Is it permissible to keep as a trophy the stuffed head of a wild animal?

Answer

The fatwa of a Mufti is not necessary for such a simple issue. In a matter of this kind, your heart is a sufficient Mufti. Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: "Seek a fatwa from your heart." One only requires sincerity and to be concerned with the truth. Then the directive will be inspired into the heart with clarity by Allah Ta'ala.

Even if the stuffed head is not a drawn or photographed or a digital picture, the Mu'min's intelligence dictates that for whatever evil Allah Ta'ala has prohibited pictures of animate objects, such evil exists manifold and in a magnified state in stuffed heads of animals. Such images are akin to idols.

Furthermore, the animal's stuffed head will exercise an undetectable athr (effect/influence) on the house and the members of the household. It invites the shayaateen, expels the Malaaikah of Rahmat and exercises effects of animality which subtly pervade its surroundings. The skins of all animals beside the pig, when treated and all moisture is expelled will be taahir (pure/paak). It is permissible to use such skins as musallas on which to perform Salaat. However, despite the permissibility, Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) forbade sitting on the skins of wild animals. Surely, there is valid and good reason underlying this prohibition. Apart from the Fiqhi category of the prohibition, at least there is a moral obligation to uphold this prohibition and not to sit on the skins of wild animals.

The reason for this prohibition is quite clear. There remains the effects of bestiality in the skins and this will be transferred to the person sitting on these skins. Once when a Buzrug passed by a village, the people brought an earthenware jug with water to him. The water was quite hot. They explained that regardless of seasons, whenever the jug was filled with cold water, it would quickly heat up. The Buzrug asked of the source of the clay from which the jug was made. They said that the clay was from the precincts of a grave. The Buzrug told them to leave the jug with him overnight.

The next morning when they came, they found the water was cold. They were mystified. The Buzrug explained that the inmate of that grave was undergoing severe punishment with fire, and this had an effect on the surroundings. Thus, the effect of the figure was in the clay from which the jug was made, hence the heat was transferred to the water.

During the night, the Buzrug had made prolonged dua of maghfirat (forgiveness) for the inmate of the grave who was being punished. Allah Ta'ala accepted his dua and the punishment was terminated. Thereafter the water in the jug always remained at the normal temperature.

Imam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah alayh) had a material/fabric shop. Once a young man entered and as he was about to sit on a chair, Imaam Abu Hanifah (Rahmatullah alayh) said: "Young man, do not sit on that chair. A lady had just now vacated it." The effect of ghair mahramiyyat was still in the chair and this can exercise a morally harmful effect on a man occupying it soon after the woman had vacated it.

The Rahmat of Allah descending on the grave of a Buzrug benefits all the graves in the nearby surroundings. There is an effect in everything. There are moral and spiritual harms and dangers in the writings and presence of fussaaq, fujjaar and kuffaar, and conversely there is great benefit in the works and presence of the Sulaha. tion with fussaaq, fujjaar politicians have vermiculated their brains. Therefore, they disgorge stupidities in order to legalize and halaalize what is unanimously haraam. They have rendered themselves person'a non grata. They are among the mudhilleen about whom Rasulullah (Sallallahu alayhi wasallam) had expressed so much fear for his Ummah.

6. There were other issues such as viewing the full female form when going to see a woman for marriage. I cannot recall who he said the reference was.

Answer: Yes, there is a view somewhere on Mars or Pluto that with the intention of marriage a man may view the woman stark naked without even a bikini. The molvi who mentions this view should be crucified, and when he perishes, his grave should be filled with rocks and thorns, not sand. He is a confirmed and a confounded agent of Iblees, hence he has the audacity citing this stupid view as a valid difference of opinion. In a nutshell he says he does not agree with people's views but they have their proof. He does not say anything as he does not want to think bad or ill off others and I should also be cautious. I am a layman. What on earth do I know how to understand or to interpret a Hadith so I cannot make sense of these references.

Answer: The molvi is a blatant liar. Those whom we have branded as agents of Iblees do not have a single valid Shar'i proof for their haraam views and halaalization of haraam. For example, the local maajin (moron) mercenary muftis, present as their 'proof' Mufti Taqi for permissibility of television and pictures. They are too stupid to present even stupid arguments as Mufti Taqi presents for halaalizing pictures. They make blind and stupid taqleed of Mufti Taqi in any view which appeals to their nafs. They have absolutely no Shar'i proof. Therefore do not become befuddled by the molvi who proffered the advice to you.

While you as a layman may not present your personal opinion, you may cite the fatwa/ opinion of the Aalim of Haqq whom you follow. In fact maybe if he was senior and academically strong with insight he would be able to understand the Hadith and context of these issues better. He is an ustaad in a small Darul Uloom. In fact, I told him if he was senior, he would have referred these issues to more senior ulama they will explain these to him in proper context. Anyway there must be a proper explanation for it which he does not know. I am not carried away by all this.

Yes, the Haqq stands out bright and shining, and the multitude of Ulama-e -Soo' will not succeed in their satanic mission to undermine Islam. Allah Ta'ala is the Protector of His Deen.