Is there ijma'a on contagious disease?

[abu Hasan]

I believe this system n book is taught to students as they progress their studies.

i believe that the system is outdated and dozens of topics that are taught in the present format were cutting edge in a different age and are as outdated as logarithmic tables and lithography in our time. when could one persuade the frog in the pond that a larger body of water exists? i am surprised why a pamphlet was not published or a poster pasted in the city.

Having a debate face to face doesn’t have to be from memory in many debates scholars have brought books so again that excuse is weak.

kids who are just opening their eyes to the world will not understand what we mean by 'from memory'. we are not talking about the ibarat per se, but the argument - the answer to this argument is found where. we read a lot of books, and we know that an answer to this objection is found somewhere we have read. that would require time to look up etc. which is not possible in a few hours format.

people who don't have the ability to present their thoughts in readable paragraphs should not be lecturing on what works and what doesn't. just sayin'

You reply regarding munazara I don’t think it matters whether you “like the format or not”

it is immaterial that whether i like the format or not. it is an obselete format which has many disadvantages i have listed - i would like to know, what exactly is the purpose and advantages of the munazarah in this format. if you wish to behold the disadvantages, you must see the shouting matches of some munazirs - and shaykh asrar's helplessness at the pathetic performance of some of his opponents.

come to think of it, if i ever accepted to a munazarah of the verbal format, it could be if it was a worthy opponent who is intelligent and fair, like shaykh asrar. else, one would be exasperated at the hapless understanding of fools or cringe at their switching positions without compunction. and be dismayed at their denials.

we have seen here on this forum that even a written format does not deter the dishonest debaters who jump to another issue when cornered without even acknowledging that they were wrong.

even alahazrat said that there should be only written debates with people like wahabis (i extend that for everyone).

If you need references to where it states face to face I can send them to you.

couldn't make head or tail of it.

I told Harris on my posts

who is harris?

the hashtag #HaroonSultan lol,

imagine the level of thinking one can expect in a munazarah. lol.

Abu Hassan thinks he’s right take it as an OPEN CHALLENGE to debate the issue of contagion

i will post whatever i deem fit on this forum or release as a paper (again announced on this forum), in sha'Allah. if anyone has objections, they are free to post them here as mature adults (without profanities and inanities, LOL).

i don't have time to waste on fools, foolish arguments and people who are incapable of making a reasonable argument. salam.

wa billahi't tawfiq.

 

[Noor ul Shaam]

i believe that the system is outdated and dozens of topics that are taught in the present format were cutting edge in a different age and are as outdated as logarithmic tables and lithography in our time. when could one persuade the frog in the pond that a larger body of water exists? i am surprised why a pamphlet was not published or a poster pasted in the city.

kids who are just opening their eyes to the world will not understand what we mean by 'from memory'. we are not talking about the ibarat per se, but the argument - the answer to this argument is found where. we read a lot of books, and we know that an answer to this objection is found somewhere we have read. that would require time to look up etc. which is not possible in a few hours format.

people who don't have the ability to present their thoughts in readable paragraphs should not be lecturing on what works and what doesn't. just sayin'

it is immaterial that whether i like the format or not. it is an obselete format which has many disadvantages i have listed - i would like to know, what exactly is the purpose and advantages of the munazarah in this format. if you wish to behold the disadvantages, you must see the shouting matches of some munazirs - and shaykh asrar's helplessness at the pathetic performance of some of his opponents.

come to think of it, if i ever accepted to a munazarah of the verbal format, it could be if it was a worthy opponent who is intelligent and fair, like shaykh asrar. else, one would be exasperated at the hapless understanding of fools or cringe at their switching positions without compunction. and be dismayed at their denials.

we have seen here on this forum that even a written format does not deter the dishonest debaters who jump to another issue when cornered without even acknowledging that they were wrong.

even alahazrat said that there should be only written debates with people like wahabis (i extend that for everyone).

couldn't make head or tail of it.

who is harris?

imagine the level of thinking one can expect in a munazarah. lol.

i will post whatever i deem fit on this forum or release as a paper (again announced on this forum), in sha'Allah. if anyone has objections, they are free to post them here as mature adults (without profanities and inanities, LOL).

