Bekijk volle/desktop versie : Waterpijp



08-01-2007, 13:28
Water met een smaakje (bv appel) i s dat haram?

08-01-2007, 13:52


De meningen daarover verschillen,

het is nu aan bepaalde mede-members om te verklaren dat het definitief haram is:

09-01-2007, 08:50
Meningsverschil.

09-01-2007, 12:21


Wat zegt de meerderheid en wat zijn de argumenten?

09-01-2007, 12:25


Question :

why is smoking haram?

Answer :

Praise be to Allaah.

Perhaps you know that all nations of the world – Muslim and kaafir alike – have now started to fight smoking, because they know that it is very harmful. Islam forbids everything that is harmful, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “There should be no harming or reciprocating harm.”

Undoubtedly there are foods and drinks which are beneficial and good, and others which are harmful and bad. Allaah described our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) in the following terms (interpretation of the meaning):

“he allows them as lawful At Tayyibaat (i.e. all good and lawful as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons and foods), and prohibits them as unlawful Al Khabaa’ith (i.e. all evil and unlawful as regards things, deeds, beliefs, persons and foods)

[al-A’raaf 7:157]

Is smoking one of the good and lawful things (al-tayyibaat) or one of the evil and unlawful things (al-khabaa’ith)?

Secondly: it was narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Allaah forbids you to trade gossip, to ask too many questions and to waste money.” And Allaah forbade wasteful extravagance when He said (interpretation of the meaning):

“and eat and drink but waste not by extravagance, certainly He (Allaah) likes not Al Musrifoon (those who waste by extravagance) [al-A’raaf 7:31]

And He described the slaves of the Most Merciful as follows (interpretation of the meaning):

“And those who, when they spend, are neither extravagant nor niggardly, but hold a medium (way) between those (extremes)” [al-Furqaan 25:67]

The whole world now knows that the money spent on smoking is to be considered as money wasted, from which no benefit is gained; indeed, it is money spent on something harmful. If the money which is spent on smoking worldwide were to be collected, it could have saved entire populations who have died of starvation. Is there anyone more foolish that one who holds a dollar bill and sets fire to it? What is the difference between him and the one who smokes? Indeed, the smoker is more foolish, because the folly of the one who burns a dollar bill ends there, whilst the one who smokes burns his money and also harms his body.

Thirdly: how many disasters have been caused by smoking, because of cigarette butts which are thrown away and cause fires. Other disasters have been caused in other ways, as when a house was burned down with its occupants inside, when a man lit his cigarette when there was a gas leak.

Fourthly: how many people are offended by the smell of smokers, especially when you are unfortunate enough to have one of them standing next to you in the mosque. Probably any nasty smell is easier to bear than the smell of the smoker’s mouth when he has just woken up. It is amazing how many women can put up with the smell of their husbands’ mouths! The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade those who had eaten garlic or onions from coming to the mosque so that they would not offend their fellow-worshippers with their smell. The smell of onions and garlic is easier to bear than the smell of the smoker and his mouth.

These are some of the reasons why smoking is haraam.

Shaykh Sa’d al-Humayd (http://www.islam-qa.com)

[Die uitspraak geldt niet specifiek voor sigaretten, maar voor roken in het algemeen. Ik werd naar deze fatwa verwezen vanuit een andere vraag, namelijk of het haraam is om een café te hebben waarin naast thee ook de waterpijp wordt aangeboden. Dus de waterpijp behoort ook tot de onderdelen die volgens deze sheikh haraam zijn.]

Wallahu a3lem.

09-01-2007, 12:34
Question:

Is smoking the water pipe haram? This brother started shouting at us in public because we were smoking it.

Answer:

Answer In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger.

Smoking of any kind if it involves inhaling harmful substances or intoxicants is considered haram or forbidden in Islam. We are to keep away from polluting our bodies, minds and souls.

Allah Almighty knows best

Bron, vraag 16.

09-01-2007, 12:34
Smoking is not specifically mentioned in either the Holy Quran or the sunna of the Prophet PBUH. A consensus of opinion on it was out of the question as smoking was unknown to the learned men at the time of the Prophet PBUH, and for a long time thereafter. For the same reason it was not dealt with by the founders of the four schools of Islamic fiqh, Imams Abu Hanifa, Malik, Al-Shafie, and Ahmad Ibn Hanbal. Smoking came to be known for the first time in the 16th century AD, through Spanish explorers who brought tobacco from the New World to their country, where it spread to various parts of the world, through France.

