Rejecting Certain Hadith of Sahih al-Bukhari

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على نبيه الامين

والعاقبة للمتقين

One of the great Islamic reformers of our time was the charismatic Allama Ahmad Sa’id Khan Chitrori (rahimahullah). He dedicated his life to preaching Tawhid al-Uluhiya, in a part of the Muslim world (the Punjab province of Pakistan), where shirk, grave worship and all manner of pagan superstitions are rife. The great Allama wrote a controversial book entitled Quran Muqaddas aur Bukhari Muhaddith in which he attempted to demonstrate how certain Hadith in the Sahih of Imam al-Bukhari (rahimahullah) are very much objectionable and contrary to the clear teachings of our most sacred scripture, the holy Qur’an. Although harsh language has been used in this text regarding certain narrators of Hadith, which the Allama should have been more cautious about using, I nevertheless agree with the spirit and tendency of this book. The aim is to reawaken within the world of Muslim scholarship an attachment to the holy Qur’an. The Ahl al-Hadith sect in particular overly emphasizes Hadith, especially the text of Sahih al-Bukhari, to the point of neglecting the Qur’an. I recently wrote an example of this being their position that the ma’mum should recite the Fatiha behind the imam even during the imam’s audible recitation of the Qur’an, despite the fact that the Qur’an itself clearly orders us to listen attentively and remain silent when the Qur’an is being recited. Unlike the Hadith-rejecters who call themselves “Qur’anists”, Allama Ahmad Sa’id Multani did not reject the Sunna and Hadith, rather, the name of his organization is Markazi Ishaate Tawhid wa-Sunna “Center for the Propagation of Monotheism and the Sunna”. However, it is true that certain narrations within the Sahih of Imam al-Bukhari, attributed to the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) and some of his Sahaba (radi Allahu anhum), are objectionable and contrary to the holy Qur’an, such as the narration that a Jewish sorcerer, Lubaid b. A’sam, cast a magic spell on the Prophet, which actually effected his mind. The Qur’an, however, clearly states in two places:

إِذْ يَقُولُ الظَّالِمُونَ إِن تَتَّبِعُونَ إِلَّا رَجُلًا مَّسْحُورًا

When the wrongdoers say, “you follow not but a man affected by magic”

(Sura 17:47)

 

وَقَالَ الظَّالِمُونَ إِن تَتَّبِعُونَ إِلَّا رَجُلًا مَّسْحُورًا

And the wrongdoers say, “you follow not but a man affected by magic”

(Sura 25:8)

The methodology of the Ahl al-Hadith sect is to unquestionably accept all Hadith whose chains of narration meet the criteria of authenticity laid down by the muhaddithin (Hadith-scholars), no matter how objectionable or strange the content of such narrations may be. The truth is, however, that the science of Hadith verification, although a great achievement and legacy of our magnificent muhaddithin, is nevertheless a product of ijtihad – human calculations – which cannot be said to be entirely inerrant. I shall cite another example of how certain Hadith in the collection of Imam al-Bukhari are contrary to the sacred text of the holy Qur’an. Allah Most High says:

وَمَا خَلَقَ الذَّكَرَ وَالْأُنثَىٰ

And He Who created the male and the female

(Sura 92:3)

However, according to some narrations in the Sahih of Imam al-Bukhari, Abu ad-Darda (radi Allahu anhu) testified that he heard the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) recite this Ayah differently, without the words وَمَا خَلَقَ so that it reads:

وَالذَّكَرِ وَالأُنْثَى

And (by) the male and the female

Likewise, Alqama narrated that he heard this recitation from Ibn Mas’ud (radi Allahu anhu). Abu ad-Darda then went on to say:

وَهَؤُلاَءِ يُرِيدُونِي عَلَى أَنْ أَقْرَأَ ‏{‏وَمَا خَلَقَ الذَّكَرَ وَالأُنْثَى‏}‏ وَاللَّهِ لاَ أُتَابِعُهُمْ

“But these people want me to recite it – ‘And He Who created the male and the female’ – but by Allah, I will not follow them.” (Sahih al-Bukhari #4944)

Now this isn’t simply a matter of a variation in the pronounciation of the Qur’an, but a significant discrepency in the meaning. According to the standard recitation of the Qur’an which we have received through tawatur, and which is found in the earliest preserved manuscripts of our holy Scripture, the Verse reads “And (by) He Who created the male and the female”, hence it is the Person of Allah being sworn by, but in this Hadith of al-Bukhari, the meaning is changed an it becomes the male and the female that are sworn by directly “And (by) the male and the female”, without any mention of the Person of Allah. The Hadith is technically authentic going by its sanad, and it appears in other compilations of Hadith too. Therefore, according to the methodology of the Ahl al-Hadith sect, this Hadith must be fully accepted.

