Sunday, March 27, 2016

Q&A: What is the Difference between Khair and Shar, and Husn and Qubh?

As-Salaam Alaikum Sheikh, may Allah grant you a long life to witness the victory, InshaAllah.
I have a question about the difference between Khair (good) and Shar (evil), and Husn (pretty) and Qubh (ugly)? Because when the topic is raised among the brothers, varying answers are given on the subject, please explain to us the difference between the two subjects, May Allah bless you.
From Abu Qusay

Wa Alaikum As-Salaam Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuhu
A. Husn (pretty) and Qubh (ugly), and Khair (good) and Shar (evil) are terminologies used by the scholars of jurisprudence and the understanding of their meanings would be according to how they defined and used them, and not as in their stated meaning in the language. I.e. for you to know the meaning and the difference between them, you must refer to the scholars of Jurisprudence not the scholars of the language, do not open the dictionary and look for the meaning of Husn and Qubh, and Khair and Shar and then say that you obtained the answer, you must look at what the jurisprudence defined and follow that meaning.
B. The scholars of jurisprudence discussed the (legislator) i.e. who has the authority to issue the classification of the actions, whether they are an obligation (fardh), recommended (mandoub), permissible (mubah), detested (makrooh), or forbidden (haram), and on the things being halal or haram? This means that it is in terms of the commands and prohibitions on them, i.e. in terms of being praised and condemned and the consequent reward or punishment.
Hassan and Qubh are defined from this angle. What is in accordance with the orders of the Shariah is praised and obliged, it is Hassan and it’s rewarded, and what is contrary to the rules of Shariah is condemned and forbidden, it is Qubh and it is punishable. Therefore Hassan and Qubh are relevant when defining actions and things in terms of what is their Hukm Shar’i (Islamic ruling), and in terms of what are the consequent praise or condemnation i.e. in terms of the reward and punishment.
Therefore, in the case of theft, for example, in terms of issuing its ruling, it is forbidden, and in terms of praise and condemnation and the consequences (reward and punishment), that the cutting off the hand is applicable or the Hellfire in the Hereafter, here we say that theft is Qabih (ugly).
C. The scholars of jurisprudence also discussed the criteria, which the person refers to when measuring the effect of harm or benefit on him, and if the person should undertake the action or not as a result, so they refer a certain action to the criteria of Islam, which they accepted, and if the result of the measurement is (benefit) according to Islam, then they love this action and carry it out and they call it Khair (good), and if the measurement is (harm) then this action is hated and they decline from undertaking the action and they call it Shar (evil).
So in the case of theft, for example, in terms of the Islamic criteria, which is used to measure its benefit or harm to the person, and which results in the person taking the action or refraining from it, this is good and evil.
So you will say that theft is evil because it is harmful according to the criteria of Islam and therefore you will refrain from stealing.
D. So you will call theft (Qabih) ugly if the discussion is about issuing the ruling on it i.e. it is forbidden, and in terms of reward and punishment i.e. the cutting off the hand in this life or going to Hellfire in the Afterlife.
And theft is called Shar (evil) if the subject of your discussion is the criteria that you use to measure benefit and harm, so you measure according to the criteria of Islam, not by your benefit or whim, accordingly you find it harmful and you will hate it and refrain from doing it, and you will call it Shar (evil).
E. Conclusion:
If the discussion is in the context of issuing the ruling on the actions and things and what follows in terms of reward or punishment, it will be described as Husn and Qubh.
If the discussion is over the criteria that you use to measure the benefit or harm and therefore love the action and carry it out or hate the action and refrain from it, then this will be described as good and evil.

