Jump to content
اسلامی محفل

MuhammedAli

Members
  • Content Count

    1,367
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    81

Posts posted by MuhammedAli


  1. Abhi mein nay Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat ki kitab ki aaik ibarat pari, Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat farmatay hen kay agar sooraj ki gravitational force heh toh phir lakhoon hazaroon saaloon kay baad bi zameen ko sooraj apni taraf keun nahin keench saka? Sawal ka maqsid heh kay agar gravitational force hoti to phir aisa zeroor hota ... woh aik misaal bi detay hen kay aik magnet kheenchay toh loha keench sakta heh ... agar gravitational magnetic force hoti toh zameen ko sooraj kheench kar apnay qareeb kar leta. Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat kay nazirat Steady State Theory kay qail thay ... is'see ka Einstein bi qail thah ...

    Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat rahimullah kay ihtiraaz ka jawab yeh heh kay Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala asman mein aik balance/tawazo qaim keeya heh. Jis ka zikr Allah nay Quran mein bi farmaya heh, Q55:7/8. Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat ka farmana kay gravitational force ki kashish joh sooraj ki heh woh zameen ko keench leti bilqul durust heh. Aur haqiqat mein aisa hi hota heh ... Jitni raftar say sooraj zameen ko apni taraf keenchta heh ya yoon keh lenh jitni raftar say zameen sooraj taraf girti heh ... utni hi raftar say sooraj apni jaga chor kar agay nikal jata heh aur istera nah zameen sooraj ko paunch paati heh. Zameen ko sooraj kheenchta heh jaisay Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat nay farmaya kay hona chahyeh magr kheechay janay kee raftar kay barbar sooraj door hota jata heh ... Samjanay ki khatir ...  do cheezen aik hi raftar mein gir rahi hen ... A aur B  ... A gir raha heh aur jitni raftar mein khud gir raha heh utni hi raftar mein B ko be kheench raha heh ... hasil kia hoga ... B kabi bi A ko nahin paunch pahay ga. Aur sooraj apni manzil ki taraf ja raha heh jis ka zikr Quran mein heh, Q36:38.  Yehni Sooraj aur zameen donoon aik hi raftar mein asman mein safar par ja rahay hen aur jitni raftar say sooraj apni manzil ki taraf ja raha heh utni hi raftar say zameen sooraj ki taraf girti heh ... nateeja zameen sooraj ko nahin paunch pati.


    Yeh nahin kay Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat rahimullah nay sab kuch ghalt likha heh ... fundamentals/bunyaden durust hen ... magr nataij akhaz karnay mein khatahen huween hen. Jis dawr mein Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat likh rahay thay us dawr mein sooraj kay manzil ki taraf safar ka nazria nahin thah ... yehni sooraj travelling through space ka nazria nahin thah ... magr Ala Hadhrat ki kitab al fauz ul-mubeen mein is ka zikr heh ... is lehaz say woh science say agay thay ... jahan par Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat ki khatahen hen wahan par un kay awr nazriat ki taeed bi mojood heh. Allah ta'ala Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat rahimullah ko azeem ajr deh ameen.


  2. Salam alaykum.

    Sayyidi Ala Hazrat nay zameen kay sakin honay par joh dalahil deeyeh hen woh darust hen. Zameen Sakin heh magr dunya sakin nahin. Zameen kay sakin honay ka Quran mein Zikr heh aur bilqul zameen sakn heh magr zameen al-ardh ka lafz mana dunya mein istimal nahin huwa ... joh bi daleel dunya kay sakin par pesh hogi woh haqiqat al-ardh kay sakin par heh aur al-ardh ka lafz istimal huwa heh ... mein Arabi nahin janta magr yeh pata heh al-ardh ka sirf mana al-duna nahin  ... balkay in ayaat mein dunya kay tukreh kay mafoom mein istimal huwa heh jissay jild kahen  ... Quran mein 7 zameenoon ka zikr ... aur aaj kay dawr mein ussay layers/jilden kaha jata heh ... Quran mein 7 zameenen is wasteh kaha gaya keun kay har aik jild ki matti ki kism mukhtalif heh ... Quran mein zameen kay sakin honay ki waja bayan heh kay Allah ta'ala nay zameen (7 jildoon mein say joh upar wali jild) par pahar pegs/killa banahay hen. Killa punajbi ka lafz heh ... lakri ka khardar hissa zameen dooz keeya jata heh aur dihaat mein gahay, behal ki rassi us say bandi jaati heh ... us lakri ko killa kehtay hen ... Allah nay paharoon ko killa farmaya ... science kay dawr mein aaj sabat huwa heh kay zameen ki 7 jildoon mein pahar hen aur yeh zameen ki 4 jild taq gehray jatay hen. aur hasil yeh hota heh kay upar wali jild jis par ham abaad hen woh hilti nahin. Misaal tor par ... aap 7 bread/rotiyan lenh ... aap upar wali ko khenchen asaani say kehnch lenh gay ... magar agar aap upar wali roti mein aap nails/meikhen gusa denh kay us nail ki aakri had upar say ginneh toh joh 4 number par roti aati heh us mein gussen ... phir aap kheench kar kay dekh lenh ya sari 7 kheenchen gay ya phir nain. Is upar wali jild kay sakin honay ka zikr heh ... Quran mein 7 zameenoon aur 7 asmanoon ka zikr heh ... magr har jaga aik hi murad nahin balkay aik jaga zameen ki 7 jildoon ka zikr heh aur dosri jaga space ki 7 jildoon ka ...65:12 ...   Zameen ki 7 jilden, here. aur space ki 7 jilden . Abh science kay mutabiq joh 7 jildoon mein joh zameen ki core kay kareeb hen woh hilti aur gumti hen pressures ki waja say aur toot-ti phoot-ti hen. Abh joh zameen tooti phooti us par insaan ka reh sakta ... kia bana sakta ...  Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) nay joh farmaya kay zameen (ki upar wali jild) sakin heh ... batanay ka maqsid yeh huwa kay insaan par ihsaan keeya kay is ko sakin banaya ... warna agar zameen ki har jild goomti toh phir kohi makhlooq zinda nah rehti ...

    Mein nay Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat ki kitab nahin pari ... magr joh un kay dalahil hen zameen kay sakin honay kay woh apni jaga darust hen ... shahid us sakin ki tabeer samajnay mein khata ki ho. Shahid unoon nay upar wali jild, pehli zameen kay sakin ko, unoon nay dunya kay sakin honay par mahmool keeya ho. Aur agar aisa heh toh phir ham un ki khatahoon kay mukhallif nahin hen. Jis zamanay mein Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (rahimullah) nay yeh kitab likhi us dawr mein Einstein bi Dunya kay sakin honay ka qail thah ... baad mein Edward Hubble nay tehqeeq pesh ki toh us nay ruju keeya ... batanay ka maqsid yeh kay jin logoon ka pesha hi science thah woh ghalti par thay aur joh dunya par sab say ziyada mana huwa scientist heh woh ghalti par thah toh phir  Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (rahimullah) jinoon nay shahid hi kohi sceince ki kitab pari ho aur agar study bi ki toh sar waraq huwi hogi. Hammen joh un ki talimaat ayn deen mutabiq hen woh maaneeh chahyeh ... science kay mozoo par  aaj ki science kaal jhooti huwi aur kal ki parsoon ho jahay gi ... agar aisay mozmoon mein Sayyidi Ala Hadrat rahimullah say khata huwi toh un ki shan o shokat mein nah kami aur nah aur nah hogi.


  3. Karamat aur Mojza say daleel leeh jaati heh. Quran mein Musa (alayhis salam) mein apnay mojzoon ko burhan/daleel tehraya heh:

    “[And now] put thy hand into thy bosom: it will come forth [shining] white, without blemish.  And [henceforth] hold thine arm close to thyself, free of all fear.  “These, then, shall be the two burhan/evidences [of thy bearing a message] from thy Sustainer  unto Pharaoh and his great ones - for, behold, they are people depraved!”  Quran 28:32

    Sirf kohi Deoband aur Wahhabiat ka anparh is ka inqaar karay ga.


  4. Yeh Yahoodi fitrat Deobandi aur Wahhabiyoon ka pesha heh. Uqabir Ulamah joh dunya jeetay jagtay chaltay phirtay Sahih ul-aqeeda Sunni thay magr jab woh fawt ho gay toh Deobandiyoon aur Wahhabiyoon nay un kay marnay kay baad unki kitaboon mein tarmeem kar daali aur apna Deobandi/Wahhabi bana deeya. Wahhabiyoon/Deobandiyoon ki karamat heh kay fawt shuda ko convert kar kay apna ham mazhab bana letay hen. Aisay Kafiroon par lakh lanat. In Kafiroon say toh Christian Kafir achay hen kam say kam Islami dushmani mein aa kar Islami Kitaboon mein tarmeem qaat chaat nahin kartay. Magr yeh Kafir in say bi bad-tar Kafir hen.


  5. Joh baat raazi nama wali likhi thee kay aisi sharahit hoon joh nah man-neh wali hoon ... woh sirf is soorat mein jab aap sirf talaq chahen. Agar woh raazi nama par tayar hoon toh aap shart likhen kay aap pehli/dosri aap is waqt wapis lenh gay jab aap walden ki taraf say zamanat ho kay un ki beti aynda kohi aisi harkat nah karay gi ... yehni talaq doh ... khula loon gi wali ... aur zamanat kay tor par kahen kay yeh likh denh kay larki kay maanh baap aap ki biwi ki harkatoon kay zummedar hoon gay ... aur agar woh zamanat kay khilaf karay gi toh phir ... joh rakam/pesay aap samjen woh deh saktay hen ... us ko bator e zamanat mangen ... yehni agar un ki beti nay aisa keeya tor phir walden ko zamanat kay pesay ada karnay hoon gay.

    Agar aap England mein rehtay hen ... ya kissi European mulk, ya America, Australia mein to phir Talaq deh denh keun kay nah aap ki biwi sudharay gi aur nah us kay waldenh. Keun kay idhar UK mein bachoon ka khana peena kapray taleem gar sab kuch goverment pay kar deti heh ... is wasteh aurat ko kohi fikr nahin. Joh solution mein nay bataya heh woh sirf Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, waghayra mein rehnay wali auratoon par kamyab ho skta heh.

    Bachay piyaray hotay hen. Mein kabi tassawar bi nahin kar sakta keh bachoon say door hoon magr mein nay 2 hadden mutayyin ki hen: aik biwi ko bardasht karnay ki, aur dosri bachoon ki waja say biwi ko bardasht karnay ki. Biwi ko bardasht karnay wali hadd thori low heh ... magr bachoon wali thori high ... magr aik hadd heh ... aur dosri ko biwi jab bi par kar deh ... raat kay 3 bajay bi biwi ko gar bahir kar doon aur agar bachoon ko leh janay ka israr ho toh un ko bi saath behij doon. Mein kabi bi bachoon ki waja say aurat ka jhoota nah banna gawara karoon aur nah aap ko mashwara doon ga. Mairay bachay mujjay bhot aziz mein. Meray beta 3 saal 6 maheenay ka heh ... subho uth-ta heh toh bister par a jata heh ... agar moonh kambal mein ho toh kambal utaar kar bosa deta heh ... i love you daddy ... daddy did you missed me ... let me hug you daddy ... bhot meethi adat aur bhot kush adat wala heh ... kabi mein gussa hoon toh ... haath ko bosa deta heh ... are you angry daddy ... do  you love me daddy ... aur meray sar par haath pherta heh aur kehta heh ... daddy don't be angry, ok ... uska mairay saath piyar aur maira us kay saath ... magr phir bi aik hadd mutayyin ki heh ...

    Husband wife mein wesay bhot jagra hota heh ... aur yeh aik fitrati baat heh ... doh banday hamesha raazi nahin reh saktay khaas kar joh aik gar mein rahen ... aur husband wife aik dosray ko bardasht kartay hen ... aur karna bi chahyeh ... aur woh aisi shadiyon mein hota heh jahan par biwi ko husband say aur husband ko biwi say piyar/lagaho ho ... respect ho ... biwi ko husband ki aur husband ko biwi ki ... phir shadi kamyab hoti heh ... joh aap bata rahay hen us say pata lagta heh keh is ka solution wohi heh joh bataya heh keun kay aap ki biwi mein thori bi respect nahin aap wasteh ...

    Meri bari behan ko khawand say kuch gila shikwa thah toh us nay khawand kay bahiyoon ... behnoon ... bahbiyoon ko jama keeya aur mujjay bi ... takay meri behan sab kay samnay apnay khawand kay mutaliq batahay ... mein nay sab ko mukhatib keeya aur poocha kia aap husband wife mein kabi kohi narazgi huwi ... aur zahir baat heh husband wife mein hoti heh ... sab nay kaha han ... phir poocha kabi aap nay gar mein muhallay kay bandoon ko jama keeya ... takeh husband wife ki burahi karay ya wife husband ki burahi karay aur woh aap ko faisla sunahen kay kis say ziyadti huwi ... sab nay kaha nahin ... phir behan ko mukhatib kar kay kaha kay tum bataho kay tum nay mujjay aur in logoon ko keun jama keeya ... kia tumari aur tumaray husband ki is mein izzat heh ... behan ko toh samp soong gaya ... magr husband kay khnay par woh bol pari us nay kaha kay hamaray akhrijaat par anh banh huwi heh ... kehnay lagi akhrijat pooray nahin hotay aur yeh fazool kharchi karta heh ... mein nay poocha kia tumara is saath guzara nahin ... kehnay lagi nahin ... mein nay kaha jab guzara nahin toh phir is ka ilaaj talaq heh kharcha poora ho nah ho jab guzara nahin toh toh talaq heh ... donoon kay pass panch mint hen soch lo kia karna heh ... panch mint baad  ... mein nay behnoi ko mukhatib keeya kia tum gar kay akhrajat nahin pooray kar saktay ... kehnay laga kar sakta hoon ... behan say poocha tumara is kay saath guzara heh ya nahin kehnay lagi ... guzara heh toh reh rahi hoon ... behnoi ko kaha tumara kaam gar kay akhrajat pooray karna heh ... behan tumara kaam gar chalana ... behan ko kaha tumara haq yeh heh kay tumara husband tumaray tamam shar'i huqooq puray karay aur biwi ka bi yahi heh ... magr is kay saath husband wife aur wife husband ki izzat kay muhafiz hen ... aur agar meri behan ainda is tera logh jama karay toh phir is ko talaq deh dena ... aur mein uth kar chala aya ... mein abhi 42 saal ka hoon yeh mamla taqriban 10 saal purana heh ... aaj taq nah khawand ki taraf say complain aahi heh kay tumari behan nay yeh kar deeya ... aur nah behan ki taraf say kohi complain aahi heh kay husband nay yeh kar deeya ... donoon ko samaj lag gahi kay ... YEH TALAQ WALI SARKAR rehmatullah alay ... fori tor par talaq karwa deh ga ... woh cigret peeta thah us nay cigret chor deeyeh ... aur haftay mein teen/char bahir dostoon kay saath hotaloon resturantoon mein khana khata thah sab kuch chor deeya ... achi koshis aur niyat ka nateeja yeh nikla kay abhi woh hateh mein 530 pound aik hafteh mein kamata heh ... achi job milli cigret jaisi shaytaniat say jaan chooti .... health behtr huwi ...

    Yeh batanay ka maqsid yeh heh kay mein nay yeh aap ko talaq ka mashwara nahin deeya ... mein Talaq wali sarkar hoon ... achi aurat talaq kay naam say kamp jati heh ... aur bewaqoof ko kohi fikr nahin ... dosra bataneh ki yeh waja heh kay insaaf kay saath chalen ... tesri waja yeh keh agr aap ki biwi achi aur agar us mein khoobi hoti toh woh kabi bi aap ko talaq ka nah kehti aur nah istera family ko involve karti ... chalen us nay kar leeya ... agar us kay gar walay aqalmnd hotay toh ulta us ki khabr letay ... takay us kay hosleh past hotay aur aap ko position aur marriage ki position strong hoti ... magr beti ki muhabbat mein aur aap ko dabbanay kay jazbay mein unoon nay poori koshish kee huwi heh kay un ki beti ko talaq ka gold medal millay ... aap ki biwi agar achi hoti toh yeh baat gar say bahir nah nikalti ... nikli toh father mother samjatay ... balkay unoon nay toh talaq doh ... ya khula loon ka wird sikha deeya agay say ...

    Lamba kissa mukhtasir ... do talaq bad agar woh nah seedhi ho ... aur us kay gar walay seedhay nah hoon ... toh phir chup kar kay talaq deh denh ... Talaq nay hona hee hona heh ... farq sirf itna heh ... woh aap ko gar say bahir nikaal deh kar khula leh gi ... jis mein aap ko mazeed zillat hogi ... aur phir talaq bi ... dosra tariqa yeh heh kay aap apni izzat ko mafooz keren aur us kay khula lenay say pehlay hi talaq ki step shoroon kar denh ... kam say kam aap ki nafs ko toh yeh taskeen toh hoga kay mein nay ussay talaq deeh ... itni zillat bad talaq ka gold medal jab ussay millay ga toh kam say kam yeh sakoon toh hoga kay aap nay talaq di. Rahi bachoon ki baat toh ... unoon nay aap kay bachay aap say chura lenay hen ... aap talaq denh ya woh khula leh ... donoon sooratoon mein bachay aap say jahen gay ... aur talaq bi hogi ... sirf woh mentally prepare ho rahi heh ... jab woh mentally prepar howi toh us nay khula leh leni heh ... misaal lenh ... jistera jagray/larahi say pehlay gali galoch shor sharaba hota heh aur jab bardasht say bhir ho jahay toh larahi hoti heh ... is'see tera aap ki biwi talaq say pehlay shor sharaba kar rahi heh ... jab aap ka wujud aur shakal us ki bardasht say bahir huwi toh us nay talaq/khula leni heh. Abhi woh first stage par heh ... ainda saal do teen mein next step ahay gi.  Is wasteh aap talaq denh ya nah us nay leni heh ... aur behtr yahi heh kay aap teen char saal keun barbad keren gay ... abhi meray mashwaray par amal keren joh pehlay deeya thah ... agar nah seedhi huwi toh kam say kam bey-fazol aurat mein waqt pesa invest karnay say bach jhen gay aur achi biwi  millay gi. Niyat achi aur koshish achi aur larki achi talash keren ...

