words of a pagan becomes the word of God

According to the Bible Solomon became a pagan at old age.

As Solomon grew old, his wives turned his heart after other gods, and his heart was not fully devoted to the LORD his God, as the heart of David his father had been. (1 king 11:4)

The Bible goes as far as saying anyone who trusts an idol worshiper becomes like them.

Those who make them will become like them, Everyone who trusts in them. (Psalm115:8)

But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people. (1 Corinthians 5:11)

Here’s the problem, if putting trust or associating with an idol worshiper is wrong. Why would you accept the writings of such individual and claim it to be the word God?

Solomon supposed to have written 2 books which are part of the Bible. The same Solomon whom the Bible says became a pagan, idol worshipper! So now Christians have to admit they have 2 books in their cannon, “the Songs of Solomon and Proverbs”, both written by Solomon who was a pagan?

If Christians have no problem preaching the words of a pagan, then why cant they also preach the words of Satan?

The very text you tried defending has exposed you! (how embarrassing)

I came across this pathetic article from answering Islam korede’s favorite website. This really made me laugh, I was shocked how ignorant scam shamoun and his clan were of the Hebrew language. Let us read a segment from the article before we expose the writers ignorance.

The Claim that the Bible is Corrupt because of Numerical Discrepancies

There are some Muslims who attempt to discredit the Bible on the basis of contradiction of numbers. They are quick to argue that if the Holy Bible is truly God's Word, then it would contain no numerical errors because God is perfect. It is true: God is perfect. However, man is not. And though it was God who revealed the Scriptures in perfect fashion, it was the hand of man that copied the manuscripts from one generation to the next. And since man is imperfect, there are bound to be mistakes in his work. We call these mistakes copyist errors because they most likely were made during the laborious and tedious task of duplicating the scriptures for wider distribution. An example of this type of error are the following verses taken from the King James version of the Bible:

And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven hundred horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen. (II Samuel 8:4)

And David took from him a thousand chariots, and seven thousand horsemen, and twenty thousand footmen. (I Chronicles 18:4)

It is clear that the first verse speaks of 700 horsemen, and the other 7000 horsemen -- a difference of 6300. Such errors in the Old Testament can be found in other passages and are attributed to the fact that many of the Hebrew characters of numbers closely resembled one another. Thus it was easy to mistake one number for another during the process of copying. It was also easy to misplace a zero that could account for the difference between 7000 and 700. These errors are believed to have been nonexistent in the original scriptures.

----------------------

Now that  you’ve read the article let me expose the sheer ignorance of the writer. Let’s start off with the title of the article, “The Claim that the Bible is Corrupt because of Numerical Discrepancies”. The writer is saying “Muslims claim the Bible is corrupt” yet he himself made the same claim?

“though it was God who revealed the Scriptures in perfect fashion, it was the hand of man that copied the manuscripts from one generation to the next. And since man is imperfect, there are bound to be mistakes in his work. We call these mistakes copyist errors because they most likely were made during the laborious and tedious task of duplicating the scriptures for wider distribution.”

How ironic, the writer contradicted himself. Let’s move on, the writer did not hesitate to admit that there are discrepancies throughout the Bible.

“Such errors in the Old Testament can be found in other passages”

Here is where it gets interesting. The writer “claims” that the “Hebrew characters of numbers closely resembled one another”. According to the writer this is the reason such a discrepancy was made he goes to to say “Thus it was easy to mistake one number for another during the process of copying. It was also easy to misplace a zero that could account for the difference between 7000 and 700.”

Did you catch the joke? “Hebrew characters of numbers closely resembled one another” seriously? Well sorry to inform you sir you are wrong. The Hebrew Bible does not use numbers it uses letters instead, the letters resembling numbers are not the same as we shall see.

If we are to compare the Hebrew of both texts, then we can see a striking difference in spelling and pronunciation.

Seven hundred horsemen (2 Samuel 8:4)

וּשְׁבַע־ מֵאוֹת֙ פָּרָשִׁ֔ים (ū-šə-ḇa‘- mê-’ō-wṯ pā-rā-šîm,)

Compare to

 Seven thousand horsemen (1 Chronicles 18:4)

 וְשִׁבְעַ֤ת אֲלָפִים֙ פָּֽרָשִׁ֔ים  (wə-šiḇ-‘aṯ  ’ă-lā-p̄îm pā-rā-šîm,)

There is no way the scribes could of made an error whist writing the numbers in words.  (thousand ’ă-lā-p̄îm and Hundred mê-’ō-wṯ). the writer is ignorant of the Hebrew language or else he wouldn’t of humiliated himself by claiming the Hebrew Bible had numbers so similar the scribes may have made mistake? I'm shocked how he thought he could get away making such a bogus claim

“It was also easy to misplace a zero that could account for the difference between 7000 and 700.”

