Ihram and Niqab

Figure 1A: An example of a ghita', a face veil used for women in ihram on `umrah or hajj before the state of hall.
Figure 1A: An example of a ghita’, a face veil used for women in ihram on `umrah or hajj before the state of hall.

The following was a wonderful question that a brother asked regarding his witnessing women wearing niqab while making tawaf around the Ka`bah – May Allah always ennoble it – and the ruling surrounding it.
____________________________________________________
From:
To: SOCSS Org
Sent: Thursday, 9 August 2012, 1:40

Wa alaykum Assalaam wa Rahmatullah Akhee Al-Hajj Al-Kareem,

wa `Alaikum us-Salaamu wa Rahmatullah,

You mentioned them on Sunday, i.e. for tawaf and sa’ee, and especially seeing the Ka’ba for the first time. Then there are the women that are wearing the niqab.

As for the statement regarding women in the Haram sanctuary wearing niqab, people witnessing this are seeing the following,

1) Women wearing what appears to be a visor and then a veil that is attached to that which hangs over the face without touching it. This is called a ghita’. This is worn by women who are in ihram as they have been commanded not to wear burqa` or niqab in the hadith in Al-Bukhari’s collection but being commanded not to wear the former two and covering the face are two different things (and rulings as well).

If you read the Shafi`ii text by the woman that you mentioned under the ihram and such I am sure you will find rulings related to the ghita’ and the difference between an overhanging veil (which is permissible in Ihram) and an attached veil (which is not permissible in ihram).

This has been discussed and duly noted by Imams Baha’ ud-Din al-Maqdisi (cf. Al-`Uddah Sharh ul-`Umdah, pp. 234-239; Mansur ibn Yunus al-Buhuti (cf. Ar-Rawd ul-Murbi`, pp. 213-214) `Abdul Qadir at-Taghlabi (cf. Nail ul-Maarib bi-Sharhi Dalil it-Talib, pp. 132-133) and also `Abdul Ghani al-Lubadi (cf. Hashiyat ul-Lubadi, pp. 147-149).

2) Women actually wearing niqab and making tawaf around the Ka`bah. The reason for this is that these women are now out of their hajj or `umrah and are in a state of hall. In that case there is no harm for them to make tawaf in niqab outside of the `umrah.

This is something reported by Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudamah (cf. al-Mughni wash-Sharh ul-Kabir, vol.3, mas’alah 2371) in a statement from our Mother, `A’ishah as-Siddiqah and others.

3) Women wearing a niqab while in a state of hall and doing ziyarah which would mean more than 2/3 of their hajj is done and they only have the remaining two days so the only thing they are forbidden from at that time is sexual intercourse with their spouses and all the other restrictions no longer apply.

Again this information has been reported by the aforementioned authorities so there should be no doubt in the matter.

was-Salaam,

brother in Islam,

al-Hajj Abu Ja`far al-Hanbali

The Khuff and What is Like That

Figure 1A: Example of a Khuff like sock
Figure 1A: Example of a Khuff like sock

This is a great question put forward by a number of noble brothers. I hope that you found as much benefit in this as the writer indeed did.

From: SOCSS Org <htspub@yahoo.co.uk>
To:
Sent: Sunday, 30 September 2012, 23:34
Subject: Re: Hanbali Position

Salam Brother Abu Ja’far

How are you? I hope all is well inshallah. I wanted to ask you what is the Hanbali position of wiping over normal socks during wudu? I remember reading on Musa Furber’s website that it was not allowed and wiping over socks for Wudu is only allowed on socks that fulfil the criteria of leather socks (very thick, can walk in them for a certain distance without ripping).

I’ve maintained the above position of not wiping over them since the Salafi brothers are the only ones who support this position and could not give me any classical scholars who supported their position. Could you let me know what the position is please?