Your brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah
29 Jumada I 1437 AH
9/3/2016 2013 CE

The link to the answer from the Ameer’s Facebook page:
The link to the answer from the Ameer’s Google Plus page:
The link to the answer from the Ameer’s Twitter page:

It’s Time to See Who is Behind the Chaos and Terror

Our soils have turned to a showdown arena for the colonial interests of the US and Western states whom Turkey regards as its allies. Behind any chaos, slaughter and terror on whatever soil on this earth, there are these blood-sucking capitalist countries. These countries wage their colonial wars between each other through the hands of the subcontractor groups they support in order to maintain their economic and political interests in the Muslim lands. And those who die are always the Muslims and innocent civilians. In spite of all these facts, Turkey still continues its cooperation and friendship with the colonial powers.
We as Hizb ut Tahrir / Wilayah Turkey have shared this fact with the public after every conducted atrocious act, and warned politicians and leaders. After the bomb attack in Suruç on July 20, 2105, “we said that “The True Perpetrators of the Blast in Suruç are the Colonialist Western Powers Who Drown the World in Oppression, Blood and Tears”, and we expressed that this attack is the outcome of American-English feud of interests upon Turkey. In our written press release on 11th of August 2015, titled “It is Colonialist America and England Who Target the Lives of Muslim Turkish and Muslim Kurdish People”, we highlighted the Western powers’ terror plans of antagonizing the Muslim Turkish and Muslim Kurdish people towards each other in the following way: “none of the steps towards ending this bloodshed which is going on for 30 years for the sake of the colonial Kuffar is sincere. Because those who take these steps act upon leaning their backs either on America or England. As soon the Kuffar’s dominance upon our soils is lifted, as soon they are not granted any voice over these soils, and as soon these kuffar disappear from our soils, then only then this war and brother fight will come to an end.” After the terror bombing in Hakkari on September 6, 2015, and the same attack in Iğdir on September 8, 2015, we once again raised our voices against the rulers who took no lessons from the experiences, we pointed at the true perpetrators and the countries who support this terror, we warned them and said: “This Fire That Burns Where It Falls Will Not Extinguish Unless You Don’t Change Your Friends”
This time the colonialist countries chose Ankara on October 10, 2015, in order to reach their aims. More than 100 people died and hundreds were injured at this blast. We indicated the true murderers to the rulers who expected condemnation from Western countries by saying, “No Matter Who the Subcontractor of the Ankara Attack is, the Colonialists are the Real Perpetrators”. This never-ending terror chaos continued in Istanbul’s Sultanahmet Square on 12th of January 2016, and in Diyarbakır’s Çinar district on January 13, 2016. On 17th February 2016, a bloody bomb attack was carried out in Ankara. We as Hizb ut Tahrir Wilayah Turkey published an explanation saying “More Pains are to Come As Long the Colonialist are Your Friends and Allies!” However, in spite of our warnings; the Government, the opposition, the rightists and leftists, all together run after dirty revenges in Turkey’s domestic politics and ignored the real killers. The leaders held hot speeches of payoff for the PKK and ISIL who live on terror and chaos and strengthen on slaughter and crime. We said: “A great state is not a state who is America’s satellite. A great state is not the one who calls the hitmen and subcontractors to account, but the instigators in propria persona. A state who is friend with the enemies of Islam and the Muslims cannot be this great state! A great state is only the Second Khilafah Rashidah able to call the colonialists to account.”
On March 13, 2016 a terrorist attack targeting at innocent civilians took place in Ankara. Once again we declared what is evident: “We Condemn the Attack in Ankara and Declare once more that the Perpetrators are the Imperialists” And lastly, another terror attack took place in Taksim in Istanbul on Saturday, March 19, 2016. Once again we condemn terror and remind that the perpetrators are the colonialists.
O Muslims! It is time to see who is behind these explosions and fights who claim the lives of innocent people in our cities. The colonialists do not give up shedding blood on our soils, and unfortunately the rulers of Turkey do not give up cooperation with them. See the truth, even though the rulers turn blind and deaf. Say bravely that the killers are the colonialists. Until, the rulers end cooperating with them. Until, the colonialists disappear from our soils.
Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir in Wilayah Turkey
Monday, 12th Jumada II 1437 AH
21/03/2016 CE
No: TR–BA–2016–MB–TR–011

Sunday, March 20, 2016

New books published by MaktabaIslamia

The Book Takattul Hizbi (Structuring of a Party by Shekh Taqiuddin) is no doubt the most honest and unbiased research into the Islamic movements in the past 2 Centuries and their aims, objectives, organisation, activities and the reason and causes for their failure and the lessons to be learnt from their failure. 