This only shows and proves, that the Bible has really been corrupted, tampered with. Even the writer who thought he could answer this stupendous problem lied to convince his readers, Yet his lies got exposed.

Another injury to answering Islam's shabby article

The authors of the article tried to make a comparison and mockery of Surah 38:21-25. The Story in which Dawud (As) had two visitors enter his palace by climbing over the wall. The authors tried to compare the story from the Quran with the "parable" found in 2 Samuel 12:1-14.

Firstly, the authors argument based on biblical narrations cannot be accepted, since the Bible itself has been proven to be unhistorical leading many  not to believe its authenticity. Secondly the Bible verse which the authors use to base their argument has no effect on Muslims since the earliest fragments of the Tanack known as the DSS specifically 1 &2 Samuel have variant readings and that story is incomplete with much of it's text missing. The author claims Nathan spoke a "Parable" to king David as found in verse 1, however this is missing from the DSS manuscript. The verse starting from verse 4, 1-3 are missing.  Verse 4 finishes at verse 5 making verses 6-7 absent. Verse 8 finishes at verse 9 making 10, 11, 12 absent.  The story in the Bible makes no mention of two men climbing over the wall which terrified Dawud (As), nor does the Bible say the two men were brothers as found in the Quran.  The two stories have no relation whatsoever, in fact the Biblical story is more dubious since no early fragments can confirm the missing parts of the story found in the Masoretic.

Finally, as for the saying " shoot oneself in the foot." that’s exactly what the author did to himself. He has proven that the Masoretic text which he depended on is not authentic and throughout time rabbis have filled the missing gaps themselves. Another reason to dismiss the Bible as the word of God

Another laughable matter

answering Islam article tried to make a comparison between Surah 2:249 and Judges 7:4-5. the story of Gideon and his men drinking water from the river. well, little did he know that story is not found in the DSS Bible. the ancient documents don't speak of such an event.

Thus, we can rule out of any such plagiarism and definitely conclude the Bible once again added a story unknown to those prior to the 1st century BC

Case closed!

The Jewish Rabbis were entrusted

We have certainly revealed the Torah in which there is guidance and light (details concerning the laws of Allaah). The Ambiyaa, who were obedient to Allaah, judged the Jews with it (the Torah) and the people of Allaah (the pious ones) and the scholars (also judged with it) because they were instructed to preserve Allaah's Book and they were witnesses to it. So do not fear the people but fear Me and do not sell My verses for a small gain (do not distort the verses of the scriptures I reveal for fear of people and to make some money). Whoever does not judge by what Allaah has revealed, then they surely are (behaving like the) Kaafiroon. (Surah 5:44)

----------

It is clear from the above  Quran Ayat, that the Jewish scholars (Rabbis of the Law) were entrusted to preserved (take care of) the Torah which was given to them. They were give the responsibility to keep the Torah safe.

Let's imagine this scenario:

Suppose you left all your household belongings (furniture, cooker. Fridge etc..) to a storage  company to keep safe until you move into your new property . After you move in to your new premises you go back to the storage company, and find out your household belongings are damaged or changed with other spare parts. Would you blame yourself or storage company? Naturally you'll blame the storage company right?. Why because you entrusted them with your personal belongings and they broke your trust and changed or damaged your personal property.

What if you purchased new furniture's before going to the storage company. What if your whole purpose was to go and tell the company, "I don’t really care of those belongings as I have new and better ones". Did you catch the drift?

If the Torah was entrusted to the Jewish Rabbis to preserve, and instead they distorted the texts. This doesn’t mean the words of Allah Swt has been changed no it only means that the Torah was only given to the Bani Isreal to keep. It was for their use only. If they distort it, change it, then they would be responsible for it since it was for them to keep safe. This doesn’t affect the universal message of Allah Swt. The Quran was meant to come and supersede all Books.

Even Paul in the New Testament makes mentioned of the Jews being entrusted with the word of God : Much in every way! First of all, the Jews have been entrusted with the very words of God. (Roman 3:2)

Allah Swt said he will preserve, guard the Quran. This does not include the previous books as they were given to a certain group or people or nation only, for a certain period of time.

Without doubt only We have revealed the Reminder (the Quraan) and (by carious means) We shall certainly be its protectors (ensuring that it remains unchanged throughout time). (Surah 15:9)

The Jews intentionally concealed words from the Torah. They made SEPARATE SHEETS FOR SHOW! Yet by the Mercy of Allah Swt the Quran was sent as a Guidence to Mankind Alhumdulillah.

 No just estimate of Allah do they make when they say: "Nothing doth Allah send down to man (by way of revelation)" Say: "Who then sent down the Book which Moses brought?- a light and guidance to man: But ye make it into (separate) sheets for show, while ye conceal much (of its contents): therein were ye taught that which ye knew not- neither ye nor your fathers." Say: "(Allah) (sent it down)": Then leave them to plunge in vain discourse and trifling.

