Is there ijma'a on contagious disease?

Discussion in 'Hadith' started by FaqirHaider, Jun 16, 2020.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider اللَه المقدر والعالم شؤون لا تكثر لهمك ما قدر يكون

    Don't worry brother I appreciate your criticism, and arguments, and I don't mean to call those points ad hominems, I meant the sprinkling of insults throughout those criticisms ;) .It will be fruitful for me in the end regardless as I may learn new things :). Rest assured this wasn't a waste of time, at least for me since (I'll take your advice and read those books).

    I won't reply until you have have fully addressed all the points. May Allah give you the tawfiq to do so.
  2. SaadSohail

    SaadSohail Active Member

    Have patience.
    And meanwhile while you are at it; try reading a bit on:

    Logical fallacies:

    P.S calling out on Incorrect interpretation of data, pointing out where the misrepresentation of information has taken place, pointing out the sleight of hand the opponent uses to build his case over under an "alleged" article the information of which essentially self-refutes the original claim of the opponent, pointing out the absurd and/or non-sequitor inferences in the opponent's argument, calling out on the fact of how ignorant the opponent is of "medical" science and taking the hadith out of their original context and the apparant denial of "observed" phenomena, pointing out the fact that opponent makes claim about medical science which are at best unsubstantiated and lie in direct contradiction to what has been observed AND calling out on the fact that the opponent hasn't bothered to verify his claims is NOT an adhominem. ;)

    At the very least i expect the people i am conversing with to "know" these things. Otherwise, it is a just matter of debating for the sake of debating. A total waste of time.
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2020
  3. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider اللَه المقدر والعالم شؤون لا تكثر لهمك ما قدر يكون

    Edit: 0.08%, 1.3%
    I had forgotten to multiple by 100 : In case you you wish to take another ad hominen jab ;), feel free regardless.
  4. SaadSohail

    SaadSohail Active Member

    Let's define slippery slope fallacy:

    In a slippery slope argument, a course of action is rejected because, with little or no evidence, one insists that it will lead to a chain reaction resulting in an undesirable end or ends. The slippery slope involves an acceptance of a succession of events without direct evidence that this course of events will happen.

    So your claim that i am committing a slippery slope fallacy is rejected because you haven't bothered to substantiate your claim.

    Not only that, you have a really convoluted (fallacious) way of thinking:

    Approximately 529,000 women die from pregnancy-related causes annually and almost all (99%) of these maternal deaths occur in developing nations.

    In other words, you are "straw-manning" me and bringing a false analogy on the table. I talk about apples and you bring oranges.

    The comparison

    1)First majority of pregnant women DONOT die from pregnanacies.
    2)Secondly, majority of pregnancies ARE UNREMARKABLE (without complications).
    3)No known correlating factors which husbands could undertake as a preventative precaution which is linked with "reduced" complication rates of delivery and pregnancy have ever been found.
    Compare the above with:
    1)Majority of people with COVID19 develop symptoms following exposure.
    2)Some develop moderate symptoms and require hospitalization and even ventilation and then recover.
    3)Some develop severe symptoms and require ventilation.
    4) Majority would recover.
    5)Known correlating factors are found such as social distancing, wearing masks, or washing hands with soap which are linked with reduced spread compared to those who don't practise precautionary measures.

    So you see you are making bogus argument which doesn't stand its ground. It is not only a straw-man but a false analogy as well.

    It doesn't take one to be a doctor to understand preventative" measures such as social distancing and wearing masks are linked with lesser infection rates compared to those who don't adopt such measures.

    Where as no such correlating factors ARE KNOWN and proven for which husbands need to take precautionary measures which are linked with reduced complications rate in pregnant women.

    Since you are too intellectually "dormant" to understand this all.

    Let me give you a better example:

    A husband is a known alcoholic and he forces his pregnant wife to drink alcohal with him. Now alcohal consumption is correlated with "fetal alcohal syndrome."

    This syndrome is not something which happen with "immediate effect" following consumption of alcohal. It happens following chronic exposure...
    This is a good example because it matches what WE ARE talking about. This is where the "husband" is repsonsible.

    Or the HIV example given in the previous post reflects the scenario in a much better way (POST #86). This is where the doctor is responsible where he is using the same syringe for each of his patient.

    How about another example? I love giving examples:

    This incident happened with me in a clinical setting at a hospital.

    I counselled a guy who a child with CKD (chronic kidney disease). The guy was adamant and he didnot want his child to undergo dialysis. Doctors came and went trying to consel him. And i noticed something. All those doctors spent about 2-3 minutes with him and when they noticed that the guy remained unconvinced they signed the papers saying "father not convinced and walked away". I took the father to my room (doctor's room) and conselled him. It took me 2 hours to counsel him. And he agreed.

    Kidneys donot function in CKD patients or they have a very minimal function. This person was of the view that without dialysis his son was still making urine so it is sufficient.

    Now urea in blood doesn't build over night. (it can in some situations). The uremic condition is linked with coma and death without dialysis.

    We did the dialysis and his son was fine (by the will of Allah). But the moment i left the ward after a few weeks, his father denied treatment for his son. And in the next 5 days he died.
    There were no immediate effects. Not all patients with CKD require dialysis as well.

    Your post is as clear as a day. It needs no TAWIL of its own.

    I think giving a balanced verdict should be taken, personally I have mingled with the infected , a family friend lost someone to the virus, I visited their house for condolences (apparently all but one person was positive), the gave me gloves, but that was maybe 10 minutes after, I talked and hugged one of the brothers (who was convinced he was false negative since everyone else was positive), neither me or anyone in my family were infected (through me), and this was a month ago, similarly my brother who hung out with his friend whose family too were infected, yet nothing happened to us Alhamdulillah.

    It is indeed very stange that your so called "dismantling" is not only working against you but proving beyond a reasonable doubt how ignorant and stubborn you really are.

    What is strange is that all this while, you didnot actually bothered to sit straight and do your research.

    HOW did you jump from cure from taking medicine is Optional to taking precautionary measures is OPTIONAL when:

    Anas bin Malik narrated that a man said:
    "O Messenger of Allah! Shall I tie it and rely(upon Allah), or leave it loose and rely(upon Allah)?" He said: "Tie it and rely(upon Allah)."

    What you fail to understand is the Quran and hadith corpus needs to be understand "wholly". Not taking individual ahadith to suit your own "twisted" notions of responsibility.

    Any person could use the hadith to suit his preconcieved notions, and astonishingly you are quite apt at.
    The only problem is that your whole argument lacks a "rational" foundation. You do not understand Predestination and niether do you understand the concept of responsibility. Not only that ,what you think you understand about "medical science" is also dubious at best.

    What you are good at is taking isolated hadith to prove a point of yours that it is not required to take precautionary measures YET surprisingly you have affirmed responsibility for a person who is a diabetic with bad habits all the while not realizing that none of what he does is associated with immediate "complications" (or effects as you seem to put it).

