Ads by Muslim Ad Network

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Qadhi 'Iyadh: Ruling upon seven cases which contain disrepect towards the Prophet ﷺ

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Qadhi 'Iyadh: Ruling upon seven cases which contain disrepect towards the Prophet ﷺ

    بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

    All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. And may the peace and blessings be upon the Master of all Messengers - our Prophet Muhammad - and upon his family and companions and those who followed them in goodness until the day of judgement.

    To proceed:

    Al-Salamu 'alaykum wa rahmatullah,

    Al-Qadhi 'Iyadh (d. 544 AH) was one of the of the great scholars of Islam and among the shining stars of the Malikiyya and the author of great and beneficial works, may Allah ta'ala have mercy upon him.

    He is also the author of the famous work and masterpiece Al-Shifa bi Ta'rif Huquq al-Mustafa (The Remedy by the Recognition of the Rights of the Chosen One), where he explains the rights that our Prophet - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - has [upon us] and his beautiful qualities and miracles.

    He also mentions those who go against his rights - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - by disrespecting him (whether intentionally or unintentionally) or speaking carelessly regarding him or what is similar to this.
    Careless speech regarding the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - is a very serious and grave issue to the degree that there are cases where one careless word uttered may lead to the instant leaving of the person of the religion of Islam such that he is regarded an apostate (Murtad)!

    This issue of careless speech has always existed, but it seems to me that in our time people have become more careless. This is why I would like to share with you some of the relevant sections from Al-Shifa in order for us not to mention the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - except with utmost respect and love and this in every situation.


    I've taken the translation of the Arabic text from the following work (see p. 243-257): "The Killer Mistake"

    On p. 243 it starts with the following statement (the footnotes can be read in the link) under the section "EXTRACT FROM SHIFĀ: THE SEVEN CASES":

    Qāđī Íyāđ explains seven cases – statements or actions considered as blasphemy. Some illustrations of these concern explicit and intentional insults and some others are implied and unintentional. Qāđī Íyāđ mentions rulings in all these cases.754
    - end of quote -


    These are the seven cases:

    The First Case:

    قَال الْقَاضِي تقدم الْكَلَام فِي قَتْل القاصِد لِسَبّه وَالإزْرَاء بِه وَغَمْصِه بأيّ وَجْه كَان من مُمْكِن أَو مُحَال فَهَذَا وَجْه بَيْن لَا إشْكَال فِيه

    The Qāđī says: [The First Case:] We have mentioned earlier that whosoever intentionally disrespects or disparages him in whatever manner – regardless of whether such description is possible or impossible755 – such a person is executed. This is a clear-cut case and there is no reason for confusion nor anything problematic about it.
    - end of quote (from Al-Shifa bi Ta'rif Huquq al-Mustafa 2/231) -

  • #2
    The Second Case:

    الْوَجْه الثاني لَا حَقّ بِه فِي الْبَيَان وَالْجَلَاء وَهُو أن يَكُون الْقَائِل لَمّا قَال فِي جِهَتِه صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم غَيْر قَاصِد لِلسّبّ وَالْإزْرَاء وَلَا مُعْتِقَد لَه ولكنه تَكَلّم فِي جِهَتِه صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم بِكَلِمَة الْكُفْر من لَعْنِه أَو سَبَّه أَو تَكذيبِه أَو إضَافَة مَا لَا يَجُوز عَلَيْه أَو نَفْي مَا يجيب لَه مِمَّا هُو فِي حَقّه صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم نَقِيصَة مِثْل أَنّ يَنْسِب إليْه إتْيَان كَبِيرَة أَو مُداهَنَة فِي تبليغ الرّسَالة أَو فِي حُكْم بَيْن النَّاس أَو يَغُضّ من مَرْتبته أَو شَرَف نَسَبَه أَو وُفُور عِلْمِه أَو زُهْدِه أَو يُكَذّب بِمَا اشْتَهَر من أُمُور أخْبَر بِهَا صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم وتَوَاتَر الْخَبَر بِهَا عَن قصْد لِرَد خَبَرِه أَو يَأْتِي بِسَفَه مِن الْقَوْل أَو قَبِيح مِن الْكَلَام ونوع مِن السَّبّ فِي جِهَتِه وإن ظَهَر بِدَلِيل حَالِه أنَّه لَم يَعْتَمِد ذَمّه وَلَم يَقْصِد سَبَّه إِمَّا لِجَهَالَة حملته عَلَى مَا قاله أَو لِضَجِر أَو سُكْر أضْطَرّه إليْه أَو قِلّة مُرَاقَبَة وَضَبْط لِلسَانِه.
    وعَجْرَفَة وَتَهَوُّر فِي كَلَامِه فَحُكْم هَذَا الْوَجْه حُكْم الْوَجْه الأوّل الْقَتْل دون تَلَعْثُم إِذ لَا يُعْذَر أَحَد فِي الْكُفْر بِالْجَهَالَة وَلَا بدعوى زلل اللسان ولا بشئ مِمَّا ذكرناه إذَا كَان عقله فِي فطرته سليمًا إلَّا من أكره وقلبه مطمئن بالإيمان
    وبهذا أفتى الأندلسيون عَلَى ابن حَاتِم فِي نَفْيه الزُّهْد عَن رسول الله صلى الله تَعَالَى عليه وآله وسلم الَّذِي قَدّمْنَاه وَقَال مُحَمَّد بن سُحْنُون فِي المَأمُور يَسُبّ النَّبِيّ صلى الله تعالى عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم فِي أيْدِي العَدُوّ يُقْتَل إلَّا أن يُعْلَم تَبَصُّرُه أَو إكْرَاهُه وَعَن أَبِي محمد ابن أَبِي زيد لَا يُعْذَر بدَعْوَى زَلَل اللسان فِي مِثْل هَذَا وَأفْتى أبو الحسن القابسي فِيمَن شَتَم النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم فِي سُكْره يُقْتَل لِأَنَّه يُظَنّ بِه أنَّه يَعْتَقِد هَذَا ويَفْعَلُه فِي صَحْوِه وَأيْضًا فَإنَّه حَد لَا يُسْقِطُه السُّكْر كَالْقَذْف وَالْقَتْل وَسَائِر الحُدُود لِأَنَّه أدْخَلَه عَلَى نَفْسِه لِأَنّ من شَرِب الخَمْر عَلَى عِلْم من زَوَال عَقْلِه بِهَا وَإتْيَان مَا يُنْكَر مِنْه فَهُو كَالْعَامِد لَمّا يَكُون بِسَبَبِه وَعَلَى هذا ألْزَمْنَاه الطّلَاق وَالْعِتَاق وَالْقِصَاص وَالحُدُود وَلَا يُعْتَرَض عَلَى هَذَا بِحَدِيث حَمْزَة وَقَوْلُه للنَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم وهل أنْتُم إلا عبيد لأبى قَال فَعَرَف النَّبِيّ صَلَّىاللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم أنَّه ثمل فَانْصَرَف لِأَنّ الخَمْر كَانَت حِينَئِذ غَيْر مُحَرّمة فَلَم يَكُن فِي جِنَايَاتَها إثْم وَكَان حُكْم مَا يَحْدُث عَنْهَا مَعْفُوا عَنْه كَمَا يَحْدُث مِن النّوْم وَشُرْب الدّوَاء الْمَأْمُون


    The Second Case: is similar to the previous one in its wording and explicitness; however, the utterer does not say it with the intention of insulting or disparaging the Prophet , nor does he believe in such things. But he has [nevertheless] uttered blasphemies – words of kufr:

    that criticise him or insult him or belie him;

    or attribute things to him which are forbidden to say about him or negate something which is obligatory for him;

    or attributes a flaw or fault to him – such as accusing him of commiting a major sin or flattery or cajolery when he preached to others or [when he] delivered the message, or in his adjudication between disputing parties;

    or says things that diminish the lofty rank Allāh táālā has bestowed upon him, or [disparages] his noble lineage or [degrades] the extensiveness of his knowledge or his austerity;

    or if a person denies things informed by him, when such reports are well-known and have reached the level of tawātur, [if such denial is in the form of] seeking to reject his opinion;

    or if a person talks about him in a rude and brusque manner, or speaks about him in vulgar and uncouth words or any other form of abusive speech;

    Even if the person proves that he has not deliberately said any of this to deride him ; or intended to insult or disparage him – whether it was ignorance that made him say such things or because he was discontented or disgruntled, or he was inebriated, or he blurted it out without thinking or it slipped from his tongue, or because of haughtiness or impudence, or impetuousity and recklessness; in all such cases, the ruling is the same as in the first case – that is, execution without further deliberation or any hesitation, because the excuse of ignorance [in such cases] which cause apostasy is inadmissible, nor the excuse of slip of the tongue, nor any other excuse which I have mentioned above as long as the person is sane and has not lost his reason. Except a person in duress, who utters such things due to coercion – as long as faith is undisturbed in his heart. It is therefore, that the Andalusian scholars decreed against Ibn Ĥātim when he repudiated the zuhd of RasūlAllāh , as mentioned earlier. Muĥammad ibn Saĥnūn said concerning the blasphemy committed by prisoners,756 that they should be executed – except in the case of such prisoners who became Christians757 or those who were compelled to utter blasphemies.

    Abū Muĥammad ibn Abī Zayd
    758 said that no one will be spared nor any excuse citing slip of the tongue will be admissible in such cases [of blasphemy]. Similarly, Abu’l Ĥasan al-Qābisī issued a fatwā that whoever insulted the Prophet even in a state of intoxication shall be executed, because it appears that the person must have held such beliefs in soberness and probably says such things when he is not drunk – and this is statutory punishment [ĥadd] which is not excusable, like the case of [unjust] accusation of adultery or murder or other ĥadd punishments as he is responsible for this himself. Because when a person knowingly [and of his own free choice] gets drunk, in full knowledge that he may commit a crime, is the same as a person who commits a crime intentionally. Based on this, we consider valid, the divorce or manumission [by a drunk] and punishment in case of homicide [qişāş] and other punishments.

    One cannot pose an objection by citing the case of Sayyidunā Ĥamzah
    رضي الله عنه when he said addressing the Prophet , “You are all the slaves of my father.” The Prophet recognised that he was inebriated and left him [without reprimanding him]. This was because wine was not forbidden at that time, and therefore a crime committed under the influence of alcohol was not a sin; and whatever said [in such a state] was pardonable – similar to a person talking in his sleep or in a state of reduced consciousness while using certain permissible medications.759

    - end of quote (from Al-Shifa bi Ta'rif Huquq al-Mustafa 2/231 - 232) -

    Comment


    • #3
      The Third Case:

      الْوَجْه الثالث أَنّ يقصد إِلَى تَكْذيبه فِيمَا قاله أَو أتى بِه أَو وُجُودَه أَو يَكْفُر أَو يَنْفِي نُبُوّتَه أو رسالته بِه انْتَقَل بِقَوْلِه ذَلِك إلى دِين آخر غير مِلّتِه أم لَا؟ فَهَذَا كَافِر بإجْمَاع يَجِب قَتْلُه ثُمّ يُنْظَر فإن كَان مُصَرّحًا بِذَلِك كَان حُكْمُه أشْبَه بِحُكْم الْمُرْتَد وَقِوي الخِلَاف فِي اسْتِتَابِتِه وَعَلَى القَوْل الآخَر لَا تُسْقِط القَتْل عنه تَوْبَتُه لِحَقّ النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم إنّ كَان ذَكَرَه بِنقِيصَة فِيمَا قاله من كَذِب أَو غَيْرِه وَإِنّ كَان متسترا بِذَلِك فَحُكْمُه حُكْم الزَّنْدِيق لَا تُسْقِط قَتْلَه التّوْبَة عِنْدَنَا كَمَا سَنُبَيّنُه قَال أَبُو حنيفة وأصحابه من برئ من مُحَمَّد أَو كَذب بِه فَهُو مُرْتَد حَلَال الدَّم إلَّا أن يَرْجِع وَقَال ابن الْقَاسِم فِي المسلم إذَا قَال إنّ مُحَمَّدًا ليس بنبي أو لَم يُرْسَل أَو لم ينزل عليه قُرْآن وَإِنَّمَا هُو شئ تَقَوّلَه يُقْتَل وَقَال وَمِن كَفَر بِرسول اللَّه صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم وأنْكَرَه مِن الْمُسْلِمِين فَهُو بِمَنْزِلَة المُرْتَد وَكَذَلِك من أعْلَن بِتَكْذِيبه أنَّه كَالْمُرْتَد يُسْتَتَاب وَكَذَلِك قَال فِيمَن تَنَبّأ وزعم أنه يُوحَى إليه وقاله سُحْنُون وَقَال ابن الْقَاسِم دعا إِلَى ذَلِك أَو جهرا وقال أصبغ وَهُو كَالْمُرْتَد لِأَنَّه قَد كَفَر بِكِتَاب اللَّه مَع الْفِرْيَة عَلَى اللَّه وَقَال أشْهَب فِي يَهُودِيّ تَنَبّأ أَو زَعَم أنَّه أُرْسل إِلَى النَّاس أَو قَال بَعْد نَبِيكُم نَبِيّ أنَّه يُسْتَتَاب إنّ كَان مُعْلِنًا بِذَلِك فإن تَاب وَإِلَّا قُتِل وَذَلِك لِأَنَّه مُكَذّب للنَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم فِي قَوْلِه لَا نَبِيّ بَعْدِي مفتر عَلَى اللَّه فِي دعواه عَلَيْه الرسالة والنبوة، وَقَال مُحَمَّد بن سحنون من شك فِي حرف مِمَّا جاء بِه مُحَمَّد صلى الله عليه وسلم عن اللَّه فَهُو كافر جاحد، وَقَال: من كذب النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم كَان حكْمُه عِنْد الْأُمَّة القتل، وَقَال أَحْمَد بن أَبِي سُلَيْمَان صاحب سحنون: من قال إن النبي صلى الله عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم أسْوَد قتل. لم يمكن النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم بأَسْوَد وَقَال نَحْوَه أَبُو عُثْمَان الْحدَّاد قَال: لَو قَال إنَّه مات قَبْل أن يَلْتَحِي أَو أنَّه كان بناهرت وَلَم يَكُن بِتِهَامَة قتل لِأَنّ هَذَا نَفْي قَال حبيب بن ربيع تَبْدِيل صِفَتِه وَمَوَاضِعِه كُفْر والْمُظْهرُ له كافِر وَفِيه الاسْتِتَابَة وَالمُسِرّ لَه زِنْدِيق يُقْتَل دون اسْتِتَابَة

      The Third Case: When a person intends to belie his words760 and seeks to falsify his message or rejects his prophethood or messengership761 or denies his existence or disbelieves in him – does such a person transfer to another religion by these statements or not? [The answer is:] such a person is [very much] an apostate by ijmāá and he shall be executed. The statement of such a person is analysed, and if statement is explicit and openly said, he is judged similar to an apostate. Scholars have debated whether his repentance is requisitioned; [some have accepted it] and according to the second opinion, this person will not be spared the death penalty, even if he repents, because of [his violating] the right of RasūlAllāh ; this is in case he utters something which is disparaging such as an accusation of lying etc.

      If he keeps such things clandestine and says them in private, he is similar to a zindīq – and will not be spared execution according to Mālikī scholars as I shall explain later; Abū Ĥanīfah and his students said that whosoever distances himself from Sayyidunā Muĥammad or belies him is an apostate and his blood is no more immune762 except if he reverts. Ibn al-Qāsim said, if a Muslim says that Sayyidunā Muĥammad is not a Prophet or that he was not sent [by Allāh táālā] as a Messenger or the Qur’ān was not revealed to him or any such slander, shall be executed. Any Muslim who rejects or disbelieves in RasūlAllāh is [akin to] an apostate763 and similarly, one who publicly belies the Prophet is dealt with as an apostate and is requisitioned to repent.

      Similarly, if one declares himself to be a prophet and claims that he receives revelation [he is an apostate and will be asked to revert and repent] as said by Saĥnūn.764 Ibn al-Qāsim said regardless of whether he makes this claim discreetly or proclaims it openly. Aşbagh said: Such a person is an apostate as he has disbelieved in the book of Allāh táālā and attributed a lie to Him.765

      Ash-hab said concerning a Jew who purports to be a prophet and claims that he was given a message [by revelation to give] to the people or if he tells [Muslims]: “There shall be a prophet after your Prophet,” he shall be asked to repent if he says such things in public – if he repents, he is spared or else executed. This is because he has belied the Prophet when he said: “There is no prophet after me” and has lied and falsely alleged that Allāh táālā has made him a prophet or a messenger.

      Muĥammad ibn Saĥnūn said: ‘Anyone who doubts a single letter766 that Sayyidunā Muĥammad has brought from Allāh ta’álā, is an obstinate kāfir.’ And he said: ‘The punishment for whoever belies the Prophet , according to [the agreement of] our nation is that he shall be executed.’ Saĥnūn’s student Aĥmad ibn Abī Sulaymān said: ‘Whoever says that the Prophet was black shall be executed because the Prophet did not have a dark complexion.’ Abū Úthmān al-Ĥaddād said similarly: ‘If one says that the Prophet passed away [young] even before he had facial hair, or that he lived in Tahert767 or denies that the Prophet did not live in Tihāmah768 – such a denier will be executed as he rejects the Prophet’s well-known attributes. Ĥabīb ibn Rabīý said, ‘Altering his attributes [deliberately] and describing him unlike his appearance; or denying his location769 is kufr; if a person says such things openly, he is an apostate and will be requisitioned to repent; and if he mentions this in private, he is considered a zindīq and shall be executed without any requisition for repentance.

      - end of quote (from Al-Shifa bi Ta'rif Huquq al-Mustafa 2/232 - 234) -

      Comment


      • #4
        The Fourth Case:

        الْوَجْه الرابع أن يَأْتِي مِن الْكَلَام بِمُجْمَل وَيَلْفظ مِن القَوْل بِمُشْكِل يمكن حمله عَلَى النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم أَو غَيْرِه أَو يُتَرَدّد فِي المُرَاد بِه من سَلَامِتِه مِن الْمَكْرُوه أَو شَرّه فَههُنَا مُتَرَدّد النَظَر وَحَيْرَة الْعِبَر وَمَظنَّه اخْتِلَاف المُجْتَهِدِين ووقفة اسْتِبْرَاء المُقَلّدِين لِيَهْلِك من هلك عَن بَيّنَة وَيَحْيَا من حَيّ عَن بَيّنَة فَمِنْهُم من غَلّب حُرْمَة النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم وَحَمى حِمى عِرْضِه فَجَسَر عَلَى الْقَتْل وَمِنْهُم من عَظّم حُرْمَة الدم وَدَرَأ الحَد بالشّبْهَة لاحْتِمَال القَوْل وَقَد اخْتُلِف أئِمّتُنا فِي رَجُل أغْضَبَه غَريمُه فَقَال لَه صلّ عَلَى مُحَمَّد صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم فَقَال لَه الطَّالِب لَا صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَى من صَلَّى عَلَيْه فَقِيل لِسُحْنُون هَل هُو كَمَن شَتَم النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم أَو شَتم الْمَلَائِكَة الَّذِين يُصَلُّون عَلَيْه؟ قَال: لَا إذَا كَان عَلَى مَا وَصَفْت من الغَضَب لأنه لم يَكُن مُضْمِرًا الشّتْم، وَقَال أَبُو إِسْحَاق البَرْقِيّ وأصْبَغ بن الفَرَج لَا يُقْتَل لِأَنَّه إنَّمَا شَتَم النَّاس وَهَذَا نَحْو قَوْل سُحْنُون لِأَنَّه لَم يَعْذِرْه بالغضَب فِي شَتَم النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم ولكنه لَمّا احْتَمَل الْكَلَام عِنْدَه وَلَم تكن مَعَه قَرِينَة تَدُلّ عَلَى شتم النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أو شَتْم الْمَلَائِكَة صَلَوات اللَّه عَلَيْهِم وَلَا مُقَدّمَة يُحْمِل عَلَيْهَا كلامه بَل القرينة تدل عَلَى أَنّ مراده النَّاس غَيْر هَؤْلَاء لِأَجْل قَوْل الآخر لَه صَلَّى عَلَى النَّبِيِّ فحمل قَوْله وسبه لِمَن يُصَلّي عَلَيْه الآن لأجْل أمْر الآخَر لَه بَهَذَا عِنْد غضبه هَذَا معنى قوله سُحْنُون وهو مطابق لعلة صاحبيه وذهب الحَارِث بن مسكين الْقَاضِي وَغَيْرُه فِي مِثْل هَذَا لإلى القتل وتوقف أَبُو الْحَسَن القابسي فِي قَتْل رَجُل قَال كُلّ صَاحِب فُنْدُق قَرْنان وَلَو كَان نَبِيًّا مُرْسلًا فأمَر بِشَدّه بالقُيُود وَالتّضْيِيق عَلَيْه حَتَّى يُسْتَفْهَم البَيّنَة عَن جُمْلَة ألفَاظِه وَمَا يَدُلّ عَلَى مَقْصدِه هَل أرَاد أصْحَاب الفَنَادق الآن فَمَعْلُوم أنَّه لَيْس فِيهِم نَبِيّ مُرْسل فيكون أمْرُه أخفّ قَال وَلَكِن ظَاهِر لَفْظِه العُمُوم لِكُلّ صَاحِب فُنْدُق مِن المُتَقَدّمِين وَالْمُتأخّرِين وَقَد كَان فِيمَن تَقدّم مِن الْأَنْبِيَاء والرُّسُل مِن اكْتَسَب الْمَال قَال وَدَم المسلم لَا يُقْدَم عَلَيْه إلَّا بِأَمْر بَيْن وَمَا تُرَدّ إليه التأويلات لَا بُد من إمْعان النَّظَر فِيه هَذَا مَعْنَي كلامه وحُكي عَن أَبِي مُحَمَّد بن أَبِي زَيْد رَحِمَه اللَّه فِيمَن قَال لَعَن اللَّه العَرَب وَلَعَن اللَّه بَنِي إِسْرَائِيل ولعن اللَّه بَنِي آدَم وَذَكَر أنَّه لَم يُرد الْأَنْبِيَاء وَإِنَّمَا أرَدْت الظّالمِين مِنْهُم أَنّ عَلَيْه الأدَب بِقَدْر اجْتِهَاد السُّلْطَان وَكَذَلِك أفْتى فِيمَن قَال: لعن اللَّه من حرم المسكر وَقَال لَم أَعْلَم من حَرّمَة وفيمن لَعَن حَدِيث لَا يَبَع حاضَر لِبَاد ولعن مَا جاء بِه أنَّه إنّ كَان يُعْذَر بالجَهل وعدم معرفة السُّنَن فَعَلَيْه الأدب الْوَجِيع وَذَلِك أَنّ هَذَا لَم يَقْصد بِظَاهِر حاله سَبّ اللَّه وَلَا سَبّ رَسُولِه وَإِنَّمَا لعن من حَرّمَه مِن النَّاس عَلَى نَحْو فَتْوى سُحْنُون وأصحابه فِي المَسْأَلَة المُتَقَدّمَة ومثل هَذَا مَا يَجْرِي فِي كَلَام سُفَهَاء النَّاس من قوله بَعْضُهُم لِبَعْض - يَا ابْن أَلْف خِنْزِير، ويا ابن مِائَة كَلْب - وَشِبْهِه من هُجْر القَوْل وَلَا شك أنَّه يَدْخل فِي مِثْل هَذَا العدد من آبائه وأجْدَادِه جَمَاعَة مِن الْأَنْبِيَاء وَلَعَلّ بَعْض هَذَا العَدَد مُنْقَطِع إِلَى آدَم عَلَيْه السلام فيبلغني الزّجْر عَنْه وتبيين مَا جهل قائله مِنْه وشدة الأدَب فِيه وَلَو علم أنَّه قَصَد سَبّ من فِي آبائِه مِن الْأَنْبِيَاء عَلَى علم لَقُتِل وَقَد يُضَيَّق القَوْل فِي نَحْو هَذَا لَو قال لرجل هاشمى لعن الله بنى هاشم، وقال: أرَدْت الظّالمِين مِنْهُم أو قَال لِرَجُل من ذُرّيّة النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم قَوْلًا قَبيحًا فِي آبائِه أَو من نَسْلِه أَو وَلَدِه عَلَى علم مِنْه أنَّه من ذُرّيَّة النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم وَلَم تكن قَرِينَة فِي المَسْأَلَتَيْن تَقْتَضِي تَخْصِيص بَعْض آبائه وإخْرَاج النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم مِمَّن سَبَّه مِنْهُم وَقَد رَأَيْت لأبي مُوسَى بن مَنَاس فِيمَن قَال لِرَجُل لَعَنَك اللَّه إِلَى آدَم عَلَيْه السَّلَام أنَّه إن ثَبَت عَلَيْه ذَلِك قُتِل قَال الْقَاضِي وَفَّقَه اللَّه وَقَد كَان اخْتَلَف شُيُوخُنَا فِيمَن قَال لِشَاهِد شَهِد عليه بشئ ثُمّ قَال لَه تَتّهِمُنِي؟ فَقَال لَه الآخَر: الْأَنْبِيَاء يُتّهَمون فَكَيْف أنْت؟ فكان شَيْخُنَا أَبُو إِسْحَاق بن جَعْفَر يرى قَتْلَه لِبَشَاعَة ظَاهِر اللفظ وَكَان الْقَاضِي أَبُو مُحَمَّد بن مَنْصُور يتوقف عَن القتل الاحتمال اللَّفْظ عِنْدَه أن يَكُون خَبَرًا عَمَّن اتّهَمَهُم مِن الْكُفَّار وَأفْتَى فِيهَا قاضِي قُرْطُبَة أَبُو عَبْد اللَّه بن الْحَاجّ بِنَحْو من هَذَا وَشَدَّد الْقَاضِي أَبُو مُحَمَّد تَصْفِيدَه وَأطَال سجْنَه ثُمّ اسْتحْلَفَه بَعْد عَلَى تَكْذِيب مَا شُهد بِه عليه إذ دَخَل فِي شَهَادَة بعض من شهد عليه وهن ثم أطْلَقَه وَشَاهَدْت شَيْخَنَا الْقَاضِي أَبَا عَبْد اللَّه بن عِيسَى أيام قَضَائِه أُتِيّ بِرَجُل هَاتَر رَجُلًا اسْمُه مُحَمَّد ثُمّ قَصَد إِلَى كَلْب فَضَرَبَه برجْلِه وَقَال لَه: قم يَا مُحَمَّد فَأنْكَر الرَّجُل أن يَكُون قَال ذَلِك وَشَهِد عَلَيْه لفف مِن النَّاس فأمر بِه إِلَى السجن وتقصّى عَن حاله وهل يَصْحَب من يُسْتَرَاب بِدِينه فَلَمّا لم يَجد مَا يُقَوّى الرّيبَة باعْتِقَادِه ضَرَبَه بالسّوْط وأطلقه

