Shield of Taqwā

“I haven’t been successful once in making a promise to Allāh in abandoning this sin (backbiting). Every time I promised Allāh to not do it, I have fallen into it...backbiting is a major sin, and perhaps a Muslim commits 70 kabā’ir in one day without realising (by backbiting 70 times).” — Shaykh Ad’ham al-‘Āsimī al-Hanafī.

“Ibn al-Qāsim (Imām Mālik’s student) said I heard Mālik say; ‘I would ponder over a topic for 13-19 years, and I’m not able to give my opinion on it.’” — Quoted by Al-Qādī ‘Iyād al-Mālikī (Died 544AH) in “Tartīb al-Madārik” (1/178) and Ibn Farhūn al-Mālikī (Died 799AH) in “Ad-Dībāj” (1/69).

Forgive others as you would want Allāh to forgive you: Imām ath-Thahabī says in the biography of Mas’ūd Ibn Muhammad Ibn ad-Dallāl al-Hamathānī (رحمه الله); (مسعود بن محمد بن الدلال) الهمذاني، شيخ القلندرية. ذكره شيخنا ابن البزوري في تاريخه، وقال: كان على قدم حسن، وكان كثيرا ما يقول: الماضي لا يذكر. فقيل إنه رؤي في المنام، فقيل له: ما فعل الله بك قال: أوقفني بين يديه، وقال لي: يا مسعود الماضي لا يذكر، انطلقوا به إلى الجنة. “Our Shaykh Ibn al-Bazwarī mentioned in his Tārīkh (history book); He has a great legacy, and he would frequently say, ‘the past is not to be mentioned’ (meaning he would easily forgive others). It has been reported that he was seen in a dream, so it was said to him, what did Allāh do with you? He replied; He made me stand in front of Him and then told me; O Mas’ūd, the past is not to be mentioned, so (Allāh ordered) take him to Paradise.” — Refer to “Tārīkh al-Islām” (42/327).

There are 5 or 6 conditions in the Hanbalī madhab for the father using his child’s wealth. Most scholars state a parent is allowed to take from his child ONLY if he’s in need. Ibn Qudāmah cites this from Abū Hanīfah, Mālik and Shāfi’ī (رحمهم الله). But in Ahmad’s madhab, even if the parent is not in need, he can take under 5 conditions mentioned in “Dalīl at-Tālib” [1]; 1. He doesn’t harm the child (by taking excessively). 2. He isn’t allowed to take it when one (father or child) of them is about to die (as this will change inheritance). 3. He doesn’t give it to another child (as the father can’t be unjust by giving to one child over another). 4. He possesses his child’s wealth via statement or intention. 5. That he takes what exists, so it’s not permitted to take something non-existent. Imām Hajjāwī adds a 6th condition in Iqnā’ that the father has to be Muslim. _____ Note: There’s a hadīth mentioned in Sunan an-Nasā’ī (4449) and Abū Dawūd (3528), stressing on the importance of parents, and the earnings that are best is what is earned with one’s own hands, and one’s child (and his wealth) is part of his earnings because he was the cause for his child to exist. This proof is important to show that it’s not considered stealing according to Imām Ahmad, while the other 3 Imāms believe the child’s wealth is protected. What supports the view of the other 3 Imams is the hadīth “All of a Muslim is inviolable to another Muslim: his blood, his wealth and his honour.” [Agreed Upon] Abū Dawūd also narrates: “The Prophet (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said: The children of a man come from what he earns, rather they are his pleasantest earning; so enjoy from their property.” (3529) Abū Dawūd said: Hammād Ibn Abī Sulaymān added in his version: “(Take only) when you need”, but this (addition) is munkar. This addition supports the 3 Imāms, but if it is munkar as Abū Dawūd stated, then it cannot be used against Imām Ahmad.

https://t.me/Jawhara3888/982 تلاوة خاشعة من أواخر سورة الزمر للشيخ د. محمد الحسن إمام جامع الجوهرة مع العلم أنها قديمة

There can never be unity in this Ummah if mere difference of opinions are not tolerated. No one should be boycotted due to a difference of opinion, rather people should be boycotted for the bad manners and harshness they possess when it comes to dealing with the believers, as this will force them to rectify their manners.