At the same time would brother Musa Furber’s website be a reliable as a Hanbali website or would you be able to recomend any other? Unless you could mention any Hanbali fiqh books in English? I already have the translation of Ibn Qudamah (RA) Al Umdah Ul Fiqh

I am a Hanbali myself and have been since I was 16 due to not wanting to be a Salafi as I found not following an established school that the Ummah has agreed upon (out of the four) as being uncomfortable.

Wassallam

Answer:

When the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, was with one of his companions, he was wearing his khuff after having made wudu.’ At another point in the day, he was making wudu,’ and the companion was assisting him. He was about to remove the khuffs, but the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, “Leave them on, for the two khuffs I have entered into the wudu’ when they were put on at a time of purity.” He then wiped over them.

Collected by Imams Ahmad ibn Hanbal in his Musnad, vol.4, pp. 254-255; Abu Dawud in his Sunan, Book of Purification under the chapter of Wiping Over the Two Khuffs; Muhammad ibn Isma`il al-Bukhari in his Al-Jami` us-Sahih, Book of Purification, under the chapter of Wiping Over the Two Khuffs; Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj in his Al-Jami` us-Sahih, Book of Purification under the chapter of Wiping Over the Two Khuffs and classified as authentic.

Imam Abul Qasim al-Khiraqi (d. 334 AH/AD 946), a student of Imam Salih al-Baghdadi, a student of a Tabi`ii, Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, stated, “And he is not allowed to wipe over the khuff that does not reach the ankles or the khuff is cut below the ankles. This is not allowed.” Al-Mughni, vol.1, pp. 329-330

Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudamah, may Allah be pleased with him, ruled, “It is permissible to wipe over every type of khuff, as long as it is possible to sustain movement in them, whether it (the khuff) be from animal skin or hide, felt, or whatever else is like it. If it is of wood, timber, iron or things such as that, then some of our companions have said, ‘It is not permissible to wipe over it, for the rukhsah (dispensation) that has been related regarding the well known khuffs is by necessity and the necessity does not call for this (wiping over wood, timber or iron khuffs) in most cases.’

Al-Qadi Abu Ya`la said, ‘The analogy of the school is the permissibility of wiping over it, for indeed a khuff covers what is possible to move and sustain mobility in just as the animal skins or hide.’ ” Al-Mughni, vol.1, pp. 330-331. The Imam has also mentioned, “It is permissible to wipe over the two khuffs and whatever is like them, whether it be the thick socks or what is worn on top of the khuff, as long as they are established on the two feet.” Al-`Umdah, pp. 15-16.

Imam Abul Qasim al-Khiraqi stated, “And it is not permissible to wipe over anything except for the two khuffs or whatever is like that that is established by itself and similar to it that goes past the ankles, meaning the tony boy parts of the lower leg.

And the same thing holds for the thick sock that does not come off when one moves around in it. And if that thick sock is established by wearing a sandal over it, he may wipe over them. But if he should take the sandal off and the thick sock comes down, it nullifies wudu.’ ” Mukhtasar al-Khiraqi `ala Madhhab il-Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, pp. 17-18.

Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudamah, may Allah be pleased with him, stated, “And if the khuff is something impermissible, meaning that is stolen, or made of pure silk, it is not permissible to wipe over it according to the authoritative ruling in the school. And if he should wipe over them and pray in them, he will need to repeat wudu’ and prayer, as he was disobedient for wearing them and it is not permissible to make a dispensation in such things just as it is not permissible for the one travelling to commit acts of disobedience to have the dispensation of shortening prayers during travel.

So if he did travel to commit acts of disobedience, it is not permissible for him to wipe over the khuffs for more than one day and one night, as a day and a night are not specified for travel nor does it count as one of the dispensations. So it is not from the dispensations, which is the opposite of wiping over the khuff for more than one day and a night. Indeed the dispensations of travel are not permissible to use to commit acts of disobedience. And this includes the shortening and combining of prayers.” Al-Mughni, vol.1, pp. 330-331

This means that the khuff is made out of some permissible substance, whether that is camel, horse, buffalo, goat, caribou, zebra, deer or any other type of cattle/livestock (that have been slaughtered according to how Allah has mentioned in the Qur’an and Sunnah), or it is felt, wood, iron, steel, metal, wool, polyester and so forth.