        The Fourth Case: When someone says something generic or cryptic; or ambiguous words which could either refer to the Prophet or to someone else. Or if the meaning of what he said could be either valid or invalid [depending on the interpretation] and therefore merits further investigation, this becomes a perplexing topic such that mujtahid scholars find it debatable and hence the conflicting opinions and adherent-scholars770 are reluctant to take a stand and excuse themselves by following the opinion of mujtahid scholars. Consequently, some are spared and some go to the gallows, depending on the outcome of the prosecution. Such [scholars and judges] who focused on defending the honour of the Prophet were bold in handing the death penalty; and those who focused on the gravity of shedding a Muslim’s blood withheld from handing strict sentences due to ambiguity of such statements.771

        [For example] our imāms differed in the case of a person who was angered by an adversary who told him:‘Send blessings on the Prophet ’ and the person blurted: ‘May Allāh never bless the person who prayed for blessings upon him ’. Saĥnūn was asked about this person whether he had insulted the Prophet or angels [because they] send blessings upon him ; and he replied ‘No, if he has said it in anger without thinking about the consequences and did not intend to insult Allāh’s Messenger .’ Abū Is’ĥāq al-Barqī and Aşbagh ibn al-Faraj said that he will not be executed because he has insulted others772 and not the Prophet . This is similar to Saĥnūn’s opinion because he did not excuse the person on account of anger773 in blasphemy of the Prophet , but because the statement was ambiguous requiring clarification – and he did not have sufficient corroborative evidence for establishing blasphemy of the Prophet or derision of angels; nor did he know the complete speech which could provide the proper context of such a statement; rather, the situation indicates that the person’s ire was directed at the other man.

        This is consistent with the reasoning of both his companions [mentioned earlier]. However, the judge Ĥārith ibn Miskīn and others opined that in such cases, the utterer will be executed. Abu’l Ĥasan al-Qābisī was reluctant to order the execution of a person who said: “Every innkeeper is a pimp,774 even if he is a prophet,and he ordered the person to be imprisoned and reprimanded until he understood the implication of his utterance. Such a person is asked to clarify whether he meant innkeepers of our time – and since it is known fact that there is no prophet in our time, his sentence is lighter. However, the apparent meaning of this statement is generic – that includes innkeepers in the past as well as the present, and there are among prophets and messengers in the past who were wealthy.775 The blood of a Muslim is precious and we cannot hasten unless the case is amply clear; if a problematic statement is open for interpretation, it is essential to analyse it at length and seek further clarification.

        Concerning a person who said: “May Allāh damn the Arabs; may Allāh damn the Children of Israel; may Allāh damn the children of Ādam” and he did not intend prophets among them – rather his intention was the oppressors and tyrants among them; Abū Muĥammad ibn Abī Zayd al-Qayrawānī is reported to have ruled for reprimanding and disciplining such a person – and punish as much is permissible for the Sultan.776 Similarly he issued a fatwā concerning the person who said: ‘May Allāh táālā damn the person777 who forbade intoxicants’ and says ‘I don’t know who forbade it.’ Or if a person curses the ĥadīth: ‘The local [trader] cannot sell to the bedouin.778 If such a person is ignorant of the ĥadīth, he will be reprimanded severely because on the outward, this person did not intend to blaspheme against Allāh táālā or His Messenger; rather, he referred to other common men who forbade it. Similar to this is the speech of foolish masses; [such as a person] who abuses another and says: ‘O son of a thousand pigs’ or ‘a hundred dogs’ – because undoubtedly in such a large number of forefathers, there might be prophets – and quite probably this figure may end up with Sayyidunā Ādam عليه السلام. It is necessary to reprimand such a person and explain the stupidity of his utterance; however, if it is known [credibly] that he indeed included the prophets in the forefathers, then he shall be executed. Similarly, if a person tells a Hāshimi:779may Allāh táālā damn the children of Hāshim’ the scope for interpretation becomes very narrow. If the person claims that: ‘I intended the tyrants among them’ or if a person says similar things to a descendant of the Prophet and in full knowledge that he is the descendant of the Prophet or says ugly things about his forefathers or ancestry or his children; because it is difficult to justify an exclusion of the Prophet while making such a generalisation. I have seen the fatwā of Abū Mūsā ibn Manās where he ordered the execution, if proven, of a person who told another: ‘May Allāh damn you[and your forefathers] until Ādam عليه السلام’.

        I say:780 our masters have differed on the issue of a person who bore witness and then said: ‘Do you accuse me of [false witness]?’ The other person replied: ‘Even prophets have been slandered and you are of a lesser consequence.’ Our shaykh Abū Is’ĥāq ibn Jaáfar ruled for his execution owing to the odiousness of the words he has used; but Qāđī Abū Muĥammad ibn Manşūr refrained from executing him because those words can be interpreted according to him – that is, the second person could be mentioning a historical fact of how the infidels slandered prophets; the Qāđī of Cordova Abū Ábdullāh ibn al-Ĥajjāj ruled similarly. However, the judgement of Qāđī Abū Muĥammad was far more stricter and he ordered the person to be chained and jailed and made him to swear an oath that he had been untruthful; and then released him.781

        I witnessed [a case dealt by] Qāđī Abū Ábdullāh ibn Ýīsā in his tenure about a person who abused another person named Muĥammad, and then kicked a dog and said: ‘Stand up O Muĥammad.’ The person who said this denied it, but a number of people bore witness that he certainly said so; the Qāđī ordered the person to be jailed and investigated whether this person spent time in the company of agnostics and dhimmis. When it was found that the person was not inimical to Islām per se, the Qāđī had him lashed and then released him.

        - end of quote (from Al-Shifa bi Ta'rif Huquq al-Mustafa 2/234 - 237) -

        Comment


        • #5
          The Fifth Case:

          الْوَجْه الخامس أن لَا يَقْصِد نَقْصًا وَلَا يَذْكُر عَيْبًا وَلَا سَبًّا لكنه يَنْزَع بِذِكْر بَعْض أوْصَافِه أَو يَسْتَشْهِد بِبَعْض أَحْوَالِه صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم الْجَائزَة عَلَيْه فِي الدُّنْيَا عَلَى طَرِيق ضَرْب المثل والحجة لنفسه أو لغيره أو عَلَى التشبه بِه أَو عِنْد هضيمة نالته أو غضاضة لحقته لَيْس عَلَى طريق التأسي وطريق التحقيق بَل عَلَى مَقْصِد التَّرْفِيع لِنَفْسِه أَو لِغَيْرِه أَو عَلَى سَبِيل التّمْثِيل وعدم التّوْقِير لِنَبِيّه صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم أَو قَصْد الْهَزْل وَالتّنْذِير بِقَوْلِه كقول القائِل إن قِيل فِي السُّوء فَقَد قِيل فِي النَّبِيّ أَو إن كُذّبْت فَقَد كُذّب الْأَنْبِيَاء أَو إن أذْنَبْت فَقَد أذْنَبُوا أَو أَنَا أسْلَم من ألْسِنَة النَّاس وَلَم يَسْلَم مِنْهُم أنبِيَاء اللَّه ورسله أَو قَد صَبَرْت كَمَا صَبَر أُولُو العَزْم أَو كَصَبْر أَيُّوب أَو قَد صَبَر نَبيّ اللَّه عَن عِدَاة وَحَلُم عَلَى أكْثَر مِمَّا صَبَرْت وكقول المتنى: أَنَا فِي أُمَّة تَدَارَكَهَا اللَّه غَرِيب كَصَالِح فِي ثَمُود وَنَحْوَه من أشْعَار الْمُتَعَجْرِفِين فِي الْقَوْل الْمُتَسَاهِلِين فِي الْكَلَام كقول المَعَرّي كُنْت مُوسَى وَافَتْه بِنْت شُعَيْب * غَيْر أن لَيْس فِيكُمَا من فَقِير عَلَى أَنّ آخِر الْبَيْت شديد وَدَاخل فِي الإزْرَاء وَالتَّحْقِير بالنَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وسلم وتفضيل حال غَيْرِه عَلَيْه وَكَذَلِك قَوْله لَوْلَا انْقِطَاع الْوَحْي بَعْد مُحَمَّد * قُلْنَا مُحَمَّد عَن أَبِيه بَدِيل هُو مِثْلُه فِي الْفَضْل إلَّا أنَّه * لَم يَأْتِه بِرِسَالَة جِبْرِيل فَصَدْر البَيْت الثاني من هَذَا الفَصْل شَديد لِتَشْبِيهه غَيْر النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم فِي فَضْلِه بالنبي والعَجُز مُحْتَمِل لِوَجْهِين أحَدُهُمَا أَنّ هَذِه الفضيلة نَقّصَت الْمَمْدُوح وَالآخَر اسْتِغْنَاؤُه عَنْهَا وَهَذِه أشَدّ ونحو مِنْه قَوْل الآخِر وَإذَا مَا رُفِعَت رَاياتُه * صَفّقَت بَيْن جَنَاحَي جَبْرِين وقول الآخَر من أَهْل العَصْر فَرّ مِن الخُلْد وَاسْتَجَار بنا * فَصَبَّر اللَّه قَلْب رضوان وكقول حسان المصيصي من شعراء الأندلس فِي مُحَمَّد بن عباد المعروف بالمعتمد ووزيره أَبِي بَكْر بن زيدون كأن أَبَا بَكْر أَبُو بَكْر الرضا * وحَسّان حَسَّان وَأنْت مُحَمَّد إِلَى أمثال هَذَا وَإِنَّمَا أكثرنا بشاهدها مَع استثقالنا حكايتها لتعريف أمثلتها ولتساهل كثير مِن النَّاس فِي ولوج هَذَا الْبَاب الضنك واستخفافهم فادح هَذَا العبء وقلة علمهم بعظيم مَا فِيه مِن الوزر وكلامهم مِنْه بِمَا لَيْس لَهُم بِه علم وتحسبونه هينا وَهُو عِنْد اللَّه عظيم لَا سيما الشعراء وأشدهم فِيه تصريحًا وللسانه تسريحًا ابن هانئٍ الأندلسي وَابْن سُلَيْمَان المعري بَل قَد خرج كثير من كلامهما إِلَى حد الاستخفاف والنقص وصريح الكفر وَقَد أجبنا عَنْه وغضرنا الآن الْكَلَام فِي هَذَا الْفَصْل الَّذِي سقنا أمثلته فَإِنّ هذا كلها وَإِنّ لَم تَتَضمن سبًّا وَلَا أضافت إِلَى الْمَلَائِكَة والأنبياء نقصا وَلَسْت أعْنِي عَجُزَي بَيْتِي المَعَرّي وَلَا قَصَد قائلها إزارة وَغَضًّا فَمَا وَقّر النُّبُوَّة وَلَا عَظّم الرسالة ولا غزر حُرْمَة الاصْطِفَاء وَلَا عزز حُظْوَة الكَرَامَة حَتَّى شَبّه من شَبّه فِي كَرَامَة نالَهَا أَو مَعَرَّة قَصَد الانْتِفَاء مِنْهَا أَو ضرب مثل لتطبيب مَجْلِسِه أَو إغْلاء فِي وَصْف لِتَحْسِين كَلَامِه بمَن عَظّم اللَّه خَطَرَه وَشَرّف قَدْرَه وَألزَم تَوْقِيرَه وَبِره ونهى عَن جهر القَوْل لَه ورفع الصوت عِنْدَه فحق هَذَا إن درئ عَنْه القتل: الأدب والسجن وقوة تعزيره بحسب شنعة مقاله ومقتضى قبح مَا نطق بِه ومألوف عادته لمثله أَو ندوره وقرينة كلامه أو ندمه عَلَى ما سبق مِنْه وَلَم يزل المتقدمون ينكرون مِثْل هَذَا مِمَّن جاء بِه وَقَد أنكر الرشيد عَلَى أَبِي نواس قَوْله فإن يَك باقي سِحْر فِرْعَوْن فِيكُم * فَإِنّ عَصَا مُوسَى بِكَفّ خَصِيب وَقَال لَه يابن اللّخْنَاء أنْت المُسْتَهْزِئ بِعَصَا مُوسَى وأمَر بإخْرَاجِه عَن عَسْكَرِه من لَيْلَتِه وَذَكَر اليقتبى أَنّ مِمَّا أُخِذ عَلَيْه أيْضًا وَكُفّر فِيه أَو قَارَب قَوْله فِي مُحَمَّد الْأَمِين وتَشْبِيهِه إيَاه بالنبي صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم حَيْث قَال: تَنَازَع الأحْمَدَان الشّبْه فاشْتَبَهَا * خَلْقا وَخُلقًا كَمَا قَد الشّراكَان وَقَد أنْكَرُوا عَلَيْه أيْضًا قَوْله كيف لا يدينك من أَمَل * من رَسُول اللَّه من نَفَرِه لِأَنّ حَقّ الرَّسُول وموجب تعظيمه وإناقة مَنْزلَتِه أن يُضَاف إليْه وَلَا يُضَاف فَالْحُكْم فِي أمْثَال هَذَا مَا بَسَطْنَاه فِي طَرِيق الْفُتْيَا على هَذَا المَنْهج جَاءَت فُتْيَا إمام مَذْهِبنَا مَالِك بن أنس رَحِمَه اللَّه وأصحابه في النّوَادِر من رِوَايَة ابن أَبِي مَرْيَم فِي رَجُل غَيْر رَجُلًا بالْفَقْر فَقَال: تعيرني بالْفَقْر وَقَد رَعَى النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم الغَنَم فَقَال مَالِك قَد عَرّض بِذِكْر النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم فِي غَيْر مَوْضِعه أرى أَنّ يُؤَدّب قَال: وَلَا يَنْبَغِي لأهل الذُّنُوب إذَا عُوتِبُوا أَنّ يَقُولُوا قَد أخْطَأت الْأَنْبِيَاء قبْلَنَا، وَقَال عُمَر بن عَبْد الْعَزِيز لِرجل: (أنْظُر لَنَا كَاتِبًا يَكُون أبُوه عَرَبيًّا) فَقَال كَاتِب لَه: قَد كَان أَبُو النَّبِيّ كَافِرًا. فَقَال: (جَعَلْت هَذَا مَثلًا) فعَزَلَه وَقَال: (لَا تَكْتُب لِي أبدًا) وَقَد كَرِه سُحْنُون أن يصلى على النبي صلى الله عليه وَسَلَّم عِنْد التَّعَجُّب إلَّا عَلَى طَرِيق الثَّوَاب وَالاحْتِسَاب تَوْقِيرًا لَه وَتَعْظِيمًا كَمَا أمرنا اللَّه وسئل القابسي عَن رَجُل قَال لرجل قبيح كَأنَّه وجه نكير، ولرجل عبوس كَأنَّه وجه مالك الغضبان فقال أي شئ أراد بَهَذَا ونكير أَحَد فتاني القبر وهما ملكان فَمَا الَّذِي أراد أروع دخل عَلَيْه حِين رآه من وجهه أم عاف النظر إليْه لدمامة خلقه فَإِنّ كَان هَذَا فَهُو شديد لِأَنَّه جرى مجرى التحقير والتهوين فَهُو أشد عقوبة وليس فيه تصريح بالسب للملك وأنما السب واقع عَلَى المخاطب وَفِي الأدب بالسوط والسجن نَكال لِلسُّفَهَاء، قَال: (وَأَمَّا ذَاكِر مَالِك خازن النَّار فَقَد جفا الَّذِي ذَكَرَه عِنْد مَا أنكر حاله من عُبُوس الآخَر إلَّا أَنّ يَكُون المُعَبّس لَه يَد فَيُرْهَب بِعبْسَتِه فَيُشَبّهَه الْقَائِل عَلَى طريق الذّمّ لهذا في فعليه ولزومه فِي ظلمه صفة مَالِك الْمُلْك المطيع لربه فِي فعله فَيَقُول كَأنَّه لله يَغْضَب غضبه مَالِك فيَكُون أخفّ وما كان يَنْبَغِي لَه التعرض لمثل هذا ولو كَان أَثْنَى عَلَى العبوس بعبسته واحتج بِصِفَة مَالِك كَان أشَد وَيُعَاقَب الْمُعَاقَبَة الشَّدِيدَة وَلَيْس فِي هَذَا ذَم لِلْمَلَك ولو قَصَد ذَمّه لقُتِل وَقَال أَبُو الْحَسَن أيضا فِي شابّ معروف بالْخَيْر قَال لِرَجُل شَيْئًا فَقَال لَه الرجل اسْكُت فإنك أمَّيّ فَقَال الشابّ ألْيس كَان النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم أُمّيًّا فَشُنّع عَلَيْه مَقَالُه وَكَفّرَه النَّاس وَأشْفَق الشَّابّ مِمَّا قَال وَأظْهَر النّدَم عَلَيْه فَقَال أَبُو الْحَسَن أَمَّا إطْلَاق الْكُفْر عَلَيْه فَخَطَأ لكنه مُخْطِئ فِي استشهادته بَصِفَة النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم وكَوْن النبي أُمّيّا آيَة لَه وَكَوْن هَذَا أُمّيّا نَقِيصَة فِيه وَجَهَالَة وَمِن جَهَالتِه احْتِجَاجُه بِصِفَة النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم لكنه إذَا اسْتَغْفَر وتَاب واعْتَرَف وَلَجَأ إِلَى اللَّه فَيُتْرَك لِأَنّ قَوْله: (لَا يَنْتَهي إِلَى حد الْقَتْل وَمَا طَرِيقُه الأدب فَطَوع فاعله بالدم عَلَيْه يوجب الكف عَنْه ونزلت أيْضًا مسألة استفتى فِيهَا بَعْض قُضاة الأندلس شيخنا الْقَاضِي أَبَا مُحَمَّد بن مَنْصُور رَحِمَه اللَّه فِي رَجُل تنقصه آخر بشئ فَقَال لَه إنَّمَا تريد نقضي بقولك - وَأَنَا بِشْر وجميع البشر يلحقهم النقص حَتَّى النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم - فأفتاه بإطالة سجنه وإيجاع أدبه إِذ لَم يقصد السب وَكَان بَعْض فُقَهَاء الأندلس أفتى بقتله

          The Fifth Case: If a person does not intend to denigrate the Prophet , nor disparages him or insults him, but his speech is indicative of it, when he mentions certain attributes of the Prophet , or certain situation that are permissible for the Prophet in mundane matters; the person mentions these by way of analogy, or to exonerate his own self or others, or by way of comparison with the Prophet or he encounters an embarrasing situation;782 he does not mention these as historical facts or an example to follow; but rather to elevate himself or others by way of positing similitude 783 lacking respect due to the Prophet or by way of small talk or trying to be novel. For example, when a person says:

          So what if bad things are said about me, people have said bad things about the Prophet

          What is [unusual] if I am belied; even prophets have been belied;

          What is [unusual] if I commit a sin? Even prophets have sinned;

          How can I be safe from the tongues of men when prophets and messengers were not safe from them;

          I have been patient similar to the patience of the Prominent Messengers;784 or as patient as Ayyūb;

          The Prophet was more patient and forbearing with his enemies more than I had to bear;


          Like the poet Mutanabbi785 has said:

          I am among this nation, may Allāh táālā set them right
          As unwelcome as Salih was among his community


          Similar is the poetry of the profligate and reckless folk, like Maárrī786 has said:

          You are like Mūsā whom the daughter of Shuáyb came to,
          Except there is no beggar among either of you787


          The second line is worse and it is an explicit insult of the Prophet Mūsā عليه السلامbecause of [the poet’s] elevating a non-prophet over him. Similarly, he has said:

          If Revelation had not ceased with Muĥammad ﷺ
          We would say: Muĥammad788 is akin to his father789
          He is similar to him ﷺ in superiority, except that
          Jibrīl did not come to him with Revelation


          The first part of the second line is the worst because he compares a non-prophet with the Prophet in superiority; and the following part can possibly render two meanings;790 the first is that it diminishes the state of the person being praised in this distich, and the second is his being free of this attribute, which is worse.791 Similar is the saying of another:792

          When the Standards were raised
          They fluttered vigorously amidst the wings of Jibrīl793


          Another contemporary794 has said:

          He fled from paradise and dwelt in our neighbourhood
          May Allāh give peace to the heart of Riđwān795


          Ĥassān al-Maşīşī, an Andalusian poet said about Muĥammad ibn Ábbād al-Mútamid and his minister Abū Bakr ibn Zaydūn:

          As if Abū Bakr is Abū Bakr,
          Ĥassān is Ĥassān and you are Muĥammad796


          Even though it is burdensome for us to narrate such things, we have mentioned many examples only to illustrate the laxity and brazenness of ignorant people and the recklessness with which they indulge in them, considering such a grave issue as a trifling matter. They are ignorant of the dire consequences of such utterances – they deem it insignificant but near Allāh táālā it is enormous. Particularly in the speech of poets, and the worst of them are Ibn Hāniy al-Andalusi and Ibn Sulaymān al-Maárrī – much of their poetry falls into the disparaging variety and disrespect and explicit kufr which we have refuted earlier. The reason I have mentioned them here is to provide illustrations for this [fifth] case. Even though none of these lines – not just the ones of Maárrī – were intended to disparage prophets or angels by those who uttered them, nevertheless they have not been mindful of the lofty station of prophetood nor the eminence of messengership; nor respected the Chosen One or regarded his honour ; rather he compared lesser ones to him for glory797 and to enliven and enthrall the congregation, by using his name; he, whom Allāh táālā has honoured, elevated his rank and made it obligatory to respect him – such that Allah forbade speaking loudly in his presence.

