Reading the Quran, one thing I have noticed is that Jesus is the only person (I have noticed so far) given the title "son of *mother's name*". The disciples , the Jews & the angel Gabriel all calling him "son of Mary". > Quran 5:112 [And remember] when the **disciples said**, "O Jesus, > **Son of Mary**, can your Lord send down to us a table [spread with food] from the heaven? [Jesus] said," Fear Allah, if you should be > believers." > > Quran 4:157 And [for] **their saying**, "Indeed, we have killed > the Messiah, Jesus, **the son of Mary**, the messenger of Allah ." And > they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but [another] was > made to resemble him to them. And indeed, those who differ over it are > in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following > of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. > > Quran 3:45 [And mention] when the **angels said**, "O Mary, > indeed Allah gives you good tidings of a word from Him, whose name > will be the Messiah, Jesus, **the son of Mary** - distinguished in > this world and the Hereafter and among those brought near [to Allah ]. I'm struggling to find out why the disciples would find the need to call him the son of Mary, wouldn't this be very obvious to Jesus? According to the information I know about Islam so far, it is the orthodox belief among Muslims that this was 100% genuinely what the disciples said , like a written tape recorder (in their own language). It is also the orthodox belief that Jesus never said he was anything other than a servant of God, and certainly never claimed to be the son of God. So logically his followers would never had thought of him to be anything other than a servant of God. It is also the orthodox belief that the Quran is not a product of Muhammad but a product of God. But the attitude I (and many others) are getting is that the author of the Quran is making a theological point, emphasising him being born of an earthly mother, in order to deny his divinity as the son of God. This obviously being completely against the teaching of the Quran (because Jesus never gave such an impression to the disciples). The question being again, what was the need of his closest friends, the angel Gabriel & the Jews calling him the son of Mary?

As far as I know, mentally ill people will not be held accountable for anything they do simply because they do not have the mental capabilities to part right from wrong. Just like a child. In that case, how will they be judged ? If they will go directly to the heaven, then isn't that unfair for rest of us ? Note that I am not saying their lives are meaningless or anything. They can be a test for the society, parents etc.

> > > Abu Umaamah said : the prophet said " 160 Angel's have been appointed over the believer to protect him from that which has not been decreed for him, including his eyes which are protected by seven Angel's as a vessel of honey is protected from flies. If a person were left to his own devices for even an instant, the devils would cause him a great deal of harm" . Al qurtubi, 20/4. Searching Google with reference isn't giving any results in English I cannot type Arabic easily nor understand Arabic. My question is the above hadith authentic or hasan?

I have a new project as a website developer to build a website for a restaurant supplies business. They sell everything you need for a restaurant (ex: knives, uniforms, shelves, machines) I noticed they also sell things like a wine fridge (empty) and bar equipment like a shaker. Note: they only have a handful of products that might be used for haram (ex: a wine fridge) but it can also be used for halal (ex: to store non alcoholic beverages) I found online source here that if the business doesn't specialise in haram (ex: they specialise in selling alcohol), it is allowed: https://www.islamweb.net/en/fatwa/395065/designing-restaurant-or-hotels-that-may-include-places-for-alcohol But they don't have any specific reference. Not sure what's the ruling here, please help. Thank you

A few years ago, a local ahlul hadith khateeb said, animals butchered by pagans with sole intention of selling its meat is permissible to muslims. I didn't ask for proofs from him. Now I am trying to find out the reason for his view. A relevant report in this regard is found in Bukhari. > Allah's Apostle presented a dish of meat (that had been offered to him by the pagans) to Zaid bin 'Amr, but Zaid refused to eat of it and then said (to the pagans), "I do not eat of what you slaughter on your stonealtars (Ansabs) nor do I eat except that on which Allah's Name has been mentioned on slaughtering." Few points to be noted from above report. 1. The quraysh kept giving meat to prophet time and again. 2. They gave meat sacrificed for sake of Allah also. 3. The incident is before revelation of quran. Based on the above points can it be construed that the prophet ate meat sacrificed in the name of Allah by quraysh? ***Another point to be considered while answering is the udiyah by pagan quraysh during hajj before 610 CE***

Many modern video games feature a free "battle pass" with various rewards, and often include an additional premium tier which can be purchased with real money which gives much more or higher quality rewards, but otherwise works exactly the same. These battle passes feature rewards which are not received immediately, but rather which are earned over time by playing or achieving set goals in-game. The rewards are often fixed, but may also include randomized drops. There is also a time limit so if the required achievements are not met before the deadline, all remaining unredeemed rewards are forfeit. **Would paying real money to access the premium tier of these battle passes be acceptable in Islam?** So as not to distract the focus of the question, assume that the video game in question is otherwise permissible.

Is it permissible to have full body wax for women/wife from a professional women? Or just under arms and pubic hair? What does Quran says about being waxed by another women to be clean?

Is political consulting job to a candidate or a political party halal or haram?

If madhiy comes out before the ejaculation of semen, and then semen is ejaculated, and then the semen mixes with the madhiy, is the semen mixed with madhiy considered to be pure or najis? I'm of the view that semen is pure. So please answer from this point of view and mention difference of opinion from this point of view. Thank you. Note : I think that if semen is ejaculated after madhiy is discharged, and the semen mixes with madhiy, the semen may purify the madhiy here as the semen overwhelms the madhiy. And I'm also of the view that says pure liquid other than water can be used to purify impurity. But this is just an assumption. My question is written above, I mainly need answer of that.

What is the opinion of the 4 madhab regarding the father marrying his prepubescent son without his consent? I read online on this site that all four madhab agree that the father has the right to wed his young son without his consent, however no sources were mentioned. > "i. Approval of the groom who has not reached puberty: The four > Madhabs agree that the father may wed his son, who has not reached > puberty, to the bride, without his permission." I would like to know the sources of this claim, along with the opinion of four madhab regarding this issue. I know the ruling that applies to young girls, but I have yet to come across a fatwa discussing young boys.

If a person calls his brother a kafir for example when they are fighting and said it out of anger(or really meant it) or without thinking but regretted it immediately afterwards, does that person become a kafir, since it is not true and there is no evidence that the brother is a kafir?

I work as a programmer for a shipping company. My job requires me to create a program which contains fields like "shipper's name", "address", etc. Also there are fields which provides information about the item being shipped, such as weight, size, etc. There is also another field which I must provide and it is called the "insurance amount" field. This field will contain the amount the shipper paid if he paid for insurance. Note that I do not know what is being shipped and who is shipping it. I just make the program where these fields get automatically populated when some one from the shipping office sends the information. The program then takes the information and stores it somewhere else. I never deal with the information directly nor do I have any information about how or what kind of insurance they have. I am just required to provide the fields. Is my work considered haram for this?

According to Islam, human beings have a duty to seek the truth—both spiritual and moral—and to use reason to recognize the oneness of God (Tawhid). Refusing to seek the truth, deliberately ignoring evidence, or remaining in ignorance when there is an opportunity to learn is considered a failure in one’s responsibility before God. > Surah 17:36 : Do not follow what you have no ˹sure˺ knowledge of. Indeed, all will be called to account for ˹their˺ hearing, sight, and intellect. With that in mind, I propose an intellectual exercise to all Muslims who may read this. > **Premise 1:** God is the most perfect being conceivable, possessing absolute perfection in all aspects, including love, which must be absolute and unconditional. > **Premise 2:** The Qur'an describes Allah’s love as conditional and partial, extending only to those who believe and behave in specific ways. > **Premise 3:** A being whose love is conditional and partial cannot be considered morally perfect. > **Premise 4:** In Christianity, God (through Christ) demonstrates absolute and unconditional love, loving even His enemies and offering love and forgiveness to all. > **Premise 5:** A being that demonstrates absolute and unconditional love is morally more perfect than one whose love is conditional and partial. > **Conclusion:** Therefore, the concept of God presented in Islam (Allah) does not represent the path to truth, as it lacks the absolute moral perfection found in the Christian concept of God. Now, I will proceed to explain each premise. **Explanation of Premise 1:** Beginning with the classical definition of God as the supreme and absolutely perfect being, it follows that all His attributes must be perfect and without flaw. This includes moral perfection, where love is considered the highest expression of goodness. Thus, for God to be truly perfect, His love must be total, absolute, and unconditional, without restrictions or limitations on its scope. **Explanation of Premise 2:** In the Qur'an, for example, Surah 3:32 states that Allah does not love those who disbelieve (see source ). This demonstrates that Allah’s love is subject to specific conditions, extending only to those who meet certain criteria of faith and behavior. In other words, divine love in Islam is not universal but selective, based on adherence to prescribed beliefs and practices. **Explanation of Premise 3:** Moral perfection entails the absence of partiality and conditions in the expression of love and goodness. If a being’s love is limited by conditions and does not extend equally to all, this reflects a moral imperfection. Therefore, if Allah’s love is conditional, this contradicts the notion of absolute moral perfection expected of a supreme being like God. **Explanation of Premise 4:** When contrasting Islamic teachings with Christian teachings, one finds that Christ demonstrated unconditional love for all humanity, including those who wronged Him. For example, His plea on the cross, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing,” and the teachings of the Sermon on the Mount highlight this universal and unconditional love, emphasizing that divine love in Christianity is truly absolute and perfect. **Explanation of Premise 5:** When comparing the moral attributes of both divine concepts, unconditional love represents a higher degree of moral perfection. A being that demonstrates unrestricted, unconditional love reflects a superior goodness and perfection compared to a being whose love is limited. Therefore, the Christian God, who loves unconditionally, is morally more perfect than the Islamic concept of Allah, whose love is conditional.

My wife and I go to a café run by non-muslims (there are limited choices where we live unfortunately). They have a separate bowl for dogs, so that it stays separate. But my wife observed another customer letting their dog drink water from a glass intend for humans to use. The glass got collected and washed in the dishwasher, but was not cleaned once with soil first. Now we are paranoid about other customers letting their dogs make the crockery at the café impure, with no way for us to purify them. We could stop going to this café, and seek out a Muslim run establishment, but even then you couldn't guarantee that something made impure by a customer's dog would be spotted and washed with soil (and expected everything to be washed with soil on the off chance it was made impure seem impractical and unreasonable to demand.) What does one do when you can't reasonably follow the Sunnah on purifying crockery made impure by dogs?

salaams everyone. I have recently eaten a chicken fillet which was picked up from the tray by a worker who did not change their gloves / wash their hands after touching burger patties. I was just thinking back on this and I am a little stressed that the (halal) chicken may have been contaminated by the (haram) burger patties from residue left on the workers gloves. would I be in the wrong here? have I consumed haram food through the chicken?

Will the barzakh period (the time until Qiyamah) be shortened for good people in the grave?

I was watching this [clip](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZD0_d5upgYM) from the founder of [Dawateislami](https://www.dawateislami.net/) . There are some things which are new to me about the use of miswak (tooth stick): 1. Miswak shouldn't be longer than a hand-span as it will cause Satan to sit on it [0:22] 2. One should not clinch with the fist as it will cause piles [0:37] 3. While washing miswak, recite salawat or better to include "Ya Qadir" [0:47] **Question:** Are these practices from the authentic sunnah?

As salamu walikum rahmatullahi barakatuh How to understand these verses, Allah says during hardship such as during sailing if polytheist come across hardship, they would ignore their idols and call upon Allah. But let say a Hindu, he will call upon Krishna or ram, Christian will call upon Jesus, atheist might not call upon any god. How to understand these verses?

From this question https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/4205/17163 , the OP writes: > **It is agreed upon that piracy is theft** according to the question Where does Islam stand on Internet Piracy? I'm respectfully contesting this claim in this question in the context of fiqh. **Question**: Is piracy a form of theft for the purposes of fiqh? In anticipation of answers which don't carefully read the question, *I'm not contesting whether or not piracy is halal/haram*; I'm contesting whether or not it's classed as theft (which may result in hadd punishment ) or something else (not necessarily requiring hadd punishment). The answers to the question Where does Islam stand on Internet Piracy? are all of the form "someone on the Internet said so" (specifically, "...this becomes copyright infringement, or stealing", "...it is still considered stealing" and "...you are not stealing anything"). Consequently, **I'm looking for authoritative sources**, e.g., fatawa. (Please back up responses and refrain from adding yet another "someone on the Internet said so" answer.) ---- Online fatawa generally seem to refrain from calling it theft. Here's what I've found via Google: - Islam Q&A 81614 quotes from fiqh councils; they declare it impermissible, but do not declare it theft. Indeed, they even go so far as to write: > Some of our scholars think that it is haraam to do this (copy things) for the purpose of selling them, but if a person makes a copy just for himself, that is permissible. In other words, "some of our scholars" argue that it's halal for personal use, and therefore is not considered theft (which is haram). - IslamWeb 132937 , 305998 , 326746 , 327097 also refrain from describing it as theft, instead using the far more tempered description "...the opinion adopted at Islamweb is that copyright ... are recognized and protected by the sharee'ah". - AskImam 949 , 25083 likewise refrains from calling it theft, with 949 even quoting Mufti Taqi Uthmani 's description of the attitudes of a "group of contemporary scholars": > ...there is no precedent in the Holy Qur'an, in the Sunnah or in the juristic views of the earlier Muslim jurists where an intangible object has been subjected to private ownership or to sale and purchase. They further argue that 'knowledge' in Islam is not the a property of an individual, nor can he prevent others form acquiring knowledge, whereas the concept of 'intellectual property' leads to the monopoly of some individuals' knowledge, which can never be accepted by Islam. - IslamQA.org: DarulUloomTT.org , AskImam 15940 , AskImam 19162 also refrain from calling it theft. Moreover, another fatwa listed on IslamQA.org writes: > In our understanding, copyrighting (attaching the clause of copyright) in itself is an act of oppression and injustice. -- Muftionline.co.za I found a single terse fatwa on IslamQA Darulifta-Deoband.org which described it as theft: > ...a lot of piracy takes place and piracy is a kind of theft and it is considered illegal but still it takes [place]... Is it allowed or not in Islamic view? > ... > Theft is not allowed in these matters also. The following searches returned no hits: site:askamufti.com piracy, site:fatwa-online.com piracy, site:sunnipath.com piracy. **Keep in mind that my search was limited to English-language fatawa.** ---- This question is related to: - https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/29576/17163 and https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/16670/17163 , which asks about justifications for software piracy, - https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/20219/17163 , which asks how bad software piracy is (which didn't get answered quantitatively); this question here is more specific, - https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/18762/17163 , https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/23611/17163 , https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/34761/17163 , which ask in the context of books - https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/13168/17163 I found several other answers on Islam.SE which again take the form of "someone on the Internet said so": - https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/11772/17163 , where one of the answers described software piracy as "basically stealing" and another said "piracy is theft". - Regarding https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/600/17163 , the top answers write "Piracy is stealing, plain and simple" and "Obviously, piracy is stealing by definition". - The answer to https://islam.stackexchange.com/q/4205/17163 writes "this kind of theft is not like normal theft". (And a recent Islam.SE user comment indicated surprise at my attitude that "piracy" is a crime distinct from "theft".)

In Surah Nisa, verse 136, Allah says: Before the first stop (jeem), Allah describes the Qur'an with "nazzala" (نَزَّلَ), while he describes the previous books with "anzala" (أَنزَلَ). Both of these come from the same root verb, nazala, which means "to descend, to go down." The first is baab two, which is a more severe form, while the second looks like the form used often when you cause something to happen (eg. make something descend). But my Arabic is rusty. What exactly is the difference of meaning of these two verbs, and what's the implication here?