Perpetuity of Hellfire (Part 2)

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

وصلى الله تعالى على خاتم النبيين

Several months ago I explained in an article the idea that based on indications from the holy Quran, and also rational arguments, the punishment of Gehinnom (Hell) isn’t infinite or everlasting, rather, it is extremely lengthy to the point it may be described as everlasting figuratively.

Recently, in a discussion with a social media religious activist by the name of ‘Amir Haq’, he asked me to answer a common objection raised against the endless perpetuity of Hell that how can there be an infinite punishment for a finite crime. I explained my position that Hellfire may be an extremely lengthy sentence but it is not infinite. Amir Haq was taken aback by this answer and quoted the following Ayah of the Quran in an attempt to prove the everlasting perpetuity of Hell:

وَ مَنۡ یَّقۡتُلۡ مُؤۡمِنًا مُّتَعَمِّدًا فَجَزَآؤُہٗ جَہَنَّمُ خٰلِدًا فِیۡہَا وَ غَضِبَ اللّٰہُ عَلَیۡہِ وَ لَعَنَہٗ وَ اَعَدَّ لَہٗ عَذَابًا عَظِیۡمًا

And whoso kills a believer intentionally, his reward shall be Hell wherein he shall abide. And Allah will be wroth with him and will curse him and will prepare for him a great punishment

(Surah 4:93)

Amir Haq drew my attention to the word khālidan in this Ayah which is generally understood to mean unending perpertuity. In my answer, I said that khuld in the Arabic language can mean both unending perpetuity but also used to describe an extremely lengthy duration, and gave the example of how the Arabs refer to mountains as khawālid because mountains, while not perpetually abiding, are nevertheless objects that are long lasting and durable. However, Amir Haq disputed this reason for why the Arabs name mountains khawālid and also the possibility of extremely lengthy duration as one of the meanings of khuld in the Arabic language. He challenged me to prove my assertion.

At the time I told him that I shall properly research the issue and get back to him, which I am glad to say I have done and shall now share my findings on this blog.

Firstly, the Ayah which Amir Haq quoted is concerning the threat of punishment for one who is guilty of premeditated murder of a Believer, a most serious crime in the sight of Allah. However, while this threat of punishment in Hell is certainly there for someone who intentionally murders a Believer, it should also be remembered that Allah may, if He wishes and by His grace, forgive someone all of their sins, including the sin of premeditated murder:

اِنَّ اللّٰہَ لَا یَغۡفِرُ اَنۡ یُّشۡرَکَ بِہٖ وَ یَغۡفِرُ مَا دُوۡنَ ذٰلِکَ لِمَنۡ یَّشَآءُ

Surely, Allah will not forgive that any partner be associated with Him; but He will forgive whatever is short of that to whomsoever He pleases

(Surah 4:48; 4:116)

The Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam) narrated the story of a man who murdered a hundred innocent people but was forgiven by Allah because of his intention to sincerely repent:

انَ فِي بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ رَجُلٌ قَتَلَ تِسْعَةً وَتِسْعِينَ إِنْسَانًا ثُمَّ خَرَجَ يَسْأَلُ فَأَتَى رَاهِبًا فَسَأَلَهُ فَقَالَ لَهُ هَلْ مِنْ تَوْبَةٍ قَالَ لاَ‏‏ فَقَتَلَهُ فَجَعَلَ يَسْأَلُ فَقَالَ لَهُ رَجُلٌ ائْتِ قَرْيَةَ كَذَا وَكَذَا‏‏ فَأَدْرَكَهُ الْمَوْتُ فَنَاءَ بِصَدْرِهِ نَحْوَهَا فَاخْتَصَمَتْ فِيهِ مَلاَئِكَةُ الرَّحْمَةِ وَمَلاَئِكَةُ الْعَذَابِ فَأَوْحَى اللَّهُ إِلَى هَذِهِ أَنْ تَقَرَّبِي‏‏ وَأَوْحَى اللَّهُ إِلَى هَذِهِ أَنْ تَبَاعَدِي‏‏ وَقَالَ قِيسُوا مَا بَيْنَهُمَا‏‏ فَوُجِدَ إِلَى هَذِهِ أَقْرَبُ بِشِبْرٍ فَغُفِرَ لَهُ

"Amongst the men of Bani Israel there was a man who had murdered ninety-nine persons. Then he set out asking (whether his repentance could be accepted or not). He came upon a monk and asked him if his repentance could be accepted. The monk replied in the negative and so the man killed him. He kept on asking till a man advised to go to such and such village. (So he left for it) but death overtook him on the way. While dying, he turned his chest towards that village (where he had hoped his repentance would be accepted), and so the Angels of mercy and the Angels of punishment quarrelled amongst themselves regarding him. Allah ordered the village (towards which he was going) to come closer to him, and ordered the village (whence he had come), to go far away, and then He ordered the Angels to measure the distances between his body and the two villages. So he was found to be one span closer to the village (he was going to). So he was forgiven."

I do not quote this Hadith with the intention of mitigating the severity of the crime of murder. Indeed, after idolatry itself it is the worst sin, and there are frightening threats throughout the Scripture and the traditions of the Prophet (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam) for the sin of murder.

If it is argued that should Allah refuse to forgive a murderer—someone guilty of having deliberate murdered a Believer—then his punishment in Hell is perpetual and unending as per Surah 4:93, based on this particular interpretation of the word khālidan, then consider the following Hadith:

يَخْرُجُ مِنَ النَّارِ مَنْ قَالَ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ، وَفِي قَلْبِهِ وَزْنُ شَعِيرَةٍ مِنْ خَيْرٍ، وَيَخْرُجُ مِنَ النَّارِ مَنْ قَالَ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ، وَفِي قَلْبِهِ وَزْنُ بُرَّةٍ مِنْ خَيْرٍ، وَيَخْرُجُ مِنَ النَّارِ مَنْ قَالَ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ وَفِي قَلْبِهِ وَزْنُ ذَرَّةٍ مِنْ خَيْرٍ

"Whoever said ‘none has the right to be worshipped but Allah’ and has in his heart good equal to the weight of a barley grain will be taken out of Hell. And whoever said ‘none has the right to be worshipped but Allah’ and has in his heart good (faith) equal to the weight of a wheat grain will be taken out of Hell. And whoever said, ‘none has the right to be worshipped but Allah’ and has in his heart good equal to the weight of an atom will be taken out of Hell."

The Prophet (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam) explained that the only condition for someone to be taken out from Hell is that they have an atom’s weight of good in their heart and said ‘La elaha illa Allah’—there is none worthy of worship except Allah. If even a serial killer of Believers fulfills this condition, he too shall one day be taken out of Hell, if Allah wills.

As for khuld, according to the Arabic-English Dictionary of Quranic Usage published by Brill, the trilateral root KH-L-D connotes: “mountains, rocks; to remain put for a long time”. From this root we get the imperfect verb takhlud which means “to remain, last, endure for a long time” and the word khālid which means “one living or remaining forever or for a long time” (p. 275).

According to the classical Arabic lexicon Taj ul-Urus

‌الخَوَالِدُ (الجِبَالُ والحِجَارَةُ) والصُّخورُ لطولِ بَقائها بعد دُرُوس الأَطلالِ

Al-Khawalid: mountains, stones and rocks, because of the length of their lasting (v.8, p.63):

Al-Raghib al-Isfahani has mentioned the same in his Mufradat (pp. 291-292):

Foreign Domination

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

British imperial rule over the Muslims is resented by and large by our people due to spread of poisonous ideologies, having their roots in the anti-colonial movements themselves, like nationalism and leftism. It is an indisputable fact that the condition of the Muslim world under European colonialism, and particularly the British, was preferable to the present state of affairs although Muslims are by and large autonomous. The truth is foreign rule and domination is often superior to native, self-rule. To the ordinary subject it shouldn’t really matter whether there is a portrait of Her Majesty the Queen in government buildings and offices, or a portrait of a brown man wearing a red fez. What really matters is the quality of governance, not the identity of the governor. Look back at the height of British imperial power, we Muslims have a lot to be grateful for. These are the people who liberated the Punjab from the Akali tyranny through the Anglo-Sikh wars of the mid 19^th century. During the Akali tyranny, the impotent Muslims of Punjab were forbidden the rite of cow sacrifice—on pain of death. Mosques were desecrated and calling the adhān was likewise proscribed. Incidentally, today in the Punjab province of Pakistan, the moronic government and other cultural institutions celebrate Ranjit Singh as a hero and part of their heritage. There are even statues [idols] of that indecent tāghūt that have been erected relatively recently to honor his memory. Likewise, there is a growing trend in the Punjab province of Pakistan to celebrate the murderer Bhagat Singh, considered a martyr by some, especially in India among the Sikhs. Upon liberating Punjab from the Akali thugs, the British fully restored the religious liberty of the Muslims. The change in political atmosphere allowed for various Islamic movements, reformist and traditional, to flourish. Regrettably, the rise of Indian nationalism and its general demand for self-rule affected many of the Muslims who shockingly joined hands with idolatrous Hindus to oppose the ‘White Man’. This solidarity with idolatrous Hindus and Sikhs, as an expression of subcontinental ‘Desi’ nationalism has only served to worsen the condition of Muslims who remained behind in India after the Partition. The present rise of Hindutva chauvinism is not hidden from anyone and exonerates the narrative of those who rejected Indian nationalism in favor of Muslim communalism during the height of the Swaraj movement. In the Mideast, the British installed client monarchies. Many of them were later overthrown by nationalists and leftists. For example, the Free Officers Movement overthrew the client monarchy in Egypt in 1952. Since then Egypt has been an extremely authoritarian and autocratic state. The revolution of 1952 used the slogans of nationalism and leftism that eventually brought the despicable Nasser to power. In 1958, something similar happened in Iraq when nationalists overthrew the British installed Hashemite monarchy. Ever since Iraq has gone from bad to worse. In 1969, another devil, Gaddafi, through a coup removed a pro-British monarchy and seized power in Libya. These Arabs may imagine they have gained something through native rule and independence but the opposite is true. They have destroyed themselves and been sucked into a vacuum of perpetual tyranny, corruption, inefficient government, autocracy and injustice. It is narrated that the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

السُّلْطَانُ ظِلُّ اللَّهِ فِي الأَرْضِ

The Sultān is the shadow of God upon the Earth

(Musnad al-Bazzar)