i don't have time to waste on fools, foolish arguments and people who are incapable of making a reasonable argument. salam.

wa billahi't tawfiq.

i believe that the system is outdated and dozens of topics that are taught in the present format were cutting edge in a different age and are as outdated as logarithmic tables and lithography in our time. when could one persuade the frog in the pond that a larger body of water exists? i am surprised why a pamphlet was not published or a poster pasted in the city.

kids who are just opening their eyes to the world will not understand what we mean by 'from memory'. we are not talking about the ibarat per se, but the argument - the answer to this argument is found where. we read a lot of books, and we know that an answer to this objection is found somewhere we have read. that would require time to look up etc. which is not possible in a few hours format.

people who don't have the ability to present their thoughts in readable paragraphs should not be lecturing on what works and what doesn't. just sayin'

it is immaterial that whether i like the format or not. it is an obselete format which has many disadvantages i have listed - i would like to know, what exactly is the purpose and advantages of the munazarah in this format. if you wish to behold the disadvantages, you must see the shouting matches of some munazirs - and shaykh asrar's helplessness at the pathetic performance of some of his opponents.

come to think of it, if i ever accepted to a munazarah of the verbal format, it could be if it was a worthy opponent who is intelligent and fair, like shaykh asrar. else, one would be exasperated at the hapless understanding of fools or cringe at their switching positions without compunction. and be dismayed at their denials.

we have seen here on this forum that even a written format does not deter the dishonest debaters who jump to another issue when cornered without even acknowledging that they were wrong.

even alahazrat said that there should be only written debates with people like wahabis (i extend that for everyone).

couldn't make head or tail of it.

who is harris?

imagine the level of thinking one can expect in a munazarah. lol.

i will post whatever i deem fit on this forum or release as a paper (again announced on this forum), in sha'Allah. if anyone has objections, they are free to post them here as mature adults (without profanities and inanities, LOL).

i don't have time to waste on fools, foolish arguments and people who are incapable of making a reasonable argument. salam.

wa billahi't tawfiq.

first: HOW? on what basis? for what reason?

debating an issue is not backbiting. if someone said that the person's face was ugly or something like that it would be backbiting.
the words used by haroon sultan are not befitting a student of knowledge. either you are that person himself or speaking on his behalf. perhaps we can start with abstaining from profanities.

no time to do munazarah. i have repeatedly said that i don't like the verbal and the extempore format of munazarah. i prefer doing research, looking up books and refuting the argument rather than 'answer' the opponent and silence him regardless of whether such an answer would hold under academic scrutiny.

of course, there were people in the past who were mountains of ilm and could marshall evidence from memory. i have never made a claim that i am like them or that i would emulate them. even if i could do it, i think it is unfair to those who do not have a good memory or who take time to understand the argument. the worst part is that when a person says: 'i misunderstood your argument' or that 'let us start again, we are not in sync' or 'i never said that' - i find it difficult to deny the opposite party such excuses.

such munazarahs worked in the past. in our days, we can do munazarah online referring to books and refuting the other person's argument without their resorting to repudiation of their own stance. if the munazarah is out to establish my 'worth' however, i concede it without contest. i am only a student of knowledge.

in short, we are in the process of a munazarah if you like - if he answers my questions, we can proceed further.

---
what stops the person from presenting his evidence, if he has any?

if that evidence is faulty or its citation worthy of criticism, you will see it here.

---
be straightforward. be clear. do not be purposely vague. and if you are that person haroon sultan, own up. it is perfectly okay if you wish to be anonymous - but pretending to be person X defending person Y, when both X and Y are the same person, is deception. feel free to disagree.

wa's salam.

