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.

I received an offer to work as a software documentalist and editor at a nongovernmental organization (NGO) whose purpose is to promote democracy and international cooperation, and eliminate repression and poverty worldwide. Is it permissible for me to work for such an NGO bearing in mind that I will not promote its ideologies?

All praise is to Allah, and peace and prayers be upon the Messenger of Allah.
It is alright to work for international programs that fight repression, poverty, extremism and racism, and promote democracy, dialogue, cooperation, justice and other ideals honored by Islam and all Heavenly Messages, and accepted by sound reason. Such values are where we all should find a common ground.
At the same time, beware of such negative ideologies penetrating the Third World as outright feminism, freedom of defamation or opprobrium, government-citizen conflict of interests, and social conflict theories that respect no moral or religious limitations.
Therefore, there is nothing wrong with having this job so long as you observe the religious guidelines and discern the difference between right and wrong. And Allah knows the best.

I have repeatedly heard that if the Noble Messenger (PBUH) is ridiculed, this is considered an indication of a forthcoming triumph for Muslims. Is there any evidence for this?

All we have on this matter is mere implications, not decisive Shar`i texts. Scholars can act upon implications only if they do not clearly contradict with the apparent denotation of the texts. One such implication is found in the Qur’anic verse: {Truly! We will protect you against the scoffers} [Al-Hijr: 95]. Those were people who mocked the Prophet (peace be upon him), and he invoked curses on them. Thereupon, Allah destroyed them entirely.
Another example is: {Indeed, it is the one who hates you (O Muhammad) that will be cut off} [Al-Kawthar: 3]. This verse talks about a person who hated and antagonized Prophet Muhammad, so Allah deprived him of blessings and descendants.
A third example is: {So, Allah will protect you against them, and He is the All-Hearer, the All-Knower} [Al-Baqarah: 137].
All such verses imply that those who mock the Prophet will be doomed and that he is protected against whatever disturbs him. After all, these remain just inferential evidence, not express statements.
Anyway, we already see how such incidents of ridiculing the Prophet have caused Muslims everywhere to unite and consolidate, which is a sign of the Blessings conferred by Allah upon His Messenger. We ask Allah, the Almighty, to crown our unity and zeal with an outstanding victory.