Ten Ahadith for Methodology

 

بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

اَلۡحَمۡدُ لِلّٰہِ رَبِّ الۡعٰلَمِیۡنَ

والصلاة والسلام على خاتم النبيين

Select Ahādīth for Methodology

Hadīth #1

عَلَيْكُمْ بِالْجَمَاعَةِ وَإِيَّاكُمْ وَالْفُرْقَةَ فَإِنَّ الشَّيْطَانَ مَعَ الْوَاحِدِ وَهُوَ مِنَ الاِثْنَيْنِ أَبْعَدُ مَنْ أَرَادَ بُحْبُوحَةَ الْجَنَّةِ فَلْيَلْزَمِ الْجَمَاعَةَ

Adhere to the Jamā’ah and beware of separation, for indeed the Satan is with one but is distant from two. Whoever wants the best place in Jannah, then let him stick to the Jamā’ah

Commentary: In this Hadith is enshrined a golden principle, which if adhered to will save a soul of this Ummah from joining a deviant sect or movement, whether religious or political in nature. Of the seventy three divisions that were destined to occur within this Ummah, the denomination which is upon truth and is therefore saved is the one that constitutes the Jamā’ah. By this term is meant the mainstream congregation of the Ummah whose existence is continuous from the time of the Sahābah (radī Allāhu ‘anhum). The fundamental beliefs, practices and methodology of the Jamā’ah represent Islamic orthodoxy and normativity. The deviant sects and factions in this Ummah are those that broke off from the mainstream Jamā’ah, such as the Kharijites, the Shi’ites, the Qadarites, the Murji’ites, the Mu’tazilites, and in modern times, Hadith-rejecters, Qadianis, naturalists, materialists, modernists, etc. The Jamā’ah are those who are known as Ahl us-Sunnah or Sunnis, whose ‘Ulamā’ have a sanad which may be traced back to the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi was-sallam).

Hadīth #2

سَلَّطَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْكُمْ ذُلاًّ لاَ يَنْزِعُهُ حَتَّى تَرْجِعُوا إِلَى دِينِكُمْ

Allāh will establish disgrace upon you and will not remove it until you return to your Dīn

Commentary: This Hadīth elaborates upon the meaning of the Āyah:

اِنَّ اللّٰہَ لَا یُغَیِّرُ مَا بِقَوۡمٍ حَتّٰی یُغَیِّرُوۡا مَا بِاَنۡفُسِہِمۡ

Verily, Allāh does not change the condition of a people until they change what is in their souls

Today, if we see that the Ummah by and large has been seized with a humiliation and subjugation at the hands of the foreign powers it is a consequence of our collective spiritual and moral lapse. The situation will not be rectified in our favor until the Ummah collectively repents from its evil ways and returns to the teachings of Islām, along with purification of the soul through worship and remembrance of Allāh. The efforts of many in this Ummah to remove the disgrace through political and other non-religious means are totally futile.

Hadīth #3

يَأْتِي زَمَانٌ مَنْ عَمِلَ مِنْهُمْ بِعُشْرِ مَا أُمِرَ بِهِ نَجَا

A time comes when someone who does a tenth of what he is commanded is saved

Commentary: The Hadīth should not be abused by being understood as a justification to sin or motivate a Muslim to be lax in his observance of the divine commandments. Its purpose is to predict that in the latter days, due to the change in external circumstances and less facilitation for worship and good deeds, if a Muslim strives to comply with the divine commandments but is only able to fulfill a tenth of them despite sincere effort then he shall be saved from damnation.

Hadīth #4

مَنْ أَحَبَّ أَنْ يُزَحْزَحَ عَنِ النَّارِ وَيَدْخُلَ الْجَنَّةَ فَلْتَأْتِهِ مَنِيَّتُهُ وَهُوَ يُؤْمِنُ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ وَلْيَأْتِ إِلَى النَّاسِ الَّذِي يُحِبُّ أَنْ يُؤْتَى إِلَيْهِ

Whoever loves that they be delivered from Hellfire and entered into Paradise then let him die while he believes in Allāh and the Last Day, and treat the people how he loves to be treated

Commentary: The “Golden Rule”, namely, to treat others as one wishes to be treated, which is universal in being a moral principle among humanity, has been confirmed by the most holy Prophet Muhammad (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi was-sallam). This Hadīth also emphasizes that true faith in the holy Person of Allāh and in the Last Day, meaning the end of this world and the Resurrection, is the entire basis for salvation. It does not mean that one can be saved by merely professing faith in Allāh and the Last Day while rejecting the other Articles of Faith and fundamentals of the Religion, rather, that the other Articles of Faith and fundamentals of the Religion stem from faith in Allāh and in the Last Day.

Hadīth #5

الْحَلاَلُ بَيِّنٌ وَالْحَرَامُ بَيِّنٌ وَبَيْنَهُمَا مُشَبَّهَاتٌ لاَ يَعْلَمُهَا كَثِيرٌ مِنَ النَّاسِ فَمَنِ اتَّقَى الْمُشَبَّهَاتِ اسْتَبْرَأَ لِدِيِنِهِ وَعِرْضِهِ

The Halāl is clear and the Harām is clear, but between them are the Mushabbahāt (doubtful matters) that most of the people have no knowledge of. So whoever, out of Taqwā, saves himself from the Mushabbahāt has protected his Dīn and his honor

Commentary: From this Hadīth we derive the principle that it is superior to have Taqwā and avoid a doubtful matter rather than act upon a Fatwā that declares it permissible. By having an attitude to avoid a doubtful matter, whose permissibility is not definitive, a person will protect his Faith and his personal honor. There are many such controversial and doubtful matters regarding which the Fuqahā and ‘Ulamā’ differ. It is better to err on the side of caution and avoid those matters, such as smoking, music, protests, seafood, red clothing, isbāl, etc.

Hadīth #6

إِذَا أَتَاكُمْ كَرِيمُ قَوْمٍ فَأَكْرِمُوهُ

When the honored one among a people comes to you then honor him

Commentary: From the way of the Muslims is to honor and respect an individual or class who are considered noble among their people, unless that individual shows hostility toward Islām, or is known to be an oppressor and evil, then he should not be honored. This Hadīth enjoining us to honor the noble person of a people especially applies to their kings, rulers and leaders. Contrary to what some extremists believe, it is not against the Sharī’ah to show deference to the kings, rulers and leaders of the non-Muslims. Rather, to insult or humiliate a person considered noble among his people will create resentment and enmity between the Muslims and those people.

Hadīth #7

فَرُبَّ حَامِلِ فِقْهٍ إِلَى مَنْ هُوَ أَفْقَهُ مِنْهُ وَرُبَّ حَامِلِ فِقْهٍ لَيْسَ بِفَقِيهٍ

The bearer of a fiqh might convey it to someone who has better understanding of it, and the bearer of a fiqh might not be understanding of it

Commentary: The context of this Prophetic statement is the virtue of conveying his Ahādīth. It confirms the possibility that the one to whom a Hadīth is conveyed may understand its meaning better than the one who conveyed it to him, even if the conveyor heard it directly from the blessed mouth of the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi was-sallam). This is especially true in the realm of prophecy. As time goes by and the fulfillment of a prophecy nears, the people of that time will naturally have a better understanding of the meaning and interpretation of the Hadīth than those who came prior to them and conveyed it.

Hadīth #8

اسْمَعُوا هَلْ سَمِعْتُمْ أَنَّهُ سَتَكُونُ بَعْدِي أُمَرَاءُ مَنْ دَخَلَ عَلَيْهِمْ فَصَدَّقَهُمْ بِكَذِبِهِمْ وَأَعَانَهُمْ عَلَى ظُلْمِهِمْ فَلَيْسَ مِنِّي وَلَسْتُ مِنْهُ وَلَيْسَ يَرِدُ عَلَىَّ الْحَوْضَ

Listen! Have you heard that after me will come rulers, whoever enters upon them and believes their lies and helps them in their oppression then he is not of me and I am not not of him nor will I receive him at the Hawd

Commentary: Many Ahādīth warn about the coming of oppressive rulers, while still enjoining the Believers to remain under their obedience and not rebel against them. This Hadīth has rare additional guidance in that while it also does not allow for the Believers to raise the sword against an oppressive ruler, it nevertheless enjoins us to stay away from them. It is a condemnation of those Muslims, including so-called Imams and scholars, who are close to the corrupt rulers and are frequently found in their palaces, courts and personal company. Historically, the pious Imams and Sufis of this Ummah, belonging to Ahl us-Sunnah, remained aloof from the rulers and the corridors of power. The corrupt and oppressive rulers of this Ummah will certainly be among those who are given the most severe punishment in the Afterlife, therefore, it is imperative that both the scholars and ordinary Muslims avoid association with them as much as possible. Likewise, in the search for a spiritual guide and scholar to take knowledge from, an ordinary Muslim should discount those who are close to the corrupt rulers and therefore likely compromised, and instead seek those who are far away from the corridors of power.

Hadīth #9

السُّلْطَانُ ظِلُّ اللَّهِ فِي الأَرْضِ

The Sultān is the Shadow of Allāh on the Earth

Commentary: By Sultān is meant a powerful or well established ruler. His existence and rule are in fact a manifestation of Allah’s mercy and compassion toward the people, hence why he is named the Shadow of God. As opposed to anarchy, the establishment of a State with a stable and strong rule benefits the ordinary people in that it grants them safety and a means to achieve prosperity while adhering to their Religion. For this and other reasons the Prophet (sall Allāhu ‘alayhi was-sallam) forbade us from insulting the Sultān, and warned that the consequence of doing so would be divine humiliation. Nevertheless, as explained concerning the previous Hadīth, the Believer should endeavor to remain aloof from the Sultān so as to save himself from fitnah.

Hadīth #10

مَنْ مَاتَ بِغَيْرِ إِمَامٍ مَاتَ مِيتَةً جَاهِلِيَّةً

Whoever died without an Imām died a death of Jāhiliyyah

Commentary: The term Jāhiliyyah signifies the state of society before the arrival of Islām and the state of an individual before his conversion to Islām, a state of ignorance and barbarism. The purpose is to emphasize the necessity of having an Imām to whom a Believer pledges his allegiance and remains in obedience to for as long as he lives, otherwise, despite being a Believer, he will be in a condition like the condition of a person who died without converting to Islām, a condition of ignorance and spiritual deprivation. Here, an Imām is not restricted to meaning the leader of the Muslims in an administrative sense, but also a religious guide and spiritual leader. There are many rulers, but only that one may be described as an Imām who is pious, learned in religious matters and guides the people to what is good.

Mawdudi's Disrespect to the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

اَلۡحَمۡدُ لِلّٰہِ رَبِّ الۡعٰلَمِیۡنَ

والصلاة والسلام على خاتم النبيين

Abul-Ala Mawdudi, one of the most misguided individuals from this Ummah whom regrettably many duped Muslims imagine to have been some great Mujaddid or Imam, was someone who audaciously disrespected several of the holy Prophets, including the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam) whom he referred to as:

ریگستان عرب کے ایک ان پڑھ چرواہے

"an illiterate herder of the Arabian desert" (Pardah, p.171)

A Saint with Prophetic Qualities: Yahya bin Abdullah

 

بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

اَلۡحَمۡدُ لِلّٰہِ رَبِّ الۡعٰلَمِیۡنَ

والصلاة والسلام على خاتم النبيين

One of the righteous Saints of this Ummah, the Imam, sayyidina Yahya bin Abdullah [al-Mahd], a descendant of the Prophet (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam) being the great-grandson of the Prophet’s grandson Imam Hasan al-Mujtaba (radi Allahu anhu). He is remembered for his uprising against the tyrannical Abbasid government in the land of Dailam in 792 CE. But this uprising failed and Yahya bin Abdullah made an agreement for safety with the Abbasid ruler Harun al-Rashid. During this period, a descendant of Abdullah bin Zubair (radi Allahu anhuma), namely, Abdullah bin Mus’ab bin Thabit bin Abdullah bin Zubair, who had enmity toward the progeny of sayyidina Ali al-Murtada (radi Allahu anhu), entered the presence of Harun al-Rashid and made a serious allegation against sayyidina Yahya bin Abdullah, accusing him of having invited him and by implication many others including those in the ruler’s court to participate in an armed revolt against the Abbasids. Sayyidina Yahya bin Abdullah not only denied this allegation, he invited his accuser, Abdullah bin Mus’ab, to participate in a Mubahalah, a prayer contest in which the two parties invoke the curse of Allah upon the liar, to settle the matter. With Harun al-Rashid’s encouragement, both individuals entered into the Mubahalah. They first offered two light raka’at, then knelt down, intertwined their right hands, then sayyidina Yahya bin Abdullah offered the following prayer:

اللهم إن كنت تعلم أني دعوت عبد الله بْن مصعب إلى الخلاف على هذا ووضع يده عليه وأشار إليه فاسحتني بعذاب من عندك وكلني إلى حولي وقوتي وإلا فكله إلى حوله وقوته واسحته بعذاب من قبلك آمين رب العالمين

“Allahumma! If you know that I summoned Abdullah bin Mus’ab to rebelliousness on the basis of this – and he placed his left hand on it and pointed to it – then destroy me with an act of Your divine punishment, and abandon me to my own strength and power. But if the contrary is true, then abandon him to his own strength and power and destroy him with an act of Your divine punishment. Amen! Lord of the Worlds”

Then Abdullah bin Mus’ab repeated the prayer and the two parted ways. Sayyidina Yahya bin Abdullah was kept imprisoned by Harun al-Rashid while Abdullah bin Mus’ab was free to go. Shortly thereafter, the very next day in fact, another descendant of sayyidina Ali al-Murtada (radi Allahu anhu), namely, Abbas bin Hasan bin Ubaidullah bin Abbas bin Ali, was summoned by Abdullah bin Mus’ab to his home through the latter’s envoy. Abbas sent his son Abdullah in his place, but as Abdullah bin Abbas approached the residence of Abdullah bin Mus’ab the womenfolk of that house came out wailing and lamenting, announcing that Abdullah bin Mus’ab had died!

Abdullah bin Abbas returned to his father and informed him of the amazing news, to which his father, Abbas, stated:

لو جاز أن يدعى ليحيى نبوة لادعاها أهله رحمة الله عليه وعند الله نحتسبه ولا والله ما نشك في أنه قد قتل

“If it were permissible to claim Prophesy [Nubuwwah] for Yahya, his family would have claimed it, may Allah have mercy on him. We reckon him to have been recompensed by Allah, by Allah, we cannot doubt that he [Abdullah bin Mus’ab] has been [divinely] killed!”

Even Harun al-Rashid was amazed, and he released sayyidina Yahya from his brief, merely a day long, imprisonment and rewarded him with a hundred thousand dinars, saying:

يا أبا محمد أما علمت أن الله قد قتل عدوك الجبار

“O Abu Muhammad! Do you know that Allah has killed your enemy, the tyrant?”

(Tarikh at-Tabari; v.8, pp.248-250)

On a subsequent occassion, while sayyidina Yahya bin Abdullah (rahimahullah) was once again imprisoned under orders from Harun al-Rashid, he was brought forth to the latter’s presence in heavy iron fetters. Bakkar, the son of Abdullah bin Mus’ab who was previously destroyed by Allah as a result of the Mubahalah, continued to bear enmity toward sayyidina Yahya and the progeny of amir al-Mu’minin Ali bin Abi Talib (radi Allahu anhu), and repeated accusations that sayyidina Yahya was covertly organizing a revolt against the Abbasids in Medina. But sayyidina Yahya bin Abdullah was intelligent and he informed Harun al-Rashid of a matter that would doubtlessly disturb him, that Bakkar had in fact, ironically, cursed the one who killed sayyidina Muhammad Nafs al-Zakiyah (rahimahullah), who was martyred in Medina in an uprising against a prior Abbasid ruler, al-Mansur. The Abbasid ruler, Harun al-Rashid, was naturally contemptuous of Muhammad Nafs al-Zakiyah and would have considered his killing a good thing. Bakkar claimed that what sayyidina Yahya (rahimahullah) was saying was a lie, and so sayyidina Yahya bin Abdullah (rahimahullah) challenged Bakkar to make the following prayer:

أنا بريء من حول الله وقوته موكل إلى حولي وقوتي إن كنت قلته

“May I be deprived of Allah’s strength and His power, and abandoned to my own strength and power if I really did say that”