As for khuffs made from hide, if it was an impermissible animal that was killed, or it was a permissible animal killed unlawfully (cf. Surat ul-Ma’idah (5), ayah), then even if the hide was tanned, it would not be lawful to pray in these, although one might wear them.

This has to do with the thickness of the khuff or what is like it. Thickness does not mean water proof. We will give some examples of what the scholars intend when they mention thickness.

Imam Baha’ ud-Din al-Maqdisi, may Allah be pleased with him, commented, “And it is permissible to wipe over the the jawrab and the jarmuq. This is due to what has been narrated from al-Mughirah, may Allah be pleased with him, that the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, wiped over his jawrab and his sandals.

And this is collected by Imams Abu Dawud and at-Tirmidhi, with at-Tirmidhi adding, ‘This hadith is authentic.’ Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said, ‘Wiping over the socks (tr. Note: Ar. jawarib) has been mentioned by seven or eight companions of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.’

And the jarmuq has the same meaning as the khuff, because it is worn and covers the foot, making it possible to sustain movement in it. Thus it is like the khuff.

The jawrab as a condition must be thick, in that it covers the foot, for when it is thin, it shows the foot and it is not permissible to wipe over it as it is not covering it. And this is the same for the torn khuff in that one may not wipe over it. And it must be established on the foot by itself without being tied, then if it falls from the foot by movement or due to heaviness, then it is not permissible to wipe over it.”

The Imam says further, “And for the jarmuq, the condition is that it reaches the ankles as it is the place that is compulsory to have covered. And it is necessary for both ankles to be covered, just like the rest of the foot.” Al-`Uddah, Sharh ul-`Umdah, pp. 50-51

Imam Mansur al-Buhuti, may Allah be pleased with him, explained the matter, “Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allah be pleased with him, said, ‘I feel no worry in my heart about the issue of wiping, as there are some forty ahadith from the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, on the subject.’

And the thick jawrab is what is worn on the foot over the khuff without it being made of hide, as the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, wiped over the jawrab and the sandals as is collected by Imams Ahmad and others and declared authentic by Imam at-Tirmidhi.

And one may wipe over anything like them, meaning what resembles the khuff and the jawrab, like the jarmuq. And the jarmuq is the small khuff, it is is permissible to wipe over it as the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, did so. And this is collected by Imam Ahmad and others.” Ar-Rawd ul-Murbi` bi-Sharhi Zad il-Mustaqni`, pp. 35-36

Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudamah, may Allah be pleased with him, explains this, “One of the conditions is that it covers the area that would normally be exposed for wudu,’ and this area must be covered in totality. And if any of the foot is exposed, it is not permissible to wipe over it, as the ruling is what covers the area that is to be wiped over.

And the ruling is that whatever is exposed is to washed, meaning the feet, so there is no way to join between them, the feet must be fully covered and just as if one of them became exposed it would not be permissible to wipe over them. And if a hole formed in a thick khuff that had an outside of animal hide and an inside of yarn or strings and the strings or yarn became exposed, it would be permissible to wipe over them.

This is because the foot is still covered. And even if there is a long hole that does not expose the foot, it is permissible to wipe over it. But if the khuff is thin and this happens, it is not permissible to wipe over it as the foot is not covered.

And if there is padding when the hole opens up in the khuff and it is firmly placed where the foot does not become exposed when he walks, it is permissible to wipe over it, as this is just like yarn or strings inside of the footgear and not the foot.

The second point is that it must be possible to sustain movement within the khuff or thing like the khuff. So if it falls down or away from the foot by movement or due to it being heavy, it is not permissible to wipe over them, as what is called for is that one can sustain movement in them, whether it is animal hide, clothing or thick socks.

This is due to what has been narrated from al-Mughirah, may Allah be pleased with him, that the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, wiped over his socks and his sandals.