However, the methodology of the orthodox and mainstream Ahl as-Sunnati wal-Jama’a is to reject this Hadith, because it is manifestly contrary to the holy Qur’an. The holy Qur’an is given priority whenever there is a discrepency with the Hadith, because these narrations of Hadith are akhbar ahad (solitary reports), and logically cannot be taken if they oppose the text of the Qur’an which is mutawatir and under divine protection. Hence, Imam al-Qurtubi states regarding this Hadith that it is to be rejected for being contrary to the ijma (concensus) of the Muslim community with regard to their reading of the Qur’an. Furthermore, the mass transmitted reading of this Ayah through Hamza and Asim comes from Ibn Mas’ud himself, therefore it is not appropriate to accept such an isolated report against the concensus of the Umma. Therefore, even if the narration of Abi Darda has an acceptable isnad, it is contrary to the recitation of Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali and the rest of the Sahaba – may Allah be pleased with them all. The ruling is to practice what has been narrated to us from the Jama’a, and to reject that which opposes it from singular, isolated reports:

قال أبو بكر : كل من هذين الحديثين مردود بخلاف الإجماع له ، وأن حمزة وعاصما يرويان عن عبد الله بن مسعود ما عليه جماعة المسلمين ، والبناء على سندين يوافقان الإجماع أولى من الأخذ بواحد يخالفه الإجماع والأمة ، وما يبنى على رواية واحد إذا حاذاه رواية جماعة تخالفه ، أخذ برواية الجماعة ، وأبطل نقل الواحد لما يجوز عليه من النسيان والإغفال . ولو صح الحديث عن أبي الدرداء وكان إسناده مقبولا معروفا ، ثم كان أبو بكر وعمر وعثمان وعلي وسائر الصحابة - رضي الله عنهم - يخالفونه ، لكان الحكم العمل بما روته الجماعة ، ورفض ما يحكيه الواحد المنفرد ، الذي يسرع إليه من النسيان ما لا يسرع إلى الجماعة ، وجميع أهل الملة

(Tafsir al-Qurtubi v.22 pp.321-322):

 

Did Ghulam Ahmad Claim Prophesy? (Part 10)

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على نبيه الامين

والعاقبة للمتقين

Mirza Mahmud Ahmad (1889-1965), the son of the 19^th century Indian Muslim reformer, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, claimed to be the Muslih Ma’wud or “Promised Reformer”, and was elected his father’s second successor upon the death of the first successor, Mawlana Nur ud-Din. The Ahmadiyya community suffered a split within its ranks upon the election of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad to the office of the caliphate. A dissenting party, led by Ghulam Ahmad’s companion, Mawlana Muhammad Ali, rejected the caliphate of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad due to the development of a doctrinal difference on the issue of the finality of prophesy. As I have attempted to prove in this series of articles, the founder of the Ahmadiyya movement, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, did not claim to be a prophet in the real sense of the word. Rather, he considered himself a Muhaddath and appointed by Allah Most High, from Whom he received regular communication, commissioned for the reformation of the Muslims and the revival of true Islam. He also claimed to be the Mujaddid of the 14^th century of the Islamic Hijri calendar, as well as the promised Messiah and Mahdi. However, it was Mirza Mahmud Ahmad and his party, known as the Qadiyanis, who insisted that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was a prophet in the real sense of the word, albeit a non-law-bearing prophet subordinate to the Shari’a of Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) – the Qur’an and Sunna. This was a great deviation within the movement, the responsibility for which lies squarely on the shoulders of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad. Under the latter’s leadership, the Qadiyanis rapidly became the dominant faction within the movement, and the dissenting party, led by Mawlana Muhammad Ali and based in Lahore, eventually fizzled out and today is a very insignificant organization with a negligable following. In a sense, the same thing happened to the Ahmadiyya movement which happened to the Jesus movement. The two movements have many parallels. Like the Mosaic Messiah before him, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, claiming to be the Mohammedan Messiah, was deeply misunderstood by many of his own followers. While the majority of Jesus’s followers deviated from his teachings, and fell into the error of deifying him, the majority of Ghulam Ahmad’s followers fell into the error of considering him an infallible prophet in the real sense of the word. The majority of the followers of Jesus, who became known as Christians, became an altogether separate religious community, and were quickly cut off from their Jewish roots and the observance of the Torah which was so central to the teachings of Jesus the Messiah. Likewise, the Qadiyanis, under the leadership of their own version of Paul of Tarsus, namely, Mirza Mahmud Ahmad, have totally separated and become cut off from the Umma of Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam), even going to the extent of refusing to pray behind the appointed imam for the Sacred Mosque in Mecca. They overly exaggerate their sectarian identity. The disciples and early, sincere followers of Jesus the Messiah, were indeed a unique and true sect of the Jews in their time. They held firmly to the observance of the Torah and the teachings of the Israelite Prophets. Jesus himself continued the ministry and the preaching of John the Baptist’s apocalyptic message. They did not believe Jesus was divine or the begotten “Son of God”, but were ardent unitarian monotheists. Nevertheless, these true followers of Jesus were drowned out by the misguided Christians under the influence of the antichrist deceiver, Paul of Tarsus. It was only until the advent of the Seal of the Prophets, Muhammad of Tihama (peace be upon him & his family), some six centuries after the passing away of Jesus the Messiah, that the original, monotheistic teachings of the latter were fully restored. Likewise, I believe that Ghulam Ahmad, in his announcement of a promised reformer to come after him, was referring to a figure who would arise within his movement and community, to revive his original teachings and repudiate the deviation of the Qadiyanis who have gone to extremes and who have made Ghulam Ahmad an actual prophet, defying the fundamental belief in the Finality of Prophesy that is so central to Islam. According to the Qadiyani narrative, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad’s claim to being an actual prophet, in the real and literal sense of the word, was gradual. They assert that Ghulam Ahmad’s claim to real and literal prophesy occurred in 1901, when he published the book Eik Ghalati Ka Izala. In this book, Ghulam Ahmad begins with the following words:

ہماری جماعت میں سے بعض صاحب جو ہمارے دعوی اور دلائل سے کم واقفیت رکھتے ہیں جنکو نہ بغور کتابیں دیکھنے کا اتفاق ہؤا اور نہ وہ ایک معقول مدّت تک صحبت میں رہ کر اپنے معلومات کی تکمیل کرسکے۔ وہ بعض حالات میں مخالفین کے کسی اعتراض پر ایسا جواب دیتے ہیں کہ جو سراسر واقعہ کے خلاف ہوتا ہے۔ اس لۓ باوجود اہل حق ہونے کے انکو ندامت اٹھانی پڑتی ہے۔ چنانچہ چند روز ہوۓ ہیں کہ ایک صاحب پر ایک مخالف کی طرف سے یہ اعتراض پیش ہؤا کہ جس سے تم نے بیعت کی ہے وہ نبی اور رسول ہونے کا دعوی کرتا ہے۔ اور اس کا جواب محض انکار کے الفاظ سے دیا گیا حالانکہ ایسا جواب صحیح نہیں ہے۔

“Some members of my Jama’at, who are less familiar with my claim and its supporting arguments, and who have neither had the chance to study my books in depth, nor have they spent enough time in my company to be fully informed, sometimes counter an objection raised by an opponent with an answer which is entirely contrary to the facts. Thus, notwithstanding their adherence to the truth, they have to suffer embarrassment. Only a few days ago, one of them was confronted with an objection that the person to whom he had sworn allegiance claimed to be a Prophet and Messenger, and the reply given was a mere denial, which was not correct.” (Ruhani Khaza’in v.18 p.206; Eik Ghalati Ka Izala p.2)

Now the reader should note a couple of points. Firstly, Ghulam Ahmad has stated here that in order to appropriately understand his claim, the members of his community need to be well-versed in his books, to be properly acquainted with his claim and its supporting arguments. In other words, contrary to the Qadiyani argument, Ghulam Ahmad did not write this clarification in a vacuum. His claim had already been made and explained in his prior writings. He is not making a new claim in this text. Therefore, the idea that Ghulam Ahmad made a claim to prophesy in the real sense of the word beginning in 1901 with the publication of this book is manifestly false. Secondly, as I have already explained in detail in the previous nine articles of this series, the claim of Ghulam Ahmad is quite nuanced and needs to be understood in light of Sufi terminology and concepts. He has repeatedly written throughout his prior writings that Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) is absolutely the last and final prophet, that no new or old prophet may appear after him whatsoever, and that he is not a prophet in the real sense of the word.

