Deobandi/Tablighi Jamaat Fabrication on Prophet (AS) Placing Hand on a Strange Woman

بســم اللــه الرحمــن الرحيــم

والصلاــة والسلاــم علــى نبيــه الكريــم

وعلــى اهــل بيتــه الطيبيــن الطاهريــن المظلوميــن

والعاقبة للمتقين

The Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) said:

مَنْ تَعَمَّدَ عَلَىَّ كَذِبًا فَلْيَتَبَوَّأْ مَقْعَدَهُ مِنَ النَّارِ

“Whoever deliberately lies upon me, then let him occupy his seat in the Hellfire” (Hadith Mutawatir)

This is a severe warning to those who fabricate stories and sayings and attribute them to the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam). The Deobandis in particular should heed this warning, as their literature is full of fabricated material concerning the beloved Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam), even to the extent of attributing to him what is not befitting for his personality and character. The Tablighi Jama’at in particular leads the way in fabricating lies upon the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) in the series of books known as “Tablighi Nisab” or “Fada’il ul-A’mal”. Here I shall present one such example of a catastrophic fabrication upon the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) which must be refuted for three reasons: 1. It is a lie upon the Prophet 2. It is denigrating to his known status and character, and 3. It contravenes the pure Islamic creed:

میں اپنی ماں کے ساتھ حج کو گیا تھا میری ماں وہیں رہ گئی (یعنی مرگئی) اس کا منہ کالا ہوگیا اور اس کا پیٹ پھول گیا جس سے مجھے یہ اندازہ ہؤا کہ کوئی بہت بڑا سخت گناہ ہؤا ہے اس سے میں نے اللہ جل شانہ کی طرف دعا کے لۓ ہاتھ اٹھاۓ تو میں نے دیکھا کہ تہامہ (حجاز) سے ایک ابرآیا اس سے ایک آدمی ظاہر ہؤا۔ اس نے اپنا مبارک ہاتھ میری ماں کے منہ پر پھیرا جس سے وہ بالکل روشن ہوگیا اور پیٹ پر ہاتھ پھیرا تو درم بالکل جاتا رہا۔ میں نے ان سے عرض کیا کہ آپ کون ہیں کہ میری اور میری ماں کی مصیبت کو آپ نے دور کیا۔ انہوں نے فرمایا کہ میں تیرا نبی محمد (صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم) ہوں

Moulana Zakariyah mentions in the virtues of Darood, an incident of a boy who used to recite Darood at every step. When asked for the reason of his action, he said: “once I went to Hajj with my mother. She died there and her face turned black and her belly swollen. I considered that condition to be as a result of some major sin. Then I prayed to Allah and saw a cloud coming from Hijaz. A gentleman appeared from the cloud. He turned his hand over my mother’s face because of which it was brightened. When he passed his hand over her belly, the swelling went away. I asked that gentleman, ‘tell me who you are, that my and my mother’s misery has been removed because of you.’ He said, ‘I am your Prophet Muhammad.’” (Fada’il-i-Durud p.138):

This fabricated story impugns the well known and established character of the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam), regarding whom the Mother of the Believers, sayyida A’isha (radi Allahu anha) said:

وَاللَّهِ مَا مَسَّتْ يَدُهُ يَدَ امْرَأَةٍ قَطُّ

“By Allah, his hand never touched the hand of a woman” (Bukhari & Muslim)

Implicit in this story is that the Prophet (peace be upon him) is somehow still alive in this world, or is able to appear in this world physically and revive the dead, a doctrine that strikes at the very core of Quranic teachings.

Misguided Ideology of Dr. Israr Ahmad

بســم اللــه الرحمــن الرحيــم

والصلاــة والسلاــم علــى نبيــه الكريــم

وعلــى اهــل بيتــه الطيبيــن الطاهريــن المظلوميــن

والعاقبة للمتقين

Dr. Israr Ahmad (1932-2010), the founder of Tanzimi Islami, an offshoot of Mawdudi’s Jama’ati Islami, was well known for his enlightened explanation of the Quran al-Karim. Nevertheless, he was affected by the political fikr introduced by the likes of Mawdudi.

Dr. Israr Ahmad was one of those individuals who taught the idea that the Umma is at present non-existent: “Today there is no Muslim Ummah united in one whole, only numerous Muslim states inhabiting their own territories.” (Rise and Decline of Muslim Ummah, p.27) This view that the Umma is non-existent or absent was shared by the likes of Sayyid Qutb and the Saudi cleric Salman al-Awdah. It is definitely an idea that smacks of mass-Takfir or at the very least characterized with that kind of dangerous thinking. While it is true that the Muslim Umma is no longer under the authority of a single state, but rather split up into numerous states, that is hardly a basis to declare that the Umma is non-existent or absent. The fact of the matter is that the Umma is not a political unit but refers to the Muslims as a collective. The adherents of the modern political fikr are notorious for redefining terms, such as Umma, without any evidence, to fit into their manufactured narrative that is largely influenced by revolutionary Marxism. With respect to ethnic nationalism as a means of resisting European colonialism, Dr. Israr Ahmad argued: “there is in fact no harm in adopting it as temporary expedient defensive strategy, provided that it is not accepted as a permanent base for Muslim ideology” (ibid, p.29). One is at a loss to understand how such a Machiavellian principle could ever be justified in light of the teachings of the pure Islamic methodology. Regarding supererogatory acts of worship, or the Nawafil, Allah Most High says:

وَمَا يَزَالُ عَبْدِي يَتَقَرَّبُ إِلَىَّ بِالنَّوَافِلِ حَتَّى أُحِبَّهُ

“My slave does not cease coming close to Me with the supererogatory till I love him” (Hadith Qudsi)

But Dr. Israr Ahmad, in yet another example of the level of misguidance which resulted from the political fikr he championed, wrote: “It has always been my position that it is permissible to engage in supererogatory acts of devotion in order to get nearer to Allah (SWT), provided Islam is dominant.” (The Reality of Tasawwuf in Light of the Prophetic Model, p.46).

Abu Yazid al-Bistami's Claim of Tahdith

بســم اللــه الرحمــن الرحيــم

والصلاــة والسلاــم علــى نبيــه الكريــم

وعلــى اهــل بيتــه الطيبيــن الطاهريــن المظلوميــن

والعاقبة للمتقين

The ninth century Sufi mystic, Abu Yazid Tayfur b. Isa al-Bistami, popularly known as Bayazid Bistami, claimed to be a recipient of direct communication from Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’la, in other words, a Muhaddath. In a well known incident, while debating with the Ulama of his time, he said to them:

أخذتم علمكم ميتاً عن ميت وأخذنا علمنا عى الحي الذي لا يموت يقول أمثالنا حدثني قلبي عن ربي وأنتم تقولون حدثنا فلان

“You take your knowledge from a deceased (narrating) from the deceased, and we take our knowledge from the Living (Allah) Who will never die. Our example is: ‘my heart narrated from my Lord’, while you say: ‘So-and-so narrated to us.’” (Sharh Kalimat al-Sufiya p.165):

 

Prostration of Respect is Disbelief

بســم اللــه الرحمــن الرحيــم

والصلاــة والسلاــم علــى نبيــه الكريــم

وعلــى اهــل بيتــه الطيبيــن الطاهريــن المظلوميــن

والعاقبة للمتقين

Prostration of Respect is Kufr

The Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) said:

مَا يَنْبَغِي لأَحَدٍ أَنْ يَسْجُدَ لأَحَدٍ

“It is not appropriate for anyone to prostrate to anyone else.” (Sahih Ibn Hibban)

It is commonly held in academic circles that a prostration to other than Allah made out of respect is only haram (unlawful and sinful) but does not constitute disbelief or apostasy from Islam. However, in the Hanafi school of thought, all prostration offered to anyone besides Allah is not only strictly forbidden, it is an act of disbelief, even if the intention is not to worship. The eighth century Hanafi scholar, al-Badr al-Rashid Muhammad b. Isma’il al-Hanafi (d. 768 H) wrote:

إذا قال أهل الحرب لمسلم: اسجد للملك وإلا قتلناك فالأفضل أن لا يسجد لأن هذا كفر صورة، والأفضل أن لا يأتي بما هو كفر صورة وإن كان في حالة الإكراه، ومن سجد للسلطان بنية العبادة أو لم تحضره فقد كفر، ومن سجد لهم إن أراد به التعظيم كفر، وإن أراد التحية اختار بعض العلماء: أن لا يكفر، قال بعضهم يكفر مطلقاً

هذا إذا سجد لأهل الإكراه أي لمن يتأتى منه الإكراه و يتحقّق منه ذلك بأن أكرهه عليه مثل الملك عند أبي حنيفة رحمه اللّه،أو كل قادر على قتل الساجد عند أبي يوسف ومحمد رحمهما الله تعالى أما لو سجد لغير أهل إلاكراه على القوين يكفر عندهم بلا خلاف