The meaning of the Hadīth does not discriminate between a Muslim or non-Muslim sovereign, let alone a foreign or native one. The British Crown at the height of its imperial power was therefore the ‘Shadow of God’. It was a blessing and a divine favor for the Muslims who were under its shade. Don’t forget it was the British imperialists who partitioned Bengal in 1905 as a means of addressing the Hindu industrialist’s exploitation of underdeveloped, predominantly Muslim East Bengal, despite the fury it evoked among the Bengali Hindu. Of course, the final parting gift from the British was the creation of Pakistan. Those who imagine Pakistan was achieved solely through the political struggle the Muslim League led by Jinnah and his associates are living in a delusion. Pakistan could not have come to fruition without British approval. Consequently, two-thirds of the Subcontinent’s Muslims owe a debt of gratitude to the British. Yes, perhaps it can be said that the British rewarded the Muslim Pakistan in recognition of their loyalty to the Crown in supporting the war effort against the Axis, whereas the Hindu led Congress of Gandhi and Nehru boycotted the war effort, and other Indian nationalists like Bose actually went to the extent of fighting on the side of the Japanese, hoping the latter would liberate them from British rule. For the Muslims at least, British rule of India proved to be the ‘Shadow of God upon the Earth’. In the aftermath of World War II, the United States of America emerged as the successor to British imperialism. It waged a Cold War against the evil Soviets and the spread of communism around the globe. A large number of Muslims were duped into viewing the US negatively because of this. Leftism had deeply penetrated much of the Muslim Ummah during this period. Combined with nationalist and anti-colonialist sentiment, it became a toxic mix. In the 1970s, communism managed to take over Afghanistan, otherwise one of the more traditional and conservative Muslim countries. Many Afghan Muslims rose up against the communists, provoking the Soviets to invade Afghanistan in 1979. We must be grateful that the Americans, through their CIA, materially assisted the Afghan Mujāhidīn in resisting the Soviet invader, who were eventually driven out in humiliation, by the grace of Allāh عزّ وجلّ. In 1990, Baathist Iraq led by the tāghūt Saddam invaded Kuwait. The latter were rescued and liberated by the US, who taught Saddam a lesson in humility. Then in the 1990s, Muslim populations in the Balkans—Bosniaks and ethnic Albanians of Kosovo—were the victims of a ghastly genocide perpetrated by the Christian Serbs. They too were rescued by a US led military intervention. In 2003, the US went into Iraq to liberate the country once and for all from Saddam’s tyranny and terror. The US practically handed Iraq freedom on a silver platter. But the subsequent chaos and bloodshed was not at all the fault of the Americans. Iraq’s immediate neighbors—Iran, Saudi Arabia and Syria—were alarmed at the prospect of a free and democratic Arab state in the midst succeeding. That success would likely result in calls for more freedom and democracy in their own countries. They therefore had a critical interest in destabilizing and sabotaging the democratic experiment in Iraq. They did this by infiltrating the country with sectarian militias, terrorists, insurgents and Jihadists. The Iraqis themselves proved the proverb ‘Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity’ perfectly true when they elected unsavory politicians into office who immediately went about marginalizing the Sunnis and looting the coffers. For their part, the Sunnis foolishly remained loyal to the overthrown Baathist regime and launched an insurgency against the Americans. Al-Qaeda emerged in Iraq, and under their agent al-Zarqawi, they decided to provoke a sectarian war by bombing Shi’ite processions and shrines. The US tried its best to restore law and order to the country, but in the end Iraq proved to be a hopeless case. Meanwhile, in 2011, when the people of Libya rose up against the cruel dictator Gaddafi, inspired by the success of the ‘Arab Spring’ in neighboring Tunisia, a US-led intervention helped them overthrow Gaddafi. But once again, certain Arab states couldn’t stomach the prospect of Libya becoming a free and democratic state. The Egyptians and Emiratis in particular sought to undermine and disrupt peace in Libya by backing the warlord Haftar, who seeks to become another Gaddafi, thus plunging that country into a civil war. So we see a recurring theme of the US intervening militarily to liberate various Muslim countries from tyranny, only for other Muslim states to sabotage and undermine them.

Rahman is Seated Upon the Throne (Part 2)

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

اللهم صلى على محمد وعلى ال محمد

Last month I posted an article outlining the Islamic belief that Allah—Holy and Exalted is He—is seated upon His Throne. The Hadith to that effect is disputed because of the presence of the narrator al-Alaa bin Maslamah, who is considered a fabricator. However, it appears the actual narrator is al-Alaa bin Salim, as Ibn Kathir has illustrated (Tafsir Ibn Kathir; v.5, p.272):

حَدَّثَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ زُهَيْرٍ حَدَّثَنَا الْعَلَاءُ بْنُ سَالِمٍ حَدَّثَنَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ الطَّالَقَانِيُّ حَدَّثَنَا ابْنُ الْمُبَارَكِ عَنْ سُفْيَانَ عَنْ سِمَاكِ بْنِ حَرْبٍ عَنْ ثَعْلَبَةَ بْنِ الْحَكَمِ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وسلم يقول اللَّهُ تَعَالَى لِلْعُلَمَاءِ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ إِذَا ‌قَعَدَ عَلَى كُرْسِيِّهِ لِقَضَاءِ عِبَادِهِ إِنِّي لَمْ أَجْعَلْ عِلْمِي وَحِكْمَتِي فِيكُمْ إِلَّا وَأَنَا أُرِيدُ أَنْ أَغْفِرَ لَكُمْ عَلَى مَا كَانَ مِنْكُمْ وَلَا أُبَالِي

Likewise, Abu Nuaim al-Isbahani has also named the narrator in question al-Alaa bin Salim and not al-Alaa bin Maslamah, however, in his report there is the wording:

إِذَا ‌قَضَى ‌عَلَى ‌كُرْسِيِّهِ بَيْنَ عِبَادِهِ

When He shall judge between His servants upon His Kursi (Ma’rifat us-Sahabah; v.487, #1386):

instead of “sitting upon His Kursi” the version here is “judging upon His Kursi”.

