Can we ask, “Where is Allah?” and ask if He is high above His creatures? Is this a sort of anthropomorphism- may Allah save us from it? What should be our position toward those who disallow this question claiming that Almighty Allah is nowhere and that whoever says this is an anthropomorphist and a heretic?

Almighty Allah described Himself as being high. He said, “Highly exalt the Name of your Lord, the Most High” and said, “He is the Most High and the Most Great.” Thus, none can doubt that Almighty Allah is high and it is not permissible for a Muslim to say otherwise. But you cannot ask “How”? In a hadith Ahad (a Hadith which at some point in the chain has only a single narrator, a man wanted to emancipate his slave girl and thus he came with her to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), who said to her, “Where is Allah?”
There is no other report where the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) asked this question. None of the salaf (early pious predecessors) asked this question. Thus, such kind of questions is not required. You should read the verses of affirmation and the verses of negation. The verses of affirmation are to be perceived as they are. The verse of negation is “There is nothing that is anything like Him.” You should not engage in such matters, for they are of no practical benefit. On the Day of Resurrection Allah will ask you about your deeds, not about His Divine Self. Thus, you have to believe in the characteristics of Allah. This was undeniably the position of the salaf.
Al-Tufi said, “The position of Ahmad and all other prominent scholars among the salaf is to regard them (the characteristics of Allah) as they are and not delve into them, and to keep silent.” None should say anything in this regard, as Abu Nu`aym, Sheikh al-Bukhary, said. Explaining the verse that reads “Then He settled Himself over the Throne. He causes the night to enveil the day.” [7:54], Ibn Kathier quoted him as saying, “We should regard them as they are and not delve into them, believing in the transcendence of Almighty Allah over anything that comes to one’s mind.” These are the words of Abu Nu`aym, Sheikh al-Bukhary, Ahmad and Yahya ibn Ma`een.
Hence, to disagree over such an issue and stir up arguments about the place and time of Allah’s actions was not a norm of the salaf. This, rather, disagrees with their norms. You should say nothing. Just read them as they are. You have to have the same belief the salaf had – no more, no less. Read the verses that affirm the highness of Almighty Allah. You say in your Prayer “Glory be to my Lord, the Most High.” In negation you read “There is nothing that is anything like Him. And He is the all-Hearing, the All-Seeing.” This is what is required from you and do not engage in futile arguments. Allah knows best.

I have an unmarried younger brother who had illicit sexual intercourse with an unmarried girl. He wants to marry her for one month and then divorce her. He also wants her to take the contraceptive injection for one year so that their affair should not be discovered, a matter that will cause undesirable results. I know that there is a difference of opinion over the ruling of marrying a woman who had illicit sexual intercourse and over the ruling of marrying with the intention of divorce. Should we give preponderance to divorce in this case, weighing up the benefits and harms? Those who are concerned agree that there is some benefit – in order to conceal their affair and not to cause problems for her – if he should marry her for a certain period of time away from the family, and then divorce her. What do you advise?

All praise is due to Allah. Peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. The issue is controversial, but the principle is that it is permissible to marry a woman who had illicit sexual intercourse, though scholars differed over the necessity of her repentance. There is also a difference of opinion concerning the issue of seeking the clarity of her womb; that is, whether it is permissible to marry her before seeking the clarity of her womb with one period, or having to wait until after this. This is a controversial issue.
Al-Shafi`i and Abu Hanifah maintained that it is permissible to marry her before seeking the clarity of her womb. Imam Ahmad and Malik maintained that it is a must to seek the clarity of her womb first, but they differed whether this should be with one or three instances of menstruation. This opinion is based on the hadith that reads “He who believes in Allah and in the Last Day shall not water the seeds of someone else (a figurative expression for having sex with a woman who might have conceived from a previous sexual relation.)” [Reported by Abu Dawud (2158) and al-Termidhy (1131).] But in this case the seed is his.
Thus, he may marry her. But it will be more proper to wait until she menstruates. `Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) wanted to marry a woman to a man who had illicit sexual relation with her after he had applied the prescribed penalty on them. This is an authentic report (see al-Musannaf by Ibn Abu Shaybah 3:52; Sunan al-Bayhaqi 7:155; al-Muhalla 10:28; Mawsu`at Fiqh `Umar ibn al-Khattab, p.649-50.) Therefore, I see that he may marry this woman to conceal their past affair and that he should ask her to repent to Allah, the Almighty.
As for the intention to divorce her, if he does not pronounce it at the time of concluding the marriage and they have not mutually agreed on this, it will have no effect, according to the majority of the scholars. He can marry her with the intention of divorcing her provided that such an intention should not be included in the marriage contract by saying something like “I marry you for such and such period of time”. Such an inclusion will make it a sort of the unlawful temporary marriage. However, before the marriage he should demand her to repent; and when he perceives her repentance, he may marry her. He also should not state a time limit for the marriage when concluding it. Then, he may divorce her whenever he likes. What he will do in the future is not to be taken into consideration in this regard. Moreover, he, together with the family of this woman, should admonish her to fear Allah, the Almighty.
Nevertheless, should he intend to continue the marriage with her, this will be better. Perhaps Almighty Allah will amend their affairs and guide them to make up for what they spoiled in the past by making sincere repentance to Him, as illustrated in the hadith that reads “He who repents from a sin is like the one who committed no sin.” [reported by Ibn Majah (4250) with a good chain of narrators.]

