For three years I have worked in tourism. Obviously, this field involves grave doubts concerning prohibited matters. I want to quit the job but I can not find another one. What is the ruling of the money I earned from this job after I quit it? May Allah reward you.

All praise is due to Allah. Peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. In fact, this question lacks details. If the questioner intends by tourism working in hotels or in public parks or resorts, as is the case in these good countries, this job is not wrong as long as it involves no sin. But if this tourism involves evil practices and preparations for prohibited matters or for drinking intoxicants, this is prohibited. I cannot give an absolute ruling without knowing the issue in detail. If the job is to provide general services to the visitors of the region, whether Muslims or non-Muslims, this job is permissible, and then the salary you take is permissible. But if the job is totally or mostly prohibited, this is not permissible.
Thus, if he is in need or poor, he may use this salary; but he has to look for another job, particularly if he is in a Muslim country, for these are not wholesome things. Considering the position of Abu Hanifah, we differentiate in some cases between working in Muslim countries and working in other countries. Hence, the issue lacks details. We advice the questioner to avoid sinful acts and prohibited matters in tourism and to take the side of innocent entertainment, for there is no harm in this as long as it involves no sin or illegitimate acts. Allah knows best.

Peace be upon you together with the mercy and blessings of Allah. There has been much talk among those who give Islamic lectures on whether the disagreement is a mercy for this ummah and whether scholars’ and jurists’ difference of opinions is a mercy for the nation of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him). The question is: How can this be true while Islam always calls for unity and for the rejection of disagreements? Besides, natural disposition tells us that disagreements are not always praiseworthy or useful. What is the correct position concerning this issue in terms of the Shari`ah, the religion, any fatwas and the truth? May Allah guide us and you to the straight path and make us and you from among His righteous servants. All praise is due to the Lord of all the worlds.

