Min Dun Illah

بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Heretical and misguided groups, like the Qadianis, which teach that the Messiah عليه السلام is dead, quote the proceeding verses of the Holy Quran:

وَالَّذِیۡنَ یَدۡعُوۡنَ مِنۡ دُوۡنِ اللّٰہِ لَا یَخۡلُقُوۡنَ شَیۡئًا وَّہُمۡ یُخۡلَقُوۡنَ

Those they call upon besides Allah do not create a thing but are themselves created

اَمۡوَاتٌ غَیۡرُ اَحۡیَآءٍ

They are dead, not alive

(Surah 16:20-21)

The argument goes that the words "min dun Illah" literally mean other than Allah and includes all the creation, including the Messiah. But as a term "min dun Illah" in many places throughout the Holy Quran refers only to the idols and false deities of the polytheists. For instance, Allah سبحانه وتعالي says:

وَمَا لَکُمۡ مِّنۡ دُوۡنِ اللّٰہِ مِنۡ وَّلِیٍّ وَّلَا نَصِیۡرٍ

There is not for you, besides Allah, a protector [wali] nor a helper

(Surah 2:107)

Yet elsewhere, He says:

اِنَّمَا وَلِیُّکُمُ اللّٰہُ وَرَسُوۡلُہٗ وَالَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوا الَّذِیۡنَ یُقِیۡمُوۡنَ الصَّلٰوۃَ وَیُؤۡتُوۡنَ الزَّکٰوۃَ وَہُمۡ رٰکِعُوۡنَ

Verily, your protector [wali] is none other than Allah, His Apostle and those who believe; those who establish the Salah and discharge the Zakah and are bowing

(Surah 5:55)

If the words "min dun Illah" as they occur in Surah 2:107 literally mean anything or anyone besides Allah, from His creation, then we have a problem, a serious contradiction! Yet Allah says:

اَفَلَا یَتَدَبَّرُوۡنَ الۡقُرۡاٰنَ ؕ وَلَوۡ کَانَ مِنۡ عِنۡدِ غَیۡرِ اللّٰہِ لَوَجَدُوۡا فِیۡہِ اخۡتِلَافًا کَثِیۡرًا 

Why do they not ponder the Quran? Had it been from other than Allah they would have found in it much discrepancy

(Surah 4:82)

Therefore, the words "min dun Illah" as they occur in the Holy Quran do not always literally mean anything or anyone besides Allah, but as a term refers to idols and false deities. And when Allah says that besides Him there is no protector or helper it means no protector or helper independent of Him. Allah says:

 لَیۡسَ لَہَا مِنۡ دُوۡنِ اللّٰہِ وَلِیٌّ وَّلَا شَفِیۡعٌ

There is not for it, besides Allah, a helper or intercessor

(Surah 6:70)

Can any Muslim understand from this that the Holy Prophet Muhammad صلي الله عليه وسلم is not the Intercessor on Judgment Day? "Min dun Illah" here again refers to idols and false deities, or that there is no protector nor intercessor independent of Allah. Is it not the meaning of the Prophet's praise and supplication of Allah:

وَأَنْـتَ الْبـاطِـنُ فَلَـيْسَ دونَـكَ شَيء

"You are Al-Batin [the Hidden], there is nothing independent of You"

(Sahih Muslim)

The Wahhabis and their various offshoots accuse mainstream, Sunni Muslims of polytheism and grave worship, and quote some of those Ayat with the words "min dun Illah" in a futile attempt to refute our doctrine.

Number of Months are Twelve in the Sight of Allah

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Salutations and Peace be upon You, My Master, Apostle of Allah

This year the Muslims will be celebrating Eid al-Fitr on three different days.

The governments of Afghanistan, Niger and Mali announced confirmation of crescent moon sightings in their respective countries on Wednesday night, therefore, Eid is on Thursday, March 19. Based on the method of global moon sighting, many Muslims in the West will observe Eid on Thursday.

The Saudi government announced that in their country there was no sighting of the crescent moon, therefore they will complete thirty days of Ramadan and observe Eid on Friday, March 20.

However, the Salafis and some other Muslims in the West, who are inconsistent, and had begun Ramadan according to the Saudi announcement despite no local moon sightings, are not following the announcement of Afghanistan, Niger and Mali and will complete thirty days of Ramadan in their blind following of the Saudis.

Other Muslim countries which did not accept the Saudi announcement for the beginning of Ramadan, doubting the scientific possibility of a moon sighting at that time, will also complete thirty days and observe Eid on Saturday, March 21.

It should be kept in mind that if one follows the method of global moon sighting (which many Muslims do) then that means one should accept the reliable testimony of Muslims of a crescent moon sighting anywhere in the world; it cannot be restricted to Arabia alone. So it makes no sense for Muslims in the West to begin Ramadan despite a lack of local moon sighting based on a Saudi announcement, but then to disregard an announcement from a country other than Saudi Arabia (like Afghanistan) that announces a crescent moon sighting for the beginning of Shawwal.

While we should respect the diversity of opinion and method with regard to moon sighting confirmation—local versus global—(but not the innovated method of astronomical calculation without visibly sighting the crescent), even if it results in the Ummah beginning and ending Ramadan on different days, we are right to call out the Salafis and other Muslims who blindly follow the Saudi government’s announcement while being outside of Arabia because they are inconsistent and apparently reject the announcement of other Muslim governments when they announce a crescent moon sighting.

The Salafi Masjid on Wright St., Small Heath (UK), considered the main Salafi center in the Anglosphere, had the first fast of Ramadan on Wednesday, February 18, despite no local moon sighting because they accepted the Saudi announcement of a moon sighting in Arabia. If they were consistent they should have said the last day of fasting in Ramadan would be Wednesday, March 18, since a sighting of the crescent moon for Shawwal was announced by the governments of Afghanistan, Niger and Mali. But because the Saudi government did not announce a moon sighting they observed Thursday, March 19 as the last day of fasting in Ramadan and will observe Eid tomorrow on Friday, March 20!

This is all part of a pattern from the Salafis in spreading fitnah among the Muslims, especially Muslim minority communities here in the West.

Jews originally determined the beginning of lunar months through witnessing the crescent moon, with witnesses brought to a special court of the Sanhedrin. Then in the 4th century CE, Hillel II introduced a fixed calendar based on calculations that the Jews have followed ever since. 

Some Muslims today who likewise follow a fixed lunar calendar based on astronomical calculations are following the innovation of the Jews. 

The Holy Prophet صلي الله عليه وسلم warned against this when he said:

لَتَتَّبِعُنَّ سَنَنَ الَّذِينَ مِنْ قَبْلِكُمْ شِبْرًا بِشِبْرٍ وَذِرَاعًا بِذِرَاعٍ حَتَّى لَوْ دَخَلُوا فِي جُحْرِ ضَبٍّ لاَتَّبَعْتُمُوهُمْ

“You will tread the same path as was trodden by those before you inch by inch and cubit by cubit so much so that if they had entered into the hole of the lizard, you would follow them in this also.” (Sahih Muslim)

Interestingly, a dissident Jewish sect—the Qumran community of Essenes associated with the Dead Sea Scrolls—rejected the practice of visible moon sighting to determine the beginning and end of the months. That was one of the reasons for their separation from the mainstream Jews of Jerusalem who accepted the validity of the priesthood serving at the Temple and continued to determine the beginning and end of the months based on visible sighting of the crescent moon.

Specifically rebuking the innovation of reckoning the lunar months based on astronomical calculations, the Prophet صلي الله عليه وسلم said:

إِنَّا أُمَّةٌ أُمِّيَّةٌ لاَ نَكْتُبُ وَلاَ نَحْسُبُ

We are an unlettered Ummah; we do not write nor count (ibid)

He صلي الله عليه وسلم then displayed all ten fingers of his hand three times, indicating the month could be thirty days, and then displayed the fingers of his hand another three times except he folded one of his thumbs the third time to indicate that the month could be twenty-nine days.

It is crucial that Muslims do not deviate from their established methods that we have been adhering to for centuries since the time of the Prophet Muhammad صلي الله عليه وسلم and the early Muslims.

In our time, some of the Christians have radically departed from the established norms and conventions, including with regard to the calendar. They have innovated the concept of a lunar Sabbath, in which the Sabbath—the Seventh Day—is not based on a fixed week of seven days, but based on phases of the moon.

We Muslims obviously reject the notion that the week is anything but a fixed cycle of seven days, with the sixth day being Yawm al-Jumu’ah (Friday) and the seventh day being Yawm al-Sabt (the Sabbath).

Although the names of the seven days of the week in English are based on Norse paganism, the days of the week are, remarkably, in sync globally, across every human culture, with the notable exception of modern-day fringe Christian churches that have innovated the Lunar Sabbath.

Allah عز وجل says:

اِنَّ عِدَّۃَ الشُّہُوۡرِ عِنۡدَ اللّٰہِ اثۡنَا عَشَرَ شَہۡرًا فِیۡ کِتٰبِ اللّٰہِ یَوۡمَ خَلَقَ السَّمٰوٰتِ وَالۡاَرۡضَ مِنۡہَاۤ اَرۡبَعَۃٌ حُرُمٌ

Verily, the number of months in the sight of Allah are twelve months in the Book of Allah (since) the day He created the Heavens and the Earth. Of them four are sacred

(Surah 9, Ayah 36)

Based on this I say that even in the Shari’ah of the earlier Prophets, like Moses, the people were instructed to follow a purely lunar calendar consisting of twelve months. The Jews innovated the introduction of an intercalary month on a “leap year” so that the months remain aligned with their seasons and so that the Passover is always in spring. Otherwise, there is no explicit commandment in the Torah to have a thirteenth (intercalary) month in seven out of every nineteen years. This innovation of the intercalary month seems to have started in the 5th century BCE, after the Jews returned from exile in Babylon, probably due to the pagan Babylonian influence they were exposed to.

Muqbil b. Hadi: Removal of the Green Dome and Prophet's Tomb

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Salutations and Peace be upon You, My Master, Apostle of Allah

The extremist Salafi from Yemen, Muqbil bin Hadi (d. 2001) said:

وبعد هذا لا اخالك تتردد في انه يجب علي المسلمين اعادة المسجد النبوي كما كان في عصر النبوة من الجهة الشرقية حتي لا يكون القبر داخلا في المسجد وانه يجب عليهم ازالة تلك القبة التي اصبح كثير من القبوريين يحتجون بها

“After this, I don’t think you would hesitate to say that Muslims must restore the Prophet’s Mosque to its state during the time of the Prophet, from the eastern side, so that the grave is not enclosed within the Mosque, and that they must remove that dome which many grave-worshippers now use as an excuse.” (The Ruling on the Dome Built Over the Grave of the Messenger of Allah)

The Wahhabis and Salafis misunderstand many matters relating to the rulings about graves. Yes, the Holy Prophet Muhammad صلوات الله والسلام عليه prohibited building high structures over graves. This means a structure directly on the surface of a grave, it is not a prohibition on enclosing a grave inside a building with a ceiling. The Holy Prophet Muhammad صلوات الله والسلام عليه was buried by his Companions in the apartment of his wife, Umm al-Mu’minin A’ishah رضي الله عنها which was not only attached to the Mosque but had four walls and a ceiling. So there is consensus in this Ummah about the validity of the location of the Prophet’s grave, and anyone who comes along and argues that it should be relocated, or that, God forbid, the Prophet صلوات الله والسلام عليه should be exhumed from his grave, is a mischief maker spreading fitnah. Muqbil bin Hadi wrote this dissertation while a student at Medina University arguing for not only the removal of the Green Dome upon the Prophet’s Mosque (God forbid), but also that the Prophet’s Mosque be rebuilt in such a way so that the Rawdah of the Prophet صلوات الله والسلام عليه is no longer within its confines!

This is the same extremist, Muqbil bin Hadi, who wrote an entire book, Nashr al-Sahifah, criticizing and attacking the Great Imam Abu Hanifah رضي الله عنه

Roshani Movement and Pashtun Nationalism

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Salutations and Peace be upon You, My Master, Apostle of Allah

As the Prophet Daniel عليه السلام was hurled into the den of lions for refusing to pray to King Darius, likewise Mujaddid Alf Thani, Imam Rabbani, Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi رحمة الله عليه was imprisoned at the Gwalior Fort by the Mughal Emperor Jahangir in 1619 for refusing to prostrate to him. 

King Darius, witnessing the miracle of Prophet Daniel being unharmed by the lions, released him and not only honored him but decreed that the people should worship the God of Daniel. Likewise, Emperor Jahangir had Mujaddid Alf Thani, Shaikh Ahmad released from imprisonment and in fact became his disciple and fell under his charismatic influence.