Imam Abi Dawud Sulaiman bin Ash’ath as-Sijistani said about al-Alaa bin Salim:

ما كان به بأس

There was no problem with him (Tarikh Baghdad; v.14, p.163, #6646):

In another Hadith reported by ad-Diya al-Maqdisi and others, the Prophet [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] is narrated to have said:

إِنَّ كُرْسِيَّهُ وَسِعَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ ‌وَإِنَّهُ ‌يَقْعُدُ ‌عَلَيْهِ فَمَا يَفْضُلُ مِنْهُ قِيدُ أَرْبَعِ أَصَابِعَ مَدَّ أَصَابِعَهُ الْأَرْبَعَ وَإِنَّ لَهُ أَطِيطًا كَأَطِيطِ الرَّحْلِ الْجَدِيدِ إِذَا رُكِبَ مِنْ ثِقَلِهِ

"Indeed, His Kursi extends over the heavens and earth and He sits on it. Not even the space of four fingers is left." He then displayed this by joining his fingers. "It screeches just as a new camel saddle screeches when someone weighty mounts it" (al-Ahadith al-Mukhtarah; v.1, p.265, #153):

The Hanbali scholar, Abu Muhammad Mahmud bin Abil-Qasim ad-Dashti, has also mentioned this Hadith and declared it authentic upon the conditions of al-Bukhari and Muslim (Ithbat al-Hadd Lillah; pp.147, 149, #33, 36):

The authenticity of this narration is likewise disputed, this time because of the narrator Abd Allah bin Khalifah al-Hamdani. However, Ibn Hibban mentioned him in his book listing trustworthy narrators (ath-Thiqat; v.5, p.28):

Prophet عليه السلام said: I am Yemeni

 باسمك اللهم

لا اله الا الله

محمد رسول الله

Our honorable and beloved Prophet Muhammad [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] was a descendant of the patriarch Abraham through his son Ishmael. However, there is a difference of opinion regarding how far back the Prophet’s geneology is preserved. We are reasonably certain that his geneology until Adnan is preserved. Our Prophet [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] is the son of Abd Allah, son of Abd al-Muttalib [Shaybah], son of Hashim [Amr], son of Abd Manaf [al-Mughirah], son of Qusayy [Zayd], son of Kilab, son of Murrah, son of Ka'b, son of Lu'ayy, son of Ghalib, son of Fihr [Quraysh], son of Malik, son of an-Nadr [Qays], son of Kinanah, son of Khuzaymah, son of Mudrikah [Amir], son of Ilyas, son of Mudar, son of Nizar, son of Ma'd, son of Adnan.

Regarding Ishmael and his descendants, it is written in the Torah:

And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation (Genesis 17:20)

The Prophet [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] was a Hashemite, a Qarshi, an Adnani Arab, of Mecca, of the region of Tihama, a Hejazi, an Ishmaelite, and a Semite.

However, there is no doubt that no human has a lineage or descent that is purely of one race or population. Everyone is mixed to some degree or another, and the Prophet [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] was no exception. It is reported that he once said:

خِيَارُ الرِّجَالِ رِجَالُ أَهْلِ الْيَمَنِ وَالْإِيمَانُ يَمَانٍ ، وَأَنَا يَمَانٍ

The best men are the men of the people of Yemen. Faith is Yemenite, and I am a Yemenite

(Musnad Ahmad; v.32, pp.198-199, #19450)

Shuaib Arnaut has graded this Hadith ‘Sahih’:

It is a contested point whether the Prophet’s proclamation of himself being Yemeni is in the genealogical sense, meaning part of his ancestry originates from Yemen or among the people of Yemen, or if his statement “I am a Yemeni” is to be interpreted as conveying a sense of solidarity.

Hasan al-Basri: Tyrants are the Punishment of Allah

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

وصلى الله على نبينا محمد وعلى آله واهل بيته الطيبين الطاهرين

The idea that evil, oppressive rulers are a manifestation of the punishment of Allah upon the Ummah for its sins and transgressions was understood by the pious Saints of the early period of Islam, venerated individuals like al-Hasan al-Basri [rahmatullah alaih]. He lived during the time of the tyrant al-Hajjaj bin Yusuf. A certain Ibn al-Ash'ath led a failed uprising against al-Hajjaj but it was decimated, and all of the rebels were massacred. Before this uprising, some of the rebel leaders came to sayyidina Hasan al-Basri, asking for his blessing and approval for their uprising, but he rebuked them:

فَدَخَلُوا عَلَى الْحَسَنِ فَقَالُوا ‌يَا ‌أبا ‌سعيد ‌ما ‌تقول ‌في ‌قتال ‌هذه ‌الطَّاغِيَةِ ‌الَّذِي ‌سَفْكَ ‌الدَّمَ ‌الْحَرَامَ ‌وَأَخَذَ ‌الْمَالَ ‌الْحَرَامَ ‌وَتَرَكَ ‌الصَّلاةَ ‌وَفَعَلَ ‌وَفَعَلَ قَالَ وَذَكَرُوا مِنْ فِعْلِ الْحَجَّاجِ قَالَ فَقَالَ الْحَسَنُ أَرَى أَنْ لا تُقَاتِلُوهُ فَإِنَّهَا إِنْ تَكُنْ عُقُوبَةً مِنَ اللَّهِ فَمَا أَنْتُمْ بِرَادِّي عُقُوبَةِ اللَّهِ بِأَسْيَافِكُمْ وَإِنْ يَكُنْ بَلاءً فَاصْبِرُوا حَتَّى يَحْكُمَ اللَّهُ وَهُوَ خَيْرُ الْحاكِمِينَ قَالَ فَخَرَجُوا مِنْ عِنْدِهِ وَهُمْ يَقُولُونَ نُطِيعُ هذا العلج قال وهم قوم عرب قالوا وَخَرَجُوا مَعَ ابْنِ الأَشْعَثِ قَالَ فَقُتِلُوا جَمِيعًا