I’m guessing you have so many members here that you don’t know who Harris is yet he’s the one that posts the replies to Haroon’s status on my post from u.
you said “you must see the shouting matches of some munazirs - and shaykh asrar's helplessness at the pathetic performance of some of his opponents? Which debate was pathetic where munazara conditions were used n abided by.
The real issue for you here is, You said that your a student. If your a student then youve admitted you don’t meet the condition of munazara that is of equality. How about you finish your study then prove equality and then can you be in a position debate Haroon face to face. Until then see if you can find ready anyone who can meet the conditions of munazarah and debate out this matter of contagion. To be honest I could see why debating shaykh Asrar face to face would be an option for you due to his lack of studies you may win. I don’t understand why you mention Ala Hazrat and their fatwa also is there’s no contagion. Saying on one hand you don’t munazara then to say if you did would be with someone who’s studied less again is a cowards way out.
If you are correct and believe there is contagion in Islam and Haroon’s got this horribly wrong then for the sake of guiding the ummah away from falsehood you need to step up.

 

[Aqdas]

Can you read? He HAS stepped up? Why are you so afraid of a written debate?

 

[Noor ul Shaam]

I can read maybe you struggle - rules of munazara dictate face to face - so anything not in the rules and conditions of munazara is not relevant.

 

[Noor ul Shaam]

Can you read? He HAS stepped up? Why are you so afraid of a written debate?

Why are you guys so scared to follow rules of munazara and have it gave face to face. Are you above the rules of munazara ?

 

[Aqdas]

You've made your point. Any more trolling and you'll be gone.

 

[AbdalQadir]

Documentary (posted an year ago) on the Spanish Flu of 1918 - worth watching for some perspective and correlation with current world situation.

 

[AbdalQadir]

Two videos in favor of opening up the lockdowns:

 

[SaadSohail]

Why not simply debate him using the rules and conditions of munazara then and put an end to the madness properly?

wouldnt this be considered backbiting?


I noticed even with the challenge posted on here, no one was qualified enough to accept it

This is strange. Very strange.
This is what i said:

(How does any of what I wrote below falls under the realm of backbiting?)
1) Is the person being mentioned, denying "transmission" of disease from infected person to the non-infected one i.e. in the sense it is the disease within the infected person which brings into existence the disease in the non-infected individual.?

If yes, then he is correct. Because in Islam everything happens by the Will of Allah. Created causes have no intrinsic power to bring about effects. Allah (swt) is the creator of causes and effects.

OR

2) Is the person denying the "correlation" between the infected person and the non-infected person?
If yes, then he is incorrect. And this entails denial of observed reality as well. The notion that non-infected person got infected from the infected person (A correlation) by the Will of Allah is not problematic. The infected person in this case is merely a correlation. Nothing more. Infected person is not the reason why the disease began to exist in the non-infected individual.
Similar to a certain"medicine" being a correlation of the "cure" when in fact it is Allah who created the medicine as well as the cure.

 

[Noor ul Shaam]

Science proves person A and B both have the disease not that one caught it from the other, as for observation then that was the same thing what the Bedouins thought with respect the healthy camel's catching the disease from the sick camel's but The Prophet of Allah peace and blessings be upon Him rejected that belief. If you feel you know better then please step up and debate this out following the rules of munazara.
I must be careful how I respond on here I’ve already been threatened to be removed for calling someone else out.

This is strange. Very strange.
This is what i said:

(How does any of what I wrote below falls under the realm of backbiting?)
1) Is the person being mentioned, denying "transmission" of disease from infected person to the non-infected one i.e. in the sense it is the disease within the infected person which brings into existence the disease in the non-infected individual.?

If yes, then he is correct. Because in Islam everything happens by the Will of Allah. Created causes have no intrinsic power to bring about effects. Allah (swt) is the creator of causes and effects.

OR

2) Is the person denying the "correlation" between the infected person and the non-infected person?
If yes, then he is incorrect. And this entails denial of observed reality as well. The notion that non-infected person got infected from the infected person (A correlation) by the Will of Allah is not problematic. The infected person in this case is merely a correlation. Nothing more. Infected person is not the reason why the disease began to exist in the non-infected individual.
Similar to a certain"medicine" being a correlation of the "cure" when in fact it is Allah who created the medicine as well as the cure.

 

[Juwayni]

Science proves person A and B both have the disease not that one caught it from the other, as for observation then that was the same thing what the Bedouins thought with respect the healthy camel's catching the disease from the sick camel's but The Prophet of Allah peace and blessings be upon Him rejected that belief. If you feel you know better then please step up and debate this out following the rules of munazara.
I must be careful how I respond on here I’ve already been threatened to be removed for calling someone else out.

