Sammaniyyah and the Mahdist Movement of Sudan

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

سبوحٌ قدوسٌ

Holy Holy

We previously discussed reformist “Sufis” like Ahmad bin Idris al-Fasi, who influenced subsequent reformist orders like the Khatmiyyah in Sudan, the Sanusiyyah in Libya and the Salihiyyah in Somalia.

Another reformist order is the Sammaniyyah attributed to Muhammad bin Abd al-Karim al-Samman (1718-1775). A descendant of the Prophet, peace be upon him, and born in Medina, he was initially in the Khalwatiyyah Sufi order and a disciple of the eminent Shaykh Mustafa Kamal al-Din al-Bakri of Syria.

Regrettably, despite his noble pedigree and background, al-Samman left the traditional Sunni way and founded a Sufi new order—Sammaniyyah—which is somewhat problematic. 

The researcher Abdulgalil Abd Allah Salih has written a paper on the Sammaniyyah entitled “The Sammaniyya: Doctrine, History and Future”. I have relied on this paper extensively to acquire a deeper understanding of al-Samman and the Sammaniyyah order.

According to it, al-Samman was “opposed to the traditional veneration of saints.” Regarding the practice of taqlid, that is confining oneself to a single Madhhab in fiqh, “Al-Samman did not confine himself to only one Madhab. He put more emphasis on ijtihad.”

According to the research paper, one of Samman’s teachers was “Muhammad Higat al-Sindi” but this is probably a reference to Muhammad Hayat al-Sindi. The latter was also the initial influence on Ibn Abd al-Wahhab of Najd in rejecting veneration of Saints, and the practice of intercession. It is quite plausible that the “reformist” streak within the Sammaniyyah in this regard originates in the influence of al-Sindi on al-Samman.

Now the false Mahdi of Sudan, who was initiated into the Sammaniyyah order, was encouraged and supported by some of the elders and members of this order, particularly Shaykh al-Qurashi, “Shaykh al-Qurashi sat on the carpet of the Sammaniyya tariqa in Sudan, for more than forty years, as a true guide and instructor, after the passing away of Shaykh Ahmad al-Tayyib bin al-Bashir. He had played a vital role in the emergence of the Mahdiya in Sudan, when he joined the Mahdi and his disciples into the Sammaniyya, and hinted to him that he is the awaited Mahdi.”

One can now clearly discern a pattern. These reformist “Sufi” orders, characterized by a rejection of taqlid and traditional veneration of saints, are often embraced by delusional militants as a springboard to launch a violent insurrection, usually against a colonial power. The “Mad Mulla” of Somalia and the “Mahdi” of Sudan are examples of this phenomenon.

Sunni Muslims should beware of so-called “reformist” Sufism, such as the Idrisiyyah, Khatmiyyah, Sanusiyyah, Salihiyyah and Sammaniyyah orders, and instead stick to the traditional Sufi orders, like the Naqshbandiyyah, Qadiriyyah, Suhrawardiyyah, Chishtiyyah, Rifa’iyyah, Shadhiliyyah, Khalwatiyyah and Kubrawiyyah orders.

In Sudan, the Mahdist movement persists in the form of the so-called Ansar and the Umma Party. But there is no doubt that Muhammad Ahmad of Sudan was a false Mahdi, who was deluded by some of the Sammani elders teaching that the Mahdi would emerge from their order. One should not join any movement, organization or party that is associated with this false Mahdi of Sudan. 

Black Clothing and Shi'ism

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

والصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

Mirza of Jhelum, one of the hideous barking dogs and squealing pigs of our time makes it a point to regularly wear black clothing and teaches a new doctrine that wearing black is a Sunnah and it is the most preferable color with regard to clothing. 

This donkey from Jhelum combines in his rhetoric a strange mixture of Wahhabism and Rafidi Shi’ism. Because wearing all black is generally associated with the Shi’ites, the pig from Jhelum is eager to promote this trend as a way of annoying Sunni Muslims, especially the pious thereof who generally wear all white.