          Such a person [who utters these things], even though he escapes the death penalty, still deserves to be reprimanded and imprisoned – and the punishment given to him will be according to the severity of his speech and the ugliness of its implication, whether such things are frequent occurrences with him or whether it was an aberration, whether the context of his utterance can be interpreted favourably and whether he is remorseful about it. Our elders have firmly rejected such things, like [Hārūn] Rashīd refuted Abū Nuwās’ lines:


          If anything from the sorcery of the Pharoah remains with you,
          Then verily, [know that] the Staff of Mūsā is in these fecund hands!798


          Rashīd said: “O son of an uncouth hag! Do you mock the staff of Mūsā عليه السلام?’ And he ordered him to be kicked out of the army that very night. Among such verses criticised as either kufr or approaching kufr is one mentioned by Qutaybī where [Abū Nuwās] says praising Muĥammad al-Amīn and compares him with the Prophet ﷺs:799

          The two Aĥmads resemble each other so much
          In appearance and in character, like [two] similar shoe laces.800


          Another criticised distich [of Abū Nuwās] is:

          How can you remain far from [attaining what you] hope
          When the Messenger of Allāh belongs to his clan801


          The right of the Messenger of Allah and his esteem is to mention others in relation to him; not to mention the Messenger of Allāh in relation with others. We have mentioned the legal ruling in such cases and the imām of our madh’hab, Mālik ibn Anas رحمه الله and his companions have ruled likewise. In Nawādir, through the report of Ibn Abī Maryam about a man who was taunted by another for his poverty and he said: ‘Do you taunt me for being poor? The Prophet has tended sheep.802 Mālik said: ‘This person has mentioned the Prophet’s case in an unsuitable manner, he should be reprimanded. He also said: ‘If those who commit sins are rebuked, they should not say “Prophets have commited errors prior to us.’ Úmar ibn Ábd al-Ázīz told a person: ‘Find me a scribe whose father is an Arab,’ His scribe said: ‘The Prophet’s father was a disbeliever.’ Úmar said: ‘Is this an example to cite?’ and he dismissed him and told him: ‘Don’t you ever write for me’.803

          Saĥnūn disliked the practice of saying the blessings upon the Prophet when one encounters something which surprises him; and that it should be said only with the intention of attaining reward and to honour the Prophet , as Allāh táālā has commanded us to do. Qābisī was asked about someone who told an ugly person that his face was like that of Nakīr, and to another scowling person that his face looked like angry Mālik.804 Munkar and Nakīr are two inquisitor angels who question the dead in their graves. This could either mean that the person is frightening in looks like Nakir or that he hates the person and degrades him; the latter is more severe and could be insulting or degrading to an angel.

          Yet, this is not explicitly disparaging or degrading an angel because he is insulting the person that he has addressed; such a person should be reprimanded, punished by lashing him and given a prison sentence. Similar is the case about the person who used the example of the angel Mālik, that is he did not intend to insult the angel – and if he did, he would receive the death penalty.

          A young man, known for his piety and righteousness was saying something and another person rebuked him: Shut up, you are an illiterate.’ The young man said: ‘Was the Prophet not among those who are not read?805 People rejected this statement and made takfīr of the young man, which pained him and he was genuinely remorseful and penitent. Abu’l Ĥasan [al-Qābisi] said: ‘Making takfīr of this person is incorrect; however, he has made an error in his analogy. The Prophet having not learned to read and write806 is a miracle, but such an attribute is a flaw for the young man; and it is out of ignorance that he has used the example of the Prophet to justify his own self. However, if he repents and does istighfār and is ashamed of his deed, he shall be acquitted because his statement is not as serious as to obligate the death penalty.

          Another such issue was raised to our shaykh, Abū Muĥammad Manşūr, by the judges of Andalus about a person who told another who degraded him: “You degrade me for my flaws? All humans, even the Prophet is not free from imperfection.” Our shaykh gave him a lengthy and rigorous prison sentence, but some other judges of Andalus ruled for the death penalty.

          - end of quote (from Al-Shifa bi Ta'rif Huquq al-Mustafa 2/238 - 244) -

          Comment


          • #6
            The Sixth Case:

            الْوَجْه السادس أَنّ يَقُول القائل ذَلِك حاكيا عن غَيْرِه وَآثِرًا لَه عَن سِوَاه فَهَذَا يُنْظَر فِي صُورَة حِكَايَتِه وَقِرينَة مَقَالَتِه وَيَخْتَلف الحُكْم باختلاف ذَلِك عَلَى أربعة وُجُوه: الْوُجُوب، وَالنّدْب، والكَرَاهَة، والتّحْرِيم فإن كَان أخْبَر بِه عَلَى وَجْه الشّهَادَة وَالتّعْرِيف بقائله والإنكار والإعلام بِقَوْلِه والتّنْفِير مِنْه والتّجْرِيح لَه فَهَذَا مِمَّا يَنْبَغِي امْتِثَالُه وَيُحْمد فاعِلُه وَكَذَلِك إن حَكاه فِي كِتَاب أو فِي مجلس عَلَى طريق الرَّد لَه والنَّقْض عَلَى قائله والفُتْيَا بِمَا يَلْزَمُه وَهَذَا منه مَا يَجِب وَمِنْه مَا يُسْتَحَب بحسَب حَالَات الحاكي لِذَلِك وَالمَحْكي عَنْه فإن كان القائل لِذَلِك مِمَّن تَصَدّى لأن يُؤْخذ عَنْه الْعِلْم أو رِواية الحديث أَو يُقْطَع بحُكْمِه أَو شَهَادَتِه أَو فُتْيَاه فِي الحُقُوق وَجَب عَلَى سَامِعِه الإشادَة بِمَا سُمع مِنْه وَالتّنْفِير للنَّاس عَنْه والشهادة عَلَيْه بِمَا قاله ووجب عَلَى من بلغه ذَلِك من أئِمَّة الْمُسْلِمِين إنكاره وبيان كفره وفساد قَوْله بقطع ضرره عَن الْمُسْلِمِين وقيامًا بحقّ سَيّد الْمُرْسَلِين وَكَذَلِك إن كَان مِمَّن يعظ العَامّة أَو يُؤدّب الصّبْيَان فَإِنّ من هَذِه سَرِيرَتُه لا يؤمن عَلَى إلقاء ذَلِك فِي قلوبهم فيتأكد فِي هَؤْلَاء الإيجاب لحق النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم ولحق شريعته وَإِنّ لَم يَكُن القائِل بِهَذِه السّبيل فالْقِيَام بحَقّ النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم وَاجِب وَحِمَايَة عِرْضِه مُتَعَيّن وَنُصْرَتُه عَلَى الأذى حَيًّا وَميتًا مُسْتَحقّ عَلَى كُلّ مُؤْمِن لكنه إذا قَام بَهَذَا من ظَهَر بِه الْحَقّ وَفُصِلَت بِه القَضِيّة وبان بِه الأمْر سَقَط عَن الباقي الفَرْض وَبَقِي الاسْتِحْبَاب فِي تكْثِير الشَّهَادَة عَلَيْه وعَضْد التّحْذِير مِنْه وَقَد أجْمَع السّلَف عَلَى بَيَان حال المُتّهَم فِي الْحَدِيث فَكَيْف بِمِثْل هَذَا وَقَد سُئِل أَبُو مُحَمَّد بن أَبِي زَيْد عَن الشّاهِد يَسْمع مِثْل هَذَا فِي حَقّ اللَّه تَعَالَى أيَسعُه أن لَا يؤدى شهادته قَال: إن رَجا نَفَاذ الحُكْم بِشهادته فليشهد وَكَذَلِك إن عَلِم أَنّ الْحَاكِم لَا يَرَى القتل بِمَا شهد بِه ويرى الاستتابه والأدب فليشهد ويلزمه ذَلِك وَأَمَّا الإباحة لحكاية قَوْله لغير هذين المقصدين فلَا أرى لَهَا مدخلًا فِي هَذَا الْبَاب فليس التفكه بعرض رَسُول اللَّه صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم والتمضمض بسوء ذكره لأحد لَا ذاكرًا وَلَا آثرا لغير غرض شرعي بمباح وَأَمَّا للأغراض المتقدمة فمتردد بَيْن الإيجاب والاستحباب وَقَد حكى اللَّه تَعَالَى مقالات المفترين عَلَيْه وَعَلَى رسله فِي كِتَابِه عَلَى وجه الإنكار لقولهم والتحذير من كفرهم والوعيد عليه والرد عليهم بِمَا تلاه اللَّه عَلَيْنَا فِي محكم كِتابِه وَكَذَلِك وَقَع من أمثاله فِي أحاديث النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم الصحيحة عَلَى الوجوه المتقدمة وأجمع السلف والخلف من أئِمَّة الهدى عَلَى حكايات مقالات الكفرة والملحدين فِي كتبهم ومجالسهم ليبينوها للناس وينقضوا شبهها عَلَيْهِم وَإِنّ كَان وَرَد لأحمد بن حَنْبَل إنكار لبعض هَذَا عَلَى الحَارِث بن أسد فقد صنع أَحْمَد مِثْلُه فِي رده عَلَى الجهمية والقائلين بالمخلوق وَهَذِه الوجوه الشائعة الحكاية عنها فَأَمَّا ذكرها عَلَى غَيْر هَذَا من حكاية سبه والإزراء بمنصبه عَلَى وجه الحكايات والأسمار والطرف وأحاديث النَّاس ومقالاتهم فِي الغث والسمير ومضاحك المجان ونوادر السخفاء والخوض فِي قِيل وقال ومالا يَعْنِي فكل هَذَا ممنوع وبعضه أشد فِي المنع والعقوبة من بَعْض فَمَا كَان من قائله الحاكي لَه عَلَى غَيْر قصد أو معرفة بمقدار مَا حكاه أَو لَم تكن عادته أَو لَم يَكُن الْكَلَام مِن البشاعة حيث هُو ولَم يظهر على حاكيه استحسانه واستصوابه زُجر عَن ذَلِك ونهي عَن العودة إليْه وَإِنّ قوم ببعض الأدب فَهُو مستوجب لَه وَإِنّ كَان لفظه من البشاعة حَيْث هُو كَان الأدب أشد، وَقَد حكي أَنّ رجلًا سَأل مالكًا عَمَّن يَقُول الْقُرْآن مخلوق فَقَال مَالِك كافر فاقْتلُوه فَقَال إنما حكيته عَن غَيْرِي فَقَال مَالِك إنَّمَا سمعناه مِنْك وَهَذَا من مَالِك رَحِمَه اللَّه عَلَى طريق الزجر والتغليظ بدليل أنَّه لَم ينفذ قتله وَإِنّ اتهم هَذَا الحاكي فِيمَا حَكاه أنه اختلقه ونسبه إِلَى غَيْرِه أو كَانَت تِلْك عادة له أَو ظهر استحسانه لِذَلِك أَو كَان مولعًا بِمِثْلِه والاستخفاف لَه أو التحفظ لمثله وطلبه ورواية أشْعَار هجوه صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم وسبه فَحُكْم هَذَا حُكَم السَّابّ نَفْسِه يُؤَاخَذ بِقَوْلِه وَلَا تَنْفَعُه نسْبَتُه إِلَى غَيْرِه فيبادر بقتله ويعجآ إلى الْهَاوِيَة أُمَّه وَقَد قَال أَبُو عُبَيْد الْقَاسِم بن سَلَام فِيمَن حَفِظ شَطْر بَيْت مِمَّا هُجِي بِه النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم فَهُو كُفْر وَقَد ذَكَر بَعْض من أَلْف فِي الإجْمَاع إجْمَاع الْمُسْلِمِين عَلَى تَحْرِيم رِوَايَة مَا هُجِي بِه النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم وكِتَابَتِه وَقِرَاءَتِه وَتَرْكِه مَتَى وُجِد دُون محْو وَرَحِم اللَّه أسْلَافَنَا المُتّقِين المُتَحَرّزين لِدِينِهِم فَقَد أسْقَطُوا من أحاديث المغازي والسير مَا كَان هَذَا سَبِيلَه وَتَرَكُوا روايَتَه إلَّا أشْيَاء ذَكَروهَا يَسِيرَة وَغَيْر مُسْتَبْشَعَة عَلَى نَحْو الْوُجُوه الأوّل لِيُرُوا نِقْمَة اللَّه من قائِلِهَا وأخْذَه المُفْتَرِي عَلَيْه بِذَنْبِه وَهَذَا أَبُو عُبَيْد الْقَاسِم بن سَلَام رَحِمَه اللَّه قَد تحرى فِيمَا اضطر إِلَى الاستشهاد بِه من أهاجي أشعار الْعَرَب فِي كتبه فكنى عَن اسم المهجو بوزن اسْمُه استبراء لدينه وتحفظًا مِن المشاركة فِي ذم أَحَد بروايته أَو نشره فكيف بِمَا يتطرق إِلَى عرض سَيّد البشر صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم

            The Sixth Case: When one cites or reports blasphemies of others. The context of the citation, his actual words and situation will be taken into account for the ruling and it varies accordingly in four possible categories:

            1.Obligatory / Wājib

            2.Preferrable / Nadb

            3.Disliked / Makrūh

            4.Forbidden / Ĥarām


            If a person mentions them in his testimony against a blasphemer and to inform others, and to reject and refute such speech; and to make it known to the public so that they abhor the blasphemer and criticise him – then such a narration is required and whoever does this is praiseworthy; similarly, if he mentions such things in a book or in a gathering to refute and quash such blasphemies or to issue a fatwā related to such utterances. This is obligatory807 or recommended for him depending on the situation and the state of the person who narrates and the one about whom such a narration is made.

            If the person who uttered [such blasphemies] is a person known to be a scholar or a teacher, [a shaykh or a muftī], or a ĥadīth scholar and narrator, or a person in authority808 or known to be a reliable witness or a well-known jurist – then it is obligatory for whosoever hears [such a thing from him] to expose him and make the public aware of what has been heard from him – and to make people dislike such a person, to bear witness against such a person and what he has said; it is obligatory for scholars and leaders in the Muslim community to repudiate such a person and clearly communicate the kufr of this person and the monstrosity of his ugly speech so that Muslims are safeguarded from the evil of such a person – and the right of the Leader of Messengers is well established. Similarly, if that person [who has uttered a blasphemy] is a preacher or a schoolmaster; if this be the things in his heart, then how can he be trusted to teach the love and reverence of RasūlAllāh to those in his care or his audience?

            It is definitely obligatory to publicise the blasph
            emies of such people809 – for the right of the Prophet and the right of the Sharīáh. If the blasphemer is not a scholar or a person of religious authority, even then defending the right of the Prophet and guarding his honour is a religious duty; and to support him against those who seek to hurt him, whether in his worldly life or after his passing is a right upon every believer. However, if one person stands to fulfil this duty810 in the service of the Messenger, to aid the Truth and establish the ruling, then the responsibility is waived from others and it is not obligatory on all others anymore – yet, it is recommended for others to attest this person’s actions and support him to warn against the evil of the blasphemer.

            Our elders have unanimously agreed that it is necessary to document and publicise the state of a ĥadīth narrator accused of lying – then what about this man [who has blasphemed against the Nabiy ]? Abū Muĥammad ibn Abi Zayd was asked about a witness who has overheard such things about Allāh táālā – is it allowed for him to keep quiet? He answered that if it is hoped that his testimony will result in a prosecution, he should bear witness. Similarly, it is necessary to bear witness in front of a governor who follows the ruling that repentance of blasphemer is acceptable and hence spares the death penalty; in fact it is necessary to [complain and] bear witness.

            Except for these two purposes, I do not see any other reason for narrating such things. It is not permissible to rake things concerning the honour of RasūlAllāh and to rinse one's mouth with obscene mentions of RasūlAllāh – neither for the person who mentions it, nor who repeats it – it is not permissible for either of them to utter it except for a valid sharaýī reason. And for the purposes mentioned above,811 it is either obligatory or recommended [depending on the situation]. Allāh táālā has mentioned the words of disbelievers which is slandering and belying His prophets; He has mentioned this to repudiate them and to warn against their kufr and to inform of His Promise to punish the beliers; and this is mentioned in the Holy Book which is also recited. Such examples are also found in the authentic ĥadīth of the Prophet . Our elder scholars and those who followed them agreed that it is permissible to narrate statements of infidels and heretics, in gatherings and in their books to analyse and demonstrate their invalidity and clarify doubts concerning them. Even though it is reported that Imām Aĥmad ibn Ĥanbal was opposed to Ĥārith ibn al-Asad al-Muĥāsibi for doing so, he himself cited such things in his refutation of Jahmīs and those who claimed that the Qur’ān is created speech.

            True, citation of such things are permissible in certain situations, however statements that are insulting to the Prophet or things that are disparaging and derogatory to his exalted station should not be narrated by way of stories and casual chatting or just to be novel812 or eccentric or for gossip, whether serious or silly discussions, or mirth and jokes of clowns; and tasteless and bizzare blathering and pointless arguments or idle talk; in all these cases, it is prohibited to mention such blasphemies, some cases being severe and worse than others. If a person cites such things, neither with an intention, nor aware that it is disrespectful to the Messenger , and it is also not his habit of mentioning such things, or if what he narrates is not very ugly, or he does not justify the blasphemer he is citing or says it in a way of commending the blasphemer or proving his speech valid – then such a person will be rebuked and will be censured against repeating such a thing again. If he has mentioned loathsome words in what he cites,813 he shall be severely reprimanded.

            A man came to Imam Mālik and said: ‘What is your op
            inion about a person who says the Qur’ān is created?’ Mālik replied: [‘This person is] a kāfir, execute him’ The person [panicked and] said: ‘I am quoting someone else.’ Imām Mālik said: ‘But we have heard it from you.’ Imām Malik said so only to reproach the person and to harshly reprimand him, because [it is a fact] that the person was not executed. If such a narrator [of blasphemies] is accused of fabricating such quotes and [falsely] attributing it to others; or such is his habit or it is demonstrable that he says it in an approving tone, or is enthusiastic about it or trivialises it814 or [is eager] to memorise such things or seek out such things and recite poems which mock or insult the Master – in all such cases, this person takes the ruling of the blasphemer himself and his excuse that he is narrating from others will not avail him. Such a person shall be put to the sword immediately and hastily dispatched to the pits of fire. Abū Úbayd Qāsim ibn Sallām said about a person who had memorised a part of a [poetic] verse which mocked the Prophet that it was kufr.815

            Scholars who wrote about ijmāá have said: Muslims a
            re unanimously agreed that it is ĥarām to narrate or quote speech that mocks the Prophet or to write it down, or read it,816 or to leave it unerased when one comes across such things. May Allāh táālā have mercy upon our elders, the pious and righteous folk, who were guarded and extremely careful about their religion that they dropped such things from annals and records of battles and biographies, and abstained from narrating such things except very little; and even then, only that which is not disgusting. The rules of citation [they followed were] according to the categories mentioned earlier, and to show how a blasphemer invites the Wrath of Allāh táālā and to arrest the slanderer. Thus, Abū Úbayd Qāsim ibn Sallām mentioned a person who was lampooned in Arabic poetry as merely ‘the satirised’ without further details, to avoid naming him in his book, mindful of another Muslim’s honour and because of his [Ibn Sallām’s] scrupulousness; then what about the honour and esteem of the Master of all mankind ; should we not be more careful and responsible?

            - end of quote (from Al-Shifa bi Ta'rif Huquq al-Mustafa 2/244 - 247) -

            Comment


            • #7
              The Seventh Case:

              الْوَجْه السابع أَنّ يذكر مَا يجوز عَلَى النَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم أَو يختلف فِي جوازه عَلَيْه وَمَا يطرأ من الأمور البشرية بِه ويمكن إضافتها إليه أو يذكر مَا امتحن بِه وصبر فِي ذات اللَّه عَلَى شدته من مقاساة أعدائه وأذاهم لَه ومعرفة ابتداء حاله وسيرته وَمَا لقيه من بؤس زمنه ومر عَلَيْه من معاياة عيشته كُلّ ذَلِك عَلَى طريق الرّوَايَة ومذاكرة الْعِلْم ومعرفة مَا صحت مِنْه العصمة للأنبياء وَمَا يجوز عَلَيْهِم فَهَذَا فن خارج عَن هَذِه الفنون الستة إِذ لَيْس فِيه غمص وَلَا نقص وَلَا أزراء وَلَا استخفاف لَا فِي ظاهر اللَّفْظ وَلَا فِي مقصد اللافظ لَكِن يجب أَنّ يَكُون الْكَلَام فِيه مع أَهْل الْعِلْم وفهماء طلبة الدين مِمَّن يفهم مقاصده ويحققون فوائده ويجنب ذَلِك من عساه لَا يفقه أَو يخشى بِه فتنته فَقَد كره بَعْض السلف تلعيم النساء سورة يُوسُف لَمّا انطوت عَلَيْه من تِلْك القصص لضعف معرفتهن ونقص عقولهن وإدراكهن فَقَد قَال صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم مخبرًا عن نفسه باستيجاره لرعاية الغنم في ابتداء حاله وقال (مَا مِنْ نبى إلا وَقَدْ رَعَى الْغَنَمَ) وَأَخْبَرَنَا اللَّهُ تَعَالَى بِذَلِكَ عَنْ مُوسَى عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامُ وَهَذَا لَا غَضَاضَةَ فِيهِ جُمْلَةً وَاحِدَةً لِمَنْ ذَكَرَهُ عَلَى وَجْهِهِ بِخِلافِ مَنْ قَصَدَ بِهِ الْغَضَاضَةَ وَالتَّحْقِيرَ بَل كَانَت عادة جميع الْعَرَب، نَعَم فِي ذَلِك للأنبياء حكمة بالغة وتدريج لله تعالى لَهُم إِلَى كرامته وتدريب برعايتها لسياسة أممهم من خليقته بِمَا سبق لهم من الكرامة فِي الأزل ومتقدم الْعِلْم وَكَذَلِك قَد ذَكَر اللَّه يتمه وعيلته عَلَى طريق المنة عَلَيْه والتعريف بكرامته لَه فذكر الذاكر لَهَا عَلَى وجه تعريف حاله والخَبَر عَن مُبْتَدَئِه والتّعجُّب من مَنِح اللَّه قِبَلَه وعَظِيم مِنّتِه عِنْدَه لَيْس فِيه غَضَاضَة بَل فِيه دَلَالَة عَلَى نُبُوَّتِه وصحَّة دَعْوَتِه إِذ أظْهَرَه اللَّه تَعَالَى بَعْد هَذَا عَلَى صَنَادِيد الْعَرَب وَمِن نَاوأَه من أشْرَافِهِم شيئا فشيئا وَنَمى أمْرُه حَتَّى قَهَرَهُم وَتَمَكّن من مِلْك مَقَالِيدِهِم وَاسْتِباحَه مما لك كثير مِن الْأُمَم غَيْرِهِم بإظْهَار اللَّه تَعَالَى لَه وتأييده بنصره وبالمؤمنين وألف بَيْن قُلُوبِهِم وإمْدَادِه بِالْمَلَائِكَة الْمُسَوّمِين وَلَو كَان ابن مُلْك أَو ذا أشْياع متقدمين لحسب كثير مِن الجهال أَنّ ذَلِك موجب ظهوره ومقتضى علوه ولهذا قَال هرقل حِين سَأَل أَبَا سُفْيَان عنه هل فِي آبائه من مُلْك؟ ثُمّ قَال: وَلَو كَان فِي آبائه مُلْك لَقلنا رَجُل يَطْلُب مُلْك أبيه وَإذَا الْيُتْم من صِفَتِه وإحْدَى عَلَامَاتِه فِي الْكُتُب الْمُتَقَدّمَة وأخْبَار الْأُمَم السّالِفة وَكَذَا وَقَع ذِكْرُه في كِتَاب أرْميَاء وبهذا وصَفَه ابن ذِي يَزَن لعبد المُطلب وَبَحيرًا لأبي طَالِب وَكَذَلِك إذَا وُصِف بأنَّه أُمّيّ كَمَا وصَفَه اللَّه فهي مِدْحَة لَه وَفَضِيلَة ثَابِتَة فِيه وَقَاعِدَة مُعْجِزَتُه إذ معجزته الْعُظمَى مِن الْقُرْآن العَظِيم إنَّمَا هِي مُتَعَلقَة بِطَريق المَعَارِف وَالْعُلُوم مَع مَا مُنَح صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم وَفُضَّل بِه من ذَلِك كَمَا قَدّمْنَاه فِي القِسْم الأول وَوُجُود مِثْل ذَلِك من رَجُل لَم يَقْرأ وَلَم يَكْتُب وَلَم يُدارِس وَلَا لُقّن مُقْتَضَى العَجَب وَمُنْتَهَى الْعِبَر وَمُعْجِزَة الْبَشَر وَلَيْس فِي ذَلِك نَقيصَة إِذ المطلوب مِن الكِتَابَة والقراءة المَعْرفَة وَإِنَّمَا هي آلة.
              لَهَا وَوَاسِطَة مُوَصّلة إِلَيْهَا غَيْر مُرَادَة فِي نَفْسِهَا فَإِذَا حَصَلَت الثَّمْرَة وَالمَطْلُوب اسْتُغْنِي عَن الْوَاسِطَة وَالسّبَب، وَالْأُمّيَّة فِي غَيْرِه نَقِيصَة لِأَنّهَا سَبَب الْجَهَالَة وَعُنْوَان الْغَبَاوَة فَسُبْحَان من بايَن أمْرَه من أمْر غَيْرِه وَجَعَل شَرَفَه فِيمَا فِيه محطة سواه وحياته فِيمَا فِيه هلاك من عداه هَذَا شَقّ قلبه وإخْرَاج حُشْوَتِه كَان تَمَام حَيَاتِه وَغَايَة قوة نفسه وثبات روعه وَهُو فِيمَن سواه منتهى هلاكه وحتم موته وفنائه وهلم جَرّا إِلَى سائر مَا رُوِي من أخباره وسيره وتقلله مِن الدُّنْيَا وَمِن الملبس والمطعم والمركب وتواضعه ومهنته نفسه في أمور وَخِدْمَة بَيْتِه زُهْدًا وَرَغْبَة عَن الدُّنْيَا وَتَسْوِيَة بَيْن حَقِيرِهَا وَخَطِيرِهَا لِسُرْعَة فَنَاء أُمُورِها وتَقَلُّب أحْوَالِهَا كُلّ هَذَا من فَضَائِلِه وَمآثِرِه وَشَرَفه كَمَا ذَكَرْنَاه فَمَن أوْرَد شَيْئًا مِنْهَا موردة وقصد بِهَا مقصده كَان حَسَنًا وَمِن أوْرَد ذَلِك عَلَى غَيْر وَجْهِه وعُلِم مِنْه بِذلِك سُوء قَصْدِه لَحِق بالفصول التى قدمناه وَكَذَلِك مَا وَرَد من أخْبَارِه وأخْبَار سَائِر الْأَنْبِيَاء عَلَيْهِم السَّلَام فِي الْأَحَادِيث مِمَّا فِي ظَاهِرِه إشْكال يَقْتَضِي أُمُورًا لَا تَلِيق بِهِم بِحَال وَتَحْتَاج إِلَى تأويل وَتَرَدُّد احْتمال فَلَا يَجِب أن يُتَحَدّث مِنْهَا إلا بالصحيح وَلَا يُرْوَى مِنْهَا إلَّا المَعْلُوم الثّابِت وَرَحِم اللَّه مَالكًا فلقد كَرَه التَّحَدُّث بمِثْل ذَلِك مِن الْأَحَادِيث المُوهِمَة لِلتَّشْبيه وَالمُشْكلة الْمَعْنَى وَقَال: مَا يَدْعُو النَّاس إِلَى التَّحَدُّث بِمِثْل هَذَا فَقِيل لَه إنّ ابن عَجْلان يُحَدَّث بِهَا فَقَال لَم يَكُن مِن الفُقَهَاء وَلَيْت النَّاس وَافَقُوه عَلَى تَرْك الْحَدِيث بِهَا وَسَاعَدوه عَلَى طَيّهَا فأكْثَرُهَا ليس تحتع عَمَل وَقَد حُكِي عَن جَمَاعَة مِن السَّلَف بَل عَنْهُم عَلَى الْجُمْلَة أَنَّهُم كَانُوا يَكْرَهُون الْكَلَام فِيمَا لَيْس تَحْتَه عَمَل وَالنَّبِيّ صَلَّى اللَّه عَلَيْه وَسَلَّم أوْرَدَهَا عَلَى قْوم عَرَب يَفْهَمُون كَلَام الْعَرَب عَلَى وَجْهِه وَتَصَرفَاتِهِم فِي حَقِيقَتِه وَمَجَازِه وَاسْتِعَارَتِه وَبَلِيغِه وَإيجَازِه فَلَم تَكُن فِي حَقَّهَم مُشْكِلَة ثُمّ جاء من غَلَبَت عَلَيْه العُجْمَة وَدَاخَلَتْه الْأُمّيَّة فَلَا يَكاد يَفْهَم من مَقَاصِد الْعَرَب إلَّا نَصَّها وَصَرِيحَهَا وَلَا يَتَحَقَّق إشَارَاتِهَا إِلَى غَرَض الإيجَاز ووحْيِهَا وَتَبْلِيغَهَا وَتَلْويحِهَا فَتَفَرّقُوا فِي تأويلهَا أَو حَمْلِهَا عَلَى ظَاهِرِهَا شَذر مَذَر فمنهم من آمَن بِه وَمِنْهُم من كَفَر فَأَمَّا مَا لَا يَصِحّ من هَذِه الْأَحَادِيث فَوَاجِب أن لَا يُذْكَر مِنْهَا شئ فِي حَقّ اللَّه وَلَا فِي حَقّ أنْبِيَائِه وَلَا يُتَحَدّث بِهَا وَلَا يُتَكَلَّف الْكَلَام عَلَى مَعَانِيهَا، وَالصَّوَاب طَرْحُهَا وَتَرْك الشُّغْل بِهَا إلَّا أن تُذْكَر عَلَى وَجْه التّعْرِيف بِأنَّهَا ضَعِيفَة الْمَقَاد وَاهِيَة الإِسْنَاد وَقَد أنْكَرَ الأشْيَاخ عَلَى أَبِي بَكْر بن فُورَك تَكَلُّفَه فِي مُشْكِلِه الْكَلَام عَلَى أحاديث ضعيفة مَوْضُوعَة لَا أصْل لَهَا أَو مَنْقُولَة عَن أَهْل الكِتَاب الَّذِين يَلْبِسُون الْحَقّ بالبَاطِل كَان يَكْفِيه طرحها ويعنيه عَن الْكَلَام عَلَيْهَا التَّنْبِيه عَلَى ضَعْفهَا إِذ المَقْصُود بِالْكَلَام عَلَى مُشْكل مَا فِيهَا إزَالَة اللّبْس بِهَا وَاجْتِثَاثُهَا من أَصْلهَا وَطَرْحُهَا أكْشَف اللبس وأشْفَى للنَّفْس


              The Seventh Case: When a person mentions things that are permissible for the Prophet or is debated among scholars whether it is permissible – concerning certain human attributes. Or concerning the trials and hardship he endured in the path of Allāh táālā or patience when he was harassed and persecuted by his enemies; and the initial period of his blessed life, and the resistance and suffering of those days. If any of these [facts] are mentioned in narration of [historical] reports or recounting the history of Islām or to learn and teach the extent of divine immunity for prophets, then such descriptions are outside the previously mentioned six cases because there is neither insinuation [against prophets] and degradation nor disrespect – neither in words used for description nor in the intended meaning of those words. However, it is necessary to restrict discussing such topics in the circle of knowledgeable folk, religious thinkers, students of religious knowledge who can benefit from such narrations; and avoid mentioning them in front of ignoramuses, audacious folk [who are heedless of their religion] and such people who are potential mischief-makers. Our elders did not like to teach the tafsīr of Sūrah Yūsuf to women because it includes story of enticement and stratagem – and due to their weakness of understanding and foibles of their perception.

              RasūlAllāh has himself mentioned his early days and that he tended to flocks of sheep said: “Every prophet has herded sheep817 Allāh táālā has also mentioned this about Sayyidunā Mūsā عليه السلام. This individual statement does not tantamount to degradation of these esteemed personalities or disrespecting them, unlike someone who mentions this to intentionally disparage and ridicule them.818 Tending sheep was common among Arabs of yore and the Divine Wisdom is that prophets tended sheep as a precursor to shepherding the nation; and Allāh táālā made them to train for the exalted office they would be later honoured with – which was ordained for them in pre-eternity and in His Divine Knowledge. Similarly, Allāh táālā has mentioned his being an orphan and his hardship to show the immense favour upon him and the honour He has granted His chosen servant.819

              If a person mentions this to describe the favours of Allāh táālā upon him
              , it is not degrading or disrespectful to him; in fact, it is proof for his prophethood and his truthful claim of being the Messenger of Allāh. Because, thereafter Allāh táālā gave him such influence and power, that gradually all the rich and powerful leaders of Arab tribes and those who opposed to him were [eventually] subdued or vanquished; their treasures and dominions came under his command and this could not have happened without Divine aid and support; and Allāh táālā made believers and prominent angels as his helpers. It would not have been such an amazing feat if he were the son of a king or a commander of armies prior to the proclamation of his prophethood, because ignoramuses820 would then attribute his success and his triumphs to these external means. It is therefore Hercules, in his conversation with Abū Sufyān asked him: ‘Is there any king among his forefathers?’ Abū Sufyān said: ‘No’ and Hercules821 said: ‘If any of his forefathers were kings, we would say that he seeks the kingdom of his forefathers’.

              Being orphan is one of the signs that were present in books of ancients and prophecies retold among previous nations; thus it is mentioned in the Book of Jeremiah.822 Ibn Dhī-Yazan described this attribute to Ábd al-Muţţalib and Baĥīrā to Abū Ţālib. Similarly, that he did not learn to read and write [ummī] is an attribute Allāh táālā has mentioned in his praise; and it is a superior attribute for him on account of the Qur’ān which is the greatest of his miracles; because, the knowledge and wisdom that was revealed to him would not be possible except for a Messenger of God, [who brought all this] without having learned to read or write, nor was he taught or instructed – yet he brings such an eloquent and astonishing book, which defies description and is beyond the capacity of humans. Thus, mentioning that he is a ummi823 is not disparaging him – because after all, the purpose of learning to read and write is to augment one’s knowledge; thus it is an important tool and means to attain more knowledge. The ability to read or write is not a goal in itself, [rather, the objective is to attain knowledge using these tools]. When that objective [of knowledge] is present already without any need for means and tools, they become inconsequential. The inability to read or write is a flaw for others, because they remain ignorant and gullible because of their illiteracy.

              Glory be to Him who distinguished the Prophet from all others – and what is a flaw for all others [in not having learned to read and write] is a mark of honour for him s.824 Similarly, his life was untouched by such an action which would have killed anyone else – such as the cleaving of his bosom and removal of a portion from his blessed heart.825 So also is the narration of his abstinence from worldly comforts and frugality in food, clothes, mounts; his humility and that he did his work and that of his family himself, his austerity and withdrawal from this mundane world, and he valued the great and small as the same – temporal and ephemeral; inconstant and fickle. All these descriptions are praiseworthy attributes and highlight his noble character as mentioned earlier. If anyone mentions these to draw inspiration or any such purpose is commendable; but if one mentions these things to insinuate and criticise, then he will be judged according to the previous [six] cases.

              Whenever one encounters a ĥadīth concerning prophet
              s in which such words are mentioned which are problematic in their literal meaning, it is necessary to interpret such words favourably; also it is not obligatory to mention such things except authentic narrations and should not narrate except which is well established and known. May Allāh táālā have mercy upon Imām Mālik who disliked narration of such reports which are ambiguous and problematic, and he said: ‘What makes people to narrate such things?’ He was told, Ibn Ájlān narrates such reports and he dismissed with: ‘He is not a discerning scholar’.826 Alas! If everyone had only followed Mālik’s example and abstained from perpetuating such narrations – after all, most of such reports are not actionable [and are merely of academic interest]. Many of our elders [salaf] disliked narration of such reports which do not entail acting upon them. The Prophet mentioned such things in front of native Arabs who understood his speech perfectly well,827 who understood the context and usage of those words, whether such phrases were idioms or used figuratively or whether those words were metaphors or used allegorically – therefore it was not problematic for them [and hence congruent with everything else].

              But those who came after them were not well-versed with the language of Arabs and had non-Arab influences in their speech and hence the misunderstanding or defect in understanding of the object of the native-Arabic except what was in plain language; and they did not understand [some forms of] figurative speech and metaphors and the context of revelation; they did not comprehend the subtleties of language and therefore differed in interpretation of such words, or insisted on the literal meaning – some believed in these reports and some others disbelieved.828 It is obligatory to abstain from narrating such [problematic] reports which are inauthentic or weak; particularly if such reports are baseless and fabricated. It is not permissible to utter things which are disrespectful to Allāh táālā or His prophets – neither should one narrate any report nor attempt to expound the meanings of such reports; rather, leave them unsaid.

              The only exception for mentioning such reports is to manifest the status of such reports. Scholars disapproved of Abū Bakr ibn Fūrak for his interpretation of weak, baseless and fabricated reports or those found in books of Jews and Christians who combine truth with falsehood. All that needs to be done with such reports is reject them with a warning that they are weak reports instead of laboriously attempting to clarify them – after all the objective of clarification is to answer objections and rejecting them completely is far easier and a sound approach.

              - end of quote (from Al-Shifa bi Ta'rif Huquq al-Mustafa 2/247 - 252) -



              And our last call is that all praise be to Allah, the Lord of the worlds. And may the peace and blessings be upon our Master Muhammad - the seal of the Prophets and Messengers - and upon all of his familiy and companions.

              Comment


              • #8
                On p. 35 of the work mentioned in the op the following summary is given for the seven cases mentioned by al-Qadhi 'Iyadh (d. 544 AH):
                1. A person says blasphemous things and he says them deliberately with the intention to hurt or disrespect the Prophet . This is outright apostasy and it carries death penalty without amnesty.

                2. A person says things deemed blasphemy; even though his intention might not be to disrespect the Prophet nor hurt him – yet, he has uttered these things deliberately and consciously; therefore, he becomes an apostate and his punishment is death without amnesty as in the previous case.

                3. A person seeks to belie his speech or the message he has brought or deny his prophethood or being a Messenger of Allah. This is also apostasy and carries the death penalty.

                4. A person utters something which is not an explicit insult and his statement is open for interpretation and there is ambiguity whether his statement is directed towards the Prophet or toward others. If the intention is proven to be blasphemy, he is awarded the death sentence – if a favourable interpretation can be found, he will be asked to repent and refrain from such things in the future.

                5. A person does not intend to denigrate the Prophet or mention a flaw or disrespect him; but he mentions certain mundane things that are permissible for the Prophet as an example to justify his own cause or bolster his argument or exonerate his own self. Here too, statements will be examined and punishment differs according to the severity of his statement; if blasphemy is proven, the person shall be executed.

                6. A person mentions blasphemies of others and mentions them by way of citation; these kind of citations fall into four categories: wājib, mandūb, makrūh and ĥarām. If a person cites blasphemous sayings or poetry without any valid reason, the context of his citation is examined; rulings and punishments concerning such people differ accordingly.

                7.
                This case is different from the six above and does not entail express or implied insult; neither in words themselves or in the meaning of such words. These are reports of certain events and ĥadīth mentioned in books – and are mentioned purely as an academic exercise. In all these cases only such things which are permissible to attribute to RasūlAllāh are mentioned. However, if a person mentions these permissible things with an intention to belittle or disparage the Prophet
                , he shall be ruled as a blasphemer in one of the six categories above.



                An important note from p. 28:

                Regardless of the blasphemer being a Muslim or a disbeliever, blasphemy of the Prophet
                is punishable by death. There is a unanimous agreement of all Muslims from the time of the companions, that a blasphemer should be executed. The Mālikīs and Ĥanbalīs do not accept, nor requisition repentance of the blasphemer – whereas, the Shāfiýīs and Ĥanafīs133 accept his repentance; and in case of [blasphemy of] a disbeliever, his conversion to Islām is mandatory for repentance and to save him from the gallows. According to some scholars, after his execution his property will be distributed among his Muslim inheritors; others opined that it will not be distributed and will be given to the common fund of Muslims. It should be emphasised that in all cases of punishments, only a Muslim ruler vested with the authority to impose sharīáh can administer such punishments and executions, after due process of law. Individuals cannot and should not take the law in their own hands.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Rejoicing in the mercy that Allah ta'ala has blessed us with

                  We're in the blessed month of Rabi' al-Awwal and it was in this very month that our beloved Prophet Muhammad - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - was born. He is the Chosen One - peace and blessings be upon him - and is sent as a mercy to all worlds and as a bearer of glad tidings and a warner. We should rejoice and be thankful for the great mercy that Allah ta'ala has honored us with and send abundant salutations upon the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam.


                  { وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ إِلَّا رَحْمَةً لِّلْعَالَمِينَ }

                  { And We have not sent you, [O Messenger], except as a mercy to the worlds. }

                  [21:107]

                  { إِنَّا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ شَاهِدًا وَمُبَشِّرًا وَنَذِيرًا }
                  { لِّتُؤْمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ وَتُعَزِّرُوهُ وَتُوَقِّرُوهُ وَتُسَبِّحُوهُ بُكْرَةً وَأَصِيلًا }

                  { [O Messenger!] Verily, We have sent you as a witness, a bringer of glad tidings and a warner [of punishment]. }
                  { So that, [O people] you may believe in Allāh and His messenger; and that you revere him and respect him, and that you sanctify your Lord in the morning and evening. }

                  [48:8-9]

                  { قُلْ بِفَضْلِ اللَّهِ وَبِرَحْمَتِهِ فَبِذَ‌ٰلِكَ فَلْيَفْرَحُوا هُوَ خَيْرٌ مِّمَّا يَجْمَعُونَ }

                  { Say, "In the bounty of Allah and in His mercy - in that let them rejoice; it is better than what they accumulate." }

                  [10:58]

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The least we can do against the accursed blasphemer!

                    Imam Taqi al-Din al-Subki (d. 756 AH) stated in al-Sayf al-Maslul 'ala man Sabb al-Rasul (p. 114) the following:

                    I do not have the power to avenge the accursed blasphemer myself – but Allāh táālā knows that my heart despises him; yet, it is not sufficient to merely consider it evil in the heart; rather, it is incumbent upon me to strive as much as I can with my tongue and my pen. I beseech Allāh táālā to not reprimand me for the paucity of my response and that He [still] grants me salvation which He grants those who forbid from evil; verily, He is Oft-Forgiving, the Pardoner.
                    - end of quote -

                    Al-Hafidh Ibn Taymiyya (d. 728 AH) stated in al-Sarim al-Maslul 'ala Shatim al-Rasul (p. 28) the following:

                    This is the least that we can do to fulfil his ﷺ right upon us – rather, Allāh táālā has made it obligatory upon us to respect him ﷺ, to aid his cause in every possible way and to sacrifice our lives and property at every juncture, defending his honour from every scoundrel seeking to hurt it. Although, Allāh táālā has made His Messenger free from being dependent on the creation for assistance, he tests us to differentiate who amongst us will stand up to support him and who does not...
                    - end of quote -

                    Note that while Imam al-Subki has criticized the abnormal views of al-Hafidh Ibn Taymiyya on many occasions, he explicitly praised his work al-Sarim al-Maslul in his al-Sayf al-Maslul (see p. 387).

                    (Both quotes are taken from the work "The Killer Mistake" (p. 26-27).)

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      France: The criminal and accursed state that needs to boycotted!

                      France has always been a state that harmed the people of Islam and slaughtered them in great numbers. In this blessed month they have now started to call towards the disrespecting of the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - and they defend doing so as a "great value and expression of freedom of speech" ON A STATE LEVEL.

                      { وَالَّذِينَ يُؤْذُونَ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ }

                      { And those who hurt the Messenger of Allāh, for them is a painful punishment. }

                      [9:61]

                      { إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يُؤْذُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ لَعَنَهُمُ اللَّهُ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَةِ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمْ عَذَابًا مُّهِينًا }

                      { Verily, those who hurt Allāh and His Messenger; Allāh has damned them in this world and the hereafter; and readied for them a humiliating punishment. }

                      [33:57]

                      Dear brothers and sisters! Do not buy any of their products and do not show them anything except enmity!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
                        France: The criminal and accursed state that needs to be boycotted!

                        France has always been a state that harmed the people of Islam and slaughtered them in great numbers. In this blessed month they have now started to call towards the disrespecting of the Messenger of Allah - sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam - and they defend doing so as a "great value and expression of freedom of speech" ON A STATE LEVEL.
                        ]
                        Shaykh Asrar Rashid states:

                        It is 150 years since the Cremieux Decree was passed by France on October 24,1870.
                        It ruled that Algerians could not own land (in their own country) unless they left Islam! Algerians were treated as second class citizens by the colonists.
                        It also gave full French citizenship to all the Jews of Algeria!
                        France killed one third of the male population of Algeria at one point. France has never apologised. France was also the centre point of the first Crusades in Palestine in 1099 and the earlier Norman invasion of England in 1066.
                        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crémieux_Decree

                        - end of quote -

                        He also states:

                        Two points of observation with regard to France, its hatred for Islam and the reaction of some: a few years ago I criticised ulama, with harsh words (audio recording was uploaded by my detractors with no context), who were being apologetic regarding the Charlie Hebdo incident. My stance was that Muslims do not need to apologise for anything to France, the Hebdo cartoonists or any other bigoted donkeys. Secondly, the Arab countries and ulama who are calling for a boycott of France are correct in doing so, but please take the same firm stance with 'Israel'. Many things are sensitive to the Anglo/Euro, like the Holocaust or the trenches of WW1, so if Muslims drew cartoons and cariactures of these sensitive issues they would be vilified and arrested in some cases. The purpose of Charlie Hebdo cartoons is not freedom but provocation, otherwise lets see 'toady' publish cartoons of the Holocaust for freedom.
                        - end of quote -

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Brothers in Palestine / Falastin:




                          Al-Salatu wal Salamu 'alayka ya Sayyidi, Ya Rasulallah! Fidaka Abi wa Ummi!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Abu Sulayman View Post
                            Brothers in Palestine / Falastin:

                            Al-Salatu wal Salamu 'alayka ya Sayyidi, Ya Rasulallah! Fidaka Abi wa Ummi!
                            This issue with France is also really a huge issue in Morocco. But some leaders are still French puppets. Disgusting!
                            https://www.ummah.com/forum/core/ima...EAAAICRAEAOw==https://www.ummah.com/forum/core/ima...EAAAICRAEAOw==
                            https://www.ummah.com/forum/core/ima...EAAAICRAEAOw==https://www.ummah.com/forum/core/ima...EAAAICRAEAOw==

                            Comment

                            Collapse

                            Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                            Working...
                            X