What is the ruling on praying in a mosque or wearing a garment that has decorations in the shape of a cross?

The Shaykh : The Shaykh :

The questioner : Regarding praying in [places with] crosses, O Shaykh!

The Shaykh : I have innovated a religious innovation to eliminate the crosses that Muslims have been afflicted with, even in their bank accounts. This cross, in this form, must be connected by joining two heads with a line above, below, to the right, and to the left. The point is to eliminate the image of a cross with the simplest thing. And if it is possible to eliminate it completely, that is undoubtedly better. As for the condition that the tail of the cross must be longer than its wings, for example, that is a strange rigidity. And in my opinion, the intention behind that is to cast doubt on the violations that have started to spread, not only in our clothes, but also in our mosques.

The questioner : Even in the Ka'bah, in the new expansion, there are many cross-like shapes!

The Shaykh : Yes, what do you think? Are these people who built these things Christians?

The questioner : O Shaykh, the scholars said: This is not a cross.

Another questioner : Is it a hadith, O Shaykh: ?

The Shaykh : Yes, .

The questioner : Could you explain it, O Shaykh?

The Shaykh : "Qadaba" means: he erased it in one way or another, by engraving, meaning because it was on the garment.

The questioner : Is it permissible to pray in a church?

The Shaykh : This is a question like that one, and it has distracted us from the answer. The prayer is valid with dislike in a mosque that has a cross, or crosses, in a garment that has a cross or crosses. It is disliked, but it is not invalid, because there is no evidence that invalidates this prayer. And we must distinguish between something being invalid and something being valid but either disliked with a dislike of disapproval, or disliked with a dislike of prohibition. But the prayer is valid in any case. So that is the answer.

The questioner : May Allah reward you with good, O Shaykh.

The Shaykh : The prayer is valid.

The questioner : Are the crosses we find in the mosques, the decorations that exist now, considered crosses?

The Shaykh : By Allah, we see, we see here crosses like, for example, the plus sign or the multiplication sign, we see them. As for these, you are pointing to them, they are not on my mind right now. Please, go ahead!

The questioner : You can pray in our mosque, and perhaps Allah (Mighty and Majestic) will benefit through you. Of course, the brothers, meaning the people of the village, are good, praise be to Allah, we consider them so. So the Sunnah is present, praise be to Allah!

The Shaykh : Praise be to Allah.

The questioner : To the extent possible, meaning we have no violations here. So if you come, they will benefit from you, even with your opinion.

The Shaykh : We ask Allah to make us successful in that. I would like to draw attention to this: First: the prayer is valid with dislike, but I want to draw attention to the fact that the Muslim must be realistic, and not be overly strict or extreme, but within the limits of: . And there is a word mentioned by the scholars of usul al-fiqh (the principles of jurisprudence) that has a perspective to some extent, but many of the contemporaries apply it more broadly than its implication, and it says: "Rulings change with the change of time and place." This generalization is wrong. Rather, the rulings that change are the rulings of independent legal reasoning (ijtihad), like what we said about 'Umar, etc. They had circumstances that they mentioned, so another circumstance comes that negates them. As for the ruling established by the text of the Book and the Sunnah, it is impossible for it to ever change with the change of time and place. This is a matter we always affirm. But I say something, and there are texts on this that no one can dispute or argue with: . There is no doubt or ambiguity for any of the great scholars or the small ones, from the great students of knowledge or the small ones: that the matter in this time is different from the first time. Meaning: in the first time, any person who saw an evil would strike and change it, and no one would say to him, "What did you do?" Or a police officer, for example, would come and detain him and take him. Things have changed now. Therefore, he (peace and blessings be upon him) said: : The rulings do not change, but they remain. But the energies and capabilities of people are what can change and transform. And this change and transformation can be caused by something resulting from within the person obligated, or it can be caused by the circumstance in which he lives. And I think this is clear speech that does not need explanation or a long elaboration.