    Talk about apples and you will have oranges. BTW the answer is within the very hadith that you gave here. Look again.

    Agreed. When did i suggest otherwise? I must say your love for logical fallacies is very obvious in your posts. (Hint: "red-herring".)

    Says someone who brings an article, all in a rather shoddy attempt to prove that what he did was "right".And doesnot even bother to read that what the article claims is in direct oppositon to his claim. And such an individual then has the audacity to talk about how pious the other individual is especially when he makes the following claim:

    Dishearted? Of course not.
    Ashamed? YES. Of how "ignorant" you really are of Islam, The concept of QADR and the modern science.

    By your definitions the doctor who uses the same hypodermic needles for the same patients can say that he is spreading MERCY (in the form of HIV) and that he is not responsible.

    It is true that disease is a mercy for the believers as it sheds SINS BUT that doesn't mean a person puts himself in conditions where he puts others or himself at risk.

    Red-herring. Not the point of discussion.

    Are you really that stupid? The prophet ﷺ did give glad tidings to those who are sick. No questions about that.

    But where did you pull this out from "then if I am an agent in spreading this “MERCY” why are you disheartened?"

    When did the noble prophetﷺ asked us to invite problems and trials under the pretense of Tawakul OR to put other people's lives in danger under the pretense of spreading mercy?

    حَدَّثَنَا مُوسَى بْنُ إِسْمَاعِيلَ، حَدَّثَنَا حَمَّادٌ، أَخْبَرَنَا قَتَادَةُ، عَنْ أَنَسٍ، أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم كَانَ يَقُولُ ‏ "‏ اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَعُوذُ بِكَ مِنَ الْبَرَصِ وَالْجُنُونِ وَالْجُذَامِ وَمِنْ سَيِّئِ الأَسْقَامِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏

    Source: Sunan Abī Dāwūd 1554

    Grade: Sahih

    عَنْ أَنَسٍ أَنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ كَانَ يَقُولُ اللَّهُمَّ إِنِّي أَعُوذُ بِكَ مِنْ الْبَرَصِ وَالْجُنُونِ وَالْجُذَامِ وَمِنْ سَيِّئْ الْأَسْقَامِ

    سنن أبي داود كتاب الصلاة باب تفريع أبواب الوتر باب في الاستعاذة

    حَدَّثَنِي عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ الْمَلِكِ بْنُ عَمْرٍو، حَدَّثَنَا زُهَيْرُ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ، عَنْ مُحَمَّدِ بْنِ عَمْرِو بْنِ حَلْحَلَةَ، عَنْ عَطَاءِ بْنِ يَسَارٍ، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ، وَعَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، عَنِ النَّبِيِّ صلى الله عليه وسلم قَالَ ‏ "‏ مَا يُصِيبُ الْمُسْلِمَ مِنْ نَصَبٍ وَلاَ وَصَبٍ وَلاَ هَمٍّ وَلاَ حُزْنٍ وَلاَ أَذًى وَلاَ غَمٍّ حَتَّى الشَّوْكَةِ يُشَاكُهَا، إِلاَّ كَفَّرَ اللَّهُ بِهَا مِنْ خَطَايَاهُ ‏"‏‏.‏
    (Sahih al-Bukhari 5641, 5642)

    The prophet ﷺdid both. He taught us the dua to seek refuge of Allah from illnesses yet at the same time to seek cure when you are sick and/or be patient as it sheds the sins of the believers.

    Your failure comes from your inability to reconcile the hadith with your twisted notions of predestination and responsibility.

    It is a mercy from Allah when you get infected. That doesn't mean you start putting lives of other peoples at risk under the false pretense that you are spreading "mercy".

    Narrated Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri and Abu Huraira:

    The Prophet (ﷺ) said, "No fatigue, nor disease, nor sorrow, nor sadness, nor hurt, nor distress befalls a Muslim, even if it were the prick he receives from a thorn, but that Allah expiates some of his sins for that."

    According to your twisted logic: a believer should start intentionally stricking his feet "repeatedly" on a thorn because it would then lead to expiation of sins. Subhan Allah.

    Or one should start placing thorns in the paths of believers BECAUSE it would (by the will of Allah) be a means of removal of their sins.

    What can be said about a person who does this?

    And Guidance alone is from Allah.

    P.S i would be writing the response to the rest of the posts in due time. In sha Allah.
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2020
  5. SaadSohail

    SaadSohail Active Member

    Isn't this whole conversation revolving around personal responsibility?

    It doesn't take much for an individual (a person who is NOT intellectually handicapped) to understand the nonsense of your implication here.

    Your underlying assumption that if the "immediate effect" is NOT THERE and there is no 90-99% aquisition therefore by default the person is not responsible.

    Let me spill out the beans for you:

    The aquisition of HIV is correlated with "infected" blood transfusions and re-using hypodermic needles in the same patients. This is OBSERVED. NOT WAHM or speculation.
    What is NOT observed is a patient developing HIV without exposure. (But this is not rationally impossible. It could happen. But that isn't the NORM).

    Now a doctor in order to save some money,uses the same syringe to withdraw blood samples from a vast majority of patients.

    The ihtiat here was to use a brand new syringe each time he withdraws sample from the patients.
    But he didn't do that. He wants to save some money. And he didn't know who the HIV carrier was.

    Now the thing with HIV is that it normally takes 10-20 years to develop FULL BLOWN AIDS-an untreatable disease according to medical community. There are no immediate effects except from flu which normally develops around 3-4 weeks following exposure.
    And the newer drugs are either unavailable or beyond the means of a common man and they are NOT linked (correlated) with eradication of AIDS/HIV.

    Therefore, according to your own principles, we should stop using "new hypodermic needles" each time we withdraw a blood sample, we should stop isolating "dialysis" machines for HIV individuals and we should stop screening blood for HIVs. After all we are not responsible. Right?

    Let me ask a better question, would you allow me to inject HIV contaminated blood in your vein?
    or your father's vein?
    But my question isn't precise. So let me rephrase it for you:
    Would you allow me to inject a needle into your vein which i have been using on my patients for the last 1 month?
    After all, since I am not responsible, according to you, then why not go ahead and do it?

    Wasn't this your original contention when you stated your lack of not taking precautionary measures is in accordance with Shariah and the fact that you are not responsible?


    On 25 April 2019, the local administration in Larkana district was alerted by media reports of a surge in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) cases among children in Ratodero Taluka, Larkana district, Sindh province, Pakistan. A screening camp was initially established at Taluka’s main hospital. Later, screening was expanded to other health facilities including selected Rural Health Centers (RHCs) and Basic Health Units (BHUs). HIV rapid test kits that were initially used were replaced with pre-qualified WHO test kits.

