Maulana Abdul Haseeb Umri Madani

FROM THE OBITUARY: WORDS IN

AND OUT OF SHARIAH
Abdul Haseeb Umri Madani

FROM THE
OBITUARY:
WORDS IN
AND OUT OF
SHARIAH
Translated by Saad Ahmad
(Jamia Millia Islamia, NewDelhi)
From the Obituary: Words in and Out of
Shariah

Maulana Abdul Haseeb Umri

Madrasa Kulliyah Hadith Shareef, Banglore, India

Translated by Saad Ahmad

(Jamia Millia Islamia, NewDelhi)
 

In the name of Allah the most beneficent,

the most merciful

In a WhatsApp group dedicated to providing Ulama with a

forum known as Dabsitan e Urdu, I used an expression in
Urdu Jo badah kash the Purane wo Uthte Jate hain1 ( The
old winebibbers are passing away) in honour of the famous
scholar known as Maulana Yusuf Jameel Jamaee who died
recently.

 
Since the group members are highly educated and well-
trained in understanding the Islamic ethos, norms and
tradition. My use of the expression was not left unnoticed.
As the expression indicates drinking (alcoholic) prohibited in
Islam, I was asked to clarify my position. Based on the
literal meaning of the expression, the objection was whether
a person might use such expression which is prohibited in
Islam or not?
 
I tried to explain my position in the ways mentioned below.
 

4 ) ; 4 A
1 !#$&% '()*%,+ /021 1% 3
" ( - . 5 67 '8 59%: <=1> ( - @%? 6BC%D+ EF% +
For any language, words play an essential role. Language
evolves in culture, not in religion, though, religion may have
a role in the culture. A culture is made out of the developed
sense of good and bad. Religion helps to recognise the good
and bad and teaches how to choose good and abstain from
the bad. For Islam, like many aspects of the language and
expression of a culture, religion is linked with them too. The
aspect of prohibited and allowed liked and disliked are here.
In many occasions, Shariah has a position that it does not
endorses rejecting a thing abruptly but appreciates if the
action of such kind is given up. The same process functions
with the words, Islamic Shariah considered a few
expressions, words or terminologies as prohibited or disliked. 
Readers may think that this play of the word is the product
of religious short-sightedness, is a biased interpretation.  
Nevertheless, whosoever keeps an eye on scopes given by
Islam and its universal teachings and makes him/herself
aware with the texture of the Shariah, instructions for the
correct usage of the terminologies and words, and remains
himself updated with the fact that word is not a word only;
it comes from a culture and tradition of that culture.
Furthermore, whosoever believes that the scope of
worshipping includes language and expression and ways to
colour it with the colour of the God, he/she does not think
this subject as insignificant neither considers the duties of
the Shariah a burden. 
The Prophet Muhammad (SWT) said: Abu Hurairah (May
Allah be pleased with him) reported:

"I heard the Prophet (‫ )ﷺ‬saying, "A person utters a

word thoughtlessly (i.e., without thinking about its being
good or not) and, as a result of this, he will fall into the
fire of Hell deeper than the distance between the east and
the west."
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim]. 
What is the meaning of saying things thoughtlessly? Does it
mean that human being utters without thinking what is
going to say? What lacks it? And What could be the
consequence?
Sometimes, dealing with the word could be very sensitive. It
may raise more severe issues when such kind of words
generates debates about the creed. In this context, several
Ahaadith (prophetic sayings) are available about many
utterances and use of words. These words (used in Urdu)
could be a subject of study. Imam Muslim has written a
chapter named "the book concerning the Use of Correct
Words".
Considering the significance about using the words in
Shariah, the genius Islamic scholar Bakr Abu Zaid (d.2004)
wrote books such as "Mu'jam manaahi allafziyah", and
"Fawaid Fel Alfaaz". These two books suggest almost fifteen
hundred words in use but could be objected from the
perspective of Shariah, or some people may find problems
with the use of words such as mentioned above. Though,
researches lead us that one should not see any problem in
using words such as these. Abu Zaid has mentioned a
number of scholarly works by those people who wrote them
with the same purpose. It may be taken as evidence that
this issues is not that intense neither new, on the other
hand, opens another window to be updated with the actions
and deeds of our predecessors taking us to the spots in the
field of knowledge and thought.

Kindly take these names as an example;

• Al-Nijat min alfaaz al Kufr by Arab Shaah Sulaiman

ibn Eis albkiri al-Hanfi (596 AH).
• Risalah fe ialfaz al Kufr by ibn Qutlubgha (978)
 • Tasheed al-Arkaan fi al-amkaan al-abda' momma
kan Muallif, by Syuti (119 AH)
• manaahi allafziyah by Muhammad Salih al Usaimin
(1221 AH)
• Fiqh al -Kalima wa masuooliyatuha fe al-Quran was
Sunnah by Muhammad Ibn Abdur Rahman Ewaz
After this, we proceed with the method to know
terminologies, words and subsequent commands of the
Shariah about them?

