Asalam o alaikum, I am a Muslim(Sunni Hanfi) teenager. I once made an oath to Allah not to commit a sin again(I was baligh then,maybe,but not mentally mature then,this was a long time ago),I said,"Ya Allah!I take a qasam that if I commit this sin again,it is like that I am not your man,I don't have imaan on you". Astaghfirullah.I wasn't mature enough to think over it,I foolishly took the oath.I couldn't stop myself and committed the sin again.Then I was very scared of Allah.I received the Kalmah Tayyibah,performed ghusl,prayed to Allah to forgive me. This was about three years ago.I ask Allah for forgiveness,to forgive me and count me as one of his pious men,I pray 5 times a day and try to repent and stay away from committing such sin again.I am currently paying kafarah for breaking qssam(3 fasts,as I can't afford anything else).Will my sin be forgiven?Also,will I be accounted for it?As now I see it,I might have been baligh then but not mentally mature and this was such a foolish thing to do.Please help me. PS:I was 11 or most probably 12 then.Had bit of beard.Had had my first ejaculation.So that's why I think I was baligh.But I wasn't mentally mature.I took such s big step without consideration.

For example, if I know what Y lvl diamonds spawn in Minecraft, and I were to share it with others, would this be considered Non-beneficial knowledge? Or have I gotten the concept of it entirely wrong? (I have no idea what tag to put so I put halal-haram)

Assalam-o-alaikum warahmatuAllahi wabarakatohu! Following image shows a part of surah Yaseen. My question is that will the highlighted part be read as **aleemonillazi**, or *can it also be* read as **aleem. Allazi ...**?

Assalam-o-alaikum warahmatuAllahi wabarakatohu! I was following a Surah Yaseen recitation on Youtube. The recitations of this qari really touch one's heart and are very beautiful. There were Arabic and English captions *embedded* in the video. However, the other day when I was following, I noticed mistakes in the vowel markings (fatha, kasra) in the Arabic captions. For example, in the following image, it should be fabasshirho (and not fabassharho) - this is one example, there are many mistakes of that sort. So I left a respectful comment, requesting that them or their team looks into it. But I didn't receive a reply or notice any change in the video. I think they missed my comment. My question is that how critical is it that I get it notified to them? Should I email or message (like direct message) to them on other social platforms or should I let it be? It is Quran, so I feel I should try to get this corrected, since I have seen it, so it has become my responsibility, and what if Allah questions me about it? I don't want Allah SWT to be disappointed (Allah forbid) in me.

> O Prophet ()! When you divorce women, divorce them at their 'Iddah > (prescribed periods), and count (accurately) their 'Iddah (periods ). > And fear Allah your Lord (O Muslims), and turn them not out of their > (husband's) homes, nor shall they (themselves) leave, except in case > they are guilty of some open illegal sexual intercourse. And those are > the set limits of Allah. And whosoever transgresses the set limits of > Allah, then indeed he has wronged himself. You (the one who divorces > his wife) know not, it may be that Allah will afterward bring some new > thing to pass (i.e. to return her back to you if that was the first or > second divorce). > > Then when they are about to fulfil their term appointed, either take > them back in a good manner or part with them in a good manner. And > take for witness two just persons from among you (Muslims). And > establish the witness for Allah. That will be an admonition given to > him who believes in Allah and the Last Day. And whosoever fears Allah > and keeps his duty to Him, He will make a way for him to get out (from > every difficulty). [65.2-3] The verses above seems to indicate that you don't need any witness to give talaq but you need witness to seal the divorce when the wife's idiah period is over. Is my assumptions correct? Is this view accepted among Sunni and Shia scholars?