فَكَانَ الْحَسَنُ يَنْهَى عَنِ الْخُرُوجِ عَلَى الْحَجَّاجِ وَيَأْمُرُ بِالْكَفِّ

تَكَلَّمَ الْحَسَنُ فَحَمِدَ اللَّهَ وَأَثْنَى عَلَيْهِ ثُمَّ قَالَ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنَّهُ وَاللَّهِ مَا سَلَّطَ اللَّهُ الْحَجَّاجَ عَلَيْكُمْ إِلا عُقُوبَةً فَلا تُعَارِضُوا عُقُوبَةَ اللَّهِ بِالسَّيْفِ وَلَكِنْ عَلَيْكُمُ السَّكِينَةَ وَالتَّضَرُّعَ

لَوْ أَنَّ النَّاسَ إِذَا ابْتُلُوا مِنْ قِبَلِ سُلْطَانِهِمْ صَبَرُوا مَا لَبِثُوا أَنْ يُفْرَجَ عَنْهُمْ وَلَكِنَّهُمْ يَجْزَعُونَ إِلَى السيف فيوكلون إليه فو الله ما جاؤوا بِيَوْمِ خَيْرٍ قَطُّ

A group of Muslims came to al-Hasan al-Basri seeking a verdict to rebel against al-Hajjaj [a tyrannical and despotic ruler]. So they said, "O Abu Sa'id! What do you say about fighting this oppressor who has unlawfully spilt blood, unlawfully taken wealth, abandoned the Salah and did this and that?" So al-Hasan said, "I hold that he should not be fought. If this is a punishment from Allah, then you will not be able to remove it with your swords. If this is a trial from Allah, then be patient until Allah's judgement comes, and He is the best of judges." So they left al-Hasan, disagreed with him and rebelled against al-Hajjaj — so al-Hajjaj killed them all. Al-Hasan used to say, "If the people had patience when they are being tested by their unjust ruler, it will not be long before Allah will give them a way out. However, they always rush for their swords, so they are left with their swords. By Allah! Not even for a single day did they bring about any good." (Tabaqat al-Kubra; v.7, pp.120-121):

Establish Islamic State in Your Heart: It Will Be Established for You in the Land

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

ولا حول ولا قوة الا بالله العلى العظيم

The so-called “Islamist” movements and groups, which aim to establish a state or government, oppose the pure Islamic methodology which is that the Believers, individually and collectively, reform themselves and in recompense it is Allah Himself Who shall grant them dominion in the Earth. Allah Most High says:

اِنَّ اللّٰہَ لَا یُغَیِّرُ مَا بِقَوۡمٍ حَتّٰی یُغَیِّرُوۡا مَا بِاَنۡفُسِہِمۡ

Surely, Allah changes not the condition of a people until they change that which is in their souls

(Surah 13:11)

The changing of the condition of the qawm or nation, meaning its outer condition, for either better or worse, is the prerogative and act of Allah Himself. In desiring divine favor in that regard, the actions of the people must be focused on an internal transformation. The changing of the condition of the nation for the better is described in detail in Ayat al-Istikhlaf:

وَعَدَ اللّٰہُ الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا مِنۡکُمۡ وَ عَمِلُوا الصّٰلِحٰتِ لَیَسۡتَخۡلِفَنَّہُمۡ فِی الۡاَرۡضِ کَمَا اسۡتَخۡلَفَ الَّذِیۡنَ مِنۡ قَبۡلِہِمۡ ۪ وَ لَیُمَکِّنَنَّ لَہُمۡ دِیۡنَہُمُ الَّذِی ارۡتَضٰی لَہُمۡ وَ لَیُبَدِّلَنَّہُمۡ مِّنۡۢ بَعۡدِ خَوۡفِہِمۡ اَمۡنًا ؕ یَعۡبُدُوۡنَنِیۡ لَا یُشۡرِکُوۡنَ بِیۡ شَیۡئًا ؕ وَ مَنۡ کَفَرَ بَعۡدَ ذٰلِکَ فَاُولٰٓئِکَ ہُمُ الۡفٰسِقُوۡنَ

Allah has promised to those among you who believe and do good works that He will surely make them Successors in the earth, as He made Successors from among those who were before them; and that He will surely establish for them their religion which He has chosen for them; and that He will surely give them in exchange security and peace after their fear: They will worship Me, and they will not associate anything with Me. Then whoso is ungrateful after that, they will be the rebellious

(Surah 24:55)

The act of Allah granting the Believers succession in the land, establishment of their Religion and peace and safety, as per His promise, is contingent to their having faith, performing good deeds, and worshiping Him alone. And throughout the Quran, the act of granting succession [khilafah] is always directly attributed to Allah Himself (Surah 6:133; 6:165; 7:129; 11:57)

In another passage in the Quran, Allah lays down the terms of His covenant with this Ummah:

یٰۤاَیُّہَا الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا ہَلۡ اَدُلُّکُمۡ عَلٰی تِجَارَۃٍ تُنۡجِیۡکُمۡ مِّنۡ عَذَابٍ اَلِیۡمٍ

تُؤۡمِنُوۡنَ بِاللّٰہِ وَ رَسُوۡلِہٖ وَ تُجَاہِدُوۡنَ فِیۡ سَبِیۡلِ اللّٰہِ بِاَمۡوَالِکُمۡ وَ اَنۡفُسِکُمۡ ؕ ذٰلِکُمۡ خَیۡرٌ لَّکُمۡ اِنۡ کُنۡتُمۡ تَعۡلَمُوۡنَ

