Recitation Behind the Imam

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلوة والسلام على رسوله الكريم

والعاقبة للمتقين

Previously I wrote that it is necessary for the ma’mum to recite Surat al-Fatiha in every rak’a, including in those in which the imam is reciting audibly. However, I have reconsidered this view in light of strong proofs and in keeping with a general following of the Hanafi school of jurisprudence, which is the most superior school of the four schools because it was aided by Allah Who caused it to spread in most of the lands of the Muslims. The general proof for our position is the Ayah of the Holy Qur’an, in which Allah Most High says:

وَإِذَا قُرِئَ الْقُرْآنُ فَاسْتَمِعُوا لَهُ وَأَنصِتُوا لَعَلَّكُمْ تُرْحَمُونَ۞

And when the Qur’an is recited then listen to it and be silent that you may obtain mercy

(Sura 7:204)

The exegetes, including Sahaba and eminent individuals of the Salaf, explained that this Ayah (7:204) was revealed particularly for the Salat. It is mentioned that people would speak during the Salat, or recite behind the Prophet صلوات الله وسلامه عليه while he was reciting in the Salat, and so this Ayah (7:204) was revealed ordering them no to do so (Tafsir at-Tabari v.10 pp.658-664):

As for the opposing view, that Surat al-Fatiha has to be recited by the ma’mum behind the imam even during audible recitation, and that without it the Salat is not valid, such a view has absolutely no proof from the Qur’an itself but is based on an interpretation of the Hadith narrated by sayyidina Ubada b. as-Samit رضى الله عنه:

‏ لاَ صَلاَةَ لِمَنْ لَمْ يَقْرَأْ بِفَاتِحَةِ الْكِتَابِ ‏

“There is no Salat for the one who does not recite the Fatiha of the Book”

(Sahih al-Bukhari)

Now this Hadith must be reconciled with the Ayah of the Qur’an (7:204) so that its correct interpretation is that the Salat of an individual is not valid if he did not recite the Fatiha in it. But in congregational prayer, only the imam is required to recite the Fatiha, and his recitation will count as the recitation for those praying behind him, as it comes in the Hadith:

مَنْ كَانَ لَهُ إِمَامٌ فَإِنَّ قِرَاءَةَ الإِمَامِ لَهُ قِرَاءَةٌ

“Whoever has an imam, the recitation of the imam is his recitation”

(Sunan Ibn Maja #850)

Although the Hadith is weak, including its shawahid, the meaning is in accord with the purpose and spirit of praying in congregation behind an imam. Hence, the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم said:

إِنَّمَا جُعِلَ الإِمَامُ لِيُؤْتَمَّ بِهِ

“Verily the imam is appointed only to be followed”

وَإِذَا قَرَأَ فَأَنْصِتُوا

“And when he recites then be silent.”

(Sunan Abi Dawud #604)

In another Hadith, narrated by sayyidina Abi Huraira رضى الله عنه:

أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم انْصَرَفَ مِنْ صَلاَةٍ جَهَرَ فِيهَا بِالْقِرَاءَةِ فَقَالَ ‏‏ هَلْ قَرَأَ مَعِي أَحَدٌ مِنْكُمْ آنِفًا ‏‏ ‏‏ فَقَالَ رَجُلٌ نَعَمْ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏‏ إِنِّي أَقُولُ مَا لِي أُنَازَعُ الْقُرْآنَ ‏قَالَ فَانْتَهَى النَّاسُ عَنِ الْقِرَاءَةِ مَعَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فِيمَا جَهَرَ فِيهِ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم بِالْقِرَاءَةِ مِنَ الصَّلَوَاتِ حِينَ سَمِعُوا ذَلِكَ مِنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم

When the Messenger of Allah ﷺ finished a prayer in which he had recited (the Qur’an) loudly, he asked: “Did any of you recite along with me just now?” A man replied: “Yes, Messenger of Allah.” He said: “I am wondering what is the matter with me that I have been contended with reciting the Qur’an.” He said: When the people heard that from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ they ceased reciting (the Qur’an) along with him at the prayers in which he recited aloud.

(Sunan Abi Dawud #826)

The fact that the order to remain silent when the imam is reciting the Qur’an aloud includes his recitation of the Fatiha (which is of course a part of the Qur’an) can be understood from another authentic Hadith:

إِنَّمَا جُعِلَ الإِمَامُ لِيُؤْتَمَّ بِهِ فَإِذَا كَبَّرَ فَكَبِّرُوا وَإِذَا قَرَأَ فَأَنْصِتُوا وَإِذَا قَالَ ‏{غَيْرِ الْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلاَ الضَّالِّينَ}‏ فَقُولُوا آمِينَ

“Verily, the imam is only appointed to be followed, so when he makes takbir then make takbir, and when he recites then be silent and when he says ‘Ghayril-Maghdubi ‘alayhim walad-dallin’ then say ‘Amin’”

(Sunan Ibn Maja #846)

So the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم has said to remain silent when the imam is reciting, but to say ‘Amin’ after he has recited the final verse of the Fatiha. This proves that the recitation of Fatiha by the imam is included in the imam’s recitation during which the ma’mum is ordered to remain silent.

The opposing view presents the saying of sayyidina Abi Huraira:

فَقِيلَ لأَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ إِنَّا نَكُونُ وَرَاءَ الإِمَامِ ‏‏ فَقَالَ اقْرَأْ بِهَا فِي نَفْسِكَ

It was said to Abi Huraira: “Verily we are behind the imam” So he said: “Recite it in yourself.”

(Sahih Muslim)

However, this statement of sayyidina Abi Huraira does not clarify whether the ma’mum is meant to recite “in himself” in both the audible and inaudible rak’at.

As for the narration attributed to the tabi Makhul (d. 100 H):

فَكَانَ مَكْحُولٌ يَقْرَأُ فِي الْمَغْرِبِ وَالْعِشَاءِ وَالصُّبْحِ بِفَاتِحَةِ الْكِتَابِ فِي كُلِّ رَكْعَةٍ سِرًّا ‏.‏ قَالَ مَكْحُولٌ اقْرَأْ بِهَا فِيمَا جَهَرَ بِهِ الإِمَامُ إِذَا قَرَأَ بِفَاتِحَةِ الْكِتَابِ وَسَكَتَ سِرًّا فَإِنْ لَمْ يَسْكُتِ اقْرَأْ بِهَا قَبْلَهُ وَمَعَهُ وَبَعْدَهُ لاَ تَتْرُكْهَا عَلَى حَالٍ

Makhul used to recite Fatiha al-Kitab quietly in the prayer in which the imam recites the Qur’an loudly when he observes the period of silence. If he does not observe the period of silence, recite it before him(i.e before his recitation), or along with him or after him; do not give it up in any case.

(Sunan Abi Dawud #825)

It is weak, along with two other narrations which are attributed to the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam):

لَعَلَّكُمْ تَقْرَءُونَ خَلْفَ إِمَامِكُمْ ‏‏ ‏.‏ قُلْنَا نَعَمْ هَذَا يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ‏.‏ قَالَ ‏ لاَ تَفْعَلُوا إِلاَّ بِفَاتِحَةِ الْكِتَابِ فَإِنَّهُ لاَ صَلاَةَ لِمَنْ لَمْ يَقْرَأْ بِهَا

“Do you recite behind your Imam?” We said: “Yes, O Apostle of Allah”. He said: “Do not do so, except for the Fatiha of the Kitab, for there is no Salat without reciting it.”