Yet, the verdict of the Holy Quran is that white is certainly superior to black, as Allah Most High says:

یَّوۡمَ تَبۡیَضُّ وُجُوۡہٌ وَّتَسۡوَدُّ وُجُوۡہٌ ۚ فَاَمَّا الَّذِیۡنَ اسۡوَدَّتۡ وُجُوۡہُہُمۡ ۟ اَکَفَرۡتُمۡ بَعۡدَ اِیۡمَانِکُمۡ فَذُوۡقُوا الۡعَذَابَ بِمَا کُنۡتُمۡ تَکۡفُرُوۡنَ

وَاَمَّا الَّذِیۡنَ ابۡیَضَّتۡ وُجُوۡہُہُمۡ فَفِیۡ رَحۡمَۃِ اللّٰہِ ؕ ہُمۡ فِیۡہَا خٰلِدُوۡنَ

The Day some faces will be whitened and some faces will be blackened. So as for those whose faces will be blackened, “Did you disbelieve after your Faith? Now taste the punishment because of your disbelieving!”

And as for those whose faces will be whitened, so they are in the mercy of Allah. In it they will abide eternally

(Surah 3, Ayah 106 & 107)

Some of the Sahabah, may Allah be pleased with them, with regard to this passage in the Holy Quran, rightly interpreted the white faces as a reference to the Sunnis and the black faces as a reference to the people of innovation and misguidance—such as the Shi’ites, Kharijites, etc.

Now the pig of Jhelum, in arrogantly declaring that black clothes are preferable to white, blatantly contradicts the Hadith of the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him:

الْبَسُوا الْبَيَاضَ فَإِنَّهَا أَطْهَرُ وَأَطْيَبُ وَكَفِّنُوا فِيهَا مَوْتَاكُمْ

“Wear white, for indeed it is purer and cleaner, and shroud your deceased in it.” (Jami al-Tirmidhi)

Engineer Mirza, the hideous, black barking dog from Jhelum, shamelessly slanders the Sunni Ulama by alleging that they discourage the laity from wearing black clothing by saying it is the clothing of the inhabitants of Hell.

The irony is that such narrations to the effect that black clothing is associated with the cursed Pharaoh and the inhabitants of Hell is derived from Shi’ite literature, not Sunni. Hence, it is reported in Yaqub al-Kulayni’s book Furu al-Kafi, under the chapter heading:

لبس السواد

Wearing Black

قال أبو عبد الله عليه السلام أما إني ألبسه وأنا أعلم أنه لباس أهل النار

Abu Abdullah [Imam Ja’far], peace be upon him, “I am wearing it and I know that it is the clothing of the people of the Fire.” (Furu al-Kafi, v.6, p.282)

It is similarly narrated from Amir ul-Mu’minin, Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him, according to the Twelver Shi’ite scholar Shaykh al-Saduq, that he said:

لا تلبسوا السواد فإنه لباس فرعون

“Do not wear black for indeed it is the clothing of Pharaoh.”

(Man La Yahdarah ul-Faqih, v.1, p.251)

Keep in mind we Sunni Muslims rejects these narrations from the Shi’ite literature, and regard it as completely permissible to wear black for both men and women.

I only quote these narrations to point out the irony and the hypocrisy of the Shi’ites who frequently wear black from head to toe, such that is has become a symbol of their religion, and to repudiate the donkey Mirza of Jhelum who falsely accuses the Sunnis of spreading the idea that black clothing is associated with the inhabitants of Hell.

So while it is permissible to wear black, and other colors, Sunni Muslims are highly encouraged to prefer all white clothing, as that is the true Sunnah, and the wearing of all white is especially today almost exclusively associated with Muslims. This is one of the wonders of Allah that out of so many different cultures, religions and populations, the wearing of all white is almost universally recognized as exclusively Islamic.

It is lamentable that Muslims today are abandoning the wearing of all white flowing garments for the European style coat and pants which tend to be black or other dark colors. The immoral celebrities and influencers of the Kuffar who wear all black are being copied by our stupid, senseless youth. All of this is taking them away from the Religion. They should instead emulate the style of our pious saints, scholars and elders who wear flowing white garments, and cover their heads with white skullcaps or turbans.

One of the reasons Twelver Shi’ites wear all black is to symbolize their mourning, especially in the sacred month of Muharram (the month in which this article is written). But the association between mourning and the color black has no basis in Islam. The custom of wearing black to funerals comes from European Christians, itself originating in the custom of Pagan Rome. It is totally alien to us Muslims, who are encouraged to frequently wear white, and shroud our deceased in it. We should make it a point to wear white to funerals as a symbolic rejection of the vain European custom. Even the Bible does not associate wearing black with mourning, but instead wearing sackcloth and ashes.