    Moti bad-shakal musalman aur ba-adab aurat patli khoobsurat bad-akal kafir ziyada aur musalman kam aurat say behtr heh. Biwi mein miyaar musalman aur kirdar ka doonden. Mard aur aurat woh achay joh zuban say musalman, amal mein musalman, lebas mein musalman, aur rehan sehan mein bi musalman aur tahzeeb mein bi musalman. Woh mard aurat joh sirf zuban say muslam aur lesbas mein bi kafir, tazeeb mein bi kafir, amal mein bi kafir ... un say bachen.


  6. Bachoon ka mamla thora complex heh ... asaan nahin heh ... meray bi do bachay hen ... bachoon say muhabbat aik aisi fitrati feeling heh joh control nahin hoti agar sabr shukr aur izzat say guzara hota heh toh theek warna ... aap ko balance karna heh ... bachay ya izzat ki zindgi ...


  7. Jahil logh ihtiraaz kartay hen kay Ala Hazrat nay ra'i e ummah farmaya ... ra'i e ummat tazeem wala heh aur ra'ina i.e. hamara charwaha gustakhi kay mana wala heh.  Jistera Allah kay Nabi sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam ko kehna ... hamaray jaisay bashir ... meray jesay bashr ... gustakhi aur be-adabi wala mana deta heh ... magr Ambiyah jaisay bashr ... Hazrat Ibrahim alayhis salam jaisay bashr ... Yahoodi ... hamara charwaha ... kehtay thay. Ummat ka ra'i ka mana ummat ka nighayban ka heh ... Ummat ka ra'i hona kohi gustakhi nahin ... jab bakriyoon ka ra'i hona mein Ambiyah ki towheen nahin toh phir Ummatoon kay ra'i honaymein kesay towheen huwi:

    https://sunnah.com/bukhari/37/3

    https://sunnah.com/bukhari/70/82

    https://sunnah.com/adab/30/40

    https://sunnah.com/muslim/36/223


  8. Biwi ko ilada kar denh. Agar phir bi problem ho ... yehni talaq khula waghayra ki damkiyan ... toh us ka joh solution joh aap ki biwi  nay apnay maanh baap kay saath mil kar banaya heh ... yehni talaq khula ... us ko poora kar denh ... yehni Talaq deh denh. Hadith mein aya heh kay Hazrat Ibrahim (alayhis salam) nay Hazrat Ismail (alayhis salam) ko hukum deeya thah kay apni biwi ko talaq deh doh keun kay woh apnay haal par raazi nahin thee aur na-khushi ka izhar keeya thah ... is kee waja say talaq ka hukum deh deeya. Joh aurat moonh ziyada damagh aur haath kam chalahay us ko Talaq deh kar farigh kar dena chahyeh.

    Bachoon ki khatir biwi ki jhooti banna pata nahin aap kesay gawara kar rahay hen. Allah ka naam leh kar aur yeh tawaqoh rakh kar kay Allah achi aur naik biwi say nikkah karwahay ga ... pehli Talaq muhallay kay bandoon ko bula kar likh kar kissi chachay, baray chota, ammi, abu, taya, mamoon ki aaik nah suneh ... us kay brothers sisters baap maan sab ko bula kar ... jama keren ... aur araam say beth kar likhen ... mein Khansullah ... hosh o hawas mein ... apni biwi ko sirf aik talaq deta hoon ... aur baghayr kuch kahay sab ko parh kar sunah denh ... aur jah kar biwi haath mein denh ... saath mubarak ho ... baqi doh aynda ayyam e pakeezi mein aik aik kar kay doonh ga ... aur phir aram say bazaar mein jahen ... enjoy keren ... aap ki biwi kay saray ball aur aap kay susr waghayra kay saray ball ... aik ki talaq say nikal jahen gay ... agar nah niklay... aur seedhi nah huwi toh aglay maheenay ... masjid kay loud speaker par jahen aur dosri talaq ka ilaan kar denh ...  agar phir bi seedhi nah ho toh ... Allah ka naam leh kar tesri aur aakhri talaq tesray 3 maheenay mein likh denh ... raazi nama sirf in sooratoon mein keren ... biwi kay maanh baap aap ko 5 lakh rupay denh gay ... mein dosri shaadi karoon ga ... gar ka sara kaam kaaj biwi karay gi aur ammi kuch bi nahin karay gi ... aur jab taq mein gar mein jag raha hoon tab taq biwi meri jhootiyan sar par utha kar bethay gi. Yehni aisi sharait joh woh maneh hee nah aur aap tesri aur aakhiri talaq likh kar hawalay kar denh.

    Ya seedhi ho jahay gi ya phir aap is ko talaq deh kar aur biwi gar leh ahen gay.


  9. Salam alaykum. 

    Behtr hota aap tabeer nah poochtay. Do tabeer hen is khawab ki ... awal aap buray kamoon mein paray hen misaal ya phir gumrah bandoon say dosti heh. . Dohim aap ki behan gumrah/bad mazhab theen.

     


  10. 21 hours ago, hanfigroup said:

    harat. 

    itraz tum kar rahy ho, aur fatwa muj sy mang rahy ho,  hamko tu itraz nahe ham fatwa kc baat ka dyn? fatwa tu tb hota agar itraz hota?

    bidat tum ny kaha sabit b tum ny karna hy. mainy nahe,  

    Ahamd raza ny lekh dari mundy ko aradatan qatal keya jay. hawala quran o ahdes ka deya. ab tum ny sabit karna hy k ummat main aisia aqeeda kc ny rakha. agar kci ny  nahe tu ahamd raza py wohe fatwa lagana ju moulna py.

    aur mazeed quran ahdess ka hawala ghalat dyna py keya saza hy

    Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat nay yeh nahin likha kay iradatan qatal keeya jahay ... keun jhoot boltay ho ... unoon nay likha kay dari munday ko qatal ki wa'eed ...yehni threat ... heh.  Abh is ka jawab dari munda fasiq e mul'an eh shariat mein ... aur fasiqoon ko quran mein qatal ki waeed deeh gahi thee ... woh auratoon ko tang kartay thay ... auratoon ko tang karna ... clean shave rehna ... kafiroon wastwh mukhbari karna ... mard auratoon ko afwahen pehla kar badnam karna ... sab fasiqoon kay kaam hen aur fasiqoon ko qatal ki waeed quran.

    Is Kafir ki kissi baat ka ihtibar nah keren ... balkay agar scan deh toh kutub joh aap kay pass hoon un ko check kar lenh ... yeh Islam ki mukhalfat mein aur thanvi gangohi nanotavi ambethvi dehalvi madaani gakharvi waghayra kay muhabbat mein aisa anda heh kay agar woh kitaboon mein kuch b likh dean ya tasleem kr lay ga... yeh woh kafir heh jis nay islam kay deeyeh ko dil say aisa gul keeyeh heh kay quran ka noor bi is ko munawwar nahin kar sakta ... is ko apnay haal par xhor denh ... wesay apna waqt zayan nah keren ... kissi kuttay par ja kar mehnat keren us kay insaan bannay kay chances is kay musalman honay say ziyada hen.


  11. 10 hours ago, hanfigroup said:

    Zabardast.

    Ye jo last khawab pashaap wala lagaya hy. Espy shareh hukam laga dou.

    Aur kci b alam ka fatwa lagao tu ye b confirm kar lyna k ulma barelvi essy itefaq karty hyn.

     

    Last scan khawab py sharih hukam lagana hy.  Khawab dukhny walay py aur tabir karny waly py

    Tum ko meray khawab par ihtiraz heh jis mein  ... mein aap ki behan kay saath ۔......

    ......

    .....

    .....

    .......

    ....

    .....

    ....

    ....

    ...

    ... ABH TUM DAKAY CHUPAY ILFAAZ MEIN GALI DENAY LAGAY TO SAMJA JAHAY GA KAY AAP KI BEHAN KA KOHI AISA HEE HAQIQAT MEIN MASLA HEH ... AUR MERAY KHAWAB SAY TUM KO YAAD AYA KAY WOH KESI HEH.


  12. Introduction:

    In Islam acts of worship are sanctioned by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and performing any act instructed by Him and demonstrated by His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). As such any act of worship without explicit sanction or Ijtihadi evidence is invalid and rejected. This raises an interesting question about acts of worship performed by polytheists in general, Satanists, Hindus, and those performed by followers of modern polytheistic religious innovations. Question arises are their innovated acts of worship actually worship in terms of Islam? To answer this question we need to interpret their actions in context of all inclusive definition of worship. There is another component to this question from perspective of innovation and it has been responded to,
    here.

    Fundamental And Ritual-Acts Definition Of Worship:

    (i) Fundamental: To invoke an Ilah with belief and intention of worship is worship. (ii) Ritual Acts: To perform any ritual-act with belief and intention of worshiping an Ilah is an act of worship.


    Interpreting Ritual-Acts In Light Of Definitions Of Worship:

    General principle is that any/every action be it dancing, breaking a coconut, performing Tawaf of candle, offering food, crawling, prostrating, bowing, fasting, singing praises, invoking for help, smacking an idol with dirty shoe, draging idol in streets … all would amount to worship if these are performed with belief and intention of worship. These acts would be worship with or without feeling of obedience, submissiveness, humility, love, respect, or fear of  an Ilah/idol. Essential requirement is affirming belief of Ilahiyyah/Ma’budiyyah for a creation, belief, desire, and intention of worship. And then any act deemed appropriate by disbelievers as an act of worship would be worship even if we as Muslims deem it inapropriate.

    Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen.
    Muhammed Ali Razavi


  13. Introduction:

    A Somali Sunni brother confused by Wahhabis contacted me via E-Mail requesting help. He provided link of a forum, here, where an article of mine, here, was employed to justify Sunni position. He wanted to understand controversy if Najd is in Iraq, or in Arabia, and if the Ahadith of Qarn ash’Shaytaan (i.e. group of Satan, commonly translated to mean, horn of Satan) apply upon residents of Arabia, or Iraq. I decided to visit the forum and decided to engage the participants in discussion hoping that conflict would be resolved. My arrival was too late because most participants of discussions had either left forum or had given upon on discussion. All was not lost because I had opportunity to respond to some of key points. This article is improved version of content published on NairaLand forum. It helped our Sunni brother and allowed him to greatly develop his understanding on subject with aid of related articles. And hope is others too would find this article a help and as a weapon against Khariji branch of Wahhabism.

    NairaLand Wahhabi Arguments Already Comprehensively Refuted:

    Wahhabi brother named as Abdullah wrote article in effort to prove Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) employed Najd in Hadith to mean Iraq. Why I am telling you this? All content which Wahhabis have quoted in support of their position in this thread,
    here, was also quoted by brother Abdullah in his article published at System_Of_Life, here. Brother Abdullah went beyond the call of duty to establish Wahhabi position. As such everything discussed at NairaLand has been indirectly responded to in my response to brother Abdullah’s article, here, here, and here. Therefore I will not be comprehensively responding to everything mentioned on this forum (i.e. NairaLand forum). Anyone interested in reading comprehensive refutation of Wahhabi arguments should read the refutations written in response to brother Abdullah.

    Key Points Of Discussion And Questions Answers To Which Can Resolve Dispute:

    Most of discussion has revolved around following points of contention: i) Khawarij emerged from Iraq or Najd? ii) Ahadith stating Khawarij emerged from Iraq are authentic or inauthentic? iii) Was Iraq known to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his companions by name of Iraq? iv) Did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) employ Najd in lingusitic usage or as a name of region? v) If Iraq is in East of Madinah or not? vi) Does the linguistic meaning of Najd fits upon country of Iraq, or upon region of Iraq from where Khawarij emerged? These questions are important and correct answer to these will resolve the dispute. Equally important are following questions and honest and answers supported with text of Hadith will help to fully understand and resolve this controversy: vii) Was Iraq known as Najd during the life time of Prophet? viii) Is there a region/village/city called Najd in Iraq? ix) When Prophet pointed toward the house of Aisha to indicate direction from which group/horn of Satan would appear; did he point toward Iraq, or toward modern Saudi capital of Riyadh? x) Hadith says Prophet [in order to point direction Khawarij/group aka horn of Satan would emerge] pointed toward the direction of sunrise ... does the sun rise from direction of Iraq or from direction of Saudi capital Riyadh? xi) Leaders of Khawarij which appeared in Iraq where they Iraqis or did they live in Arabia and were part of Banu Tamim? Please note answer to all these will be provided in this article.

    Method Of Resolving Conflict And Ahadith Of Iraq Are Authentic:

    Shortest route to resolving this conflict is via last three points, i.e. viii, ix, and x. These are fundamentals and whatever is established with aid of authentic evidence will by default provide answers to all other questions except i, ii, and iii. To answer the first point. It is a fact that over-whelming members of Khawarij and their leadership such as of Khawarij like Dhul Khawaisirah at-Tamimi, Abdullah Ibn Wahb al-Rasibi were from tribe of Banu Tamim. This has been established in following article,
    here. It is also a undeniable fact that Banu Tamim as a tribe, Kharijis, and their leadership all were residents of central Arabian province of Najd. Following maps depict location of Banu Tamim, here, and region of Najd, here. Therefore it should be clear all that Khawarij as a sect emerged from central Saudi Arabia but as a rebel group rebelling against rightly guided Caliph distinguished itself from Jammah in Iraq. So in conclusion Khawarij emerged from Najd and Iraq. One set of Hadiths points to tribal land of Khawarij and other Ahadith point to country where they would become known as a distinct sect. By now observant readers would have deduced answers to contention ii, iii; Ahadith of Iraq and Najd both are authentic. It should be known to all members especially Sunnis; Iraq was known to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), to his companions with name Iraq, here, here, here, here, and here. Note usage of word Iraq in content of Hadith so Sunnis please refrain from making this blunder again. With such amaturish errors you’re underminding position of Ahlus Sunnah and unnesscerily empowering arguments of enemies of religion of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).

    Where Is Najd: In Country Of Iraq Or In Central Arabia:

    Earlier a map depicting Najd was shared and not all would have accepted it. I have maxim; one who is sincere needs evidence to believe and insincere person needs excuses; and there is no shortage of excuses. A genuine demand would be to ask for evidence of Quran and Sunnah which corresponds with what the map has depicted. Everything else is fluff and excuses to disbeleive in truth by an insincere individual. So lets ask the right question: Where is Najd? Is it in Arabia or in country of Iraq? Answer to these questions is not hard if all Ahadith about Najd are taken into account. Using individual Hadith and arguing over it makes it impossible to resolve the dispute so let’s not do this. We should take into account all available Ahadith and this will help us to precisely pin point direction and location of Najd. Note; you must look at all evidence as a whole. There can be disagreement over interpretation of single Hadith related to this topic but when it is looked in light of all other then wrong interpretation of it will become evident.

    Najd Is In Arabia – Application Of Linguistic Najd On Iraq:

    Wahhabis commonly argue Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not employ Najd as a name of region but in linguistic sense of raise/elevated/mountanous land. And then dishonestly apply linguistic meaning of Najd upon Iraq. Application of linguistic meaning of Najd upon Iraq is nothing like applying description of black on white. Iraq linguistically denotes meaning of low. Allamah Yaqut Hamvi (rahimullah) in his Mo’jam al-Buldan while defining meaning of Iraq states lowest part of Mashk (i.e. waterskin) from where water is drawn corresponds with meaning of Iraq. In other words in his understanding Iraq is in meaning of region which drains water into see. He also stated Iraq is called Iraq because comparatively it is flatter and lower then Najd. And this date perfectly corresponds with modern research. Please see following article to see maps, ground elevation of Iraq and Najd,
    here.

    Najd Is In Araba – East, Direction Of Sunrise, And Group Of Satan:

    There are Ahadith which state group of Satan aka Qarn ash-Shaytan will emerge from direction of East and direction of sunrise: “Verily, afflictions (will start) from here," pointing towards the east, "whence the side of the group of Satan comes out." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H714] "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out." Or said: "... the group [from direction] of sun (rise) ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] Using modern sciencetific research and tools it can now be established that one living in Madinah will not see sunrising from Iraq and most definitely not see sun rising from direction of Baghdad, Kufa, Nahrawan, and Harura. Note these were regions of Iraq from where Khawarij either assembled or fought,
    here. Resident of Madinah will see sunrising in lands of modern and ancient Arabia.

    Najd Is In Araba – Land Of Sunrise And Two Group Of Satan:

    Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explicitly stated sunrises between the two groups of Satan. Two groups of Satan are tribes of Rabia and Mudhar: “Ibn Umar reported Allah's Messenger as saying: Do not intend to observe prayer at the time of the rising of the sun nor at its setting for it rises between the groups of Satan.” [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1807] "True belief is Yemenite yonder but sternness and mercilessness are the qualities of those who are busy with their camels and pay no attention to the Religion. [It is a place] where the two sides of the group of Satan will appear. Such are tribe of Rabia and Mudar." [Ref: Bukhari, Bo54, H521] And guess where were these two groups of Satan are located at? If you said Arabia then you're smart. In following artilce you will see tribal lands of Banu Rabia and Mudhar depicted on map,
    here. There was tiny confusion which was resolved in the following article, here. This establishes sunrising boundary according to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is land of Banu Rabia and Banu Mudhar. And this perfectly corresponds with Hadith which states group of Satan will emerge from direction of sunrise. This substantiates claims that one living in Madinah will not see sunrising from country of Iraq.

    Najd Is In Araba – Pointed At House Of Aisha To Point Group Of Satan:

    And IRREFUTABLE, and CONCLUSIVE, and DESICIVE evidence is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward the direction of house of Aysha (radiallah ta'ala anha) to point the direction from which group of Satan would emerge: Narrated 'Abdullah: The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointing to 'Aisha's house, he said thrice, "Affliction (will appear from) here," and, "from the side, where Satan's head will come out." [Ref: Bukhari, B53, H336] This Hadith is employed in following article to prove with unquestionable certaintity; he pointed direction of Saudi capital Riyadh while telling where the group of Satan would emerge from,
    here. Finally whe have many Ahadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) mentioned name Najd from where group/horn of Satan would appear: “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: (The Prophet) said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen." People said: "Our Najd as well." The Prophet again said: "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said again: "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said: "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] Please access historical Najd depicted on following maps, here.

    Prophet Precisely Indicated Appearance Of Wahhabism:

    All this evidence, and maps, clearly and emphaticly come togather to prove Najd is in Arabia and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) precisely pointed toward Saudi capital Riyadh. And  Dirriyah and Uyaynah are stones throw away from capital. Two villages are connected with origin of Wahhabism because Uyaynah is birth place of founder of Wahhabism, Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab and Dirriyah became mission centre for Wahhabism. After reading all the material if there is still a individual who believes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) said Najd and he meant Iraq, or Najd is in Iraq then you my Wahhabi brother have defeated me. I have no answer to your lack of education. You have beaten me and my tiny learning. It is evident Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward Dirriyah/Uyaynah. By pointing toward them he indicated none other then emergence of Wahhabism. From this demonstration it is clear that Ahadith of Iraq cannot legitimately be interpreted to mean Iraq is Najd. Nor Ahadith which state Khawarij will emerge from Najd should be interpreted to mean Najd is Iraq. Clearly both regions are not the same. And this proves that there are two sets of Ahadith, one set applies to Arabian province of Najd and other applies to country of Iraq. Therefore both sets should be interpreted in light of their own Ahadith.