Another critical point to note from this quotation is that Ghulam Ahmad has stated that those from his community who absolutely deny that he has claimed to be a prophet or apostle of God, without any clarification or qualification, are still “people of the truth”. Yes, they may suffer embarrassment when confronted by the opponents of Ghulam Ahmad, i.e., the bigoted mullas, in making such an unqualified denial without any clarification, as that will give the opponent an opportunity to cite a statement from the writings of Ghulam Ahmad, out of context of course, in which the latter appears to be making a claim to Nubuwwa. Hence, the real issue is avoiding having to face such embarrassment, not that making such an unqualified denial is misguidance from the truth. If Ghulam Ahmad really did claim to be a prophet in the real sense of the word, how could those who attribute themselves to him but make an absolute denial of that claim still be considered people of the truth? Because Ghulam Ahmad attributed prophesy to himself figuratively, in a sense that is in accordance with the concept ellucidated by the great Sufi mystics, to make an unqualified denial of him being a prophet cannot at all be considered misguidance from the truth, though it may lead to embarrassment during disputation with Ghulam Ahmad’s detractors if one does not clarify the reality of this figurative claim.

In fact, Ghulam Ahmad goes on to explain that by an unqualified denial he does not actually mean that a person says Ghulam Ahmad is not a prophet, but he means a statement in which someone says that the words ‘prophet’ and ‘apostle’ do not at all occur in the inspirations that Allah inspired him with:

حق یہ ہے کہ خدا تعالی کی وہ پاک وحی جو میرے پر نازل ہوتی ہے۔ اس میں ایسے الفاظ رسول اور مرسل اور نبی کے موجود ہیں نہ ایک دفعہ بلکہ صدہا دفعہ پھر کیونکر یہ جواب صحیح ہوسکتا ہے کہ ایسے الفاظ موجود نہیں ہیں۔

“The fact is that in the Divine revelation of which I am the recipient, words such as ‘Messenger’, ‘Apostle’ and ‘Prophet’, appear not once, but hundreds of times. How then can it be correct to say that such words have not at all been used?” (ibid):

 

Kingdom of Solomon

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على نبيه الامين

والعاقبة للمتقين

The greatest kingdom in human history, from the perspective of Islam and the pure Abrahamic tradition, was that of the kings David and Solomon (peace be upon them both). These two, father and son, were not merely kings or earthly rulers, but prophets of God, men of extreme piety, justice and wisdom, and their rule serves as a model. The reign of King Solomon in particular was perhaps the closest this world has been to realizing the vision of the “Kingdom of Heaven” on Earth. The great Temple of Solomon was constructed, and the holy city of Jerusalem was at the zenith of its glory and splendour. Both of these great kings ruled for forty years respectively. This is what is meant by the supplication of King Solomon as narrated in the holy Qur’an:

قَالَ رَبِّ اغْفِرْ لِي وَهَبْ لِي مُلْكًا لَّا يَنبَغِي لِأَحَدٍ مِّن بَعْدِي ۖ إِنَّكَ أَنتَ الْوَهَّابُ

He said: “My Lord, forgive me, and grant me a kingdom such as will not belong to anyone after me. Indeed, You are the Bestower.”

(Sura 38:35)

History bears witness that the supplication of King Solomon was answered. Immediately after his death that mightly kingdom rapidly deteriorated under the rule of his son, Rehoboam:

فَلَمَّا قَضَيْنَا عَلَيْهِ الْمَوْتَ مَا دَلَّهُمْ عَلَىٰ مَوْتِهِ إِلَّا دَابَّةُ الْأَرْضِ تَأْكُلُ مِنسَأَتَهُ

And when We decreed for Solomon death, nothing indicated to the jinn his death except a creature of the earth eating his staff

(Sura 34:14)

I believe this Ayah is referring to the rule of Rehoboam, the “creature of the earth” who metaphorically knawed away at the staff of his great father. There was civil war and division between the North and the South, which became separate kingdoms. After this, the great Davidic monarchy never recovered its lost glory. It came to a traumatic end when the Babylonians sacked the holy city of Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple under the leadership of the evil Nebuchadnezzar II in the 6^th century BCE. The Jews were taken into captivity for an entire generation before they were allowed to return and reconstruct the Temple in the time of Cyrus the Mede. But they remained subjects and clients of the Persian empire, and then the devastating Hellenic rule of Alexander the Macedon and his successors. Under the leadership of Judas Maccabeus, the Hasmonean dynasty was established, but it was no where near the glory and power that had been wielded by King Solomon. Similarly, the Herodian dynasty was responsible for building up Jerusalem and the Second Temple, but it was a client of the oppressive Romans. After a Jewish revolt, the Romans sacked Jerusalem and not only destroyed the Second Temple in 70 CE, they also exiled all the Jews from the Holy Land, who remained in exile, often facing terrible persecution, for nearly two millennia.