Alhamdulillah the Sharh (Explanation & Commentary) of this book by Shekh Hafez Saleh (one of the early pioneers of the Da'wa) is now available in print in English. You can check the book out on the follow link

Another book that Sheikh Taqiuddin Nabhani coauthored with Shekh Ali Raghib in 1958 was Ahkam As-Salah (the Rules of Prayer). Thanks to the efforts of the team behind RevivalPublications, we have been able to bring this amazing book in print. The book is available on the following link

Alwaie magazine is also available in print on MaktabaIslamia. Edition 353 is the latest edition and is available in store. You can check it on the following link

Saturday, March 12, 2016

Q&A: Can Private Property become Public Property?

Assalaamu Alaikum our honourable Sheikh, I would like to ask you a question regarding public ownership.  Can a private ownership transfer to a public ownership in accordance to the Shariah rules, like transferring water springs from a private ownership into public property if that is needed for the public good? And if the public no longer needs it, does it revert as private property? Similar to oil wells when they are depleted, can they become a private property?
Thank you, and May Allah help you and make your foothold strong, Wa Assalaamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuhu
From Nadir Az-Za’tari

Wa Alaikum us Salaam Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakaatuhu,
If any type of public ownership was as a result of a divine reason (‘illah), then the rule will follow this divine reason, whether it exists or in its absence. If the ‘illah is present then that public ownership will remain, but if it was absent, then it will be permitted to privately own that type of property, however on the condition that the ‘illah is Shar’i found in a Shar’i text.
For example, public utilities are considered as public property, which have been explained by the Prophet ﷺ in the Hadeeth in terms of its description, and not its quantity: On the authority of Ibn Abbas that the Prophet ﷺ said:
«المسلمون شركاء في ثلاث في الماء والكلأ والنار»
“People are partners in three: Water, Pasture, and fire.” Narrated by Abu Dawoud and narrated by Anas from the Hadeeth of Ibn Abbas and he added: «وثمنه حرام» “And its price is Haram”.
Ibn Majah narrated from Abu Huraira that the Prophet ﷺ said:
«ثلاث لا يمنعن: الماء والكلأ والنار»
“Three that must not be prevented: Water, Pasture, and Fire.”
This is the evidence that people are partners in water, pasture, and fire; and that they are not permitted for ownership by individuals.
However, the Prophet ﷺ permitted individuals to own water in Ta’if and Khaibar, and they did so to irrigate their plants and fields.
Similarly, some Muslims privately owned wells in Medina; Bukhari narrated on the authority of Abdullah (ra) from the Prophet ﷺ that he said:
«مَنْ حَلَفَ عَلَى يَمِينٍ يَقْتَطِعُ بِهَا مَالَ امْرِئٍ مُسْلِمٍ، هُوَ عَلَيْهَا فَاجِرٌ، لَقِيَ اللَّهَ وَهُوَ عَلَيْهِ غَضْبَانُ»
“Whosoever gives oaths falsely to take the wealth of a Muslim illegitimately, he is a fajir (wicked), and will meet Allah while He سبحانه وتعالى is angry with him.”
And Allah سبحانه وتعالى revealed:
إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَشْتَرُونَ بِعَهْدِ اللَّهِ وَأَيْمَانِهِمْ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا
“Indeed those who exchange the covenant of Allah and their [own] oaths for a small price.”
(Al-i-Imran: 77)
Al-Ash’ath came and said: An Ayah was revealed about what Abu Abdul Rahman spoke to you about me, I had a well in the land of my cousin, he asked:«شُهُودَكَ»  “Your witnesses”, I said I do not have witnesses, he said: «فَيَمِينُهُ» “his oath (is required)”, I said: O Messenger of Allah, then he must give an oath, then the Prophet ﷺ mentioned this Hadeeth, and Allah سبحانه وتعالى revealed the Ayah to support His truth.” End quote
If partnership in water, in and of itself, and not because of the need for it, it would have not been permitted for individuals to own it. From the saying of the Prophet ﷺ:
«المسلمون شركاء في ثلاث في الماء»..
“People are partners in three: water…”
And the permission given by the Prophet ﷺ to individuals to own water, this extracts the ‘illah in the partnership in water, pasture and fire, and it is from the public utilities that people can not live without.
Hence the Hadeeth has mentioned three but they are based on ‘illah because they are public utilities. Therefore  this ‘illah follows what is reasoned in its existance and absence; so anything that is considered as public utility is considerd as public property, but if it is not considered as public utility even if it was mentioned in the Hadeeth like water, then it is not public property, but it is considered as property that can be privately owned. Public utilities are decided when all resources are not available for a group of people, whether it is a group living in house made of tents, or living in a village or city or a state, and have disputed to get it, is considered public utility, like water source, pastures or woods, grazing areas for cattle, and the like.
-e.g. Minerals are considered as public property if found in abundance, like in mines and the like, these minerals are public property, and it is not permitted to be owned by individuals, due to what Tirmithi narrated from Abyadh Bin Jamal:
«أنه وفد إلى رسول الله r، فاستقطعه الملح فقطع له، فلما أن ولّى، قال رجل من المجلس: أتدري ما قطعت له؟ إنما قطعت له الماء العِدّ، قال: فانتزعه منه»
“He came to the Prophet ﷺ and asked to assign him a salt (mine),  so He ﷺ did, when he left, a man from his ﷺ council said: Are you aware of what you assigned him? You assigned him a perennial (‘id) spring of water, he  said: so he took it back from him.”
“’Id” water is the continuous source of water, he drew the similarity between salt and water for its unlimited source. This Hadeeth is an evidence that the Prophet ﷺ has given a portion of mountain salt for Abyadh Bin Jamal, but when he ﷺ found out that the mineral is unlimited, he took it back from him and prevented its private ownership, i.e. it is public property.  Salt here is an example of a mineral, what is intended is the mineral not the salt. From this Hadeeth it is cear that the‘illah of prevention of giving the portion of the mineral of salt is that it is ‘Id i.e. unlimited.
This ruling, that the unlimited mineral is a public property, which includes all minerals whether they are on the surface and easily accessed that people frequent and use, like salt, coal, emerald and the like, or it was found underground, that needs to be extracted with equipment, like gold, silver, iron, bronze, lead, and the like. And whether it is solid like crystals or liquid like oil, they are are minerals that come under the Hadeeth. Since unlimited minerals are public property for all citizens, the state is not permitted to give its ownership to individuals, companies, or allow individual or companies to extract them for their own use; instead the state must extract them itself on behalf of the Muslims, in looking after their affairs, and all that it extracts from them is public property for all the citizens.
Therefore, the property mentioned in the question will be considered as public ownership if they are public utilities, e.g. the water well in a village which is the only source of water, it is a public property and not allowed for individual ownership… But if the people in the village have another sufficient source of water, it will be permitted for an individual to dig a well in his land and own it, because it is not from the public utilities in this case, i.e. that the ‘illah of its public property is absent. But the well which was a public property does not become a private property but remains as a public property and it will be allowed to sell to individuals if there is sufficient water for the people and then it will be priced for the private ownership.
Hence, the water well is a public property if the people have no other source, but if there was an depletes or the people do not need it any more, i.e. the ‘illah is absent of it being a public utility, by the presence of a sufficient source of water, then it will be permitted to sell that well to individuals and it’s priced for private ownership. Oil wells for example are public utilities as long as it is unlimited, but if there were depletes, i.e. the ‘illah for being a public property is absent, then it is allowed to sell this well for people and its price is put for private ownership.