    Two Major Groups Of Satan To Emerge - First One Appeared In Iraq:

    Discerning readers would note I have indirectly established appearance of two groups of Satan. One appeared from Iraq and rebelled against rightly guided Caliph Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Jammah of companions. And the second appeared in 17th century and rebelled against Uthmanic Caliphate and Jammah of Muslims but I have offered no evidence to support my point of view. To lift this burden of evidence from my shoulders. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) foretold there will be two [main] groups/horn of Satan from Banu Rabia and Banu Mudhar: “And harshness and callousness of the hearts is found amongst the rude owners of the camels, who drive them behind their tails (to the direction), where emerge the two groups of Satan, they are [from] the tribes of Rabi'a and Mudar.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H83] Following Hadith is proof that Khawarij are to appear from Iraq: “Narrated Yusair bin Amr: I asked Sahl bin Hunaif, "Did you hear the Prophet saying anything about Al-Khawarij?" He said, "I heard him saying while pointing his hand towards Iraq. "There will appear in it some people who will recite the Qur'an but it will not go beyond their throats, and they will go out from (leave) Islam as an arrow darts through the game's body.' " [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H68] This first group of Khawarij was none other then those who rebelled against Caliph Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Banu Mudhar split into Banu Tamim. The first one was group of Khawarij lead by Abdullah, aka Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi, aka Hurkus Ibn Zuhayr, and Abdullah Ibn Wahb al-Rasibi. The first Khawarij marched to Syria with army of Ali from Arabian province of Najd. After incident of arbitration returned to Iraq and fought in a rebellious war against Ali (radiallah ta'ala anhu). A comprehensive explanation of this Hadith with aid of other authentic Ahadith is given in following article,
    here.

    Two Major Groups Of Satan To Emerge – Second Emerged From Najd:

    The second main group emerged from Najd and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) foretold of this here: “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: (The Prophet) said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen." People said: "Our Najd as well." The Prophet again said: "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said again: "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said: "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] Apart from being certain that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with very accurately pointed toward land from where group of Satan i.e. Wahhabism was to emerge; is there anything else which connects Wahhabism to Kharijism? This would be a logical and perfect question. Are there signs/traits which connects Wahhabism to Kharijism? Of course there are and lets begin.

    Wahhabism Is Another Major Offshoot Of Kharijism:

    Rebellion is sign of Khawarij. Shaykh al-Najd and his Wahhabis rebelled against authority/rule of Khilafat. And his Wahhabi minions have continued to start rebellions and lead civil wars against Muslim states to this day; TTP (Pakistan), ISIS, Al-Qaidah, Boko Haram (Algeria), Al-Shabab (Somalia), Jammat Abu Sayyaf (Malaysia), Islamic Salvation Front (Mali), Islamic Armed Group (Mali) … And Shaykh al-Najd and his Wahhabis rebelled against Jammah of Muslims. Another trait of Khawarij is that they declare Muslims as Kafir/Mushrik due to actions of major sins committed by ignorant Muslims. Shaykh al-Najd and his Wahhabis accused Muslims of committing major Shirk and on account of it justified killing them, looting their property, enslaving believing women, and forced them into sexual actions. And his followers even to this day are engaged in same. Khawarij charged the Muslims of Kufr/Shirk for absolutely no justified reason whatsoever. For things which are not even sin/Kufr/Shirk in Shari'ah. Khawarij declared Ali (radiallah ta'ala anhu) Mushrik/Kafir for choosing Abu Musa al-Ashari (radiallah ta'ala anhu) as an arbitrator to judge between him and Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). They quoted verse, judgment is only for Allah, and said Ali (radiallah ta'ala anhu) and his followers have committed Shirk because accepted creation as Judge. On this ground we find: Shaykh al-Najd and his rabid Wahhabis have in principle consider all those who practice Istighathah and believe in its legitimacy as Mushrikeen/Kafireen. Khawarij kill Muslims with imputiny and looted property and enslaved women of believers. Shaykh al-Najd and his Wahhabis committed massacre after massacre of Muslims professing la-ilaha il-Allah. They took the wives, mothers, sisters, daughters of Muslims as slaves, and fornicated/raped them believing they are women of Mushrikeen/Kafireen. And this is something expressedly prohibited by Prophet: “Anas bin Malik narrates from the Prophet who said: Three things are the roots of faith: (i) To refrain from (killing) a person who says “there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah” (ii) Not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits. (iii) and also not to declare him out of Islam due to any of his deed. Jihad continues from the day I was sent as Prophet to ...” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B14, H2170] Wahhabis and their Shaykh al-Najd violated all three. Sign of Khawarij is that they apply Quranic verses revealed for polytheists and their idol-gods upon believers as following Hadith establishes: “Ibn Umar considered the Khawarij and the heretics as the worst beings in creation, and he said: They went to verses which were revealed about the disbelievers and applied them to the Believers.” [Bukhari; Chapter Khawarjites. Ibn Hajr al Asqalani said in Fath ul Bari: That its sanad is sahih.] Shaykh al-Najd, his Wahhabis of past, present all are guilty of this. Shaykh al-Najd in his books, just take Kitab al-Tawheed as an example, quoted all verses revealed for Mushrikeen/Kafireen to lay the foundation of his accusation that Muslims are in fact guilty of Shirk. He didn’t stop just there but verses which were revealed about Kafirs not believing in ressurection after death and judgment day; he applied them upon Muslims of Makkah and accused them of disbelieving in life after death and judgment day. Another attribute of Khawarij is that they will excessively shave their heads – like BNP racist skin heads: “Sahl bin Hunaif reported Allah's Apostle as saying: There would arise from the east a people with shaven heads.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2338] Shaykh al-Najd and his Wahhabis originally were all skin-heads. And books of scholars recording their description in their own time recorded this fact but after scholars applied relevent Ahadith upon Wahhabis to warn Muslims they gradually left this practice. It should not be difficult to determine on basis of these facts that Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, aka Shaykh al-Najd, and his followers were second group of Satan, aka Khawarij. In his own time scholars and even his own brother told him that you're the horn/group of Satan that was prophecised to appear from Najd.

    Conclusion:

    Ahadith record a group of Satan is to appear from Najd and another from Iraq. Ahadith about these two regions are authentic. Details precisely establish Najd is in Arabian Peninsula and is region surrounding Saudi capital Riyadh. To distort this Hadith and apply it upon country of Iraq would be distortion of Hadith. Linguistic meaning of Najd and Iraq are completely opposite and ground reality of Iraq is such that linguistic meaning of Najd cannot be applied to it. Traditional understanding and universally accepted fact is that Najd was a province in central Arabia. Central Arabia’s  unique trait in comparision to Iraq is that it is vastly mountanous terrain thus it is deserving linguistic application of Najd. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold appearance of two groups of Satan. First one appeared in Iraq during the Khilafat of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and the second one appeared in middle of 17th century in Najd. And this second group was/is none other then Wahhabism.

    Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen.
    Muhammed Ali Razavi.


  14. Understanding Requirements Of Ibadadh In Islam: And Determining Why Evil Innovations Are Accepted As Valid Evidence Of Shirk And Kufr.

    Introduction:

    During a debate/discussion with a Pakistani Ghayr-Muqallid Wahhabi on topic of Talaq e Thalathah (i.e. three divorces) and generally about subject of innovation/Biddah. He jibed Barelwis have introduced so many innovations as acts of worship that another innovation of three divorces issued in an instant ending marriage would not harm your reputation anymore. This discussion can be read, here. when I pointed out to him that your knowledge of definition of  Biddah, your understand what Ibadah is defective. And you most certainly don’t know what we believe thus you’re in no position to make any judgment about Biddah, Ibadah, and our belief. He responded by saying test me and tested I him certainly. He failed to meet the challenge and instead got quite angry/abusive. He charged me with instilling doubts in his faith. He called me names i.e. agent of Iblees … went far as issuing edict of Kufr. In response to his evil best I could do was to to educate him, what Ibadah is in Islam, what are requirements for action to be of worship, here, here.

    Principally Innovated Acts Of Worship Are Rejected:

    For a Muslim every act of worship he performs must be sanctioned and instructed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in Quran or by the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam), transmitted and recorded in books of Ahadith. If a Muslim innovates an act of worship which does not agree with principles of Deen and performs innovated act of worship to gain pleasure of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then his innovative practice will be only be rejected. He will gain no reward but instead will be punished for such [reprhensible] innovation. Technically the [reprehensible] innovation will be considered act of worship but will be termed as a [reprehensible] innovation and rejected due to lack of authority from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). In this context it is evident their riatual-acts do not have sanction from of Islam. Thus how can these people be guilty of worshiping false gods when their methods of worship and Ilah/gods are their innovations? Readers should note that this question can only be correctly answered if authorative Ibadah and Biddah definitions are known.

    The Core Which Defines Islamic And Non-Islamic Ritual Acts As Worship:

    Islamic and non-Islamic ritual-acts are defined as acts of worship based on three factors; creed, action and intention. If one believes a certain ritual-act is act is of worship and believes one to whom act is as an Ilah/Ma’bud; then with intention of worship directs ritual-act toward that Ilah/Ma’bud then act will be judged as worship.

    Scenario To Elaborate The Core Principles Of Worship:

    Suppose Amr invokes Krishna with love, and praises Krishna, or invokes and seeks need from Krishna believing Krishna is an ilah then major Shirk has occurred due to creed and action. Shirk in creed because Amr has taken Krishna to be an Ilah and in action because Amr has praised and sought need from Krishna believing him to be an ilah. Take for example innovated act of worship; kissing candle twice, third time lighting it and circumbulating it around the mini idol/ilah seven times and then finally putting the candle out by dashing it on the feet of mini idol/ilah. This practice is not Islamicly sanctioned as an act of worship but instead it is [reprehensible] innovation. If polytheist performed it with intention of worship and believed that idol/ilah then major Shirk has occurred in belief and in practice. The innovated ritual-acts of worship practiced by polytheists are acts of worship regardless of rituals involved.

    Ahadith Of Rejected Evil Innovations:

    Ahadith record every innovation is misguidance and takes to hell-fire,
    here. ‘Every’ is not absolutely inclusive of ‘all innovations’ because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) reported to have said, a matter and a action not from Islam is rejected, here, here. This proves Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) made Takhsees and informed us to reject every innovation which contradicts with teaching of religion of Islam. Bukhari, Muslim, numbering of Surahs and verses, additions of diacritical markings to faciliate recitation of Quran for non-Arabs even though are innovations but they are not contradicting Islamic teaching but rather mean of promoting and faciliating Islam therefore are not part of rejected innovations which are misguidance and take to hell-fire.

    Innovated Good Sunnahs Are Made Part Of Islam:

    Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said whoever introduces a good Sunnah in Islam for him and those who follow the newly introduced Sunnah into Islam will equally be rewarded,
    here. This Hadith is proof that a good Sunnah (i.e. innovation) introduced by any Muslim is part of Islam. Note innovation is not part of Islam and if a good Sunnah not already part of Islam is made part of Islam and there is reward for initiator and actor: Then natural meaning of Hadith is initiator of good innovation in Islam and actors will get equal reward.

    Way In Which Evil Innovation Is Rejected And Accepted:

    i) Every good innovative Sunnah when it is introduced by default becomes part of Ijtihadi-Islam [and is not part of revealed Islam] but an evil innovation; i.e. evil Sunnah, rejected matter, a rejected action; is to be rejected and not made part of Ijtihadi-Islam. And rejected in meaning that it is not acted on because it is misguidance which takes to hell-fire. Ahadith of rejected matter/action also means that on day of judgment Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will not accept innovative action and will not reward it. Evil innovation is rejected in these meanings only. ii) But evil innovation, be it in belief or action, of Kufr or Shirk, is accepted and valid proof for Kufr/Shirk. Rejection of evil innovation does not include rejection where innovation is completely rejected and is not deemed as proof of someons belief/action. Such complete rejection would/does mean Mushrikeen of world of past/present cannot be judged to be Mushrikeen. And this completely and utterly contravenes Quranic message and Islamic teachings.

    Answering The All Important Question In Light Of Established Facts:

    Islamicly ritual worship is defined by three fundamental cores; the creed and the actions and intentions. Muslims believes Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is worthy of worship (i.e. Ilah); ritual-actions performed in accordance with teaching of Quran/Sunnah, and with intention of worship are therefore worship. Non-Islamic ritual-acts are also defined by three fundamental cores; creed, action and intentions. If Krishna is believed to be an Ilah and a ritual-act believed to be of worship is directed toward Krishna with intention of worship then ritual-act is worship. And to be precise worship of Krishna. This would be so even if method of worship has no approval of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), or of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Their ritual-actions are judged to be worship in accordance with their own belief, intention, and practice. Mushrikeen certainly have no permission from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to worship anyone other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), or to take anyone other then Him as an Ilah. Mushrikeen worshiping a creation and taking Ilahs beside/instead of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is innovation. Despite it being an innovation if a certain creation is believed to be an Ilah then it is rejected by Muslims and not deemed a part of Ijtihadi-Islam, nor acted, and will be rejected and not rewarded by Him. Yet it will be valid/accepted proof of Mushrik individual’s Shirk.

    Conclusion:

    Foundation of worship is affirmation of belief of Ilahiyyah for deity. And along with it are two essential components; intention to worship a deity and ritual-action to worship a deity with. If any one of three is missing then no act of worship has been performed. Action of worship is determined to be worship by judging the belief of person performing ritual-action. Even if ritual-action of worship has no sanction in Shari’ah due to it being an innovation it is of worship and valid/accepted proof of an individual’s Shirk/Kufr. Rejection of innovations only means not making it part of Ijtihadi-Islam, not acting on it, and innovation bearing no reward from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) on day of judgment.

    Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen.
    Muhammed Ali Razavi


  15. Introduction:

    Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab the founder of Wahhabi branch of Kharijism and his then/current group of Iblees (i.e. Qarn ash’Shaytaan) due to countless reasons accused Muslims of worshiping graves, trees, Jinn, Awliyah-Allah, fairies, and idols. This is despite the fact that none of the accused ever affirmed belief of Ilahiyyah for anyone other except Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And none from them believed they are worshipping any mentioned nor had any intention of worshipping anyone of these. Wahhabi justification has been that they have offered acts of worship such as Sajdah (i.e. prostration), Tawaf (i.e. circumblation) and Dua (i.e. invocation) to these therefore guilty of worship. Object of this article would be to establish three core principles and demonstrate them to be correct/valid with examples. And then demonstrate, Sajdah, Tawaf, and Dua are not worship until performed with in context of these three core principles.

    Three Fundamental Principles Of Worship:

    The three essential principles of worship are belief in Ilahiyyah, intention of worship, and an action of  worship. For Islamic ritual-acts of worship there are other requirements but three mentioned are absolutely must without any there can be no worship even if performed by Muslim, or non-Muslim.

    Implicit Affirmation Of Attributes Which Warrant Ilahiyyah And Worship:

    When there is no EXPLICIT affirmation of Ilahiyyah but an idol/person is beleived to posses anyone of the atributes of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) such as; its is beleived idol/person possesses Zaat and Sifaat which are Mustaqil bil'Zaat, Wajib ul-Wujud, Qadeem ... Or it is beleived that idol/person is ‘biological’ son, or is daughter of Allah; and then with intention of worship is loved, adored, respected, honoured, feared; and people stand, bow, prostrate, kneel; and supplicated in praise, beseech for their needs; in humility, submissiveness, respect, love, and fear then this would warrant affirmation of Ilahiyyah in belief and worship. Both of which are Shirk al-Akbar (i.e. major act of polytheism). Figurative use of son of God for any creation is Kufr but not Shirk.

    Explicit Affirmation Of In-equal Ilahiyyah And Intention, Action, And Worship:

    When belief of Ilahiyyah is affirmed and idol/person is not associated as an equal Ilah-partner of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), in one or more of His Sifaat, nor an equal in His Zaat; Ilah-partner is not praised, nor needs are sought from him, nor respected, loved, feared, honoured; nor bowed to, or prostrated to, or knelt infront of, or stood infront of as mark in respect; even then Shirk al-Akbar has occured due to affirmation of belief of Ilahiyyah. If such inferior Ilah-partner is praised, invoked for need, respected, loved, feared, honoured, bowed to, or prostrated to, or knelt infront of, or stood infront of as mark in respect then worship has occurred.

    Role Of Intention/Niyyah In Worship Is Absolutely Crucial:

    In Islam worship is only valid and accepted when the beleif about the Ilah ( i.e. Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala) is worthy of Him. Fundamentally a believer must profess Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Ilah/Ma’bud (i.e. deserving of worship) along belief in Tawheed. If such beleif is absent then actions alone can not be deemed worship. With the correct belief worshipper must have intention of worshipping Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) otherwise actions performed will be rejected by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in hereafter because no worship has taken place. If belief of Tawheed is correct but defect is in method of worship or in related but not Tawheed then worshipper is a Muwahid and Muslim. Zaid believes in Ilahiyyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), affirms all essential understanding of Tawheed, rejects all major and abstains from minor forms of Shirk, performs perfect Wudhu, chooses clean place, clothing worn by him is properly purified, method of Salah is fully in accordance with prophetic method of Salah but in his heart he has no intention of worshipping Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but does everything to fit into the crowd; in this scenario despite all no worship has been performed by Zaid. In this scenario Zaid had no intention of worshipping Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) therefore his actions and everything else cannot be worship. Yet he remains a Muwahid and a Muslim because he attests to all requirements of Islam.

    Demonstrating Absence Of Ilahiyyah And Intention Equals No Worship:

    Kumar a new-age nut believes in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but not as an Ilah/Mabud but was a human being because Hadith of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) creating Adam (alayhis salam) in His/his image. He holds to misguided notion that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is an Insaan like rest of us but with superior technology and a huge spaceship. And Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) created Adam (alayhis salam) in His/his own image on some planet and beamed Adam (alayhis salam) down on earth. Note he does not affirm belief of Ilahiyyah/Rububiyyah or anything else of Tawheed. You have to agree Kumar is a mad nut-job but he still performs Salah with intention of worship and meets all requirements of Salah except affirmation of Ilahiyyah. Question to you is; is Kumar worshipping Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? He is not because his belief is Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is not worthy of worship for example he does not believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is an Ilah/Ma’bud. What if Kumar affirms all Islam except Ilahiyyah for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and performs action of worship for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but with no intention of worship; is he worshipping Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? No because beliefe of Ilahiyyah and intention and action are all essential components of worship.

