Print

FAQ - 2

Question & Answer



Are the Bhuddhists among the Ahlul Kitab? Question:
 
They are not from them. Answer:
 
Can Muslim, who rents a fully furnished house in the West, consider everything in it to be ritually pure as long as he does not find any trace of impure things in it, even if the previous occupant was from Ahlul Kitab, i.e., a Christian or a Jew? What if the previous occupant was a Bhuddhist or an atheist who does not believe in God and the prophets? Question:
 
Yes, he can consider everything in the house ritually pure as long as he does not know that it has become impure. Just conjecture or doubt about impurity is of no value. Answer:
 
The floor of most houses in the West is covered with carpet which is glued to the floor in such a way that it is difficult to lift it off. How can such a carpet be rendered pure (tahir), if it becomes impure with urine or blood? The water used to purify in both the cases could be qalil or kathir. Please explain the ruling in both cases. Question:
 
If it is possible to wipe the water off the carpet by using a piece of cloth or a vacuum cleaner, it can be purified with qalil water, provided that the water is wiped off the carpet, in the process. Conversely, it must be purified by kathir water [i.e., by using a hose pipe connected to the tap]. Answer:
 
In the West, there are many public laundry places in which Muslims and non-Muslims wash their clothes. Is it permissible for us to pray in the clothes washed in such facilities, especially when we have no knowledge whether or not the washing machines are connected to the kurr water at some stages of the washing, and whether or not it purifies the clothes in the process of washing? Question:
 
There is no problem in praying in those clothes that were pure before washing them [in such facilities] as long as you are not aware that they have become impure. [In other words, what goes in the public washing machine as pure comes out as pure unless you are sure that it has become impure.] Similarly, [you can pray in] the impure clothes [that were washed in the public laundry machines] provided that you are reassured: that the impure element, if any, has been washed away; that the pure water covered the entire impure area twice (if it had become impure by urine and even if the water was connected to kurr source as an obligatory precaution) or just once (if it had become impure by other elements); and that the water was removed from the clothes by wringing or other similar method [i.e., spinning of the machine] if it was qalil. However, if you are not sure and just have conjecture that the garment has been purified as per religious requirement, the previously impure garment will still be considered impure and praying in it would not be valid. Answer:
 
Can the clothes washed with liquid detergent in laundry facilities owned by a non-Muslim be considered tahir while knowing that Muslims as well as non-Muslims wash their clothes there? Question:
 
If you do not know that the clothes have come into contact with a source of najasah, you can consider them tahir (pure). Answer:
 
Some soaps contain pigs' fat or other animals not slaughtered Islamically. Furthermore, we do not know whether or not chemical change has taken place in the manufacturing process. Can such soaps be considered tahir? [Chemical change is a purifying agent in the sense that it purifies a najis item.] Question:
 
If it is proven to contain those [impure] elements, it should be considered impure, except if the occurrence of chemical change is proven. Such a change is not proven in manufacturing of soaps. Answer:
 
A toothbrush that contains bristles from the hair of a pig: is it permissible to buy, sell and use it? Does the mouth become impure by using such a toothbrush? Question:
 
It is permissible to buy, sell and use it; however, the mouth will become impure by using it; and the mouth will become pure by taking that toothbrush out and getting rid of the remaining toothpaste from the mouth. Answer:
 
If blood is seen in the yolk or the white part of the egg, does it make the egg impure and haram for us? Is there a solution for it? Question:
 
The clot of blood inside the egg is pure, but it is haram [for consumption]. Therefore, the egg can be eaten by removing the blood from it, provided it not very minute and been absorbed in it. [In the latter case, is not removable, then the egg becomes haram.] Answer:
 
Are alchoholic beverages pure? Is beer pure? Question:
 
There is no doubt about the impurity of alchoholic drinks. As far as beer (fuqa') is concerned, it is impure on the basis of precaution; however, there is no doubt in it being haram. Answer:
 
The people residing in Europe are of different faiths, nationalities and religions; and when we buy moist or wet food items, the shopkeeper may touch it with his hands. Since we do not know his religion, can we consider that food as pure? Question:
 
As long as it is not known that the hands of the shopkeeper were najis, the food is to be considered tahir. Answer:
 
What about the leather products made in a European country, if we are unaware of the source of that leather? It is said that some European countries import cheap leather from Muslim countries and then use it for manufacturing various products. Can we consider such leather pure? Are we allowed to say salat in them? Can such a weak probability [about it originating from a Muslim country] be given any credence? Question:
 
If the probability of the leather originating from a zabiha (an animal slaughtered Islamically) source is so weak that people would not normally give any credence (for example, the probability of 2%), it is to be considered impure and this cannot be used in salat. But if the probability is not so weak, it can be considered pure and using it in salat would be permissible. Answer:
 