The promise of a Messiah, who according to Judaism shall restore the rule of the Davidic line, and according to Islamic prophecy shall rule for forty years:

فَيَمْكُثُ فِي الأَرْضِ أَرْبَعِينَ سَنَةً

“He shall remain on the Earth for forty years”

(Sunan Abi Dawud #4324)

like kings Saul, David and Solomon (peace be upon them), who each ruled for forty years, will be remnicient of the golden age under King Solomon, but still not a perfect match. The idea that the Messianic kingdom shall be greater than the rule of King Solomon goes against the Qur’anic supplication of the latter “grant me a kingdom such as will not belong to anyone after me” (38:35). Even the rule of the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam), although unmatched in terms of justice and purity, was not greater in terms of power and dominion in comparison to the rule of King Solomon, as he himself said after he had captured an ifrit (demon), intending to bind it to a pillar of the mosque, but instead released it.

Laughter of Allah

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على رسوله الكريم

وعلى اهل بيته الطيبين الطاهرين المظلومين

والعاقبة للمتقين

As Muslims who adhere to the orthodox creed of the old school Hanabila, we believe that laughter is one of the attributes of Allah, meaning Allah laughs when He wills in a way that befits His Majesty, without resemblance to human laughter. Many other sects, such as the astray Asharis, either deny this attribute of Allah Most High, or interpret it away to mean His mercy. They do so because their approach to theology has been colored by outdated Platonic and Aristotelian metaphysics. According to that Hellenic philosophy, perfection is understood as stasis, and so it is inconceivable and horrifying for the warped Ashari and Mu’tazili mind that Allah, the King of Heaven, laughs. The proof for our creed is the sound Hadith of the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam):

ضَحِكَ رَبُّنَا مِنْ قُنُوطِ عِبَادِهِ وَقُرْبِ غِيَرِهِ

“Our Lord laughs at the despair of His slave although He soon changes it”

(Sunan Ibn Maja #181)

As already mentioned, the Mu’awwila make ta’wil of this divine attribute and claim it is synonymous with Allah’s mercy, and that Allah does not actually laugh nor does He have an attribute that is known as laughter upon the linguistic meaning of laughter. But this claim is manifestly refuted in what proceeds from the rest of the Hadith. The narrator of the Hadith, Abi Razin (radi Allahu anhu) was amazed that Allah Most High laughs, so he asked the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) for clarification:

قُلْتُ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ أَوَ يَضْحَكُ الرَّبُّ قَالَ ‏ نَعَمْ ‏‏ ‏.‏ قُلْتُ لَنْ نَعْدِمَ مِنْ رَبٍّ يَضْحَكُ خَيْرًا

I said: “O Apostle of Allah, does the Lord laugh?” He said: “Yes”. I said: “We shall never be deprived of good by a Lord Who laughs”

(ibid)

If the divine attribute of laughter must in truth be interpreted to be synonymous with Allah’s mercy, or it is not literally laughter, that was the perfect opportunity for the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) to explain it to his companion Abi Razin (radi Allahu anhu). Instead, the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) simply replied in the affirmative to his question “does the Lord laugh?”.

Then there is also the authentic Hadith of sayyidina Abi Huraira (radi Allahu anhu) that the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) said:

يَضْحَكُ اللَّهُ إِلَى رَجُلَيْنِ

“Allah laughs at two men...”

(Sahih al-Bukhari)

And this belief that the Lord God actually laughs, and that laughter is one of His many divine attributes, was revealed in the Zabur – the Psalms of David:

יוֹשֵׁב בַּשָּׁמַיִם יִשְׂחָק

He who sits in the heavens shall laugh

(Psalm 2:4)

אֲדֹנָי יִשְׂחַק-לוֹ

The Lord shall laugh at him

(Psalm 37:13)

וְאַתָּה יְהוָה, תִּשְׂחַק-לָמוֹ

But You, YHWH, shall laugh at them

(Psalm 59:8)

The World is an Abode of Faith and Islam

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على رسوله الكريم

وعلى اهل بيته الطيبين الطاهرين المظلومين

والعاقبة للمتقين

The idea of “minority fiqh” is a clever ruse to get Muslims to water down their obversance of the Shari’a. Islam is a universal faith, relevant and applicable in all times and places. This division of the world into the “abode of Islam” and the “abode of unbelief” has no clear basis in the divine revelation. It is actually a construct of medieval jurisprudence. The Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) said:

فَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ الأَرْضَ لِلَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ

“Know that the Earth belongs to Allah and His Apostle”

(Sahih al-Bukhari)