Till this day, wearing all black is not only associated with Twelver Shi’ites, especially their clergy, but also the Christian clergy, especially Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox, and Assyrian clergy. It is also strongly associated with the Haredi and Hasidic Jewish sects.

But as for wearing all white, the Sunnah of my Master the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, and the Angels, it is till this day universally associated with the Muslims and may it continue to be so till the end of time. Amin!

Now some people might question why I have used such harsh language in this article against Engineer Mirza of Jhelum. This is an individual who has committed blasphemy against the Saints of Allah, and rude, disrespectful language and tone of voice against my Master the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, and many of his Companions. This is an individual who day and night seeks to destroy Islam with his heretical ideas and notions, and deceives the youth with his anti-clerical narrative, and his rabid hostility to Sufism. Simultaneously, he glazes the enemies of Islam, both external and internal, including heretics and innovators like Ghamidi. The Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, said:

مَنْ وَقَّرَ صَاحِبَ بِدْعَةٍ فَقَدْ أَعَانَ عَلَى هَدْمِ الْإِسْلَامِ

“Whoever honors an innovator has surely aided in the destruction of Islam!” (Shu’b al-Iman, #9018)

Abortion is Murder

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

والصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

Allah says:

وَلَا تَقۡتُلُوا النَّفۡسَ الَّتِیۡ حَرَّمَ اللّٰہُ اِلَّا بِالۡحَقِّ

And do not kill a soul that Allah has made sacred, except by right

(Surah 17, Ayah 33)

On Judgment Day Allah will ask the following question to the child who suffered infanticide:

بِاَیِّ ذَنۡۢبٍ قُتِلَتۡ

For what crime were you killed?

(Surah 81, Ayah 9)

Islam teaches that Allah sends an Angel to breathe the Ruh (spirit) into the fetus of every unborn child while it is still in the womb of its mother. This happens 120 days after conception. Hence, deliberate abortion after this period of time is nothing but a euphemism for baby murder. However, an abortion may be performed for a valid reason, meaning, if the mother gives birth it will likely cause her to die. In this unique and extreme scenario the principal life of the mother is given precedence over the life of the unborn child.

The Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, taught that the unborn child is a person. According to a Hadith, it is reported that he said:

إِنَّ السِّقْطَ لَيُرَاغِمُ رَبَّهُ إِذَا أَدْخَلَ أَبَوَيْهِ النَّارَ فَيُقَالُ أَيُّهَا السِّقْطُ الْمُرَاغِمُ رَبَّهُ أَدْخِلْ أَبَوَيْكَ الْجَنَّةَ فَيَجُرُّهُمَا بِسَرَرِهِ حَتَّى يُدْخِلَهُمَا الْجَنَّةَ

Indeed, the miscarried fetus will contend with his Lord if his parents entered Hellfire. It will be said, “O you miscarried fetus that contends with his Lord, enter your parents into Paradise.” So he will drag them by its umbilical cord until he causes them to enter Paradise (Sunan Ibn Majah, #1608)

According to the Shari’ah, if someone unintentionally causes a pregnant woman to miscarry, he or she is liable to pay the appropriate blood money. These facts establish that Islam considers the unborn child to be a person, and its abortion is totally prohibited.

Some foolish people among the Muslims, usually influenced by feminism, argue that abortion is unrestrictedly permissible before ensoulment of the fetus, meaning before 120 days of pregnancy. Even if technically the fetus has no spirit at that time, it is still alive. It may not technically be considered murder, but that is not a license to abort it. Rather, the sin of aborting a fetus before ensoulment, and without a valid excuse such as the mother’s life being jeopardized if she carries it to term, is like the sin of cutting off one’s limb or doing permanent damage to one’s organs. 

According to the Hanafi school of jurisprudence, while abortion prior to 120 days does not entail the same gravity of sin and evil as abortion subsequent to the ensoulment of the fetus, it is nonetheless prohibited. Allamah Ibn Abidin al-Shami has mentioned a discussion on this point in his famous commentary of Durr al-Mukhtar:

وَفِي كَرَاهَةِ الْخَانِيَّةِ وَلَا أَقُولُ بِالْحِلِّ إذْ الْمُحْرِمُ لَوْ كَسَرَ بَيْضَ الصَّيْدِ ضَمِنَهُ لِأَنَّهُ أَصْلُ الصَّيْدِ فَلَمَّا كَانَ يُؤَاخَذُ بِالْجَزَاءِ فَلَا أَقَلَّ مِنْ أَنْ يَلْحَقَهَا إثْمٌ هُنَا إذَا سَقَطَ بِغَيْرِ عُذْرِهَا قَالَ ابْنُ وَهْبَانَ وَمِنْ الْأَعْذَارِ أَنْ يَنْقَطِعَ لَبَنُهَا بَعْدَ ظُهُورِ الْحَمْلِ وَلَيْسَ لِأَبِي الصَّبِيِّ مَا يَسْتَأْجِرُ بِهِ الظِّئْرَ وَيَخَافُ هَلَاكَهُ وَنُقِلَ عَنْ الذَّخِيرَةِ لَوْ أَرَادَتْ الْإِلْقَاءَ قَبْلَ مُضِيِّ زَمَنٍ يُنْفَخُ فِيهِ الرُّوحُ هَلْ يُبَاحُ لَهَا ذَلِكَ أَمْ لَا اخْتَلَفُوا فِيهِ وَكَانَ الْفَقِيهُ عَلِيُّ بْنُ مُوسَى يَقُولُ إنَّهُ يُكْرَهُ فَإِنَّ الْمَاءَ بَعْدَمَا وَقَعَ فِي الرَّحِمِ مَآلُهُ الْحَيَاةُ فَيَكُونُ لَهُ حُكْمُ الْحَيَاةِ كَمَا فِي بَيْضَةِ صَيْدِ الْحَرَمِ وَنَحْوُهُ فِي الظَّهِيرِيَّةِ قَالَ ابْنُ وَهْبَانَ فَإِبَاحَةُ الْإِسْقَاطِ مَحْمُولَةٌ عَلَى حَالَةِ الْعُذْرِ أَوْ أَنَّهَا لَا تَأْثَمُ إثْمَ الْقَتْلِ وَبِمَا فِي الذَّخِيرَةِ تَبَيَّنَ أَنَّهُمْ مَا أَرَادُوا بِالتَّحْقِيقِ إلَّا نَفْخُ الرُّوحِ وَأَنَّ قَاضِيَ خَانْ مَسْبُوقٌ بِمَا مَرَّ مِنْ التَّفَقُّهِ وَاَللَّهُ تَعَالَى الْمُوَفِّقُ

And regarding abortion before ensoulment being prohibitively disliked, in the Khaniyyah: “I do not say it is permissible, since if a pilgrim in Ihram breaks game eggs, he is liable for them because they are the origin of the game. Since he is held accountable for the penalty, then at the very least, sin will befall her here if it falls without a valid excuse.” Ibn Wahban said: “Among the excuses is that her milk ceases after the pregnancy becomes apparent, and the father of the child has no means to hire a wet nurse. And he fears its death.” It was reported in the Dhakhirah that if she wanted to expel it before the time had passed when the soul would be breathed into it, is that permissible for her or not? They differed on this. And the jurist Ali bin Musa used to say that it is prohibitively disliked, for the water, after it has fallen into the womb, its destiny is life, so it has the ruling of life, as in the case of the egg of game hunted in the sanctuary and the like. In the Zahiriyyah, he said, Ibn Wahban said: “The permissibility of abortion is based on the condition of a valid excuse, or that it does not constitute the sin of murder.” And what is in the Dhakhirah makes it clear that what they truly intended was nothing other than the breathing of life into the fetus, and that Qadi Khan was preceded by what has been mentioned regarding the understanding of jurisprudence. And Allah the exalted is the One who grants success. (Radd ul-Muhtar, v.4, p.336)

In fact, all Four Schools are in unanimity that abortion after 120 days is totally forbidden and is tantamount to murder. The Maliki school is strictest in prohibiting abortion at any stage in the pregnancy, including prior to ensoulment. There is difference of opinion in the Shafi’i school regarding abortion prior to 120 days, some say it is permitted but other prohibit it. The Hanbali school permits abortion only in the first 40 days of pregnancy.

From a moral standpoint there is no justification for abortion of an unborn child due to rape, adultery, fornication, let alone inconvenience to the mother such as shame for being unwed or being a financial burden, etc. Why should the child be punished for the crime of its parent? Allah says in the Quran not to kill your children for fear of poverty, for He is the Provider Who provides sustenance for you and your children, and that the killing of children is a mortal sin (Surah 17, Ayah 31).

It is to the ultimate shame of Canada, my country of birth and residence, that abortion at any stage in the pregnancy is totally legal.