“If the people of Harb (war) say to a Muslim: ‘Prostrate to the king or he will kill you’, it is better not to prostrate because that (prostration to the king) is a form of disbelief, and so it is better not to carry out a form of disbelief even in a state of duress. And whoever prostrated to the Sultan (ruler) with the intention of worship, and he wasn’t threatened, then that is disbelief. And whoever prostrated to them (meaning rulers), if he intended worship (ibaadah) and veneration (ta'dheem) he has disbelieveed, and if he intended a welcome greeting (tahiyyah) some of the scholars have chosen the view that he does not disbelieve. Yet some of them said that he disbelieves absolutely [no matter what the reason] and it is unlawful for him to make the greeting by means of a prostration, and even if he does not have the intent (of worship) at the time of prostration, he disbelieves in the view of majority of the people of knowledge, may Allaah have mercy upon them. This is - in the view of Abu Haneefah (rahimahullaah) - when he prostrates to those who make compulsion (upon others) such as the king and - in the view of Abu Yusuf and Muhammad (bin al-Hasan al-Shaybanee) (rahimahumallaah) - every person who has the power to kill the one that does not prostrate (to him). As for when he prostrates to other than the people who (impose prostration upon them) through compulsion, upon either of the two views (just mentioned) [which are held], he disbelieves in the view of them all without any difference of opinion.” (al-Jami fi Alfaz al-Kufr pp.113-114):

 

 

Reality of Ijtihad

بســم اللــه الرحمــن الرحيــم

والصلاــة والسلاــم علــى نبيــه الكريــم

وعلــى اهــل بيتــه الطيبيــن الطاهريــن المظلوميــن

والعاقبة للمتقين

Now coming to the fourth source of Islamic law, Ijtihad, usually translated to mean mental effort or exertion to arrive at an opinion, it is usually manifested as Qiyas or analogical reasoning among the Sunnis and referred to as the use of Aql or intellect, among the Shi’a. All of these terms are essentially synonymous with respect to referring to this fourth source of the Shari’a. As in the case of Ijma (consensus), Ijtihad is not a primary or independent source of Islamic law, rather, its validity has been derived from the primary sources, particularly the following Hadith narrated by the companions Amr b. al-As and Abi Hurayra (radi Allahu anhuma) that the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) said:

إِذَا حَكَمَ الْحَاكِمُ فَاجْتَهَدَ ثُمَّ أَصَابَ فَلَهُ أَجْرَانِ، وَإِذَا حَكَمَ فَاجْتَهَدَ ثُمَّ أَخْطَأَ فَلَهُ أَجْرٌ

“When a judge passes a judgment through Ijtihad and arrives at a correct decision, for him is a double reward, and when he judges through Ijtihad but makes an error, he is still entitled to a single reward.” (mutaffaq alayh)

Based on this Hadith it is firmly established that the exercising of Ijtihad is the domain of the one who is fit to be a judge. In other words, an ordinary layperson cannot be a mujtahid as he does not possess the necessary academic qualifications to be a judge or scholar of the Religion. Another critical fact concerning Ijtihad is that it can only be exercised in matters regarding which both the Quran and Sunna are silent, as illustrated in the Hadith of Mu’adh bin Jabal (radi Allahu anh), that before the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) sent him to act as a judge in Yemen, he quizzed him:

كَيْفَ تَقْضِي.‏ فَقَالَ أَقْضِي بِمَا فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏‏ فَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ ‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ فَبِسُنَّةِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏‏ فَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ فِي سُنَّةِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ أَجْتَهِدُ رَأْيِي ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏ الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ الَّذِي وَفَّقَ رَسُولَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم

“How will you judge?” He (Mu’adh) said: “I shall judge according to what is in the Book of Allah.” He (the Prophet) said: “And if it is not in the Book of Allah?” He said: “Then by the Sunna of Allah’s Apostle peace be upon him.” He (the Prophet) said: “And if it is not in the Sunna of Allah’s Apostle peace be upon him?” He (Mu’adh) said: “I shall give my opinion through Ijtihad.” He (the Prophet) said: “All praise belongs to Allah Who made the emissary of the Apostle of Allah peace be upon him agreeable.” (Jami al-Tirmidhi #1327)

