I work at an Islamic art production company, and we sometimes use percussion instruments with the chants we write. What is the ruling in this regard?

There is nothing wrong with this, Insha’ Allah, as it is reported in a hadith that the people of Abyssinia danced at the Mosque of the Prophet (PBUH), and he assented to this, and when `Umar Ibn Al-Khattab wanted to throw them with pebbles as a means of rebuking them, the Prophet said to him, “They are Banu Arfadah”. We understand from this that they were permitted to carry out their traditions and customs, and since this matter does not involve a Shar`i misdeed, then there is no harm in doing it. For this reason, it is deemed permissible to beat drums in festivals and other events, based on the ruling that detestation, in some cases, does not utterly negate permissibility of the action. Hereupon, if this is a tradition and it is aimed to promote and benefit people, then the matter is flexible, Insha’ Allah, and there is no problem with it.

What is the Shar`i ruling on covering the face and hands for women?

The issue of covering the face and hands for women is controversial among Muslim scholars as well as among the Prophet’s Companions. Ibn Mas`ud held the view that this should be done, while `A’ishah (the Prophet’s wife) adopted the opposite view. Difference of opinion on this issue is based on the interpretation of the Verse: {Do not reveal their adornment except what appears thereof}. Some of the Companions deemed the face and hands objects of apparent adornment, while others said that the words “what appears thereof” refers to the outward appearance, i.e., the body seen after a woman has worn her clothes that cover her fully.
After the Era of the Companions, scholars differed on the matter. The majority adopted the opinion that the face and hands are not `awrah (i.e., private body parts), such as Malik, Abu Hanifah, and Imam Ahmad (as one of the several judgments given by him in this respect). However, the opinion stated in these schools explains that uncovering the face and hands is only valid if the woman will not cause fitnah (i.e. temptation). But if fitnah is feared, scholars have two different opinions on whether it is permissible to uncover the face and hands. Some said that the man must lower his gaze, and the woman is not obligated to cover her face. This is the opinion of Al-Qadi `Iyad, who belongs to the Maliki school of thought, citing the hadith that tells the story of a woman from the tribe of Khath`am who came to the Prophet (PBUH) and he turned the face of Al-Fadl to the other side, but did not order her to cover her face.
Many scholars opine that a woman should cover her face if fitnah is feared. The issue is controversial. The authentic opinion of Imam Ahmad indicates that a woman should cover her face and hands in the presence of strangers. In this regard, we advocate the opinion that a woman should cover her face and hands at places where the face and hands need to be covered, but at other places where this is not necessary, we commend a woman covers her head at least. In the end, this issue does not require much debate or disagreement. There are many other issues and duties more significant than such minor controversies.

In this relation, we urge Muslim preachers (may Allah reward them) to direct their efforts to useful channels and focus on vital issues of the Muslim Nation, seeking to cause unity, not discord. It is acceptable to differ on detailed points, especially if it is a controversy that has had some rationale since the time of the Prophet’s Companions, a controversy that relies on texts from the Qur’an and Sunnah, a controversy that originates from different interpretations. Those who advocate a controversial opinion should not be accused of weak faith or bad intentions. Instead, such an opinion should be recognized as respectable and acceptable, Insha’ Allah.
We advise those who adopt controversial opinions to be aware of the grounds of controversy and not to accuse each other of infidelity or fabrication in the religion. The matter is flexible, and Allah has made for us no hardship in religion. He says, {And (Allah) has not laid upon you in religion any hardship}.
For example, to order a woman in Europe to cover her face and hands, thus causing her trouble with the police or at airports, is something unallowable. Such kind of fatwas (legal opinions) is far from the insightful purposes of Shari`ah. In such a case, it would be better for her to stay in her own country if she wants to cover her face and hands, but if she travels to another country, covering her face and hands would cause a problem greater than that caused by uncovering her face and hands. And Allah knows best.

Someone divorced his wife and after a few weeks he revoked the divorce. Now, she wants to file for Khul`, although he promised her he would not make the same mistakes with her again. Earlier, he had not given maintenance or due care to the family, and she had to pay for everything. She does not want to continue living with him, and she wants to know: Does her husband have the right not to grant her khul`?