Your brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah
15 Jumada I 1437 AH
24/2/2016 CE

Link to the answer in the Ameer’s Facebook page:

Link to the answer in the Ameer’s Google Plus page:

Link to the answer in the Ameer’s Twitter page:

Attempts of Intimidation Only Makes Muslims Stand Firm

On Monday the 7th of March, it was “breaking news” that the city council of Aarhus (second largest city of Denmark), decided to withdraw the approval and support of a large central mosque. A project that has been on the way for 17 years. The reason was a several-episode “documentary” that, by use of hidden cameras and moles, “exposed” how imams in different mosques taught in Shariah and gave Islamic advice.
The documentary has caused much disturbance in Denmark, and raised a new debate about Islam and Shariah. Danish politicians have stumbled over each other to come with new measurements to avoid the rise of Islamic awareness among Muslims.
Among the proposal have been “exit-programs” as for bikers and gang members. A certification of imams, to ensure that they conform to secular democratic values. More offers for young Muslims who want to run away from home. A strong call to young Muslims to rebel against their parents and Islam and other proposals alike.
These proposals are not new, and the current stir is not about the so-called documentary, but rather about raising a new attack on Islam and Muslims. An attempt to put pressure on the Mosques to stop talking about Islam, so future generations can grow up empty of the Islamic ideology.
Several things could be learned from this, and here is a short list with a few of them:
  • There is no “moderate” and “extreme” Islam, there is just Islam, and Muslims abide by it.
  • Mosques should be independent from governmental funds, and speak the truth no matter the consequences.
  • The last decade of attempts to assimilate and intimidate Muslims, have completely failed.
  • The young generation of Muslims is even more aware of-and abiding to Islam, than the generation before them.
  • The “benefit” for Islam and the Muslims, is where Islam defines it to be and nowhere else.
  • It only and always pays to speak the truth both in public and in private.
  • Muslims should increase their contact with non-Muslims, to inform them of Islam, free from Islamophobic propaganda.
The purpose of intimidating Muslims to abandon, or at least be silent of Islam and Shariah as a complete solution, has again failed heavily. In turbulent times like these, Muslims have again and again showed that they will stand for Islam and that pressure only makes them hold fast even stronger.

Junes Kock
Media Representative of Hizb ut Tahrir in Scandinavia

Video: "Reforming" Islam's creed and Shariah | Uthman Badar

Talk 1 from the event "The Agenda to "Reform" Islam" held in Sydney, Australia in February 2016. Delivered by Uthman Badar, media representative of Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia

Q&A: Blood Money for Accidental Killing

As-Salaam Alaikum, I have a question: in the book, The Punishment System in Islam, it states that the killing is of four types, the fourth type what takes the course of wrongful killing, and it is known as the murder without the will of the perpetrator. If it is carried out without his will then why does he have to pay blood money, knowing that the Hadith says, my Ummah will not be accounted for mistakes?
From Hamzeh Shihadeh