And this is a Book which We have sent down, bringing blessings, and confirming (the revelations) which came before it: that thou mayest warn the mother of cities and all around her. Those who believe in the Hereafter believe in this (Book), and they are constant in guarding their prayers. (Surah 6:91-92)

Toilet Manners (Aadaabul-Khalaa) : Abdul-Azeem ibn Badawee al-Khalafee

by AbdurRahman.org

1 - It is recommended for the person who wants to enter the toilet to say:

بِسْمِ الله ) اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَعُوْذُ بِكَ مِنَ الْخُبُثِ وَالْخَبَائِثِ)

(Bismillaah),
(Allaahummaa innee a`oodhu bika minal-khubuthi wal-khabaa·ith)

(With the name of Allaah),
(O Allaah! I seek Your refuge from male and female devils).

This is because of the hadeeth of `Alee -radiyallaahu `anhu- that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) said:

<<The screen between the jinn and the private-parts of the descendants of Aadam, when one of you enters the toilet, is that he says:‘Bismillaah’ (with the name of Allaah).>> [1.1]

And because of the hadeeth of Anas -radiyallaahu `anhu- who said: “When Allaah’s Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) went to the toilet he used to say:

اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَعُوْذُ بِكَ مِنَ الْخُبُثِ وَالْخَبَائِثِ

‘Allaahummaa innee a`oodhu bika minal-khubuthi wal-khabaa·ith’ (O Allaah! I seek Your refuge from male and female devils).”  [1.2]

2 - And it is recommended that when he departs he says:: (Ghufraanaka): (I seek Your forgiveness), because of the hadeeth of Aa·ishah -radiyallaahu `anhaa- who said: “When the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) came away from the toilet he would say: << Ghufraanaka>> (I seek Your forgiveness).” 1.3

3 - And it is recommended that he should enter with his left-foot first, and depart with the right-foot first.

This is because the right-side is used for noble actions, and the left-side for actions which are not noble actions; and there are reports which indicate this generally. [1.4]

4 - And if he is in an open place, then it is recommended for him to move far enough away so that he is not seen:

From Jaabir -radiyallaahu `anhu- who said: “We went out along with Allaah’s Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) on a journey, and Allaah’s Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) would not go to the toilet until he had gone far enough so that he would not be seen.” [1.5]

5 - And it is recommended that he does not raise his garment until he is close to the ground:

From Ibn `Umar -radiyallaahu `anhumaa- : “That when the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) wanted to relieve himself he would not raise his garment until he was close to the ground.” [2.1]

6 - And it is not permissible to face or to have ones back towards the qiblah, whether in the open desert or within a building:

From Aboo Ayyoob al-Ansaaree -radiyallaahu `anhu- from the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) who said:

“When you go to the toilet, then do not face the qiblah and do not have your back towards it, but rather turn to the east or to the west.” [2.2]

Aboo Ayyoob said: “So we came to Shaam, and we found toilets which had been built facing towards the Ka`bah. So we would turn aside from it, and we would ask for the forgiveness of Allaah -the Most High.” [2.3]

7 - And it is forbidden to go to the toilet upon the path-way of the people, and in the places where they take shade:

From Aboo Hurayrah that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) said:

<<Beware of the two things which bring about curses.>> They said: “And what are the two things which bring about curses, O Messenger of Allaah?” He said: <<The person who goes to the toilet upon the path-way of the people, or where they take shade.>>2.4

8 - And it is disliked to urinate in the place where he takes a bath: From Humayd al-Himyaree who said: I met a man who had accompanied the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) just as Aboo Hurayrah accompanied him, [2.5] who said: “Allaah’s Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) forbade that one of us should comb his hair every day, and that he should urinate in the place where he takes a bath.”  [2.6]

9 - And it is forbidden to urinate in standing water:

From Jaabir: from the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) that he forbade urinating in standing water. [3.1]

10 - And it is permissible to urinate standing, but sitting is better:

From Hudhayfah -radiyallaahu `anhu-: that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) came to the rubbish dump of a people, and he urinated whilst standing. So I moved away, so he said: <<Draw near.>> So I drew close to him, until I stood at his heels. So he performed wudoo·, and wiped over his leather socks. [3.2]

And we said that sitting is better because that was his usual practice, to such an extent that `Aa·ishah -radiyallaahu `anhaa- said: “Whoever narrates to you that Allaah’s Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) urinated whilst standing then do not believe him. He had not used to urinate except whilst sitting.” [3.3]

And this saying of hers does not negate what occurs from Hudhayfah, since she informed about what she had seen, and Hudhayfah informed about what he had seen; and, as is known, the one who affirms is given precedence over the one who negates, since he has additional knowledge with him.