And this is collected by Imams Abu Dawud and at-Tirmidhi, with at-Tirmidhi adding, ‘This hadith is authentic.’ Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said, ‘Wiping over the socks has been mentioned by seven or eight companions of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.’ And the reason for this allowance is that it is worn and covers the foot and is possible to sustain movement in it, just like the khuff.

If someone should take pieces of blanket and tie them on the legs, it is not permissible to wipe over them, as they are not established by themselves. They are only established by tying them.” Al-Kafi fi Fiqh il-Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol.1, pp. 58-60

Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din, may Allah be pleased with him, states further, “And so it is permissible to wipe over the two socks only so long as they possess the same ruling as the khuffs, namely 1) they are thick, meaning that no part of the foot is exposed 2) one is capable of sustained movement within them.” Al-Mugni, vol.1, pp. 330-331.

Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudamah, may Allah be pleased with him, said the following, “It is not permissible for the one travelling to commit acts of disobedience to have the dispensation of shortening prayers during travel. So if he did travel to commit acts of disobedience, it is not permissible for him to wipe over the khuffs for more than one day and one night, as a day and a night are not specified for travel nor does it count as one of the dispensations.

So it is not from the dispensations, which is the opposite of wiping over the khuff for more than one day and a night. Indeed the dispensations of travel are not permissible to use to commit acts of disobedience. And this includes the shortening and combining of prayers.” Al-Mughni, vol.1, pp. 330-331

The expression one day and night which in the Arabic appears as ‘yawman wa laylan’ has a few points to it. This means one day and one night. But how do we understand what is meant by this speech? We will look at the Words of Allah and then examine the context.

The Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, commanded that the traveller may wipe over his khuffs three days and their nights while the resident may wipe over this khuffs for one day and one night. Collected by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal in his Musnad, vol.6, pp. 26-27.

Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allah be pleased with him, said of this narration, “This is the most noble hadith on the subject of wiping over the khuff, because it took place during the Battle of Tabuk. This was the very last battle the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, took part in so it was the last action on the subject.” Al-`Uddah Sharh ul-`Umdah, pp. 50-51.

There have been some in this particular era that have taken this and the other ahadith on the subject to be referring to 24 hours. They would reason that as we are on a 24 hour clock, the wiping of the khuff would end at 12am, which would signal a new day in countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada and others.

However, we would need to take a closer look at the hadith. The hadith of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, advises, “Three days and their nights.”

The word for “day” used in Arabic is “yawm” while the word used for “night” is “lail” in Arabic. We will need a definition of these terms in context. When defining the word “yawm,” Imam Ibn Mandhur, author of the most authoritative Arabic dictionary, defined it as, “The well known period of time referred to by this title which is from sunrise to sunset.” Lisan ul-Arab, vol.12, pp. 773-774.

The same author goes on to define the expression “lail” as, “Lail is the end of the nahar and its’ beginning is from the setting of the sun. The night is the opposite of the nahar and the night is the shadows while the day is the light.

So when speaking of them singly, one would say, ‘a night and a day.’ ” He said further, “Nahar is the name of every day while lail is the name of every night…and the opposite of the day is the night…so night is the opposite of the day and the day is the opposite of the night.” Lisan ul-`Arab, vol.11, pp. 720-722.

The gist of this definition is that the “day” for a Muslim begins at sunset. Thus sunset on Monday night becomes Tuesday, so from sunset on Monday to sunset on Tuesday, the night that comes first and then the daylight up until sunset is counted as one “day,” which in this example would be Tuesday.

We can see that this is what is referred to in the hadith when we were given permission to wipe over the khuff for three days and “their nights.”

And what is more, the 24 hour clock did not start to become popular globally until AD 1300 onwards, but before hand the Muslims would have no such understanding of a 24 hour clock.

So the hadith, the dictionary definition and the scholars show us that the understanding for a “day” and the wiping period would be from sunset to sunset.