> أخرجه أبو بكر بن أبي شيبة في المصنف ت الشثري (ج11/ص310) حدثنا علي بن > مسهر عن عبيد الله عن نافع عن ابن عمر أنه كان إذا أراد أن يشتري الجارية > وضع يده على أليتيها وبين فخذيها وربما كشف عن ساقيها. وهذا إسناد صحيح > > > > > It was narrated by Abu Bakr Ibn Abi Shaybah in Al-Musannaf, edited by > Al-Shathri (vol. 11, p. 310): Ali Ibn Musher narrated to us from > Ubaidullah from Nafi' from Ibn Umar that when he wanted to buy a > female slave, he would place his hand on her buttocks and between her > thighs, and sometimes uncover her legs. And this is a sound chain of > narration. > >Islamink > عَبْدُ الرَّزَّاقِ، > > ١٣٢٠٨ - عَنِ ابْنِ جُرَيْجٍ قَالَ: أَخْبَرَنِي مَنْ أُصَدِّقُ عَمَّنْ، > سَمِعَ عَلِيًّا، يَسْأَلُ عَنِ الْأَمَةِ تُبَاعُ أَيَنْظُرُ إِلَى > سَاقِهَا، وَعَجُزِهَا، وَإِلَى بَطْنِهَا؟. قَالَ: «لَا بَأَسَ > بِذَلِكَ، لَا حُرْمَةَ لَهَا، إِنَّمَا وَقَفَتْ لِنُسَاوِمَهَا» > > Abdul Razzaq, > >13208 - From Ibn Jurayj, he said: "A trustworthy person told me from whom I trust, that he heard Ali asking about a female slave being sold, whether one should look at her leg, her buttocks, and her belly?" He said: "There is no harm in that, she has no sanctity, she is only standing for us to negotiate her price." > >Shamela My Question is as follows: I have seen that many scholars limit looking and touching slave women in the markets based on their defined awrah (navel to knee which is impermissible to inspect). But in the above narrations, we can see Ibn Umar (r.a) touching buttocks (over clothes) and touching between thighs but both of those areas fall between navel and knee. Also what does between thighs refer to? Vagina? Also Ali (r.a) is saying it's permissible to look at the buttocks. We also see in another narration below that a Companion of the prophet said it's not permissible to look at between navel and knee. > صح عن أبي موسى الأشعري أنه قال ألا لا أعرفن أحداً أراد أن يشتري جارية فينظر إلى ما فوق الركبة أو دون السرة لا يفعل ذلك أحد إلا عاقبته > > It was authentically reported on the authority of Abu Musa al-Ash’ari that he said: “I do not know anyone who wants to buy a female slave and looks above the knee or below the navel. No one should do that except that I will punish him.” > > Islamink I see in places where Islam restricts slave women inspections to navel and knee then isn't what i stated at the beginning contradicting? > وتبقى ميزة الإسلام في تقييد ذلك بحدود العورة, وأمن الفتنة, وغير ذلك من > الضوابط، على خلاف ما كان معمولًا به في الدنيا بأسرها من إطلاق ذلك > تمامًا. ومن وراء هذا كله يأتي حث الشريعة وترغيبها في عتق الرقيق، > والإحسان إليهم. > > And the distinctive feature of Islam remains in restricting that > within the limits of modesty, ensuring the prevention of temptation, > and other regulations, contrary to what was practiced in the entire > world by allowing it completely. And beyond all this comes the > encouragement and urging of Sharia to emancipate slaves and to treat > them kindly. > > Islamway Would like some explanation on this. Thanks.

Does the verse 5:17 mean as if Christians believe Christ is Only God or Godhead is confined to Jesus by saying God is Messiah? I also want to copy this from a Christian missionary: "Fifth, the Quran also distorts Christian beliefs regarding the Person of Christ when it accuses Christians of saying that God, or Allah, is the Christ. The historic Christian position is that Jesus is God, which is not the same as saying that God is Jesus. The former implies that Christ is fully God in essence; that he has the entire essential attributes of Deity and is all that God is, whereas the latter suggests that Christ is the only one that is God. In other words, saying that God is Jesus means that the entire Godhead is instantiated in Christ alone to the exclusion of the Father and the Holy Spirit, or that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are nothing more than manifestations of a single Divine Person. This latter understanding would imply that Christ is all three manifestations, which is a form of an ancient heresy known as Sabellianism which was condemned by the early Church, why would it still be the problem for the Quran ."

Did our Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) have stepchildren from his wives' previous marriages? If so, how many were there, and how did he treat them, according to hadiths and sirah?

I recently started to draw a character that I saw as my desktop wallpaper. Suddenly, I realized that drawing living creatures is haram, and that Allah will ask us to put life into the pictures that we draw. I stopped drawing the character immediately, but I am still confused about whether or not it is haram to draw living creatures, especially fictional ones. Are these drawings really haram, even if we have no intention of giving them life or just drawing to do the timepass? I am especially wondering about fictional creatures like anime and other cartoon characters. Is it permissible to draw these?

I stop doing haram things and sin and I quit all the bad habits a long time ago and I started to go towards Allah and I can feel that Shaitan is whispering more then ever into my ears and I committed zina will Allah forgive me and accept my dua's and repentance

Is Dajjal natural evil? Did Allah created him evil to test mankind or his like satan chose to become evil by his own will?

For example: > Our Lord, and send among them a messenger from themselves who will > recite to them Your verses and teach them the Book and wisdom and > purify them. Indeed, You are the **Exalted in Might, the Wise**." > (2:129) We can safely assume that these pairs do not appear randomly. We can equally safely assume that their **order** do not appear randomly. In various lectures I remember hearing that there is great wisdom in these pairs as well as their orders—so much so, that when we see them we should pause and ponder as to why they are specifically chosen by Allah. Are there English sources which analyze in depth the significance of Allah's names coming in pairs? (If there are only Arabic sources, I would also like to know them.)

I would like to know if the below information is true or not. I have heard this from one of my friend and she claims that she has got this info from reliable sources like Peace TV, well known and qualified Mufti's etc. **The information is:** Suppose a person has debts and the debt amount has exceeded the minimum Nisab amount. As his net amount was negative, the person did not give Zakaat in Year 1. However, he was able to clear off his debts up to considerate amount in Year 2 and he has savings on which Zakaat becomes obligatory. Hence, he gives Zakaat on the savings in Year 2. But, according to my friend, this person needs to give the Zakaat from Year 1 as well in Year 2. Since he was not able to give Zakaat in Year 1 due to his debts, he needs to give Year 1's zakaat in Year 2. If he is not in a state to give the whole amount at once, he can distribute the money all over the year and pay off monthly/quarterly/whenever he can. BUT, still it is obligatory to pay off Year 1's Zakaat whether or not you are in debt. Summary is, After you clear off the debts, you need to give the previous year's Zakaats as well. Hope I am not confusing you with the content. I would like to know if this information is correct.

I'm a Hindu man and i'm in relationship with a Muslim girl and allah says interfaith marriage is accepted only for Muslim men and not woman and there are some reasons for them. And my major question is if she seeks solution for this they say the man should be converted to Muslim and then only it can be accepted or else she have to leave the relationship and there is nothing if the Muslim girl hurt the feelings of man. And Allah have anything for hurting the feeling is of a man. And why they are not allowing woman for interfaith marriage.

Salam, I stumbled upon this hadith in Musnad Ahmed (also in Tabarani & Silsilah as-Sahihah) link [here](https://tracesofknowledge.com/music/10-hadith-on-music/) . and has been authenticated by ibn Hajar Haythami & Al-Shawkani. I just need help understanding it in the light of the difference of opinion in musical instruments/singing. >عنه أن امرأة جاءت إلى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، فقال: “يا عائشة، أتعرفين هذه؟ قالت: لا يا نبي الله، فقال: “هذه قينة بني فلان تُحبين أن تغنيك؟”، قالت: نعم، قال: فأعطاها **طبقاً**، فغنتها، فقال النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم: “قد نفخ الشيطان في منخريها “A woman came to the Prophet and he said: “O Aisha, do you know this person?” Aisha said: “No, O Messenger of God.” The Prophet said: “This is songstress of such and such tribe, would you like her to sing for you?” Aisha said: “Yes.” Then she was given a **plate** (to beat on) and she began to sing. The Prophet said: “Satan has blown into her nostrils.” >“Musnad Ahmad”, 3/449, “Tabarani”, 7/187, “Silsilah as-Sahihah”, 3282. 1.The questions that I have are about the meaning of the word (طبقاً) and is it a percussion instrument (that is different from the duff), if so how do understand it in the light of bukhari 5590 (ma'azif hadith)? 2.Then about the fact that prophet muhammad (pbuh) is listenig to a lady singer with Aisha (ra), is the prophet allowed to listen to a non-mahram singer? 3.Did this event happen during eid, or a wedding, or was this a normal day in mecca/medina? 4.Final question is what does "satan has blown into her nostrils" mean, does it imply makruh since then aisha did just listen to her sing, i wound't think it would be haram? Jazakllahir