The great imam of ahl as-Sunna, Imam al-Hasan b. Ali al-Barbahari (rahimahullah) (d. 329 H), did not recognize the division of the world into two opposing abodes, but wrote:

واعلم بأن الدنيا دار إيمان وإسلام

“Know that the world is a place of faith and Islam”

(Sharh as-Sunna #45):

Superiority of Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على رسوله الكريم

وعلى اهل بيته الطيبين الطاهرين المظلومين

والعاقبة للمتقين

The mas’ala of the Prophet Muhammad’s (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) superiority and excellence over the entire creation is not, in my humble opinion, an issue of iman and kufr. Nevertheless, it is my firm belief and conviction that the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) is indeed the most beloved of all things to Allah Most High, as He says:

عَسَىٰ أَن يَبْعَثَكَ رَبُّكَ مَقَامًا مَّحْمُودًا

It is expected that your Lord will raise you to a praised station

(Sura 17:79)

And He says:

وَرَفَعْنَا لَكَ ذِكْرَكَ

And We raised up for you your mention
 (Sura 94:4)

And He says:

وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ إِلَّا رَحْمَةً لِّلْعَالَمِينَ

And We did not send you except as a mercy for the worlds

(Sura 21:107)

Indeed, the holy Quran is filled with the praise of our beloved master, the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam), extolling his high virtues and excellences. The rank of Nubuwwa (prophesy) is the highest one among the creation of Allah. But the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) isn’t merely a prophet, rather, he is khatam an-Nabiyyin “Seal of the Prophets”. As some of the mystically inclined Ulama have pointed out, the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) being Seal of the Prophets should not be understood as referring exclusively to his chronological finality, rather, it is among his excellences and signifies his superiority in rank. Allah Most High says, concerning His Apostles:

تِلْكَ الرُّسُلُ فَضَّلْنَا بَعْضَهُمْ عَلَىٰ بَعْضٍ

Those Apostles – some of them We caused to exceed others

(Sura 2:253)

Therefore, there is indeed an order of excellence within the ranks of the Prophets and Apostles of Allah. During the Mi’raj (spiritual night ascension), the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) beheld Adam on the first heaven, Jesus and John the Baptist on the second heaven, Joseph on the third heaven, Enoch on the fourth heaven, Aaron on the fifth heaven, Moses on the sixth heaven and Abraham on the seventh heaven (peace and blessings of Allah be upon them all). But all of these Prophets and Apostles of Allah are humans, and our Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) is the master of all humanity, as he stated:

أَنَا سَيِّدُ وَلَدِ آدَمَ

“I am the chief of the children of Adam”

(Sahih Muslim)

أَنَا قَائِدُ الْمُرْسَلِينَ

“I am the leader of the Apostles”

(Sunan ad-Darimi)

Keeping this fact in mind, we must still be cautious and mindful of the fact that it is forbidden to contrast the Prophets against each other in a way that results in a Prophet of Allah being put down, as that is extremely disrespectful to the lofty rank of prophesy:

لَا نُفَرِّقُ بَيْنَ أَحَدٍ مِّن رُّسُلِهِ

“We make no distinction between any of His Apostles”

(Sura 2:285)

It is in light of this ordinance the Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) severely forbade us to give him specific excellence over any other Prophet by name. The Prophet Muhammad (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) said:

‏ لاَ يَنْبَغِي لِعَبْدٍ أَنْ يَقُولَ إِنَّهُ خَيْرٌ مِنْ يُونُسَ بْنِ مَتَّى

“It does not behove a slave to say that he is better than Jonas son of Amittai”

(Sahih al-Bukhari)

The reason for the Prophet’s specific mention of Jonas (peace be upon him) is because of his story as related in the Quran in which he attempted to flee from his prophetic duty in Nineveh. Because of this, an ordinary person may be deluded by Satan to think he is somehow better than the Prophet of God, though a non-prophet cannot even come close to the great status and rank of a prophet.

When one of the Prophet’s companions from among the Ansar slapped a Jew for having declared the Prophet Moses as being the greatest, the Prophet (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) stated in a state of anger:

لاَ تُفَضِّلُوا بَيْنَ أَنْبِيَاءِ اللَّهِ

“Do not make distinction of excellence between the Prophets of Allah”

(Sahih al-Bukhari)

By saying so, he thereby warned his own followers and nation not to give him specific excellence over any of the ancient prophets by name, and not to make distinctions between individual prophets. All prophets were sent by Allah and dear to Him, and we have no right to compare and contrast them. It is a fundamental article of our faith to believe in all of them fully without exception, and therefore to honor them all. In another Hadith, sayyidina Anas bin Malik (radi Allahu anhu) narrates:

جَاءَ رَجُلٌ إِلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم فَقَالَ يَا خَيْرَ الْبَرِيَّةِ ‏.‏ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ ‏ ذَاكَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ عَلَيْهِ السَّلاَمُ

A man came to the Apostle of Allah (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) and said: “O best of the creation”. So the Apostle of Allah (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) said: “That is Abraham, peace be upon him”

(Sahih Muslim)

These and similar narrations are not necessarily meant to be taken as statements of creed, but are examples of the Prophet Muhammad’s (sall Allahu alayhi wasallam) personal modesty and humbleness.