As Salaamu Àlaykum Wa RahmatulLah,

What is your source on the narration regarding the camel and the Bedouins?

 

[abu Hasan]

What is your source on the narration regarding the camel and the Bedouins?

i asked him whether there was an ijmaa on the understanding of the hadith. but he headed to dublin and from there went to reykjavik.

 

[SaadSohail]

Science proves person A and B both have the disease not that one caught it from the other, as for observation then that was the same thing what the Bedouins thought with respect the healthy camel's catching the disease from the sick camel's but The Prophet of Allah peace and blessings be upon Him rejected that belief. If you feel you know better then please step up and debate this out following the rules of munazara.
I must be careful how I respond on here I’ve already been threatened to be removed for calling someone else out.

Who told you what science has proven?
Do you want articles from Pubmed?
Do you realize you are talking to a medical doctor here?
Science believes and holds this to be true by all means that the disease in one person is the reason why disease occurs in another person. Scientists attribute efficacy to created causes such as medicines, diseases and what not.

This is what we muslims disagree about the scientists. To us muslims it is all a correlation.

Do you understand what a correlation is?
Let's take an example of Two people (A and B) sitting next to each other and have a disease X. Let's assume A was the one who got infected First.

It is our belief (the ahlus sunnah wal jammah) that Allah is the one who created the disease X both in A and in B. A is not the reason "why" B got infected.

1) How does this run contrary to Islam?
2) How does claiming that "A is a prior correlating event of B, and is Not the reason why disease began to exist" in B runs contrary to Islam?

As far as the understanding of the beduins go, the prophet was right to reject their belief because the disease from the infected camel is NOT the reason why the healthy camel got infected.

4)How will you prove that this particular hadith is denying a correlating event as well when in fact it is affirming a correlating event (i.e. who infected the first)?

 

[Juwayni]

Who told you what science has proven?
Do you want articles from Pubmed?
Do you realize you are talking to a medical doctor here?
Science believes and holds this to be true by all means that the disease in one person is the reason why disease occurs in another person.

Do you understand what a correlation is?
Let's take an example of Two people (A and B) sitting next to each other and have a disease X. Let's assume A was the one who got infected First.

It is our belief (the ahlus sunnah wal jammah) that Allah is the one who created the disease X both in A and in B. A is not the reason "why" B got infected.

1) How does this run contrary to Islam?
2) How does claiming that "A is a prior correlating event of B, and is Not the reason why disease began to exist" in B runs contrary to Islam?
3)How does the understanding above runs contrary to what i have quoted above?

As far as the understanding of the beduins go, the prophet was right to reject their belief because the disease from the infected camel is NOT the reason why the healthy camel got infected.

4)How will you prove that this particular hadith is denying a correlating event as well when in fact it is affirming a correlating event (i.e. which one being infected first)?

Doc, isn't the thing with vaccines that they (correlatively per Ahlus Sunnah) trigger the immune system to prepare itself against foreign pathogens? That pre-supposes that pathogens can enter the body to infect it in the first place.

 

[SaadSohail]

Doc, isn't the thing with vaccines that they (correlatively per Ahlus Sunnah) trigger the immune system to prepare itself against foreign pathogens? That pre-supposes that pathogens can enter the body to infect it in the first place.

With vaccines they use an attenuated (let's say decapitated) pathogen so that it triggers an immune response in the body. They inject the attenuated pathogen inside the body. According to them scientists, it is the attenuated pathogen which invokes an immune response.
According to muslims, attenuated pathogen is associated (correlated) with an increase in immune response. None of this could happen without Allah willing it.

Pathogens Do ENTER the body. This is observed. Example bacteria in blood using non-hygenic/dirty hypodermic needles.
Another example can be such as a scraping off an infected wound, followed by rubbing on a non-infected wound is associated with increase number of same bacteria (flora) in the non-infected wound.