Thus one who was a resident and did his first wiping over the khuff at the time of sunset prayer, would be allowed to do so until the next sunset. Once that next sunset came, a “day” would have elapsed and he would have to remove the khuffs and make wudu’ by washing his feet as normal.

The same would be the case for the traveller given permission to wipe over the khuffs for three days and their nights.

originally cited from the text: The Primer by Imam Musa al-Qaddumi, translated by al-Hajj Abu Ja`far al-Hanbali, pp. 37-41

…And So It Comes to Pass

buti

10 Jumada al-Uwla 1433 AH

Faceless cowards let off a bomb in Masjid al-Iman in the neighbourhood of Al-Mazra`ah in Syria, killing more than 15 people, one of them by Imam Muhammad Sa`id Ramadan al-Bouti.

The situation in the country has escalated to the point now that marja` people are being killed, the very land of the High Ranking Saints being overrun with two groups, both fighting for a throne.

On one side is Bashar al-Asad, the inheritor of the throne; on the other are various demonstration groups that have transmogrified into the Free Syria Army. The war for the throne unfortunately has not just engulfed these two groups.

If it had, we could have just merely said, “Well, let them kill each other and let them leave our affair.” The problem is that it is not just that. It is the very case that those in the throne currently are striking back with ferocity at those trying to remove them.

Those desiring the throne are now showing that they are just as vicious as the regime is in killing, halting Jumu`ah due to gunfire and scaring people to the point that they are barricading themselves into their homes or areas.

Common laity are dealing with the problem and taking the brunt of the civil unrest. Access to bread, water, basic facilities and amenities are now luxuries with more than 1 million people dashing over the border towards Turkey, Iraq (it sounds strange to read Syrian refugees saying that, “We came here as we found it more stable.”), Jordan, Lebanon and further afield toward Europe.

Imam Muhammad Sa`id Ramadan al-Bouti, may Allah have mercy upon him and accept his martyrdom,  warned what would come to pass and we have 17 pages of fatawa from the beginning of the demonstrations up until his death that demonstrate this painful fact. I suppose an old marja` knows a couple of things more about the world than we think.

In his death, cowards, well wishers and capitulation specialists now call him, “one of the most important scholars of the Ummah,” “a mujaddid of the time,” and a really “eminent teacher and `allamah.”

Why only moments ago, our post-mortem bootlickers had called Imam Al-Bouti a stooge, a government scholar, hater of jihad (even though he is one of only four mujtahids who gave the landmark fatwa that opened to door to what we now know as suicide bombings in Palestine based upon strict principles) and even “discovered” a fatwa giving the “go ahead” for pornography (a spectacular lie that is easily unseated by looking at the fatwa itself and the translation) and many other pejorative titles.

The Imam was patient and continued to say what should be said and stuck to his guns. Yes, he did call the demonstrators scum and Marxists (keep in mind that many of them did not pray, so the word scum is gentle compared to being called kuffar by Allah in the Qur’an).

He also warned that if they carried on, the battle between them and the regime would produce nothing. Indeed this is the case. So the question in the destruction of masjids, madrasahs, burning of mushafs, killing of maraji` (10 of the 30 maraji` of Duma that gave the rulings against demonstrations and demonstrators are dead from assassination attempts) is this:

Are you now happy with what you’ve done? How do you like the country now? Enjoy the land you’re ruined.

Rest assured that Allah will avenge his authorities and the High Ranking Saints and He is never mocked.

Q and A with Feedback: The Qur’an is the Speech of Allah

quran
Figure 1A: The Muslim believes the Qur’an to be the word for word Speech of Allah.

Although this question was asked some time ago, it is still very useful so I posted it for everyone to read. May Allah put some benefit in the response and the questioner.

To: SOCSS Org <htspub@yahoo.co.uk>
Sent: Sunday, 8 June 2008, 17:47
Subject: Re: : God\’s Speech

as-salamu `alaikum sayyidi,

wa-Alaikum us-Salaamu wa Rahmatullah, 

It appears from  tahrim al-nadhr fi kutub ilm al-kalam that at least some major
Hanbalis like sh. Ibn Qudamah believed that God speaks with sound and letters.