In the name of Allah, the All-Merciful, the Mercy-giving. And upon you be peace and the mercy and blessings of Allah. This is a significant issue. The issue of disagreement among the ummah and it being a mercy is mentioned in an unauthentic hadith reported by al-Bayhaqy with a broken chain of narrators on the authority of Ibn `Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him), who said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Anything you have been given of the Book of Allah, you have to act on it. There is no excuse for any of you to neglect it. If there is no relevant ruling in the Book of Allah, then consider my unambiguous Sunnah. If there is no unambiguous Sunnah on my part, then consider what my companions have said. My companions are like stars in the sky, whichever one you follow you will be guided. Disagreement among my companions is a mercy for you.” Al-Albany cited this report in his al-Da`ifah (59) and called it spurious. Ibn al-Hajib also mentioned this report with a different wording that reads, “Disagreement among my ummah is a mercy.” Moreover, al-Mulla Ali al-Qaray said: Al-Suyuty said, “This was reported by Nasr al-Maqdisy in al-Hujjah, al-Bayhaqy in al-Risalah without a chain of narrators, al-Qady Husayn, Imam al-Haramayn, and others. Perhaps it was reported in some of the books of the scholars of hadith that have not reached us yet.” Al-Suytuy also reported on the authority of `Umar ibn `Abd al-`Azeez that he said, “I would not be pleased if the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) did not differ about any opinion; because if they did not differ, there would be no licensee.” Also al-Khateeb reported that Haron al-Rasheed said to Malik ibn Anas, “O Abu Abdullah! Let us write this book – i.e. al-Muwatta’ – and force people to adopt it and distribute it across the Islamic world to force people to adopt it.” He said, “O commander of the believer! Scholars’ difference of opinions is a mercy from Almighty Allah for this nation. Each one follows what has been proved authentic in his view, each of them is guided, and each of them has intended to please Almighty Allah.”
Thus, these words indicate that the hadith that reads, “Disagreement among the ummah is a mercy” is not authentic, but there are indications that the issue has a basis, as in the words of `Umar ibn `Abd al-`Azeez and Malik (may Allah have mercy with him). This means that the commendable disagreement is that which is due to acceptable reasons, such as that due to different indications of words or the rationale of texts. Such a difference of opinion is called by Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy with him) the justifiable difference of opinion between the people of the truth. Thus, there is no harm in this kind of disagreement. Each Muslim should ponder on the wise advice written by one scholar to his son, saying, “Know the difference of opinions and you will become broadminded.”
Hence, knowing the scholar’s difference of opinions and the reasons for these differences, which result from the different indications of words and the rationale of the texts, makes one know why ijtihad differs. Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy with him) said, “If there is nothing in the Sunnah concerning the issue nor a consensus of opinion concerning it and ijtihad is justifiable, no blame should be directed to the one who acts according to this ijtiahd, whether he is a mujtahid or an imitator.” Al-`Izz ibn `Abd al-Salam said, “Whoever does something whose prohibition is controversial, believing in its lawfulness, should not be repudiated unless the opinion that makes it lawful is very weak.”
Thus, difference of opinions in this case is considered as providing broad outlines for people concerning secondary issues. So whoever acts according to one of the scholars’ opinions in this case will be right, insha’Allah. Even if he is mistaken, he will be pardoned. He who practices ijtihad and reaches the correct ruling will have two rewards, and he who practices ijtihad and makes a mistake will have one reward, as mentioned in the hadith reported by al-Bukhary (7352) and Muslim (1716) on the authority of `Amr ibn al-`Ass (may Allah have mercy with him). In this case, any difference of opinion should not be rejected.
This is the disagreement that represents mercy because it provides a broad outline for solving the issues and problems of the ummah and helps people to live with one another without having unjustifiable rancor or malice. As for the forbidden disagreement, it is the one mentioned in the Quranic verse, “???And do not quarrel [among yourselves] or else you will become fainthearted and your strength depart.” [8:46] This disagreement leads to harboring hatred and turning back on one another. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) prohibited this and said, “Do not harbor rancor, turn your backs on one another or deceive one another in any sale, and be brothers, O servants of Allah!” [Reported by al-Bukhary (6066) and Muslim (2563) on the authority of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah have mercy wth him)]
The disagreement that leads to harboring rancor and turning back on one another is the disagreement over major creedal issues, a matter that, according to the contemporary expression, goes beyond the red lines. It goes beyond the acceptable disagreement, resulting in disputes, fights, and disunity when facing the enemy. This disagreement is blameworthy. Hence, there is the commendable disagreement that is considered a healthy sign. This is the disagreement whose reasons are known and its good results for the ummah have become clear as it has provided easiness. And there is the blameworthy disagreement whose bad effects on the ummah have also become evident. Therefore, a scholar has to be insightful and be able to distinguish the kinds of disagreements that are tolerable and those kinds of disagreements that lead to destroying the unity of the ummah and lead to rancor and turning one’s back on one another, which the Shari`ah has forbidden. I hope that the questioner has understood this. Almighty Allah knows best.

What is the ruling of reading Al-Fatihah before the beginning of public meetings? I hope you give the details and show the evidence so that we can have the Shari`ah proof.

And upon you be peace together with the mercy and blessings of Allah. Reading the Quran is absolutely commendable but not in a specific place or time. Almighty Allah said, “Read of the Quran, so much as may be easy [for you]” and “Read of it, so much as may be easy [for you]” [73:20] Hence, reading the Quran has a great reward because Almighty Allah gives you ten rewards for each letter, “I do not say that Alif Laam Meem is one letter, but Alif is one letter, Laam is one letter, and Meem is one letter” as the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said. [Reported by al-Termidhy (2910) on the authority of Ibn Mas`oud (may Allah be pleased with him)]
In the hadith reported by al-Termidhy (2926) on the authority of Abu Sa`eed al-Khudry (may Allah pleased with him) the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “He who keeps himself busy with the Quran and with My remembrance, I shall give him better than what I give to those who ask Me.” Thus, reading the Quran is one of the virtuous and recommendable deeds. As for doing this before, after, or during meetings, there is no specific text in this regard.
So, if a person does this believing that it is a sunnah or something obligatory, he will thus be contravening the Shari`ah. But if he reads it to seek the blessings of the Quran, there will be nothing wrong with this, insha’ Allah, according to the correct position we choose. The issue is based on the difference of opinion concerning what is called additional bid`ah (innovative religious practices). Many of the Malikites dislike the additional bid`ah, while, according to some other scholars, the issue pertains to the general rule. Thus, they are included under the evidence of general permissibility or recommendation, as viewed by the Safi`ites as well as al-`Izz ibn `Abd al-Salam and al-Qarafy from among the Malikites.
Hence, there is nothing wrong with this issue; in the sense that there should be no disagreement between Muslims regarding it, “Never harbor hatred to one another, never harbor envy to one another, never turn your backs on one another…” [Reported by al-Bukhary (6065) and Muslim (2559) on the authority of Anas (may Allah be pleased with him)] Therefore, whoever wants to read al-Fatihah, we should not prevent him. But none should say that this is from the sunnah or that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to begin with it, for this is not correct. Nevertheless, if you read al-Fatihah to seek blessings from it and to seek reward from Allah, there will be nothing wrong with this, insha’ Allah.