    From 25 April through 28 June 2019, a total of 30,192 people have been screened for HIV, of which 876 were found positive. Eighty-two per cent (719/876) of these were below the age of 15 years. During the screening, several risk factors were identified, including: unsafe intravenous injections during medical procedures; unsafe child delivery practices; unsafe practices at blood banks; poorly implemented infection control programs; and improper collection, storage, segregation and disposal of hospital waste.

    Can the doctor present an excuse here that he didn't know who the (HIV)carrier was and therefore by default he is not responsible for using the same syringe in multiple number of patients despite knowing the fact that "using the same syringe is a correlating factor of HIV transmission"?

    And guidance alone is from Allah.

    More posts will be added in due time in sha Allah.
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2020
  6. SaadSohail

    SaadSohail Active Member

    I Never ONCE claimed that you called the corona virus itself Wahmi. What does that statement even mean?
    These kind of (intentional or unintentional tactics) change the frame of discussion. They drift the conversation to a place which was never about the original discussion in the first place.

    I have no idea where you pulled that out from.

    How does any of what you wrote above negate the following:
    It has been observed that majority of people staying in contact with COVID19 get infected?
    It doesn’t.

    However the article you quoted isn’t about what you claim it is about. I will address that later in this post.

    You need to demonstrate for the readers; “what frame of your position” I changed. If you meant the following then there is no need. I will address that.

    Your posts have given me enough experience on not to debate those who like to talk without knowledge. IF your concern was “immediate” effect then you wouldn’t have written the following:

    What are the statistics here that you are talking about?

    You do not even know how much time a diabetic patient normally takes (with poor glycemic control) to develop gangrene of toes (following autonomic neuropathy) which ultimately leads to having the toes being "amputed" by a surgeon.

    When i asked:
    The man doesnot mend his ways.3 months later, his toes are amputated. 6 months later his whole foot is amputated. After a year he dies from what they call a "Silent" heart attack.
    Is this person not responsible for not taking care of his health?

    You responded:
    [quoted]As stated he is responsible for his actions here, since he in in control of this affair (by will of Allah).[/quoted]

    I will repeat what i wrote earlier. You have no idea what this discussion is about in the first place.


    The following is directly QUOTING YOU.

    You shouldn’t have inserted that “Ebola virus” fatality rate comment here. Because since you did that it is indeed a false analogy fallacy NOT A NON-SEQUITOR.

    Not only that your previous posts are riddled with “Mortality” rates (which I later addressed) when it wasn’t the point of discussion in the first place. The point of discussion was “Your responsibility” which you are STILL very keen on evading.

    Anyways this whole point of discussion pertaining to immediate effects is somewhat STILL IRRELEVANT.

    To those who didn’t understand:
    1)please see how much time it normally takes for a diabetic person with poor glycemic control (albeit linked to person’s poor eating habits or laziness in taking medicines) to develop complications such as foot gangrene.
    2)And while you are at it try researching how “better” glycemic control correlates with development of complications and/or better outcomes.

    While it is TRUE that not all humans who get in contact with the VIRUS develop the symptoms, I totally grant that.

    But that doesn’t evade the fact that majority of individuals who DO get the disease have a history of CONTACT. That is observed.This is NOT WAHM.

    It is NOT the following case:

    1) It has been observed that people staying in contact with COVID19 get infected. (50%)
    2) It has been observed that people who did not stay in contact with COVID 19 get infected as well. (50%).

    While you can Find isolated examples where people could develop COVID symptoms without PRIOR history (It is not rationally impossible) BUT that doesn’t negate the fact that majority of individuals who get infected with COVID19 are have a contact history with COVID19 patients.

    All this dumbing down of complex stuff should have been pretty “useless” had you bothered to research what I wrote (provided how much time you took to write this all).

    For example:

    The article that you quoted.

    Did you even bother to read it? Let me cite the relevant stuff:

    The 20-year-old from the Kokama tribe tested positive for the virus in the district of Santo Antonio do Iá, near the border with Colombia, 880km (550 miles) up the Amazon river from the state capital Manaus, Sesai said in a statement on Wednesday.

    Four cases of coronavirus have been confirmed in the same district, including a doctor who tested positive last week, raising fears the epidemic could spread to remote and vulnerable indigenous communities with devastating effect.

    Sesai said the woman was a medical worker who had been in contact with the doctor. She was the only person to test positive among 15 health workers and 12 patients tested after the doctor was found to have the virus, Sesai said. Their names were not made public.

    The doctor had returned from vacation in southern Brazil to work with the Tikunas, one of the largest tribes in the Amazon with more than 30,000 people who live in the upper Amazon near the borders with Colombia and Peru.

    The woman has not shown symptoms of Covid-19 and has been isolated with her family, Sesai said.

    Health experts warn that the spreading virus could be lethal for Brazil’s 850,000 indigenous people, who have been decimated for centuries by diseases brought by Europeans, from smallpox and malaria to the flu.

    This what you wrote:

    Now tell me isn't this a case of "intellectual dishonesty?"

    Although the article says nothing about “no known contact”, in fact it establishes the positive contact and its travel history.(The heading under the photo explicitly states this: The indigenous woman was a medical worker who had contact with an infected doctor in Brazil.)

    I still grant you that the incident happened as you claim it happened.

    So what?

    Did I for once claim that all people who get in contact with COVID19 patients develop the disease? Did i?

    What I said is, it has been observed that majority of people who get in contact with COVID19 develop the disease.

    So you are attempting to write a refutation without even bothering to read “correctly” what that article you cited is talking about in the first place?

    Define inconsistent?
    How do the majority of people getting infected from exposure to COVID19 patients sound inconsistent to you?

    Does this RED-HERRING need a response?

    I think it is better that I bring a quote from your own post:


    let the readers compare the two comments that you wrote above:

    1)After coming to know that “plaque” has broken out.
    2)After coming to know that “Majority of people who are COVID+ have CONTACT history”
    3)After coming to know that “That the disease takes time to develop and meanwhile a person could be what they call in scientific community as a carrier”.
    4)After coming to know that a “certain group of people develop extremely severe symptoms”

    A person goes out in the open meets with people who HE KNEW ARE COVID+ without taking precautionary measures and when pointed out talks about how he is not responsible by citing examples riddled with fallacious reasoning and totally irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

    Guidance alone is From Allah (swt).

    P.S i would be addressing the rest of your posts when I find time.

    Jazak Allah
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2020
  7. AMQadiri

    AMQadiri Seeker

    Shaykh Shamsuddin, the Shaykh of Sultan Muhammad Faatih alayhirahmah, proposed the theory of transmission and wrote about it in his book "Maddat ul-Hayat (The Material of Life)"

  8. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator


  9. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider اللَه المقدر والعالم شؤون لا تكثر لهمك ما قدر يكون

    No Sidi Abu Hasan, I am not fixated on that , as I clarified that pathogens effectuated (Allah Willing) cause people to get sick , I was though, attempting to appropriate the understanding of the past scholars with modern discovery without either losing much of what they said.