I would like to know if this should be considered to be the 'default'
position of Hanbalis as a whole on this issue?  Also, is anything authentic related from
Imam Ahmad himself in this regard?

JazakumAllahu khayran

The Reply:

From: SOCSS Org <htspub@yahoo.co.uk>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, 17 June 2008, 21:42
Subject: Re: : God\’s Speech

As-Salamu Alaikum wa Rahmatullah,

Noble brother,

Thank you for your question and may Allah reward you for your e-mail. The e-mail that you sent is a very dear inquiry and I thank you for sending it. When discussing the text and the position of the Hanbalis, we will have to mention perhaps five points:

1)      The text in question, in its’ Arabic form is some seventy pages and even that which has been translated by some Orientalists has been more than 150 in English. The text does not appear to be the full text unless they have serialised it, used brevity in translating or perhaps used a smaller font (this is not levelling the charge of dishonesty as I could not do such a thing, but rather it seems more brief than most of the times I have seen even cursory translations done. This may be an error on my part if they have chosen to use more pithy English to bring the words to life).

2)      When using these expressions ‘harf’ and ‘sawt,’ things must be defined. Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allah have mercy upon him, used the expression in his text, al-`Itiqad. The expression has invariably (explicitly or implicitly) been used by Imams Salih al-Baghdadi (the son of the Imam), Ibn Battah, al-Qadi Abu Ya`la the Elder, Mahfuz al-Kalwadhani, `Abdul Qadir al-Jilani, `Abdul Ghani ibn `Abdul Wahid al-Maqdisi, Ibn al-Jawzi, Muwaffaq ud-Din ibn Qudamah, Shams ud-Din Ibn Qudamah, Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali, Muhammad ibn `Abdul Qawi al-Badran, Mar`ii ibn Yusuf al-Karmi, Mansur al-Bahuti, Ibn Qa’id an-Najdi, Muhammad al-Balbani, Muhammad ibn Ahmad as-Saffarini, Ibn `Abdul Baqi al-Muwahibi, `Isa al-Qaddumi and his sons and grandsons (including `Abdullah ibn Sufan al-Qaddumi), Hasan ash-Shatti and others.

3)      The meaning of this expression and its’ application, however, is of the utmost importance for the question being asked. When Hanbalis use the word ‘harf’ or ‘kalimah’ or ‘kalam,’ they mean that the Speech of Allah is verses, it is words, it was the same verses that were recited to the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, that received them. Allah has said,

And if one of the idol worshippers seeks your protection, then protect him, so that he might hear the Speech of Allah and afterwards take him to his place of safety. This is because they are a people that do not know. Surat ut-Tawbah (9), ayah 6.

Allah says of His Revelation further,

But it is clear verses in the hearts of those who have given knowledge. Surat ul-`Ankabut (29), ayah 49

It was the verses of Allah that the Children of Israel heard when Allah (Glorified be He in his Sovereignty for giving us this gift) spoke to them from Mount Sinai. They heard the Speech of Allah and those that did not believe answered that they would disobey. Allah has revealed,

And when We took from you the covenant and raised above you the mountain, proclaiming, “Take what I have given you and hold tightly to it and listen.” They said, “We hear and we disobey,” so the love of the calf was taken into their hearts due to their unbelief. Surat ul-Baqarah (2), ayah 93

4)      So when we say that the Speech of Allah is that which Allah handed down, the verses, the words, then the word ‘sawt’ is not referring to sound by them, but the fact that the one subjected to the Speech of Allah hears it. So when Allah has revealed His Speech, His Word, His Verses, it is handed down infallibly (Glorified and Exalted forever are you when indeed You Speak to us Your Will and Pleasure!). Those who are vouchsafed it, hear this Speech of Allah and testify to it. Again, most of the problems that there are between the three jama`ahs is just simple misunderstanding of the points in questions. And sometimes, they have spoken past one another. The main thing is to learn what the terminology may mean to someone else who is using the same words but intending a different meaning.