The crime of abortion will most certainly be among those which God judges at the Resurrection. In fact, He will first reckon will all matters of bloodshed before any other matter, as my Master, peace be upon him, said:

أَوَّلُ مَا يُقْضَى بَيْنَ اَلنَّاسِ يَوْمَ اَلْقِيَامَةِ فِي اَلدِّمَاءِ

“The first matter to be judged between mankind on the Day of Resurrection is concerning bloodshed.”

Let the unrepentant who have committed this horrible crime of infanticide, of either their born or unborn children, beware! You have blood on your hands and you will have to answer to your Maker; for what crime of this little one did you butcher her?

On that Day my Lord and my God will be in a state of fury the like of which has never been manifested before. Therefore, repent and start to make amends by calling for the criminalization of abortion.

Now see the consequences of allowing this abortion. Spiritually dead societies like China aborted millions of girls during the One-child policy. God is retributing them with a severe imbalance in their demographics, in terms of age and sex. An aging society with no sufficient replacement to sustain the economic and infrastructural machinery. The same state of affairs is true in most of the so-called developed world, which is permissive of abortion.

Though the United States is to be lauded for suddenly slamming the breaks on this evil when its Supreme Court rightly overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022.

But I emphasize my message to my fellow Muslims and to the Muslim states of this world. Beware! Do not tolerate the legality of abortion in your societies in those places where it is legal. Nor fail to speak out and act in those places where it is common or overlooked despite the law, lest the punishment of Allah rain down upon us for our moral failure to respect and uphold the sanctity of human life.

Consensus on Four Wives Maximum

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

والصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

Allah, holy and exalted is He, says:

 فَانۡکِحُوۡا مَا طَابَ لَکُمۡ مِّنَ النِّسَآءِ مَثۡنٰی وَثُلٰثَ وَرُبٰعَ

Marry those that are agreeable to you of women, two, three, or four

(Surah 4, Ayah 3)

According to the Shari’ah, a Muslim may have four wives maximum simultaneously. On this point there is an established consensus.

However, some misguided sects and individuals deviated from the consensus and argued that the Ayah proves a man may have nine wives, and some said it proves he may have eighteen wives!

The Holy Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, kept nine wives simultaneously after his first wife, Khadijah, may Allah be pleased with her, passed away. However, this privilege of having more than four wives simultaneously is reserved for the Prophet exclusively, as Allah says:

خَالِصَۃً لَّکَ مِنۡ دُوۡنِ الۡمُؤۡمِنِیۡنَ

Purely for you [O My beloved Prophet Muhammad] and not for the other Believers

(Surah 33, Ayah 50)

Imam al-Qurtubi mentioned the argument of those who seek to establish from the Ayah (4:3) that a man is permitted up to nine or eighteen wives:

ٱعلم أن هذا العدد مَثْنَى وثُلاث ورُباع لا يدل على إباحة تِسعِ كما قاله من بَعدُ فهمُه للكتاب والسنّة وأعرض عما كان عليه سلف هذه الأُمة وزعم أن الواو جامعة وعَضَد ذلك بأن النبيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم نكح تسعاً وجمع بينهن في عِصْمته والذي صار إلى هذه الجهالة وقال هذه المقالَة الرافِضةُ وبعض أهل الظاهر فجعلوا مثنى مثل اثنين وكذلك ثُلاث ورُباع وذهب بعض أهل الظاهر أيضاً إلى أقبح منها فقالوا بإباحة الجمع بين ثمانِ عشرة تمسُّكاً منه بأن العدل في تلك الصيغ يفيد التكرار والواو للجمع فجعل مثنى بمعنى ٱثنين ٱثنين وكذلك ثُلاث ورُباع وهذا كله جهلٌ باللسان والسُّنة ومخالفَةٌ لإجماع الأُمة إذ لم يُسمع عن أحد من الصحابة ولا التابعين أنه جمع في عصمته أكثر من أربع

Know that the numbers two, three, and four do not indicate the permissibility of nine, as claimed by those who misunderstood the Quran and Sunnah, turning away from the practice of the Salaf of this Ummah. They asserted that the conjunction “and” is used to indicate a joining, supporting this claim by stating that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) married nine women and kept them all in his care. Those who fell into this ignorance and espoused this view are the Rafidis and some of the Zahiris.

Some of the Zahiris went even further, claiming the permissibility of marrying eighteen women simultaneously.