    The last text I mentioned actual goes further into explaining (I have not provided the screenshots) the interpreting the meaning of "la adwa" beyond the literal understanding, but we have for instance the hadith la Ghoul, isn't in rejection of the existence of ghoul as that can be found in the hadith lexicon, but a rejection of a certain "understanding and assumptions around the GHOUL(JInn)." Personally, I have a similar approach to the hadith "la Safar."

    So, I by no means reject the role of pathogens in the spread of disease as a "cause and effect phenomenon."

    But what I have an issue is with blaming the person who takes the classical approach as culpable , this can't be the status quo ,and would have to be looked at case by case basis (especially intent).

    I mentioned Ibn Qutaybah and Abu Sulayman al Khattabi, both proposed the model of virus, pathogens as causes.

    I am not denying the approach of ihtiyat, I never have, I just had personal preference over the other opinion (because there exists as you stated CONTRADICTION), and consider it more meritorious (due to the reward mentioned in hadith, if one is destined to get the disease).

    Anyone is free to disagree with me and also try to prove me wrong I will take all criticism, but as of now I am not at all convinced on (culpability) of the infector (especially with regards to airborne diseases), but particularly with COVID which is spread by aerosolized respiratory droplets,like Leprosy.

    Highly infectious and Slightly Infectious would have no bearing in the contention brought about by Brother Sohaib, because in both cases an individual would be faulted as having been an instrument in causing sickness.

    That is all. I don't have issues with people wearing or using masks, and If told to I will wear and use masks and gloves (as I do when entering stores that demand it.)

    But personally, I to use gloves , soap, and sanitize my hands when I feel there is a good chance of germs , toxins, and poison, and pathogens being present (like when digging through toxic dirt, or the like), but I will only call it naive when there is a 'significantly' high probability for harm beyond repair. For me with regards to COVID I honestly feel the numbers (relative to location ) do not justify the demand to abide by certain protocol : exceptions being the elderly .

    When I visited the family, I had already assessed they have gone through recovery and whatever pathogen in their body that would be , were already dead or to weak to spread, over the fact that my age group (20-30's) has strong immunity to this disease, Over the fact that it all boils down to my own immunity and what Allah Had willed will be.

  10. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    in the famous hadith of good company:

    if you sit near a blacksmith, your clothes could be set on fire - or at the least you will feel the smoke and heat.
    if you sit near a perfume seller - he may give you a perfume, or at the least as long as you sit there, you enjoy the nice smell.

    is perfume 'contagious'?
  11. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    does a rotten fruit spoil the bunch?
  12. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    man you don't seem to understand the simple fact that 'infection' as a cause-effect phenomenon which involves an agent is post modern knowledge. all those texts including that of alahazrat, do not consider this information.

    if you read the hadith, the three things mentioned are all similar - that is, certain things are superstitions that have persisted among people.

    if there are seemingly contradicting hadith - in this case:
    - one to avoid proximity with the diseased
    - and another that 'infection' has no basis,

    you try to reconcile the first one and find explanations. why can't you do it the other way?

    besides, you forget that the fact is TWO seemingly contradicting hadith exist. and it is scholars who are trying to explain in the terms of knowledge available to them at that time. their opinion in worldly phenomena, in spite of their high stature does not have to be accepted at all costs.

    take the aayat of "maa fi'l arHam". do you believe that ultrasound scan can reveal the sex of the foetus? or is it also an unsubstantiated claim?

    one set of fuqaha/muhaddithin favour a view; and there are also others who favour the opposite view. so it is not a matter of certainty. they admitted that it is an issue open to interpretation. many luminaries held view A (i.e. 'infection' 'contagion' does not happen) because they couldn't really explain it in a cause-effect format. hence they took the hadith literally or absolutely.

    if they had the modern knowledge of 'infectious disease' and that there IS an agent - a virus, bacteria or some other pathogen, they would probably favour the other view.

    i don't think you have read or understood what you have quoted properly. you have already fixed your understanding to mean 'infection' = 'contagion without any cause'.

    i am reminded of an interaction i had with a guy many years ago. a native arab, who was puzzled how cars were mentioned in the qur'an.

    "ja'at sayyaratun" - and a 'car' came. so you can propound on how streams of yoghurt are found in jannah. (laban). and so forth...

    [instead of a car-van. oops caravan. you can do ta'weel too: it was 'car or van' and this became car-a-van and hence, caravan.]

    Last edited: Jul 30, 2020
    Unbeknown likes this.
  13. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider اللَه المقدر والعالم شؤون لا تكثر لهمك ما قدر يكون

    REASON 3:
    The opinion of Imam Al Baqilani and Ibn Battal forwarded by Imam Hajar and Shams al Din Al Karmani :

    negating contagion for any disease, except for the diseases that are under the same category as leprosy, [which we now label as Contagious / Communicable diseases]

    My thoughts: Here we see some affirmation of contagion, and so far, this is completely aligning with “my breakdown of contagion” which you called useless, at least to me it reconciles all points mentioned in reason 1-3. As for your claim of blame/accountability. That was categorically rejected by said Ulama, (reason 2 ; sadd al dharia).

    p17.jpg p16.jpg
    REASON 4:

    Also, an opinion forwarded by Imam ibn Hajar:

    The two apparently contradicting Hadith, were revealed at two different occasions, those who have Strong Yaqeen and Tawwakul will and enjoin the company of the contagious, while those who are weak should side with caution, to prevent any wrong belief creeping into their minds.

    My thoughts: With your understanding, Imam ibn Hajar is being naïve.

    REASON 5:

    The opinion, aided by the Tawfiq of Allah, of Ibn Qutaybah and Abu Sulayman al Khattabi:

    The issue of running from a Majzoob, doesn’t event enter the topic of Adwa (as in it not an issue of aqeedah), instead it is (protocol) to prevent the transmission of disease to another by means of physical touching, clothing and sniffing.

    My thoughts: Here we have an understanding of what we call pathogens and the like, which is something I am willing to agree and adopt as it is mentioned in my initial post (I affirmed pathogens and its contagious nature). But I was rejecting the proof of it through the hadith, but clearly these ulama had said it and you also made the same point, so I will agree with you, keeping in mind that this is contingent upon points 1-4 anyway.

    REASON 6:

    Another opinion forwarded by Imam ibn Hajar:

    Categorical rejection of contagion, the command to stay away from the Leper is to protect his dignity, and not to put ill feelings into his heart, which would come from people’s uncordial and repulsive reactions upon encountering them.

    The author then goes on to commend the ulama for their efforts in aiming to mend these contradictions, and pointed that many of the mentioned reason offer answers, some better than others. He goes further, into this. But I will leave that for need bases , those who are interested may read it.

    I mentioned the above for the purpose of the group and to show that my approach is in line with sunni juristic ethos.

    Now as My final driving point I would like you to understand and think deeply on the next and final narration I will mention as it will put you in hot waters for everything you have said so far.

    Translation (matn):

    Here (i.e. in Mecca) there was a man called Nawwas and he had camels suffering from Heem : Mad Camel Disease?/(Camel spongiform encephalopathy). Ibn `Umar went to the partner of Nawwas and bought those camels. The man returned to Nawwas and told him that he had sold those camels. Nawwas asked him, To whom have you sold them? He replied, To such and such Sheikh. Nawwas said, Woe to you; By Allah, that Sheikh was Ibn `Umar. Nawwas then went to Ibn `Umar and said to him, My partner sold you camels suffering from the Heem and he had not known you. Ibn `Umar told him to take them back. When Nawwas went to take them, Ibn `Umar said to him, Leave them there as I am happy with the decision of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) that there is no Adwa.

    Hazrat Ibn Umar initially told him to return them, but then he recalled the hadith of the Prophet ﷺ and told Nawwas “LEAVE IT !” (in Punjabi vernacular something to the likes of: OI CHAT DE!) he is pleased with what the Prophet ﷺ ﷺ’s informed about the Qadr of Allah.

    Now, Heem is highly contagious, according to you what Hz Ibn Umar did was naïve, not only but Ibn Umar is reprehensibly accountable and responsible for all the healthy camel me causes to becomes sick by entering them to his collection of camels, and that since is deliberately is purchasing a contagious camel he is culpable for all subsequent infections through the interaction of his camel.

    Clearly, he did not think it was naive of him to do so.

    From Allah is Tawfeeq, al Fatiha.
  14. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider اللَه المقدر والعالم شؤون لا تكثر لهمك ما قدر يكون

    In light of the confusion brought out through my "lack of clarity," I will readdress my points and concerns, clarifying my previous post and then addressing my opinion to Brother Sohaib's points.

    My position on the issue of Contagion in general, and specifically COVID-19, and Responsibility is as such:

    The Responsibility I am speaking of is: the state or fact of being accountable or to blame for something.

    Not: being a correlator factor

    Not: the state or fact of having a duty to deal with something or of having control over someone.

    Not: the opportunity or ability to act independently and make decisions without authorization.

    Not: a thing that one is required to do as part of a job, role, or legal obligation

    Nor: a moral obligation to behave correctly toward or in respect of

    This should avoid any equivocation fallacy from this point onward.

    I shall now Provide a summary of the Ulama Opinion on the Issue of Adwa, I will be relying on a work for the sake of convenience , by a Saudi Salafi Usaama ibn Abdullah al Khayyat (I do not endorse the authors aqeedah), where he summarizes the opinion of the (Sunni -Ash’ari, Maturidi) Ulama on this issue of omens and adwa and the contention of contradiction that lie therein.

    The Ulama have mentioned 6 Possible Reasons (some stronger than others) behind this apparent contradiction. From the bat it’s already clear that there is difference and your claim that “there is only one understanding, and it’s obvious,” already falls flat on its face.

    Reason 1:
    The opinion of Qadhi Abu Bakar al Arabi , Abu Umar Ibn Al Salah, Ibn Qayyim, Al Mundhari, and Al Bayhaqi :

    Nothing infects another with a disease intrinsically, rejecting the false understanding of people of Jahiliya of correlation = Causation. The Prophet ﷺ Rebuking this false notion by “eating with a contagious person (Majzoom) to show that CURE and DISEASE ONLY occur according to the will of Allah. To prevent the minds of people to assume by observing the “common occurrence,” or what you’d like to call wajib aadatan, as the reason instead of the means that Allah has chosen at a common occurrence. The correlation is proven BUT contingent upon ALLAH’s WILL.

    Imam Nawawi: Quotes the Hadith a Sick person should not come around a healthy, person, to affirm the approach of being cautionary, NOT REJECTING USING THE MEANS or Proceeding with caution with what is observed to be common in case of contagion

    My thoughts: You (Dr. Sohaib) are taking the approach of the above said Ulama’, and Alhamdulillah that is good for you .

    REASON 2:

    The opinion of Hafidh Ibn Hajar al Asqalani, Imam Al Tahaawi, Imam al Tabari:

    The Prophet ﷺ rejected Contagion in the general sense, and he affirmed this by the hadith, nothing infects another. Then they understand that Allah creates the sickness in each person independent of the observed correlation, just like how the first camel was diseased. The command to flee from a Leper is in accordance to, closing the doors (of fitna in aqeedah), lest he think it was due mixing with a person which gave him the contagion and getting sick (by Allah had destined) affirming CONTAGION [as in wajib (not mumkin) aadatan], and that he would put himself in undue GUILT and BLAME, so he’s commanded to stay away.

    My thoughts: This is the approach I am taking, which is of the 3 Imams’ above, by the way In Aqedah it’s the same in fact it can be combined with Reason 1, so In fact My approach is of both 1 and 2 so far, but wait there is more.
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2020
  15. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider اللَه المقدر والعالم شؤون لا تكثر لهمك ما قدر يكون

    It is very relevant and you will see why near the end.

    The Arabic text does not have the word intrinsic in it , that is the work of the translator, so you don’t have “explicit” proof for it being “intrinsic power,” but that’s isn’t where I disagree with you any , I agree it is intrinsic, my point is you keep pushing the hadith about it being intrinsic but then neglect whatever come after as nothing of importance ? WHAT happened about QADR? I am looking at it holistically, denying intrinsic nature of contagion, and then “accepting the effect as QADR.

    I asked for you to bring a hadith that is explicitly trying to deny the intrinsic nature of something, and nothing else.

    I am not enforcing I gave my defense for my view and critiqued yours when you concurred; you had the “audacity” to indirectly call the approach of the Sahaba as a Naïve, by calling my approach out. If this isn’t clear don’t worry it is coming “near the end.”

    1) No, it’s not a clear giveaway, and this shows your lack of dept in this topic, this has always been a matter of debate and difference of opinion

    2) No, He agrees with me , and proof of that is coming ahead.

    It sure is sophistry, because it’s a figment of your imagination, a straw man that never existed and a non sequitur at that! How do you jump from fire being the reason for burning to exist to no believing that events can be correlated?!

    MY statement doesn’t imply anything of the like, that’s all you straw manning, plus were JAHILIYYA, ASHAR’I THEOLOGINAS? Can’t Jahiliya have sophistry? The argument of ignorance is not form me but you, yes jahiliyya believed in BAD OMENS coming from the CORRELATORY factor, they blamed owl for BAD LUCK!

    You need to back track because your confirmation bias is not purely coming from your medical background but your theological one as well.

    An argument of convenience, never was it “expressed” what responsibility meant, on one side you would refer responsibility to being a correlator, and then another as being culpable. I was not the one who was making a equivocation fallacy it was you. a

    Jazakallah Khair for the aqeedah lesson, it is very helpful but oft repeated, although the images are nice to have.

    How are you denying you ever accused me of responsibility now? YOU literally were lambasting my approach as naïve, surely to say that me being in an environment of sick people is correlated to getting the disease therefore making me responsible for putting myself in that situation.

    But Allah does provide him sustenance , even if he were to sit in a room an do nothing, he is just told to tie the camel, by typing the camel making dua or zikr is also a means but for the sufi or ahle tawakkul, and even then it is not preferred or recommended, rather striving and working is the perfect means.

    But again, this is not relevant, because in case of sickness, we are told to VISIT the sick, this is the sunnah! , only in the of a plague the hukm is stay in your land if not infected , and not leave your land if infected.

    Yes, it is and you may do so, how is it relevant to the discussion, as I already mentioned is it not in the hadith to ask to be given martyrdom in a plague? I am already in a state that has a plague, my state is among the TOP with the most cases nearly 1,800,000. I am already in an infected land, I can go wherever I want in this land, just not leave it.

    And according to Shaykh Salek, I can leave it and go wherever I want as long as I don’t believe I am postponing death.

    I don’t aim to change anyone’s opinion; I am merely defending mine and trying to prove it backed by Traditional Ulama of the highest caliber.

    I never intended to sidetrack or straw man, but as it goes, I don’t debate often so these fallacies and arguments may manifest unintentionally I do apologize for that.

    Yes as do I.
  16. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider اللَه المقدر والعالم شؤون لا تكثر لهمك ما قدر يكون

    Brother I never said don’t fight , for me tawakkul, dua iman, and proper healthy lifestyle and habits is the strategy and technique to win this war, you can have an unskilled individual with a sword and shield and still end up dead, I am not advising other not to wear masks or gloves for me I believe the strategy I am using is “sufficient” but as mentioned if any authority “requires” that I wear, then I obey the authority.

    You clearly didn’t read any of the hadith I posted from Kanz al Ummal or any other texts for that matter, Our Prophet ﷺ Prayed for the death of some among his ummah to be given the rank of Martyrdom, SHAHADA. I mentioned this before.

    That is why its an analogy which means similarity to but not the fact that it’s the same thing, and the reason why I treated it is as such is due to the wording of said hadith and that of FIRAR = to flee from FEAR of imminent harm which in the case of a plague is and dead from plague are treated as martyrs. Hence my analogy. It is not to say it takes the same Shari rulings as jihad entirely.

    And all these precautionary methods are not the same actually one is more appropriate than the other , for instance sword and shield is like mask and gloves, as it is the outer protection, but fitness and exercise is like the strong immune system, the one who Is most effective is one who has both, but with the tawfeeq and tawakkul of Allah if anyone lacks either or he can still win (as attested in war’s the Prophet ﷺ fought with support from well skilled and unskilled and weaponless ashaab alike).

    First of all, I never advocated “one MUST NOT take the means,” were did you get this from, I simply mentioned my personal approach to this issue take, a preference that is also found in the sunnah. As I will make clear near the end.

    It does imply facing death, because the word Firar, is used then someone rushes to or from something with urgency, now the other hadith mentioned running away like you run from a lion. Ask yourself do you run away form a anything other than fear of death or injury?

    This is a “loaded question,” fallacy, because you state “are you going to encourage your parents.”

    This was never my proposition to begin with, I am not encouraging anyone, I am stating “my stance,” and backing up my opinion on the matter.

    So NO, for in the case you mentioned elderly are at a high risk of 20% of death and they should take precaution

    And YES, I would still tell them both opinions, and make sure their Aqeedah is straight, and make sure they don’t assume they are “preventing death even if it by a minute.”

    I addressed this part previously, and it has already been proven that masks and gloves are not sufficient means to prevent covid from spreading, and only reduce to eliminate the chances of getting it , people are spreading the virus regardless, only sanitization and washing hands is a proper means to kill possible pathogens.

    I understand fully your proposition, and I will bring this up near the end. I hope I have made it clear that to consider this “COVID” pathogen like poison is false analogy , but if you don’t want to agree, or maybe I am mistaken , it won’t help your case , as you will see why.

    And you have failed to address the argument of legality, MAN Slaughter or murder by intent or negligence is proceeded with blood money, HOW come there is no shar’i evidence of such a “blood money” paid by any of the Sahab, Salaf or even the Muta’akhireen” for that matter , for of course they could “correlate” that a fatal sickness was passed on by an individual (culpability),

    Unfortunately for you this only weakens your argument further, it falls flat on its face.

    How can you propose on one hand that the reason is because it’s not as “contagious” (low likelihood) and then at the same time use the hadith “run from the leaper as your run from a lion” to highlight the dangers of contagion [from a not so as likely conatagion!]???

    This is an outright contradiction, additional to the fact that “culpability” is not lifted, because it’s still CONTAGIOUS! And one is STILL liable and capable by “your” standards if they get Leprosy or any of the above said disease.

    Additionally, you yet again missed the point, the hadith isn’t about Hepatitis C, it’s about leprosy, sharing the same plate with the leper, mixing the saliva of a leaper with the food. In case you forgot it is sunnah to eat together in one plate and with one’s right hand, it was not a matter of “sitting together at a meal,” as you would like, it was a matter of “EATING together from the same plate.”

    “Furthermore, how foolish it is to dismiss what the Prophet ﷺ said, “Eat having trusted Allah, and have full reliance on him!,” why the need to even say this to a leper who has a “little to no chance of spreading diseae?!”

    This hadith can not be used to “prove”, “low contagion”, and this is indeed confirmation bias to assume so. Because as mentioned the Run form the Leper as you run from a lion would them assume that it is “highly contagious,” or else why would you have on one end running from a "low contagion," and then also eat with a person who is of low contagion?

    It “can” however be affirming contagion, and saying have trust in Allah so that it doesn’t intrinsically carry over to anyone. BUT THIS IS NOT the opinion of IMAM HAJAR you keep quoting.

    I already established I don’t deny correlation, nor pathogenic spreading, this was made clear in my initial post.

    You keep missing my point, I am focused on what is to be done “after knowing the fact (that no disease is intrinsically contagious),” but you are, for whatever reason still stuck on this.

    Imam Hajar opinion is as such:

    He is denying correlation equals causation!

    and by extension I say, the one who CAUSES sickness here is ALLAH when he willed how your bodies immune system will react, and to associate blame to the person for causing “weakness in his immune system” is what is warned against.

    The author(salafi) plugs Ibn Qayyum opinion by mentioning the hadith in which the Prophet ﷺ “apparently” affirms omens, for women, a house, a horse (ride), but then it is shown that it is merely affirming the correlation when certain things are present but they “intrinsically don’t cause evil or ruin.”
  17. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider اللَه المقدر والعالم شؤون لا تكثر لهمك ما قدر يكون

    Maybe it was my mistake to assume that conclusion from the statement, by vast you mean nearly all people, since you suggesting all people to observe protocol, I appreciate the gesture and it is on good will and your job as a doctor. But you are straw manning me by changing my “majority to minority.” My argument was you denying the majority, but you reject that premise, you instead apply rhetoric and make it sound like I’m rejecting the minority.