Despite reluctance and obvious fear, Bakkar finally repeated the prayer sayyidina Yahya instructed him to say. Soon thereafter, Bakkar suffered a paralytic stroke and died immediately! Members of his family, however, claimed that he was murdered by his wife, who was jealous of his taking a concubine, and had two Black slaves kill him by means of sitting on his face and having him suffocate to death. (Tarikh at-Tabari; v.8, p.246)

Either way, it is evident that the death of Bakkar bin Abdullah bin Mus’ab, like the death of his father, was a divine punishment for his slanders and enmity toward the pious Saint and Imam, sayyidina Yahya bin Abdullah (rahimahumullah).

Indeed, the victory of sayyidina Yahya bin Abdullah against the two Zubairids, father and son, by means of Mubahalah and Li’an, is from among his Karamat (miracles). Abbas bin Hasan bin Ubaidullah bin [Abul-Fadl] Abbas bin Ali even testified to the effect that sayyidina Yahya had prophetic characteristics within him, and that his family would have claimed Nubuwwah for him had such a thing been possible after the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam).

Inspiration of Ayah to Mujaddid Alf Thani: Glad-Tidings of a Boy Named Yahya (19:7)

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على نبيه الامين

The great Reformer, Mujaddid Alf Thānī, Imām Rabbānī, Ahmad Sirhindī رحمة الله عليه received the following Ilhām (inspiration) which is an Āyah of the Qurān:

اِنَّا نُبَشِّرُکَ بِغُلٰمِ ۣاسۡمُہٗ یَحۡیٰی

We give you glad-tidings of a boy, his name is Yahyā

Subsequently, a son was born to Mujaddid Alf Thānī and he named him Muhammad Yahyā (Maqāmāt Imām Rabbānī, p.136)

Mawdudi Called Prophet Joseph a Dictator Like Mussolini معاذ الله

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على نبيه الامين

Commenting on the passage in the Qurān which mentions the prophet Joseph عليه السلام asking the king of Egypt to grant him the portfolio of treasury in the government, Abūl-A’lā Mawdūdī said:

یہ محض وزیر مالیات کے منصب کا مطالبہ نہیں تھا جیسا کہ بعض لوگ سمجھتے ہیں، بلکہ یہ ڈکٹیٹر شپ کا مطالبہ تھا۔ اور اس کے نتیجے میں سیدنا یوسف علیہ السلام کو جو پوزشن حاصل ہوئی وہ قریب قریب وہی پوزشن تھی جو اس وقت اٹلی میں مسولینی کو حاصل ہے

This wasn’t merely a request for the office of the minister of the treasury as some people understand, rather, this was a request for dictatorship. And as a result our master Joseph, peace be upon him, acquired a position that is quite near to the position which currently Mussolini has in Italy (Tafhīmāt, part 2, p.122)

Majlis-e-Ahrar Declared Pakistan 'Palidistan'

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على نبيه الامين

The Majlis-i-Ahrar, a discredited political party active in the Punjab, which uses religion to cloak its nefarious political agenda, actively opposed the creation of Pakistan, a state necessary to protect the Muslims from brute Hindu majoritarianism and bigotry.

In his presidential address given at Kasur on 1^st of December 1941, Ch. Afzal Haq dubbed Pakistan as Palidistan (impure land):

احرار اس پاکستان کو پلیدستان سمجھتے ہیں

The Ahrar considers this Pakistan to be Palidistan (Khutbāt-i-Ahrār, p.83)

Danger of Liberal Religious Movements in Indonesia

 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على نبيه الامين

وعلى آله واصحابه اجمعين

A conservative, puritanical and strict approach to Islam is what is most pleasing to Lord Allah. Tragically, the State in many places around the Muslim World is facilitating the imposition of a religious tendency that is the exact opposite. I have written at length on this blog concerning the danger posed by statism and state versions of Islam which are designed to modify Islam so that it is more suitable to the interests and desires of the elites and the irreligious masses. In Indonesia, the religious establishment, namely, Nahdlatul Ulama, gravitates toward a conception of Islam that is far from the ideal. It may be characterized as excessively liberal and modern, meaning it is lax, embracing the dangers of pluralism, democracy, feminism and modernity.

In our time, certain practices and laws associated with Islam have become controversial leading to a culture war. It is observed that dangerous liberal and progressive movements among the Muslims almost universally challenge the institution of veil, gender segregation and the proscription on music.

From the principles of Indonesia’s Nahdlatul Ulama, which is also generally widespread in the East Indies, is tasāmuh which roughly means leniency as opposed to harshness. While gentleness is from the disposition of our Religion in certain matters, it is quite evident that in others, especially the sensitive matters, it is the way of the Prophets and the pious Imams to utilize harshness in admonition.

The spread of sexual immorality in Muslim societies today is certainly rooted in a laxity with regard to observing the veil and modesty, and a total disregard for the institution of gender segregation and the seclusion of ladies. But this is certainly not a new phenomenon, it is the same problem which plagued the children of Israel for which their holy Prophets rebuked them.

Islam Nusantara, the philosophy promoted by the State in Indonesia and by its religious establishment (Nahdlatul Ulama or NU), is against the spirit of orthodox Islam precisely because it is opposed to the sentiment of zeal for Islamic exclusivity and purity, the spirit so gloriously manifested in the activity of the ancient Prophets, and the Reformers and Saints of this Ummah who follow in their footsteps.

The second major religious movement in Indonesia, a sort of rival to the NU, is the so-called Muhammadiyah. These are essentially Salafi modernists, and promote a concept they dub Islam Berkemajuan or a “progressive” approach to Islam. Unlike Islam Nusantara, this concept is not intended for a local context but a global one. Muslims ought to beware of such philosophies, often predicated on the notion of ijtihād. In practical terms, what this means is that many important matters which have already been settled by the early Sunni jurists in terms of law and jurisprudence may be re-evaluated and modified for the modern context. The tendency of those who invoke the necessity of ijtihād in modern times is always toward greater cultural liberalization and laxity, especially a more permissive attitude with respect to the issues of veiling, gender segregation, music, interest, banking, and political activity. In this sense both NU and Muhammadiyah are problematic, indeed dangerous religious movements that are currently dominating the religious landscape of Indonesia. Cultures in the East Indies or the Malay Archipelago are historically somewhat matriarchal. The strictness of veiling and gender segregation, a fundamental aspect of orthodox Islam and still observed in places like Arabia and Afghanistan, is alien to the Malay Archipelago. Rather than aggressively seeking to Islamize their society with an emphasis on the conservative traditions and the strictures of the Sharī’ah, the corrupt religious establishment of this region in the Muslim World is constantly validating the pre-Islamic and even un-Islamic customs and culture in the name of moderation. With the passage of time, as the globe gravitates toward greater cultural liberalization and permissiveness, this corrupt religious establishment, which falsely claims to be moderate and traditional, may even reevaluate its position toward homosexuality and the validity of practising other religions and even worshipping other deities. The holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said:

‌لَتُنْقَضَنَّ ‌عُرَى ‌الْإِسْلَامِ ‌عُرْوَةً ‌عُرْوَةً فَكُلَّمَا انْتَقَضَتْ عُرْوَةٌ تَشَبَّثَ النَّاسُ بِالَّتِي تَلِيهَا وَأَوَّلُهُنَّ نَقْضًا الْحُكْمُ وَآخِرُهُنَّ الصَّلَاةُ

The bonds of Islam will be undone one by one. Each time one bond is undone, the people will move to the next one (and adhere to that). The first bond to be undone will be the Hukm [rule] and the last one will be the Salāh (Musnad Ahmad)

The meaning of the Hadīth is that the first aspect of Islam that the Muslims will abandon and neglect will be the divinely legislated guidelines and laws related to political administration and governance (which happened with the demise of Khilāfat ar-Rāshidah within thirty years of the Prophet’s passing away from this world) while the last will be the collective abandoning of the five daily prescribed prayers, the most salient Islamic practice.

