2 weeks ago

Miftah-ul-Janna (Booklet for way to Paradise)

prevent the penetration

prevent the penetration of water, regardless of their amount, they will prevent ghusl as well. The same is written in Halabî. It cannot be argued that “there is no haraj, difficulty in removing the food remains, but fillings and crownings cannot be removed; so there is haraj in removing them.” Yes, there is haraj. Yet when something done by man causes haraj, it becomes an ’udhr for him to imitate another Madhhab. It does not become an ’udhr to omit a farz. A person’s being absolved from a farz requires impossibility of imitating another Madhhab, which in turn means coexistence of a darûrat and a haraj. If it should be asked, “Having one’s teeth filled or crowned is intended to prevent toothaches and to protect one from loss of teeth. Then isn’t there a darûrat for doing so, (i.e. for being absolved from the farz and thereby doing without washing the tooth sockets,)” then our answer will be, “There being a darûrat requires there not being a (prescribed) way out by imitating another Madhhab.” The argument, “The mandate of having to wash the teeth when making a ghusl shifts to the outer surfaces of the fillings or crownings,” is not appropriate in Islam. Tahtâwî (Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Ismâ’îl) states in his annotation to (Shernblâlî’s) book entitled Imdâd-ul-Fattâh: “When the ablution of a person who put on his mests after having made an ablution breaks, the breaking of the ablution affects the mests instead of the feet.” [1] This statement in books of Fiqh appertains exclusively to ablution–making and mest–wearing. To tailor it so as to fit into situations pertaining to tooth crowning, and even to ghusl–making, means to have a shot at issuing personal fatwâs. Nor would it be apposite to compare a filled or crowned tooth to thick beard. For, whereas it is not compulsory to wash the skin under thich beard when making an ablution, it is farz, (and so it is compulsory,) to wash the skin under it when making a ghusl. A person who argues that it is not farz “to wash the skin under thick beard when making a ghusl since it is not farz to wash the skin under thick beard when making an ablution,” will not wash the skin under his thick beard. Thereby, the ghusl made by that person and by people who believe him, and ergo the prayers of namâz performed by them, will not be sahîh. Nor would it be something consistent with books of Fiqh to [1] Please see the third chapter of the fourth fascicle of Endless Bliss for expressions such as ‘mests’ and ‘having an ’udhr (excuse)’. – 68 –

draw a comparison of crownings and fillings with ointments applied to fissures on feet or with wooden splints fastened to wounded or broken limbs or with plaster casts and bandages. For, when there is haraj or a possible damage in removing them from wounds and broken limbs, it is not possible to imitate another Madhhab. On account of these three reasons, one will be absolved from having to wash under them. Since you have the freedom of choice to have a rotten and aching tooth filled or crowned because you do not want to have it extracted and replaced with a removable false tooth or a set of false teeth furnished with a half or complete palate, to have your teeth filled or crowned or to have a fixed bridge of teeth made will not engender a darûrat. To say that there is a darûrat will not, on its own, constitute a cause to absolve you from the obligation of washing the areas under them. For, it is possible to imitate another Madhhab. No one has the right to exploit the groundless argument that there is a darûrat as a tool for castigating other people, who obey books of Fiqh and imitate the Shâfi’î or Mâlikî Madhhab. Darûrat means a supernatural cause that compels one to do something (or not to do something), i.e. a cause that cannot be helped. Examples of a darûrat are an Islamic commandment and prohibition, a vehement pain, danger of losing one of one’s limbs or one’s life, and to have no other option. Haraj, on the other hand, means difficulty or hardship to prevent something you have done from preventing you from performing an act that is farz or from causing you to commit an act that is harâm. Commandments and prohibitions of Allâhu ta’âlâ, as an ensemble, are called Ahkâm-i-islâmiyya. When observing one of the rules of the Ahkâm-i-islâmiyya, i.e. when performing one of the commandments or avoiding one of the prohibitions, you follow the widely-known and chosen one of the statements made by the scholars of your own Madhhab concerning the matter. If a haraj (difficulty) in following that chosen scholarly statement arises on account of something you have done, you follow a less preferable and weaker one of the scholarly statements (made by other scholars who, too, are in your own Madhhab). If there is a haraj in following that statement as well, then you imitate another Madhhab and follow that Madhhab concerning that matter. If there is haraj in following that other Madhhab as well, then you look into the matter to see whether or not there is a darûrat in doing the thing which causes haraj: 1– When there is a darûrat in doing something that (is farz and – 69 –

Ramadan Guide
Seadet-i Ebediyye - Endless Bliss Fourth Fascicle
O Son !
Seadet-i Ebediyye - Endless Bliss Fifth Fascicle
Seadet-i Ebediyye - Endless Bliss First Fascicle
Seadet-i Ebediyye - Endless Bliss Second Fascicle
Seadet-i Ebediyye - Endless Bliss Sixth Fascicle
Seadet-i Ebediyye - Endless Bliss Third Fascicle
The Rising and the Hereafter
Answer to an Enemy of Islam
Ethics of Islam
Belief and Islam
The Sunni Path
Sahaba - The Blessed
Could Not Answer
Islam and Christianity
Confessions of a British Spy and British Enmity Against Islam
Why Did They Become Muslims
Pitfalls in the Quest for Knowledge - IslamBasics
Islams Reformers
The Proof of Prophethood
Documents of the Right Word
Advice for the Muslim
5-Endless Bliss Fifth Fascicle - Hakikat Kitabevi