Wa Alaikum us Salaam Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatuhu,
What you are asking about is mentioned in the book, The Punishment System in Islam, in the following texts:
“And killing is in four forms: intentional, and semi intentional and accidental (mistaken) and what takes the course of wrongful killing. The intentional form of killing is clear from the verse:
ومن يقتل مؤمناً متعمداً
“But whoever kills a believer intentionally”
(An-Nisa: 93)
The semi-intentional is clear from the narration of Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-Aas that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:
«ألا إن دِيَةَ الخطأ شبه العمد ما كان بالسوط مائة من الإبل منها أربعون في بطونها أولادها»
“The blood money of the killing by mistake, semi-intentional is what is in place of one hundred camels, including forty in the bellies of her children”
As for killing by mistake (accidental), it is clear from the verse:
وما كان لمؤمن أن يقتل مؤمناً إلا خطأ
“And never is it for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake”
(An-Nisa: 92)
as for what takes the course of wrongful killing, it is a form of the killing by mistake but the definition of killing does not fit it, because its reality differs from the killing by mistake, since the killing by mistake is accompanied by the will of the deed, but the person misses the target that he was aiming for, but what takes the course of wrongful killing is not accompanied by the will to act at all, the action is not by intention at all, its reality is different from the reality of the accidental killing, such as if a sleeping person turns over on someone and kills him, or if a person  falls on someone from a height and kills him, or trips over and falls on someone and kills him … that is why it takes the ruling as the first form of killing by mistake, which its blood money should be a hundred camels, together with Kafara (atonement) which is freeing a slave, if he does not have that then he fasts for two consecutive months.”
And now we come to answer your question:
The Hadith narrated by Ibn Hibban from Ibn Abbas that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said:
«إِنَّ اللَّهَ تَجَاوَزَ عَنْ أُمَّتِي الْخَطَأَ وَالنِّسْيَانَ وَمَا اسْتُكْرِهُوا عليه»
“Allah forgives my Ummah for mistakes, forgetfulness and what is forced upon them (by duress)”, is not an evidence for what you explained because the meaning of the hadith is that Allah Almighty does not punish people for mistakes, or when they commit action out of forgetfulness or under duress. I.e. that Allah سبحانه وتعالى will not punish those people because their actions do not carry any sin. The one who kills another by mistake when aiming a shot at a bird but it hits that person, he is not sinful in Islam, and the same is for the one who kills others in what takes the course of wrongful killing, like falling from a height and killing someone, it is not a sin in Islam, because the action in both cases applies to the hadith, they are not sinful… and it seems that you asked the question because you thought that the payment of blood money is a punishment for an act of murder, the act is not by the will of the person, but it was outside his sphere of control, and so you asked how is he punished?
And what is correct is that blood money is in case of killing by mistake, and what takes the course of wrongful killing is not a punishment for an act of murder, this is confirmed by the fact that this blood money is due in the money of Al’Aqila, who are the kin group of a man: his brothers, uncles and their children, and downwards… Even though they did not commit anything, and it is not obligatory in the money of the killers who killed by mistake, if he was to be punished then the blood money (Diyyah) would have been obliged from his money, as in the case of the obligation from the money of the killer by intention.
And from Shariah evidences is that Blood money of killing by mistake is not taken from the money of the murderer but from the money of the ‘Aqila:
Directed by Ibn Majah in his Sunan from Al-Mughira Bin Shu’ba that he said:
«قَضَى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم بِالدِّيَةِ عَلَى الْعَاقِلَةِ»
“The Messenger of Allah ﷺ decreed that the blood money is on the ‘Aqila”.
I will quote to you the opinions of the scholars who have adopted this:
–  Abu Yusuf, the companion of Abu Hanifa, says in his book “Al-Athar”: “.. and killing by mistake is when you aim at something but strike another by the weapon, the blood money is therefore in this case is upon the ‘Aqila …”
– In As-Sunan Al-Kubra by Bayhaaqi: “Ash-Shafi’i, may Allah have mercy on him, said: I did not know anyone who disputed that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ decreed that blood money is on the ‘Aqila, and this is more in the Hadith of Al-Khasah, we mentioned it from Hadith of Al-Khasah.” This is also mentioned in “Al-Uum” by Ash-Shafi’i: “There are two states of the mind, the intentional (killing), in which the blood money is taken from the offender and not his ‘Aqila, whether there is a decrease or increase, and the mind of the (killing) by mistake in which the blood money is on the ‘Aqila of the offender, whether there is a decrease or increase.”
– Ibn Qudaamah said in al-Mughni: “Ibn al-Mundhir said: It is agreed by all of whom we learned from the scholars, that killing by mistake, is when someone aims to throw something, but hits another, I do not know of anyone who disagreed. This is the view of Omar bin Abdul Aziz, Qatada, Nakha’i, Az-Zahri, Ibn Shubrumah, Ath-Thawry, Malik, Ash-Shafi’i, and people of opinion. This mistake makes it an obligation on the ‘Aqila to pay the Diyyah and kafara from the money of the killer, and we do not know of any dispute.”
In conclusion, Diyyah, the blood money, in the accidental killing is not a punishment to the murderer in the sense that he is sinful because of the accidental killing, otherwise it would have been taken from his money and not from the ‘Aqila’s money, who did not commit the killing, the accidental killer is not sinful for killing by mistake or what takes the course of wrongful killing, and the noble Hadith applies to it.
As for why the Shar’i obliged the blood money on killing by mistake and what takes the course of wrongful killing upon the ‘Aqila, it is for a wisdom not specified for us by the Shar’, and Allah is the Most Wise Most Aware.
Your brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah
22 Jumada I 1437 AH
2/3/2016 CE
The link to the answer from the Ameer’s Facebook page:

The link to the answer from the Ameer’s Google Plus page:

The link to the answer from the Ameer’s Twitter page:

Saturday, March 05, 2016

Video: A Caliphate Soldier and an American Legend

The US has been openly misleading the public and the international community about the nature of political Islam, specifically the Caliphate. US history has solidified that the U.S. is very familiar with the caliphate state, and America is fully aware of the emerging Caliphate. The US has a lengthy history of good relations, but it chooses to conceal that part of history.

Q&A: Bio-Energy Therapy

As-Salamu Alaikum,
I am a student studying nursing at Hebron University, our lecturer, who teaches us, has started taking courses in the field of energy therapy and wants to study it in her Masters.
But a colleague of ours has researched the subject and said that it is forbidden in Islam, but the lecturer asked him for the conclusive proof of the prohibition in Islam, because she wants to complete her studies in it, but the student was not able to bring a clear evidence from the Qur’an and Sunnah on this subject, can you please provide me with your opinion in this subject?
From Iman Thawabteh

It is not clear from the question what is meant by bio-energy therapy, and it was better for the inquirer to explain the meaning of bio-energy therapy to be able to provide the specific answer to the question
However, the introduction of prohibition in the subject makes me suspect that she is not inquiring about the physical tangible energy such as radiation energy and laser therapy for example, and radiation therapy to treat cancer whereby a high-energy rays are used or MRI: Magnetic resonance imaging) (In short it is called magnetic x-ray procedure) or so, there is no problem in using these in therapy … but I expect that the inquirer is asking about the energy called Bio-Energy… If this is the energy in question then I say and may Allah grant us success:
According to the information we have attained on the subject of Bio-Energy Therapy, it became clear that it is a type of treatment based on a philosophical Buddhist foundations, its founders allege “that it is a psychophysical and spiritual therapy built on understanding the unseen effects on humans discovered by the ancient Orientalists, of which the most important is the existence of a flowing force in the universe called “Qi”, or “chi” or “prana”, man can derive and absorb it invisibly into his body organs to be cured from the physical incurable diseases and the prevention of mental disorders and depression, but also to gain mental influencing abilities that enables him to reach for success and change people and treat their bodies and mentalities dramatically … “and that the treatment mixes exercise with deception and superstition …
There is no doubt that such a treatment is forbidden because it is built upon philosophical foundations of Buddhism, which is contrary to Islam, and for being a type of deception and superstition…
Just because there is no text in the Quran and Sunnah that mentions the therapy under the name Bio-Energy Therapy, it does not mean that it cannot be forbidden, but it is enough to prove that this treatment is forbidden because it is built on the philosophical foundations of Buddhism and paganism, and it mixes exercise with deception and superstition.
If this is the subject in question, then the answer is mentioned above, but if it is regarding a different form of energy then please explain it clearly so that we can answer it, Allah willing.

Your brother,
Ata Bin Khalil Abu Al-Rashtah
08 Jumada I 1437 AH
17/2/2016 CE

The link to the answer from the Ameer’s Facebook page:
The link to the answer from the Ameer on Google Plus:
The link to the answer from the Ameer on Twitter: