عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

Scary Questions about Severance of Kinship Ties
Author : Dr. Mohammad bani Taha
Date Added : 01-11-2022

Scary Questions about Severance of Kinship Ties

 

Am I banned from entering Jannah (Paradise) because I don`t maintain kinship ties? Does this apply to me? Is it true that my deeds will neither be presented before Allah nor accepted by Him? Such scary questions haunt most people, so they send them to the Iftaa` Department via social media. 

 

In fact, there is a number of motivations for posing such questions; the most important of which are:

 

First: Religiosity, thanks to Allah. This is embodied in hoping to win the pleasure of Allah in this world and the next life and fearing to be deprived from His mercy.

Second: There are many texts from the Quran and the Prophetic Sunnah warning against severance of kinship ties and harboring enmity, and that Allah won`t accept the deeds of kinship-ties severer and will deprive him/her from His mercy.

Third: Arguments and disagreements leading to enmity and severance of kinship ties.

Relieving the questioner's` fear can be achieved through assuring them that being afraid of the warning against those who harbor enmity and sever kinship ties is a sign of righteousness reflecting firm belief and closeness to Allah. This can also be done through explaining the qualities of the individual liable for this warning by interpreting the Sharia texts that dwelled on this theme. The most salient of these texts are:

- Sura 13, Verse No. (25)" But those who break the Covenant of God, after having plighted their word thereto, and cut asunder those things which God has commanded to be joined, and work mischief in the land;- on them is the curse; for them is the terrible home!."

- The Prophet (PBUH) said: "Anyone who cuts off relationship from his nearest relatives will not enter Paradise." [Agreed upon].

- The Hadith reported by Al-`Amash in [Jami` Mu`ammar Bin Rashi, vol.11/pp.174].

- Abu Huraim reported Allah's Messenger (PBUH) as saying: "The deeds of people would be presented every week on two days, viz. Monday and Thursday, and every believing servant would be granted pardon except the one in whose (heart) there is rancor against his brother and it would he said: Leave them and put them off until they are turned to reconciliation." {Transmitted by Muslim}.

 

Abu Musa al-`Ash‘ari (May Allah Be Pleased with him) reported God’s Messenger as saying: "God most high looks down on the middle night of Sha'ban and forgives all His creatures, except a polytheist or one who is hostile." [Ibn Majah, vol.1/pp.44].

 

After careful consideration of these texts and scholars` commentaries on them, it is made clear that the one deserving the above-mentioned warning must meet the following conditions:

 

1- Deeming severance of kinship ties lawful without a valid excuse or doubtfulness although he/she knows that it is unlawful. The eminent scholar Al-Khastalani said: "The person referred to in this regard is the one who deems severance of kinship ties lawful without a valid excuse or doubtfulness although he/she knows that it is unlawful." [Shareh Al-Khastalani].

 

2- Severance of kinship ties for a worldly interest. However, doing so out of enjoining kindness and forbidding iniquity to please Allah and be admitted into Jannah excludes such person from this warning. However, this is provided that the rules of enjoying kindness and forbidding iniquity are observed. Of course, this should be done with wisdom and fair preaching.

 

3- Maintaining kinship ties doesn`t result in moral or material harm. It was narrated from Hudhaifah, that The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: "It is not for the believer to humiliate himself." They said: "How does he humiliate himself?" He said: "By taking on a trial which he can not bear." [Sunn At-Tirmithi, vol.4/pp.523].

 

4- Transgressing against near relatives, harboring hatred and enmity towards them, intending every evil for them, and depriving them from any benefit in this life and the next. However, the one who means them no harm and keeps kinship ties at the minimum, for example greeting with Asalamu Alikum, is relieved from the above-mentioned warning. Commenting on Sahih Al-Bukhari, Ibn Battal cited the words of Tabari who said: "The one who keeps kinship ties at minimum, such as greeting with AsalamuAlikum, isn`t considered a severer of kinship ties. Therefore, who is the person intended by the Hadith? He said: the one who deserts near relatives, harbors enmity towards them and deprives them from any benefits in this life and the next."