The zeal for the oneness of God, and willingness to endure persecution and even death for its sake often moves the heart of many an unbeliever and evildoer to repent and later honor the Believer for his uncompromising attitude.

The way of the people of Sunnah and the Jama’ah is therefore not to raise the sword against tyrants and evil rulers, but rather to speak truth to power and firmly invite them to amend their ways and subordinate themselves to the divine law of Allah سبحانه وتعالي

The tendency to revolt against the government is something far from the prophetic methodology and the way of the saints and mystics of Islam who follow in the footsteps of the Prophets. Rebellion is from the madhhab of the Kharijites and Shi’ites.

Apparently motivated by a desire for social justice and egalitarianism, some misguided individuals and groups from this Ummah rose up in rebellion against the government of their day. 

Consider the movement of Bayazid Ansari, so-called Pir Roshan of Jalandhar, a 16th century Pashtun tribesman who rose up in revolt against the Mughals. Bayazid and his Roshani movement were accused of holding heterodox doctrines too, such as pantheism and the transmigration of souls. They were characterized as antinomian, seeking to replace the Islamic Shari’ah with the code of Pashtunwali.

In many ways, the Roshani movement resembled the earlier heresy of the Qaramitah, and the ideology behind the Zanj rebellion. Its anti-feudal and egalitarian character was the basis for a last ditch nativist and ethnic revolt against orthodox Islam.

Indeed, there are echoes of the Roshani movement today in the terrorist insurgency of the TTP in northwestern Pakistan, and of Marxist Baluch and Kurdish separatist factions elsewhere. Well, the TTP insurgency matches closer the legacy of the Roshani movement not merely because it too is based in Pashtun ethno-nationalism, but also because it presents a religious coloring unlike the secularist Baluch and Kurdish separatists.

The Roshani movement could be considered in the line of earlier nativist Iranian false prophets and heretics who rose up in revolt against Arab Muslim rule.

It has come to my attention that some elements within Pashtun ethno-nationalism view Bayazid Jalandhari positively and take inspiration from him and his heretical movement.

The Mughals established themselves in the Subcontinent after overthrowing the Lodi dynasty, which was Afghan, and taking possession of Delhi. This is partly what sparked the Roshani movement’s uprising, for it could not stomach the rule of Mughals, non-Afghans. Likewise, the TTP and other Pashtun nationalist anti-State activity is largely animated by an unwillingness to accept the apparent ascendancy and domination of an Indic people—the Punjabis—identified as the power behind the modern state of Pakistan.

Prioritizing their narrow ethnic interests and sense of honor over and above the glory of Islam and the rise of a new and mighty Islamic power is certainly what unites the 16th century Roshani movement with the 20th and 21st century Pashtun nationalist sentiment against Pakistan. Pakistan is essentially the heir of the Mughal legacy, representing a shift from the palaces of Delhi to General Headquarters (GHQ) in Rawalpindi.

Persecution and Execution of Heretics

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

Salutations and Peace be upon You, My Master, Apostle of Allah

When Amir al-Mu’minin, Ali al-Murtada رضي الله عنه had the hypocrite and heretic Abd Allah bin Saba executed he set a magnificent precedent in Islam in how the Muslim leaders should deal with heresy.

The Umayyad ruler Abd al-Malik bin Marwan, known for having constructed the beautiful Dome of the Rock to honor the Foundation Stone, the first Qiblah, had the false prophet al-Harith bin Sa’id and the heretic Ma’bad al-Juhani executed. 

His son, Hisham bin Abd al-Malik, had the heretic Ghaylan al-Dimashqi executed.

A governor for the Umayyads in Iraq, Khalid al-Qasri, had many other heretics executed, including al-Ja’d bin Dirham, Bayan bin Sam’an and al-Mughirah bin Sa’id.

Another governor for the Umayyads in Iraq, Yusuf bin Umar al-Thaqafi, had the heretic and rebel Abu Mansur al-Ijli executed.

The Abbasid ruler al-Mutawakkil had the false prophet Mahmud bin al-Faraj executed.

The mighty Salah al-Din al-Ayyubi رحمة الله عليه had the controversial Shihab al-Din al-Suhruwardi, founder of the Ishraqi philosophy, also known as Illuminationism, executed.

The great Mughal emperor, Aurangzaib رحمة الله عليه had Sarmad Kashani executed.

In 1985, the heretic Mahmud Taha was executed by the then Sudanese government of Ja’far al-Nimayri.