(Sunan Abi Dawud #823)

It should be noted this is the primary evidence presented by the opposing view that one is required to recite the Fatiha while praying behind an imam. But this and the proceeding Hadith are both weak according to the great muhaddith, Imam al-Albani (rahimahullah):

فَلاَ تَقْرَءُوا بِشَىْءٍ مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ إِذَا جَهَرْتُ إِلاَّ بِأُمِّ الْقُرْآنِ

“So do not recite anything from the Qur’an when I (recite) it loudly except the Mother of the Qur’an (Fatiha)”

(Sunan Abi Dawud #824)

As I have stated, Imam al-Albani had graded all these narrations which command the recitation of the Fatiha behind the imam as weak (Da’if Sunan Abi Dawud pp.68-69):

As stated earlier, the opposing view has no direct evidence from the Qur’an itself. Some do present the following words from the Qur’an:

فَاقْرَءُوا مَا تَيَسَّرَ مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ

So recite what is easy of the Qur’an

(Sura 73:20)

According to this opposing view, “what is easy of the Qur’an” refers to the Fatiha. If we accept this for the sake of argument, it is still a general command and cannot be utilized as an explicit proof to recite the Fatiha behind the imam, especially when the Qur’an elsewhere has strictly enjoined remaining silent when the Qur’an is being recited (Sura 7:204). Secondly, it is not established that the words “what is easy of the Qur’an” refers to the Fatiha. Firstly, these words which are from an Ayah of Surat al-Muzzammil were revealed before the revelation of Surat al-Fatiha. Secondly, the eminent sahabi, sayyidina Abi Sa’id al-Khudri رضى الله عنه made a distinction between the Fatiha and “what is easy of the Qur’an”:

أُمِرْنَا أَنْ نَقْرَأَ، بِفَاتِحَةِ الْكِتَابِ وَمَا تَيَسَّرَ ‏

“We were ordered to recite with Fatiha of the Kitab and that which is easy”

(Sunan Abi Dawud #818)

Finally, I shall present here the statements of two eminent companions of the Prophet which forbid reciting anything, including the Fatiha, behind the imam:

سَأَلَ زَيْدَ بْنَ ثَابِتٍ عَنِ الْقِرَاءَةِ، مَعَ الإِمَامِ فَقَالَ لاَ قِرَاءَةَ مَعَ الإِمَامِ فِي شَىْءٍ

Ata b. Yasar reported that he asked Zayd b. Thabit about the recitation with the imam, so he said: “There is no recitation with the imam in anything”

(Sahih Muslim)

سَمِعَ جَابِرَ بْنَ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ، يَقُولُ مَنْ صَلَّى رَكْعَةً لَمْ يَقْرَأْ فِيهَا بِأُمِّ الْقُرْآنِ فَلَمْ يُصَلِّ إِلاَّ أَنْ يَكُونَ وَرَاءَ الإِمَامِ

Jabir b. Abdillah said: “Whoever prayed a rak’a in which he did not recite in it the Mother of the Qur’an (Fatiha), then he did not prayer, except if he was behind the imam.”

(Jami at-Tirmidhi #313)

So it is conclusively proven that these two companions, Zayd b. Thabit and Jabir b. Abdillah رضى الله عنهما agreed that there is no recitation of the Fatiha behind the imam.

Hanbali Madhhab: Not Allowed to Recite Fatiha Behind Imam in Loud Prayers

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والعاقبة للمتقين

According to the Hanbali madhhab, it is not allowed for the ma’mum (one who is praying behind an imam) to recite anything from the Qur’an, including Surat al-Fatiha, when the imam is reciting aloud:

“The ma’mum, on hearing the recitation of the imam, must not recite al-Hamd or any other (sura) for (Allah) Most High says: ‘When the Qur’an is recited then listen to it and be silent that you may be given mercy’ (7:204), and what was narrated by Abu Huraira may Allah be pleased with him from the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam): ‘Why am I being contended with in the Qur’an?’. So the people ceased reciting in that which the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) recited in aloud. It is mustahhab to recite during the pauses of the imam and in what he does not recite in aloud. But if he does not do that his Salat is still complete because ‘whoever has an imam, the recitation of the imam is for him a recitation.’” (Mukhtasar al-Khiraqi p.23):

People of Scripture Believe in Messiah Before THEIR Deaths (4:159)