What we as muslims should believe is this "scraping off" from an infected wound followed by rubbing on the non-infected wound and increase in bacterial growth in the non-infected wound cannot take place without Allah willing it and bringing it into existence. Scraping and rubbing from infected wound is merely a correlation of non-infected wound getting infected not the reason why it got infected in the first place. These are mere events tied together. It was rationally possible that the wound did not get infected in the first place. It depends on what Allah (swt) wills. However, If the scraper did it deliberately he is mukkalaf.

NOTE: That doesn't mean one shouldn't go for vaccines. One should go for vaccines believing and hoping that he will be cured by the Will of Allah.
Just like one eats or drinks knowing satiety and removal of thirst is not BY food or water but Created By Allah.

 

[SaadSohail]

Science proves person A and B both have the disease not that one caught it from the other, as for observation then that was the same thing what the Bedouins thought with respect the healthy camel's catching the disease from the sick camel's but The Prophet of Allah peace and blessings be upon Him rejected that belief. If you feel you know better then please step up and debate this out following the rules of munazara.
I must be careful how I respond on here I’ve already been threatened to be removed for calling someone else out.

Please read post #33 before commenting.
The following are some thought experiments for those brothers who like to think and use their intellect.

Imagine a scenario in which we have ward filled with COVID-19 patients. We have 100 volunteers (completely non-infected) and we divide them into two groups (50 volunteers in each group). Group A and Group B. Group A is sent to the ward filled COVID-19 patients and they live there for a week.
Group B is kept in a seperate room without establishing any sort of contact with COVID-19 patients.

1) What do we see after a week?
All the volunteers belonging to Group A got infected with COVID-19 and the volunteers from Group B remained non-infected.

This experiment is repeated 100 number of times and each time it was observed that the volunteers who established contact with the COVID-19 patients, were infected a week later. Where as those volunteers who didnot establish any contact with the COVID-19 patients DIDNOT get infected.

2)How would a muslim see or "interpret" such a scenario?
A muslim would say that Allah has willed it that this should be the outcome of such an experiment. Not only that, Allah has decreed (in such a scenario) that all the volunteers who established contact with COVID 19 patients would be infected and He has decreed those volunteers who didnot establish contact would not be infected*.

*It was possible for Allah to decree that volunteers who didnot establish contact with the infected COVID-19 patients would be infected and those who established contact would not be infected.
**It was also possible for Allah to decree that all the volunteers got infected with or without establishing contact with COVID-19 patients.

But this is not what we observe from such an experiment and what that means is Allah has willed these events the way we observe them. Allah could have willed them otherwise but He didn't. What He has precisely willed, that is precisely the way the flow of events took place.

3)What is a correlating factor in such an experiment?
Remember all the volunteers were non-infected initially. The volunteers who established contact with COVID-19 were seen to develop similar symptoms AFTER living with them for 1 week. Establishing contact and living with such patients is a CORRELATING EVENT Which was followed by subsequent events such as development of symptoms and infection in the volunteers.
In case of non-infected volunteers, they didnot get infected. "Not establishing contact with the infected COVID-19 patients" is a correlating event.

4) What happens when one denies a correlating event in such a scenario?
This entails denial of observed reality, the experiment and judgement of a muslim.
The person is denying the flow of events (The volunteers establishing contact and living with COVID-19 patients) followed by another event (i.e. the development of symptoms). He is affirming this is not the way events occured or flowed.
In otherwords, what he is trying to say is Allah has not decreed the flow of events (contact and living with infected COVID-19 patients for 1 week) followed by another event i.e. development of symptoms.
He is denying the existence of such subsequent flow of events and that entails denial of observed reality.
The two events did happen ONE AFTER ANOTHER.

Not only that he is trying to place, the two groups in the same bucket i.e. The event "Establishing contact with COVID19 patients" is EQUAL TO the event "Not establishing contact with COVID 19 patients" and that is absurd because the two events are completely opposite to each other and they are indeed different.

And if someone affirms the existence of all events without attributing any efficacy to them and stating that everything happens by the will of Allah and the ways these events occur is subject to His Will and Power, then he has established what we were trying to prove in the first place.