Although this narration is weak due to the presence of unknown narrators in its sanad, the meaning is certainly correct in the sense that Ijtihad is only to be exercised when the sources of Quran and Sunna have been exhausted and no explicit answer can be found in them to a practical problem that has risen and requires judgment. It is often said that the “Gate of Ijtihad” was closed in medieval times by the medieval scholars, and that it is not now possible for a perfectly qualified mujtahid to arise and make any fresh Ijtihad. According to this idea, all that Ijithad that could be done has already been exercised and the results compiled in the schools of law attributed to the great Mujtahidin of the past, particularly the four Imams, Abi Hanifa, Malik, al-Shafi’i and Ahmad b. Hanbal (rahimahumullah). What is required now is only to make taqlid (blind-following) of the Ijtihad of one of these four Imams and the school of law associated with him. Incidentally, this idea that the “Gate of Ijitihad” is closed and that it is now impossible for a new qualified Mujtahid to arise let alone a new madhhab or school of jurisprudence, is itself based on someone’s Ijtihad, otherwise it has no basis in the primary sources of Quran and Sunna that a time would ever come when the “Gate of Ijtihad” would be shut forever. In fact, this appears to be a weak and illogical view that should be rejected by the academic circles, in part because it is an attitude that has historically nurtured intellectual laziness and stagnation.

Reality of Ijma (Consensus)

بســم اللــه الرحمــن الرحيــم

والصلاــة والسلاــم علــى نبيــه الكريــم

وعلــى اهــل بيتــه الطيبيــن الطاهريــن المظلوميــن

والعاقبة للمتقين

As mentioned in the previous entry, there are four sources of Shari’a or Islamic law with Ahl us-Sunnati wal-Jama’a, the third of which is Ijma (consensus). However, a distinction needs to be made between the first two sources (Quran and Sunna), which are the primary sources, and the second two, Ijma and Ijtihad, which are the secondary sources. The Quran and Sunna are two independent sources, though the Quran is given priority over isolated narrations of Hadith where the two may possibly clash. Ijma, along with Ijtihad, are not independent sources of Islamic law, but in fact derive their authority from the primary sources of Quran and Sunna. Hence, the authority of Ijma is not absolute or independent, but rather a means of manifesting a correct understanding of a text of the Quran or something from the Sunna. It is in fact from certain Hadith that the validity of Ijma has been delegated and derived:

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لاَ يَجْمَعُ أُمَّتِي -عَلَى ضَلاَلَةٍ وَيَدُ اللَّهِ مَعَ الْجَمَاعَةِ

“Verily, Allah shall not gather my Umma upon an error, and the Hand of Allah is with the Jama’a.” (Jami al-Tirmidhi #2167)

وَأَنْ لاَ يَظْهَرَ أَهْلُ الْبَاطِلِ عَلَى أَهْلِ الْحَقِّ وَأَنْ لاَ تَجْتَمِعُوا عَلَى ضَلاَلَةٍ

“The people of falsehood will never prevail over the people of truth, and neither shall you all be gathered upon an error.” (Sunan Abi Dawud #4253)

However, these narrations are not without criticism with regard to their authenticity. More importantly, the definition and reality of Ijma or concensus is hotly contested among the “orthodox” scholars themselves. The apparent wording of the narrations which provide a basis for Ijma as a legal concept in the principles of Islamic jurisprudence speak of the complete concensus of the entire Umma of the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) without restriction of time. There is no specification of this concensus referring to the concensus of scholars or the academic community only, or the concensus of the Prophet’s companions only. Taking these facts into consideration, it has to be concluded that although Ijma is acknowledged as the third source of Islamic law, this is merely theoretical, because in practice it doesn’t seem possible how to determine what is and what isn’t an example of concensus. As I have made clear, the function of concensus is only to reinforce or manifest something that is already present in the texts of Quran and Sunna. Concensus cannot be used to manufacture or legislate any law or doctrine that is independent of or does not already have a basis in the primary sources of Quran and Sunna. Practically speaking, it can be said that the function of Ijma then appears to be to only reinforce the most fundamental laws and beliefs in Islam, known by necessity, which are already firmly entrenched in the primary sources. For example, the concensus of the Muslim Umma that there are five mandatory prayers (Fajr, Zuhr, Asr, Maghrib and Isha), that pork and hard drink are forbidden, and the like of very basic rulings that are known by necessity. Those extremely isolated and deviant groups, such as the Ghulat and Zanadiqa, can be said to be deviated and even disbelievers on the basis of their breaching of the consensus of the Muslim Umma on these very basic rulings and teachings of Islam. If there are any authentic narrations of Hadith from which the concept of Ijma can be derived as a legal principle, it should be kept in mind that the primary objective of such narrations are not to give us a legal principle but to give the Umma glad tidings that it cannot ever go astray in totality, and Allah knows best.