    Establishing Principles Through Prophet Ya’qub And Angels Prostrating:

    Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructed the angels to prostrate to Prophet Adam (alayhis salam). Tongue in cheek will translate this Quranic verse in accordance with Wahhabi understanding of how Ibadah/Shirk takes place; all the ‘Mushriks’ prostrated to Prophet Adam (alayhis salam) but Iblees the Wahhabi type flag bearer of Tawheed refused to ‘worship’ Prophet Adam (alayhis salam) and upheld his belief in Tawheed. Incase of misunderstanding so I will set the record straight; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) commanded the angels to prostrate to Prophet Adam (alayhis salam) angels prostrated as they were commanded to show their respect to Prophet Adam (alayhis salam) and in obedience to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). If Sajdah by its very nature was worship then angels worshipped Prophet Adam (alayhis salam) but it is not the case. Principle is that for an/any action to be worship one performing the action must affirm belief of Ilahiyyah for whom the action is performed and intend to perform the action with intention of worship. Angels performed action of prostration without belief of Ilahiyyah for Prophet Adam (alayhis salam) and without ever intending to worship him therefore no worship took place. Same principle and understanding applies to action of Prophet Ya’qub (alayhis salam) when he prostrated to his son Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam).

    Conclusion:

    Three cores of worship are affirmation of Ilahiyyah, intention of worship, and action of worship. Without any of these three no worship has taken place. O Khariji minions of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab these principles are demonstratable truth and you cannot disbelieve in them. Why do you accuse Muslims of worshipping graves, trees, fairies, idols, righteous servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Jinn? And you know there is no affirmation of Ilahiyyah by Muslims, no intention to worship them, and in ninety-nine percent of times no action which resembles acts of worship. And even if there was an action which outwardly resembled act of worship even then such action alone is not worship until belief of Ilahiyyah, and intention of worship are part of it. Just as action of prostation performed by angels and Prophet Ya’qub (alayhis salam) without Ilahiyyah/Niyyah did not amount to worship. Any who makes Takfir of a Muslim is a Kafir and Takfir of Wahhabis returns to them.

    Wama Alayna Ilal Balaghul Mubeen.
    Muhammed Ali Razvi


  16. Intorduction:

    There are many definitions of Islamic Ibadah (i.e. worship) circulated in books of scholars and over internet. And almost all fail to properly and comprehensively define what Islamic defintion of worship is. Most definitions were produced by classical Islamic scholarship and they stopped at linguistic meaning of Ibadah with addition of love/fear of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Amongst orthodox scholarly circles these definitions wouldn’t do any harm because traditional scholarship has always drawn missing Shar’i components from Quran/Sunnah to make them whole. Linguistic definitions in hands of Khawarij lead by Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab of Najd has employed linguistic and incomplete defintions with imputiny to their advantage. And as result they have managed to misguide and lure many Muslims into Kufr of Khawarij. To combat this Kharijism Islamic/Shar’i defintion of worship is being offered as an alternative. May Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) make it way of guidance for many. Ameen.

    Supplication/Dua Related Definition Of Worship:

    (i) Fundamental: To invoke an Ilah is worship. (ii) Comprehensive: To show obedience, submissiveness, humility, and to hold in respect; to fear, or to love; to invoke in praise, or to invoke in time of difficulty, or ease; and to request great, or small from one believed as an Ilah; while believing Ilah is far, or near with belief and intention of worship amounts to worship.

    Definition Applicable To Islamic Ritual-Acts Of Worship:

    (iii) Ritual Acts Basic: To perform any ritual-act with belief and intention of worshiping an Ilah is an act of worship. (iv) Comprehensive Ritual Acts: Performing any ritual-act in obedience, submissiveness, humility,  respect, love, fear to an Ilah; and to praise, to glorify qualities/attributes with belief and intention of worshiping an Ilah is an act of worship.


    Fundamental Worship And Other Components Of Worship:

    Fundamentally invoking a being believed as an Ilah is worship. This invocation is of praise, or request of need. Worship can consist of ritual acts or just verbal recitation. It can be worship with or without love, fear, humility, submission, and respect. If a Hindu, or Christian, or any other polytheist invokes an invented Ilah with or without love, fear, humility, submission, respect; despite this they will be guilty of Shirk due to belief of Ilahiyyah and guilty of Kufr due to engaging in a ritual-act with beliefe and intention of worship. A Muslim must worship Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with love, fear; with humility, submission, and respect. Worship performed without these feelings points to improper understanding of worship and heedlessness of worshipper.

    Advance And Basic Understanding Of Tawheed:

    There are two levels of knowing/understanding Tawheed. Basic level of Tawheed requires affirmation of Ilahiyyah/Rububiyyah for ONLY Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And to affirm Tawheed of Ikhlas in brief and in detail; He was not begotten by mother/father, and He has no consort to beget son/daughter. And to affirm there is nothing resembles Him in His creation. Those due to lack of advance knowledge of Tawheed only hold to previously stated understanding of Tawheed; they are not only believers but worship offered with basic understanding/knowledge of Tawheed will be accepted. Generally educated Muslims are expected to affirm following advance understanding of Tawheed with basic Tawheed: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Wajib ul-Wujud (i.e. existance is must) and His Ad’am Wujud (i.e. non-existance) is impossible. He is Mustaqil bil’Zaat (i.e. self existent) and none has granted Him existance. Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) Zaat (i.e. essence) and Sifaat (i.e. attributes) are Zaati (i.e. personal), Qulli (i.e. all-encampassing), Azli (i.e. eternal), bi’Ghayr Izni (i.e without permission of another), Muhaal al-Fana (i.e. anahilation impossible) … One who worships Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with comprehensive understanding of Tawheed has earned a greater merit in his worship and will earn greater reward.

    Worship Definition Pertaining To Islamic Ritual Acts Of Worship:

    (v) Islamic Ritual Concise: Being in position of Qiyam (i.e. standing), Ruku (i.e. bowing), Sujud (i.e. prostration), Tashahhud (i.e. kneeling position), or raising hands in a Dua, or during Tawaf of Kabah or Safa/Marwah; in obedience, submissivenes, humility, love, adoration, fear, honour, respect; while praising, or asking, begging and pleading Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with belief and intention of worship is worship. (vi) Islamic Ritual Comprehensive: With belief Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the One and the Only Ilah/Rubb. He is without mother/father and brother/sister. Has no wife, or son, or daughter. He resembles nothing and anything does not resemble Him. He is the First, the Last, the Apparent, and the Hidden. His Zaat (i.e. essence), Sifaat (i.e. attributes) are Wajib ul-Wujud, Mustaqil bil-Zaat, Azali, Muhaal al-Fana, bi’Ghayr Izni, Qulli, Zaati, Haqiqi … Assuming position of Qiyam (i.e. standing), or Ruku (i.e. bowing), or Sujud (i.e. prostration), or sitting in position of Tashahhud (i.e. kneeling position), or raising hands in a Dua, or during Tawaf of Kabah and Safa/Marwah; in obedience, submissiveness, humility, love, adoration, fear, honour, respect; while praising, or asking, or begging and pleading Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with belief and intention of worship is worship.

    Missing Components Of Tawheed From  Islamic Ritual Comprehensive Definition:

    There was much more of advance Tawheed then what has been stated. Detail of Tawheed not mentioned in I.R.Comprehensive but mentioned else where in this or another articles produced  by me, or by other members of Ahlus Sunnah should be deemed correct. And can be inserted into text of definition I.R.Comprehensive right after the three dots. As matter of principle I.R.Comprehensive should be inclusive of all details of Tawheed and principles which explain Zaat and Sifaat of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).

    Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen.
    Muhammed Ali Razavi


  17. Salam Alaykum,

    Jab mein nay newly Deobandiat par thook kar chora thah toh aik bandeh nay yeh khawab mujjay bataya mein nay kaha yeh khawab heh khawab par control toh nahin phir jurm kia. Banday nay bataya kay aqalmand aur ba-sha-hoor banday apni betiyoon, behnoon, biwiyoon ka naam bi nahin letay ghayr mehramoon mein. Ta-kay un ki taraf kissi ka khayal bi nah jahay ta-kay kohi ulti sochay bi nah. Yeh banda aisa khawab Hadhrat Fatimah (radiallah ta'ala anha) kay baray mein kitab mein likh raha heh joh agar sacha khawab bi ho toh zikr karna bey-adabi heh. Kia agar Thanvi ko khawab ata kay is ki beti kay saath aik larka bister par leta heh aur Thanvi ki beti ko seenay say lagaya huwa heh toh kia yeh banda is khawab ko kitab mein publish karta? Ya aap (yehni mujjay Muhammed Ali ) ko aisa khawab ahay toh kia aap kitab mein publish keren gay? Mein baat ko samaj gaya ... toba astaghfar ki ... kaam say jab ghar aya 2 rakaat astaghfar kay nawafil paray ... toba kee ... aur kaan pakr kar moonh qibla ho kar das dafa sit&stand keenh ...

    Mughal bhai aisay pages idhar nah lagahen is ko bar bar parh kar dil dukhta heh. Yeh bey-iman Musalman ki ghayrat, haya, adab, tazeem say mehroom heh. Is ko Thanvi, Gangohi, Dehalvi, Chandpuri, Ambethvi waghayra say hi muhabbat heh aur un ki taraf-dari mein kuch bi keh aur kar sakta heh aur in kay har kufr aur bay-hayahi ko acha aur ayn Islam kahay ga. Aap is kay samnay yeh khawab hazaar dafa bayan keren is kabi bi is ko ghalat aur towheen Hadhrat Fatimah (radiallah ta'ala anha) nahin manay ga, aur nah tehra-hay ga, nah samjay ga, aur nah mahsoos karay ga. Waja is ki apnay aur para-hay wali heh. Joh is kay apnay hen aur jinneh yeh dil say apna manta heh un wasteh is kay dil parh meri batenh dard ka basit hen magr RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ko aur un ki family ko sirf yeh zuban say apna manta heh dil mein sirf Thanvi jaisay Kafir gussay hen. Yeh misdaq heh ... tum Kafir ho chookay imaan lanay kay baad ...

    Is ki behan ko mein agar khawab mein seenay say lagahoon aur shafa pahoon. Ya mein is kay samnay beth kar is ko batahoon kay tumari BIWI ko mein nay khawab mein seenay say lagaya huwa thah aur us nay mujjay phir meri bemari door ho-gahee. Ya phir kitaab publish karoon aur likhoon, Ashraf Ali Thanvi ki jawan sweet 16 sala beti ko mein nay khawab mein dekha ... aur ham donoon jawani ki masti mein aik dosray ko galay laga-hay kharay hen ... aur tabeer batahoon kay mein gunnah kabeera karoon ka ... aur is khawab ko TV par bi ... radio par bi ... kitaboon mein publish karoon ... aur Thanvi ki sweet 16 sala beti ka khoob charcha karoon aur batahoon kesay galay millay ... sari tafseel likhoon ... moment ko artist kee tara lafzoon mein capture karoon takay readers ... meri khawab ko peren toh mehsoos keren kay khud dekh rahay hen ... agar aap aisay khawab bana kar saath is ko pesh keren toh dekhna yeh kesay rawayati Deoband wali gaali aur mughallazaat par ahay ga ...  Is ko sirf dukh is kay joh apnay hen uneeh ka hoga. Allah kay Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ki izzat, un ki beti ki izzat, Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta'ala anha) ki izzat, Imam Hassan aur Hussain ki izzat aur in ki bey-zati ka nah is ko pata heh aur nah parwah.

    Is nay gaali sirf aaik hi baat par deni heh, THANVI ki sweet 16 sala beti, ko khawab mein galay mein keun lagaya ... teri jurrat Barelwi ... tooh Kafir ho gaya ... Barelwi Mushrik ho gaya tooh Barelwi. Yeh Kafir Thanvi aur is'see jaisay Kafiroon kay peechay lattoo bana huwa heh sirf ineeh kay wasteh yeh zinda heh. Allamah Anayatullah Sanglahill (rahimullah) ka andaaz ... ashidda alal kuffar ... apnahen. Yeh tawaqoh mat keren kay aap khawab ka scan lagahen gay toh yeh masla samaj jahay ga. Yeh woh paak matti nahin jis par bheej aur paani dalenh toh imaan ka poda uggay ga. Yeh Kufr ka reykastan heh aur is mein agar Islam ka bheej bona heh toh pehlay joh Kufr ka zang laga heh us ko zarboon say utaren. Aur phir agar ho saka toh shahid yeh murda Kafir biznillah zinda ho jahay. Yeh ashidda alal kuffaar ka misdaq heh aur Kafiroon wala sulook rakhen.


  18. 3 hours ago, hanfigroup said:

    Mughal

    Kitni dafA post karni hy. Kam az kam Mari post he par lo.  Jawab miljay ga.  Roman urdu main nahe urdu main jawab dou

    Jitni dafa tum apni jawal-baazi ko dobara paste karnay aur meri tamam posts ka ba-qaida jawab nahin detay. Ya phir kalmah paro aur Musalman ho jaho aur mein dobara paste karna chor doon ga.


  19. 47 minutes ago, Mughal... said:

    میرے پاس تو آپ کا بھی علاج نہیں ہے 

    آپ پوائنٹ اکھٹے کر دو جواب میں لکھ دوں گا اردو میں 

    Roman Urdu mein yeh sab kuch par sakta heh. Urdu rasm ul-khat mein likha talb is leeyeh kar raha heh keun kay is nay likhay huway material ko kissi ko dena heh ta-kay woh jawab likh deh aur woh romanised Urdu parh nahin sakta.


  20. untitled2.JPG.f9e739ef82352a5fe86c06894b69e56d.JPG

    @HanafiGroup

    HanafiGroup Sawal 1: Kia tumaray nazdeek aap (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ko kulli ilm ghayb hasil heh?

    Jawab: RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ko ma kana wama yakoon ... i.e. jo kuch ho chuka aur jo kuch hoga ... ka ilm hasil heh. Is mahdood aur takhsees ko kull ilm kaha jata heh. Yehni kull ilm ma kana wama yakoon ... magr tafseel ko bar bar doranay kay bajahay sirf kull kay ikhtisar ko bayan keeya jata heh. Yeh ilm mahdood heh aur ba muqabila e Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) baaz banta heh.

    HanafiGroup Sawal 2: Kia jis kissi ko juzwi ilm ghayb hasil ho to kia us ko aalim ul-ghayb kaha ja sakta heh?

    Jawab: Pehli baat Aalim ul-Ghayb kay ilfaaz khaas Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) wasteh istimal huway hen aur in ka ghayr wasteh istimal jaiz nahin. Dosri baat aap ka sawal aap ki ilmi yateemi ka subut heh keun keh ilqab/title/khitaab ka talluq juzwi ya qulli say nahin. Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) Rauf ar-Raheem heh (Quran: 16:7). Aur Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) ko Rauf ar-Raheem kay ilqaab bi ata keeyeh (Quran 9:128). Ilqabaat juzzi aur qulli tor par kissi khoobi ya ilm kay ata honay say nahin deeyeh jatay.
    Aik aur misaal leh lenh. Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) nay RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ko rahmatal lil alameen farmaya. Sawal heh kay RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ki rahmat nay Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) ki tamam Rahmat e la-mahdood ko paa leeya aur phir khitaab mila ya juzwi rahmat ki bina par khitaab mila? Zahir heh RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) rahmat mahdood aur juzwi heh. Aur aap ka asool toh yahi heh nah kay joh kamil darja sift/khoobi/ilm par ho ya pa leh to phir khitab/title kay layk hota heh. Kissa mukhtasar khitab ka ata hona darja akmaliat par honay ki waja say nahin balkay Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) ki atah heh juzwi par bi ata kar deh. Jistera RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) kay title rahmatal lil alameen ko Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) kay wasteh istimal nahin keeya ja sakta is'see tera aalim ul-ghayb ko RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) wasteh istimal nahin keeya ja sakta. Aur aik kay khitab ko dosray wasteh nah bolnay ka ki waja juzwi ya la-mahdood nahin ... keun kay rahmat e illahi la-mahdood heh aur agar is bina par khitab ka itlaq hota to phir Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) hi rahmatal lil alameen kay layk heh ... magr Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) nay RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ko ata keeya.

    HanafiGroup Sawal 3: Kia janwar parinda kay pass bi kohi ghayb ki khabr ho sakti heh?

    Jawab: HanafiGroup Sahib ko yeh bi pata nahin kay sawal kesay karoon aur kia sawal karoon. Kissi bi Musalman ka yeh nazria nahin kay janwar/parindeh ko Ghayb ki khabr hoti heh. Ghayb ki khabr Nabi/Rasool ko Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) ki taraf say deeh jaati heh.

    Note: Keun kay janab ko yeh bi pata nahin kay sawal kesay karoon aur kia karoon is leyeh mein khud hi HanafiGroup ki taraf say sawal pooch leta hoon aur jawab bi deh deta hoon. Sawal: Kia janwar aur parinda ko bi ilm ghayb ho sakta heh? Jawab: Musalman sirf janwaroon wasteh ilm ghayb say mushayda ghayb aur sama ghayb kay qail hen. Aur woh bi sirf kutta aur gadda wasteh keun kay Hadith mein is ka subut heh. Hadith mein aya heh kay kutta bhonkta aur gadda awaaz nikalta heh keun kay woh ghayb dekhtay hen:
    "Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah: The Prophet said: When you hear the barking of dogs and the braying of asses at night, seek refuge in Allah, for they see which you do not see." [Ref: Abu Dawood, B42, H5084, here.]
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    untitled3.JPG.ed95430aea1ed704b0472e20174640d7.JPG

    Aap nay kaha kay Thanvi sahib ilm ghayb ko nahin mantay balkay sawal jawab kar rahay hen taqay agay walay ko qail keren. Kia chawal baazi mari heh aap nay bi. Abdul Shakoor lakhnavi nay yeh chawal sab say pehlay mari thi kay Thanvi Ilm ghayb nah RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) wasteh manta heh aur nah kissi aur wasteh. Magr is kay bar-khilaaf Manzoor Naumani nay apni kitab bawariq ul ghayb aur Ashraf Ali Thanvi nay apni kitab Bawadir al-Nawadir mein RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) wasteh ilm ghayb mana heh. Magr us ki taraf baad mein tawajoh karoon ga.