 

[abu Hasan]

it has been mentioned by others as well, and i had shared it with friends, but forgot to post it here.

imam ibn Hajar mentions in his work on plague that people went out to pray for relief in congregation and after return, far more died. this was said in the context of praying (for succour) in congregration during plague (taa'un) similar to praying for rain; and which he termed it as an innovation (bid'ah).

even though shaykh al-islam did not intend it, his report actually gives us evidence that it was observed that proximity aggravated the spread of infection (he rejects adwaa as understood in his time).

quick translation:

congregating to pray [for relief from plague] similar to [congregational] prayer for rain [istisqa'a], then it is a [reprehensible] innovation which was first conducted during the great plague of the year 749 AH in damascus.

i have read in a monograph by manbajji, [where he mentioned] after criticising the people who organised people to assemble in one place, he says that the people prayed shouting loudly; this even was in the year 764 AH, when plague descended in damascus. he [manbajji] mentioned: that in the plague of 49, people went out of the cities in the open fields [or desert], prominent people of the city [went with them] and they prayed and beseeched [dua, istighatha]. but the plague only became worse [i.e. more people became sick and/or died]; and it was lesser prior to their prayer-congregation.

i [ibn hajar] say: this has happened in our time as well. when the plague first spread in cairo in rabiy al-akhir of the year 827, and then in 833. the people who had died were less than 40.

so they went out to pray in the desert on the fourth of jumada al-ula. they were asked to fast for three days, similar to the manner of praying for rain [istisqaa] - so they gathered and prayed and tarried for an hour and they returned.

the month had not passed, but the number of dead in cairo was more than ONE THOUSAND EVERY DAY. thereafter it increased even more.


====

 

[FaqirHaider]

Maybe we can dive further into its lexicon , when doctors speak of a "disease" being contagious what I think they mean is "transmission of virus particles , or bacteria, shifting from one place to another." Such pathogen can be transmitted inside a person's body and "possibly" infect and multiply which would then result in symptoms finally resulting in a disease. Merely being positive in having the virus in the body does not mean one has the disease, it means one has the virus (he is a carrier). This technical notion is either a mouthful to state all the time , or is taken for granted given the audience have been taught basic microbiology/ health sciences/and or epistemology in high school or university. Therefore we may have fallen prey to reductionism so need to be a bit more aware of the Etymology of the term "contagion in English and more so 'Adwa in Arabic."

Where Science and the materialists side with "chance, and or probability," to explain anomalies and or inheritance of occurrence abnormalities, for instance something is either "highly contagious or slightly contagious," for the believers we have full conviction it is all from divine will, but each manifest in the way Allah designed, so it maybe be so that Allah willed a certain disease to be more common and widespread than another.

Communicable Diseases (bacteria, virus, parasites) [The cause of all the fuss (pun)]

Can it not be proposed that "bacteria viruses pathogens etc " are contagious, but "diseases" however are not. Disease is the "result", not the cause. Science takes Divine intervention out of the picture, so they stress the cause of disease being bacteria, viruses, or parasites, fungi alone. For the Muslims we easily understand that these are the asbab (means) in the Sunan al kawn , just like your analogy of cure and medicine.

Because, one only gets the disease when his immune system adopts the pathogen (by the WILL of ALLAH), our health is in the hands of Allah, that includes our immunity , our white and red blood cells, the whole nine yards. It is not incomprehensible that each cell or organ is maintained by an Angel who operates on the will of Allah, same goes for with the movement of each virus wherever it lands, from whatever location and obviously , as emphasized in the hadith, its very existence; which is either ex nihilo ,or hidden and manifested following (sunnan al kawniyya - as in mutation of disease ). Some contagious diseases mutate and become stronger ? Does science know why ? No, because it's random. ".Acquisition of the "disease is not in our hands and we are not accountable for its effect, this includes "carriers" , its totally dependent on how Allah has willed the recipient's immune system to handle it, no measurements beyond available dhanni medication can cure the person, there are always patients who react negatively or unsuccessfully to "known and working medication and vaccines."