All of this is ignorance of the Arabic language and the Sunnah, and a contradiction of the consensus of the Muslim community, as it has not been reported that any of the Sahabah or the Tabi’in kept more than four wives in their care.” (Tafsir al-Qurtubi, v.6, p.33)

And it is mentioned that the argument, based on this Ayah (4:3) allowing a man to have nine or eighteen wives was made by some of the Kharijites:

وَقَالَ بَعْضُ الْخَوَارِجِ الْآيَةُ تَدُلُّ عَلَى جَوَازِ تِسْعٍ مَثْنَى بِاثْنَيْنِ وَثُلَاثَ بِثَلَاثٍ وَرُبَاع بِأَرْبَعٍ وَمَجْمُوعُ ذَلِكَ تِسْعٌ وَبَعْضٌ مِنْهُمْ تَدُلُّ عَلَى ثَمَانِيَةَ عَشَرَ مَثْنَى اثْنَيْنِ اثْنَيْنِ وَثُلَاثَ ثَلَاثَةً ثَلَاثَةً وَرُبَاعَ أَرْبَعَةً أَرْبَعَةً وَمَجْمُوعُ ذَلِكَ مَا ذُكِرَ وَهَذَا خَرْقٌ لِلْإِجْمَاعِ

“Some of the Khawarij said the Ayah proves permissibility of nine, adding two, three and four and that is nine. And some among them proved eighteen; a pair of two, a pair of three and a pair of four, together rendering what was mentioned. But this is contrary to the Ijma (consensus).” (Mughni al-Muhtaj, v.3, p.241)

A proof for the mainstream Sunni ruling that a Muslim may only have a maximum of four wives is that when certain individuals embraced Islam while having more than four wives the Prophet, peace be upon him, instructed them to select four wives to retain.

For instance, al-Harith bin Qais al-Asadi, may Allah be pleased with him, embraced Islam while he was married to eight women, and the Prophet, peace be upon him, told him:

اخْتَرْ مِنْهُنَّ أَرْبَعًا

“Select four from among them” (Sunan Abi Dawud; Kitab ut-Talaq)

With regard to the Rafidi Twelver Shi’ites, it is well known that in their madhhab a man must suffice with four permanent wives maximum but may have an unlimited number of temporary wives!

عَنْ أَبِي عَبْدِ اللهِ عَلَيْهِ السَّلام قَالَ ذَكَرْتُ لَهُ الْمُتْعَةَ أَهِيَ مِنَ الأرْبَعِ فَقَالَ

تَزَوَّجْ مِنْهُنَّ أَلْفاً فَإِنَّهُنَّ مُسْتَأْجَرَاتٌ

Zurarah said: “I mentioned Mut’ah to him [Imam Ja’far], is it from the four?” so he said, “Marry a thousand from them, for they are hired women.” (Al-Kafi, v.5, p.272)

But this mas’alah demonstrates why it is so important for Muslims to suffice with the consensus of the Four Schools of Sunni Islam and never go beyond them.

Some people argue that such matters are not from the fundamentals of Islam but the subsidiary matters regarding which difference of opinion is tolerable. Yet, a subsidiary or legal ruling upon which the Four Schools of Sunni Islam have arrived at a consensus means that if anyone individual or party rejects that agreed upon ruling he may be going beyond the pale of Sunni orthodoxy. This is a real problem with especially the Salafi movement and the Zahiri school. In many legal rulings they dissent from the Four Schools.

This also illustrates the erroneousness of a purely textualist approach without due regard for the consensus of the scholastic authorities. In some legal matters the textual basis may be scant or ambiguous. For instance, the well known law of the Shari’ah is that it is absolutely prohibited to prostrate to anyone or anything except Allah. Yet this law is not explicit in the Quran. From the Hadith corpus it is not found in any mutawatir report, and not even in the most authentic collections of Hadith such as Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.

I personally came across individuals with a Hadith-rejecting tendency who argued for the permissibility of prostrating to other than Allah on the basis that Allah commanded the Angels and Iblis to prostrate to Adam. Likewise, see how some of the Kharijites and some of the Zahiris argue that it is permitted for a man to have nine or eighteen wives. And the Twelver Shi’ites say a man may have maximum four permanent wives but a thousand women hired for mut’ah if he so desires! 

These are not merely subsidiary issues in which difference of opinion is tolerable, these are issues which demarcate the borders between mainstream Sunni Islam and the astray sects.