     Pehlay gustakhi kay pehloo ko letay hen. Misaal tor par, mein nahin manta aap HanafiGrou kissi kanjri kay bachay hen aur nah hi manta hoon kay aap khalis asal haram zaday hen, abh mein aap HanafiGroup nay mutaliq yeh donoon nah mantay huway bi kahoon ... HanafiGroup haram zaday kissi kanjri kay bachay ... aap batahen yeh aap ko gaali hogi kay nahin? Gaali aur towheen huwi nah! Bilfarz Ashraf Ali Thanv ilm ghayb RasoolAllah wasteh nah mantay huway ... sawal jawab karta heh ... baaz ghayb thah ya kull ghayb ... aur nah hi Thanvi janwaroon (i.e. gaddeh/kutteh) wasteh ilm ghayb nahin manta ... woh sirf aalim ul-ghayb kay itlaq kay radd karnay kay chakkar mein yeh sawal jawab karta heh ...  toh kia aisa kehna gustakhi nahin: “Phir yeh kay aap ki zaat muqaddisa par ilm ghayb ka hokam keeya jana  agar ba-qawl Zaid sahih ho to phir daryaft talb yeh amr heh keh is Ghayb say murad baaz ghayb heh ya kull ghayb agar baaz uloom ghaybiyah muraad hen toh is mein hazoor hi ki kia takhsees heh aisa ilm ghayb toh Zaid wa Umar balkeh har sabbi wa majnoon balkeh jami hawanaat wa bahim kay leyeh bi hasil heh.[Hifz ul-Iman, here] Nah mantay huway bi gustakhi banti heh. Mein nay pehlay Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta'ala anha) ka waqia bataya thah ... here, here, ... Kia Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta'ala anha) ya baqi Sahabah auratoon ko gaddoon/kuttoon barabar jantay thay? Nahin jantay thay nah! Phir bi towheen ho gahi. Sirf paleed janwaroon kafiroon tawaifoon ki list mein gina jana hee towheen ka asar deta heh aur jahan tashbeeh aur takhsees Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ki takhsees/khasoosiat ka hi inqaar keeya jahay wahan par gustakhi kesay nah ho. Note keren ... Thanvi Sahib nay ilm mein khasoosiat nah honay ki waja say RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ki joh takhsees janwaroon, pagaloon bachoon par thi us ka inqaar kar deeya ... ibarat ghor say parh lenh: "... agar baaz uloom ghaybiyah muraad hen toh is mein hazoor hi ki kia takhsees heh aisa ilm ghayb toh Zaid wa Umar balkeh har sabbi wa majnoon balkeh jami hawanaat wa bahim kay leyeh bi hasil heh.” Bilfarz janwaroon, parindoon, pagaloon, bachoon ka ilm Ghayb RasoolAllah jaisa hota toh kia phir RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ko in par takhsees/khasoosiat hasil nahin. Nabi ko makhlooq par khasoosiat nahin? Thanvi Sahib nay mutlaqan Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ki ...yehni tamam khasoosiatoon ka inqaar kar deeya ... kia aqil ki pagal par takhsees sabat nahin? Kia insaan ko janwar par khasoosiat hasil nahin? kia Nabi ko in tamam jin ka Thanvi nay zikr keeya in sab par takhsees baghayr ilm ghayb hasil nahin? Jab heh toh phir takhsees sabat honay kay bavjood inqaar karna aur aisa kay lafz say RasoolAllah  (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ko pagaloon janwaroon bachoon say tashbeeh dena Towheen/gaali wasteh hee banta heh. RasoolAllah ki khasoosiat ka inqar kar kay pagaloon janwaroon jaisa sabat karna towheen nahin toh aur kia heh? Aakhir mein arz heh kay gustakhi baghayr aqeedah rakhay bi ho jati heh.

    Abh atay hen aap kay jhoot ki taraf kay Ashraf Ali Thanvi Ilm Ghayb ko nahin mantay thay.  Yeh lenh aap kay jhoot ka parda faash hota heh:
    “A Shar’ri example of this would be it is jaiz (i.e. permissible) to say that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has granted limited knowledge of Ghayb to Prophets but it is not permissible to say they are Aalim ul-Ghayb.” [Ref: Bawadir al-Nawadir, Page; 532, by; Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, here.] Urdu asal ibarat aap khud parh lenh neechay paste karta hoon:

    bawadir.JPG.6abcf5c5f3f47158e74dd09c295589af.JPG

    Jab yeh sabat huwa kay Thanvi Sahib RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) wasteh baaz ilm ghayb ko jaiz mantay hen aur ayn mutabiq Shariah batatay hen toh phir Hifz ul-Iman mein,"... agar baaz uloom ghaybiyah muraad hen toh is mein hazoor hi ki kia takhsees heh aisa ilm ghayb toh Zaid wa Umar balkeh har sabbi wa majnoon balkeh jami hawanaat wa bahim kay leyeh bi hasil heh.” , joh baaz ilm ghayb ko tajweez kia aur tashbeeh aur tashreeh kee apnay aqeedeh kay mutabiq hi ki.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  21. untitled1.JPG.97ded6fa6c218aba54fd5d2ee8dea930.JPG

    @HanafiGroup

    Hifz ul-Iman ki ibarat kufria par aap ko tafseeli jawab deeya ja chooka heh aur aap jawab nahin deh saktay. Koshish mein ho keh agay peechay mozoo ko gaseeta jahay.

    Hifz ul-Iman ki asal ibarat jis par gustakhi ka ilzam aur khasoosiat e ilm ghayb ki nafi ka inqar ka hokam jari huwa: “Phir yeh kay aap ki zaat muqaddisa par ilm ghayb ka hokam keeya jana  agar ba-qawl Zaid sahih ho to phir daryaft talb yeh amr heh keh is Ghayb say murad baaz ghayb heh ya kull ghayb agar baaz uloom ghaybiyah muraad hen toh is mein hazoor hi ki kia takhsees heh aisa ilm ghayb toh Zaid wa Umar balkeh har sabbi wa majnoon balkeh jami hawanaat wa bahim kay leyeh bi hasil heh.[Hifz ul-Iman.] HanafiGroup ki ibarat: “Phir yeh kay Hazrat ki zaat muqaddas par ilm ghayb agar ba-qawl Zaid (sahil) sahih ho to ham us say daryaft kartay hen keh is ghayb say murad kia heh yehni ghayb ka har fard ya baaz ghayb hee keun nah ho pas agar baaz ghayb murad heh toh aap (saw) ki takhsees nah rahi keun keh baaz ghayb ka ilm Zaid wa Umar balkeh har bachay aur deewana balkeh hawayannat ko bi hasil heh. [Ref: HanafiGroup – Ki Manh Pasand.] Donoon ibaraat kay ilfaaz mein kafi farq heh magr mein sirf joh bunyad ikhtilaf heh us ki taraf tawajjoh dalahoon ga. Asal ibarat Hifz ul-Iman mein lafz aisa ko HanafiGroup nay hifz kar deeya aur aisa ki zameer ki jaga lafz baaz mutabadil kar deeya. Yehni asal ibarat mein ilfaaz “… aisa ilm ghayb …” kay thay magr janab nay tehreef kartay huway ussay “… baaz ilm ghayb …” kar deeya. Janab yeh dawa keren kay aisa ki zameer baaz ilm ghayb ki taraf lot’ti heh toh phir aisa karna tashreef huwa tahreef nah. Tashreeh tab hoti jab aisa ki zameer ko hifz nah keeya jata. Asal ibarat mein lafz aisa aik khaas mana deta heh jis ko hifz tahreef heh tashreeh keh tor mein Hanafi group agar aisa ki zameer saath baaz ka izafa kar letay toh tahreef kay ilzaam ka jawaz nah hota. Yehni agar HanafiGroup Sahib apni is ibarat ko “… baaz ilm ghayb …” is tera pesh kartay “… aisa (baaz) ilm ghayb …” to tahreef kay ilzaam say bari hotay.  Zameer aisa kay mutabadil baaz ko lana darust nahin. Dekhyeh khud HanafiGroup sahib nay meri baat ki ta’eed aik aur jaga ki aur voh bi is’see ibarat mein. “… ilm ghayb agar ba-qawl Zaid (sahil) sahih ho to ham …” Is jaga par HanafiGroup Sahib nay Zaid ki tashreeh Sahil say ki magr Zaid ko hifz nahin keeya balkay brackets mein lafz Sahil ka izafa keeya joh tashreeh banta heh. Magr janab nay asal ibarat mein lafz aisa jis par kitaben likhi gaheen aur munazray huway us ko hifz kar deeya.

    i) Kehta heh kay asool munazra mutabiq pehlay apna ihtiraaz pesh kiya jata heh joh HanafiGroup nay asaan ilfaaz mein likh deeya. Haqiqat yeh keh HanafiGroup Sahib nay ihtiraaz pesh nahin keeya balkay Hifz ul-Iman kay jaisi aik ibarat pesh kee heh. Magr yeh ibarat ko ihtiraaz kay tor pesh kar rahay hen. ii) Hanafi group nay kaha: “Asool munazra mutabiq pehlay apna ihtiraaz pesh kiya jata heh jo mein nay asaan ilfaaz mein likh deeya.” Asool e Munazra mein dawah aur ihtiraaz meray zumidari heh aur aap ka jawab dawah aur ihtiraaz ko uthana. Aap ko Hifz ul-Iman par kab itiraaz huwa joh aap ihtiraaz ko pesh kar rahay hen? Ihtiraaz Ahle Islam ko ho aur pesh Ahle Kufr say HanafiGroup kar raha heh. Hamara ihtiraaz kia heh voh toh alhamdulillah mein pesh karon ga. iii) Agay likhta heh: “Muhammed Ali tumara ihtiraz is’see aqeedeh pay hay joh mein nay upar pesh keeya heh?” Hamara ihtiraaz Hifz ul-Iman ki ibarat aur us mein joh Kufriat hen un par heh. Voh kia hen us ki tafseel aynda ahay gi. Magr mukhtasar Ahle Islam ka nazria heh keh RasoolAllah sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam ko baaz ilm al-ghayb hasil heh. Baaz ilm ghayb kay is aqeedeh par ahle Islam ko kohi ihtiraaz nahin.

    Thanvi Sahib ki ibaraat jis ki waja say ikhtilaf o hokum kufr jari huwa: “Phir yeh kay aap ki zaat muqaddisa par ilm ghayb ka hokam keeya jana  agar ba-qawl Zaid sahih ho to phir daryaft talb yeh amr heh keh is Ghayb say murad baaz ghayb heh ya kull ghayb agar baaz uloom ghaybiyah muraad hen toh is mein hazoor hi ki kia takhsees heh aisa ilm ghayb toh Zaid wa Umar balkeh har sabbi wa majnoon balkeh jami hawanaat wa bahim kay leyeh bi hasil heh.[Hifz ul-Iman, here] Ahle Islam kay Ahle Kufr ki ibaraat par do wujuhaat ki bina par ihtiraaz heh: i) RasoolAllah sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam kay ilm ghayb  ki takhsees/khasoosiat ka inqaar keeya aur is waja say Kufr sar’ri mein para. ii) Thanvi Sahib nay Hifz ul-Iman mein RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) ko janwaroon, pagaloon, bachoon say tashbeeh deh kar ghaali di aur towheen kar kay Kafiroon say huwa.

    Takhsees buyadi tor par chaar tor say sabat heh: i) Allah kay Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) ka ilm Ghayb qatti aur kamil darja yaqeeni heh jis mein shak o shuba nahin aur Sahihah mein shak karnay wala gumrah aur mutawatira mein shak karnay wala Kafir agar toba baghayr maray toh. Aur RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) kay ilawah tamam insanoon janwaroon ko joh ilm ghayb hasil ho voh zanni aur shak shuba kay saath heh. Is sirf bunyad kar agar malhooz rakha jahay toh kia baaz ilm Ghayb qatti ko baaz ilm Ghayb zanni par khasoosiat  hasil nahin? Sirf is’see bunyad par say RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) kay ilm ki khasoosiat/takhsees sabat ho chuki. ii) Mazeed takhsees wasteh miqdar uloom e ghaybiyyah ko hee leeya jahay toh RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’allam) ka uloom e Ghabiyyah ki miqdar is Hadith say maloom ho jati heh jis mein awal qaynaat say ta qayamat kay ahwal kay bayan ka zikr heh. Jab yeh uloom e Ghaybiyyah ki miqdar RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’allam) wasteh sabat heh toh Thanvi Sahib kon say kuttay billay khanzir behal gadday bachay pagal ko jantay hen jin ko itna ilm hasil heh? Agar nahin toh RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) kay ilm ghayb ki wasilah miqdar say takhsees sabat huwi. iii) Qaynat kay awal say qayamat din sab kuch bata deeya wali Hadith ki tarf aik dafa phir motowajjoh hoon. Is Hadith say nah sirf miqdaar ki tadad sabat huwi balkay yeh bi sabat hota heh kay RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) nay joh waqiat bayan keeyeh un ka talluq zamana maazi, zamana haal, aur zamana mustaqbil say thah. Jin pagaloon, janwaroon, bachoon ki bunyad par RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) kay ilm ki khasoosiat ka radd aur inqaar keeya un mein say kon hen jinoon nay zamana maazi, haal, mustaqbil kay Ilm e Ghayb ki voh tafseel batahi joh RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) chukay hen? Agar kohi nahin toh phir maanh lenh kay RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) kay ilm ghayb ki takhsees sabat ho chuki. iv) RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) kay Ilm Ghayb mein maazi haal mustaqbil ka mushayda ghayb, sama ghayb waghyra sabat heh … misaal tor par jannat mein Sahabi kay qadmoon ki awaaz ko sun lena … aur jannat/dozakh musalla namaz par kharay ho kar dekhna … Thanvi Sahib aur un ki aal e Deoband aik aisa gadday, pagal, bachay keeray makoray ka bata denh jin mein yeh khaboobi sabat huwi ho. Agar kohi heh aisa aap kay ilm mein toh; lakh lanat hi us’si taraf mar aur us’see ka kalmah parh. Aur agar nahin aur yaqeenan qattan kohi nahin toh phir maanh lenh kay RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) kay ilm ghayb ki khasoosiat sabat huwi. v) RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) kay Ilm Ghayb ki khasoosiat ka munkir nah tadad uloom mein khasoosiat, qatti ilm mein khasoosiat, aur Ghayb ki kismoon mein khasoosiat, aur teenoon zamanoon kay ghuyub jan-nay mein khaoosiat ka imaan rakhta heh aur is’see waja say khasoosiat/takhsees ka inqaar karta heh. In chaar bunyadi nuqtoon say sabat huwa kay RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) kay Ilm Ghayb ki Takhsees/khasoosiat sabat heh. Aur joh is khasoosiat/takhsees ka munkir heh ya toh voh parlay darjjay ka jahil heh aur agar aalim bazahir heh toh phir bila shak o shuba pakka aur sacha aur sucha Kafir nahin toh murtad zeroor heh. Aur is hukum Kufr ki bunyaden doh hen: i) murtad nay khasoosiat e RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) ka radd karnay wasteh janwaroon, pagloon, bachoon ko RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) ki khasoosiat mein shamal keeya. ii) Aur yeh lehaz nah keeya kay aisoon ko shamil karnay say RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) ko pagloon, janwaroon bachoon say tashbeeh deeh aur shaan mein kami or towheen ki.

    Tashbeeh Hifz ul-Iman Doh Tarika Say Sabat Huwi: i) Tashbeeh Isharatan: Ahadith say sabat heh kay aik Sahabi nay Um ul-Momineen Aisha (radiallah ta’ala anha) kay samnay bayan keeya kay kutta gadda aurat agar namazi say guzray toh namaz toot jaati heh … toh un-noon nay farmaya kay aap nay auratoon ko kuttoon gaddoon say tashbeeh deh kar mila deeya … aur Hadith say sabat heh kay Sahabi nay ilfaaz tashbeeh kay nah keeyeh thay balkay sirf zikr mein auratoon ko kuttoon gaddoon mein shamil keeya … misaal tor par … “Kutta, Fir’aun, Thanvi, khanzir jandar hen.”  Tashbeeh wasteh aisa, waisa, jaisa, istimal nahin huway sirf gina to towheen sabat huwi … abh readers khud hi faisla kar lenh kay kuttay, khanzir kay zikr saath Thanvi aur Firawn ki tauheen huwi ya Thanvi  Wa Firaun kay zikr mein kuttay aur Khanzir ki towheen huwi. Hasal kalam keh Tashbeeh wasteh ilfaaz tashbeeh ka zikr zeroori nahin sirf  paleedoon kafiroon mein gina janay say towheen ho jaati heh. Thanvi Sahib kay lafz ko agar bilkul hi hifz kar denh ya taweel itna is-qadr aur yeh bi keren toh kuch farq nahin parta keun kay phir tashbeeh isharatan sabat huwi joh asool Um ul-Momineen say sabat heh. ii) Tasbeeh Wazia: Ibarat Hifz ul-Iman mein wazia lafz aisa likha heh: “… agar baaz uloom ghaybiyah muraad hen toh is mein hazoor hi ki kia takhsees heh aisa ilm ghayb toh Zaid wa Umar balkeh har sabbi wa majnoon balkeh jami hawanaat wa bahim kay leyeh bi hasil heh. Aisa tashbeeh wasteh istimal hota heh. Agar aisa ko zaat e RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) kay ilm ghayb taraf lotaya jahay toh phir mana huwa; joh ilm ghayb RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) ko hasil heh aisa ilm ghayb bi janwaroon pagloon bachoon ko hasil heh to phir takhsees nah rahi. Aur agar aisa ko baaz ki taraf lotaya jahay toh tashbeeh ka rasta badalta heh tashbeeh khatam nahin hoti. Ibarat ka mana hoga … ilm ghayb joh RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) ko hasil heh aisa baaz zaid Umar, Sabi majnoon hawanat ko hasil heh toh takhsees ki waja nah rahi.