یَغۡفِرۡ لَکُمۡ ذُنُوۡبَکُمۡ وَ یُدۡخِلۡکُمۡ جَنّٰتٍ تَجۡرِیۡ مِنۡ تَحۡتِہَا الۡاَنۡہٰرُ وَ مَسٰکِنَ طَیِّبَۃً فِیۡ جَنّٰتِ عَدۡنٍ ؕ ذٰلِکَ الۡفَوۡزُ الۡعَظِیۡمُ

وَ اُخۡرٰی تُحِبُّوۡنَہَا ؕ نَصۡرٌ مِّنَ اللّٰہِ وَ فَتۡحٌ قَرِیۡبٌ ؕ وَ بَشِّرِ الۡمُؤۡمِنِیۡنَ

O ye who believe! shall I point out to you a bargain that will save you from a painful punishment?

That you believe in Allah and His Messenger, and strive in the cause of Allah with your wealth and your persons. That is better for you, if you did but know

He will forgive you your sins, and make you enter the Gardens through which streams flow, and pure and pleasant dwellings in Gardens of Eternity. That is the supreme triumph

And He will bestow another favour which you love: help from Allah and a near victory. So give glad tidings to the believers

(Surah 61:10-13)

In exchange for the Believers believing in Allah and His Apostle and striving in the cause of Allah with their wealth and persons, Allah shall not only grant them eternal salvation in the Afterlife, but also that which they love, namely, divinely aided victory and conquest in this world.

The severe misguidance of the so-called “Islamist” movements and parties is that they want to put the cart before the horse: they seek to establish political dominion and succession in the Earth for the Muslims while bypassing the need for spiritual and moral reform of the Muslims, individually and collectively. They direct their efforts in that sphere which Allah assures us He Himself shall take care of on condition that we spiritually and morally reform our internal condition.

Ironically, it was a former leader of the Ikhwan al-Muslimin (Muslim Brotherhood), one of these foolish “Islamist” organizations which emphasize political activity for the purpose of establishing an Islamic state, who once said:

أقيموا دولة الإسلام فى قلوبكم تُقم لكم على أرضكم

"Establish the state of Islam in your hearts and it shall be established for you in your land"

These words of Hassan al-Hudaybi, murshid al-’am (general guide) of the Muslim Brotherhood from 1951 till his death in 1973, were quoted by the neo-Salafi muhaddith, al-Albani, who described these words as though they were divine revelation from Heaven

كأنها من وحي السماء

(at-Tasfiyah wat-Tarbiyah; p.33):

Punishment of Grave Happens to Soul not Corpse (Part 3)

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

ولا حول ولا قوة الا بالله العلى العظيم

A compelling indication from the Sunnah that the tribulation of the ‘grave’ does not actually occur in the earthly burial hole where the corpse of the deceased is buried is the Hadith narrated by mother of the Believers, sayyidatuna A’ishah [radi Allahu anha]:

‌إِنَّمَا ‌مَرَّتْ ‌عَلَى ‌رَسُولِ ‌اللهِ ‌صَلَّى ‌اللهُ ‌عَلَيْهِ ‌وَسَلَّمَ ‌جَنَازَةُ ‌يَهُودِيٍّ ‌وَهُمْ ‌يَبْكُونَ ‌عَلَيْهِ ‌فَقَالَ أَنْتُمْ تَبْكُونَ وَإِنَّهُ لَيُعَذَّبُ

The funeral of a Jew passed by the Messenger of Allah [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] and they were crying for him, and he said: “You are crying and he is being tormented.” (Sahih Muslim: Kitab al-Jana’iz, #2153)

In this version of the Hadith, in which Urwah is narrating from sayyidatuna A’ishah [radi Allahu anha], it is clearly mentioned that the deceased Jew had not yet been buried, the Prophet had passed by the bier upon which his corpse was placed with his relatives weeping or wailing over him, at which he [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] said: “he is being tormented”. If it is argued that this torment or punishment precedes the actual punishment of the grave which only begins once the corpse is buried, then there is another version of the Hadith, also narrated by sayyida A’ishah, but via Amrah bint Abdir-Rahman and not Urwah:

إِنَّمَا مَرَّ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ بِيَهُودِيَّةٍ يَبْكِي عَلَيْهَا أَهْلُهَا فَقَالَ إِنَّكُمْ لَتَبْكُونَ عَلَيْهَا ‌وَإِنَّهَا ‌لَتُعَذَّبُ ‌فِي ‌قَبْرِهَا

The Messenger of Allah [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] passed by a Jewish woman for whom they were crying, and he said: “They are crying for her, but she is being tormented in her grave.” (Sahih Muslim: Kitab al-Jana’iz, #2156)

This Hadith is also reported by Imam al-Bukhari in his Sahih and Imam Malik in his Muwatta. There is the obvious discrepency between the two aforementioned narrations, the first is regarding a deceased Jewish man, and the second a deceased Jewish lady. However, it may be that both narrations are speaking of a single incident, and some minor details like the gender of the deceased has been confused by one or some of the narrators. Both narrations are narrated through umm al-Mu’minin A’ishah [radi Allahu anha] and that too in answer to the claim of another companion, sayyidina Ibn Umar [radi Allahu anhuma] that the wailing of the relatives for the deceased is the very cause of the deceased being tormented in his or her grave.