When Muslims came to know smoking in the late 10th or early 11th century of hijra (2), scholars endeavoured to formulate an opinion on it but they were unable to reach a consensus. Most of them ruled that it was haram; some did not go as far as that, judging it as reprehensible; others thought it to be permissible, while a last group withheld judgment (on the basis that they did not have at their disposal any provisions from the Quran or the sunna to guide them one way or the other).

There follows an outline of the opinions of some of these scholars

A. Scholars who ruled that smoking was haram

1. Sheikh Shirnibali of the Hanafi school. In no ambigious terms Sheikh Shirnibali decided it was haram. He summed up his ruling in the following statement: "It is forbidden to sell or smoke tobacco. To smoke while fasting undoubtedly breaks the fast".

2. Hanafi scholar Sheikh Ismail al-Nabulsi reported that a husband has the right to forbid his wife from eating garlic and onions as well as anything else that might foul the breath. He went on to say that as smoking fouled the breath, a wife must be forbidden to smoke, especially if her husband is a nonsmoker.

3. Hanafi scholar Sheikh al-Misairi is reported by his disciple Sheikh Ismail al-Nabulsi to have declared that smoking was haram.

4. Sheikh Al-Emadi of the Hanafi School. Ibn Abdin in his annotation says: "Al-Emadi's words seem to indicate that he considered smoking reprehensible bordering on haram, and that a smoker is a sinner (fasiq)".

5. Hanafi scholar Ala' al-Din al-Haskafi in his work entitled Addur al-muntaqa was emphatic that smoking was haram, not in itself, but on the basis of the Sultan's fiat banning its use. (3)

6. Sheikh Ibrahim al-Laqqani of the Maliki school ruled it to be haram.

7. Sheikh Salim al-Sanhouri of the Maliki school. Al-Sanhouri's disciple Sheikh Ibrahim al-Laqqani reports that "when smoking became first known in Egypt a man from the Maghreb named Ahmad ibn Abdullah brought in some tobacco and enquired about it from our guide and imam the learned scholar Salim al-Sanhouri who ruled that it was haram. Sheikh Al-Sanhouri continued to hold on to this ruling till his death without ever running up against any dissenting opinion. His ruling, which I heard verbally from him and read in his writings, was meticulously observed by men of piety from the Hanafi school as well as from other schools". (4)

8. Sheikh Shihab al-Din al-Qalyubi of the Shafie school says: "All solids which have a drugging effect and could benumb the brain are clean in themselves but haram due to their effect. Some of our mentors have stated that this rule applies to smoking, and rightly so. For one thing, smoking opens up the passages of the body, making them vulnerable to several grave diseases. For example, a smoker's body becomes flabby and develops boils. Smoking could also lead to blindness. Knowledgeable people report that it also causes dizziness. It is obvious that this is more harmful than makmour (a kind of food) which was prohibited by Zarkashi in view of its harm". (5)

9. Sheikh Al-Najm al-Ghazi of the Shafie school quotes the author of Addur al-mukhtar as saying: "Even if one does not dispute the smoker's claim that smoking is not intoxicating there is no denying that it causes languor, and is therefore haram on the basis of the saying of the Prophet quoted by Ahmad through Umm Salama to the effect that whatever caused intoxication and languor was haram. Indulging in smoking once in a while may not constitute a major sin, however if the ruler forbids its use, it becomes categorically haram, as its use may harm the body. And, like all minor sins, persisting in it makes it a major sin." (6)

10. Sulayman al-Bujairami, of the Shafie school rules that "smoking that is now in vogue and which is called tobacco (may the person who introduced it be cursed) is but an ugly innovation (bida'a). Our mentor Sheikh Al-Ziyadi initially ruled that it does not violate the rules of fasting because he was not sure what it was. However, when he saw the stains it left on the smoker's pipe he changed his mind and ruled that it did after all constitute a violation of the rules of fasting". (7)

11. Hanbali scholars of Najd: Sheikh Mustafa al-Rahibani says: "In all the four schools of fiqh there are those who ruled that smoking was haram, those who ruled it was reprehensible, and those who ruled that it was permissible. Most Shafie and Hanafi scholars were of the opinion that it was either pemissible or reprehensible, but some of them went further and declared it haram. Maliki scholars, on the other hand, are mostly of the opinion that it is haram; so are our Hanbali scholars, especially those of Najd. However, it has not come to my attention that any of our Hanbali colleagues has explicity ruled that it was haram." (8)

These were the opinions of earlier scholars on the prohibition of smoking. As to contemporary scholars, many of them are of the opinion that smoking is haram. The following are but a few of the advocates of the prohibition of smoking:

1. Al-Azhar Fatwa Committee has passed a ruling on smoking that says:

Smoking has definitely been proved to be detrimental to health as stated by knowledgeable persons and international medical conferences. It has been established that smoking causes cancers of the lung and larynx and poses serious hazards to the arteries. Furthermore, it wastes money being spent on something that brings no good to human beings. The Prophet PBUH has banned everything that causes harm to both health and wealth, whether of oneself or of others. Therefore, we are of the opinion that it is haram to smoke, import, export or trade in tobacco. God knows that which we do not know. (9)

2. The International Islamic Conference to Combat Intoxicating Substances and Drugs, at which scholars declared that smoking, growing and trading in tobacco were haram. (10)

3. Sheikh Muhammad Ibrahim al-Sheikh, former Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia. In his ruling he declared that smoking was undoubtedly foul, noxious, languorous and sometimes intoxicating. He further stated that smoking was haram on the basis of authentic quotations, sound judgment, and the opinion of authoritative physicians. (11)

Evidence used by scholars who declared smoking haram

Those who said that smoking was haram substantiated their ruling by the following arguments:

1. Smoking is harmful to health, according to authoritative physicians, and anything that has such an adverse effect is ruled haram by consensus.

2. It is a form of drug whose use is forbidden by the sharia on the strength of Umm Salama's report that the Prophet PBUH prohibited everything that caused intoxication or languor, a prohibition which applies to smoking as it causes languor.

3. Smoking is malodorous and offends nonsmokers, especially at congregational prayers and similar gatherings; it also offends the honourable angels. The Prophet PBUH, said "Whoever eats garlic or onions, let him stay away from us and from our mosque and let him stay at home" (reported by Al-Bukhari and Muslim quoting Jaber) Another saying by the Prophet PBUH tells us that "the angels are offended by the same things which offend human beings". Furthermore, the Prophet PBUH says: "Whoever offends any Muslim has offended me, and whoever offends me has offended God "(reported by Al-Tabarani quoting Anas).

4. Smoking is an extravagance, since it has no use and causes certain harm as reported by specialists. (12)

B. Scholars who ruled smoking was reprehensible

1. The Hanafi scholar Sheikh Al-Emadi as reported by the author of Addur al-mukhtar. Ibn Abdin, however, commends the fact that the statement of Al-Emadi apparently indicates that smoking is reprehensible bordering on haram and that a person who smoked was a sinner. (13)

2. The Maliki scholar Sheikh Muhammad Elaish says that Al-Laqqani ruled smoking to be haram, whereas Al-Ajhouri ruled that it was not prohibited. Later scholars have followed Al-Ajhouri's ruling in spite of the fact that evidence was more in favour of the ruling that it was haram. He also says that it is a form of piety to abstain from smoking.(14) The body of his rulings as a whole suggests that smoking is reprehensible.

3. The Shafie scholar Sheikh Abdullah al-Sharqawi says: "...and with regard to smoking the accepted opinion is that it is reprehensible. Al-Qalyubi's ruling that it is haram on account of the fact that smoking leads to blindness and causes boils, flabbiness and inflation of veins is debatable. Those who are more convinced of its harm are prohibited from smoking. However, this ruling is not confined to smoking, for it applies in some cases even to honey which is also a cure for physical ailments as we are told by God".(15)

4. The Hanbali scholar Sheikh Mustafa al-Rahibani says: "As for me, I have no doubt that it is reprehensible". (16)

5. Hanbali scholar Sheikh Mansour al-Bahuti. Sheikh Al-Rahibani says that Sheikh Mansour in his book Adabun nisa apparently suggests that smoking is reprehensible.

09-01-2007, 12:34
Er zijn er die zeggen dat het is toegestaan. Voornamelijk hanafi.

Evidence used by scholars who declared smoking reprehensible

Those who said that smoking was reprehensible supported their ruling by the following arguments.