Some people, under the influence of European ideologies (liberalism, secularism and humanism) object to the execution of apostates, heretics, blasphemers, false prophets, sodomites and sorcerers as mandated by our Shari’ah.

But the established history of the execution of such evil individuals throughout Islamic history is a proof against those certain Muslims who, under the influence of liberalism, secularism and humanism, claim that Islam does not condone or require a physical eradication of heresy.

On the contrary, I say that the Muslim rulers and governments should actively persecute and seek to exterminate the Zanadiqah. Unlike the People of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), and other pre-Islamic religions and communities like Hindus, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, etc., there can be no tolerance for the Zanadiqah (heretics). They ought to be pursued and totally exterminated.

As God Almighty was furious with the Israelites for their failure to cleanse the Holy Land of the various idolatrous nations such as Amalek, it appears to me that one of the factors that led to the end of the Ottoman Empire was its unwillingness in its final phase to not only keep the non-Muslims subjugated but also its unwillingness to exterminate dangerous heretical cults like the Druze, Alawites, Alevis, Yarsanis, Yezidis and others that as a consequence persist till this day.

On a positive note, the heretical Zikris of Baluchistan, who consider Mulla Muhammad of Attock their prophet and a messenger of God, and reject the Five Pillars of Islam, were actively persecuted and fought against by the great Baluch ruler, Mir Nasir Khan (1749-1817) رحمة الله عليه

The zeal of Mir Nasir Khan for orthodox, Sunni Islam, and his smashing the Zikris was greatly appreciated by the Ottomans. Mir Nasir Khan later joined forces with another great Muslim king, Ahmad Shah Abdali رحمة الله عليه who famously fought the Sikh infidels and destroyed their idolatrous temple in Amritsar in 1762.

The glorious mission of Mir Nasir Khan against the Zikris in 18th century Baluchistan is somewhat reminiscent of the Hasmonean Jewish king John Hyrcanus who conquered the Samaritans and destroyed their temple at Mount Gerizim, which had been constructed in opposition to the Temple in Jerusalem.

The Parable of the Good Samaritan is cited by Samaritans to argue that Jesus Christ عليه الصلاة والسلام was favorable toward them. But Jesus Christ confirmed the doctrine of the Jews over that of the dissident Samaritans with regard to the sanctity of Jerusalem—rejected by the Samaritans—when he said: “Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews” (John 4:22, KJV).

The Samaritans not only reject the sanctity of Jerusalem, but also reject belief in the Israelite Prophets subsequent to Joshua son of Nun عليه السلام and the Scriptures revealed to them. They reject belief in the Prophets Samuel, David, Solomon, Job, Elijah, Elisha, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Jonah and the others عليهم السلام

Perhaps the last great Muslim conqueror was Emir Abd al-Rahman Khan (d. 1901) of Afghanistan رحمة الله عليه

He conquered both the Hazara Rawafid Shi’ah of Hazarajat, in central Afghanistan, and the pagans of Kafirstan in eastern Afghanistan who thereafter converted to Islam. Their land of Kafirstan is now called Nuristan—the land of light.

Finally, I will mention the great General Muhammad Zia ul-Haq (1924-1988), a President of Pakistan, رحمة الله عليه

He overthrew the socialist and secularist government of Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in 1977, and during his rule initiated a project of Islamization of Pakistan and materially aided the Afghan Jihad against the Soviets throughout the 1980s.

Though restrained by the reality of the modern age, President Zia ul-Haq nevertheless did what he could to persecute and marginalize heretical groups in Pakistan, especially the Qadiyanis—followers of the false prophet Mirza Ghulam Ahmad—against whom he passed several executive ordinances to prevent them from masquerading as Muslims and proselytizing their heresy.

President Zia ul-Haq also initiated a policy of settling Sunni Muslims from mainland Pakistan into the Northern Areas—now called Gilgit-Baltistan—to dilute the non-Sunni sects (Twelver Shi’ah, Isma’ilis and Nurbakhshis) that predominate in that region.

The extreme hatred that the Qadiyanis, Shi’ites, Hindu India, communists, secularists, liberals and feminists have for Zia ul-Haq till this day is sufficient reason for us conservative Sunni Muslims to embrace him as our hero. It is that widespread hatred from the aforementioned enemies of Islam for the man that explains why he was tragically martyred through the bombing of his plane while he was onboard.