Our Dialogue

Q. We are often asked by friends and relatives to give them loans, particularly when they are in need to help finance house purchase. However, a loan given in this way may often remain outstanding for a very long time, or remain unpaid. Since it is imperative to help others in need, do we commit a sin if we refuse to lend our money?


A. Unfortunately, it is often the case that friends or relatives abuse the kindness given to them. In financial dealings, people often do not honour their promises. Many of us can relate stories that they or some close relatives of theirs experienced, and all confirm that many people are ready to request loans and credits, but they shy away when it is time for them to settle such debts. At times, the borrower is ready to insult the creditor who asks him for repayment. The kindness he received does not stop him from being aggressive. This has led many people to refrain from extending loans even to their immediate relatives. Since God knows human nature, He made extensive legislation covering the loan procedure. Verses 282-283 of Surah 2 give these details, requiring the writing down of the loan agreement and the time agreed for repayment. Unfortunately, some of us think that if they are requested to write down the loan agreement, then such a request means that the creditors do not trust them, when it is God that has made this necessary.


Because of the risks involved in giving loans, the creditor receives a generous reward from God for helping others. A borrower asks for a loan only when he is desperate for money, while a charity is given at all times.


What all this leads to is to encourage people who are well placed to help others who are less fortunate than them with advancing money to them as a loan. They should sign a written agreement specifying the terms and method of repayment. A loan should be returned as soon as possible because the Prophet (Pbuh) says: “Delaying debt repayment by someone who is able to settle it is an act of injustice.” Borrowers must appreciate the help they receive and try as best as they can to ensure repayment on time.


As for the specific question of refusing to make an advance when one suspects that money would not be repaid easily, this is perfectly acceptable. Indeed, if you fear that the borrower will not honour his promises of prompt repayments, then you should not advance money to him.

Q. My mother has objected most strongly to my wearing a beard. She said that I must not do this while she is alive or at least until I get married. She has taken the issue so passionately that it has caused a real problem in our family. I feel that she is putting too much pressure on me when I am only trying to do what Islam requires.


A. Some scholars nowadays attach far more importance than necessary to wearing a beard, considering it an Islamic duty. They maintain that if one shaves, one incurs a sin. They are entitled to their view and we pray to God to reward them for it.


It is well known that a scholar who gives a wrong ruling will receive a single reward for having made the effort to arrive at a ruling, but the one giving the correct ruling receives a double reward. I have mentioned on several occasions that the majority of scholars consider wearing a beard to be a Sunnah, which means that it is not obligatory.


One stands to earn reward from God for doing a Sunnah, but its omission does not incur a sin; nor does such omission make a person liable to punishment. Your mother seems to have taken the issue too seriously. Maybe she is thinking of what is happening these days, when bearded young people are suspected of belonging to different groups, and she feels that you will be safer without a beard. If so, she has a valid reason for her opposition. However, she seems to have carried her stand to an extreme.


While you are not obliged to comply with what your mother says on this issue, you have to consider your family situation. If wearing a beard is causing such a problem that you fear that your mother’s vehement opposition will adversely affect your father’s health, then you should comply with your mother’s wishes and you should not wear a beard. God will reward you, if He so pleases, for your intention to act on the Sunnah in the first place, and you stand to earn further reward for pleasing your mother and sparing your father probable ill effects.

Q. You have said more than once that women are allowed to go out with their faces and hands uncovered. If so, may I ask whether some women in Saudi Arabia wear the veil covering their faces and gloves covering their hands on the basis of tradition?


A. This column is intended to answer questions in the light of Islam. It is not intended to go into the reasons and motives of people’s actions and their background. When we want to arrive at the Islamic ruling concerning any action, we have to look at evidence from the Qur’an and the Sunnah. We must also realize that everything is permissible, or halal, unless we have clear evidence to make it otherwise. Such evidence comes in the form of a statement either in the Qur’an or in the authentic Sunnah. No other evidence is admissible as a basis for a ruling.


The veil, which normally signifies a dress code that requires women to cover their faces and hands, in addition to the rest of their bodies, is not limited to Saudi women. It is seen almost everywhere, including European and American countries. Moreover, most Saudi women do not conform to the veil when they travel abroad. Women who wear the veil do so either out of conviction that it is an Islamic requirement, or they are compelled to wear it by the force of tradition or family pressure. There is no doubt that some scholars today maintain that it is obligatory. However, these are a small number compared to the vast majority of scholars in the Muslim world who maintain that neither the face nor the hands are included in the parts of her body that a woman must cover.


Why do we have such a divergence of views? The answer is simple. The scholars who support the veil maintain a very restrictive reading of the Qur’anic statement that deals with women’s appearance, which occurs in Verse 31 of Surah 24. Scholars have always differed on numerous questions, and their differences did not cause any problems. What we need to understand is that when such differences occur, a person needs to know the basis of each point of view and choose the one that he finds better founded on more solid evidence.


When we speak about the veil, i.e. a woman covering her face in public, we find no clear-cut statement in the Qur’an or the Sunnah to support it. On the other hand, we find much clearer evidence to confirm the other view that a woman should cover all her body, with the exception of her face and hands, when she goes out or in the presence of men whom she can marry.

Q. I want to marry a relative of mine, and she agrees to our marriage. However, her father is too ill to be her guardian in the marriage contract. Her family wants my parents to visit them before they can agree to the marriage. Her eldest brother is unwilling to consent to this marriage before that happens. Her younger brother said that he would do it if that were permissible. Can her younger brother be her guardian?


A. I have often said that marriage in Islam is a bond between families with the aim of establishing a new family. Therefore, the woman’s father or guardian acts for her when the marriage contract is done. A woman’s father is her guardian, or waliy. If he is present, then no one else can be her guardian. However, if he is incapacitated and cannot undertake the task, or if he is away and cannot be present, then a near relative takes over this role. A guardian must not withhold the marriage of a woman under his guardianship without a valid reason. On the basis of what the reader has said, there seems to be no reason for the woman’s family to reject him other than their wish that his parents should be in agreement to the marriage. He has not told me why his parents are objecting to the marriage.The question focuses on whether the younger brother can act for his sister in her marriage. The answer is: Certainly he can if she asks him to do so. Her brothers are in equal status and any of them can act for her in her marriage, with her consent.


This is the legal position, but it may not be very suitable from the family’s position as it may create friction between the two brothers, or between them and their sister. Therefore, it may be better if a respectable figure in the family intervenes to advise the brothers on how to proceed with this matter.

Q. Before his death, my father gave one house to my mother as her dowry.. She has two sons and three daughters. She has converted this house into six flats and wants to give a flat to each one of her five children and keep one for herself. She wishes to gift her flat as an endowment, or waqf after her death. My brothers are fighting with her on account of this division of her house saying that it is incorrect. Does my mother have a right to decide on how she handles this issue?


A. Your mother has done it all in the right way. Your brothers are absolutely wrong and they have no say in how their mother disposes of her property. To start with, the house is your mother’s own property and no one else has any claim to it as long as she is alive. This is due to the fact that a dowry is the wife’s own property. No one else has any claim to it. Most probably your brothers are objecting to the division because they take the shares of inheritance into consideration, when a daughter receives one share compared to her brother who receives two shares. But your mother is giving a gift now, in her lifetime. When parents give their children gifts, they should maintain absolute justice between them, giving a girl as much as they give a boy. I have often quoted the Hadith which mentions that a companion of the Prophet (peace be upon him) once came and said to him: “Messenger of God, I have given this son of mine a slave and I would like you to witness that.” The Prophet asked him whether he had given everyone of his children a similar gift. When the man answered in the negative, the Prophet refused to be a witness, saying: “Seek some other witness, for I do not witness what is unjust.” Needless to say, what is unjust is forbidden. The Prophet also says: “Fear God and maintain justice between your children.” It is clear from these Hadiths that there should be no discrimination between one’s children in a parent’s gifts.


This means that when your mother decided to give a flat to each one of her sons and daughters, she was absolutely right. Your brothers’ objections are invalid. They must stop such objections. As for the endowment, it depends on whether the flat will be less than, or equal to, one-third of your mother’s property at the point of her death. If it is so, then there is no problem with making such a will. If it is more than one-third of her property, which is likely after she would have given away her five flats, then she should have the agreement of her children. She may obtain it now, but they will have to confirm it after her death. Therefore, the way out for your mother is to make all this arrangement at the same time and have it all documented and registered with the authorities. She could make an agreement with all her five children that in return for receiving their flats, they forfeit any claim to the remaining sixth flat and agree to its becoming an endowment.