Allah has revealed and spoken His Revelation,

And Allah spoke directly to Musa. Surat un-Nisa,’ ayah 164.

Allah has given it and chosen to speak to whom He wills,

Indeed I have chosen you over humanity with My Message and My Speech. Surat ul-A`raf (7), ayah 144.

And those who have received the revelation have heard it from their Lord,

And if one of the idol worshippers seeks your protection, then protect him, so that he might hear the Speech of Allah and afterwards take him to his place of safety. This is because they are a people that do not know. Surat ut-Tawbah (9), ayah 6.

And they know it is His Speech and knowingly disobey, even after hearing it,

And when We took from you the covenant and raised above you the mountain, proclaiming, “Take what I have given you and hold tightly to it and listen.” They said, “We hear and we disobey,” so the love of the calf was taken into their hearts due to their unbelief. Surat ul-Baqarah (2), ayah 93

And they understand the Speech of Allah and still lie,

And do you think they will believe in you and a group of them already heard the Speech of Allah, then corrupted it after what they understood and they know they did so. Surat ul-Baqarah (2), ayah 75

Someone could hear speech or communication without the speaker or communicator having need of a larynx, vocal cords or chest cavity, as a rock gave salam to the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, before he received the first verses of the Qur’an. (Collected by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal in his Musnad, vol. 1, pp. 11-12; Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj in his Jami` us-Sahih, Book of Virtues under the Chapter of the Virtue of the Lineage of the Prophet and the Stone that Greeted Him before Receiving Revelation and classed by them as authentic).

And then there is the poison rack of lamb that warned the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, that it was poisoned. Collected by Imam al-Bukhari in his Jami` us-Sahih, Book of Jizyah, under the Chapter of When the Idol Worshippers Assassinate Muslims, It is Forgiven? and classed by him as authentic.

Further to this, there is the date palm that wept when the Muslims started doing Friday prayer in the Masjid and not under its’ branches. Collected by Imam al-Bukhari in his Jami` us-Sahih under the Book of Jumu`ah.

Then there is the date palm that gave him salam one day. Collected by Imam al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, vol. 2,  pp. 619-620

We know then that these trees, the rock, the rack of lamb, none of them have vocal cords, chest cavity or anything like that. Yet they spoke and were heard by those spoken to according to the narrations. And again, these are creations. Our Lord, who spoke at Mt. Sinai (according to historical accounts three million were present) speaks revelation and is heard speaking it. This is all the Hanbalis mean and is the core argument used by Imams `Abdul Ghani al-Maqdisi in his al-Iqtisad fil-I`tiqad, pp. 130-150; Muwaffaq ud-Din ibn Qudamah, Lum`at ul-I`tiqad, pp. 10-11; Ibn `Abdul Baqi in his al-`Ain wal-Athar, chap. On Speech of Allah; Ibn Qa’id an-Najdi in his Najat ul-Khalaf fi `Itiqad is-Salaf, chap. On Speech of Allah; Muhammad ibn Ahmad as-Saffarini in Lawami` ul-Anwar ul-Bahiyyah, chap. On the Speech of Allah and many others.

5)      The Hanbali scholars have by and large been very stalwart in their positions simply due to the fact that doors being opened that should remain shut pose a danger to the common Muslim. And it is this reason why that simple creed is still uppermost. If you should ask the common Muslim, “Did Allah speak with verses when He revealed the Book?” He may perhaps look at you like an indigent for he knows it was revealed. It is verses. And the same applies if you ask whether those who received it heard it. It is this same creed which is the safest and hence the common Muslims are not the most theologically sophisticated, but the most accurate as the words are clear. And may Allah bring us back to that so that time is not wasted and we argue over too many things that we do not know or have not received as revelation.

was-Salaam,

brother in Islam,

Abu Ja`far al-Hanbali