    Hifz ul-Iman ki tashbeeh do wujuhat ki bina par Kufr huwi: i) Agar Thanvi RasoolAllah ka ilm ghayb ko qatti yaqeeni kamil akmal la rayb wala manta heh toh janwaroon pagaloon  bachoon say tashbeeh deh kar pagloon bachoon janwaroon kay ilm ghayb ko bi qatti yaqeeni kamil akmal tehraya. Jis waja say Allamah Umar Ucharvi (rahimullah) nay ibarat Hifz ul-Iman kay radd mein likha kay phir agar in sab ka ilm qatti yaqeeni heh toh phir RasoolAllah (sallallahua alyhi wa aalihi was’sallam) par keun imaan laya jah udhar kuttoon ki taraf mar aur un par imaan lah. ii) Dosra mana yeh bi nikalta heh kay agar janwaroon ka ilm qatti/yaqeeni Thanvi nah manay balkay Ahle Islam ki tara zanni shak shuba wala manay toh phir aisoon kay ilm ghayb say tashbeeh deh kar us nay RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) kay ilm ko bi zanni shak o shuba wala tehra deeya. Jis mein towheen e RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) bi huwi aur un kay ilm ki khasoosiat ka inqaar bi aur mutawatira say sabat qatti yaqeeni ilm ka darja gira kar shak o shuba wala tehraya aur Nabuwat e RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) aur Wahi e Illahi joh milti thi us mein shak o shuba dala aur yeh bi Kufr heh.

    Shahid Ahle Kufr kahen keh kay aisa mana itna, is-qadr, yeh mein istimal huwa heh jaisay Manzoor Naumani nay Taweelat keenh. Aur in mana mein aisa Tashbeeh wasteh nahin. Awal toh janab kay gar say hi Hussain Ahmad Madani ki gawahi mojood heh kay lafz aisa hifz ul-Iman mein tashbeeh wasteh istimal huwa heh. Chalen choren Hussain Ahmad Madani pagal thah bhonk gaya ham Deobandi toh nah maneh gay. Aayeh sabat keren kay lafz aisa yahan par sirf Tashbeeh wasteh hi ho sakta heh aur agar mana is-qadr, itna, yeh mein bi ho toh phir bi Tashbeeh wasteh hee hen. Dekhyeh asool musallam heh kay kissi aik ki kissi dosray par fazeelat ya barabari ya khami sabat karni ho toh taqabuli muwazna lazam heh yehni comparision/tashbeeh. Zaid ki agar Amr par Takhsees sabat karni ho ya takhsees ka radd toh donoon ki khoobiyoon ka comparision yehni Zaid aur Amr mein tashbeeh/comparision lazam heh. Warna ba-ghayr comparision aik ki dosray par bartari sabat nahin hoti. Thanvi Sahib ki ibarat Hifz ul-Iman mein taqabuli jaiza leeya gaya, tashbeeh dee gahi, aur nateejan kaha gaya kay RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) ko ilm ghayb kay jannay ki waja say janwaroon, pagaloon bachoon par kohi takhsees hasil nahin. Is waja say ibarat mein taqabul subut Tashbeeh heh. Aur yeh bi musallam heh kay Tashbeeh taqabuli bi hoti heh. Misaal tor par lion bhot bahadur aur taqatwar heh aur aisay hi Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Allah kay lion hen. Abh aap itna ko is-qadr, itna, yeh, aisa ba-mana baaz, aisa ba-mana ilm ghayb Nabi, jisteraf bi lotahen ibarat ki bunyad mein taqabuli jaiza heh jis waja say har aik harf mutabadil mein tashbeeh hi pahi jahay gi.

    Abh Umm ul-Momineen kay asool Tashbeeh Isharatan kay asool ko mad e nazr rakh kar HanafiGroup ki ibarat ki taraf atay hen. HanafiGroup Sahib ki ibarat yeh heh: “Phir yeh kay Hazrat ki zaat muqaddas par ilm ghayb agar ba-qawl Zaid (sahil) sahih ho to ham us say daryaft kartay hen keh is ghayb say murad kia heh yehni ghayb ka har fard ya baaz ghayb hee keun nah ho pas agar baaz ghayb murad heh toh aap (saw) ki takhsees nah rahi keun keh baaz ghayb ka ilm Zaid wa Umar balkeh har bachay aur deewana balkeh hawayannat ko bi hasil heh. [Ref: HanafiGroup – Ki Manh Pasand.] Janab nay koshish ki kay aisa ko nikaal kar tashbeeh ko hifz kar deeya jahay. Magr kufr jahl say Islam ka haq kabi chup nahin paya. Agar aisa ko bilkul hifz keeya jahay toh tab bi tashbeeh sabat huwi Umm ul-Momineen kay asool say, aur takhsees ka inqaar toh janab ki ibarat mein mojood heh. Jis ki explanation aur waja, i.e. ibarat hifz ul-Iman mein taqabuli jaiza, heh. Aur hukum kufr waja tashbeeh aur takhsees ka inqaar heh. Aur Thanvi aur HanafiGroup ki ibarat mein takhsees aur tashbeeh mojood heh. Farq sirf yeh kay Thanvi ki ibarat mein aisa bazahir mojood heh aur HanafiGroup ki manpasand ibarat (joh asal mein al-Muhannad ki ibarat ki naqal heh) mein tashbeeh implied/isharatan heh.


  22. Wahhabi: Hadith-2194 and Hadith-3492 both state three Talaq were deemed one during life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and during Caliphate of Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu). In this context Hadith (-2191) of Rukanah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is interpreted to mean; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) made his three Talaq into one.

    Sunni: (i) How do you know Ahadith, Hadith-2194 and Hadith-3492 are inclusive of all/every three Talaq in one sitting! Without contextual information it would be leap of false Qiyas to act on this Hadith and apply it upon every three Talaq. You’re aware of principle Ihtimal (i.e. possibility) invalidates Istidlal (i.e. inference). (ii) You believe, correct me if I am wrong, ALL instances of three Talaq in one sitting are ONE TALAQ. Hadith-2194 and Hadith-3492 does not state ALL such Talaqs are one. You’ve assumed all into text Hadith. There is Ihtimal (i.e. possibility) only some three Talaq in one sitting are one and not every three Talaq in one sitting. And this Ihtimal invalidates your Istidlal. (iii) Hadith (-2191) of Rukanah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) does not explicitly state companion gave three Talaq in one sitting it just states he divorced her irrevocably. Ihtimal is that he could have divorced her on three menstrual periods. This Ihtimal also invalidates your Istidlal.

    Wahhabi: i) Imam Abu Dawud (rahimullah) said Rukanah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had issued three Talaq in one sitting. You said he could have given three Talaq on three menstrual periods. That cannot be possible because of two main reasons: ii) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would have validated divorce. Why would he not invalidate marriage if it was three Talaqs as prescribed by Quran? iii) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) recited verse this verse admonishes him: "O Prophet, when you divorce women, divorce them at their appointed periods." Why would Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) quote this verse then? This can only make sense if Abd Yazid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had divorced Umm Rukanah (radiallah ta’ala anha) against the instructed method.

    Sunni: If you can get plausible answer to your points you will agree Ihtimalaat have invalidated your inferred evidence/argument?

    Wahhabi: No! If your plausible answer fits into text of Hadith I will concede point.

    Sunni: i) Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu), Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu), and Imam Malik (radiallah ta’ala anhu) were closer to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then Imam Abu Dawood (radiallah ta’ala anhu). When I cited their judgments as evidence you rejected their judgments and you cited what Imam Abu Dawood’s (rahimullah) said to substantiate your position. You can abandon companions and their judgments and you expect me to adhere to judgment of Imam Abu Dawud (rahimullah). You shouldn’t expect and shouldn’t demand that I hold to scholarly views which you reject yourself. ii) There have been special exceptions to norm. Companion who broke his fast and as an act of atonement … he was told go eat dates yourself and feed your family. Quran indicates four wives but Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had eleven wives. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) may have made special exception in case of three Talaq issued by Rukanah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). iii) You did not read the Hadith properly. Hadith states Abd Yazid divorced Umm Rukanah (radiallah ta’ala anha) and then married woman of Banu Muzaynah. Umm Rukanah (radiallah ta’ala anha) went to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and he instructed Abd Yazid to divorce his wife. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed Abd Yazid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to divorce his new wife not Umm Rukanah (radiallah ta’ala anha) because she was already divorced. He divorced his new wife and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed him to take his ex-wife back. Then recited verse quoted by you because he divorced his new wife instantly with three Talaq in one sitting. With this interpretation we have proof for an exceptional case of three Talaqs being made void but no proof for three Talaqs becoming one. You can argue no he recited verse because of Umm Rukanah (radiallah ta’ala anha) but my interpretation proves there is Ihtimal of another interpretation in this Hadith and therefore your Istidlal is invalid. [Readers should take note that I had not consulted other Ahadith on this topic and interpreted Hadith-2191 in isolation.]

    Wahhabi: I can see how you derived your understanding of Hadith-2191 but Brother I cannot accept Ihtimal invalidating Istidlal principle. How can that be correct?

    Sunni: It is an agreed upon principle by all sects that Ihtimal of another interpretation invalidates Istidlal. You presented these evidences to prove your position. I argued back proving these evidences do not conclusively prove three Talaq issued in one sitting is one. It is your job to provide satisfactory evidence in support of your position.

    Wahhabi: This has turned into a never ending discussion so I will purpose way to end it: i) I quoted these Ahadith; Hadith-2194 and Hadith-3492. If you quote me evidence; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) deemed three Talaq issued in one sitting as valid I will concede and accept our position is not established. ii) About Hadith of Umm Rukanah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) you theorized one Talaq was intended and two additional were for emphasis. If you prove this I will concede and admit our understanding of Hadith is incorrect. If you fail you will admit your position is invalid. Right? It is time for Namaz/Salah. Salam Alaykum.

    Sunni: I will acknowledge lack of my knowledge and after thoroughly investigating however long it takes if I find our position is invalid I will leave it. [He signed out.]

    Episode Two – Return Of Sunni And Truth Obliterating Falsehood:

    Sunni: As promised my Brother I am back. Salam Alaykum.

    Wahhabi: Brother I am so glad you’re back. Wa Alaykum Salam. Are you back with substance or back for more beating you took last time?

    Sunni: I don’t recall me giving up under pretext that it has become never ending discussion when things got hard for me. Smile.

    Wahhabi: I purposed way to solve the dispute. You have had week to prepare for this so I am guessing you believe you’re prepared.

    Sunni: Prepared as much as I needed to be. You purposed how we can solve the dispute and it is absolutely fine but needs tiny improvement.

    Wahhabi: Brother you’re making excuses because you know you cannot meet my demands. Your improvements will be changes which you will be able to meet.

    Sunni: Brother I am not making any changes to what you demanded but about to say all your evidence needs to be explained in a way that no contradiction between my evidence and your evidence remains.

    Wahhabi: How you going to do that?

    Sunni: Watch me and learn. First I will explain your evidence in light of prophetic Sunnah and then meet your demands.

    Wahhabi: OK! Make it harder for yourself. Lolz. Why don’t you just give-up this bravado Brother because we both know your just empty vessel making loud noise.

    Sunni: Your first evidence was Hadith of Rukanah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Following Hadith: “Narrated Abdullah Ibn Abbas: Abd Yazid the father of Rukanah and his brothers divorced Umm Rukanah and married a woman of the tribe of Muzaynah. She went to the Prophet and said: He is of no use to me except that he is as useful to me as a hair; and she took a hair from her head. So separate me from him. The Prophet became furious. He called on Rukanah and his brothers. He then said to those who were sitting beside him. Do you see so-and-so who resembles Abdu Yazid in respect of so-and-so; and so-and-so who resembles him in respect of so-and-so? They replied: Yes. The Prophet said to Abdu Yazid: Divorce her (the wife from Banu Muzaynah). Then he did so. He said: Take your wife the mother of Rukanah and his brothers, back in marriage. He said: I have divorced her by three pronouncements, Messenger of Allah. He said: I know: Take her back. He then recited the verse: "O Prophet, when you divorce women, divorce them at their appointed periods." [Ref: Abu Dawud, B12, H2191, here.] With regards to it I said it is not about three Talaq in one instance but I was wrong. I affirm it was/is about three Talaq in one instance.

    Wahhabi: This refutes me doesn’t it Brother? Lolz.

    Sunni: Summarizing before I start. Calm down. I also said three Talaq in this Hadith can be in sense; one was intended, and two for emphasis. And I have found evidence which supports this indirectly.

    Wahhabi: Your evidence is in Fiqha of Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimullah)? Lolz.

    Sunni: “It was narrated from Abdullah bin Ali bin Yazid bin Rukanah, from his father, from his grandfather that: He divorced his wife irrevocably (i.e. three times), then he came to the Messenger of Allah and asked him. He said: ‘What did you mean by that?’ He said: ‘One (divorce).’ He said: ‘By Allah did you only mean one (divorce) thereby?’ He said: ‘By Allah, I meant one.’ Then he sent her back to him.Muhammad bin Majah said: I heard Abul-Hasan Ali bin Muhammad Tanafisi saying: ‘How noble is this Hadith.’ Ibn Majah said: 'Abu Ubaid left it (i.e. did not narrate it) and Ahmad was fearful of it. [Ref: Ibn Majah, B10, H2051, here.] “Ali b. Yazid b. Rukanah reported on the authority of his father from his grandfather that he (Rukanah) divorced his wife absolutely (i.e. three times); so he came to the Messenger of Allah. He asked (him): What did you intend? He said: A single utterance of divorce. He said: Do you swear by Allah? He replied: I swear by Allah. He said: It stands as you intended.” Abu Dawud said: This tradition is sounder than that of Ibn Juraij that Rukanah divorced his wife by three pronouncements, for they are the members of his family and they are more aware for him. The tradition of Ibn Juraij has been narrated by some children of Abu Rafi' from 'Ikrimah on the authority of Ibn 'Abbas. “ [Ref: Abu Dawud, B12, H2202, here.]

    Wahhabi: Give me link I want to check reference.

    Sunni: He gave three Talaqs intended one and logically the other two were for emphasis so Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) decided it was one Talaq.

    Wahhabi: Brother I didn’t know these Ahadith existed. I trusted Ahle Hadith scholarship.

    Sunni: I know Brother. You have been flying little too high due to your Taqleed of Wahhabi scholarship but I must continue.

    Wahhabi: I wasn’t being arrogant Brother Ali. I was just messing with you.

    Sunni: You also quoted following Hadith: “Tawus said: Abu al-Sahba said to Ibn Abbas: Do you know that a divorce by three pronouncements was made a single one during the time of the Prophet and of Abu-Bakr and in the early days of the caliphate of Umar? He replied: Yes.” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B12, H2194, here.] Note Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) narrated this Hadith. Following Hadith is also narrated by Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in which he clearly states that three Talaq was one if couples had not had sexual relationship: “Tawus said A man called Abu Al Sahba used to ask Ibn Abbas questions frequently. He asked “Do you know that when a man divorced his wife by three pronouncements before sexual intercourse with her, they (the people) made it a single divorce during the time of the Apostle of Allah, of Abu Bakr and in the early phase of the caliphate of ‘Umar?” Ibn “Abbas said “Yes, when a man divorced his wife by three pronouncement before sexual intercourse they made it a single divorce during the time of the Apostle of Allah, of Abu Bakr and in the early phase of the caliphate of ‘Umar. When he saw that the people frequently divorced (by three pronouncements) he said “Make them operative on them (i.e., on women).” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B12, H2193, here.] Note this Hadith is also narrated by Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu). In Hadith-2197 he did not narrate the context but in Hadith-2193 he narrated context, when and why, three Talaq became one. In your understanding EVERY/ALL instances of three divorces in an instant is ONE divorce therefore this Hadith does not support your position.

    Wahhabi: I want to check Urdu translation. There is something fishy in these translations.

    Sunni: You said three Talaqs are one and you quoted these Ahadith to support your foundation: “Tawus said: Abu al-Sahba said to Ibn Abbas: Do you know that a divorce by three pronouncements was made a single one during the time of the Prophet and of Abu-Bakr and in the early days of the caliphate of Umar? He replied: Yes.” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B12, H2194, here.] “Abu Sahba said to Ibn Abbas: Do you know that three (divorces) were treated as one during the lifetime of Allah's Apostle, and that of Abu Bakr, and during three (years) of the caliphate of Umar? Ibn Abbas said: Yes.” [Ref: Muslim, B9, H3492, here.] This is clearly and absolutely contradicted by following Hadith from Sahih Muslim: “Abu al-Sahba said to Ibn Abbas: Enlighten us with your information whether the three divorces (pronounced at one and the same time) were not treated as one during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger and Abu Bakr. He said: It was in fact so, but when during the caliphate of Umar people began to pronounce divorce frequently, he allowed them to do so (to treat pronouncements of three divorces in a single breath as one).” [Ref: Sahih Muslim, B9, H3493, here.] According to this Hadith it was Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) who allowed three divorces to be treated as one but in the time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) this was not the case.

    Wahhabi: Brother you’re talking rubbish. Where are you getting all this?

    Sunni: Brother Read Ahadith don’t shoot the delivery service guy and if you don’t believe me check Urdu translations.

    Wahhabi: Even if this is true Hadith then there is contradiction.

    Sunni: There is no contradiction between Hadith-3493 and what you quoted Brother. Your evidence of Ahadith in summary is: Hadith-2194 and Hadith-3492 are about SPECIFIC three Talaq issued in one breath to a virgin turning to one Talaq. Where as my evidence of Hadith-3493 is about GENERALLY three Talaq were not one Talaq.

    Wahhabi: You will have to provide proof that three Talaq were not one in other instances and I will accept.

    Sunni: I will but first I need to put something else in context. We established that three Talaq were generally three. Only except was in context of virgin getting divorced with instantaneous divorce or person intending one divorce but emphasizing it with two more. Now question is which Talaq did Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made three in his Caliphate time? Answer is all exceptions including three Talaq of virgin, three Talaq given but one intended, two to emphasize the first one, he made them all three.

    Wahhabi: I am still waiting on your answer to my explanation of Sunnah of Caliph Hadith.

    Sunni: Noted that down Brother next time. Right now I am trying to go through this portion.

    Wahhabi: It would be interesting to read what you have to say on that.