We smuggle lawful meat across the borders of the country where we live in Europe, because the lawful meat there is doubtful, besides the quantity of meat in this country is little and thus very expensive. Is this permissible? The Muslim community needs this lawful meat. Please give us a fatwa in this regard – may Allah reward you.

In the name of Allah, the All-Merciful, the One Who gives Mercy. Peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. Smuggling, whatever its content, place or source may be, cannot be permitted because it goes contrary to the system of the country where the Muslims live. Muslims have been enjoined to fulfill all their covenants. Thus, they should not contravene this covenant “O you who believe! Fulfill all contracts,” [5:1] “Thus, you shall fulfill the covenant of Allah whenever you make a covenant. And you shall not break oaths after their affirmation; for, indeed, you have made Allah a guarantor over you.” [16:91]
Nevertheless, if you can find a suitable way to bring in this meat without directly contravening the system, this will be more proper. Brothers who live in this country can, for example, buy this meat from a neighboring country or take any other means that does not lead to distorting the reputation of Muslims. For, if any of them is caught while doing something like this and the media broadcasts it, this will give a bad reputation to Muslims. Preserving Muslims’ reputation is one of the objectives of the Shari`ah. Allah knows best.

Our honorable sheikh! We talk about people who have excuses and are allowed to break their fast. What are the categories of inability that allow Muslim to break his fast?

All praise is due to Allah, the Lord of all the worlds. May Allah send peace and blessings upon our master Muhammad and upon his family and his companions.
The shari`ah intends ease and does not intend to make things difficult or cause ruin to people. This is one of the characteristics of this gracious shari`ah. Almighty Allah said “[These are] the ones who shall follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find inscribed in the Torah [that is] with them and in the Evangel; who enjoins them with what is right and forbids them from what is wrong, making lawful for them wholesome things, and prohibiting for them impure things; and relieving them from the burden [of strict obligation] and the yokes that were [laid] upon them.” This is a complementary statement to your introduction.
Accordingly, we say that people of excuses include travelers and sick people as explicitly stated in the Quran “But one among you who is sick or is on a journey [shall fast] the same number of other days.” The sick person is excusable, and fasting is not obligatory upon him. He is not even permitted to fast if he is badly sick. But scholars differed in the degree of the disease that allows breaking fasting. All the scholars agree that severe sickness drops the obligation of fasting if it causes such harm that may lead- or almost lead- to perishing, which is the case of maximum necessity. There is also a slight sickness that does not remit the obligation of fasting except according to the view of a group of scholars such as al-Bukhary who held the view that the word “sick” covers every person who feels sick and so he dropped the obligation of fasting in the case of slight sickness.
This position finds support in reports attributed to some scholars from among the Successors. But scholars differed concerning mild sickness. The correct position is that if fasting will lead to prolonging or increasing the sickness, the obligation of fasting becomes remitted in the sense that one is permitted to give up fasting but he does not have to. This means that if he fasts, his fasting will be valid, according to the correct scholarly position, because sickness remits the immediate obligation not the reason of the obligation. This is the difference between sickness, on the one hand, and menstruation and postnatal bleeding, on the other hand. In case of menstruation and postnatal bleeding a woman is not permitted to fast. These are two other excuses considered by the lawgiver and fasting in these cases is not even valid or permissible, whereas if the sick person can endure fasting, his fasting will be valid according to the position of the majority. Traveling also remits the obligation of fasting.