 

5- Being contented with severing kinship ties and harboring enmity towards near relatives without exerting every effort possible to set the records straight and make reconciliation. However, the one who tries to bring these ties to normal and make reconciliation, even if the other party refuses, isn`t considered a severer of kinship ties. This is because he has done his part and, as well known, Allah burdens not a soul beyond its scope.

 

One should remember that the Quran and the Sunnah contain multiple texts that call for forgiving others, overlooking mistakes, and cleansing hearts from hatred and enmity. This is since The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: "It is not lawful for a Muslim to desert (stop talking to) his brother beyond three nights, the one turning one way and the other turning to the other way when they meet, the better of the two is one who is the first to greet the other." [Agreed upon].

 

This way, fear and despair are eliminated and a person is motivated to eliminate all causes of enmity and severance of kinship ties to keep the society united against all attempts of sowing the seeds of discord amongst its members. This achieves the intention of the Lawgiver in establishing a society in which people`s dignity, property, and blood are considered inviolable.

 

 

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

"I told my family at night: 'I will fast tomorrow as qaḍā' (a make-up fast),' but I forgot to make the intention before sleeping. Is my fast valid?"

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
 
The intention is obligatory in acts of worship. For obligatory fasting, the required intention is to resolve to fast during the night [before dawn]. Its proper locus is the heart, while verbalizing the intention out loud in acts of worship is a sunnah — so that the tongue may align with the heart. If the intent behind the statement in question was the intention to fast, then it is valid; but if the intent was merely to inform someone, or reflected hesitation or doubt, then it is not valid.
 
It is stated in *Bushrā al-Karīm* (Vol.1/P.216): "It is a sunnah to verbalize the intention — that is, whatever has already been intended in the heart, whether an obligatory or a voluntary act — such as specifying the number of rak‘ahs, just before the opening takbīr — so that the tongue may assist the heart, and because this is further removed from whispered doubts (waswasah), and in order to accommodate the view of those who held it obligatory in every act of worship that requires an intention (even though this is a minority position), by analogy with Ḥajj."
 
Accordingly: if the intention to fast arose in your heart before the second adhān [i.e., before Fajr], then your fast is valid.
 
And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What are the conditions for a valid Udhiyah?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
First: The age of the animal must meet the Sharia requirements. These requirements vary depending on the type of sacrifice:
 
Camels: Must have completed five years and entered their sixth.
 
Cows: Must have completed two years and entered their third.
 
Goats: Must have completed two years and entered their third. As for Sheep, they must have completed one year and entered their second.
 
Some scholars have permitted goats that have completed one year and entered their second.
 
The Hanafi school, along with an opinion in the Maliki school, permits sacrificing sheep that are at least six months old, provided they are healthy and physically substantial. According to the Shafi’i school, it is permissible if the sheep sheds its front teeth (ajdha') before reaching one year [Al-Iqna’, by Al-Shirbini (Vol.2/P.588)].
 
Second: Soundness and freedom from defects. The animal must be free from any defect that causes a decrease in its meat or market value. This is based on the hadith narrated by Al-Bara' bin 'Azib, that the Prophet (peace be upon him) said:
 
"Four [defects] are not permissible in sacrifices: A one-eyed animal whose blindness is evident, a sick animal whose illness is evident, a lame animal whose lameness is evident, and an emaciated animal that has no marrow in its bones." [Reported by Abu Dawood and Al-Tirmidhi, who graded it as authentic].
 
These defects are detailed as follows:
 
Evident Lameness: It is not permissible to sacrifice a lame animal if the lameness is severe enough to prevent it from walking to the pasture or seeking food, as this leads to a decrease in its meat. However, slight lameness that does not hinder its grazing is overlooked.
 
Evident Blindness (One-eyed): It is not permissible to sacrifice a sheep, cow, or camel that has a white film over its eye blocking light, or one that has lost an eye entirely. Weak vision that does not affect its ability to eat does not prevent the sacrifice from being valid.
 
Evident Illness: An animal with a clear sickness that prevents it from eating or moving is not valid. This includes severe mange (Jarab) that spoils the meat.
 
Extreme Emaciation: An animal so thin that there is no marrow left in its bones is invalid. The standard for emaciation that invalidates the sacrifice is that which spoils the quality of the meat to the point that people would find it undesirable even in times of plenty.
 
Additional Considerations:
These are the defects mentioned in the Prophetic tradition, and any defect that causes emaciation or reduces the meat or value is compared to them by analogy. This includes animals that are mentally unstable (diseased), those with mange, or those with a missing ear. In contrast, a slit or pierced ear does not affect the validity of the sacrifice. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on compensating the patient in case of medical error on the part of the treating physician?

 
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The foundational principle is that every mistake issued by a physician that causes harm to another due to his negligence or lack of expertise obligates him to guarantee liability and compensate the harmed party. The Sharia maxim, in this regard, states: "The direct actor is liable."
 
Ibn Qudamah (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "As for if he was skilled but his hand committed an error—such as exceeding the proper limit of incision, cutting in an incorrect site, cutting with an instrument that inflicts excessive pain, or cutting at an unsuitable time—he is liable, because it is destruction (Itlaf) whose liability does not differ between intent and mistake, thus resembling the destruction of property; and because it is a prohibited act, so he guarantees liability for its secondary effects." [Al-Mughni].
 
However, if the physician performed what was necessary in the most complete manner and took all measures of care and caution, but complications occurred that could not be avoided according to specialists, then no liability rests upon him.
 
Shaykh al-Islam Imam al-Nawawi (may Allah have mercy on him) says: "The cupper and the circumciser bear no liability if they have not been negligent, and likewise the veterinarian if he bleeds an animal and it perishes." [Rawdat al-Talibin].
 
Al-Khattabi (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "I know of no disagreement that if the practitioner transgresses and the patient perishes, he is liable. Anyone who undertakes knowledge or practice he does not know is a transgressor; so if perishing arises from his action, he is liable for the blood-money (Diyah) while capital retaliation (Qisas) is dropped from him, because he did not act independently without the patient's permission. And the physician’s offense in the view of the generality of jurists is borne by his agnates ('Aqilah*)."* [Ma'alim al-Sunan].
 
If negligence or transgression is established against the physician, it is necessary to compensate the patient or seek forgiveness from him. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on combining more than one intention in the prayer, such as combining the *sunnah* of wuḍūʾ with the pre-Dhuhr *sunnah*, or combining the *sunnah* of greeting the mosque (*taḥiyyat al-masjid*) with the pre-Dhuhr *sunnah*?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
Combining two intentions in a single act of worship, which some jurists call the “overlapping of acts of worship”, has several cases and precise rules. These can be consulted in the books of legal maxims, such as al-Manthūr fī al-Qawāʿid al-Fiqhiyyah by al-Zarkashī and al-Ashbāh wa’l-Naẓāʾir by al-Suyūṭī. Among the most important of these rules:
First: If all of the acts of worship that one wishes to combine under one intention are obligatory, the intentions do not overlap. An example is combining the intention of the obligatory ʿAṣr prayer with that of the obligatory Dhuhr prayer. The intentions do not overlap in this case.
Second: If the two acts are specified supererogatory prayers (nawāfil muqayyadah) that are aimed at in themselves because of a particular time, occasion, or cause, or if they are an obligatory prayer and a specified supererogatory prayer, the intentions again do not overlap. An example is the Duha prayer, which may not be combined with, for instance, the regular sunnah of Dhuhr.
It is stated in Bushrā al-Karīm: “Whatever is not, in meaning, an absolute voluntary prayer, such as the Duha sunnah… is not subsumed under another. Rather, if he intends something else along with it… the prayer is not validly entered. This is because combining two obligations, two specified supererogatory prayers, or an obligation and a specified supererogatory prayer invalidates the prayer in cases not built upon overlapping, as ritual purification (ṭahārah) is.”
Third: If the two acts are absolute voluntary prayers (nawāfil muṭlaqah), or one of them is, where the texts of the Sharīʿah show that the aim of the voluntary act is to fill the time with worship, then overlapping of intentions is permissible. An example is the obligatory Dhuhr prayer together with the sunnah of greeting the mosque (taḥiyyat al-masjid). And Allah Almighty knows best.

See More