1. Smoking is a waste of money.

2. It fouls the breath in the same manner as raw onions, garlic, leek and similar food.

3. It is incompatible with decency in the sight of those who champion virtues and high ideals. (17)

C. Scholars who ruled that smoking was permissible


1. The Hanafi scholar Sheikh Abdulghani al-Nabulsi who wrote a treatise proving that smoking was permissible, entitled: As-sulh bayn al-ikhwan fi ibahati shurb ad-dukhan. (18)

2. The Hanafi scholar Sheikh Muhammad Amin "Ibn Abdin" said that should it be established that smoking was nothing but detrimental, one could rule it to be haram; otherwise the general rule of permissibility would be applicable. "As most Muslims are afflicted by the habit of smoking, a ruling of permissibility would be a great relief. Let us keep in mind that whenever the Prophet PBUH had two things to choose from, he always chose the easier. That smoking is an innovation (bida'a) should not give cause to worry, for it is an innovation in terms of what one consumes and religion is not involved".(19)

3. The Hanafi scholar Sheikh Muhammad al-Abassi al-Mahdi says that smoking which does not affect the brain, causes no harm to the body, does not produce languor, leads to nothing that is forbidden by Islamic laws and incurs no harm whatsoever is most probably permissible. (20)

4. The Maliki scholar Sheikh Ali al-Ajhouri is in favour of permissibility, on which he wrote his work entitled Ghayatul bayan fi hill shurb ad-dukhan. (21)

5. The Shafie scholar Sheikh Al-Sharwani says that a tobacco allowance must be included in the money a husband pays for the maintenance of his wife if she is a smoker. (22)

6. The Hanbali scholar Sheikh Mar'i al-Karmi is of the opinion that the use of tobacco and coffee is permissible although it is more appropriate for decent people to avoid both.(23)

These were the scholars of an earlier era who ruled that smoking was permissible. Contemporary religious scholars who are of similar inclination include the following.

1. Sheikh Hassanain Makhluf, who said in his fatwa dated 25 Muharram 1367 AH (8 December 1947): "The right judgement to us, as in Raddul al-muhtar, is that it is permissible". (24)

2. Sheikh Hassan Mamoun, who made a fatwa to this effect on 8 Jumada Al-Ula 1349 AH (10 November 1959). (25)

Evidence cited by scholars who declared smoking permissible

Those who said that smoking was permissible substantiated their ruling by the following arguments.

1. As a general rule all things which cause no harm are classified as permissible, as long as they are not prohibited by any religious injunction.

2. Prohibition and reprehensibility are two religious rulings which are applicable only if they are supported by evidence. In the case of smoking, there is no evidence for prohibition or reprehensibility.

3. There is no evidence that smoking causes intoxication, languor or harm. On the contrary it has been established to be beneficial. Thus it is covered by the general rule that unless proved otherwise all things are presumed permissible. Even if it presumably poses certain hazards to some people, it should not be prohibited to everybody. Honey, for example, is categorically stated to be a cure, yet it is harmful to people who are of choleric temperament, and may ail them.

4. Safe judgment is not achieved by inventing prohibition or reprehensibility without evidence, but rather by ruling permissibility, which is the original status (26) of all things.

A comment on the arguments of those who ruled that smoking was permissible

All scholars who stated that smoking was permissible did so on the basis that there was no evidence in the sharia proving that impermissibility of smoking had been established nor had smoking not been proved to cause intoxication, languor or harm so as to make it haram or reprehensible. That being the case, smoking was treated under the general rule of presumption of permissibility of all things, as indicated in their arguments above.

After these scholars made their rulings, it was established beyond doubt that smoking posed serious health hazards and caused grave diseases that were difficult to treat and might be fatal. Thus, the grounds for permissibility are no longer valid and smoking should be ruled upon differently in light of the valid evidence that we shall advance after briefly stating the opinion of specialists with regard to the effects of smoking.

09-01-2007, 15:00
Omhoog.

Ps: Iemand nog bewijzen? Plaats ze inshaAllah.

09-01-2007, 15:09
Jah heb je er nu niet genoeg dan ugt?

09-01-2007, 22:00
Het onderschrijft mijn eerste reactie, ik weet dat veel geleerden in Sham het roken van de shisha mubah(vrij/toegestaan) verklaard hebben.