In Shariah, words and terminologies could be divided into

three categories:
Firstly, words which are used in Shariah. These are
commonly mentioned in the traces of the Quran, Sunnah or
Companions. Evidently, there is no problem with such
words.
The second kind of words is often considered as prohibited in
Shariah. There could be much reason behind the prohibition
of using those words. Whatever Shariah has stopped from
would be considered in this very category.
As during the lifetime of our Prophet Muhammad (SAW),

Jews tried to play with the word ra'ina *H%8 I5J, and Allah, in
response, revealed the Ayah "O ye of Faith! Say not (to the
Messenger) words of ambiguous import, but words of respect;
and hearken (to him): To those without Faith is a grievous
punishment." [2:104]. Pay attention to the context and
background, and one should consult interpretations of the
Quran for the further update about the difference between
L
Ra'ina and UnZurna (C%D8 KMN
% 8 5).

One of the many prohibited words is the king (when a king
ask people him to call him king)
Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger saying
"The vilest name in Allah's sight is Malik al-Amidh (King
of Kings). The narration transmitted on the authority of
Shaiba (contains these words): There is no king but Allah,
the Exalted and Glorious. Sufyan said: Similarly, the word
Shahinshah (is also the vilest appellation). Ahmad b.
Hanbal said: I asked Abu' Amr about the meaning of
Akhna. He said: The vilest"2.

Another example is taken from Arab society. They used to

call grapes as krm3, which suggest their cultural practices in
which wine had a significant role. Arabs believed that wine
causes them to be generous. This context led them to
recognise wine as krm, which means generosity. Prophet
Muhammad (SAW) said: "Do not call grapes generosity but
call it grapes. Because generosity is the heart of
believer" (Bukhari 68123 and Muslim 2247). This
prophetic instruction explains that generosity belongs to the
heart; hence, one should not call grapes as generosity. There
are already several other words and expressions which are
seen by Shariah critically. So, I recommend looking at the
mentioned works of Bakar Abu Zaid.
The third kind of words is not available in either source.
This category is further divided into three parts:

mَ
2 Q*
ْ َ ?
Xِ
P %S*%Tَ Vُ Hْ? % Q*
P HY Zْ8 %[ُ \*
ُ َ ( ُّ ٕ cdِ% C%e `a َ %f`gَ %e`َٔ ْa5 c ِi%e jkَّ lَ % ( Vٌ %,ُ + J Vَّ %,َ + 7 Kَ %oَ _5
َ aَّ 5
َ %]َ _5 ` ِ َ ِ َ َ َ َ ّ8 ّ p ْ8
t
ِ َ qH%Iِ s ْ 5 uvَ8 w% ْ8 5
ٍ َ َٔ QPَ 5
ّ ِ ٕ
َ ْ

6*ْ %Tَ?

3 xy%z
 (A) words not found in Shairah but hardly contradict with
the teachings mentioned through Shariah, these words are
correct, and Shariah does not see any problem in using such
terms, words or expressions. The maximum portion of a
language relies on such words. As the sum of eating and
drinking is hillat (allowed), for Shairah, the actual drive
comes from Halal (allowed), and a very few things are
prohibited by the legislator (Prophet Muhammad). Likewise,
there are very few words which are prohibited from using.
As Prophet Muhammad (SAW) never tended to change the
Arabic language from any angle, and The Noble Quran was
revealed in the language Arabs were capable to understand,
Our believe Prophet cautioned about a few words which were
against the purpose of Shariah. In the same manner, the
essence of every language, adhered interpretation, metaphor
remains valid in the eyes of Shariah.

(B), Those expressions or terms which could not be recorded

in Shariah but some maximum use of it may keep it in
contraction to the very assumptions even by Shariah norms,
whatever such expressions or words contain the meanings
Shariah warns fro musing such terms or words. For
example, these expressions,  dukhtar nek Akhtar  or fulaan
ke sitare garish mein hain or fulaan ka sitara e Iqbal bland
ho" these three sayings are results of the belief in star
worship which relates the destiny of a person with the star,
an act of superstition in the eyes of Shariah. Hence, the
instruction says to avoid such words and expressions.  
  
One more example is about the "lost spirits" say, for
example, bhatakti Aatma, fulan shaks mein fulaan ki rooh
hulool kar gyi", or ruhon ki haazri wagairah". I nIslamic
beleif, any one dies naturally or accidentally, his/her soul
goes to Illiyin (Superior court) and Sijjin (imprisoned).
Things about lost spirit or entering into one's body are
baseless. Hence, words, terms or expressions leading to such
belief is prohibited in Shariah. 