Basically, the husband has to provide for his wife. If she requests khul` (divorce on the request of the wife in return for the marriage dowry), while he provides for her, then he may or may not accept to give it to her, as believed by the majority of Muslim scholars. To illustrate, the husband is not obligated to accept a woman’s request for khul`, but he is recommended to accept it if his wife requests it, and he should not hold her within the wedlock against her own will. Thus, if she insists on requesting khul`, the judge shall intervene to identify whether it is the husband or the wife who has caused the discord. To that end, the judge shall appoint two arbitrators to investigate the case. Allah, Exalted be He, says, {Appoint (two) arbitrators, one from his family and the other from her family; if they both wish for peace, Allah will cause their reconciliation} [An-Nisa’: 35]. Accordingly, the appointment of the two arbitrators is an important issue in Shari`ah. If it is found out that the reasons of the quarrel are wholly on the part of the husband, then divorce shall be effected; if it is on the part of the wife, she will be demanded to adhere to good marital practices. However, if no reconciliation could be reached, the judge shall request the husband to accept khul`. The majority view states that acceptance of khul` is not obligatory. In this respect, there is a hadith indicating that Thabit Ibn Qays was ordered by the Prophet (peace be upon him) to divorce his wife upon her request for khul`. The Prophet asked the wife, “Will you give him back his garden (transferred to her as the marriage dowry)?” She replied, “Yes!” The Prophet then told the husband to divorce her [Sahih Al-Bukhari, 5273]. This hadith implies preferability, not obligation.

I am a journalist for an English-speaking newspaper, and I made a full report on the wave of anger that prevailed across the Islamic World on the Danish cartoons drawn by the enemies of Islam that blaspheme Prophet Muhammad, the master of all humanity (PBUH). I also published statements by prominent orientalists, Westerners and international leaders expressing their great admiration and praise of Allah’s Messenger. I picked out three of the notorious Danish cartoons, minimized and with a big X mark covering most of the pictures. The frame size was about 7×9 cm, published in a large page format.
Republication of this disparagingly X-marked miniature was a response to the insults that the cartoonists tried to use against the impeccable Messenger. But unfortunately, I was accused of blasphemy and was detained for 12 days. Now, I have been taken to the court, and I do not know what Allah has destined me for! Is what I did punishable? Or is it permissible on the grounds that it was meant to retort, not to support, the insult?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and prayer be upon the Messenger of Allah. We advise the questioner to avoid all situations that are doubtful, as stressed by the hadith: “Leave that which makes you doubt for that which does not make you doubt” [Narrated by At-Tirmidhi (2518) and others]. By publishing these cartoons, you have exposed yourself to accusations and brought upon yourself needless trouble. Such cartoons irritate and hurt Muslims all over the world, then why did you publish them again?! Even if it was with good intentions, and we should believe that the publication was with good intentions, you should not have published them in the first place. You know that Muslims have been extremely angered by such cartoons, which mock the master of all creation and the one beloved by Allah, Prophet Muhammad, so why would you republish them? You have said that you republished them to defend the Prophet. But, to truly defend the Prophet, you should publish anything else, but not such very cartoons. It was good to publish statements by major orientalists praising the Prophet. In general, I think that the court could believe your argument and accept your excuse and regret for publishing them, and you should never do so again.
A final advice: you should not seek help from the enemies of Islam against your fellow Muslims. Even if the court rules against you, do not resort to non-Muslims; otherwise, you will be a hypocrite. Keep patient with your own people, even if you believe that the decision is unfair. When the Prophet decided to punish Ka`b Ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) by not speaking with him, the king of Ghassan (who was a Christian) sent him a letter offering him asylum. Steadfast in his faith, Ka`b threw the letter into the fire, saying, “Even those people wish that [i.e., the renunciation of Islam] from me?!” Afterwards, Allah accepted his repentance.
The point is to hold fast to your faith, even if you see that the court’s decision is wrong and that you only sincerely wanted to defend the Prophet but your action was misunderstood. You chose a wrong way, as republishing the cartoons, even if marked with an X, may imply an interest in promoting them and might cause readers to buy the foreign newspaper that first published them, which opens the door to accusations. Anyway, you should deal with this crisis firmly and declare expressly that your intention was good and that if it was misunderstood then you repent to Allah, seek forgiveness from Him, and invoke blessings on His Prophet.

I was working at a Gulf-based holding company, and my job duties included reviewing and editing agreements concluded between the group’s subsidiaries and banks, most of which involved interest-based transactions. For this reason, after about two years, I joined another company as Director of the Legal Department, whose tasks are to undertake and provide consultation to new establishments, including traditional banks, Islamic banks and companies with haram business activities such as trading in alcohol, managing nightclubs, etc. Is my current job halal or haram? And what should I do?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. The questioner should try to return to his first job, as it is much better than his current work, which facilitates usury and has an evident basis of illegitimacy. The company helps in the foundation of firms that provide haram services such as alcohol, nightclubs, etc. Hence, his former work, where he reviewed contracts, is by far better than the company where he is working now.
More preferably, we advise the questioner to look for a job at a Shari`ah-compliant bank or company or any other job that has nothing whatsoever to do with usury. The current job entails direct engagement in usury. Naturally, the farther one is from factors of illegitimacy, the better. Here, the current job has a closer relation to things which are haram than the previous one. Thereupon, we advise him to search for another job and leave this job.
We ask Allah to grant him, us and all the Muslims success and prosperity.