    Sunni: Now what remains is for me to prove that three divorces were three even in time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). It is recorded in Hadith that Uwaimir (radiallah ta’ala anhu) divorced his wife three times in presence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “Narrated Sahl bin Sa`d As-Sa`idi: Uwaimir Al-Ajlani came to Asim bin Adi Al-Ansari and asked, "O Asim! Tell me, if a man sees his wife with another man, should he kill him, whereupon you would kill him in Qisas, or what should he do? O Asim! Please ask Allah's Messenger about that." Asim asked Allah's Messenger about that. Allah's Apostle disliked that question and considered it disgraceful. What Asim heard from Allah's Messenger was hard on him. When he returned to his family, 'Uwaimir came to him and said "O Asim! What did Allah's Messenger say to you?" Asim said, "You never bring me any good. Allah's Messenger disliked hearing the problem which I asked him about." Uwaimir said: "By Allah, I will not leave the matter till I ask him about it." So Uwaimir proceeded till he came to Allah's Messenger who was in the midst of the people and said: "O Allah's Messenger! If a man finds with his wife another man, should he kill him, whereupon you would kill him (in Qisas): or otherwise, what should he do?" Allah's Messenger said: "Allah has revealed something concerning the question of you and your wife. Go and bring her here." So they both carried out the judgment of Lian, while I was present among the people (as a witness). When both of them had finished, Uwaimir said, "O Allah's Messenger! If I should now keep my wife with me, then I have told a lie". Then he pronounced his decision to divorce her thrice before Allah's Apostle ordered him to do so. (Ibn Shihab said, "That was the tradition for all those who are involved in a case of Lian." [Ref: Bukhari, B63, H185, here.] Another Hadith on same incident reveals that Uwaimir (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had told truth and his wife had illicit sexual intercourse with another man: “Narrated Ibn Juraij: Ibn Shihab informed me of Lian and the tradition related to it, referring to the narration of Sahl bin Sa`d, the brother of Bani Sa`idi He said: "An Ansari man came to Allah's Messenger and said: 'O Allah's Apostle! If a man saw another man with his wife, should he kill him, or what should he do?' So Allah revealed concerning his affair what is mentioned in the Holy Qur'an about the affair of those involved in a case of Lian. The Prophet said: 'Allah has given His verdict regarding you and your wife.' So they carried out Lian in the mosque while I was present there. When they had finished, the man said: "O Allah's Messenger! If I should now keep her with me as a wife then I have told a lie about her. Then he divorced her thrice before Allah's Messenger ordered him, when they had finished the Lian process. So he divorced her in front of the Prophet." Ibn Shihab added: "After their case, it became a tradition that a couple involved in a case of Lian should be separated by divorce. That lady was pregnant then, and later on her son was called by his mother's name. The tradition concerning their inheritance was that she would be his heir and he would inherit of her property the share Allah had prescribed for him." Ibn Shihab said that Sahl bin Sa`d As'Saidi said that the Prophet said (in the above narration), "If that lady delivers a small red child like a lizard, then the lady has spoken the truth and the man was a liar, but if she delivers a child with black eyes and huge lips, then her husband has spoken the truth." Then she delivered it in the shape one would dislike (as it proves her guilty). [Bukhari, B63, H229, here] This proves three Talaq were not one in time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And Hadith-229 records Uwaimir (radiallah ta’ala anhu) divorced his wife after Li’an (i.e. mutually invoking curse of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala) and this had not been done before him. Rather his act of issuing Talaq set a precedent and others followed his example in such cases. This establishes it became a norm for Li’an to end marriage via three Talaq after Li’an. And there is not a single Hadith which states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said these three Talaq are to be counted as one.

    Wahhabi: I will be back in few minutes Brother. You can continue.

    Sunni: Earlier you quoted Hadith that Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said in the time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) three Talaqs were one. Yet Hadith records Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) invalidate Nikkah in cases of such Talaq: “Mujahid said: I was with Ibn Abbas. A man came to him and said that he divorced his wife by three pronouncements. I kept silence and thought that he was going to restore het to him. He then said: A man goes and commits a foolish act and then says; ‘O Ibn Abbas! Allah has said: ‘And for those who fear Allah, He (ever) prepares a way out.’ Since you did not keep duty to Allah I do not find a way out for you. You disobeyed your Lord and your wife was separated from you. Allah has said ‘O Prophet! When you divorce women divorce them in the beginning of their waiting period.” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B12, H2192, here.] In another Hadith recorded in Muwatta Imam Malik (rahimullah) Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) has issued same Fatwah that three Talaq or more invalidate Nikkah: “Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that a man said to Abdullah Ibn Abbas: ‘I have divorced my wife by saying I divorce you a hundred times. What do you think my situation is?’ Ibn Abbas said to him: ‘She was divorced from you by three pronouncements, and by the ninety-seven, you have mocked the ayat of Allah.’" [Ref: Muwatta Malik, B29, H1153, here.]

    Wahhabi: Wouldn’t that mean he gave Fatwah against the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)?

    Sunni: Why would you deduce that?

    Wahhabi: If prophetic Sunnah was contrary to his Fatwah then naturally it would be against Sunnah.

    Sunni: Brother I don’t know what and how you view Sahabah as but in my understanding a Sahabi would not knowingly give Fatwah against prophetic teaching. And in case of Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) he knew prophetic Sunnah of three divorces in one breath meaning three.

    Wahhabi: So what you make of his statement that in the time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) three Talaq were one?

    Sunni: Brother Sahabi understands prophetic Sunnah better then you and me. He understands his own statements better then you and me. And he issues judgments better then you and me. When these are true don’t you think his statement three Talaq was one is better understood by him then you? I want answer for this Brother.

    Wahhabi: Sahabi!

    Sunni: Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) himself contextualized his own general statement of three Talaq was one in specific context of virgin getting divorce. Are you all claiming to know prophetic Sunnah and meaning of statement of Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) better then Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu)? Don’t forget Sahabi is better in knowledge of Sunnah and Taqwa then Wahhabi. [He didn’t say anything so I asked.] Can I continue with my final piece of evidence?

    Wahhabi: Yes but quickly.

    Sunni: Ahadith record Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) also judged three Talaqs in one breath to mean three Talaqs which invalidate Nikkah: “When Ibn Umar was asked about a man who divorced his wife when she was menstruating, he would say: ’If it is the first or second divorce, the Messenger of Allah would tell him to take her back and keep her until she has menstruated again and purified herself, then divorce her before having intercourse with her. But if it was three simultaneous divorces, then you have disobeyed Allah with regard to the way in which divorce should be conducted and your wife has become irrevocably divorced.’" [Ref: Sunan Nisa’i, B27, H3587, here.] There is little ambiguity in Hadith-189 but if you pay attention you will realize it also means the same: “Nafi said: When Ibn Umar was asked about person who had given three divorces, he said: "Would that you gave one or two divorces, for the Prophet ordered me to do so. If you give three divorces then she cannot be lawful for you until she has married another husband (and is divorced by him)." [Ref: Bukhari, B63, H189, here.]

    Wahhabi: Can you explain how Hadith-189 amounts to evidence for three Talaq in one sitting? It can also be three menstrual period Talaqs.

    Sunni: Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was asked about three divorces in one breath. He said it would have been better if he had given one or two. If he had given one each at end of every menstrual period then why would Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) would make suggestion of one, or two, because then in his suggestion/advice there would be no benefit. If companion had given three Talaq in one go, in one sitting, in one breath, in an instant then his advice/suggestion would make sense because issuing three would end marriage but one or two would leave room to revoke Talaq.

    Wahhabi: Salam Alaykum. [He signed out.]

    Sunni: I have concluded my response now if you have anything to say you can have your say. [He had gone by this time so I got no response.]

    Episode Three – Three Talaq Is A Rejected Innovation And Nikkah Stands:

    Sunni: Salam Alaykum Brother.

    Wahhabi: Wa Alaykum Salam.

    Sunni: You want to add something or respond to something?

    Wahhabi: No not right now. You have caught me off guard. I will have to research on what you said. I have to say for now everything makes sense but your explanation does not fit with Ahadith of; every innovation is misguidance and Ahadith of; a matter which is not from Islam is rejected.

    Sunni: Can I respond to your point about Sunnah of Caliphs? Otherwise I will forget again.

    Wahhabi: Yeah! Respond to that point first.

    Sunni: Brother following is just a brief summary of what transpired. It may not be exactly as stated here because I will be adding our motives and objectives into this summary.

    Wahhabi: I don’t remember anything about our earlier discussion apart from that one point so you can make up what you like. Lolz.

    Sunni: Our entire discussion on subject of Talaq e Thalathah is safe with me; PalTalk audio and written exchanges, E-Mail, WhatsApp audio and written exchanges, all are safe with me. Eventually our discussion will feature, here. I am MuhammedAli. Smile. I won’t publish your name, email address, and other details.

    Wahhabi: I can’t check right now but will do. Definitely later. You will write all this and publish it?

    Sunni: Will do.

    Wahhabi: Good luck then Brother.

    Sunni: I have prepared discussion ten times longer then this. Smile.

    Wahhabi: OK! Brother can we get to Sunnah of Caliphs Hadith.

    Sunni: You said Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) ordered three Talaq being three and before his Caliphate it was one. Therefore you cannot accept three Talaq being three because his actions went against prophetic Sunnah. I responded saying even if this is the case; we are instructed in Hadith to follow Sunnahs of rightly guided Caliphs. So we have to obey rightly guided Caliph and deem three Talaq issued in one sitting as three. You then responded with; scholars said Hadith is being incorrectly interpreted and applied because scholars said Sunnah of Caliphs is those prophetic Sunnahs which Caliphs apply as law. Therefore Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs is not inclusive of their own Ijtihadat and innovative Sunnahs. End. You would agree something like that could have transpired?

    Wahhabi: You got my stance right and that’s all that really matters to me not the context.

    Sunni: I quote the Hadith: “It was said to him: 'O Messenger of Allah, you have delivered a speech of farewell, so enjoin something upon us.' He said: 'I urge you to fear Allah, and to listen and obey, even if (your leader) is an Abyssinian slave. After I am gone, you will see great conflict. I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the Sunnah (i.e. Path) of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, and cling stubbornly to it. And beware of newly-invented matters, for every innovation is a going astray.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H42, here.] Which scholars said Sunnah of Caliphs is referring to prophetic Sunnahs which Caliphs make law?

    Wahhabi: Shaykh ul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah (rahma-ullah) explained it in his Majmu al-Fatawah but I cannot recall precise reference. It shouldn’t matter because my understanding is just that.

    Sunni: I doubt it but let us continue. However you play Brother you loose at the end. If you agree that Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs is referring to Ijtihadaat of rightly guided Caliphs then you will have to obey RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and accept Ijtihadi Sunnah of Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu). This translates to mean that you will have to accept three Talaq is three after Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) judged it to be so. If you hold to your position that Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs is referring to those prophetic Sunnahs which Caliphs make into law then you will have to accept and obey Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Implication of this is; Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) took prophetic teaching of three Talaq is three and made it law. With your interpretation of Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs is about prophetic Sunnah you have refuted your very foundation of your position (i.e. in life time of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam three Talaq were one). Not surprisingly your indirect invalidation of your stance on Talaq e Thalathah is actually supported with evidence. And I have already provided proof of it earlier. Smiles.

    Wahhabi: Brother you’re wasting time because I already told you I will have to investigate everything. Why are you barking up the wrong tree? [First sign of anger building in him.] There was no need to put it [the statement of Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs] in context of Talaq Thalathah discussion. I wanted you to prove your assertion why Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs is about innovations. If you can then prove how and why this statement is about innovations of Caliphs.

    Sunni: Brother that’s simple. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, and cling stubbornly to it. And beware of newly-invented matters, for every innovation is a going astray.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H42, here.] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed the believers to adhere to his Sunnah. If a Jahil teaches you a prophetic Sunnah, or a common man, or an Aalim, or your brother, or your mother, or a rightly guided Caliph makes it a law, or an evil Caliph; will you say no I will not follow the prophetic Sunnah! Regardless of who teaches or makes prophetic Sunnah into law you will act according to it and accept it. Prophetic Sunnah will not be disputed or rejected by believers.

    Wahhabi: Why are you telling me this Brother? I am loosing my patience with your never ending responses. [He signed out.]

    Sunni: Sunnahs (i.e. practices) innovated via Ijtihad by Caliphs could have been challenged and rejected. Result of this would be strife in Ummah so Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed us to follow their innovated practices (i.e. Sunnahs).

    Wahhabi: Brother how can they be allowed to innovate Sunnahs of their own when every innovation is misguidance?

    Sunni: Brother absolutely every innovation is not evil. Otherwise what will you do about Sahih Bukhari? Every innovation of a certain type is evil innovation and misguidance and it takes to hellfire. If you take prophetic statement absolutely literally then what will you make of prophetic statement: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466, here.] Note Hadith states any who introduces a SUNNAH IN ISLAM will earn equal reward to one who follows the good Sunnah introduced in Islam. So Ijtihadi innovations/Sunnahs introduced by Caliphs are not same as the prophetic Sunnahs. We interpret phrase Sunnahs of Caliphs in light of this Hadith. And we have proof Caliphs did introduce good innovations in Islam which they said are good/excellent innovation. I mean Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) saying Taraweeh of entire month, in Masjid, under single Qari, entire Quran recited is an excellent innovation. You follow his innovated Sunnah and we do too.

    Wahhabi: This Hadith [of good Sunnah in Islam] is about prophetic Sunnahs.

    Sunni: Brother how can I introduce a prophetic Sunnah in Islam and earn equal reward like the one who follows it? Isn’t prophetic Sunnah already part of Islam? And if I teach someone prophetic Sunnah have I introduced it in Islam? If answer to all is no then how this Hadith can refer to prophetic Sunnahs which are already part of Islam. This Hadith is about those Sunnahs which are not part of Islam but are made part of Islam and one who innovates a good Sunnah in Islam and those who follow the good innovative Sunnah will earn equal reward. In this context we have Taraweeh of entire month, under a single Qari, performed in Masjid and Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) making all instances of three Talaq into three. He even removed exceptions of virgin girl Talaq being one and three Talaq of emphasis. And regarding Taraweeh of entire month … Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said it is an excellent innovation. Therefore Sunnahs of rightly guided Caliphs does not refer to prophetic Sunnahs but to innovative Ijtihadi good Sunnahs which rightly guided Caliphs introduced into Islam.

    Wahhabi: Brother this Hadith is actually referring to actions of companions. Contextually poor Bedouins came to Madinah and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) encouraged companions  to give Sadaqah to them. This statement is about a companion who had started off the process of giving Sadaqah and those who were encouraged by his actions to give Sadaqah. To tell them of their reward Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466, here.] I don’t understand why you’re distorting this Hadith. It perfectly fits into context of historical event.

    Sunni: Let me ask you something very simple. Did the companion who started off process of giving Sadaqah and those who followed did they introduce Sadaqah in Islam: Or was it already part of Islam and they acted on it?

    Wahhabi: It was already part of Islam I believe.

    Sunni: Yes! Sadaqah was already part of Islam and the companion who started the ball rolling and those who followed his example did not introduce it in Islam. If something is already part of Islam then our action on it does not mean we have introduced it in Islam. It is common sense. Do you agree with this?

    Wahhabi: What other choice do I have Brother! I have already said it was part of Islam. Brother just make your point and don’t beat around the bush. [I had to go to attend my son so we continued in next meeting.]

    Sunni: You could have said Sadaqah was not part of Islam and companions by giving Sadaqah introduced a new practice in Islam. But that would be self defeating for you because this would prove that we Muslims can introduce things into Islam which were not already part of it on condition that they do not contradict spirit of Islam. You took the route that it was already part of Islam then my question to you is how does prophetic statement refer to the historical context? You will have to agree it doesn’t in fact you have previously said Sadaqah was already part of Islam. This is indirect admission that prophetic statement does not fit the historical context. And there is something else that does not fit the historical context and that is statement which followed it: “And he who introduced some evil practice in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without theirs being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466, here.] Later part of Hadith has no connection with giving Sadaqah. Why should the first part of Hadith apply contextually to historical event and not this part.  Did the companions introduce an evil Sunnah in Islam? If not and you reason no but he was just warning them if they did introduce evil practice in Islam they would be responsible like the one who starts it off. Precisely Brother this logic can also be applied to ”… good Sunnah in Islam …” part of Hadith also because we already know nothing was introduced in Islam by companions and Sadaqah was already part of Islam. Hence Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was using the event to tell the companions; if you introduce some good Sunnah in Islam you will and those who follow will equally be rewarded for it. And this would prove that both parts, good Sunnah and evil Sunnah, both do not apply to historical events rather Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) used the event as an excuse to issue a teaching for benefit of Muslims.

    Wahhabi: This has gone on for so long that I actually forgot why we even discussed this Hadith.

    Sunni: We started discussion on this Hadith because I was proving that Sunnah of Khulafah Rashideen (i.e. rightly guided Caliphs) are innovated good Sunnahs and not prophetic Sunnahs. And I quoted this Hadith to argue that Sunnah of Caliphs is interpreted in light of; whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam. And I pointed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) made distinction between his Sunnah and Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs by saying follow my Sunnah and Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs.

    Wahhabi: There are two reasons why I find your point of view hard to accept: i) You said: “Sunnahs (i.e. practices) innovated via Ijtihad by Caliphs could have been challenged and rejected. Result of this would be strife in Ummah so Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed us to follow their innovated practices (i.e. Sunnahs).” Your justification is based on Qiyas. Evidence of Hadith saying the same would convince me. ii) The main reason is that you said Muslims can introduce innovations INTO Islam. Brother the right to legislate religion is of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). How can you say and believe Muslims can innovate into Islam good Sunnahs/Biddahs. If this was permissible there would be countless Islams. You’re opening the gate of misguidance and innovations wholesale. You’re very persuasive Shaytan I can give you that. I am beginning to loose my patience with you Brother.

    Sunni: OK! My best possible approximation is bothering you. Brother when you’re asked why Khanzir is prohibited in Islam by disbelievers. What do you say to them? Its dirty and filthy animal. Where did you get this answer from Quran or Sunnah? You have looked at its behaviour and gave best possible/likely reason due to which it was prohibited in Islam. When a Kafir enquires from you why isn’t woman allowed to marry four men like man is allowed four wives. What do you say? O the men wouldn’t know who is father of which child. Is this stated in Quran/Hadith or you have deduced best possible/likely reason why it has been prohibited? But in context of Hadith of follow my Sunnah and Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs I exercised liberty which everyone else does so and you’re hurting in your guts. Are the rules not same for you and me? When you deduce a best possible reason according to your own intellect and understanding of environment its all HALAL but I am Mujrim (i.e. criminal) if I did the same. Just to unhurt your guts. I take my statement and instead say; tough cookies mate. Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said you should follow his Sunnah and innovated Sunnahs of rightly guided Caliphs; and tough cookies. You don’t deserve WHY. Obey Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam).

    Wahhabi: Lolz. That wasn’t my main point Brother. Deal with the main point.

    Sunni: The right to legislate religion is of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) told His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) the following: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466, here.] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) legislated that any who introduces into Islam something which was not already part of it the innovator of good Sunnah and those who follow his good Sunnah all will get equal reward. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the Lord of universe, the legislator of religion of Islam and maker of its rules has informed us and told us there is reward for introducing good Sunnahs into Islam. Who do you think; you’re challenging His authority and prohibiting what He permitted? Are you rival of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? Have you elevated yourself to a status of Rabb/Ilah to abrogate and void religious injunctions of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? There is no Ilah/Rabb beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and you’re obliterated al-Batil.