(C) The third kind is about the probabilities regarding the

use of such terms, words or expressions; It means that in
such cases in which words may refer two different things at
the same time, one contradicting Shariah and another in
peace wit shariah. Words mostly have their original
meaning, but while suing in everyday language, they
manifest through new meanings, leaving a reader in the
confusion that which one is the most accurate meaning of
the word. In such a situation, these words neither could be
rejected nor adopted freely. Now to understand the meaning
of the word in poetry or prose should follow the rule that it
should not contradict with norms given by Shariah. As
evidence, Sufyan ibn Uwainah added a similar word, say
for, shahenshaah, for malik al-amlaak. Now, please have a
look at below for understanding how to reach the intended
meaning of a word? What could be the primary sources for
deciding the meaning of a word? Kindly see the below:
1. towards and terminologies in a sentence could be
understood through the adhered context
2. Most of the time, the intended meaning is grabbed
just by knowing the position of the writer
3. One should look at the custom in which the word is in
use which could help to understand the appropriate
meaning of the word
Words such as these may help to identify the intended
meaning and may lead to identifying which word be used or
not? 
The example of this are the following words:
1. Creator (Takhleeq kaar): This word is common in
Urdu. The work of a poet is considered as the creation
of the poet himself. There is confusion in
understanding a word used for eating and drinking.
 The question is about whether it is right to call a
person a creator? Secondly, unlike the creedal
understanding of Sunni Islam, Mu'tazilites think that
a person is the creator of his actions. Further, the
problem rises as that how far calling a poet a creator
is good?
In expelling this, we should mention that prohibition about
the processional understanding fo the creator is recorded in
the Quran and Sunnah in detail.
• What is the difference in attributing the act of
creation with God and non-God?
• Who may be considered as the creator of the action
committed by a human being?
It will also lead us to reify the accepted meaning among
native speakers and writers and whether poetry is accepted
as the creation of poet, if yes, then it may be allowed, but
this kind of expression should be avoided. The act of
attribution serves the purpose of common sense; hence, there
is no problem in its ways of using such words. If the
intended meaning is attributed to Mutazilah, it must be
considered as prohibited.

2. Nabi e Pak (Holy Prophet):

In our everyday language, the word nabi e Pak is used to
describe the Prophet as infallible, which is preferred and
allowed. On the contrary, if somebody believes that he is
infallible in terms of need essential to human beings, it may
contradict with the belief that only the God is Quddoos
(holy). Sufis have maintained the tradition in which the
Prophet Muhammad remains above the human being in
terms of having human traits and attributes. Their literature
is full of the expression such as "Nabi e Pak". The word pak
(holy) explains the meaning suitable only for Allah. In this
sense, the use of the word Nabi e Pak is allowed in one way
but prohibited in other ways. 
There are many examples similar to these, as mentioned
above. For example, words like rabb for the employer (in
modern sense) owner of the slave (earliest and medieval
period) and Sayyid for the Prophet Muhammad if were
prohibited in one case are also allowed in other cases. So, a
reasonable opinion is that one should not be worried about
using terms of such kinds as mentioned above. Alternatively,
if somebody is interested in being more cautious, then he/she
must adopt a moderate path. 

Now we come to the subject of this essay, using terms like

badah kash (@%? A 6BC%D+ ) and jam wo paimana ({%|8 *}~Y €% • 7 x*%,+ ).
Anyone aware of Urdu literature and its aesthetics will
appreciate using such words known for their metaphorical
meaning sometimes more than their first (literal) meaning.
Words like paimana, jaam, masti Sharaab (all these words
literally means to express a glass of wine ), often used to
verbally illustrate emotions, meanings and most importantly
state of mind. Scholars of Islam have used terms like Jaame
Shahadat nosh Karna (for martyrs) and badah tawhid (for
the staunch believer). The famous poet Ghalib also used
such expression in his poetry4.
In this context, tashbeeb (love poetry) could be another
example in which a poet starts by praising her imagined
lover and reaches a stage where he could deliver the emotion
he wanted to reveal. If one is unable to learn the difference

4 4 E•HZ8 ‚ % $ q‰w% : Š$‹

% ƒ%„ …%F 6q$%&*†%X ‡ˆ
( ( ? 8

ŠŒY •8 Ž% + •$ •’1‘ - K8o% *%T 7 6BC%D+ '$ “ !#Y ”$ •% 8 j–( —8 ˜% +

between tashbeeb ( poetry) and scurrility, despite the fact
that Prophet Muhammad said about Hassan ibn Thabit that
"Gabriel will continue in helping you till the moment you
defend the God and his messenger". The poet Hassan ibn
Thabit could be subjected to criticise for everything he said.

Now it has been clear that in a literary context, using such

terms as badah kash (@%? A 6BC%D+ ) and jam wa paimana (7 x*%,+

{%|8 *}~Y €% )
• are allowed. Such expressions serve the purpose of
metaphor and irony. The other side of the meaning, as I was
provoked to respond for, should not be taken so seriously.
Since the context of the expression cherishes Urdu culture
with which every literate person of that culture is expected
to be aware. Among educated and learned scholars, poetic
expressions and literary methods are appreciated and
enjoyed. Labelling to such literary expression with something
of dire nature could produce other issues unpredicted in
history. Live with dangerous words and use them for positive
purposes. Allah knows the best.

I am thankful to Shamsur Rabb, a research scholar and
assistant professor at the University of Mumbai whose
reaction led me to prepare this essay.