عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

The Obligation to Honor the Prophetic Station and to Uphold Complete Etiquette toward His Noble Rank
Author : The General Iftaa` Department
Date Added : 24-08-2026

 

The Obligation to Honor the Prophetic Station and to Uphold Complete Etiquette toward His Noble Rank

On the occasion of the anniversary of the birth of our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, the General Iftaa Department affirms the obligation to honor the Prophetic station and to uphold complete etiquette (adab) toward his noble rank.

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.

The Noble Qur'an and the pure Prophetic Sunnah have made obligatory the observance of complete etiquette and reverence toward our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ — including the obligation to carefully select one's words, elevating one's speech in a manner befitting his noble rank, and in describing his states and accounts, peace and blessings be upon him. Allah, the Exalted, says (what means): "That you [people] may believe in Allah and His Messenger and honor him and respect him [i.e., the Prophet] and exalt Allah morning and afternoon" [al-Fatḥ/9]. And Allah, the Exalted, says (what means): "Do not make [your] calling of the Messenger among yourselves as your calling of one another" [an-Nūr/63].

Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, has made obligatory his honoring — meaning, his support and reverence — and has made incumbent his esteem and exaltation. Accordingly, using any expression that carries disrespect toward his noble station is among the major sins, even if the speaker did not intend disrespect.

For this reason, the noble Companions and those who followed them in righteousness refrained from transmitting the mockery and insults directed at the Messenger of Allah ﷺ by the polytheists and hypocrites, even merely for the sake of narration. This has been clarified by the scholars. It is stated in the book ash-Shifā bi-Ta‘rīf Ḥuqūq al-Muṣṭafā — after mentioning those who transmitted scholarly consensus (ijmā‘) on the prohibition of narrating what was used to mock the Prophet ﷺ: "May Allah have mercy on our pious predecessors, who were so careful to safeguard their religion — they omitted from the narrations of the military campaigns (maghāzī) and biographical accounts (siyar) whatever followed this path, meaning disrespect, and abstained from narrating it, except for a few minor and inoffensive matters mentioned in a manner similar to the earlier examples, so as to show Allah's vengeance upon the one who uttered such words, and His seizing of the slanderer for his sin. This is Abū ‘Ubayd al-Qāsim ibn Sallām, may Allah have mercy on him, who exercised great caution in his books regarding the mocking Arabic poetry he was compelled to cite as evidence — he would conceal the name of the one being mocked by using a name of similar meter, safeguarding his own religion and taking care not to participate in defaming anyone through narrating or spreading such material. How much more so, then, regarding anything that touches upon the honor of the master of mankind, peace and blessings be upon him."

Adhering to the noblest and most fitting speech is thus a sharī‘ah obligation, and it is among the rights owed to the Prophet ﷺ by Muslims — a measure of a Muslim's faith, the sincerity of his following, and his appreciation of what the Messenger of Allah ﷺ represents for him. He is the mercy sent [to all creation], and the illuminating lamp sent with wisdom. It is therefore fitting for believers to express their gratitude to him, peace and blessings be upon him, through faith in him and emulation of his guidance, until adherence to proper etiquette toward him becomes a way of life for believers. And all praise is due to Allah, Lord of all the worlds.

The published article reflects the opinion of its author

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

Is it permissible for a husband to stop his wife from visiting her family?

A husband shouldn`t stop his wife from visiting her family, and it is disliked for him to do so because such an act makes them harbor feelings of hatred against him.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on someone who wakes up in a state of janābah (major ritual impurity) near the very end of the prayer's designated time, during cold weather — should he heat water in order to perform ghusl, even though the prayer's time will expire as a result, or should he perform tayammum instead?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If the water is cold, and cannot be used due to fear of harm that is not ordinarily tolerable, or that would result in illness, then in this case it becomes obligatory to heat the water — even if heating it causes the time for Fajr to expire — and no sin is incurred in doing so, due to his valid excuse. He may not resort to tayammum (dry ablution) instead, since water remains available [and merely needs to be heated].
Imam Shihāb ad-Dīn Aḥmad ar-Ramlī (raḥimahullāh) said: "He was asked regarding a person who, if he were to use cold water, would experience harm that permits tayammum, and who has access to something with which he could heat the water — but if he heats it, the prayer's time will expire. Is it obligatory for him to heat it even if the time expires, or should he pray with tayammum within the prescribed time? He answered that it is obligatory for him to heat the water, even if the time for that particular obligatory prayer expires." [Fatāwā ar-Ramlī, Vol.1/P.98]
Imam al-Bājūrī (raḥimahullāh) said in his Ḥāshiyah on Sharḥ Ibn Qāsim (Vol.1/P.173): "And if he fears [harm] from using cold water, and is currently unable to heat it, but knows of a place where firewood is available, such that if he were to go there he would not return until after the prescribed time has expired — what appears [to be the correct position] is that it is obligatory for him to go and seek the firewood, even if the time expires as a result, as this is the position ultimately settled upon by ar-Ramlī, and as related from him by Ibn Qāsim." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, and is it permissible to slaughter the ewe if one knows it is pregnant?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a person slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, the fetus becomes lawful (ḥalāl) by virtue of its mother's slaughter (tabaʿan li-ummihā).
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.6/P.158): "A fetus found dead [after the mother's slaughter], or found alive but in a state resembling that of a slaughtered animal [i.e., dying shortly after], becomes lawful — whether or not it had grown fur — provided it is found in the womb of a mother that was lawfully slaughtered, whether her slaughter was by cutting the throat, or by an arrow or hunting dog sent after her. This is based on the ḥadīth: 'The slaughtering of the fetus is [effected by] the slaughtering of its mother' [narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who graded it ḥasan, and by Ibn Ḥibbān, who graded it ṣaḥīḥ] — meaning that the slaughter which rendered the mother lawful renders the fetus lawful as well, by virtue of following her; and because the fetus is one of her constituent parts, and her slaughter renders lawful all of her parts."
This ruling differs, however, from the case of one who knows from the outset that the ewe is pregnant [and intends to sacrifice her specifically as the udḥiyah while pregnant] — in which case, according to the Shāfi'ī school, she does not fulfill the requirement of a valid sacrifice.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Bujayrimī 'alā al-Khaṭīb (Vol.4/P.335): "A pregnant animal does not fulfill the requirement [of a valid sacrifice], and this is the authoritative position (al-mu'tamad), because pregnancy diminishes the quality of the meat. As for why such an animal is nevertheless counted as complete [i.e., fully valid] in matters of zakāh, that is because the intent there is reproduction (nasl), not the quality of the meat.". And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

See More