Mamati Deobandi Ahmad Said Multani: "Absolutely Impossible for Dead to Speak" REFUTED

Ahmad Sa’id Khan Multani, the founder of the Chitrori sect known as Markazi Isha’at-i-Tawhid o Sunnah was a Mamati-Deobandi and bigotted follower of the Hanafi madhhab. He wrote his now “infamous” book Quran Muqaddas aur Bukhari Muhaddis in which he shameless and quite audaciously attacked the great Muhaddith Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah), accusing him of having narrated Hadith from “cursed” liars. Being altogether ignorant of the true teachings of the Quran and Sunnah, Ahmad Said Multani boldly asserted in his book that it is impossible for the dead to speak. He quoted two verses of the Holy Quran to that effect:

وَ لَوۡ اَنَّنَا نَزَّلۡنَاۤ اِلَیۡہِمُ الۡمَلٰٓئِکَۃَ وَ کَلَّمَہُمُ الۡمَوۡتٰی

If We had sent down to them the angels, and the dead had spoken to them... (6:111)

اَوۡ کُلِّمَ بِہِ الۡمَوۡتٰی

Or the dead be made to speak...(13:31)

According to Ahmad Said Multani, these verses indicate that it is impossible for the dead to speak:

مردوں کا کلام کرنا محال اور نا ممکن ہے

“It is impossible for the dead to talk”.

Based on this principle he derived from the Holy Quran, Ahmad Said Multani then proceeds to repudiate an authentic Hadith as reported in Sahih al-Bukhari:

إِذَا وُضِعَتِ الْجِنَازَةُ فَاحْتَمَلَهَا الرِّجَالُ عَلَى أَعْنَاقِهِمْ ، فَإِنْ كَانَتْ صَالِحَةً قَالَتْ : قَدِّمُونِي ، وَإِنْ كَانَتْ غَيْرَ صَالِحَةٍ قَالَتْ لِأَهْلِهَا : يَا وَيْلَهَا أَيْنَ يَذْهَبُونَ بِهَا , يَسْمَعُ صَوْتَهَا كُلُّ شَيْءٍ ، إِلَّا الْإِنْسَانَ وَلَوْ سَمِعَ الْإِنْسَانُ لَصَعِقَ

Translation: “When a funeral is ready and the men carry it (the deceased) on their shoulders, if it was pious then it will say, 'Present me quickly (or take me ahead)', and if it was not pious, then it will say, 'Woe to it (me), where are they taking it (me)?' And its voice is audible to everything except a human being and if he heard it he would fall unconcious.”

[Sahih al-Bukhari; Kitab al-Janazah, H. 1316]

So what is the answer to this objection and argument raised by Ahmad Said Multani and company? First of all, the first verse quoted from him clearly says that “if the dead had spoken to them”. So if anything is being denied here, it is not that the dead speak, but specifically that the dead do not speak to them and by “them” is meant human beings. Going back to the Hadith of Bukhari Sharif, we see that it clearly says that although the deceased speaks something upon his funeral bier, it is impossible for any human being to hear him. Therefore, there is at least no contradiction between the Hadith and the first verse cited by Ahmad Said Multani.

As for the second verse, it too is not a proof for an absolute impossibility of the dead to speak. Rather, when read in context, the verse is simply saying that if there were to be a Qur'an through which mountains could be moved, the Earth split asunder, or the dead made to speak.

First of all, it is not an absolute impossibility that the mountains be moved or the Earth be cleft asunder. In fact, the Qur'an itself predicts that the mountains will be moved and the Earth cleft asunder (the earth is cleft asunder whenever an earthquake occurs).

This is why the word بِهِ has been used, a combination of a prefixed preposition and a third person masculine, singular personal pronoun to indicate that if the dead were made to speak “by it” meaning by such a hypothetical Qur'an. By now way can the verse be misconstrued to mean that it is an absolute impossibility for the dead to speak.

Furthermore, the Holy Quran itself proves that the dead speak (though in a limited sense) which is enough to demolish Ahmad Said Khan's false principle that the dead do not speak in an absolute sense. Allah Most High says:

حَتّٰۤی اِذَا جَآءَ اَحَدَہُمُ الۡمَوۡتُ قَالَ رَبِّ ارۡجِعُوۡنِ۞لَعَلِّیۡۤ اَعۡمَلُ صَالِحًا فِیۡمَا تَرَکۡتُ کَلَّا ؕ اِنَّہَا کَلِمَۃٌ ہُوَ قَآئِلُہَا ؕ وَ مِنۡ وَّرَآئِہِمۡ بَرۡزَخٌ اِلٰی یَوۡمِ یُبۡعَثُوۡنَ

Until when death comes to one of them, he will say: “My Lord send me back. So that I may act righteously in that (world) which I have left behind.” Never! It is simply a word he utters, and in front of such people there is a barrier till the day when they will be resurrected

[Holy Quran; Surah 23:99-100]

This verse leaves no room for doubt that the dead do speak after death. The evil from among them plead to Allah to return them to the world. This means they are speaking not in the moment before death, but after death proper, otherwise they would not say “send me back”. And Allah refuses them on account that once they have died it is impossible to return to the world, there is an unseen barrier (Barzakh) between them and the world of the living.

In summary, this passage of the Quran (23:99-100) simply proves Ahmad Said wrong that it is absolutely impossible for the dead to speak, and furthermore shows how misguided he is for rejecting an authentic Hadith due to his ignorance of the Qur'an.

Reference: Quran Muqaddas aur Bukhari Muhaddis; p.47-48

Chishti/Barelwi Pir Mehr Ali Shah of Golra: "Coming of a Prophet without New Shari'ah does not Break Khatam an Nabuwwah"

The Barelwi mulla and pir Mehr Ali Shah of Golra (1859-1937) had a book penned by the name of Saif-i-Chishtiyai in which he attempted to refute Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad sahib of Qadian (alaihis-salaaam). It has already been proven that the fake “Pir” plagiarized this book from the notes of one Maulawi Muhammad Hasan Faidi of Bheen.
Regarding the controversy of Khatam-an-Nabuwwah Pir Mehr Ali Shah explains his point of view in such a way as to validate the claim of Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of being a non-law bearing Prophet. Mehr Ali Shah writes:
میں کہتا ہوں کہ عیسی بن مریم کے بارہ میں بھی سب اہل اسلام کا یہی عقیدہ ہے کہ جدید شرع اپنے ساتھ نہ لائیں گے۔ بلکہ شرع محمّدی علی صاحبہ الصلوۃ والسلام کے مطابق حکم کریں گے۔ جب کہ قادیانی کا نبی ورسول ہونا خاتم النّبیّین کے مفہوم میں بباعث نہ لانے شریعت جدیدہ کے فرق نہیں لاتا تو عیسی بن مریم کا نزول ہمارے عقیدہ کے مطابق خاتم النّبیّین کی مہر کو کس طرح توڑ سکتا ہے۔

Translation: “I say that regarding Jesus son of Mary, all of the people of Islam have the belief that he will not come with a new Shari’ah. Rather, he shall rule in accordance to the Shari’ah of Muhammad peace and blessing be upon him. When the Qadiyani being a Nabi and Rasul [Prophet and Messenger] does not make a difference to the meaning of Khaatam an-Nabiyyeen as a result of him not bringing a new Shari’ah, so how can the descent of Jesus son of Mary, according to our belief, break the seal of Khaatam an-Nabiyyeen?”

*Note: Mehr Ali Shah, in attempting to justify the belief of the second coming of Jesus son of Mary as not violating the Finality of Prophethood, has inadvertently validated the very claim of Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of being a Prophet but without a new Shari’ah! He is saying that his and the people of Islam’s belief concerning the second coming of Jesus does not break the Seal of Khaatam an-Nabiyyeen because Jesus will not come with a new Shari’ah, similar to how Hadrat Mirza’s claim of being a Prophet but without a new Shari’ah does not break the Seal of Khaatam-an-Nabiyyeen.

In fact, Mehr Ali Shah goes on to write that not just Jesus, but every single previous Prophet can return to this world and it would not make any difference to the belief in Khatam an-Nabuwwah:

مگر چنکہ آنحضرت صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کے دنیا میں تشریف لانے سے پہلے ان کو ملا ہے لہذا خاتم النّبیّین کی مہر کو اگر سارے انبیاء درنیا میں آپ کے بعد آجائیں تو بھی نہیں توڑ سکتے۔

Translation: “Because the previous prophets received [their prophethood] before the Holy Prophet [Muhammad] Sallallaho alaihi wasallam came into the world, therefore if all the prophets were to come into the world after him [Sallallaho alaihi wasallam] it would not break the seal of Khaatam-an-Nabiyyeen.”

*Note: What Mehr Ali Shah has essentially stated is that the coming of any number of Prophets into the world, including all of them, does not affect or break the Khatam an-Nabuwwah so long as those prophets received their prophethood before our beloved Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaho alaihi wasallam). However, the dilemma remains that why can only a previous prophet come and not a new prophet – since Mehr Ali Shah has not explained the wisdom or logic behind his rudimentary and semantic explanation of Khatam an Nabuwwah which only precludes the coming of a new Prophet but not a previous Prophet – although the result in both cases is basically the same that a Prophet comes into the world, receiving revelation acting as a Prophet after the passing away of Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaho alaihi wasallam).

Reference: Saif-i-Chishtiyai; p.22-23

Authentic Hadith Proves that Messiah (A.S) Lived for 120 Years then Died

In an authentic Hadith, whose narrators are all trustworthy according to the Muhadditheen and experts of the science of Ilm al-Rijal, the Prophet (Sallallaho alaihi wasallam) said:

إِنَّهُ لَمْ يُبْعَثْ نَبِيٌّ قَطُّ إِلا عَاشَ نِصْفَ مَا عَاشَ الَّذِي كَانَ قَبْلَهُ

Translation: “Verily, a Prophet was never sent except that he lived for half the lifespan of the Prophet who preceded him.”

Imam Tabarani (Rahimahullah) has reported this Hadith with a chain of narrators going back to the illustrious companion Zaid bin Arqam (Radiyallahu anhu). This is the complete Sanad:

حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ عَبْدِ الْعَزِيزِ ، ثنا أَبُو نُعَيْمٍ ، ثنا كَامِلُ أَبُو الْعَلاءِ ، قَالَ : سَمِعْتُ حَبِيبَ بْنَ أَبِي ثَابِتٍ ، يُحَدِّثُ ، عَنْ يَحْيَى بْنِ جَعْدَةَ ، عَنْ زَيْدِ بْنِ أَرْقَمَ

This Hadith proves quite plainly that the Messiah (peace be upon him) has died, since he was the Prophet who preceded our Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaho alaihi wasallam). Our beloved Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaho alaihi wasallam) lived a life of approximately sixty years then passed away. Therefore, according to the purport of this Hadith, the Messiah (alaihis-salaam) must have lived for about 120 years.

*If it is accepted that the Messiah is still alive and has not died, his age would be about two thousand years – which contradicts this Hadith.

Reference: Mu'jam al-Kabir (Imam Tabarani); v.5, p.171-172, H. 4986

 

Ahl-i-Hadith scholar Sanaullah Amritsari and Death of Messiah

The Ahl-i-Hadith scholar, Mawlana Abul Wafaa Sanaullah Khan of Amritsar (d. 1948) accepted the reality of the death of the Messiah (alaihis-salaam) in the pages of his Urdu translation and commentary of the Holy Quran.

Translating the verse (3:55):

اِذۡ قَالَ اللّٰہُ یٰعِیۡسٰۤی اِنِّیۡ مُتَوَفِّیۡکَ

Mawlana Sanaullah Amritsari wrote:

جب اللہ نے کہا اے عیسی میں تجھے فوت کرنے والا

Translation: When Allah said: “O Eesaa! I am going to cause you to die”

Commenting on the reality of this, Sanaullah writes:

اس آیت کے معنی میں انہی کا ترجمہ منظور کیا ہےاور متوفی کے معنی موت دینے والا لکھا ہے۔

Translation: “Regarding the meaning of this Ayat (Verse) their [Ahmadiyya] translation has been accepted and I have written the meaning of Mutawaffi as 'One Giving Death'”

Reference: Tafsir-i-Sanai; v.1, p.211

 

Abi Mansur Maturidi Denies Basmalah is Verse of Qur'an (in 113 Places) معاذ الله

The founder of the Maturidi sect, Abi Mansur al-Maturidi (d. 333H) is followed by the vast majority of Hanafis today (both Barelwis and Deobandis) in the field of theology. He is regarded as their “Imam” in Aqa'id (creed).

Let us witness how this misguided “Imam” who was guilty of denying and interpolating the meaning of Allah Most High's Holy and Pure Attributes, deviated from the truth in another matter.

Regarding the Basmalah بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم a verse which occurs 114 times in the Qur'an al-Majid (including twice in Surah an-Naml), “Imam” Maturidi has claimed that apart from a single instance in Surah an-Naml (when it is quoted as part of the letter written by the Prophet King Solomon), the Basmalah is not to be considered as a verse of the Holy Qur'an despite it being placed at the beginning of every Surah (chapter) of the Holy Qur'an except Surah 9!

In other words, “Imam” Maturidi has deleted the Basmalah as a verse from the Holy Qur'an in 113 places, and claims that the Basmalah occurs only once in the entire Qur'an (whereas we Muslims believe that Basmalah is repeated 114 times in total throughout the Holy Qur'an!)

Maturidi writes:

فثبت أنها آية واحدة

Translation: “So it is proven that it (Basmalah) is only a single verse”

Similarly, Imam Maturidi has claimed (based on extremely flimsy “evidence”) that Basmalah is not one of the Seven Verses of the first chapter of the Qur'an – Surah al-Fatihah (which doesn't make sense because without Basmalah Surah al-Fatihah would consist of only 6 verses!)

Reference: Ta'weelaato Ahlis Sunnah (Tafsir al-Maturidi); p.349-351

Deobandi Qari Tayyab: Different Interpretation of Khatam-an-Nabuwwah

The major Deobandi mulla and director of Darul Ulum Deoband, Qari Muhammad Tayyab Qasmi (1897-1983), explained in his book Aftab-i-Nabuwwat [lit. The Sun of Prophecy] the true reality and significance of the term Khatam-an-Nabuwwah [Seal of Prophecy]. It is ironic that the Deobandis claim to be the champions of Tahaffuz-i-Khatm-i-Nabuwwat yet, as we have repeatedly demonstrated, their most senior Ulama have interpreted and understood the reality of Khatam-an-Nabuwwah similar to how the Ahmadiyya sect of Islam interprets and understands it.

Qari Tayyab writes:

یہی شان کسی وصف کے خاتم کی ہوتی ہے کہ وہ وصف اسی سے چلے اور اسی پر لوٹ ائے۔ وہی فاتح ہو اور وہی خاتم ہو، وہی اس وصف کا مبدا ہو اور وہی منتہاء ہو، وہی اوّل ہو اور وہی آخر ہو۔ اس لئے اب ہم سورج کو محض نورانی نہیں کہیں گے بلکہ نور بخش اور نور آفریں کہیں گے اور محض صاحب انوار نہیں کہیں گے بلکہ خاتم الانوار کہیں گے۔ جبکہ سب ستاروں کو نور اس سے ملتا ہے اور اوس نوری حرکت میں پھرای کی طرف عود کرآتا ہے، پس سورج کی یہ خاتمیت انوار ہی در حقیقت اس کے سارے کمالت کا ممتاز عنوان ہوگا

Translation: And this is the status of the description of Khaatam, this attribute comes from it and returns to it. He is the Faateh (meaning first) and the Khaatam, the first one (having this attribute) and the last one. This is why we will not say that the sun is only luminous, rather it is Nur Bakshi(meanin g it provides light)…we will not only say it is possessor of light but Khatam ul Anwar, as the light of all stars come from it, and in this movement of light, it goes back to it. So being Khatam ul Anwar will be the most distinguished of its qualities, and this can properly describe its particularity

*Note: Before proceeding further with the quote of Qari Tayyab, let us pause here and understand what the Deobandi mulla is trying to say. He is explaining the significance of Khatam-i-Nabuwwat by giving the analogy of the sun. Qari Tayyab says that the Sun is not only Saahib-i-Anwaar (a thing giving light or luminous) but rather it is Khaatam al-Anwaar (the Seal of Lights) because through it all the other stars attain their light (by way of reflection). Please note, while the Deobandi mulla is extremely ignorant of basic astronomy, unaware that the stars are each independent sources of light and do not reflect the light of the sun, but perhaps the analogy can be accepted in a limited sense as the moon and other planets of our solar system which appear in our sky as glimmering lights are indeed reflecting the light of the sun.

Qari Tayyab continues by saying:

ٹھیک اسی طرح آفتاب نبوت (جناب رسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم) کی شان صرف نبی ہونا نہیں کہ یہ شان قدر مشترک کے طور پر ہر نبی میں موجود ہے

بلکہ آپ کا اصل امتیازی وصف یہ ہے کہ آپ نور نبوت میں سب انبیاء کے مربی ان کے حق میں مصدر فیض اور ان کے انوارکمال کی اصل ہیں۔ اس لئے اصل میں نبی آپ ہیں اور دوسرے انبیاء علیہم السلام اصل میں نہیں، بلکہ آپ کے فیض سے نبی ہوئے ہیں۔

Translation: In the same way, the status of the sun of Prophethood (the noble Messenger of Allah^SAW) is not only being a Prophet, this quality is common among all Prophets...

So his real particular quality is that in matters of prophetic light, he is the Murabbi of all Prophets, and the Masdar of Faydh (centre of emanation) for them, and the origin of their excellent lights. This is why he is a Prophet in real, and the other Prophets (peace be upon them) are not (Prophets) in real but became Prophets from his Faydh (emanation).

*Note: Let us again pause at this juncture and consider what Qari Tayyab has said. It becomes clear from this quote that Qari Tayyab is comparing the status of the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaho alaihi wasallam) of being the Seal of the Prophets with the Sun as being the Seal of Lights, in the sense that the moon and planets as twinkling stars in our sky are actually reflections of the sun's own light, similarly, all of the other Prophets are not Prophets in an original or real sense, but are Prophets in the sense of having received their respective Prophethoods from the light of spiritual emanation of the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaho alaihi wasallam).

Finally, in getting to the heart of the matter, Qari Tayyab writes:

تو حضور کی شان محض نبوت ہی نہیں نکلتی بلکہ نبوت بخشی بھی نکلتی ہے کہ جو بھی نبوت کی استعداد پایا ہوا فرد آپ کے سامنے آگیا نبی ہوگیا اور اس طرح نور نبوت آپ ہی سےچلا اور آپ ہی پر لوٹ کرختم ہوگیا اور یہی شان خاتم کی ہوتی ہے

Translation: the status of Huzur is not only being a Prophet, but also Nubuwat Bakhshi (meaning he provides Prophethood), every person who is ready for Prophethood and comes in front of him will become a Prophet. In the same manner, the light of Prophethood started from him and will return to him, and this is the description of Khatam…”

اس لئے ہی آپ کو وصف نبوت کے لحاظ سے صرف نبی ہی نہیں کہیں گےبلکہ خاتم النبیین کہیں گے کہ آپ ہی پر تمام انوار نبوت کی انتہا ہے جس سے آپ منتہائے نبوت ہیں۔

Translation: For this reason, we do not simply call him (Prophet Muhammad Sallallaho alaihi wasallam) as a Prophet but he is called Khaatam an-Nabiyyeen that all of the lights of Prophethood find their ultimate manifestation in him, making him the pinnacle of Prophethood.

*Note: These quotes of Qari Tayyab describing in detail the reality of Khatam-an-Nabuwwah leave no room for misgiving that Qari Tayyab does not subscribe to the plain and simple traditionalist understanding that the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaho alaihi wasallam) being the Seal of Prophets signifies that he is the last Prophet to come in a chronological sense, and absolutely no Prophet of any description or sense whatsoever can come after him. Rather, Qari Tayyab has given a more nuanced and deeper interpretation of Khatam-an-Nabuwwah as signifying the fact that the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaho alaihi wasallam) is the Prophet in whose essence/person the spiritual Lights and excellences of Prophecy have reached their climax and completion, and all other prophets (including any future prophet) receives his prophethood from the Prophet Muhammad's Faid (emanation) just like the moon, stars, planets, etc., receive their light from the glorious sun.

Reference: Aftab-i-Nabuwwat; p.80-82

 

 

Mawdudi: "Raising of the Messiah Bodily into Heaven Not Proven from Words of Quran"

In discussing the issue of the alleged ascension of the Messiah (peace be upon him) into Heaven, Mawdudi confesses the fact that based purely on the wording of the Holy Qur'an, there is absolutely no evidence to indicate for certain that the Messiah (peace be upon him) was raised up into Heaven with his body. Under the heading of:

رفع مسیح کی کیفیّت

“Reality of the Ascension of the Messiah”

Mawdudi says:

رفع مسیح کے بارے میں جو کچھ میں نے کہا ہے وہ صرف یہ ہے کہ قرآن مجید کے الفاظ سیدنا مسیح علیہ السّلام کے جسدا آسمان پر اٹھالیے جانے کی تصریح نہیں کرتے۔

بلکہ اس کا مطلب صرف یہ ہے کہ محض ان الفاظ کی بنا پر قطعیت کے ساتھ یہ نہیں کہا جاسکتا کہ قرآن مجید رفع الی السماء کی تصریح کر رہا ہے۔

Translation: “Whatever I have said concerning the Raf'a-i-Maseeh (ascension of the Messiah) it is only this that the Words of the Qur'an Majid do not clearly state that our master the Messiah peace be upon him was bodily raised up to Heaven...Rather, it means that based solely on these words it cannot be said with definiteness that that the Qur'an Majid is clearly stating anything about a physical ascension into Heaven.”

Reference: Rasa'il-o-Masa'il; Part 3, p.59

 

Mawdudi: The Mahdi will be a Revolutionary Leader. Will not have Visions or Divine Inspiration (!!!)

Continuing the series from our previous entry; we now come to the frightening aspect of Mawdudian thought concerning its alteration of the original teachings of Islam and the Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaho alaihi wasallam) in order to accommodate and cement the neo-revolutionary thought of Mawdudi and company. Concerning the reality of the Imam al-Mahdi (may Allah be pleased with him and hasten his appearance), Mawdudi openly denies that the Mahdi will be a spiritual figure who receives divine inspiration from Allah. This, of course, is contrary to the teachings of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaho alaihi wasallam) who prophesied regarding the Mahdi:

الْمَهْدِيُّ مِنَّا أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ , يُصْلِحُهُ اللَّهُ فِي لَيْلَةٍ

Translation: “The Mahdi is from us, the Ahl al-Bayt (Household of the Prophet peace be upon them). Allah shall rectify him in a single Night.” [Sunan Ibn Majah; H. 4085]

This Hadith of the Prophet (Sallallaho alaihi wasallam) plainly indicates that the promised Mahdi shall have a direct relationship with Allah Most High, Who will rectify the promised Mahdi within a single night. This is clearly pointing towards the fact that in a single night the Mahdi shall receive some sort of Kashaf or Ilhaam (divine inspiration) from Allah Most High in which he shall become aware of his identity of being the Mahdi and what he has been divinely commissioned to accomplish.

However, the misguided Mawdudi has denied the purport of this Hadith by claiming that the Mahdi will not be a recipient of Kashaf or Ilhaam but rather a mere political leader as well as the founder of a new religious school of thought (!):

مجھے اس کے کام میں کرامات وخوارق، کشوف والہامات، اور چلّوں اور مجاہدوں کی کوئی جگہ نظر نہیں آتی۔ میں یہ سمجھتا ہوں کہ انقلابی لیڈر کو دنیا میں جس طرح شدیر جدّ وجہد اور کشمکش کے مرحلوں سے گزرنا پڑتا ہے انہی مرحلوں سے مہدی کو گزرنا ہوگا۔ وہ خالص اسلام کی بنیادوں پر ایک نیا مذہب فکر پیدا کرے گا۔

Translation: “I don't see any place for miracles, wonders, Kushoof (visions), Ilhaamaat (divine inspirations), spiritual retreats and labors in his [the Mahdi's] work. I think that just as a revolutionary leader has to go through the phases of severe struggle and strife, the Mahdi will also have to undergo these phases. He shall create a new school of thought upon the foundations of pure Islam.”

Reference: Tajdid-o-Ahya-i-Din; p.54

 

Mawdudi: "The Muslim Ummah is a Revolutionary Political Party" (!!!)

Continuing the series from our previous entry; we are witnessing more and more just how deviated Mawdudi (The founder of Jama'ati Ghair Islami) was from the true Message of Islam and the teachings of all the Prophets of Allah (peace be upon them). Look how Mawdudi has laid the foundations for the worst type of Zanadiqah by changing the essence of virtually every aspect of Islam – transforming the Faith into a petty political and materialist ideology that is obsessed with things like government, political power, and revolutionary struggle. Mawdudi even claims that the Muslim Ummah – a community of Faith – is in fact a political party whose objective is to seize control of the State. He says: “Muslims are in fact an international revolutionary party organised under the ideology of Islam to implement its revolutionary programme.”

Reference: Jihad in Islam; p.5

 

Mawdudi the Misguided Claims Democracy is a Necessity إنا لله وإنا إليه راجعون

Continuing from our previous entry concerning Abul-Alaa Mawdudi the founder of the deviant cult known as Jama'ati Islami (which in reality should be called Jama'ati Ghair Islami), gave an interview which has been transcribed in English for the benefit of the English speaking reader. In it, he shamelessly states that democracy (government of the majority) is not only permissible, but it is a necessity, saying: “Whether we like it or not, the elections shall have to be a starting point, because this is at present the only peaceful course for changing the system of government and rulers. There is no other alternative for bringing about a change in the system of government and choosing leaders for running it.”

Reference: System of Government under the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him); p.21



 

Mawdudi: "All Prophets were Sent to Strive for Political Revolution and Establish Governments" معاذ الله

The stupid mulla and founder of the so called Jama'at-i-Islami, Abul-Ala Mawdudi (1903-1979), created an immense Fitnah in the Muslim world by introducing a Marxist/revolutionary inspired political ideology to the Ummah in the garb of an Islamic/revivalist movement. Contrary to the teachings of the Qur'an and Sunnah, Mawdudi claimed that all of the Prophets (peace be upon them) were sent by Allah for the express purpose of struggling for a political revolution and establishing a theocratic government:

اسی وجہ سے تمام انبیاء نے سیاسی انقلاب برپا کرنے کی کوشش کی۔

Translation: “For this reason, all of the Prophets strove for a political revolution.”

Furthermore, Mawdudi reveals how mentally disturbed and misguided he was from the Truth of Islam by claiming that the Prophets of Allah had no concern with the beliefs and doctrines of their people; they were only interested in seizing the reins of power and establishing their political authority over public affairs!

وہ اہل جاہلیّت کو یہ حق تو دینے کے لیے تیار تھے کہ اگر چاہیں تو اپنے جاہلی اعتقادات پر قائم رہیں اور جس حد کےاندر ان کے عمل کا اثر انہی کی ذات تک محدود رہتا ہے اس میں اپنے جاہلی طریقوں پر چلتے رہیں۔ مگر وہ انہیں یہ حق دینے کے لیے تیار نہ تھے اور فطرۃ نہ دے سکتے تھے کہ اقتدار کی کنجیاں ان کے ہاتھ میں رہیں

Translation: “They [the Prophets] were ready to give the people of ignorance the right to remain upon their ignorant doctrines and beliefs, to the extent that it was limited to their personal selves, they could continue upon their ways of ignorance. However, they [the Prophets] were not at all prepared and neither disposed to leaving the keys of political authority in the hands of the people of ignorance.”

Reference: Tajdid-o-Ahya-i-Din; p.34

 

Syed Qutb Compares Life of Messiah (A.S) with Allah to Life of Martyrs

In continuation of our previous entry, the commentary of Syed Qutb of the Holy Qur'an indicates that he did not have the so called “orthodox” or “traditionalist” understanding of the Wafaah of the Messiah. Commenting on the verse of the Holy Qur'an:

وَ کُنۡتُ عَلَیۡہِمۡ شَہِیۡدًا مَّا دُمۡتُ فِیۡہِمۡ ۚ فَلَمَّا تَوَفَّیۡتَنِیۡ کُنۡتَ اَنۡتَ الرَّقِیۡبَ عَلَیۡہِمۡ

Translation: “I (Messiah) was a witness over them as long as I was among them. But when you caused me to die, You were the Watcher over them.” [Surah 5:117]

Because this verse is so clear and precise regarding the fact that the Messiah (peace be upon him) has already died and is no longer alive in this world, Syed Qutb was forced to indicate this reality, hence he wrote:

ثم يخلي يده منهم بعد وفاته.. وظاهر النصوص القرآنية يفيد أن الله – سبحانه – قد توفى عيسى بن مريم ثم رفعه إليه. وبعض الآثار تفيد أنه حي عند الله. وليس هنالك – فيما أرى – أي تعارض يثير أي استشكال بين أن يكون الله قد توفاه من حيات الأرض, وأن يكون حياً عنده. فالشهداء كذلك يموتون في الأرض وهم أحياء عند الله. أما صورة حياتهم عنده فنحن لا ندري لها كيفاً. وكذلك صورة حياة عيسى -عليه السلام – وهو هنا يقول لربه: إنني لا أدري ماذا كان منهم بعد وفاتي

Translation: He then disclaims any responsibility for what they did after his Wafaat. Taken at face value, the Qur’ānic text means that God gathered Jesus then elevated him to Himself. Some reports indicate that he is alive with God. In my view, there can be no contradiction between the two situations; for God may have determined that Jesus had completed his term of life on earth, and He may have taken him so that he be alive with Him. Martyrs die and finish their lives on earth, but they are alive with God. We do not know what form their life with God takes, nor do we know what form of life Jesus has; but he says here to his Lord that he does not know what they did or said after his Wafaah.

Reference: Fee Zilal al-Qur'an; p.1001

*Note: By comparing the life of the Messiah with Allah to the life of the Martyrs, Syed Qutb has hinted at the fact that Jesus (peace be upon him) has died and is no longer alive in this world; otherwise the comparison with Martyrs would be superfluous, since the Martyrs also experience death by way of killing. The Martyrs are not taken up into Heaven in their bodies without experiencing death.