29. The Prophet has said in a hadith of the Sahihayn, “A believer’s jewelry will end where his ablution ends” (Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir).

30. Some have understood the verse as, “They will be adorned therein with bracelets of gold and (with) pearls,” and not as “adorned therein with bracelets of gold and pearls.” But it sounds more correct to render it as, “They will be adorned therein with bracelets of gold and silver” (Qurtubi).

31. It might be recalled that, according to report in Nasa’i, the Prophet said,

من لبس الحرير في الدنيا لم يلبسه في الآخرة و من شرب الخمر في الدنيا لم يشربه في الآخرة و من شرب في آنية الذهب و الفضة في الدنيا لم يشرب بها في الآخرة ثم قال : لباس أهل الجنة و شراب أهل الجنة و آنية أهل الجنة

“Whoever wore silk in this world, will not wear it in the Hereafter. Whoever drank wine in this world will not drink it in the Hereafter. And whoever drank out of gold and silver ware in this world will not drink out of them in the Hereafter.” Then he added, “(These are) the attires of the people of Paradise, drinks of the people of Paradise and vessels of the people of Paradise.”

The report is in Mustadrak of Hakim which Dhahabi declared trustworthy (Au.).

However, some scholars have thought that the prohibition will remain until a man has been through the punishment and until he has entered Paradise. Once in there, the ban will be removed. But, the apparent words do not lend support to such a meaning. What they convey, rather, is that even if they entered Paradise, they will be denied these things. Indeed, this is confirmed by another sound report coming through Abu Sa`id al-Khudri. The Prophet said,

من لبس الحرير في الدنيا لم يلبسه في الآخرة و إن دخل الجنة لبسه أهل الجنة و لم يلبسه

“He who wore silk in this world, will not wear it in the Hereafter even if he entered Paradise. Others in Paradise will wear it, but not he” (Qurtubi).

The above report is also from Hakim’s Mustadrak and declared trustworthy by Dhahabi (Au.).

32. Ibn `Abbas interpreted the term “hudu” as “they were inspired” (Ibn Jarir).

33. Referring to the words, “They were guided to the Good Word, Tabari reports Ibn Zayd as having said that the following is the Good Word:

لا إله إلا الله، والله أكبر، والحمد لله

Some others have said that the allusion is to the Qur’an, yet others that it is words of supplication that are meant. Ibn `Abbas said that the allusion is to the testimony (Ibn Jarir, Qurtubi).

As regardsthe words, “They were guided to the path of the Praiseworthy,” the allusion is the guidance to the place where, as a trustworthy hadith says,

يُلْهَمُونَ التَّسْبِيحَ وَالتَّحْمِيدَ كَمَا يُلْهَمُونَ النَّفَسَ

“They will be inspired with praises and hymns, as one is inspired with the breathing action (Ibn Kathir).

The above is part of a hadith in Muslim (Au.).

34. There have been differences in the understanding of the textual term al-Masjid al-Haram, whether it refers to the Holy Mosque alone or to the entire area surrounding it?

The area surrounding the Ka`bah is, at present, about 22 acres in size (Au.).

Most commentators believe it applies to the entire Haram. Mawdudi expands it to include the entire “hill”. He writes “Now, it is quite evident that the performance of Hajj rites is not confined to the Holy Mosque. Instead, its rituals are performed at several places, such as, Safa, Marwah, Muzdalifah and `Arafat.”

However, Sufi Thanwi, who was also a Mufti of the Hanafiyy order, brings the fuqaha’s brilliance to fore. He writes that the subsequent passage, “which We have made equally (open) to (all) men, whether resident therein or visitor” offers the evidence that the whole of the Haram is included in the term “Masjid al-Haram.” Allah said in this passage, “whether resident therein..” Obviously, the residents do not live inside the Holy Mosque.

35. Our translation of “baad” as “visitor” is based on the explanations offered by Mujahid, Qatadah, Ibn Zayd and others as in Ibn Jarir.

What exactly is the implication of the passage, “Which We have made equally (open) to (all) men, whether resident therein or visitor?” Ibn `Abbas said that it means that everyone, whether a Makkan or non-Makkan, should have equal access to the Holy House and have the right of residence in the town. This was also the opinion of Mujahid, Abu Salih, Zayd b. Aslam and a few others. The unanimous opinion is that the entire Haram area is a “waqf property” for Muslims of all parts of the world. In fact, in earlier times, quarters in Makkah (not houses within the quarters) did not have doors to them; nor individual houses had doors to their courtyards. In `Umar’s time someone installed a door because of increased theft. `Umar objected to it. The person involved said that he wished to secure people’s property. So `Umar kept quiet and other people began to add doors to their houses. However, `Umar had ordered that doors leading to every courtyard (or quarters) should be left open during the Hajj season in order to allow the Pilgrims alight wherever they wished. Imam Malik nevertheless ruled that the rule was applicable to the Grand Mosque alone, whereas the Makkan residents had the right to close the doors of their houses. Most scholars have accepted this and this is the practice till today (Qurtubi).

