house arrest until the Bûyids’s own downfall in 447/1055, when the Sunnî Saljûq Turks came as “liberators.” However, the ‘Abbâsid khalîfahs soon found that the Saljûqs were just as intolerable and would allow the khalîfahs no power, although they “respected” them, for example, by seeking to marry their daughters. The Saljûks arrogated to themselves the title of sultân or “authority,” which henceforth became the main title of the rulers in Islam until the last century, when malik or “king” began to make a comeback. The ‘Abbâsid khalîfahs only became independent again from the Saljûk sultâns in 547-656/1152-1258, after which Baghdad was captured and destroyed by the kâfir Mongols and the last ‘Abbâsid khalîfah was slain. The Egyptian Mamlûks set up one of his relatives, but he too was killed by the Mongols trying to go back to Baghdâd. After that, they set up a distant relative in Cairo in 659/1261 as khalîfah, and that line continued until the death of the last one in 950/1543. This was the so-called “‘Abbâsid khilâfah in Cairo.” Although the very far away Muslim Sultanate of Delhi in India used to seek investiture from them, everyone else regarded them as a joke. Usually the Mamlûk sultân would go out and drag the khalîfah along in his baggage just like one of his wives. It was form without content.

At the same time, the Turks of Turkey used the titles of amîr al-mu’minîn and khalîfah occasionally before 905/1500, but their real title was sultân, just like the Saljûks, Ayyûbids, and Mamlûks before them. After that the title khalîfah was not used by them for several centuries, until it was rediscovered at the Treaty of Kuchuk Kanarjli in 1188/1774. At that time, in that treaty with the Russians, the Turkish sultân reserved the title of khalîfah for himself so that he could still be considered the spiritual leader of the Crimean Tatar Muslims who were surrendered at that time to the Russians. Thereafter, it was used very little except from 1293/1876, when the Ottoman ruler ‘Abd al-Hamîd II started calling himself the Sultân-khalîfah in order to threaten the British Empire and thus preserve his rule. In this he was strongly opposed by ‘Abd al-Rahmân al-Kawâkibî (d. 1321/1903), who pointed out that according to Sunnî law, the khalîfah had to be from Quraysh, and the Ottomans were not Qurashîs and had never claimed to be. Long after ‘Abd al-Hamîd was overthrown in 1326-1327/1908-1909, many Muslims started looking back on him as the ideal ruler and his time as the golden age, because his overthrow practically meant the end of the multinational Ottoman Turkish state, but they did not think so at the time. His successors Muhammad V Rashâd (1327-1336/1909-1918) and Muhammad VI Wahîd al-Dîn (1336-1341/1918-1922) continued to use the title, but they were under the control of military dictators. When Muhammad VI surrendered to the British in 1337/1918, he fell under the control of those colonialists, and none mourned his expulsion by the military dictator Mustafâ Kamâl in 1341/1922. Thereafter for two years, Muhammad VI’s cousin ‘Abd al-Majîd II had the title of khalîfah without being sultân, until that was terminated by Kamâl in 1342/1924. That was the end of one khilâfah, but hardly the end of THE khilâfah, because there was nothing legitimate about the Ottoman claim to be khalîfahs to begin with.

After that, various rulers tried to claim to be khalîfah, including the British puppet kings of Egypt and the Hâshimite ex-king of the Hijâz, but no agreeable candidate appeared. The Sa‘ûdî rulers never tried to claim it, maybe because they had fought the Ottoman Turks on and off for nearly two centuries and did not respect their claim to the title, so they did not see that any legitimate title had become vacant.

It would seem to me that any attempt to restore the khilâfah today would have to begin by asking why all Muslims should not swear allegiance to King Muhammad VI of Morocco, who certainly holds this claim and does so through an ancient and venerable lineage that goes back much earlier than the Ottoman claim and is much more authentic. Not that I hold the view that that is what is to be done, but it would seem that classical theory would require allegiance to the existing khalîfah rather than setting up another as rival. The Ottoman state did represent the largest surviving Muslim state in the center of the Muslim world in the thirteenth-fourteenth/nineteenth century, it is true, but it almost went under in 1247-1256/1831-1840 and was only saved by British intervention. Thus, for most of its last century it did not constitute a truly independent Muslim polity but depended on Britain for protection from Russia and from other enemies. Indeed, its destruction after the First World War occurred because it had transferred its poltical allegiance to Germany, so that Britain no longer wished to preserve it.

Besides these difficulties with idealizing the Ottoman state, there are other problems. The centralizing organization of that state made the religious scholars very subservient, thereby undermining their traditional role as defenders of the people. Ottoman statism cynically used Islam in the thirteenth/nineteenth and early fourteenth/twentieth centuries, not cultivating real spiritual and moral values and already capitulating to the West. Thus, Mustafâ Kamâl, the secularist military dictator, represented more a continuation of Ottoman statism than a revolution against the Ottoman state model. Even if we go back to Muhammad II al-Fâtih (855-886/1451-1481) and Sulaymân I al-Qânûnî (926-974/1520-1566), we find the statist model in full operation. Nor is its derivation even wholly Muslim; in many of its forms and especially its content, it goes straight back to the defunct, authoritarian Roman Empire which it replaced in 857/1453. Of course, there is also some virtue in the Ottoman state as an example of possible Muslim political arrangements, but it can hardly be considered to accord with the classical shar‘î model of a Muslim state, nor can it be wholly defended on moral grounds. It is better to be circumspect about such matters.

The idealization of Sultân ‘Abd al-Hamîd II is also a dubious exercise. While I agree that he has been overly abused by European colonialist writers, his rule, although sometimes clever, was not ideal in an Islamic sense at all. It was rather filled with compromises and a huge intrusion of European influence, including a bankruptcy similar to Egypt’s meltdown of 1293/1876. Most modern defenders of Muslim statism would not have liked ‘Abd al-Hamid’s conservative dependence on the Sufi shaykh Abû al-Hudâ al-Sayyâdî, nor perhaps his personal character, nor would they have been content to live under his rule without protest.

Finally, one should note that it is not usually wise to take a partisan position about every episode in past history, as we were not there, did not experience it, and do not know the details to weigh who was more in the right in the majority of cases. It is true that we have set views received from our tradition regarding respect for the Prophets (AS), in particular our Prophet Muhammad (SAAS), as well as his Companions (RAA), especially the Rightly-guided Khalîfahs or Râshidûn. And even after them one may make some historical criticisms and judgements after careful study. But in most cases it is better to invoke and obey the command of the Prophet (SAAS) in the sahîh hadîth from al-Bukhârî, “lâ tasubbû al-amwât, fa-innahum afdaw ilâ mâ qaddamû” = “Do not curse the dead, for they have gone to the reward of what they did” (See al-Bukhârî, Sahîh, translated by Muhammad Muhsin Khân, Vol. 2, p. 270, hadîth 476 (kitâb al-janâ’iz, bâb mâ yunhâ min sabb al-amwât), and Vol. 8, p. 344, hadîth 523 (kitâb al-riqâq, bâb sakarât al-mawt); also reported by al-Nasâ’î, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and al-Dârimî).

Share

If we look back on the lives of the four imams – Abū Hanifah, Mālik b. Anas, al-Shāfi`ī, and Ahmad b. Hanbal – we find that they were extremely tolerant people. They were respectful of their contemporaries, predecessors and the earlier generations of Muslims, whether they agreed with their views or not. Indeed, they followed the example of their predecessors in being tolerant of differences.

Allah says: “And those who came (into the faith) after them say: Our Lord! Forgive us and our brethren who were before us in the faith, and place not in our hearts any rancour toward those who believe. Our Lord! You are full of kindness, most merciful.” [Sūrah al-Hashr: 10]

The four imams — the leading scholars who founded the four canonical schools of Islamic Law — never allowed past disagreements to cause them to disparage or raise suspicions about the people of an earlier generation who held divergent views. Likewise, they never called for an inquest of their contemporaries who disagreed with them and they never got involved in their affairs except in a positive way.

The four imams certainly disagreed with one another and with other jurists of their day, but they always maintained their calm in debate and disagreed respectfully. They never permitted others who spread their ideas to use their teachings as a source of conflict or as a means to cause division.

It could possibly be that the principle they developed, of coexistence in the face of changing political and social circumstances, came as a result of their engaging with the substantial societal changes they witnessed during the era in which they lived. They recognized a need to develop a clear and precise approach to respond to such changes.

It can be observed that none of the four imams ever accepted an official political post, not as judge nor magistrate nor anything else. At the same time, they also never constituted themselves as a political opposition. They never gave their support to the government’s political opponents, even though all four imams times suffered government persecution on account of accusations that they did. However, a close examination of the imams’ historical circumstances shows that such accusations were baseless. Instead, they were victims of the old idea: “You are either with us or against us.”

Their insistence on intellectual autonomy is what brought such suspicion upon them, along with how unscrupulous people would sometimes manipulate their statements and interpret their juristic verdicts for various political ends.

In truth, the four imams represented a third way: neither aligning themselves with the interests of those in power nor with the political opposition. This allowed them to carry out a vital leadership role of their own in maintaining social stability in a society made up of a number of contending factions: between the ruling class and the populace, as well as between a bewildering array of ideological factions and intellectual movements, not to mention ethnic and tribal differences. After all this, we can understand how they were so good at tolerating the disagreements of their colleagues among the various schools of Islamic jurisprudence!

They all kept a measured distance from the various contending elements in society while remaining fully connected to society. This made it possible for them to be a point of stability and balance, which protected Islamic civilization from a great deal of conflict, strife, and social disintegration.

The role they played in their times is all the more needed today with our widening social and class disparity and a weakened culture of tolerance, conditions that promote conflict whenever conditions are ripe for it.