While the first narration I quoted makes clear that the deceased Jewish person hadn’t been buried in a grave yet, the second narration has the explicit wording of the Prophet [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] that “she is being tormented in her grave.” The only reasonable conclusion one can draw from this is that the punishment of the grave which the Prophet [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] informed us about does not have the physical, lifeless corpse of the deceased that is buried in the earthly grave as its object, but the soul of the deceased which is punished and tormented in another realm – the Barzakh.

Some Muslims who insist the torment of the grave is literal in referring to the actual corpse buried in the earthly grave argue that these narrations are better translated as the Prophet [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] saying “he is about to be tormented” and “she is about to be tormented in the grave”, but such an interpretation is forced with the intent of justifying their mistaken belief – a preconceived notion. The translations I have quoted which are in the present tense is by Nasiruddin al-Khattab as published by Darussalam:

Inclusion in Rank of Prophets of Whoever Obeys Allah and the Apostle (4:69)

 

بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

والصلاة والسلام على خاتم النبيين

Approximately a year and a half ago I wrote this article outlining some of the basics proofs from the Quran for the possibility and continuation of Prophesy. Although the Ayat presented there are general in meaning with regard to Prophesy being possible, other passages in the Quran help us understand that the specific type of Prophesy that remains open after our Prophet Muhammad [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] is that whose attainment is subject to subordination to him, i.e., subordinate Prophesy. Allah Most High says:

وَ مَنۡ یُّطِعِ اللّٰہَ وَ الرَّسُوۡلَ فَاُولٰٓئِکَ مَعَ الَّذِیۡنَ اَنۡعَمَ اللّٰہُ عَلَیۡہِمۡ مِّنَ النَّبِیّٖنَ وَ الصِّدِّیۡقِیۡنَ وَ الشُّہَدَآءِ وَ الصّٰلِحِیۡنَ ۚ وَ حَسُنَ اُولٰٓئِکَ رَفِیۡقًا

And whoso obeys Allah and the Messenger shall be among those on whom Allah has bestowed His blessings, namely, the Prophets, the Truthful, the Martyrs, and the Righteous. And excellent companions are these

(Surah 4:69)

The straightforward explanation of this blessed Ayah is that the greater the degree and intensity of a Believer’s obedience to Allah and His Apostle Muhammad [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam], the loftier the rank will he be favored with. Allah mentions four specific ranks: Prophets, Siddiqs, Martyrs, and Righteous. It is odd that the so-called “orthodox” party concede the possibility of a Believer attaining the rank of Truthfulness, or Martyrdom, or Piety after the Prophet Muhammad [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam], but insist that the gate to Prophesy has been sealed shut absolutely, in every sense, despite the fact that the rank of Prophesy is mentioned alongside these other three ranks.

Those who oppose our logical interpretation of this Ayah argue that it is only speaking of companionship, in the Afterlife, with those upon whom is Allah’s favor, namely, Prophets, Siddiqs, Martyrs and the Righteous. But at the very least it must be conceded that an individual who can be said to be under the obedience of Allah and His Apostle [sall Allahu alaihi wasallam] is a Salih, a righteous man, and not simply someone who shall enjoy the company of other Salihin, righteous men, in the Afterlife without being a righteous person himself. Therefore, the word مع "with" or "among" must necessarily mean inclusion within the rank, and not merely association or companionship. A strong example of this connotation of the word "with" as it appears in the holy Quran is the Ayah:

وَ تَوَفَّنَا مَعَ الۡاَبۡرَارِ

Cause us to die among the righteous

(Surah 3:193)

It is evident that what is meant in this prayer is that an individual dies while being included within the category of the Abrar, righteous, and not that he dies while being in a state of enjoying companionship with the Abrar while not personally being included among them himself.

The Ayah (4:69) bearing this meaning is clarified by the celebrated commentator of the Quran, Abu Hayyan of Granada (d. 745 H), who also quotes al-Raghib al-Isfahani (d. 502 H) to that effect:

وَقَوْلُهُ مَعَ الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِمْ تَفْسِيرٌ لِقَوْلِهِ صِراطَ الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ وَهُمْ مَنْ ذُكِرَ فِي هَذِهِ الْآيَةِ وَالظَّاهِرُ أَنَّ قَوْلَهُ مِنَ النَّبِيِّينَ تَفْسِيرٌ لِلَّذِينِ أَنْعَمَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِمْ فَكَأَنَّهُ قِيلَ مَنْ يُطِعِ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ مِنْكُمْ أَلْحَقَهُ اللَّهُ بِالَّذِينِ تَقَدَّمَهُمْ مِمَّنْ أَنْعَمَ عَلَيْهِمْ ‌قَالَ ‌الرَّاغِبُ ‌مِمَّنْ ‌أَنْعَمَ ‌عَلَيْهِمْ ‌مِنَ ‌الْفِرَقِ ‌الْأَرْبَعِ ‌فِي ‌الْمَنْزِلَةِ ‌وَالثَّوَابِ ‌النَّبِيُّ ‌بِالنَّبِيِّ ‌وَالصِّدِّيقُ ‌بِالصِّدِّيقِ ‌وَالشَّهِيدُ ‌بِالشَّهِيدُ ‌وَالصَّالِحُ ‌بِالصَّالِحِ ‌وَأَجَازَ ‌الرَّاغِبُ ‌أَنْ ‌يَتَعَلَّقَ ‌مِنَ ‌النَّبِيِّينَ ‌بِقَوْلِهِ ‌وَمَنْ ‌يُطِعِ ‌اللَّهَ ‌وَالرَّسُولَ ‌أَيْ ‌مِنَ ‌النَّبِيِّينَ ‌وَمَنْ ‌بَعْدَهُمْ