Q. An e-mail is in circulation which includes 9 boxes in each of which is written a word of Qur’anic Arabic, such as Ya Seen, Ha Meem, Alif Lam Meem. People say that if one looks at these in the morning, all his problems will be taken care of. Some people firmly believe in this. Could you please explain whether it is correct.


A. I can confirm that it is absolutely incorrect. To start with, they are separate letters with which some surahs of the Qur’an start. None of them has a meaning on its own, or when placed in a sentence. They are just like you say in English ‘y, s,’ or ‘h, m,’ etc.


Their inclusion at the beginning of Qur’anic surahs is made in a form of a challenge to the unbelievers. The challenge tells them that the Qur’an is composed of Arabic words and sentences, which are made of these letters, available to them all the time. Why cannot they use these letters to produce something like the Qur’an? Needless to say, they could not produce a single surah like it, and the challenge remained open and will remain open for the rest of time. No one will ever produce anything like the Qur’an, which is God’s word.


The Qur’an gives much blessing when it is read, deliberated upon and implemented. The mere recitation of the Qur’an is a blessing. Some people place a copy of the Qur’an in their cars, thinking that it would prevent accidents. We in fact degrade the Qur’an if we think of it in this way. It is not a charm or a talisman to wear or place in a good position to prevent harm. It certainly prevents much harm when it is implemented, because it ensures justice and community welfare.


We must always think of the Qur’an as God’s message that He sent to us to implement, not to use as an article of adornment, or to make of it something that does not please God. Certainly God will not be pleased if we abandon the implementation of the Qur’an, reducing it to an article that brings good effects by its mere presence in a place or by playing a cassette of the Qur’an in the background.


If you have a copy of this e-mail, do not send it to anyone. Get rid of it and do not accept anything of similar nature.

Q. You have quoted on several occasions the verse that rejects compulsion in religion. However, I read that this applies to forcing people to change their religion and accept our faith. But within the Muslim community, people can be punished if they refuse to observe God’s law. Please comment.


A. The Quranic statement is very clear, and it has a general import. In literal translation we render it: “No compulsion in religion.” A more expressive rendering is: “No compulsion is admissible in matters of religion.” This certainly applies to beliefs, as belief can only be the result of personal conviction. Therefore, it is totally against Islam to force anyone to accept the Islamic faith. We invite people to accept it, but leave the decision to them, and do not punish them in any way if they choose to follow different faiths. This was the practice of the Islamic state throughout history. If this applies to the basic principle of accepting God’s oneness, it applies even more clearly to matters of lesser importance, such as the implementation of certain Islamic rules. People should obey God’s law because they believe in Him and hope to receive reward from Him.


Having said that, I should add that this should not be confused with enforcing penalties for law violations. Islamic society is not an anarchist one. It lays down rules that must be obeyed, but this is part of maintaining law and order in society, which is universally accepted as necessary. Thus, no one follows a person into private places to check whether that person is fasting or not, but a Muslim society may introduce penalty for eating in public during the day in Ramadan. This penalty is not for non-fasting, but for not observing public decency at a time when an act of worship is observed by the whole community through fasting. Enforcing such penalties is not compulsion to follow Islam, but protecting the community against anarchy and disorder.

Q. I have noticed when reading the Qur’an that God refers to Himself in the plural form “We”. I know that Judaism and Christianity accept the plural formula in referring to God. Islam, on the other hand, insists on God’s oneness. Please explain.


A. Your observation is correct. God often refers to Himself in the plural form, and this form is often interchangeable with its singular counterpart. There is no problem with that, because we treat this in the same way as the usage of the royal “we” in many languages.


It is often the case that a reigning monarch uses the plural form in referring to himself, or herself. While we are not comparing monarchs to God, for nothing bears any similarity to God, the usage of the pronoun is the same. The usage of the plural form does not imply any sense of plurality.


However, it benefits the addressees, i.e. human beings, because it generates a stronger sense of God’s greatness and His control of all matters in the universe. On hearing it, a Muslim does not feel any sense of anyone being in a relationship of partnership with God. Yet he feels that God is too great to be fully comprehended by us.