11 - And it is obligatory to keep oneself clean of urine:

So from Ibn `Abbaas -radiyallaahu `anhumaa- : that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) passed by two graves, and said:

<<They are being punished, and they are not being punished for something serious. As for one of them, then he had not used to keep himself clean of his urine; and as for the other, then he used to go between the people with reports to cause trouble (nameemah).” [3.4]

12-And he should not hold his penis with his right hand whilst he is urinating, nor clean himself with it:

From Qataadah -radiyallaahu `anhu- who said: Allaah’s Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) said:

“When one of you urinates, let him not hold his penis with his right hand; and let him not clean himself with his right hand.” [4.1]

13 - And it is permissible to clean oneself with water, or with stones-or with whatever is like them, and water is better:

From Anas -radiyallaahu `anhu- who said: “Allaah’s Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) used to enter the toilet, and I and a boy of similar age to me used to carry a pot of water and a spear. So he would clean himself with the water.” [4.2]

And from `Aa·ishah -radiyallaahu `anhaa- that Allaah’s Messenger (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) said: <<When one of you goes to the toilet then let him take three stones along with him, and let him clean himself with them, since they will suffice him.>>  [4.3]

14 - And it is not permissible to suffice with less than three stones:

From Salmaan al-Faarisee -radiyallaahu `anhu- that it was said to him: ‘Your Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) has taught you everything, even how to use the toilet!’ So he said: “Yes indeed! He forbade us from facing the qiblah with excrement or urine; and that we should clean ourselves with the right hand, and that we should clean ourselves with less than three stones; and that we should clean ourselves with a piece of animal dung or with a bone.” [4.4]

15 - And it is not permissible to clean oneself with a bone, or with a piece of dung: From Jaabir -radiyallaahu `anhu- who said: “The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) forbade that a person should wipe himself clean with a bone or a piece of animal dung.” [4.5]

Footnotes :

[1.1] Saheeh: Saheehul-Jaami` (3611); at-Tirmidhee (2/59/606)-and this is his wording; Ibn Maajah (1/109/297)…

[1.2] Agreed upon: al-Bukhaaree (1/242/142), Muslim (1/283/375), Aboo Daawood (1/21/4), Ibn Maajah (1/109/298), at-Tirmidhee (1/76), an-Nasaa·ee (1/20)

[1.3] Saheeh: Saheehul-Jaami` (4714); Aboo Daawood (1/52/30), at-Tirmidhee (1/7/7), Ibn Maajah (1/110/300).

[1.4] ‘as-Saylul-Jarraar’ (1/64). Shaikh al-Albaanee said in his notes upon ‘Ta·seesul-Ahkaam’ (1/34), concerning entering the toilet with the justify-foot: “I do not know anything from that in the Sunnah” (transl.).

[1.5] Saheeh: Saheeh Ibn Maajah (268); Ibn Maajah (1/121/335), Aboo Daawood (1/19/2) -with its like.

[2.1] Saheeh: Saheehul-Jaami` (4652); Aboo Daawood (1/31/14), at-Tirmidhee (1/11/14) as a hadeeth of Anas.

[2.2] Saheeh: Mukhtasar Muslim (109), [Muslim (no.264)], Saheeh Abee Daawood (7).

[2.3] Agreed upon: al-Bukhaaree (1/498/394), Muslim (1/224/264), at-Tirmidhee (1/8/8).

[2.4] Saheeh: Saheehul-Jaami` (110); Aboo Daawood (1/47/25), Muslim (1/226/269)…

[2.5] The narration of an-Nasaa·ee contains the additional wording “for four years.” (transl.).

[2.6] Saheeh: Saheehun-Nasaa·ee (232); an-Nasaa·ee (1/130), Aboo Daawood (1/50/28).

[3.1] Saheeh: Saheehul-Jaami` (6814); Muslim (1/235/281), an-Nasaa·ee (1/34).

[3.2] Muslim (1/228/273), at-Tirmidhee (1/11/13), al-Bukhaaree (1/329/225), an-Nasaa·ee (1/19), Aboo Daawood (1/44/23), Ibn Maajah (1/111/305).

[3.3] Saheeh: Saheehun-Nasaa·ee (29), an-Nasaa.ee (1/26), at-Tirmidhee (1/10/12)….

[3.4] Agreed upon: al-Bukhaaree (1/317/216), Muslim (1/240/292), at-Tirmidhee (1/47/70), Aboo Daawood (1/40/20), an-Nasaa·ee (1/28).

[4.1] Saheeh: Saheeh Ibn Maajah (250); Ibn Maajah (1/113/310) -this is his wording; and it was reported by: al-Bukhaaree (1/254/154), Muslim (1/225/267), Aboo Daawood (1/53/31), at-Tirmidhee (1/12/15), an-Nasaa·ee (1/25) -in longer form, and in abridged form.