What seems to bother people, is holding someone accountable for giving someone the "disease," nowadays they correctly say "passing the virus," but they truly (foolishly) mean disease. Twitter is flooded with such comments, with Divine decree out of the picture, they put themselves in depression by considering themselves at fault for the infected, and or death resulting from their transmission, when life, death and sickness, health only happens by the will of Allah.


One group undermines correlation, and the other uses it to overshadow divine will, this dichotomy creates this illusion of conflict, and given most laymen , especially those grown in the anglosphere, suffer from a concrete understanding and acceptance of Qada' and Qadar, it would make sense to give a verdict siding with caution (staying away from infected areas is also sound from the hadith), but they should also definitely emphasize and narrate the actions of sahaba who did mingle and engage with infected individuals, and this action is established in the deen and it is a matter of higher Iman, at the same time this shouldn't discourage people from taking avoiding and keeping distance as that too is what we are told to do, because it's merely a means (regardless of statistical success rates), because as mentioned it will only work if it is Willed so.



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. If anything does happen (alhamdullilah) and If it doesn't (alhamdulilllah). The idea of "fear of getting the virus, is weak and Imam Al-Tahawi disagrees with that reason, and he leaves to Allah what the real reason is.

 

[SaadSohail]

Maybe we can dive further into its lexicon , when doctors speak of a "disease" being contagious what I think they mean is "transmission of virus particles , or bacteria, shifting from one place to another." Such pathogen can be transmitted inside a person's body and "possibly" infect and multiply which would then result in symptoms finally resulting in a disease. Merely being positive in having the virus in the body does not mean one has the disease, it means one has the virus (he is a carrier). This technical notion is either a mouthful to state all the time , or is taken for granted given the audience have been taught basic microbiology/ health sciences/and or epistemology in high school or university. Therefore we may have fallen prey to reductionism so need to be a bit more aware of the Etymology of the term "contagion in English and more so 'Adwa in Arabic."

Where Science and the materialists side with "chance, and or probability," to explain anomalies and or inheritance of occurrence abnormalities, for instance something is either "highly contagious or slightly contagious," for the believers we have full conviction it is all from divine will, but each manifest in the way Allah designed, so it maybe be so that Allah willed a certain disease to be more common and widespread than another.

Communicable Diseases (bacteria, virus, parasites) [The cause of all the fuss (pun)]

Can it not be proposed that "bacteria viruses pathogens etc " are contagious, but "diseases" however are not. Disease is the "result", not the cause. Science takes Divine intervention out of the picture, so they stress the cause of disease being bacteria, viruses, or parasites, fungi alone. For the Muslims we easily understand that these are the asbab (means) in the Sunan al kawn , just like your analogy of cure and medicine.

Because, one only gets the disease when his immune system adopts the pathogen (by the WILL of ALLAH), our health is in the hands of Allah, that includes our immunity , our white and red blood cells, the whole nine yards. It is not incomprehensible that each cell or organ is maintained by an Angel who operates on the will of Allah, same goes for with the movement of each virus wherever it lands, from whatever location and obviously , as emphasized in the hadith, its very existence; which is either ex nihilo ,or hidden and manifested following (sunnan al kawniyya - as in mutation of disease ). Some contagious diseases mutate and become stronger ? Does science know why ? No, because it's random. ".Acquisition of the "disease is not in our hands and we are not accountable for its effect, this includes "carriers" , its totally dependent on how Allah has willed the recipient's immune system to handle it, no measurements beyond available dhanni medication can cure the person, there are always patients who react negatively or unsuccessfully to "known and working medication and vaccines."
View attachment 5792
View attachment 5793
View attachment 5794
What seems to bother people, is holding someone accountable for giving someone the "disease," nowadays they correctly say "passing the virus," but they truly (foolishly) mean disease. Twitter is flooded with such comments, with Divine decree out of the picture, they put themselves in depression by considering themselves at fault for the infected, and or death resulting from their transmission, when life, death and sickness, health only happens by the will of Allah.
View attachment 5795

One group undermines correlation, and the other uses it to overshadow divine will, this dichotomy creates this illusion of conflict, and given most laymen , especially those grown in the anglosphere, suffer from a concrete understanding and acceptance of Qada' and Qadar, it would make sense to give a verdict siding with caution (staying away from infected areas is also sound from the hadith), but they should also definitely emphasize and narrate the actions of sahaba who did mingle and engage with infected individuals, and this action is established in the deen and it is a matter of higher Iman, at the same time this shouldn't discourage people from taking avoiding and keeping distance as that too is what we are told to do, because it's merely a means (regardless of statistical success rates), because as mentioned it will only work if it is Willed so.