These days the Muslim nation suffers from insecurity. We call upon disbelieving countries to solve our problems and lift injustice. If European countries have their own armies and nonetheless joined NATO, why do Muslim nations not establish one strong army to protect their peoples against any external aggression and at the same time to stop the dangers they face. Then there will be no need to invite America or any other power to help. Is this a good idea?

All praise is due to Allah. Peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. The issue you are talking about is vital. It seems that you have posed this question and presented these ideas because you believe in the importance of solidarity between the members of the Muslim nation. But we would like to say that solidarity between the members of the Muslim nation and between Muslim countries suffers from problems that are obvious to the naked eye. There are several reasons:
First, Muslims’ negligence of the teachings of their religion, particularly those related to the social system as prescribed by Islam. Almighty Allah said, “And do not quarrel [among yourselves], or else you will become fainthearted and your strength depart.” [8:46] In a prophetic hadith Muslims are described as being like “one building whose parts reinforce one another.” [Reported by al-Bukhary (481) and Muslim (2585)] This solidarity took the shape of having one ruler and one sovereignty for the Muslim nation, known as the caliphate.
This was the case before the ummah (Muslim nation) became divided on ethnical, racial and geographical grounds. Hence, the basic principle is that the ummah ought to be under one banner and one ruler. This is the basic principle prescribed by Islam. But the status quo shows that the ummah has been disunited for a long time, its enemies have grown significantly, and its magnificence has declined.
Second, recession in the field of industries and other aspects of material progress.

Third, the ceaseless, fierce campaign launched by the enemies of the ummah, especially western allies, under different pretexts – sometimes under the pretext of regaining Jerusalem from the Muslims through the crusade efforts, sometimes under the pretext of colonialism, and sometimes under the pretext of training the ummah and the enforcement of democracy. We should be aware of all of these.
Nevertheless, questioner, in a moment of conscience after the eruption of the fire in Al-Aqsa Mosque in 1969, the Organization of Islamic Conference was formed to represent a sort of the solidarity which you and we all call for; but the international powers have been watching and weakening its influence and vigor to form a strong united Muslim front. Thus, the organization has grown weak and regional interests have gained precedence. But this organization still gives a hope for the unity and the federation you called for. Your suggestion is reasonable. The ummah should have one army to protect it. It needs no foreign armies or interference in any form. But, unfortunately, I have to say that these days, this strong federation is far-fetched, considering the circumstances we live in. However, we ought not to despair of Allah’s mercy “For, most surely, none despairs of Allah’s mercy except the disbelieving people,” [12:87] Also He said: “And who desponds of the mercy of his Lord but those who are astray?” [15:56] We still have the hope that every person in the ummah will work and try to achieve this solidarity, even through a good word, a useful economic project, or an idea that can help the ummah to get rid of colonization. This is all I want to say.

I am a senior employee and have a good salary – praise be to Allah. I do not have my own house, but I live in a rented one. I have a sum of money that is not enough to buy a house, but is enough to perform hajj. Should I fulfill the obligation of hajj, although I live in a rented house? Can I defer the fulfillment of the hajj obligation until after buying a house, taking into account that this may take years?

All praise is due to Allah. Peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. Brother, you have to give priority to the obligation of hajj because it is an immediate obligation, according to the position of the majority of scholars. So, as long as you have enough money to fulfill the obligation of hajj and will not leave your family in hardship, you have to go to perform hajj and not defer it. Hajj is an immediate obligation, according to the position of Malik, Ahmad and a strong opinion in the Hanifite school.

We have a problem in the Scandinavian countries that we suffer in summer concerning `Isha’ Prayer. In the Scandinavian countries we, Muslims, have predetermined times for Prayers. But in the summer, `Isha Prayer is so late and this causes a great problem. For example, Maghrib Prayer is at 21:50 while `Isha’ Prayer is at 1:00 am. Each mosque applies this in its own way. In some mosques they combine Maghrib and `Isha, and in some others they pray `Isha an hour and half after Maghrib, while others wait until its 1:00 am. Will you make it clear which is better? May Allah bless you.

All praise is due to Allah. May the peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. We know that the times of twilight cause a problem in Northern Europe, because the sun sometimes does not even set. Thus, the issue is broad. This can be summarized in the following points: 1) Muslims there can combine `Isha with Maghrib, 2) they can set some time between Maghrib and Fajr to pray `Isha, which is better, 3) if there is any hardship, they can combine the two Prayers, because combining them for one who is resident was permitted by some scholars. Imam Ahmad permitted this for a suckling woman, if it is difficult for her to perform each Prayer individually. A group of scholars also permitted it, such as Ibn Sireen and Ashhab, according to one of his two opinions. It is also the opinion of Ibn Habeeb from among the Malikites. All these scholars permitted combining Prayers without an excuse.
Ibn `Arafah, a Malikite scholar in the eighth century, said: One of our sheikhs would combine prayers when he wanted to go to the hammam (public hot bath). The basic evidence in this regard is the authentic hadith reported by Muslim (705) and others that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) combined Prayers without being in conditions of fear or on travel. In another narration: without being in conditions of fear or in times of rain. Ibn `Abbas was asked why he (the prophet (peace be upon him)) did that? He said: So as not to cause hardship for his ummah.
This is the basic evidence with regard to combining the Prayers. The important thing is that this should not be a habit.
If people combine Prayers for these reasons of hardship and necessity, particularly those who have jobs in the morning, this will be permissible and involve nothing wrong, but with the condition that this ought not to be a habit, in the sense that from time to time one should perform such Prayers in their due times. Allah knows best.