Become Humiliated Monkeys! (2:65)

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

Concerning the violators of the Sabbath among the Israelites, Allāh سبحانه وتعالى says:

وَلَقَدۡ عَلِمۡتُمُ الَّذِیۡنَ اعۡتَدَوۡا مِنۡکُمۡ فِی السَّبۡتِ فَقُلۡنَا لَہُمۡ کُوۡنُوۡا قِرَدَۃً خٰسِئِیۡنَ ﴿ۚ

And surely, you have known the end of those among you, who transgressed in the matter of the Sabbath. So We said to them: Be ye apes, despised

(Juz 1, Sūrah 2, Āyah 65)

Many people believe that Allāh literally transformed a party of Israelites into apes. While this appears to be the most widespread interpretation of the Āyah, and others like it which mention مسخ (metamorphosis), a figurative interpretation of some evil humans becoming swine and apes seems more reasonable and profound. Hence, the great mufassir Mujāhid bin Jabr (d.104 H) from among the Tābi’īn, commented on this Āyah, saying:

‌مُسِخَتْ ‌قُلُوبُهُمْ وَلَمْ يُمْسَخُوا قِرَدَةً وَخَنَازِيرَ وَإِنَّمَا هُوَ مَثَلٌ ضَرَبَهُ اللَّهُ لَهُمْ مِثْلَ الْحِمَارِ يَحْمِلُ أَسْفَارًا

Their hearts were transformed, not that they were [actually] transformed into monkeys and pigs. Indeed, it is a similitude that Allāh presented for them, like the donkey carrying volumes of books (Tafsīr Ibn Abī Hātim, v.1, p.133, #672)

Here sayyidinā Mujāhid رحمه الله referred to the parable mentioned in Sūrat al-Jumu’ah:

مَثَلُ الَّذِیۡنَ حُمِّلُوا التَّوۡرٰٮۃَ ثُمَّ لَمۡ یَحۡمِلُوۡہَا کَمَثَلِ الۡحِمَارِ یَحۡمِلُ اَسۡفَارًا

The likeness of those who were made to bear the Torah, but would not bear it, is as the likeness of an ass carrying a load of books

(Juz 28, Sūrah 62, Āyah 5)

In other words, the transformation of some evil humans into pigs and monkeys means a transformation of their internal characteristics and behavior. Their hearts became like the hearts of apes and swine, as Mujāhid رحمه الله explained. In Arabic linguistics, the word ‘monkey’ derived from the trilateral root ق ر د carries the meaning of ‘to deceive; to subdue, to humiliate’. Thus, the transformation of evil humans into monkeys signifies their becoming subdued and humiliated. Likewise, the word ‘pig’, derived from the quadrilateral root خ ن ز ر carries the meaning of ‘to be rough and crude’, so those among them who were transformed into pigs signifies their roughness and crudeness. This is found in many cultures and almost universally understood that calling someone a pig means he is obscene, shameless, gluttonous, perverted and disgusting. Calling someone a monkey means he is disgraced, humiliated, or ugly.

This interpretation is made clearer in certain Ahādīth of the holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم

أَمَا يَخْشَى أَحَدُكُمْ أَوْ لاَ يَخْشَى أَحَدُكُمْ إِذَا رَفَعَ رَأْسَهُ قَبْلَ الإِمَامِ أَنْ يَجْعَلَ اللَّهُ رَأْسَهُ رَأْسَ حِمَارٍ أَوْ يَجْعَلَ اللَّهُ صُورَتَهُ صُورَةَ حِمَارٍ

Is not the one who raises his head [from prostration and bowing] before the Imām afraid that Allāh will make his head the head of a donkey or that Allāh will make his form the form of a donkey! (Sahīh al-Bukhārī)

To date, there has been no recorded instance of someone’s head or body being literally transformed into that of a donkey’s, indicating that it is a figurative phenomenon, as sadly the phenomenon of ignorant and heedless people raising their head from bowing or prostration before the Imām in Salāh is not uncommon, especially among the astray Shī’ah. In Arabic linguistics, the word donkey is derived from the trilateral root ح م ر which carries the meaning of ‘to be difficult’. In other words, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم described those who raise their heads in Salāh before the Imām as obstinate people.

In another tradition, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم predicted that a party of his Ummah shall consider silk, wine and musical instruments permissible, and that Allāh will transform them into monkeys and pigs:

وَيَمْسَخُ آخَرِينَ قِرَدَةً وَخَنَازِيرَ إِلَى يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ

(Sahīh al-Bukhārī)

يَخْسِفُ اللَّهُ بِهِمُ الأَرْضَ وَيَجْعَلُ مِنْهُمُ الْقِرَدَةَ وَالْخَنَازِيرَ ‏

(Sunan Ibn Mājah)

There have already appeared many Muslims, including those who identify as scholars clothed in the garb of knowledge, who declare music permissible, and who change the name of alcoholic beverages and other intoxicants saying they do not fall in the category of the prohibited khamr. Yet we know of no instance in history in which such people were literally transformed into apes and swine.

Concerning the Qadariyyah, meaning those who deny Qadar (that Allāh has decreed and determined human destiny, and is the Creator of our deeds), they are a sect that appeared quite early on in the history of the Ummah, and it is reported that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said about them:

يَكُونُ فِي هَذِهِ الأُمَّةِ خَسْفٌ أَوْ مَسْخٌ أَوْ قَذْفٌ فِي أَهْلِ الْقَدَرِ

From this Ummah the people of Qadar shall be transformed, swallowed by the Earth, and pelted with stones (Jāmi’ at-Tirmidhī)

Yet there has been no recorded instance in history of innovators from the Qadariyyah, Mu’tazilah, Shī’ah and other sects which deny Qadar being literally transformed into animals.

As a matter of fact, the holy Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم himself seems to have indicated that the incident of some people being transformed into apes and swine, as mentioned in the holy Qurān, was not literal. It is mentioned that someone asked the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم about those transformations:

فَقَالَ رَجُلٌ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ الْقِرَدَةُ وَالْخَنَازِيرُ هِيَ مِمَّا مُسِخَ

A man asked: ‘O Messenger of Allāh, what about the monkeys and pigs which were transformed?’

فَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏‏ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَزَّ وَجَلَّ لَمْ يُهْلِكْ قَوْمًا أَوْ يُعَذِّبْ قَوْمًا فَيَجْعَلَ لَهُمْ نَسْلاً وَإِنَّ الْقِرَدَةَ وَالْخَنَازِيرَ كَانُوا قَبْلَ ذَلِكَ

The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم answered: ‘Indeed, Allāh عزّ وجلّ does not destroy a people or punish a people then grant for them progeny. Indeed, monkeys and pigs existed before that.’

(Sahīh Muslim)

The statement that monkeys and pigs existed before the instances of maskh (metamorphosis) mentioned in the holy Qurān is a strong indication that the literal monkeys and pigs from the animal kingdom are a separate category, and those evil people described as monkeys and pigs in the holy Qurān are another category. And Allāh knows best.

In a Hadīth attributed to the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, though its authenticity is not established:

عَن أبي أُمَامَة رَضِي الله عَنهُ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُول الله صلى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسلم تكون فِي أمتِي فزعة فَيصير النَّاس ‌إِلَى ‌عُلَمَائهمْ ‌فَإِذا ‌هم ‌قردة ‌وَخَنَازِير

There will be terror and dismay in my Ummah, so when the people turn to their Ulamā’ [they will find] them monkeys and pigs (Nawādir al-Usūl, v.2, p.196)

Hadith: "Prophets are alive in their graves, praying" Is Jesus included?

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

وصلى الله على نبيه الكريم

According to a Hadith narrated by sayyidina Anas bin Malik (radi Allahu anhu) the most holy Prophet (sall Allahu alaihi wasallam) said:

الأَنْبِيَاءُ أَحْيَاءٌ فِي ‌قُبُورِهِمْ يُصَلُّونَ

“The Prophets are alive in their graves, praying” (Musnad al-Bazar, v.13, p.299, #6888; Musnad Abi Ya’la, v.6, p.148, #3425)

The authenticity of this Hadith is hotly contested. Nevertheless, if we assume the Hadith is sound, it is actually a proof that the Messiah Jesus, who was among the Prophets, was not raised alive to Heaven in his earthly body but like all the other Prophets is buried in a grave.

The reality of the life of the Prophets in their graves is a spiritual life in the Hereafter, and not in this worldly realm. The term ‘grave’ here refers to the dimension known as Barzakh, an intermediary state which the soul enters after death but before the Resurrection. It is comparable to the Biblical concept of Sheol.