The presence of an autonomous knowledge-based mediating authority is needed to act as a a source of strength for the weak and a moderating influence on the strong, to arbitrate in matters, and to impart to society the values of tolerance and mutual understanding. There is a need for those who can speak out for justice and the inalienable rights that are needed to ensure peace and security in any country, and which can prevent violent factions and extremist movements of whatever persuasion from developing.

The world contains nations where you find a strong government and an equally strong civil society. They are held together by organizing principles and their vital, political, social, and charitable institutions. This is what makes the government strong through its people and the people strong through their government.

Most Muslim countries do not enjoy this balancing of institutional power, essential for stability and continuity, which comes from the presence of mediating institutions that are widely recognized and accepted on both an official and popular level, institutions whose role is often only appreciated when their loss leads to the erosion of society.

Ideological and partisan disagreements, religious differences, and other potential sources of division do not inevitably lead to conflict and strife. Allah says in the Qur’ān: “It is He who has spread out the Earth for all His creatures.” [Sūrah al-Rahmān: 10]

Within the sphere of Islam, matters are referred back to universal principles and the legitimate needs of life that Islam upholds. When such a reference becomes impracticable due to the severity of the disagreement tor disparity of the parties involved and the matter cannot be brought to a resolution through dialogue, there still remains a broader circle for coexistence: the one of: “knowing one another” referred to in the verse: “O humankind! Lo! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that you may come to know one another.” [Sūrah al-Hujurāt: 13]

This coming to know one another, this mutual and reciprocal knowledge of the other, is the foundation for social relationships necessitating goodwill, justice, and kindness.

It is possible that through such relationships you will realize your own best interests as well as those of the people you disagree with at one and the same time. We see this in so many aspects of life: commercial dealings, in public administration, health, development, and industry.

Returning to the four imams, it needs to be pointed out that the disagreements between them in Islamic Law were nothing compared to the disagreements that existed among the Companions and Successors. Moreover, they introduced through their own juristic efforts a number of opinions that were new to their generation. Therefore, it is wrong for anyone to claim that their views abrogate the views of their predecessors and exclude all views other than theirs.

The later scholars who worked within the framework of one of the four schools of law, though they did not usually go off in an entirely independent direction, never ceased to engage in choosing between different opinions and deducing new rulings on the basis of precedent. I have studied the legal preferences of the preeminent Hanbalī jurist Ibn Qudāmah, and found that he sometimes adopted a position that was at variance to what was adopted by all four schools of thought. He did so after acknowledging and discussing all of their received opinions. His judgments in these cases are often quite erudite and impressive.

We can find similar cases among the jurists of all four schools of law. This is because the views of the Companions, Successors, and other jurists are no less important than the views of the four imams. They were also from the earliest Muslim generations and theirs is a rich and valuable legacy which has been preserved for us in works like the Musannaf of `Abd al-Razzāq, the Musannaf of Ibn Abī Shaybah, and the writings of Ibn Mundhir.

When we look at the magnitude of the changes taking place in the world today, we can appreciate the value of there being such a broad spectrum of opinion during the earliest days of Islam. Their contributions should not be ignored, since they enrich our understanding of Islamic Law. Though there may have been times in the history of Muslim civilization that such a plurality of opinion was unnecessary for society to function, our present age is certainly not one of those times.

By Danesh Juyandeh

The age of `A’ishah, daughter of Abu Bakr, when she married the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) is something that has only recently become controversial. The traditional account is that the marriage was consummated when she was nine years old, which naturally appears strange, if not uncomfortable, to many in a modern, western context. Hence, some recent Muslims (of varying levels of intellectuality, motivations and scholarly qualifications) have re-visited the sources. They have discovered some evidence in the classical historical texts, and reinterpreted the traditionally adduced narrations, to suggest that `A’ishah may actually have been older (with various ages suggested). My aim, in this brief piece, is not to analyze the arguments for and against a young marriage age for `A’ishah, but rather to contextualize the entire discussion with a bird’s-eye view that remains intact regardless of which view (if either) an individual chooses to commit to.

The first (and most) important point to note is, as indicated above, is that the controversy is a relatively recent one. The Prophet’s own contemporaries took no issue with the Prophet’s marriage to `A’ishah; it was not problematic in their eyes. This includes both his disbeliever antagonists and his believing followers. Certainly, his antagonists were ever eager to discredit him, and the Qur’an itself records details of this. They accused him of being a sorceror, a madman or a soothsayer. They objected to his marriage to Zaynab, remonstrating that (according to pre-Islamic Arab culture) a man may not marry the divorcee of his adopted son just as he may not marry the divorcee of his biological son. Yet they did not attempt to discredit him on the basis of his marrying a girl too young for him. Neither in the Qur’an nor in any historical source is there any mention of such an objection having been raised, despite the fact that these sources do mention numerous other strategies used by the Prophet’s opponents.

So, if the Prophet’s contemporaries did not object to `A’ishah’s age of marriage, then we conclude with certainty that her age was within the norm. Logically, this in turn implies one of two things: either it was acceptable, in 7th century Arab culture, for older men to marry younger girls (even as young as 9), or the reason for their non-objection was that `A’ishah was in fact older. Once again, my aim here is not to prove one or the other, but to put the whole issue in perspective. The age of `A’ishah is not a central tenet of Muslim faith, nor should it eclipse the core message and teachings of Islam. Muslims contemplating the issue of `A’ishah’s age might find it beneficial to recall that, ‘Part of the excellence of a person’s Islam is his/her leaving aside what does not pertain to him/her.’

Non-Muslims would serve themselves better by contemplating the Prophet’s teachings of monotheism and righteousness, and the Book he presented as God’s revelation, rather than dwelling on what is, at most, a socio-culturally historical oddity.

The general character of the Prophet, and his marital history, speak clearly against the notion that he was other than upright. His first marriage, at age 25, was to a widowed woman (Khadijah) who was 15 years his senior, and he remained in a happy and solid monogamous marriage to her for a quarter-century (twenty-five years), the marriage ending only with Khadijah’s death, aged 65. If we are extrapolating general lessons from the Prophet’s life, then his marriage to Khadijah is far more relevant for paradigmatic value. It was only subsequent to that, and often under specific circumstances (as others have discussed) that he married other women, and all of them (other than `A’ishah) were either widows or divorcees. Some historical sources even record that one of the strategies his antagonists tried, to dissuade him from his preaching, was to offer him whatever wealth or wives he desired, but he refused this initiative.

Hence, without necessarily putting the two possibilities (regarding `A’ishah’s age) on equal footing, and without stifling those who wish to delve deeper into the scholarly (and sometimes non-scholarly) arguments on either side, it is sufficient for the Muslim to defer the issue to God, saying, “I believe whichever of the two is the truth before God.” There are many more useful and pressing issues for us to occupy ourselves with.

The modern option of upgrading `A’ishah’s age might offer a more immediate appeal, and an ‘easy’ and convenient solution, for which little further explanation or reasoning would be necessary. Indeed, in the absence of birth certificates, records of ages prior to the modern era can be expected to have some margin of error. However, it is worthwhile to look at the issue in a larger perspective, and to avoid viewing the veritable tapestry of human culture, across space and time, through the colored lenses of modern, western culture. A slight familiarity with anthropology is sufficient to convince one that there has been, and still is, remarkable variety in human cultural practices and norms. The Catholic Encyclopedia observes about the Virgin Mary (peace be upon her) that, “it is possible that Mary gave birth to her Son when she was about thirteen or fourteen years of age.”[1] In Shakespeare’s classic play Romeo and Juliet, Juliet was only thirteen, yet her mother tells her that “ladies of esteem” younger than her are already mothers.[2] According to the “Encyclopedia of Children and Childhood in History and Society,” both Christian Canon law and European civil law considered seven years as the age of consent, but judges in medieval England would approve marriages based on mutual consent at ages even lower than 7.[3] As recently as the nineteenth century, ages of consent of 13 to 14 were common in Western countries.[2] Now, we are responsible for acting in accordance with our conscience, and our own societal norms may well factor into this, but it may be a bit presumptuous to pass judgment on people of the past and future, and those of other cultures. People in the future may well look on some of our mores as bizarre.

The bottom line, is: God knows best about all the details of things. And, it remains well-established that Islam’s central message is one of monotheism, decency and morality. It is to this that our energies can be more profitably devoted.

[1] http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15464b.htm, accessed 06/11/2010

[2] Shakespeare, Romeo and Juliet, Act I, Scene 3.

[3] http://www.faqs.org/childhood/A-Ar/Age-of-Consent.html, accessed 06/15/2010

[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent, accessed 06/11/2010

Share

Link to all Ramadan 2010 posts

From a distance you notice his eyes – piercing, brilliant and engaging.  The choicest Praise and Mercy of Allah be upon him.  Muhammed, the Praised one is Ahmed, the greatest in Praise of Allah; sublimely appropriate.  Al-Mustapha, the Divinely Chosen, is real.  He was flesh and blood.  Human.

I love him, O Allah, I love him – sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.

In a world of distortion, where truth is overcome by fiction, the full moon rises.  Although obscured by shadows or an overcast sky, the moon remains.  Such is the fame and honour of Muhammed, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.

Of average height, he towers above the elite of history.  He would stand fully erect without a lazy slump.  He was powerful, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.  His chest was broad with a dusting of hair that extended vertically in a thin line down to his flat stomach, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.

Any kind of hardships you can envision and pray to never face was shouldered by him, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, simultaneously.

He experienced in his 63 years of blessed life more tribulation than a cohort.  He, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was an orphan, a widower, battle scarred, and unjustly outcast.  He outlived many of his children and buried some of his grandchildren.  His uncle, the Mercy of Allah be upon him, was martyred and his body desecrated.  He, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was defamed, mocked, lied to and lied about.  He was poisoned, stoned, and had to witness his companions tortured on account of their faith in his Message, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.,

Sabraan, remain steadfast in patience, O Family of Yasser; your destination is Paradise.  His teaching was simple.  Allah, the All Mighty, is the only One deserving of worship and devotion.  All that we encounter is by His Command.  No harm can befall without His Permission.

His hair, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was black and wavy.  He liked to keep it longer in length, usually not past his earlobes.  It contained a few gray strands, about 23 in number.  With dark irises he could, by Divine Permission, view a world that was unseen.  He had long, dark eyelashes that from a distance could be mistaken for kohl.  He, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, would not avert his attention from a petitioner until their voice fell silent.  His eyes would sleep but his heart was awake.  His eyes never betrayed or invited treachery, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.

The weakest, poorest and socially downtrodden would access him, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, as readily as the chieftains.  He sheltered the needy, fed the hungry, protected the vulnerable, guarded the secrets and instructed the uninformed.  He, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was calm when others were agitated, loving when others were filled with hate, and polite when shown contempt.  He, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, is the highest standard of character and the spring of Divinely ordained etiquette.

His skin, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was soft and naturally fragrant.  His blessed hands were softer than silk and gave off the scent of aromatic musk.  He was reddish in colour.  He was not dark, nor was he pale.  His skin was blemished with the seal of prophethood between his shoulder blades.  He was proportional in all respects, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.

In his prayer, he found comfort and pleasure.  His voice quivered in awe of the All Mighty.  When leading others, he would, for the most part, recite from al-Qisar (the short chapters).  If he heard a child crying, he would cut the recitation short to relieve the parent of any distress.  His, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, grandchildren would ride atop his back during his prostration, and he would not move until they felt content.  His voice was measured, and he paused at the end of every verse.  He would recite the Quran in various accents to accommodate all the dialects of his companions.  When alone at night, he would pray.  He would remain vigilant for half the night, sometimes more, sometimes less.  When he recited a passage addressing Allah’s Divine Mercy, he would stop and ask for it.  If one of torment, he would seek protection from it, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.

His face, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was manifest beauty.  His eyes were well set apart and covered by full brows.  They were not sunk into his face or overtly protruding.  His mouth smelled sweet, and his teeth were always clean and white.  His saliva was a medicine and blessing, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.  By the Grace of Allah, it was a cure to the blind, increase in food to the poor, and an ointment to the disfigured.  He had a full, dark beard that obscured his slender long neck from a distance. His smile was radiant, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.

He was soft spoken except when he sermonised on Friday.  His voice was melodious and captivating.  He spoke only when necessary and refrained from idle chit-chat.  His, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, tongue was true.  He loved to listen and would ask questions of those whom he instructed.  He was modest and sensitive to the needs and feelings of others.  He smiled and laughed often, seldom loudly.

When he, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was displeased, it could be read from his face.  He never raised his hand against another living creature except during Divinely ordained battle.  He, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was courageous and led from the forefront.  He stood in the ranks of his soldiers and faced the hardship they endured.  He ate what they ate, slept where they slept and dressed as they dressed.  He, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was a man unlike the world has ever seen.

He, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, dressed similar to his compatriots.  He never owned a throne or regal markings to distinguish himself, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, from others.  He would walk without an escort and disliked sentries being placed to guard him.  He preferred neutral shades of white, green and black to clothe himself with.  When he ate, it was never to his fill, and he always ate while sharing his food with others.  He loved milk, dates and honey.  His favourite dish was tharrid – roasted mutton on buttered bread and broth.

He, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, cared for the earth and despised wastefulness and corruption.  He was a tree hugger – LITERALLY.  He loved animals and instructed his companions to show kindness to them.  When a camel wept, he would stroke it and speak to it in hushed tones.  When the tree whimpered, he paused his sermon and embraced its trunk, whispering to it soothing words of comfort.  Animals took comfort in him, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.

Today, his modality of life and tradition remain intact, preserved not only in print, but in conscious spirit.

He loved us so much, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.  He would think of those who will believe in him many generations after his generation and weep in longing and hope.  He loved us more than some care to consider.  Every Messenger of God was allowed a request that would be answered by Allah.  All the Messengers utilised their invocation in the worldly life except for Muhammed, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam. He, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, preserved his invocation to be intercession on the Day of Judgement for those who accept his message!

None can truly claim faith until Muhammed, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam is more beloved to them than their parents, spouse and children.  To know him is to love him.  To love him is to obey him.  If he, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam, was to walk into your life now, what would he think?

O you who believe, send your greetings to Muhammed, sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam.

| Part 1 |Part 2 |Part 3 |Part 4|Part 5|

“Remember that there is much good in bearing with patience that which you dislike, and that victory comes with patience, and that with hardship comes a way out and with difficulty comes ease.” (Ahmad).

Golden words of advice spoken to Ibn ‘Abbas by the Messenger of Allah (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam). In the story of Ka’b bin Malik (radhiAllahu anhu) and those who stayed behind is a reflection of the truthfulness of these words.

40 painful days of isolation have passed. Ka’b bin Malik (radhiAllahu anhu) and the two companions await a response, a sign of relief. Divine revelation had ceased to descend upon the Prophet (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam), by Allah’s wisdom, just as He delayed it in the incident of the slander of Aisha (radhiAllahu anha).  But the Prophet (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam) now has a message for Ka’b and his companions. A messenger was sent. Had he come with tidings of relief? Were the Muslims were permitted to speak to them?

When forty out of the fifty nights elapsed, behold! There came to me the messenger of Allah’s Apostle and said, ‘Allah’s Apostle orders you to keep away from your wife,’

I said, ‘Should I divorce her; or else! what should I do?’ He said, ‘No, only keep aloof from her and do not cohabit her.’ The Prophet sent the same message to my two fellows. Then I said to my wife. ‘Go to your parents and remain with them till Allah gives His Verdict in this matter.’

The trial is bitter, with seemingly no signs of a sweet end. Yet Ka’b responds with words showing his ardent desire to ensure compliance with the order of the Messenger of Allah (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam).  If he was told that he must divorce her, he would have done so immediately without delay.

Here we notice exemplary manners from the Companions in dealing with the commands of the Prophet (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam). The messenger who came to Ka’b did not reply with extra words beyond those conveyed to him by the Prophet (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam). He did not say ‘I think he meant this (to divorce) or I think he meant not to divorce.’ He repeated the previous command without further interpretation.  Ka’b also complied immediately and refused to ask for flexibility, even when others told him to seek it:

Kab added, “The wife of Hilal bin Umaiya came to Apostle and said, ‘O Allah’s Apostle! Hilal bin Umaiya is a helpless old man who has no servant to attend on him. Do you dislike that I should serve him? ‘ He said, ‘No (you can serve him) but he should not come near you.’ She said, ‘By Allah, he has no desire for anything. By, Allah, he has never ceased weeping since his case began till this day of his.’

In testing His slaves, Allah is Merciful. From His mercy upon them was that this command came towards the last days of the test, perhaps they would not have been able to remain patient had it come earlier on. Through this,  is a reminder to console ourselves in testing times by pondering over the mercy of Allah, that He did not allow the test to be worse.

The Prophet (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam) was also merciful to his ummah. Even though the matter was serious, he exempted Hilal bin Umaiya by allowing his wife to serve her elderly husband.

On that, some of my family members said to me, ‘Will you also ask Allah’s Apostle to permit your wife (to serve you) as he has permitted the wife of Hilal bin Umaiya to serve him?’ I said, ‘By Allah, I will not ask the permission of Allah’s Apostle regarding her, for I do not know what Allah’s Apostle would say if I asked him to permit her (to serve me) while I am a young man.’

Then I remained in that state for ten more nights after that till the period of fifty nights was completed starting from the time when Allah’s Apostle prohibited the people from talking to us.

Separating a man from his wife, a hefty matter, only emphasized that this was indeed a great trial. But, Ibn Al-Qayyim (rahimahullah) in his book Zad Al-Ma’aad, points out that the command to avoid their wives, was in fact a sign of closely approaching good in two ways.

First, the messenger sent by the Prophet (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam) was considered a type of ‘speaking’ with them, after he had completely avoided them, even through an intermediary.

Second, the specific command for them to avoid their wives served as a reminder for them to abandon any means of pleasure and increase in worship. When worship is increased, this signals that the period of test or punishment is almost over. Related to this is the last ten nights of Ramadan, when the Prophet (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam) set an example of avoiding his wives and heavily increasing worship, before the month reaches its end.

So as signs of the end of this trial begin to appear, for every afflicted believer, there are also tidings of hope.  When you are overcome by distress, worry, and debts or when backs are turned to you and a genuine smile can no longer spread across your face due to the grief shadowing your days, think of Ka’b (radhiAllahu anhu). Remember now that it is a sign from Allah, that the time has come to turn to none but Him, subhanahu wata’ala.

“And who is better in religion than one who submits himself to Allah.” (al-Nisaa’ 4:125)

This is the purpose of your trial; that you are freed from arrogance, pride and cured of the hardened heart that comes with a state of ongoing ease and prosperity.

The goal is to repent to Allah and flee to Him, so that your heart is attached to Him like never before. Ka’b bin Malik had no one to complain to but Allah. Refrain from complaining to the creation, who cannot relieve you of your agony.  In fact, we should be shy from Allah, that He sees us asking and hoping in other than Him. Ka’b never gave up hope in Allah when everyone turned away. To give up hope in your Creator and Sustainer is to hold poor thoughts of Him, subhanahu wata’ala. How is it that we fail to place our trust in Him, when He is more Merciful to us than our own selves?

In the hands of the people, you will not find honor or even disgrace. When you keep asking of them, they increase in annoyance. As for Allah, when you ask Him, He is more pleased.  Allah loves to hear his slaves invoking, begging and asking from Him Alone.

“Is He [not best] who responds to the desperate one when he calls upon Him and removes evil.” (al-Naml 27:62)

Reflect on the example of Prophet Ayyub (alayhe asallam) who, in a state of affliction in wealth, children and health, called out to Allah:

And [mention] Job, when he called to his Lord, “Indeed, adversity has touched me, and you are the Most Merciful of the merciful.”

So We responded to him and removed what afflicted him of adversity. And We gave him [back] his family and the like thereof with them as mercy from Us and a reminder for the worshippers [of Allah]. (al-Anbiyaa’ 21:83,84)

Allah ends off the example of this Prophet by describing it as  ذِكْرَىٰ لِلْعَابِدِينَ : ‘A reminder for all those who worship Us.’

On these words, Ibn Kathir comments: “We made him an example lest those who are beset by trials think that We do that to them because We do not care for them, so that they may take him as an example of patience in accepting the decrees of Allah and bearing the trials with which He tests His servants as He will.’ (Tafsir Ibn Kathir)

When you turn to Allah in supplication, be sure of a response. If it is delayed, He will compensate you by filling your heart with patience and certainty, both of which are sources of reward, until invoking Him carries a sweetness of its own. A delayed response makes the believer blame none but himself, hence leading to repentance. Once we humble ourselves, seeking forgiveness, admitting that indeed we are undeserving due to our sins, Allah will forgive and bring forth relief.

It is not the calamity that has narrowed our life, rather falling in the trap of the incapable ones is what restricts us. The Prophet (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam) said: “The most incapable person is the one who does not make du`a.” (Sahih Al-Jami’)

The heart of the believer is pulled towards its Lord in times of hardship, unlike those hearts numbed from sensing the alarm that awakens the living hearts.  Every test is a key with which we unlock our hearts. Allah (subhanahu wata’ala) says,

“Then why, when Our punishment came to them, did they not humble themselves? But their hearts became hardened.” (al-An’aam 6:43)

Abu Sa’id Al-Khudri narrated: One day the Messenger of Allah (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam) entered the mosque. He saw there a man from the Ansar called Abu Umamah and said to him: “What is the matter that I am seeing you sitting in the mosque when there is no time of prayer?”

Abu Umamah said: “I am entangled in sorrow and debts.”

The Prophet (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam) replied: “Shall I not teach you words by which, when you say them, Allah will remove your sorrow, and settle your debts?”

Abu Umamah said: “Yes, Messenger of Allah”

The Prophet (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam) said: “Say in the morning and evening:

Allaahumma inni a’oodhu bika min al-hamm wa’l-hazn wa’l-‘ajz wa’l-kasal wa’l-bukhl wa’l-jubn wa dala’ al-dayn wa ghalbat al-rijaal

“O Allah! I seek refuge with You from worry and grief, from incapacity and laziness, from cowardice and miserliness, from being heavily in debt and from being overpowered by (other) men.”

Abu Umamah said: “When I did that Allah removed my distress and settled my debt.” (Abu Dawud).

When Abu Umamah faced hardship, he fled to Allah, Who aided him with the du’aa that the Prophet (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam) taught him, thus relieving his distress.

Finally, after you plead to your Creator, seeking a way out of the darkness, recall the example of Prophet  Zakariya (alayhe asallam) who upheld righteous deeds whilst invoking Allah for offspring.  When the angels came to grant him glad tidings of a son, Yahya, they found him standing in the mihrab. Istiqamah on the obedience of Allah, after du’aa is a cause of being blessed with a response, as opposed to heedlessness and displeasing Allah, after asking Him.

“So the angels called him while he was standing in prayer in the chamber, “Indeed, Allah gives you good tidings of John.” (Aal-‘Imran 3:39).

As for our beloved companion, Ka’b bin Malik (radhiAllahu anhu), a messenger came to him while he too was in a state of obedience, having just concluded the fajr prayer:

When I had offered the Fajr prayer on the 50th morning on the roof of one of our houses and while I was sitting in the condition which Allah described (in the Qur’an) i.e. my very soul seemed straitened to me and even the earth seemed narrow to me for all its spaciousness, there I heard the voice of one who had ascended the mountain of Sala’ calling with his loudest voice, ‘O Kab bin Malik! Be happy (by receiving good tidings).’ I fell down in prostration before Allah, realizing that relief has come.

Allah has spoken the Truth;

“For indeed, with hardship [will be] ease. Indeed, with hardship [will be] ease.” (al-Sharh 5,6).

| Part 1 |Part 2 |Part 3 |Part 4|

A letter from an unbelieving king; a promise of protection and a good life.
His brothers in faith; turning away, no words, no greetings, no promises.

Then I took the letter to the oven and made a fire therein by burning it.

Without second thought, the king’s letter was burned. His brothers were given precedence.
He could have decided to go and ‘stick to his principles’. After all, the king did not ask him to abandon his religion, it was a brief invitation to move to a place where he wouldn’t feel ‘inferior’. Or he could have decided to take it home, carefully contemplate the offer, and then reach a final decision. Aside from rejecting it, he could have kept the letter merely for its royal origin.

But our beloved companion knew otherwise. He knew that this was a fitna, a great one, for his faith and his allegiance to the Muslims.
His loyalty remained with the believers, for whom the sincere ones grant their love and allegiance. Everyday application of ‘aqeedah (creed) was the way of the companions, whose fiqh (true understanding) of the fundamentals of Islam shone in their actions.

Facing some sort of hardship from our fellow Muslims, should not lead us to give up on them. They are most deserving of patience, and not preferring others over them even if they allure us with kindness.

“And keep thy soul content with those who call on their Lord morning and evening, seeking His Face; and let not thine eyes pass beyond them, seeking the pomp and glitter of this Life; no obey any whose heart We have permitted to neglect the remembrance of Us, one who follows his own desires, whose case has gone beyond all bounds.” (al-Kahf 18:28).

Such is true manifestation of walaa to the believers. How is it that one can turn away from those who share the strongest ties of kinship in faith?

“Your ally is none but Allah and [therefore] His Messenger and those who have believed – those who establish prayer and give zakah, and they bow [in worship].” (Al-Ma’idah 5:55).

In instantly burning the letter, Ka’b (radhiAllahu anhu) was an example of hastiness in ridding ourselves from all means that lead to corruption in deen.
Burning the letters and cutting the ropes pulling us toward misguidance is a step to being saved from the eternal Fire. Every link between us and the prohibited should be terminated, thereby disallowing any chances for the whispers of shaytan. The truly determined ones are those who do not allow the juice to ferment, as Ibn Al-Qayyim so eloquently symbolized. The more one permits means of temptation to remain in their surroundings the more they are at risk of poisoning their faith.

Prophet Sulayman (alayhe asallam) was one whose example of cutting off ties with that which distracted him from the remembrance of Allah was mentioned in the Quran.

And to David We gave Solomon. An excellent servant, indeed he was one repeatedly turning back [to Allah].
[Mention] when there were exhibited before him in the afternoon the poised [standing] racehorses.
And he said, “Indeed, I gave preference to the love of good [things] over the remembrance of my Lord until the sun disappeared into the curtain [of darkness].”
[He said], “Return them to me,” and set about striking [their] legs and necks. (Saad 38:30-33).

When the racehorses diverted  him from the ‘asr prayer until the sun had set, he slaughtered them all to reprimand himself for allowing them to distract him. For the sake of emphasis, you have just spent hours washing, waxing and adding classy accessories to your luxorious car. You stand back to admire your efforts for a moment, but your joy is cut short when you look up to find the sun setting while you were heedless to prostrate to your Creator in fulfillment of your obligation.  Would your prized car be pledged for charity on the spot? Although not obligatory to do so, it is an illustration of the importance of remaining alert to that which diverts from the five daily prayers.
Allah (subhanahu wata’ala) warns us:

O you who have believed, let not your wealth and your children divert you from remembrance of Allah . And whoever does that – then those are the losers. (al-Munafiqun 63:9).

As soon as Allah blesses and guides us to realize that a certain path leads to sin, our immediate response should be blocking all access to it, particularly if it lies in the proximity of our homes, of close reach to us and those living with us. Otherwise, it will keep tempting us until we eventually submit to its calls, except whomever Allah has mercy on.

From the incident of the king’s letter, there is a lesson in being extra cautious of wolves who take advantage of the lone sheep. There are those who prey on believers in their moments of weakness and despair, calling them to their way and ultimately leading them to their own ruin. This is of particular importance to our youth, who may find themselves wandering alone in the fields of temptation and immorality. Such wolves may appear disguised in sweetness and friendship, like the king who attempted to take advantage of the weakness and loneliness of Ka’b. Hence the need for Muslim youth to associate in the company of the righteous, who encourage one another towards virtue, forbid one another from treading the paths of temptation and strengthen one another’s resolve in the face of the trials of this life.

If we turn to the example of the Prophet (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam), it will be of no surprise that burning the letter was Ka’b’s response. The example before his eyes was a courageous one of strong resolve. He (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam) refused to be coaxed by his people into accepting vast wealth, lofty status and beautiful women as a ‘reward’ for giving up the faith he so deeply loved and so earnestly strove for.  Allah commanded him,

Then do not obey the deniers. They wish that you would soften [in your position], so they would soften [toward you]. (Al-Qalam 68:8,9)
His (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam) only response to the allurement of his people was:

“By Allah, if they put the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left on condition that I abandon this course, until Allah has made me victorious, or I perish therein, I would not abandon it.”

Just as Ka’b followed in the footsteps of his beloved, be among the strong-willed, who do not allow a temptation of this temporary life to unravel works of  previous good, done seeking the pleasure of their Creator.

But, along with your determination, most needed is Allah’s help and guidance to keep your foot steady and your heart firm. Like the Prophet (sallaAllahu alayhe wasallam), we too must supplicate:

Yaa muqallib al-quloob thabbit qalbi ala deenak

O Controller of the hearts, make my heart adhere firmly to Your religion.