یعنی اللہ کا فرمانا کہ مع الذین انعم اللہ علیہم یہ صراط الذین انعمت علیہم کی تفسیر ہے۔ اور یہ ظاہر ہے کہ اللہ کا قول من النبین تفسیر ہے انعم اللہ علیہم کی۔ گویا یہ بیان کیا گیا ہے کہ تم میں سے جو شخص اللہ اور اس کے رسول صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کی اطاعت کرے گا۔ اللہ تعالی اس کو ان لوگوں میں شامل کردے گا۔ جن پر قبل ازیں انعامات ہوئے۔ اور امام راغب نے کہا ہے کہ ان چار گروہوں میں شامل کرلیگا۔ مقام اور ثواب کے لحاظ سے نبی کو نبی کے ساتھ اور صدیق کو صدیق کے ساتھ شہید کو شہید کے ساتھ اور صالح کو صالح کے ساتھ۔ اور امام راغب نے جائز قرار دیا ہے کہ اس امت کے نبی بھی نبیوں میں شامل ہوں جیسا کہ اللہ نے فرمایا ومن یطع اللہ والرسول یعنی من النبیین نبیوں میں سے۔

Allah’s saying “with those upon whom is Allah’s favor” [4:69] is the explanation of “the Path of those upon whom is Your favor” [1:6]. And His saying “among the Prophets” [4:69] is the explanation of “those upon whom is Allah’s favor”. Whoever obeys Allah and His Apostle shall be included among them, Allah will make them meet those whose mention has preceded upon whom is favor. Raghib said: Included among the four sections upon whom is favor, in terms of rank and reward; the Prophet with the Prophet, the Siddiq with the Siddiq, the Martyr with the Martyr, and the Righteous with the Righteous. And Raghib held it permissible that Prophets are in the address of His saying ‘whoever obeys Allah and the Apostle’, from the Prophets and whoever is after them (al-Bahr al-Muhit; v.3, p.699):

Did Ghulam Ahmad Claim Prophesy? (Part 16): Door of Prophesy in Real Sense is Closed

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على خاتم النبيين

Yet another statement from Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in which he denied having made any claim to prophesy in the real or true sense:

وہ الہام جو خدا نے اپنے اس بندہ پر نازل فرمایا اس میں اس بندہ کی نسبت نبی اور رسول اور مرسل کے لفظ بکثرت موجود ہیں۔ سو یہ حقیقی معنوں پر محمول نہیں ہیں۔

In the inspiration which God has revealed to me, the words Nabi, Rasul and Mursal are frequently attributed to me. But they do not connote the literal meanings.

حقیقی نبوت کے دروازے خاتم النبیین صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کے بعد بکلّی بند ہیں۔

The door of real prophesy [haqiqi nubuwwat] is altogether closed after the Seal of the Prophets, sall Allahu alaihi wasallam (Ruhani Khazain, v.12, p.5; Siraje Munir p.3)

On this page, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has clarified several matters:

1. it is an indecent allegation against him that he claims to be a mursal (apostle):

پھر یہ کیسی بیہودہ نکتہ چینی ہے کہ مرسل ہونے کا دعوی کیا ہے

2. mursal and rasul in the strictly linguistic meaning simply means one who is sent

جو بھیجا گیا ہے اس کو عربی میں مرسل یا رسول ہی کہیں گے

3. the real meaning [haqiqi ma’na] of these terms, which is used for one who brings a divine law [sahibe shari’at] is not intended for him, but rather the meaning of one who is commissioned [ma’mur] is intended

بلکہ جو مامور کیا جاتا ہے وہ مرسل ہی ہوتا ہے

4. after Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم the coming of either a new or old prophet is not allowed, according to the Quran

نبوت کے حقیقی معنوں کی رو سے بعد آنحضرت صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم نہ کوئی نیا نبی آسکتا ہے اور نہ پرانا۔ قرآن ایسے نبیوں کے ظہور سے مانع ہے

5. in the metaphorical sense, Allah may refer to a mulham as nabi or mursal

مجازی معنوں کی رو سے خدا کا اختیار ہے کہ کسی ملہم کو نبی کے لفظ سے یا مرسل کے لفظ سے یاد کرے

6. the Ahadith in which the coming Messiah is called ‘Prophet’ is likewise not terming him ‘Prophet’ in the literal or true sense

   ایسے ہی وہ نبی کر کے پکارنا جو حدیثوں میں مسیح موعود کیلئے آیا ہے وہ بھی اپنے حقیقی معنوں پر اطلاق نہیں پاتا۔

If it is argued that these are quotes from Siraje Munir, published in March 1897, and are therefore from Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s earlier writings which have been abrogated by his later writings in which he allegedly claimed to be a prophet in the real and true sense, then the answer to this objection is that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad has declared here, in Siraje Munir, that this understanding he is putting forward, of the cessation of Prophesy in the true sense, is not from himself, but it has been revealed and intimated to him by Allah:

یہ وہ علم ہے جو خدا نے مجھے دیا ہے

This is that knowledge which God has given me

میرے پر یہی کھولا گیا ہے کہ حقیقی نبوت کے دروازے خاتم النبیین صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کے بعد بکلی بند ہیں۔ اب نہ کوئی جدید نبی حقیقی معنوں کے رو سے آسکتا ہے اور نہ کوئی قدیم نبی۔

This has been disclosed to me that the door of real prophesy [haqiqi nubuwwat] is altogether closed after the Seal of the Prophets, sall Allahu alaihi wasallam. Now there can neither come a new prophet, in the true sense, nor an old prophet. (Ruhani Khazain, v.12, p.5; Siraje Munir p.3):