Reality of Sunna and Amal al-Tawatur

بســم اللــه الرحمــن الرحيــم

والصلاــة والسلاــم علــى نبيــه الكريــم

وعلــى اهــل بيتــه الطيبيــن الطاهريــن المظلوميــن

والعاقبة للمتقين

Having established that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him & his family), in his person, is the Ma’khadh or source of Islamic knowledge, because it was upon his heart that the divine Revelation was revealed, I now move on to the four things that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him & his family) brought or authorized as sources of law: (1) the Quran (2) the Sunna (3) Ijma (4) Ijtihad

These are the four sources of Shari’a in their proper sequence according to the mainstream and orthodox Ahl us-Sunnati wal-Jama’a. With regard to the Sunna, it means the Qawl (saying), F’il (action) and Taqrir (approval) of the Prophet (peace be upon him & his family). One of the common misnomers that is becoming widespread among the Muslims is that the only source of the Prophet’s Sunna are the Ahadith. Certainly, the Ahadith are a source of knowledge of the Prophet’s Sunna, but the reader should consider the fact that the Prophet’s Sunna was obviously in existence even before the Ahadith were narrated and collected. For example, the Quraan enjoins the Believers to pray five times a day, but the details of those mandatory prayers, including the number of rakaat is known from the Sunna. It is from the Sunna that the Fajr prayer consists of two raka’a, Zuhr consists of four raka’a, Asr consists of four raka’a, Maghrib consists of three raka’a and Isha consists of four raka’a. Suppose not a single Hadith was narrated concerning the number of raka’at for these mandatory prayers, would any reasonable person conclude thereby that there is no proof for the number of rakaat for these prayers? Obviously not! That is because the Muslim community has come to know and practice this necessary knowledge regarding the number of rakaat in the prescribed prayers through Amal al-Tawatur, or continuous mass practice going back to the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him). Hence, Amal al-Tawatur is also a source of Sunna, in fact, it carries greater weight and significance than isolated reports from the Hadith, known as Khabr Wahid. Members of the Ahl al-Hadith sect, however, consider the Hadith as the sole source of Sunna, and emphasize a literal reading of the Hadith, making no distinction between mutawatir (mass-transmitted) and khabr wahid (solitary report) and rejecting the concept of attaining the Sunna through Amal al-Tawatur independent of the texts of the Hadith. Take for instance the issue of covering the head for a male, with a turban, skullcap, etc. Muslim males of Ahl us-Sunna have been covering their heads for religious significance, especially during acts of worship, as Amal al-Tawatur. But the Ahl al-Hadith sect does not consider covering the head for a male as having any religious significance, and so it is common among their ranks to go bareheaded and pray bareheaded. They argue that since there isn’t a single authentic Hadith which enjoins covering the head for a male, or quotes any virtue in doing so, therefore they conclude that covering the head for a male is of no consequence and is merely a cultural custom. Another strong example is the issue of Udhiya or the animal sacrifice that is on the Eid al-Qurban (Festival of Sacrifice) and days of Tashriq in the month of Dhi al-Hijja. According to the Ahl al-Hadith, what is there, from the Hadith specifically, in preventing someone from sacrificing a bird for the Udhiya? The fact that Muslims restrict themselves to sacrificing an’am animals during the Festival of Sacrifice, meaning camels, cattle, sheep and goats, is an example of Amal al-Tawatur, since there is nothing explicit in either the Quran or the Hadith which forbids us from sacrificing birds, chicken or even deer, all of which are Halal, but we come to know from the mass practiced Sunna of the Muslim community that despite being Halal, those animals cannot be sacrificed for the Festival of Sacrifice. Outside of the Festival of Sacrifice, to ordinarily sacrifice deer, birds, ducks, chicken, etc., is a valid act of worship in order to attain closeness to Allah. This sums up my discussion on the reality of Sunna and the fact that it is not only derived from the Hadith but more importantly from Amal al-Tawatur, the continuous mass practice of the Muslim community going back to the time of the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) and his Companions (radi Allahu anhum).

Ultimate Source of Faith: The Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله

بســم اللــه الرحمــن الرحيــم

والصلاــة والسلاــم علــى نبيــه الكريــم

وعلــى اهــل بيتــه الطيبيــن الطاهريــن المظلوميــن

والعاقبة للمتقين

I begin this new series of articles regarding juristic issues, or to be more precise, the principles of Islamic jurisprudence especially pertaining to leadership of the Muslim community and political theory. In this particular entry, I wish to discuss the source of guidance and truth. It is quite common to hear nowadays that the ultimate source in Islam is the Qur’an, the divinely-revealed Scripture. This is considered the ma’khadh (source) of Islam absolutely by many Muslims nowadays. I say, however, that the ultimate source of Islam, meaning, the means to guidance and knowledge of what Islam is, is the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wa aalihi wasallam). I can present many proofs and arguments in favor of this, but shall restrict myself here to only a few. Firstly, the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wa aalihi wasallam) was the one to whom the holy Qur’an was revealed. In other words, the Qur’an was not revealed upon the heart of each and every individual Believer, but it was revealed to a single Prophet, who then conveyed its contents to the people:

 

قُلْ مَن كَانَ عَدُوًّا لِّجِبْرِيلَ فَإِنَّهُ نَزَّلَهُ عَلَىٰ قَلْبِكَ بِإِذْنِ اللَّـهِ مُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ وَهُدًى وَبُشْرَىٰ لِلْمُؤْمِنِينَ۝

Say: Whoever is an enemy to Gabriel, for verily he brought it down upon your heart [O My Prophet!] by the permission of Allah, confirming what was before it and a guidance and glad tidings for the believers.

(Sura 2:97)

The words alaa Qalbika “upon your heart” in the singular, a direct address to the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wa aalihi wasallam) is one of the proofs that the Quraan was revealed to him, and not revealed collectively upon the hearts of the believers. Similarly, Allah says:

وَإِنَّهُ لَتَنزِيلُ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ ﴿١٩٢﴾ نَزَلَ بِهِ الرُّوحُ الْأَمِينُ ﴿١٩٣﴾ عَلَىٰ قَلْبِكَ لِتَكُونَ مِنَ الْمُنذِرِينَ ﴿١٩٤﴾

And verily it is a Revelation of the Lord of the worlds.

The trustworthy Spirit has brought it down.

Upon your heart (O My Prophet!) that you may be of the warners.

(Sura 26:192-194)

Having established that the Quraan was revealed upon a single heart, the pure heart of our holy Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wa aalihi wasallam), and was not a collective revelation to the hearts of the Believers, it is quite obvious that in order to access and attain the Quraan one must take the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wa aalihi wasallam) as its medium and source. Unless the Prophet Muhammad says “this is the Quraan” it is impossible for one to know what the Quraan even is. Additionally, consider the fact that when the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wa aalihi wasallam) was first commanded by Allah to invite people to Islam, he was ordered to begin with his nearest kin:

وَأَنذِرْ عَشِيرَتَكَ الْأَقْرَبِينَ۝

And warn your closest kindred

(Sura 26:214)

This he did, in the well known episode known as the da’wat al-Ashira. The Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) had various clans of the Quraysh assembled on the mount of al-Safa, and asked them:

أَرَأَيْتُمْ إِنْ أَخْبَرْتُكُمْ أَنَّ خَيْلاً تَخْرُجُ مِنْ سَفْحِ هَذَا الْجَبَلِ أَكُنْتُمْ مُصَدِّقِيَّ

“If I inform you of a cavalry coming up the side of this mountain, would you believe me?”

To which all the people assembled replied:

مَا جَرَّبْنَا عَلَيْكَ كَذِبًا

“We have never known you to tell a lie.”

It was then that the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) conveyed the divine message with which he was sent in the following words:

فَإِنِّي نَذِيرٌ لَكُمْ بَيْنَ يَدَىْ عَذَابٍ شَدِيدٍ

“So verily I am a warner to you of a coming severe punishment.”

Consider the fact that in this, his first da’wa to the people since being appointed a Prophet and Apostle, sayyidina Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) did not invite them to believe in the Quran, but rather, invited them to believe in his person as a Nadhir (harbinger), warning them of an imminent divine punishment. In other words, belief in the Prophet’s person as being a Prophet and Apostle of God necessarily precedes belief in the Scripture that was revealed to him. It is fundamentally an incorrect approach to first believe in the Scripture and then derive belief in the Prophet Muhammad based on that Scripture. In fact there are many fundamentals of Faith, particularly the very creed, the two testifications through which one enters into Islam, that a Believer must necessarily be acquainted with before even laying hands on a copy of the holy Quraan. The creed of Islam is:

لــا الــه الــا اللــه

محمــد رسوــل اللــه

There is none worthy of worship except Allah

Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah

 

Interestingly, this formula is not found as a single statement in the Quraan, yet the vast majority of Muslims consider it the most fundamental and basic teaching of their Faith. It is a very powerful evidence that belief in this Kalima or creed not only precedes but is independent of the Quran, a strong refutation of particularly those so-called “Quranist” sects which consider the text of the Quran as the sole and ultimate source of Faith and religious knowledge. Iman or faith is learnt before one even approaches the Quran, proving that the knowledge of Iman precedes and is independent of the Quran, as the sahabi Jundub b. Abd Allah (radi Allahu anh) said:

كُنَّا مَعَ النَّبِيِّ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ وَنَحْنُ فِتْيَانٌ حَزَاوِرَةٌ فَتَعَلَّمْنَا الإِيمَانَ قَبْلَ أَنْ نَتَعَلَّمَ الْقُرْآنَ ثُمَّ تَعَلَّمْنَا الْقُرْآنَ فَازْدَدْنَا بِهِ إِيمَانًا

“We were with the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) and we were strong youths, so we learned Faith before we learned the Quran, then we learned the Quran and our Faith increased thereby.” (Sunan Ibn Maja #61)

What is meant by learning Faith here, a knowledge that is independent of and precedes knowledge of the Quran, is the learning of the belief in the Oneness of Allah, the belief in the Angels like Gabriel and Michael, the belief in the Scriptures like the Torah and the Quran as being a divine revelation, the belief in the Prophets and Apostles, and the Last of the Prophets Muhammad (peace be upon him) the belief in the Hereafter and resurrection (Judgment Day, Heaven and Hell), and belief in the divine decree. All of this is necessarily learned before one picks up the Quran and starts to read it. Furthermore, the reader should note that if it is the Quran which is the ultimate and primary source of the Faith of Islam, then the Kalima would certainly state:

 

لا اله الا الله

القرآن كتاب الله

“The Quraan is the Book of Allah”

In lieu of “Muhammad is the Apostle of Allah” or at least before it.

Akhbari Shiite Sect Belief in Tahrif (Distortion) of Quran

بســم اللــه الرحمــن الرحيــم

والصلاــة والسلاــم علــى نبيــه الكريــم

وعلــى اهــل بيتــه الطيبيــن الطاهريــن المظلوميــن

 

Allah Azza wa Jalla says: 

إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ۝

Verily, We have sent down the Dhikr and verily We are its Guardians

(Sura 15:9)

Consequently, it is one of the fundamentals of our Faith to believe and have certainty in the fact that the holy Qur’an is the pristine and undistorted Words of Allah. Anyone who believes the holy Qur’an has been tampered with, that it has not been maintained in its original form or sequence, that either parts of it were fabricated or removed, has become an apostate from the Religion of Islam and is guilty of outright kufr. Incidentally, the books of the Ithna Ashari sect of Shi’a contain numerous reports attributed to the twelve Imams and others that apparently state that the Qur’an has been distorted. The doctrine of tahrif (distortion) of the Qur’an is quite evident in the well known books of the Ithna Ashari sect. For example, in a previous entry I cited an Ayah (25:74) which absolutely demolishes the false doctrine of Imamate held to by the Ithna Asharis and other Imamiyya sects. Unable to answer this powerful Qur’anic proof, the Ithna Ashari texts found no other avenue except to claim that the Ayah was distorted and put forward the alleged original text of the Verse. Nevertheless, the mainstream Ulama of the Ithna Asharis fiercely deny this doctrine and maintain that they fully believe in the Qur’an as it is. These tend to belong to the Usuli school of thought, but there is another group of Ithna Asharis known as the Akhbari school. The Usuli school, from the word Usul meaning “principles” cite one of their principles that any Hadith or Khabr (report) which opposes the holy Qur’an ought to be rejected. However, the Akhbari school apparently give preference to the Akhbar (reports) of their twelve Imams over anything else. The axis of the Akhbari sect is therefore the alleged sayings of the twelve Imams and not the holy Qur’an, i.e., the Word of God. In the Indian subcontinent, the Akhbari sect is based in Hyderabad, India. The now deceased Moulana Syed Riyaz Uddin Hyder Jaffery played a major role in disseminating the Akhbari ideology among the Shi’a community there. At present, the movement seems to be led by Moulana Syed Waheed Uddin Hyder Jaffery. They maintain a website which has devoted an entire section to openly proclaiming their doctrine of tahrif of the holy Qur’an. However, one should not imagine that among the Ithna Ashariya it is only the Akhbaris who openly believe in tahrif while none of the Usulis do. The truth is there are a growing number of Usulis among the Shi’a community who have ditched their taqiya in favor of no longer concealing their belief in tahrif. This is because it is no longer possible for the Usulis to hide the fact that some of their heavyweights and classical scholars, the likes of Mulla Baqir Majlisi (1627-1699) openly believed in the doctrine of tahrif. I shall, within the course of time, update this website with references from their books exposing this doctrine of tahrif (in sha Allah).