(Indeed, some have thought that properties in Makkah cannot be bought, sold, or rented out). In fact, Imam Shafe`i and Is-haq b. Rahwayh differed over this issue while they were in the Masjid al-Khayf (in Mina). Ibn Hanbal also happened to be there. Imam Shafe`i’s opinion was that Makkan property could be bought, sold, inherited, and rented out. In evidence he presented the hadith of the Sahihayn according to which Usama b. Zayd asked the Prophet, “Messenger of Allah. Shall we alight in your quarters in Makkah tomorrow?” He answered, “Has `Aqeel left us any property in Makkah?” (Aqeel had sold out his house in his absence). It is also reported that `Umar ibn al-Khattab had bought out Safwan b. Umayyah’s quarters in Makkah for 4000 Dirhams to convert it into a prison. However, Is-haq b. Rahwayh was of the opinion that Makkan property could not be inherited and could not be rented out. He presented a hadith in evidence (now in Ibn Majah) which says, “The Prophet, Abu Bakr and `Umar died, but no one claimed the Makkan properties except the (roaming) cattle. Whoever wished, settled in Makkah, and whoever did not, allow others do it. This happens to be the opinion of quite a few of the Salaf, Mujahid, and `Ata’ being noteworthy. `Abdullah ibn `Amr would not allow the sale of Makkan property or its renting. He reported, “Whoso devoured rents from Makkan property, devoured Fire.” Indeed, `Umar ibn al-Khattab had prohibited that the Makkan residential quarters be closed off with doors, preventing Pilgrims from alighting in any quarter. Imam Ahmad seemed to have taken the middle road when he said that the Makkan property maybe owned, inherited, but could not be rented out” (Ibn Kathir).

The Hanafiyy position however is that it is undesirable (makruh) to charge rent on the Makkan houses during the pilgrimage season. Otherwise, its property might be bought, sold, leased, inherited, and rented out (Alusi).

36. What is “ilhaad” therein? Literally, “ilhaad” is deviation from the right course. Mujahid said that the allusion is to declaring associates to Allah, in short, shirk. But Ibn `Abbas thought the reference is to treating Allah’s unlawful as lawful therein, such as, taking life without right. A few others – such as `Abdullah Ibn `Amr - have included all sins. Dahhak b. Muzahim in fact went a step further to say that whoever was not in Makkah, but wished to commit a sin therein (along with any other), would be counted a sinner even if he played no role in the sin committed (Ibn Jarir).

In other words, if one willed a sin but did not commit it, normally he will not have it written down against him in his Book of Deeds. But the rule is different in reference to Makkah, where, even if someone merely willed, although he did not execute his will, he will be sinning (Qurtubi).

Sa`id b. Jubayr in fact included such small matters as abusing one’s servant as violation of Makka’s sanctity. In a hadith preserved by Ibn Abi Hatim, the Prophet counted

احْتِكارُ الطَّعامِ بِمَكَّةَ إلحَادٌ

“hoarding of grain in Makkah” as “disbelief.”

Haythami pointed out that one of the narrators have been treated trustworthy by Ibn Hibban, while others distrusted him (Au.).

There is another report in which the Prophet said,

يَغْزُو جَيْشٌ الْكَعْبَةَ فَإِذَا كَانُوا بِبَيْدَاءَ مِنَ الأَرْضِ خُسِفَ بِأَوَّلِهِمْ وَآخِرِهِمْ

“An army will head towards Makkah (to subdue it). But when they are in the middle of the desert, the first and the last will be swallowed in. (Some scholars have said that the army will be after the newly appeared Mahdi: Au.).

Similar versions appear in several collections, one of which Albani treated as Sahih.

Accordingly, (when Ibn Zubayr had been besieged in Makkah by Hajjaj b. Yusuf’s troops), `Abdullah ibn `Umar went up to him and said, “I have heard the Prophet say,

إِنَّهُ سَيُلْحِدُ فِيهِ رَجُلٌ مِنْ قُرَيْشٍ لَوْ وُزِنَتْ ذُنُوبُهُ بِذُنُوبِ الثَّقَلَيْنِ لَرَجَحَتْ قَالَ فَانْظُرْ لَا تَكُونُهُ

‘A man from the Quraysh will make it lawful. If his sins are weighed against the sins of the two (Jinn and mankind), they will outweigh. So, see to it that you do not happen to be that person” (Ibn Kathir).

Haythami treated the above report as trustworthy (Au.).

In fact, `Abdullah ibn `Amr b. al-`Aas was so careful about not committing the slightest of sins in the Haram that he had two quarters in Makkah: one within the Haram area and another outside it, in the Hill area. He only reproached his family members or shouted at them in the Hill house but never in the Haram house (Qurtubi).