    As more evident comes and more testing is done, I am more than willing to accept the position that vast majority, but as of now the numbers don’t convince me. Clearly you don’t want to admit, and consider it postulation that the majority didn’t get infected. The myopia I’m speaking of; is when one says with confidence that vast majority of people are observed to have this effect, for this to be true you need to have statistical report which in contingent on vast majority of people (lets say 70% of USA) to take a blood test after having exposure to a COVID patient. Otherwise it’s a deduction based on available evidence. The reports coming in about how people got infected, is based on heresy unless substantiated by further evidence.

    My stance is majority of people did not get infected with the disease, not the fact that majority of the people who interacted with COVID don’t get infected with the pathogen.

    I stated this many times, I believe in pathogenic spreading, I believe in the correlation of the pathogens with the disease , what I don’t believe is in the responsibility of damage when it comes to COVID which doesn’t have enough statistical evidence (for me) to consider one “liable and blameworthy,” conditioned on “good will” and not evil intent.

    I was merely addressing your point and trying to show my perspective, and it’s not missing the point it addresses the point even you don’t agree to it. I have read your point with an open mind, and you point is not something I have heard for the first time, and I am not denying correlation.

    Nothing prevented me especially when wearing a mask and glove does not help, only two things help in my situation, a 6ft distance, and hand sanitization. I also wore gloves when they requested, as I mentioned everyone was already recovered from COVID, and for me I was under the impression from what I knew prior that a virus won’t spread after recovery, I even asked one of them and they responded “we don’t know.”

    Additionally, they are the infected ones, who have recently recovered, I did not believe this is one of those viruses that can be infected twice.

    And the final reason is what I made this whole post about, personally its on my immunity which is in the hands(Dust e qudrat) of Allah, despite all “ihtiyat” I have tawakkul and husne dhan bilAllah when it comes to my immunity in this disease.

    It was the elephant in the room, just something worth mentioning. Since the discussion had already gone of tangent for a while.

    I have already clarified this.


    Is that the only reason one closes the door if a serial killer comes to your house? Muslims do not close door because they think they could evade the time of death.

    But that doesn’t mean Muslims don’t act responsibly. They do adopt precautionary measures. They are not fatalists.


    Again, false analogy and straw man, is COVID a serial killer. Why because a serial killer is it a cautious human being with evil intent to kill people? Is a serial killer a mercy from Allah for the believers and a punishment for kuffar? Additionally, a serial killer will use a weapon will have 90-99% the time efficacy, even if that is his fist and merely punching and kicking, it will be addressed as such which means one is responsible for not defending. If a serial killer slash your throat does you have a chance of survival? Do 99% of people survive an attack of a serial killer? Does a serial killer have a correlated kill rate of 20% for elderly people, meaning he tries killing everyone but only succeeds in killing 20%?

    But even if I am to consider it a good analogy then yes those are the only reason people close doors to a serial killer,

    I said they fear COVID because of death or injury (symptoms mild to severe)

    Which translated as

    People fear a Serial killer because of death or getting injured (physical or mental harm to self and others, loss or damage of property etc).

    If these two weren’t the case, entertain me why would any one fear a serial killer.

    I am not missing the point. You are not seeing my point.

    I did not assume anything I made a statement based on facts, you said:” It is an observed fact that hospital beds are totally FULL.

    A generalization to make your case that is not true, you provide evidence yourself, private hospitals are hospitals none the less hospitals, and they are not empty. You accused me of generalization where it fits, but clearly you did the same thing although I agree with you in that public hospitals in many places are full and are working under full load.
  18. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider اللَه المقدر والعالم شؤون لا تكثر لهمك ما قدر يكون

    I retract my statement if I every said that generally, and yes, I am mistaken, what was meant was treating people as symptomless carriers by no substantiating evidence (test positive) as being conjecture.

    Among the listed diseases, I would clarify that I am not denying correlating factors for being infected but that those “correlating factors “alone” are the reason for disease, as for even infection, because merely intermingling or even shaking hands with or without protection is not enough to be “certain.” The fact that wearing the mask or gloves reduces infection is besides the point, people who wear masks and gloves are not protection from spreading or transferring the pathogens, pathogens spread through gloves and masks regardless.

    “Hygiene and Sanitization “are prevention factors as they kill pathogens on the surface. Your whole issue was with the issue of not practicing “ihityat” And responsibility thereafter.

    Actually, this virus is no different from any flu virus in terms of mechanism of spread, its only different is that with advance technology and heavy monitoring we are more aware of the spread of virus, but in term of the “nature” and “severity” lack of “vaccaine,” it is definitely worth attention.

    I know this isn’t what you are saying, but this is how its being understood, not by you but by many, people (generally) aren’t jumping to the conclusion once they are tested positive that they got it from grocery shopping or but immediately to the last sick person they met, or last group meeting they had. When the truth is if they logged in all possibilities, they would end up with more than those two incidents.

    This is an unsubstantiated claim, and it doesn’t take sherlock homes to see this. America is a population of 300 million, 4 million have been diagnosed with COVID 0.013% of known patients, you have no grounds to make any definitive case on how many people these 4 million interacted with , so it is “assumed”, and it is well known that America was the slowest to take protocol and steps , and by the time they did enforce mandate it did “prevent an accelerated pace of spreading of pathogens” but it did not eliminate its growth.

    Due to globalization and supply chain the virus has spread globally no doubt that is a means, but to me it still begs the question countries like INDIA (a population of 1.3 Billion), who were just as late to the game as USA and many neglected “safety” protocol and lived unhygienic lifestyles, before government mandate, resulted in 1 million diagnosed 0.0008% of known patients thus far. FAR LESS than that of USA. If you are saying this is due to lack of facilities and proper diagnoses , lets , double the “known” infected statistics, for india that’s 2 million, still half of USA, the numbers don’t add up if one is too acknowledge it is highly infectious its is for sure not highly deadly or a severe threat to 90-99% of people. For India to balance USA’s infected rate, you need a reported of 17 million infect (0.013% of 1.3 billion.)

    17 million is a lot of people, but this isn’t 17 million people in one city, its 17 million across the country and 17 million is still less than 1% of INDIA. Does it makes sense to treat something that if we were to multiply the casualty times 17 would result in 1% of the population, like its doomsday?

    So, given this apparently doesn’t mean, asymptomatic equates to being diseased 7-14 days later in MAJORITY of cases, given that you are treating asymptomatic people as potential “carriers.”