[4.2] Agreed upon: al-Bukhaaree (1/252/152), Muslim (1/227/271), an-Nasaa·ee (1/42)- and he does not have a mention of the spear. An-Nawawee said: “The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم ) used to take it (i.e. the spear) along with him, because when he had performed wudoo· he would pray. So he needed to erect it in front of him, so that it would be a barrier which he could pray towards.” (transl.)

[4.3] Saheeh:Saheehun-Nasaa·ee; an-Nasaa·ee (1/42), Aboo Daawood (1/61/40)

[4.4] Saheeh: Saheeh Ibn Maajah (255); Muslim (1/223/262), at-Tirmidhee (1/13/16), Aboo Daawood (1/24/7), Ibn Maajah (1/115/316), an-Nasaa·ee (1/38)

[4.5] Saheeh: Saheehul-Jaami` (6827); Muslim (1/224/263), Aboo Daawood (1/60/38)

Source : Al-Wajeez, The Book Of Purification  –  Abdul-`Azeem ibn Badawee al-Khalafee, Translated by Abu Talhah Dawood Burbank . An excellent book on the rules and regulations of various acts of worship, with evidences from the Book and Sunnah. This chapter deals with water and aspects of purification, wudhoo, ghusl, the toilet etc

Related Link: https://abdurrahman.org/tahara-purification/

Questions regarding Blood Transfer / Blood Donation – alifta

by AbdurRahman.org  

Questions regarding Blood Transfer (Blood Transfusion) / Blood Donation – alifta

Ruling on blood donation

Q 43: What is the ruling on blood donation? [1]

A: There is no wrong in doing so, especially at times of necessity and need.

[1] Published by Al-`Arabiyyah Magazine, Rajab, 1420 A.H.

Fatwas of Ibn Baz>Volume 20>Chapter on Gifts and Grants
http://alifta.net/Fatawa/FatawaChapters.aspx?languagename=en&View=Page&PageID=3891&PageNo=1&BookID=14

What is the ruling on non-Muslims donating blood to Muslims?

Q 1: What is the ruling on blood donation? What is the ruling on non-Muslims donating blood to Muslims?

A: It is permissible to donate blood to Muslims whether the donor is Muslim or Kafir (non-Muslim); and whether he is of the People of the Book, or idolater if there is no harm to the donor and the person to whom blood is donated was in need of it.

The Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta’ – alifta.net
Fatwas of the Permanent Committee>Group 1>Volume 25: Miscellaneous Fatwas 2>Treatment with blood>Blood donation

Question:

Is it allowed to transfer blood from one person to another, and what if the two are of different religions?

Answer:

When a patient becomes so sick that the only way for him to get better is to undergo a blood transfusion, and when doctors are at least confident of the benefits that will result, he may be treated in this fashion, even if the donor and the recipient belong to different religions. Blood form a disbeliever, even though he may be at war with the Muslims, can be donated to a Muslim. And Muslim blood may be donated to a disbeliever who is not at war with the Muslims. May Allaah send peace and blessings upon Muhammad, his family, and his Companions.

Permanent Committee for Research and Verdicts
Fatawa Islamiyah Vol. 8 Page 229
DarusSalam English Publication

Muslims donating blood to non-Muslims is a good deed

The former Mufti of Saudi Arabia Shaykh bin Baz mentioned…

It is permissible for Muslims to donate blood to non-Muslims and you will be rewarded (by Allah) for doing so. But it’s not permissible to accept compensation for donating blood. Thus Whoever accepted money for donating blood should give that money in charity to the poor.

http://www.binbaz.org.sa/fataw/4868
http://www.binbaz.org.sa/fataw/3875

Summarized and Translated by Rasheed ibn Estes Barbee

Transferring blood from a male to a female and vice versa

There is nothing wrong with transferring blood from a male to a female and vice versa, as this does not affect marriageability and such matters.

[Issued by the Permanent Committee, Fatwa no. 19477, the sixth question]
http://www.alifta.net/Fatawa/FatawaChapters.aspx?languagename=en&View=Page&PageID=319&PageNo=1&BookID=17

Donating blood and taking a Price / receiving Gifts for it.

Receiving compensation for blood donation is unlawful, whether the compensation is money or any other kind of payment based on the Hadith reported on the authority of Abu Juhayfah in Sahih Al-Bukhari: The Prophet (peace be upon him) forbade the price of blood [1].There is a general Ijma` (consensus of scholars) that it is unlawful even if the money is a gift; for it is a gift given in return for something that it is forbidden to sell.

[1] Al-Bukhari, Sahih, Book on clothing, no. 5945; and Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, vol. 4, p. 308.

http://www.alifta.net/Fatawa/FatawaChapters.aspx?languagename=en&View=Page&PageID=321&PageNo=1&BookID=17

Narrated `Aun bin Abu Juhaifa:

My father bought a slave who practiced the profession of cupping. (My father broke the slave’s instruments of cupping). I asked my father why he had done so. He replied, “The Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وسلّم) forbade the acceptance of the price of a dog or blood, and also forbade the profession of tattooing, getting tattooed and receiving or giving Riba, (usury), and cursed the picture-makers.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 2086 (Book 34, Hadith 39), Translated Dr. Muhammad Muhsin Khan

Q: A blood bank grants gifts to blood donors, such as prayer rugs, medals, head coverings or the like, and sometimes three hundred riyals. I would like to know what is the Islamic ruling on such gifts.

A: After considering the Fatwa request, the Committee gave the following answer:

It is not permissible to sell blood based on the Hadith related in Sahih Al-Bukhari on the authority of Abu Juhayfah who said: I saw my father buying a cupper [a person who performs cupping] and ordered that his tools be broken. I asked him about this and he replied: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) forbade the price of blood, the price of dogs, and the earnings of a prostitute; and he cursed the woman who tattoos others and she who gets tattooed, the one who takes or gives Riba (usury or interest), and the Musawwir (one who makes pictures, statues, or photographs of living beings).

Al-Hafiz in Al-Fath said: “This means that it is prohibited to sell blood just as it is prohibited to sell dead meat and pork. This is unanimously Haram (unlawful), i.e., to sell blood and take a price.”

Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta’
http://www.alifta.net/Fatawa/FatawaChapters.aspx?languagename=en&View=Page&PageID=320&PageNo=1&BookID=17

Does blood transfusion create a Mahram relationship?

Transferring blood from a man to a woman or vice versa does not fall under the same category as breastfeeding, whether linguistically, conventionally, or legally, nor is it liable to the rulings on breastfeeding, such as creating a Mahram (unmarriageable relatives) relationship or affecting marriageability and the like, as breastfeeding does.

[Issued by His Eminence Shaykh Muhammad ibn Ibrahim Al-Shaykh, may Allah be merciful to him]

http://www.alifta.net/Fatawa/FatawaChapters.aspx?languagename=en&View=Page&PageID=315&PageNo=1&BookID=17

Establishing an Islamic bank to store blood for emergency aid for wounded Muslims

It is permissible to found an Islamic bank for accepting blood donations from people and preserving it to provide first aid to the Muslims who need it, provided that the bank does not take anything from the patients or their guardians in return for providing blood to them and does not use it as a commercial means to earn money. There is no doubt that such project will be of public interest to Muslims.

[Decree of the Council of Senior Scholars no. 65 dated 7/2/1399 A.H.]
http://www.alifta.net/Fatawa/FatawaChapters.aspx?languagename=en&View=Page&PageID=330&PageNo=1&BookID=17

Share this, Baarakallaah Feekum: [“One who guides to something good has a reward similar to that of its doer” - Saheeh Muslim vol.3, no.4665] [This website protects the copyrights of the authors/publishers. The Content is posted on this website with implicit/explicit permission from content owners. If you find any copyright violations please inform the same.I ask you to fear Allah before you spread the rumours and false information]

The forgotten root: “They know him as they know their son”

BY ERIC BIN KISAM on AUGUST 5, 2017 • ( 4 )

Scriptures  are not just text of revelation which one must understand within the border of sacred theological paradigm  but it can also be approached as a collective memory of a profane history.  In this context one should not neglect to read re-examine the scriptures as veracious historical evidences through philology, this is what we will try to attempt in this post.

In the Qur’an there is an interesting keyword which we argue linguistically refer to prophetic claim:  abna‘ ( ابناء ):

لَّذِينَ آتَيْنَاهُمُ الْكِتَابَ يَعْرِفُونَهُ كَمَا يَعْرِفُونَ أَبْنَاءَهُمْ ۖ وَإِنَّ فَرِيقًا مِّنْهُمْ لَيَكْتُمُونَ الْحَقَّ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ. الْحَقُّ مِن رَّبِّكَ ۖ فَلَا تَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْمُمْتَرِينَ

Those to whom We gave the Scripture know him as they know their own sons. But indeed, a party of them conceal the truth while they know [it]. The truth is from your Lord, so never be among the doubters. (Q 2:146-7)

The Quran thus told us that “Those to whom We gave the Scripture” ie the Israelites will  recognize  Prophet Muhammad like their own sons.  This consequently imply that Prophet Muhammad has legitimate right of the biblical prophecies via biological genealogies not only through his character, the signs he brought, and the truth of his message.

By employing the term  ابناء (abna’) in arabic, whih cognate with hebrew בני (b’ney), the Quran thus link the prophetic claim of Muhammad through genetic ancestry with the Israelites. Therefore this verse do not merely speaks allegory as, I am sure, many of used to think. 

Lets analyze this verse :

الذين اءتينهم الكتاب يعرفونه كما يعرفون ابناءهم

(2:46 البقرة)

Alladhīna ʾātaynāhumu l-kitāba yaʿrifūnahū ka-mā yaʿrifūna ʾabnāʾahum

אלה אשר נתנו להם את הספר מכירים אותו כפי שמכירים את בניכם

(2:146  סורת אלבקרה)     

Elleh asher natannu lachem et has-Sefer machchirim oto kefiy shemmachchirim et b’neychem ^[1]

Those to whom We gave the Scripture know him as they know their own sons.

(Al-Baqarah 2:146)

Traditional Historical sources in Tarikh Al Islam confirm the accuracy of the genetic link of the Prophet of Islam to Israelite because genealogically Prophet Muhammad (p) is not of a “pure” arab stock or A’rab ‘Aaribah العرب العاربة rather he is considered as “arabized” arab or A’rab Musta’ribah  العرب المستعربة .  This may surprise some but it should not. 

Hāshim ibn Abdul Manan (whom the tribe is named hence Banu Hashim or Hashemite)  the great-grandfather of Prophet Muhammad married to Salma bint Amr of Banu Najjar a priestly Israelite clan^[2]  from the city of  Medina (Yathrib as known to the Arabs) the birthplace of the Prophet Muhammad. This makes Banu Hashim a unique both an Ishmaelite and Israelite clan and this comes as no surprise that this clan is prominent to this day^[3].

We have textual evidence that the city of Medina is  always a city  of particular significant for the jews as in Targum Onkelos 10:30  which was written in Judeo Aramaic from 1AD there is reference of settlements of Joktanides^[4] which is called מָדִינְחָא Medincha ^[5,6], and there is no reason to think that this is the city other than  Medina in Arabia. There must be particular reason why the Israelite clans, the large number of them, settled in the primary Arab city of Medina, I would assume this was to do with the prevailing messianic/prophetic expectation at that time of but that perhaps another topic for another post. The fact is to such a great extend Medina had been known by the Israelites 6 centuries prior to the advent prophet Muhammad, a Hashemite (qabilah banu Hashim), whom paternal bloodline are the descendants of  Patriarch Abraham through his first-born son and seed (zera), prophet Ishmael^[7], but also claim maternal bloodline of priestly Israelite ancestry from the tribe of Banu Najjar.

Exceptional Clan Solidarity

To be sure, the solidarity of the Hashemite clan was exceptionally strong. In Tarikh Al Islam we learnt that although the message of Prophet Muhammad the hashemite   incited the resentment of other Arabic tribes, the Hashemites were always united to protect one of his son, whether they are believers or not to the point that other tribes enforced a economic and social boycott against the Hashemites. For years the hashemites lived in exile and endured misery and hunger. Never once Prophet Muhammad (p) stop in preaching the message of revelation still the Hashemite clan were always by his side with exceptional patience and fortitude because they believed the noteworthiness of Muhammad’s prophetic role^[8].

Exilarch connection

Hāshim ibn Abdul Manan also married another woman Qaylah (or Hind) bint Amr ibn Malik of the Banu Khuza’a from whom he had a son Asad (who was Ali Ibn Abi Thalib‘s maternal grandfather the 4th Caliph, the cousin and son-in-law of Prophet Muhammad). Asad ibn Hāshim then married to Zahna bat Kafnai Gaon, an Exilarch^[9] princess, the daughter of Kafnai Gaon of Baghdad, the 32th Babylonian Exilarch (C. 530 – C. 580/581): a very noble royal family who traced their ancestry through the Davidic patrilineal line/ Malkhut Beit David (מלכות בית דוד).  From this marriage Asad ibn Hāshim and Zahna bat Kafnai Gaon bore Fāṭimah bint Asad, who then was married to  Abu Thalib bin Abdul Muthalib ibn Hashim.

Fatimah the Blessed Memory

I will argue there must be a good reason why Asad ibn Hāshim and Zahna bat Kafnai named his daughter Fāṭimah. It turns out that Fāṭimah is no ordinary for name in the Oral Torah. As a daughter of a prominent jewish leader, Hazna must realized the significance of this name and play part in choosing it as a good name for her daughter, a name from the collective memory of her tradition which is the wife of prophet Ishmael the noble patrilineal ancestor of her husband: פטימא Phetima.

Here is the text from Targum Jonathan on Genesis/Sefer Bereshit 21:21 found in most rabbinic bible Mikraot Gedolot (מקראות גדולות):

וְיָתִיב בְּמַדְבְּרָא דְפָּארָן וּנְסֵיב אִתְּתָא יַת עֲדִישָׁא וְתֵרְכָהּ וּנְסִיבַת לֵיהּ אִמֵיהּ יַתפְּטִימָא אִתְּתָא מֵאַרְעָא דְמִצְרָיִם

‘And he dwelt in the wilderness of Pharan and took for a wife Adisha, but put her away. And his mother took for him Phetima to wife from the land of Egypt.

And also it was no coincidence that Prophet Muhammad too also gave his youngest daughter (from Khadija), Fāṭimah. Even until now she is one of the most loved and revered woman figure and prominent character in the religion of Islam and after her name is most muslims give name to their daughter. It is the  most popular muslim girl’s names. Undoubtedly it is to do with divine plan to preserve this noble name Phetima פְּטִימָא  (Ar: Fāṭimah فاطمة‎‎)  for generations to come.

Their Own Son

The Ishmaelite – Israelite blood union within the Hashemite genealogy proved the mature and stable existence of religious and political axis between the Babylonian Exilarch  in Baghdad – and their counterpart in Yathrib in pre-Islamic Arabian peninsula (The Hijaz)  through the uniquely influential and mixed Ishmaelite and Israelite ancestry, the Hashemite clan.  Thus genealogically it makes perfect sense that the  Qur’an designate Prophet Muhammad as “their own son” for the Israelites (ie. those who had been given scriptures) not only  in the sense through the prophecies in the  Bible.

It may explain why when Prophet Muhammad made his Hijrah  هِجْرَة  and the city was soon renamed Madīnat مَـديـنـة, the the jews of Yathrib who had the upper hand with their large settlement and huge property never objected to the name. This is a strong indication that the jews had already familiar with the name which was medintā מְדִֽינְתָּא֙ in Judeo -Aramaic and they were there awaiting the arrival of a future prophet. This is further supported by the most prominent Gaonic Rabbi:  Saadia Gaon ben Yosef / Rasag who mentioned the location Mecca مكة and Medina المدينة for his rendering of Genesis/Bereishit10:30^[10].

Notes

1. Subhi ‘Ali ‘Adwi, הַקּוּראָן בְּלָשׁוֹן אַחֵר Ha-Qur’an BeLashon Akher, 2015.
2. The Banu Najjar /  b’ney Naggar בני נגר  (Arabic: بنو نجّار) tribe literally translates to “Sons of the Carpenter.” It may also be hinting at a rabbinic lineage as the termנגר naggar in the Talmud signifies a learned, wise and literate in the Torah.  [Jesus the Jew: a historian’s reading of the Gospels by Geza Vermes 1983; p21-22 ] 
3. This bloodline from Salma and their father Hashem, makes the Hashemites in specific, unique among their Ishmaelite clans in Arabia and the entire Middle East, as they  are both Ishmaelite by paternal descent, and also Israelite through maternal descent, from the Royal House of Judah, from whom the Bani an-Najjar originally descend.
4. Joktanites: ancient Arab tribes of southern Arabian peninsula
5. Onkelos on the Torah Bereishit Noach Ch 10:30 p57 by Drazin & Wagner
6. Medincha or Medinta? Are we sure the Aramaic term is  מָדִינְחָא Medincha with chet? But as far as my knowledge of Aramaic goes I would expect the correct spelling should read מְדִֽינְתָּא֙ medintā  with taw. The latter simply  mean the “city” in singular exactly cognates with the arabic مدينة where the blessed city are known for until today.
7. Lineage from Ishmael according to classical accounting are considered the “Arabized” arabs or A’rab Musta’ribah  العرب المستعربة . They were arabized because Ishmael had to learn arabic when je came to Mecca and subsequently married into arab tribe of Jurhum. From Ishmael came the “Northern Arabs” associated with Adnān and later to Prophet Muhamad (in contrast to the biblical Joktanites  which give rise to “Southern Arabs” like the Yemenis)

8. ان الله اصطفى كنانة من ولد اسماعيل و اصطفى قريسا من كنانة واصطفى قريسا بني هاشم و اصطفى ني بني هاشم – صحيح مسلم

   Verily Allah granted eminence to Kinana from amongst the descendants of Isma’il, and he granted eminence to the Quraish amongst Kinana, and he granted eminence to Banu Hashim amonsgst the Quraish, and he granted me eminence from the tribe of Banu Hashim. (Sahih Muslim » The Book of Virtues).
9. Exilarch (Heb: ראש גלות Rosh Galut, Aram: ריש גלותא Reysh Galuta or Resh Galvata, Ar: رأس الجالوت Raas al-Galut lit. “leader of the captives”) refers to the leaders of the Diaspora Jewish community in Babylon following the deportation of King Jeconiah and his court into Babylonian exile after the first fall of Jerusalem in 597 BCE
10.  See my previous article entitled The Road to Shur in this blog.