Is imposing punishment if someone engages in permissible thing but the permissible act is restricted by the ruler correct as per Fiqh? إضاءات حول قاعدة تقييد المباح اقرأ المزيد في إسلام أون لاين: https://islamonline.net/%D8%A5%D8%B6%D8%A7%D8%A1%D8%A7%D8%AA-%D8%AD%D9%88%D9%84-%D9%82%D8%A7%D8%B9%D8%AF%D8%A9-%D8%AA%D9%82%D9%8A%D9%8A%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AD/ This article clarify matter regarding restricting what is permissible but there is no discussion whether the punishment imposed by the authority after restricting what is permissible is valid as per Sharia or not? > **Examples for better understanding** > > Govt. restricts govt employees from working in any other job apart > from govt job till he is a govt employee. If an employee engages or > works part-time after working hours, authorities don't punish him/her > if they found out > > While in another scenario govt punishes the employee So Are these punishment valid as per Sharia?

>“Ibn Uthaymeen said: and the second benefit is; the prohibition of killing women and children during war. > >And if it is said, if they did this to us, that they killed our children and women, can we kill them? **What is apparent, is that it is allowed for us to kill their women and children, even if that were to cause us to miss taking them as wealth, due to what this contains from breaking the hearts of the enemies and weakening them, and due to the generality of Allah’s saying**, “And whoever transgresses against you, then transgress against them the like of what they have transgressed against you, — Q2:194.” > >The questioner continues: then we are allowed to kill their women and children. But O sheikh, they, the men are the ones who killed the women, and the women are innocent, so how can they be punished due to the crimes of men? > >Ibn Uthaymeen replied: **This is because of the greater benefit, the greater benefit to those who are fighting. Because if we do not do to them what they do to us, this would be humiliation in front of them.** > >Ibn Uthaymeen continued: **Justice with their woman is incomprehensible, they killed our women, we kill their women. This is justice. It is not justice that we say, if they kill our women we will not kill their women. Also, we note that this influences them greatly.**” > >*— Bulugh Al-Maram, Explanation by Ibn Uthaymeen, Tape 3, Side B.* The focus of this ticket is as follows: 1. What is the reliability of this attribution to Ibn Uthaymeen? 2. If it's reliable, is he really saying that, based off of Q2:194, if the enemy kills our non-fighters; more specifically, woman and children who do not take part in battle, we may do the same to them as a form of retaliation? 3. Most importantly, how well reflected is this position within the mainstream/ classical understanding Islamic jurisprudence; the opinions of the fuquha within the 4 madhabs?

Among these two women who is the worse? 1. A woman who treats her husband well, serves him well but does fornication (Zina) in absence of her husband. 2. A woman who prays salah, do her hijabs but neglects her husband and doesn't serve him well and treats badly.

So in Surah 24 verse 33 say > **Sahih International** > > But let them who find not [the means for] marriage abstain [from > sexual relations] until Allah enriches them from His bounty. And those > who seek a contract [for eventual emancipation] from among whom your > right hands possess - then make a contract with them if you know there > is within them goodness and give them from the wealth of Allah which > He has given you. And do not compel your slave girls to prostitution, > if they desire chastity, to seek [thereby] the temporary interests of > worldly life. And if someone should compel them, then indeed, Allah is > [to them], after their compulsion, Forgiving and Merciful. the sentence "to them" is only in brackets (that means the word to them is not there at all in the original translation) and if we delete the word "to them" in this verse then the meaning is: > then indeed, Allah is, **after their compulsion, Forgiving and Merciful**. Does this verse speak to slaves or masters? And is it true that Allah will forgive the sins of masters who have forced their slaves to commit prostitution?

As far as I understand until now, shirk is to "worship" anything other then ALLAH, were the term "to worship" is a matter of believe and circumstances (otherwise any living soul would have the sin of shirk no matter how hard they try). Kufr looks more like an ethnically aspect, or otherwise, not worshiping anything, not having any deity at all. Please clarify. ---- With my low status of reputation points I am not allowed to leave comments and will stay away from this site, as I cannot do any good and would not misuses answers in place of comments. Have a nice day.