Critical Role of the Madrassa

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على رسوله الكريم

وعلى اهل بيته الطيبين الطاهرين المظلومين

والعاقبة للمتقين

Nearly a year ago, I wrote concerning the critical role of the madrassa as a means to safeguard and perpetuate the faith among the youth and future generations of Muslims. Ultra-Orthodox Jews, known as Haredim, live a lifestyle that centers around the yeshiva, to the point of making their wives earn the daily bread while they study Torah day and night. Of course, Muslims should not go to that extreme, as Islam enjoins us to live in this world and labor for our daily bread as long as we do not neglect frequent and consistent worship of Allah. The study of our own Scripture, the holy Quran, and those sciences which facilitate its understanding, must be a lifelong pursuit. Tragically, the majority of Muslims these days are intent on sending their children to study in secular schools to obtain modern, secular education, at the expense of their required basic religious education – learning to read the Quran al-Karim. The fact of the matter is that the secular system of education, imparted through the public schools of the government, is turning our young people away from religion, and in many cases, into outright atheist disbelievers. This crisis of apostasy is sufficient reason for every Muslim parent to enrol his or her child in a madrassa, or at the very least, in a private Islamic school. The fraction of Muslims who are committed to becoming fully qualified Ulama by studying the religion full time has drastically decreased. In many places there is an acute shortage of not only fully qualified Ulama, but also of Qurra and Huffaz who are wanted to lead the five daily prayers in the mosques. The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him & his family) prophesied:

يُقْبَضُ الْعِلْمُ، وَيَظْهَرُ الْجَهْلُ

“Knowledge will be taken away and ignorance shall appear”

(Sahih al-Bukhari)

This is truly an amazing prophecy because it is counterintuitive yet has indeed been fulfilled. Despite the digital revolution that has radically facilitated access to information for ordinary people, the Muslims have declined in terms of their possession of religious knowledge, largely because of the proportional shortage of Ulama. Instead, there are many pretenders who wear the gown of knowledge while in reality they are ignorant, and due to their woeful ignorance are leading their blind-followers down the wrong path. In some places, like Pakistan, India and Bangladesh, there is an abundance of madaris, but the quality of religious education is lacking. The result is that the madaris in the Indian subcontinent largely churn out individuals who are only capable of reciting the Quran for the five daily prayers, and completing its recitation during the Tarawih prayers in Ramadan. They do not possess competency in any other field for which scholars are desperately needed in our community. Furthermore, even their recitation of the Quran is speedy and not heartful, and otherwise substandard in terms of correct pronunciation.

I truly believe that our madaris, though focused on training the youth to become qualified Ulama, should be open for older people too and encourage their attendance at lessons, so as to spread greater religious literacy among the community. The elders of our community are sadly among the most ignorant because their generation was completely dismissive of the need to acquire basic religious education. Most of them cannot properly read the Quran and have little knowledge on how to correctly discharge the obligated acts of worship like Salat and Zakat.

Islam vs. Communism

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

والصلاة والسلام على رسوله الكريم

وعلى اهل بيته الطيبين الطاهرين المظلومين

والعاقبة للمتقين

During the mid-20^th century, the poison of communism and socialism spread throughout the Muslim and Arab world. For many decades, the Muslims of Central Asia were brutally subjected to the iron-fisted rule of the Soviets. Sadly, those Muslims (Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Turkmen, Tajiks, Kirghiz, Azeris, Tatars, Chechens, Dagestanis, Bashkirs, etc.) lost touch with their Religion to a great degree, and it is only in recent years there has been somewhat of a revival in their understanding and practice of Islam. Marxism is a materialist political ideology that seeks to create a classless society, and prescribes socialism to achieve that. Socialism is a system in which the state, acting on behalf of the working class, owns and controls the means of production. The Communist Manifesto calls for a violent revolution in which the working class unite to overthrow the capitalists and establish a socialist state. Needless to say, this 20^th century political ideology is diametrically opposed to the teachings of Islam. Apart from being a foreign idea produced by European atheists and materialists, Marxism or communism is naturally contemptuous of religion and the clergy, or religious leadership. This explains why religion, particularly Islam, was brutally supressed by the Soviets, and continues to be supressed by China’s authoritarian, Communist Party regime. Presently, we are witnessing the horrific persecution of Uighur Muslims in western China because of their Faith and its teachings against atheism and worship of the state. China’s Communist Party regime, like the Soviet Union, and like Kim Jong Un the dictator of North Korea, and other communist dictators (Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, Fidel Castro) is ataghut, like the tawaghit of the past whom the Believers were commanded to reject, the likes of Nimrod, the Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzer, Antiochus, etc.