Deobandis Calling Themselves "Dog"

بســم اللــه الرحمــن الرحيــم

Adherents of the Barelwi sect take pride in referring to themselves as Sag-i-Madina (“dog of Medina”), considering such self-deprecation  in referring to themselves as “dogs” as being an expression of their love and devotion to the holy Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam). Of course, this kind of self-deprecation is against the teachings of Islam, and even if the intention is to demonstrate love and devotion to the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) it is against the golden example of the Prophet’s foremost devotees among his Sahaba (may Allah be pleased with them) none of whom ever referred to themselves as “dogs”.

Allah Most High says:

فَمَثَلُهُ كَمَثَلِ الْكَلْبِ إِن تَحْمِلْ عَلَيْهِ يَلْهَثْ أَوْ تَتْرُكْهُ يَلْهَث ۚ ذَّٰلِكَ مَثَلُ الْقَوْمِ الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآيَاتِنَا

So his parable is like that of the dog: if you chase him, he pants, or if you leave him, he still pants. That is the parable of the people who denied Our Signs

(Sura 7:176)

Hence it is clear that it is beneath the status and dignity of a Muslim believer to compare himself to a dog, it is a kind of ungratefulness to Allah who made us human beings, the most noble and honored of the kingdom of God’s creation. It is only those people who deny the Signs of Allah who are to be compared to dogs.

What is interesting is that the rivals of the Barelwis, namely, the Deobandis, also have the sense to condemn their Barelwi rivals and even go to the extent of ridiculing them in this regard. But as the regular reader of my blog has in all probability by now realized, the Deobandis are usually guilty of the same things they tend to criticize the Barelwis for, and often guilty to a much greater degree! Hence, while the Deobandi polemicists ridicule and attack the Barelwis for referring to themselves as “dogs”, the sages and elders of the Deobandi and Jama’at ut-Tabligh sect likewise referred to themselves as “dogs”. For example, the founder of Jama’at ut-Tabligh, Maulana Muhammad Ilyas, would sign his name to a letter with the epithet:

از سگ آستانۂ عزیزی واحمدی

“from the dog of the city of Shah Abdul Aziz and Sayyid Ahmad”

(Makatib Hazrat Maulana Muhammad Ilyas p.54)

 

Another Deobandi elder and major figure in the Jama’at ut-Tabligh, namely Zakariya Kandhelwi, referred to himself as:

ایک رو سیاہ ہندی کتّے

“a black Indian dog”

(Sawaneh Hazrat Maulana Muhammad Yusuf Kandhelwi p.132)

 

In a previous entry, I also quoted the Deobandi elder, so-called Hakim ul-Ummat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi, as saying about himself: “I actually consider myself worse than a dog and pig”.

In conclusion, the Deobandis have no leg to stand on in criticizing their Barelwi rivals for referring to themselves as the “dog of Medina”, when Deobandi elders have called themselves “dog of Astana-i-Azizi o Ahmadi” and “black Indian dog” which is much worse.

Sunna of Perfuming the Mosque

بســم اللــه الرحمــن الرحيــم

 

Our cherished Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) gave many glad tidings and exhortations for clinging to and reviving his blessed Sunna, particularly in the latter days when the people have become corrupt and negligent. For example, it is reported that he (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) said:

رَحْمَةُ اللَّهِ عَلَى خُلَفَائِي ، قِيلَ : وَمَنْ خُلَفَاؤُكَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ؟ ، قَالَ : الَّذِينَ يُحْيُونَ سُنَّتِي ، وَيُعَلِّمُونَهَا النَّاسَ .

“The mercy of Allah upon my successors!” It was said: “And who are your successors, O Apostle of Allah?” He said: “Those who revive my Sunna and teach it to the people.”

In another narration, though weak due to an unknown narrator (Muhammad b. Salih al-Adawi), the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) is reported to have said:

الْمُتَمَسِّكُ بِسُنَّتِي عِنْدَ فَسَادِ أُمَّتِي لَهُ أَجْرُ شَهِيدٍ

“Whoever adheres to my Sunna when my Umma is corrupted will have the reward of a martyr.” (Mu’jam al-Awsat lil-Tabarani)

From among the blessed Sunan is to perfume the mosque. These days fewer and fewer managements adhere vigorously to this Sunna and burn incense or apply scent in their respective mosques. This despite the fact that:

أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ أَمَرَ بِالْمَسَاجِدِ أَنْ تُبْنَى فِي الدُّورِ وَأَنْ تُطَهَّرَ وَتُطَيَّبَ

“The Apostle of Allah (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) ordered that mosques be built in villages and that they be cleaned and perfumed.” (Sunan Ibn Maja #758, 759)

Burning of incense (al-Bakhur) for scent is from the Sunna. The Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) would particularly burn aloeswood, sometimes mixed with camphor. (Sahih Muslim #2254)