A person used to make mistakes in the way he performed his wudhu (minor ablution) or ghusl (major ablution). After many years, he comes to realize his mistakes. When he inquires as how to solve his problem, he is told: "Repeat all your prayers and perform the pilgrimage again." Since saying all the prayers and doing the pilgrimage again is difficult, is there a solution which would salvage his prayers and pilgrimage performed with wudhu and ghusl that he thought was correct? Is there such a solution as a concession to this person so that he does not become disheartened and rebellions against religious obligations in a society which encourages such kind of rebellion? Question:
 
If he was ignorant out of innocence, and therefore made mistakes without causing harm (e.g., did not follow the proper sequence in washing the head and the other parts of the body in ghusl; or did the wiping of the head or feet [mash] with a new water), then his wudhu and ghusl will be considered correct; and, consequently, his past prayers and pilgrimage will also be considered correct. But if he was ignorant out of negligence in learning the Islamic laws or did mistakes which do invalidate the act in general (e.g., leaving out some parts of the body which must be washed in wudhu or ghusl), there is no way to validate his past prayers and pilgrimage. However, if there is the fear that he would totally rebel when asked to make up all the past prayers and pilgrimage, then it is not appropriate to ask him to do so. Maybe Allah will improve his situation in future. Answer:
 
Some people pray for years and even perform pilgrimage, yet they do not pay khums.* Is it obligatory on them to repeat their prayers and pilgrimage? Question:
 
Based on precaution, it is obligatory on them to repeat prayers and pilgrimage, if the particular dress that they used in prayers, in tawaf and in salat of tawaf was from items on which khums had become due. However, if only the dress they used in salat of tawaf was from items on which khums had become due, and they were ignorant (even out of negligence) of the law or the status of the dress, their pilgrimage is valid, but they have to repeat salat of tawaf if they had no excuse for their ignorance. [In this case,] they have, as a matter of precaution to return to Mecca [to perform the salat of tawaf again], if it does not entail great difficulty; otherwise they can perform that salat wherever they are. Similarly, they will have to do the pilgrimage again if the animal offered as a sacrifice was bought with money on which khums had become due. However, if they had bought it with money whose unspecific portion was liable for khums -as is the case normally - there is no problem in their pilgrimage, even if they used it from the money on which khums had become liable; of course, they will be responsible for that amount [for payment of khums]. All this is applicable, if they knew about the obligation of khums and the law forbidding them to utilize items on which khums has become wajib or if they were ignorant out of negligence. But, if they were ignorant out of innocence, their prayers and pilgrimage are valid. Answer:
 
If a traveller leaves his home town immediately after the adhan of noon prayer, i.e. without saying that prayer, and reaches his destination after sunset, has he committed a sin? And is it obligatory on him to make up for noon prayer? Question:
 
Yes, he has committed a sin by neglecting the obligatory prayer in its appropriate time, and he has to make it up. Answer:
 
Is the ink that had dried [on our hands, for example] a barrier to perform wudhu or ghusl? Question:
 
If it does not form a mass that would prevent water from reaching the skin, the wudhu and ghusl is valid. However, if one has doubt whether it forms a mass or not, it must be removed. Answer:
 
Is it permissible for a Muslim to involve in pleasure by continuing to watch an entertaining movie even, though salat time is due, and then he goes to say his prayers just before it becomes overdue (qadha)? Question:
 
It is not appropriate for a Muslim to delay the saying of salat from its preferred time (i.e., at the beginning of its time span) except for an excuse; what has been mentioned in the question is not an acceptable excuse. Answer:
 
Is cream a barrier to water reaching the skin, and if so should it be removed prior to wudhu and ghusl? Question:
 
Apparently the effect left on the skin after it is applied is nothing but just moisture, and so it does not constitute a barrier to water reaching the skin. Answer:
 
Some women let their nails grow longer than necessary for beauty. Sometimes a nail breaks up, requiring a cover that must be placed over the broken nail. Knowing that such a cover prevents water from reaching the nail in wudhu and ghusl, is it permissible to use it? How should wudhu and ghusl be performed with that cover? Question:
 
Wudhu and ghusl with such a cover over the nail is not valid; therefore, it is necessary to remove it for ablutions. And the purpose mentioned above for the cover is not justifiable. Answer:
 
When should one say his salat full (tamam) and when should one say it qasr (two rakat instead of four)? Is the general perception about a person being resident of a city sufficient for him to say his salat fully [in that city]? Question:
 
The conditions for qasr in travelling have been mentioned in the Manual of Islamic Laws. When a person considers residing in a city for a long time, and in the general perception it is considered as such, he is not considered as a traveller (e.g., if he intends to reside in that city for year and a half, it will be considered as his home-town after one month). But if he intends to stay in that city for a short while only and is considered, in the general sense, as a visitor, he should pray qasr. Answer:
 
How can we know the time of mid-night? Do 00.00 hours the point of mid-night as it is commonly held by some people? Question:
 
Midnight is halfway between sunset and true dawn. So if the sun sets at 7 p.m. and the true dawn begins at 4 a.m., then midnight will be at 11:30 p.m. The criteria for determining midnight are the timings of sunset and true dawn, which differ according to place and season. Answer:
 

 

Islamic News