    I understand the protocol and merit the doctors and specialists for their effort but I would say this this protocol is severely flawed for a few reasons

    1) Testing doesn’t detect positive for COVID, especially in the case when isn’t enough viral load, the machine will not detect it therefore “an infected” (by medical standards) will be considered negative.

    2) This 2-week isolation will have to be a repeated process for the rest of the year or until the virus goes away? why? Basically, a person will question his infected nature ever two weeks because he may have obtained the virus after the point of being tested, this will be repeated ad infinitum until he is infected, and at this point he will lock himself and wait two weeks. (this to me is breeds anxiety)

    3) The belief that “COVID” can potential spread even after being infected and recovered is debunked, Unless you mean those individuals who have yet to recover fully, which still leaves contention #1 and #2.

    When was this about Pakistan, again I was speaking holistically, but you seem to frame your perspective solely on Pakistan?

    And who is to say that said countries are not under reporting? Have no doubt even china where his disease all began has underrated their reporting and they weren’t short of any supplies, they built makeshift hospitals overnight.
  19. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider اللَه المقدر والعالم شؤون لا تكثر لهمك ما قدر يكون

    Brother neither am I being pretensions in my “acting smart,” nor does my lack in medical knowledge justify ad hominem or dispel me from the conversation, no matter how much you’d like that.

    But may I take the opportunity to show the where pretentiousness has indeed occurred:

    Your post #39

    So you agreed with my “meaningless break down which comes from 0 idea pertaining to medical science.” Subhanllah brother, you should never had agreed to it in the first place as now this serves as embarrassment to your medical professional status. You should have pointed out the mistake in my understanding in the first place, even as doctor your job is not to affirm false understanding but educate them in a deferential manner. In any case, you had no issue with my understanding in the medical side, but with the issue of responsibility.

    Here is where you missed the point, by dismissing my break down rejecting my frame of reference by looking at by conclusion not efficacy. I was going by immediate efficacy /effectiveness.

    Non communicable disease, which includes genetic and auto immune diseases cannot be categorically Sabab Wahmi in effect, for the mere fact people can be born with genetic disorders or diseases which will end in 90-99% of symptoms manifesting. Given a diabetic patient , if he is diabetes type 1 the individuals pancreas produces zero to no insulin, increases glucose and since muscles don’t use the sugar they have high sugar, there is no cure and is managed to injecting insulin and diet managent, this will be sabab aadi in its effect because such symptoms are observed in all patients who have this disease.

    Diabetes type 2 is similar, both have immediate repeated, chronic symptoms, again immediate efficacy.

    Diabetes type 2 is a result of poor nutrition and life style, obesity, here one is responsible, type 1 he is not responsible.

    THAT’S the difference, I am not making a generalization of every disease please don’t assume this on my end.

    Fatality is IRRELEVANT because it was because in conclusion (fatality) it is sabab wahmi because all that is correlated in studies is a reduction of life expectancy by 10-15years.

    You were pushing your argument on basis of conclusion, as I pointed out before, so when

    discussing SABAB AADI or SABAB WAHMI , what are you talking about ? SABAB of what is Aadi and of what is Wahmi.

    My argument was “acquisition” of pathogen, and its efficacy is wahmi, once one has the disease and it indeed takes effect (during 2 week asymptomatic period), the symptoms are aadi (in that it is observed in all COVID patients , people have x y z symptoms) but FATALITY is still WAHMI.

    I understand that many pathogenic disease are wahmi, because they don’t have immediate efficacy let alone lead to Fatality.

    Well this is an assumption I am not parroting but I maybe working on an incorrect understanding of the word , I proceeded with your definition but I would kindly like a documented reference of sabab aadi and wahmi with examples from the books of the ulama , I will accept any misunderstanding and mistakes from my end.

    It is a case by case bases, and not categorical, additional to the point that it’s a slippery slope argument grounded, as for diabetes type 2 one need to have a consistent poor diet with excessive sugar (which is against the sunnah), based on ones genetics and other factors the odds of diabetes is higher and contingent on those factors. Unlike COVID, if you have an individual and inject him with the same strand of COVID the result is bilateral, either the person will get the (including all genetic factors) disease or her will not (his/her immune system will fight it before it can multiply).

    The 80% of asymptomatic people fall under the second category, where they had little to no symptoms because their generic innate system (skin , mucus,, white blood cells) responds immediately to the invading pathogen killing off the virus to a level that is low enough that there is no chance for it spreading and causing infection. (THIS is WAHM in efficacy, we don’t know the penetration rate )

    Ironically a “deadly” virus such as COVID is not hurting children as much as adults.

    The more common observable result of infection is when the virus enters the body and to the lungs attaching to the receptors ACE2 and replicates (THIS is WAHM in efficacy, we don’t know the penetration rate again), here ALLAH’ has willed how your body will react, how much virus will replicate and how the immune system responds. AFTER THIS POINT, It sas been observed empirically certain age and ethnicities have higher probability of severity and risk but none are at 50% let alone 90-99%.
  20. FaqirHaider

    FaqirHaider اللَه المقدر والعالم شؤون لا تكثر لهمك ما قدر يكون

    aqir :
    Never denied correlating factors. I agree with you. As for calling it a false analogy, would not be fair since, refer back to previous posts.
    Hence why you kept missing “my” point, my conversation was revolved around my initial post, not about people calling CORONA fraud, whatever that means.

    The explanation of this is coming.

    I have clarified this position previously I hope, intention and belief is key, if he believes he is “delaying death,” my claim is not moot, but if he doesn’t then indeed it is moot.

    Al -Faaar, is literally the act of fleeing “from fear of death,” if you actually spent the time and asked people why they don’t shake hands or why don’t they stay in a COVID stricken area, they will say I Don’t want to catch the virus, why ? because its DEADLY.

    The armor, and helmet is in relation to one’s immune system, the actual DEFENCE mechanism when it comes to disease and Immunity, as a doctor you should know this. What should be promoted “more,” than masks and gloves and building one’s immune system.

    As for the murderer, I already explained this is a false analogy, being stricken in the hand with knife will 90-99% cut the hand, maybe even mutilate it. Being struck with COVID pathogens in the hand, will not 90-99% result in it entering the body forget about even entering the body and then multiplying and fooling the immune system.

    It’s not a special pleading fallacy, even if it were, as Muslims we have cases of special pleadings when it comes to appealing authority in which case neither are fallacies.

    That’s what I meant the whole time, I agree with you

    My jump from point 2 to 3 is contingent, when people think they are “DELAYING” or “PREVENTING” death.

    Now if he doesn’t believe that and wears it as a means (asbab) that the sharia has allowed, then by all means, as I mentioned in my previous posts. But the Opposite is just as true, allowed and without any criticism

    I apologize, and it was my mistake to say there is little evidence to support that Asymptomatic people can spread a virus, all studies conclude is conjecture.

    I meant to be speaking specifically in the case of COVID, but ended up saying as a general statement, regarding COVID one may read this article :

Share This Page