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. If anything does happen (alhamdullilah) and If it doesn't (alhamdulilllah). The idea of "fear of getting the virus, is weak and Imam Al-Tahawi disagrees with that reason, and he leaves to Allah what the real reason is.

I agree with everything you wrote. I would like to stress on one point and expand upon it a bit. We know for a fact that everything happens by the Will of Allah (swt) but that wouldn't absolve the person of the responsibility if he intentionally or deliberately stands infront of a bus and gets killed in the process all the while believing whatever happens is by the will of Allah (swt). It would not absolve him of the responsibility.

Just like one wouldn't put his hand in a fire even though he knows for a fact that the heat and the burning happens by the Will of Allah (swt). And if he does place it there, it would not absolve him of the responsibility even though if he believes that fire is just a correlating factor of heat and burning Not the real reason.

Or if he deliberately leaves his walking baby near a fire alone, telling himself that everything happens by will of Allah, and if the baby gets burnt in the process that wouldn't evade him of the responsibility.



Let me try & give a better example. Cyanide is a poison. And it's ingestion is correlated with mortality. Knowing the creator of life and death is Allah would anyone give his brother this poison to drink? Would that absolve him of the responsibility? What if he argues that poison isn't the reason why the brother died and it was the Will of Allah?
What he said is correct;"the poison, act of giving poision and drinking poision" is indeed a correlating factor of mortality not the real reason why his brother died BUT We all know that one cannot use predestination as an excuse to ward off responsibility. This is where he gets it wrong.

On one hand, you have a group of people going to extremes, fearing the virus and NOT Allah.They are the trusting the means, the correlating factors and NOT Allah.

On the other hand, you have a group of people evading their own personal lapses, rejecting the means, completely ignoring the correlating factors as a reality, and giving excuse of predestination.

The balance is practising (ihtiat; caution) and putting your trust in Allah. (tie your camel and trust in Allah).

What compelled me to write what i wrote above is that the majority of awam of Pakistan (not talking about the liberals one finds on twitter; not all of them are though), is taking this whole situation too lightly. They even said "all this corona situation is a fraud" and doctors are deliberately killing patients by injecting poison and diagnosing them as COVID positive.

Nowadays, the ICU (intensive care units) and HDU (high dependency Units) are full and the same individuals who were once labelling COVID19 as a fraud and what not are now begging doctors to get oxygen for their patients at a "Mun boli" price. But the doctors cannot do anything since all the beds are full.

What i am trying to highlight is the fact, that although what is to happen will happen according to the decree of Allah and we should completely trust in Him however there does come a degree of responsibility which seems to be a lost case especially for the awaam of Pakistan.

To be honest, they are also misinformed of the whole issue because our "incompetent" government is only good at making promises NOT KEEPING THEM.

To give you an example:
A drug by the name of hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine was shown to be correlated with improved outcomes when given early in COVID-19 patients.

This drug completely dissappeared from the markets, is not available in most if not all hospitals. Yet i heard in the news they were giving it out as a donation to other friendly countries (USA, CHINA and some others).

Another example:
A drug by the name of Tocilizumab is found to be correlated with improved outcomes in severe COVID patients on ventilatory support.

This drug's price was around 10000 PKR (61.25 USD) for a vial. Now its being sold at 300,000 PKR (1800 USD) in the blackmarkets.

This is the haal (condition) of us. May Allah guide us all. Ameen.

 

[Unbeknown]

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. If anything does happen (alhamdullilah) and If it doesn't (alhamdulilllah). The idea of "fear of getting the virus, is weak and Imam Al-Tahawi disagrees with that reason, and he leaves to Allah what the real reason is.

please re-evaluate the appropriateness of your actions in the light of the brother's post below.

just a friendly advice.