It means that such a person must believe in the essential requirements of the Islamic faith, and he should not do anything against the spirit of the faith. In the same book we come across this statement:

“That is to say, it is an agreed view of the Islamic scholars that a person who violates the essential requirements of Islam is a disbeliever, though he may be a follower of the Qiblah and he may spend his entire life in performing the acts of obedience, as has been stated in Sharah-E- Tahreer by Imam Ibnul Hammam.”

The books of Islamic belief, law and principles are full of clear directives and details on this point.

(Tamheed Ul Iman by Ala Hazrat radi allahu anhu)


Fourthly, this subject has its own plain logic. Can a person, who offers prayers five times a day with his face towards the Qiblah and worships Maha Dev once a day, be regarded by any sensible person to be a Muslim? The action of worshipday Maha Dev and the action of calling Allah a liar or insulting the Prophet are equally the acts of disbelief but the acts of disrespecting Allah and His Prophet are definitely more serious than worshipping Maha Dev. ‘Some acts of disbelief are worse than others’. The reason is that worshipping an idol is a symbolic denial of Allah, but this symbolic denial, is not equal to the actual denial. Moreover, prostration (sadja) before an idol can be possibly given a rational explanation that it may have been just an act of respect and not an act of worship. Any act of respect done in the form of prostration (sadja), is not an act of disbelief in itself. For example, if a person comes before a scholar or a spiritual leader and prostrates before him as a mark of respect, he win be judged as a sinner but not a disbeliever. The Islamic law has condemned idoIatory by the non-Muslims as disbelief because it falls into a pattern of disbelief in their life-style. On the contrary, talking ill of Prophet Muhammad صلى اله عليه وسلم is in itself a disbelief, which leaves no chance of Islamic belief left in this case. I am not relying here basically on the difference that the Islamic community can by its unanimous decision forgive a worshipper of an idol but even one thousand Imams cannot and would not forgive a person, who talks ill of the Prophet of  Islam صلى اله عليه وسلم .

Our Hanafi scholars of distinction like Imam Bazazi, Imam Ibnul Hammam, Allama Maula Khasrau author of Dar Radd-E-Gharoor, Allama Zain bin Najeem auttKJr of Bahrar Raaiq and Ishbah Wan-N-Nazaair, Allama Umar bin Najeem auttKJr of Naharul Faaiq, Allama Abu, Abdullah Muhammad bin Abdullah Ghazi author of Tanveer-ul-Absaar, Allama Khairuddin Ramli author of Fataawa Khairiyya, Allama Shaikh-Zada author of Majma-ul-Anher, Allama Mudaqaq Muhammad Ali Haskafi author of Durr-E- Mukhtar and many other prominent scholars have held this view. (For further details and discussion on this point see my book “Fataawa-E-Rizwiyah”).
It should be understood that the inability to forgive is limited to the court of an Islamic ruler, because he has to pronounce death sentence even after hearing the plea of forgiveness. On the other hand, if somebody seeks forgiveness sincerely and heartily it is acceptable in the court of Allah. There is a danger that these insolent people may put up an excuse that there is no point is seeking forgiveness because it cannot be granted. The correct positon is that the disbelief will be obliterated; you will become a Muslim and get rid of the eternal confinement to Hell. To this extent there is unanimity amongst the Islamic scholars (see Rudd-ul Mukhtar and other books).

(Tamheed Ul Iman by Ala Hazrat radi allahu anhu)


There is a consensus of opinion amongst the scholars that the wearing of gold ring is prohibited for the believing men.

So far as the silver ring is concerned, its wearing is permissible, but according to some scholars it is not desirable because Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) wore it as a necessity since he used it as a seal for the letter sent to non-Arab Kings and Emperors. Sayyiduna Anas (radi Allahu anhu) reported that when the Glorious Prophet of Islam (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) decided to write letters to the Rulers of various nations, somebody suggested that the Rulers do not accept a letter which does not bear the stamp of the sender. Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) made a silver ring with the words “Muhammad Rasoolullah” engraved upon it. Imam Bukhari reports that the inscription was in three lines,“Allah” in the first line, “Rasool” in the second and “Muhammad” in the last line.

Sayyiduna Abdullah Bin Omar (radi Allahu anhuma) reported that the Messenger of Allah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) made a golden ring and wore it in his right hand and then threw it. Then he made a sliver ring, which bore the above-mentioned inscription. The Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: “Don’t make a ring having inscription like my ring.” The Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) wore the ring with the stone towards the palm. He prohibited men to wear the ring in the pointer or the middle finger.

Sayyiduna Buraidah (radi Allahu anhu) reported that a man, who was wearing a brass ring, called on Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) who said: “You smell like an idol.” The visitor threw away the ring. Then, he came to the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) wearing an iron ring. The Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: “You have come wearing the ornament of the inmates of Hell.” He threw away that ring too and asked the Holy Prophet (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam): “Tell me, O Allah’s Apostle (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam)! Of what metal should I make a ring?” He said: “Of silver, less than four and a half Mashas in weight.”

The ring should necessarily have a stone.

%d bloggers like this: