Friday Nasiha

Semi-knowledge, \r\n coupled with vanity and pride, is more dangerous and \r\n subversive than an admitted total ignorance, \r\n because the former is the ignorance of a person who \r\n is not aware of his limitations. Such ignorance manifests \r\n itself in various ways, the most important of which \r\n is sticking rigidly to the literal meanings of the texts \r\n in total disregard for their essence and purposes.

Let us examine the following text:

It is related in an authentic hadith \r\n that a Muslim should not carry a copy of the Qur'an \r\n when traveling in the land of the kuffar or the enemy. \r\n But if we examine the reason underlying this prohibition, \r\n we conclude that the Prophet (peace be upon him) prohibited \r\n this out of his concern that the kuffar might do harm \r\n to or defile the Book. In the absence of such harm or \r\n defilement, Muslims can take it with them wherever they \r\n wish. This is the customary practice among all Muslims \r\n today. Indeed, people of other religions and faiths \r\n now compete to distribute their \"sacred books\" \r\n and utilize all possible means in the process. Muslims \r\n are trying to do the same through translations of the \r\n meanings of the Qur'an for non-Arabic speakers.

The Prophet also did not permit a Muslim \r\n who had been away from his family for a long period \r\n of time to arrive back at night. He himself used to \r\n return only in the mornings or early evenings. There \r\n are two reasons for this. First, arriving home unexpectedly \r\n after a long absence may indicate that the husband mistrusts \r\n his wife and intends to take her unawares. This kind \r\n of mistrust is not acceptable in Islam. Secondly, it \r\n is argued that the prohibition seeks to give the wife \r\n the right to know of her husband's arrival so that she \r\n may beautify herself for him. But in modern times a \r\n traveler can come home any time he likes, on the condition \r\n that he informs his wife by telephone or by letter, \r\n telex, telegram, etc. Further, today's traveler cannot \r\n always choose when to travel, for he is governed by \r\n schedules and timetables. Therefore, such a prohibition \r\n cannot be taken at its face value; it must be analyzed \r\n on the basis of its original purpose and intent with \r\n regard to the circumstances of time and place.