One of the fundamental objectives of Islam is to preserve private wealth and property, as the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him & his family) stated:

فَإِنَّ دِمَاءَكُمْ وَأَمْوَالَكُمْ وَأَعْرَاضَكُمْ بَيْنَكُمْ حَرَامٌ كَحُرْمَةِ يَوْمِكُمْ هَذَا، فِي شَهْرِكُمْ هَذَا، فِي بَلَدِكُمْ هَذَا

“So, verily, your blood, your wealth and your honor, among yourselves, is sacred like the sacredness of this your day, in this your month, on this your land.”

(Sahih al-Bukhari)

While Islam certainly advocates social and economic justice, as manifested in the institution of Zakat and the encouraging of Sadaqa (charity), the idea that the means of production must be seized from their private owners and put in the ownership of the people collectively is entirely a violation of the sacred Islamic law. Likewise, the method of Marxism, i.e., violent revolution, is in contrast to the blessed work of the Prophets of Allah, who sought to establish Tawhid (unitarianism) through their preaching and prophesy. Some so-called “Islamist” groups like Hizb ut-Tahrir and others, due to the strong influence of Marxist theory upon them, call for a violent revolution to establish the caliphate or the Islamic state. This is quite evident in the manifesto of Syed Qutb entitled ‘Milestones’, a carbon copy of the Communist Manifesto in both form and substance, and in the programme of Dr. Israr Ahmad’s Tanzimi Islami.

During the 1960s and 1970s, communism and other leftist variants were a grave threat in most of the Muslim world. Due to the ordinary peasant and blue collar worker’s remoteness from Islam in terms of both understanding and practice, the various leftist parties and movements were able to mass recruit from among them, and at times succeeded in establishing leftist governments. For example, they established a communist government in Afghanistan. However, the pious and dedicated Muslims of that country rightfully rose up against the communist regime that had been imposed on them by the secular elite of Kabul. The Soviets made the fateful decision to intervene on behalf of the communist government in Afghanistan when the Islamic uprising against it seemed it was about to succeed. For the next decade, the brave Afghan mujahidin, joined by motivated volunteers from throughout the Muslim world, courageously resisted and eventually forced the Soviets to withdraw. Undoubtedly, that was a true Jihad in the path of Allah which was blessed by Allah and attained His divine aid. The great humiliation of the Soviets in having been defeated by an apparently inferior force in the face of their superior technological and military might, led to the collapse of the USSR. The leftist and communist hypocrites within the Muslim world were extremely distressed and demoralized by the defeat and collapse of the Soviet Union at the hands of the Afghan mujahidin. As a result, their enmity for Islam and the forces of Islam grew exponentially. The leftists and communists claim that the forces of Islam had collaborated with the “imperialist” powers like the United States and its CIA, and till this day use that as a point to denigrate the forces of Islam. The truth is that the material support of the United States, the CIA, or the Pentagon was limited, and that the real reason for the victory of the Jihad against the Soviets was the divine help of Allah Most High and the sincerity and bravery of the Mujahidin. Secondly, while the so-called “imperialist” Western powers gave material support to the Jihad against the Soviets in Afghanistan for their own interests, there can be no question that the capitalist West is far superior in terms of morality to the atheist, authoritarian, communist states of the East, which inflicted far greater harm to the Muslims. A parallel may be drawn with the clash between two ancient powers, the Eastern Roman empire and the Sassanid Persian empire. The Sahaba in the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) were sympathetic to the former, while the pagan Arabs favored the latter, though both empires were empires of the disbelievers. So when the Byzantines defeated the Persians in 622 CE, in fulfilment of the prophecy of the Quran, on that day the Believers rejoiced (Sura 30:4). Although the Byzantines were disbelievers, they were at least people of the Scripture, being Christians, while the Persians were fire-worshiping Magians. Likewise, the capitalist West is Christian too, albeit nominally, and is therefore preferable for the Muslims to the godless, communist Soviet Union and China.