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والعاقبة للمتقين

In my recent live discussion with a Deobandi-Hayati Mufti, Sakhawat Ali, student of Mufti Taqi Usmani, concerning the death of the Messiah of Nazareth عليه السلام, the respected Mufti cited as proof for his belief that the Messiah عليه السلام is alive the proceeding Ayah of the Qur’an:

وَإِن مِّنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ إِلَّا لَيُؤْمِنَنَّ بِهِ قَبْلَ مَوْتِهِ ۖ وَيَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ يَكُونُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا

And there is none from the People of the Scripture but that he will surely believe in him before his death. And on the Day of Resurrection he will be over them a witness

(Sura 4:159)

According to those who believe the Messiah of Nazareth عليه السلام is alive, the Qur’anic verse states that all of the People of the Scripture, meaning the Jews and Christians, will truly believe in the Messiah, in that way that faith in him is required by Allah, before the Messiah’s عليه السلام death. The pronoun from “before his death” refers to the Messiah عليه السلام according to them. This is why certain translations of the Qur’an have inserted the name of the Messiah عليه السلام in place of the pronoun altogether, such as Saheeh International. It must also be admitted that the Prophet Muhammad’s صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم eminent companion, sayyidina Abi Huraira رضى الله عنه, cited this Ayah as a proof of the second coming of the Messiah عليه السلام, which in all fairness must mean that he also regarded the pronoun from “before his death” as referring to the Messiah of Nazareth عليه السلام:

ثُمَّ يَقُولُ أَبُو هُرَيْرَةَ وَاقْرَءُوا إِنْ شِئْتُمْ ‏{‏وَإِنْ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ إِلاَّ لَيُؤْمِنَنَّ بِهِ قَبْلَ مَوْتِهِ وَيَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ يَكُونُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا‏}

Then Abu Huraira said: And recite, if you wish, “And there is none from the People of the Scripture but that he will surely believe in him before his death. And on the Day of Resurrection he will be over them a witness.”

(Sahih al-Bukhari #3448)

According to this argument, since the Jews and Christians till this day have not appropriately believed in the Messiah عليه السلام, the Messiah عليه السلام must still be alive as the Qur’an has stated here that there isn’t a single one of them but that he will believe in the Messiah عليه السلام before the Messiah’s عليه السلام death. This view cites the following Hadith regarding the second coming of the Messiah عليه السلام in support of the idea that the People of the Scripture will have no choice but to embrace Islam:

وَيُهْلِكُ اللَّهُ فِي زَمَانِهِ الْمِلَلَ كُلَّهَا إِلاَّ الإِسْلاَمَ

“Allah will destroy, in his time, all of the religions except Islam”

(Sunan Abi Dawud #4324)

But it should be noted here that the Hadith which speak about the second coming of the Messiah mention the fact that he shall slay the Dajjal. The Dajjal will be followed by an army of Jews. According to an authentic Hadith, he shall be accompanied by seventy thousand Jews of Isbahan wearing tallis (Jewish prayer shawls):

قَالَ عِيسَى عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمُ افْتَحُوا الْبَابَ ‏.‏ فَيُفْتَحُ وَوَرَاءَهُ الدَّجَّالُ مَعَهُ سَبْعُونَ أَلْفِ يَهُودِيٍّ كُلُّهُمْ ذُو سَيْفٍ مُحَلًّى وَسَاجٍ فَإِذَا نَظَرَ إِلَيْهِ الدَّجَّالُ ذَابَ كَمَا يَذُوبُ الْمِلْحُ فِي الْمَاءِ وَيَنْطَلِقُ هَارِبًا وَيَقُولُ عِيسَى عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمُ إِنَّ لِي فِيكَ ضَرْبَةً لَنْ تَسْبِقَنِي بِهَا ‏.‏ فَيُدْرِكُهُ عِنْدَ بَابِ اللُّدِّ الشَّرْقِيِّ فَيَقْتُلُهُ فَيَهْزِمُ اللَّهُ الْيَهُودَ فَلاَ يَبْقَى شَىْءٌ مِمَّا خَلَقَ اللَّهُ يَتَوَارَى بِهِ يَهُودِيٌّ إِلاَّ أَنْطَقَ اللَّهُ ذَلِكَ الشَّىْءَ لاَ حَجَرَ وَلاَ شَجَرَ وَلاَ حَائِطَ وَلاَ دَابَّةَ - إِلاَّ الْغَرْقَدَةَ فَإِنَّهَا مِنْ شَجَرِهِمْ لاَ تَنْطِقُ - إِلاَّ قَالَ يَا عَبْدَ اللَّهِ الْمُسْلِمَ هَذَا يَهُودِيٌّ فَتَعَالَ اقْتُلْهُ

Jesus peace be upon him will say: “Open the gate”. So it will be opened and behind it is the Dajjal with seventy thousand Jews, each armed with an adorned sword and shawl. So when the Dajjal sees him he will melt like salt in water. He will run away, and Jesus peace be upon him will say: “I have only one blow for you, which you will not be able to escape!” He will catch up with him at the eastern gate of Lod, and will kill him. Then Allah will defeat the Jews, and there will be nothing left that Allah has created which the Jews will be able to hide behind, except that Allah will cause it to speak - no stone, no tree, no wall, no animal - except for the Gharqad (box-thorn), for it is one of their trees, and will not speak - except that it will say: “O Muslim slave of Allah, here is a Jew, come and kill him!”

(Sunan Ibn Maja #4077)

So in light of this and other narrations, it is problematic that all of the People of the Scripture, especially the Jews, will believe in the Messiah before the Messiah’s death, especially if that means during the time of his second advent. These narrations state that during the Messiah’s second advent, the Muslims shall kill thousands of Jews who are part of the Dajjal’s forces. Those Jews will not embrace faith in the Messiah.

Having presented the case of those who believe that the Messiah عليه السلام is physically and bodily alive in Heaven, I will now present our own view that this Ayah is not a proof for their argument. The controversy surrounds the pronoun from “before his death”. According to our view, the pronoun is not referring to the Messiah but instead it refers to any individual from the People of the Scripture. This was apparently the interpretation of the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم eminent companion sayyidina Ibn Abbas رضى الله عنهما and the great exegete from the Tabi’in, Mujahid b. Jabr رحمه الله (Tafsir Ibn Jarir v.7, pp.667-671):

So according to this view, each and every one from the People of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), shall experience a sort of kashaf at the time of his death, just before his soul is being taken out of his body by the Angel of Death, and which it shall be made manifest to him that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah and a true prophet of Allah, not the “son of God” and not divine. This is the view of sayyidina Ibn Abbas رضى الله عنهما, in whose favor the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم made the following supplication:

اللَّهُمَّ عَلِّمْهُ الْحِكْمَةَ وَتَأْوِيلَ الْكِتَابِ

“Allahumma! Teach him the wisdom and the interpretation of the Scripture”

(Sunan Ibn Maja #166)

For this reason, sayyidina Ibn Abbas رضى الله عنهما is considered the “Imam of the Mufassirin”, and his interpretation of the Ayah (4:159) should be given precedence over any other interpretation.

Now it should be clarified that the Jews and Christians who are made to believe in the reality of the Messiah just before their death are not Believers who shall be granted salvation. The kind of faith in the Messiah they will have no choice but to have is that which does not benefit. It is similar to the faith which the Pharaoh of Egypt proclaimed before he was seized by Allah:

حَتَّىٰ إِذَا أَدْرَكَهُ الْغَرَقُ قَالَ آمَنتُ أَنَّهُ لَا إِلَـٰهَ إِلَّا الَّذِي آمَنَتْ بِهِ بَنُو إِسْرَائِيلَ وَأَنَا مِنَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ

Until when overwhelmed in the flood, he said: “I believe that there is no god except Him Whom the Children of Israel believe in and I am among the Muslims.”

(Sura 10:90)

However, because the Pharoah proclaimed his faith when it was too late, when the proof had already been established against him, and it was not faith in the unseen adapted out of sincerity, his faith was not accepted nor will it benefit him in the afterlife. Another example of this kind of faith is that which the disbelievers will proclaim after some of the manifest Signs of Allah shall appear, such as the rising of the sun from the west:

يَوْمَ يَأْتِي بَعْضُ آيَاتِ رَبِّكَ لَا يَنفَعُ نَفْسًا إِيمَانُهَا لَمْ تَكُنْ آمَنَتْ مِن قَبْلُ أَوْ كَسَبَتْ فِي إِيمَانِهَا خَيْرًا

The Day that certain Signs of thy Lord do come, no good will it do to a soul to believe in them then if it believed not before nor earned good through its faith

(Sura 6:158)

According to an alternative reading of the Verse (4:159) held by sayyidina Ubayy b. Ka’b رضى الله عنه

وَإِن مِّنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ إِلَّا لَيُؤْمِنُنَّ بِهِ قَبْلَ مَوْتِهِم

“And there is none from the People of the Scripture but they will believe in him before their deaths.”

In this reading, the pronoun from “before his death” is pluralized proving that it cannot be referring to the Messiah of Nazareth عليه السلام who is a single individual, and must be referring to the People of the Scripture (Tafsir al-Baydawi v.2 p.108; Durr al-Manthur v.5 p.107):

In conclusion, the Ayah (4:159) is in no way a proof that the Messiah of Nazareth is physically and bodily alive and did not experience death in his own time.

Reality of Musaylima the Liar

The so-called khatm un-nubuwwa movement, which has a superficial understanding of the doctrine of finality of prophesy it has made its business to propagate, cites the example of Musaylima b. Habib, the pretender of Yamama, to refute any nuanced explanation that qualifies the meaning of the Prophet Muhammad’s prophesy. What I mean to say is that in the world of Sufism, whenever a saintly individual claims to exhibit within himself the blessed nubuwwa of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), being animated by that nubuwwa due to strict obedience and following in the footsteps of Prophet Muhammad, contemporary “orthodoxy” is quick to brand such a figure as the Musaylima of the day. Musaylima notoriously claimed prophesy during the latter days of the Prophet Muhammad’s life. The Prophet Muhammad had seen a vision in which two gold bangles were placed in his hands, but this caused him distress. Within the vision he was inspired to blow upon the bangles, and doing so they vanished into nothingness. He then interpreted the vision of the two gold bangles as refering to the two pretenders, one of them being Musaylima, and the other being the pretender of San’aa’, al-Aswad al-‘Ansi (Abhala b. Ka’b). Musaylima in fact met the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) in person during the year of the delegations, when he accompanied his tribal delegation of the Bani Hanifa to Madina al-Munawwara. Having outwardly embraced Islam, Musaylima originally coveted the rulership of the Muslims, saying:

إِنْ جَعَلَ لِي مُحَمَّدٌ مِنْ بَعْدِهِ تَبِعْتُهُ

“If Muhammad appoints me after him, I shall follow him”

But in their brief encounter, the Prophet Muhammad rebuked Musaylima and stated that even if he asked for the twig that was in his, the Prophet’s, blessed hand, he would refuse to gift it to Musaylima. It was after this incident that Musaylima, upon his return to Yamama, declared himself a prophet and the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was then shown the vision of the two gold bangles in his hands. Now it is quite clear that Musaylima was a liar and false prophet, and the personal motivation for him laying claim to prophesy is not hidden from any reasonable person who knows the historical facts. Musaylima’s ambitions and lust for power drove him to claim prophesy, as he felt he could replicate the achievements of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and unite his own people, the Arabs of Yamama.

The mullas of the khatm un-nubuwwa movement, consisting of a number of religious organizations generally of Sunni persuasion dedicated to “defending” the doctrine of finality of prophesy particularly against the Qadiyanis or followers of Ghulam Ahmad of Qadiyan, declare that Musaylima was no different from the likes of Ghulam Ahmad and other individuals within the Umma who have made some sort of claim to prophesy while maintaining their membership within the Umma and upholding the Shari’a. This I feel is a grave error for a number of reasons.

Firstly, as I have already explained, whether Musaylima’s claim of prophesy was or was not in itself kufr and apostasy from Islam, we know that Musaylima was a liar and he had personal motives for declaring himself a prophet. For example, if someone claims to be a Muslim, there is nothing wrong with making such a claim in itself, since Allah desires that all humanity embrace Islam and be Muslims. But if someone falsely claims to be a Muslim while rejecting Islam in his heart, such a person is a condemned hypocrite and is in fact worse than an ordinary disbeliever who does not pretend to be Muslim. Such is the case of Musaylima. Whether or not prophesy continues after Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is not really the issue. Musaylima is condemned because he self-evidently lied in claiming prophesy for himself. What greater distinction can there be between Musaylima and certain Sufi saints of the Umma who are unjustly branded heretics for laying claim to the type of prophesy that is figurative because what they mean is that they have been scented with the fragance of the Nubuwwa of sayyidina Muhammad (peace be upon him). Although the scent of the Prophet Muhammad is emanating from their clothes it is obviously not their own scent. They have merely applied it to their persons.

Secondly, the khatm un-nubuwwa movement states that Musaylima claimed for himself the same type of nubuwwa which certain Sufi saints have acknowledged as a legitimate form of nubuwwa and which the likes of Ghulam Ahmad of Qadiyan and other ummatis laid claim to. This is patently false. It is true that Musaylima acknowledged the prophesy of sayyidina Muhammad (peace be upon him), at least initially, as expressed in the epistle he wrote to our Prophet. But unlike Ghulam Ahmad, Musaylima did not declare himself subordinate to Prophet Muhammad, rather, he said he was his partner and equal:

إِنِّي قَدْ أُشْرِكْتُ فِي الأَمْرِ مَعَهُ

“I have been partnered in this matter [prophesy] with him”

[Tarikh at-Tabari]

Musaylima also expressed his exact da’wa in his well known epistle to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him):

مِنْ مُسَيْلِمَةَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ ، إِلَى مُحَمَّدٍ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ : سَلامٌ عَلَيْكَ . أَمَّا بَعْدُ : فَإِنِّي أُشْرِكْتُ مَعَكَ فِي الأَمْرِ ، وَإِنَّ لَنَا نِصْفَ الأَرْضِ ، وَلِقُرَيْشٍ نِصْفَ الأَرْضِ ، وَلَكِنَّ قُرَيْشًا قَوْمٌ يَعْتَدُونَ

“From Musaylima, Apostle of Allah, to Muhammad, Apostle of Allah: Peace be upon you. To proceed: I have been partnered with you in the matter. Verily, for us is half the land and for Quraysh is half the land, but Quraysh are a transgressing people.”

So it is evident that Musaylima claimed the prophesy of partnership. In other words, he held himself to be equal to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). To clarify, what is meant by partnership or sharing is meant sharing the rank of nubuwwa, and not sharing a single nubuwwa. This is in stark contrast to the various saints and Sufis of the Umma who spoke of fana fil-Rasul, meaning having their own personalities annihilated and taking on instead the persona of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). By being the repository of that persona, they might have said something to the effect of “I am the Prophet”, figuratively of course, and not at all in the sense in which Musaylima the Liar said: “I am a prophet”.

Thirdly, Musaylima altered the Religion and Shari’a of Prophet Muhammad. For example, he proclaimed wine and fornication licit, and demolished the institution of Salat – the five daily prayers.

Fourthly, Musaylima stood in opposition to not only the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), but also in opposition to the institution of Khilafa, and the Prophet’s true successor, sayyidina Abi Bakr (Allah be pleased with him).