    Wahhabi: The gate of Prophet-hood is closed and none can add, or alter, or abrogate any teaching of Islam. Wahi (i.e. revelation) has ceased and anyone who claims revelation is an al-Kadhab (i.e. the Liar) and a Dajjal (i.e. impostor). Are you opening the closed gate of Prophet-hood? Or are you saying revelation can be received by non-Prophets?  How can you add to Islam without a Prophet and without revelation? You’re crazy in head for sure but not crazy enough to believe Wahi can be received by non-Prophets. By believing innovations in Islam are allowed and due to it by default you’re opening the closed gate of Prophet-hood and claiming Wahi is sent to one who innovates a good Sunnah in Islam. This leads to conclusion you’re actually claiming those who innovated in Islam are Prophets. Shia indirectly ascribed Prophet-hood to their Imams and you Barelwis are their brothers and you’re no better. You’ve indirectly ascribed Prophet-hood to innovators. [Hold your rage until tomorrow. Lolz. He signed out.]

    Wahhabi: Salam Alaykum. I am here for about an hour and half then I will have to go. You can continue from where I left off.

    Sunni: Wa Alaykum salam. Brother Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught this principle: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466, here.] And despite this Hadith fact is Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is last Prophet after him no Prophet will be born and then sent as a Prophet/Messenger. Wahi is only received by Prophets and no non-Prophet person receives Wahi from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). When all this and Hadith of good Sunnah is true then natural conclusion should be and must be that introduction of good Sunnah in Islam does not require birth of another Prophet after Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and does not require coming of Wahi from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) via Jibraeel (alayhis salam).

    Wahhabi: You’re *uc*ing pissing me off. How else something can be part of Islam then you senseless moron?

    Sunni: Khabeeth if you can’t take Islam destroying your evill innovation then just quit. Otherwise stop using profanity.

    Wahhabi: Brother you know what you’re saying is outrageous. Who do you think will not react to what you’re saying?

    Sunni: A Deen educated Muslim will not react but would fully agree with me. If you’re not understanding something just wait. Do you think I am an idiot? This far I have substantiated everything I have claimed and I will explain how innovated good Sunnahs can be made part of Islam without claim of Prophet-hood and without need of Wahi.

    Wahhabi: OK! Go on then Brother. The suspense is killing me.

    Sunni: Your objection to Hadith stems from your misunderstanding about Islam. The Hadith says, reward is for good Sunnahs introduced in Islam, and you assume these good Sunnahs are made part of core of Islam, the fundamental Islam; which was revealed via Wahi to Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Innovated good Sunnah cannot be part of core/fundamental Islam which was revealed to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) because condition for being part of that is Wahi and Nabuwah.

    Wahhabi: Exactly that’s what I am saying Brother.

    Sunni: There are two Islams: i) Fundamental Islam/Core Islam - of Wahi and Nabi/Rasool, ii) Ijtihadi Islam – not revealed as part of Wahi but derived from Core Islam.

    Wahhabi: Can you give an example of each so I can grasp it better?

    Sunni: Fundamental Islam is Islam which is Quran and Tafsir of Quran known to us as prophetic Sunnah. An example of Ijtihadi Islam would be; Books of Hadith, or Taraweeh. Sahih Bukhari composed of prophetic Sunnahs. It is composed of Core Islam but Sahih Bukhari itself is not part of Core Islam. There is no verse or Hadith in which it is stated read Sahih Bukhari therefore it is not part of core Islam but it is composed of it.

    Wahhabi: I still don’t see why Bukhari would be considered part of Islam and as a good Sunnah in Islam. To be honest with you; you’re confusing me Brother Ali.

    Sunni: Is Sahih Bukhari an Islamic book?

    Wahhabi: If it wasn’t Islamic then why would it be so widely read.

    Sunni: Is it Islamic or un-Islamic?

    Wahhabi: Islamic!

    Sunni: Is there a verse in which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or a Hadith in which Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said read Sahih Bukhari, Sahih Muslim … to learn religion of Islam?

    Wahhabi: No!

    Sunni: Is Surah Ikhlas a Islamic Surah or un-Islamic?

    Wahhabi: Brother what are you going on about? Do you really need my answers on these?

    Sunni: Brother Sami’ullah can you just go along and answer the stupid questions.

    Wahhabi: It is Islamic! Now can you make your point.

    Sunni: Brother point is Surah Ikhlas is part of core Islam revealed via Wahi and you said it is ISLAMIC. Meaning you judged it to be part of Islam. With regards to Sahih Bukhari you also said it is Islamic but it is not revealed rather Imam Bukhari strived hard. His Ijtihad which resulted Sahih Bukhari you have termed ISLAMIC. Even though it was not revealed via Wahi. Point I am making is that alif can be said to be part of Islam in sense of Prophet/Messenger receiving revelation. And noon can be said to be part of Islam even though it is Ijtihad of a righteous Muslim. This establishes in our understanding there are two ways  in which something can be made part of Islam: i) Via Wahi to a Prophet/Messenger, ii) Via Ijtihad of Mujtahid when his Ijtihad is supported by what was revealed via Wahi.

    Wahhabi: If I got it right then you’re saying; good innovation is not part of revealed Islam but innovation is connected via umbilical cord with revealed Islam therefore it is judged to be part of Islam.

    Sunni: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466, here.] He did not mean to say; whoever introduces a good Sunnah in core Islam … He was actually talking about Ijtihadi innovative good Sunnahs made part of Islam because their justification is from core Islam. These good innovated Sunnahs are made up of matters which were revealed in core Islam. We have Taraweeh as example of this. Three day in leadership of a Qari in Masjid was Sunnah but entire month, in Masjid, under leadership of Qari was not part of core Islam but its foundation (i.e. Asl) is from core Islam therefore it is judged part of Islam. End. [About umbillical cord comment I said:] I couldn’t have phrased it better myself brother.

    Wahhabi: What is the umbillical cord that connects them then?

    Sunni: Umbilical cord in good innovation would be teaching of Quran/Sunnah.

    Wahhabi: I made the connection but I lost it again. Lolz.

    Sunni: OK! I am about to give a example by creating a good innovation. It might help. Call this innovation, Dua Namaz, and it involves reciting after every Salah; Surah Fatihah x3, Surah Ikhlas x3, Surah al-Kauthar x3 and then supplicating Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Surah Fatihah, Surah Ikhlas, Surah al-Kauthar, and Dua; all serve as umbillical cord between Quran/Sunnah and Dua Namaz.

    Wahhabi: OK! I am totally confused now. How can the umbillical cord also be same as the innovation itself?

    Sunni: Umbilical cord is; Surah Fatihah, Surah Ikhlas, Surah al-Kauthar and Dua. Dua Namaz is; Surah Fatihah x3, Surah Ikhlas x3, Surah al-Kauthar x3 and Dua at the end of Salah. Note specific repetition of three for each mentioned Surah and then Dua after each Salah is not part of Islam but each in their own right is part of core of Islam. Visual example would be imagine big sign board with neon lights in big writing it says Dua Namaz and in smaller writing; i) Surah Fatihah x3, ii) Surah Ikhlas x3, iii) Surah al-Kauthar x3, iv) and Dua. Now imagine a giant book labelled, Islam, and from this giant book four electrical cables are connected to and powering each of four. In other words revealed Islam, core Islam, is powering Dua Namaz but it is not Dua Namaz.

    Wahhabi: Allah Hafiz. Until we meet again. Salam Alayqum.

    Sunni: This proves  innovated good Sunnah can be deemed as part of Islam if they are derived from core Islam. And Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs are innovated good Sunnahs which are deemed to be part of Islam because they emerge from core Islam. Same principle applies to Mawlid, Khatam, Geeyarweenh … These itself are not part of core Islam but are derived from various teaching of core Islam therefore are deemed as being part of Islam.

    Wahhabi: I have to go. Brother it is work time I need to get ready and go. Salam Alaykum. [He signed out. I had to finish the train of thought so I E-Mailed the following to him.]

    Sunni: Well I have actually finished my response on subject of Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs and I believe I have convincingly responded to all of your points. So I will sum up the over-all point. You argued Talaq Thalathah was legalized and made effective as three during Khilafat of and by Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu). I responded saying we are under instruction to follow Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs. And I explained that Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs if it instructs us to follow innovated Sunnah of a Caliph then prophetic instruction is binding upon us therefore three Talaq in one breath is three. If Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs prophetic Sunnah which a Caliph implements as law then it means Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) implemented prophetic Sunnah of three Talaqs meaning three. We also discussed meaning of introducing good Sunnah in Islam and it was established good Sunnah in Islam can only be an innovation which was not already part of Islam but is made part of Islam. We also debated on if we incorporate innovated good Sunnah into [core] Islam revealed via Wahi to a Nabi/Rasool. It was established that innovated good Sunnah is made part of Islam because it incorporates and becomes a whole by borrowing Quranic and prophetic teachings. In other words innovated good Sunnah in Islam is amalgamation of Quranic, or prophetic Sunnahs, or combination of both. Three Talaq issued in an instant even if it is an innovation and Ijtihad of Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) it has a precedent from prophetic Sunnah. Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) looked at prophetic precedent where he counted three Talaq in an instant as three and made judgement that from now on all three Talaqs without exception will be counted as three. This is principally no different from Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) taking three day practice of Taraweeh under a Qari in Masjid and legalized it for entire month of Ramadhan. In three Talaq case he legalized it for every instance of three Talaq and in case of Taraweeh he legalized three day practice of Taraweeh for entire month. Principally he did exactly the same in both places. Taraweeh is accepted by you because Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah didn’t object and three Talaq being counted as three in every case is objected/disbelieved by you because Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah has objected/disbelieved and understood Deen of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) better then Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu). End. I am sorry but I am not done yet. I levelled the charge at you/your Wahhabi-kind that by you prohibiting innovative good Sunnahs in Islam you’re all indirectly elevating yourself as lords/gods against Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Because the right to legislate religion and make Halal and Haram is of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and by prohibiting what He has legalized you’re indirectly and unjustly claiming Ilahiyyah/Rububiyyah. So in return you levelled charge that I/We are claiming/attributing prophet-hood for those who introduced good innovations into Islam. End. Even before your accusation I had proven to you that Islam allows good Sunnahs to be introduced into Islam. What remained was your misunderstanding about how an innovation can be made part of Islam. You thought we believe innovation is made part of core-Islam the Islam revealed via Wahi to a Nabi/Rasool. I had established this is definitely not the case. Instead we mean something which is derived from Quran/Sunnah and which linguistically is said to be Islamic because it is derived from it like we say Sahih al-Bukhari is Islamic book; or it is said Bukhari is part of Islam. So I refuted your charge and logically and scripturally established my belief and understanding why we cannot be accused of opening closed gate of Wahi; or accused of ascribing prophet-hood to scholars. This brings me to what I expect from you in our next meeting. I want you to respond to my allegation and justify why you’re not setting your self as a rival of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) by prohibiting what He has allowed and attempting to void His teaching. On second thought I am going to tone that down. I want you to prove/reason why you’re not exercising right of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) by prohibiting innovative good Sunnahs in Islam which He has allowed. [End of E-Mail.]

    Wahhabi: You can accuse me of what you like. I don’t care.  I need to address the real issue.

    Sunni: Brother this discussion will be posted online just make note of that.

    Wahhabi: More of a reason to respond to real issue. How sneaky are you! You have me tangled in other subjects but yourself you respond to everything. On top of that you’re dictating what I need to respond to. GTFOH! [I believe he just cursed again.]

    Sunni: As you wish but don’t cry later on.

    Final Episode – Three Talaq Is An Innovation And Every Innovation Is Misguidance:

    Wahhabi: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said every innovation is misguidance: “And he would join his forefinger and middle finger; and would further say: ‘The best of the speech is embodied in the Book of Allah, and the best of the guidance is the guidance given by Muhammad. And the most evil affairs are their innovations; and every innovation is error.’" [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885, here.] Three Talaq in one sitting is an innovation regarding which you will not even disagree. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Narrated Aisha: Allah's Messenger said: ‘If somebody innovates something which is not in harmony with the principles of our religion, that thing is rejected.’" [Ref: Bukhari, B49, H861, here] Three Talaq in one sitting clearly goes against Quranic and prophetic teaching. I want to see how do you reconcile three Talaq in one sitting being an [evil] innovation and but yet accepted.

    Sunni: I agree three Talaq issued; in one instance, in one sitting, in one breath, in one instance is a rejected [evil] misguided innovation. The real issue is that does this rejected innovative three Talaq invalidate Nikkah?

    Wahhabi: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said innovation is rejected then how can we accept it and invalidate Nikkah?

    Sunni: Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) a companion and an Aalim, a Mujtahid agreed that it is rebellion against instruction of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and a sinful action but it invalidated marriage despite this: “When Ibn Umar was asked about a man who divorced his wife when she was menstruating, he would say: ’If it is the first or second divorce, the Messenger of Allah would tell him to take her back and keep her until she has menstruated again and purified herself, then divorce her before having intercourse with her. But if it was three simultaneous divorces, then you have disobeyed Allah with regard to the way in which divorce should be conducted and your wife has become irrevocably divorced.’" [Ref: Sunan Nisa’i, B27, H3587, here.] “Nafi said: When Ibn Umar was asked about person who had given three divorces, he said: "Would that you gave one or two divorces, for the Prophet ordered me to do so. If you give three divorces then she cannot be lawful for you until she has married another husband (and is divorced by him)." [Ref: Bukhari, B63, H189, here.]
     “Mujahid said: I was with Ibn Abbas. A man came to him and said that he divorced his wife by three pronouncements. I kept silence and thought that he was going to restore het to him. He then said: A man goes and commits a foolish act and then says; ‘O Ibn Abbas! Allah has said: ‘And for those who fear Allah, He (ever) prepares a way out.’ Since you did not keep duty to Allah I do not find a way out for you. You disobeyed your Lord and your wife was separated from you. Allah has said ‘O Prophet! When you divorce women divorce them in the beginning of their waiting period.” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B12, H2192, here.] “The Prophet said: 'Allah has given His verdict regarding you and your wife.' So they carried out Lian in the mosque while I was present there. When they had finished, the man said: "O Allah's Messenger! If I should now keep her with me as a wife then I have told a lie about her. Then he divorced her thrice before Allah's Messenger ordered him, when they had finished the Lian process. So he divorced her in front of the Prophet." Ibn Shihab added: "After their case, it became a tradition that a couple involved in a case of Lian should be separated by divorce. … prescribed for him." Ibn Shihab said that Sahl bin Sa`d As'Saidi said that the Prophet said (in the above narration), "If that lady delivers a small red child like a lizard, then the lady has spoken the truth and the man was a liar, but if she delivers a child with black eyes and huge lips, then her husband has spoken the truth." Then she delivered it in the shape one would dislike (as it proves her guilty). [Bukhari, B63, H229, here] “Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that a man said to Abdullah Ibn Abbas: ‘I have divorced my wife by saying I divorce you a hundred times. What do you think my situation is?’ Ibn Abbas said to him: ‘She was divorced from you by three pronouncements, and by the ninety-seven, you have mocked the ayat of Allah.’" [Ref: Muwatta Malik, B29, H1153, here.] They judged all gave these verdicts because in the time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) three Talaqs issued in one breath were deemed to be three [except in case of virgin getting three Talaqs in one breath] and a companion narrates this fact: “Abu al-Sahba said to Ibn Abbas: Enlighten us with your information whether the three divorces (pronounced at one and the same time) were not treated as one during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger and Abu Bakr. He said: It was in fact so, but when during the caliphate of Umar people began to pronounce divorce frequently, he allowed them to do so (to treat pronouncements of three divorces in a single breath as one).” [Ref: Sahih Muslim, B9, H3493, here.] This is same companion whom you quoted to justify three Talaq were actually one during life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), Khilafat of Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and during first period of Khilafat of Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu): In this Hadith he has flatly and categorically refuted your claim of three Talaq were one in this period. In fact Ahadith explain only three Talaq which was one during that period was three Talaq issued to a virgin. And in Khilafat of Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) he even revoked that and made this even three.

    Wahhabi: Brother if one Hadith states it is one and then other says it was not this proves there is contradiction in Ahadith. I told you I will have to research your evidences and then I will answer you.

    Sunni: Brother you have had long enough time prepare and respond. You’re using that just as an excuse to avoid responding to evidence. Why are you continuing to discuss when truth of this evidence can sort dispute? Don’t you think it is more important to investigate them first?

    Wahhabi: I can trust you or what you quote from websites. Barelwis are Mushriks and they cannot be trusted. You people have introduced so many forms of innovative worships like Khatams, Geeyarweenh, Chaliswan, Teeja, and countless other innovations. You acting on another innovation won’t add much weight to your sins nor dent your reputation in anyway. I know you’re lying. I bet you these Ahadith which you’re quoting only exist in Barelwi-fied books of Ahadith.

    Sunni: Brother you’re so blind to truth if it hit you in face danced in front of you screaming I am truth you will completely blind to it. You said Sunnis are Mushrikeen and Sunnis have innovated acts of worship and we introduced innovations. Brother you don’t know how to determine innovation, worship, and you definitely don’t know our beliefs and practices to make a/any judgment so stop making tall claims and don’t hurt your hereafter.

    Wahhabi: Are you taking the p**s? lolz. If we Ahle Hadith don’t know what Ibadah is and what Biddah then who else is suppose to know. We are people of Quran and Hadith. Your sect derives their understanding and Islam from books of Fiqha instead of Quran/Sunnah. So if anyone doesn’t know what Islamic teaching of Biddah and Ibadah are then it’s your sect. Proof is in the pudding. You Barelwis are disgusting people because you worship graves and introduced innovations. We we only follow Quran/Sunnah and have not introduced a single innovation. No one from us worships any grave, or tree, or Pir, or anyone else. And you think we don’t know what Biddah is and what Ibadah is? Are you high or something! I dare you to test me.

    Sunni: Tall claims from short man. Claim of guidance from a Mubtadi (i.e. innovator).

    Wahhabi: GTFOH! You know I would crush you. Go on ask me a question then you MORON.

    Sunni: Stop swearing! I have been very civil with you.

    Wahhabi: Moron means stupid person. I just said the truth. Are you going to test me or not?

    Sunni: Read what I ask you carefully.

    Wahhabi: You’re not asking me question about quantum mechanics so it can’t be hard. Just ask.

    Sunni: It begins. As a principle any ritual-act which has not been sanctioned as ritual-act of worship in two primary sources even though individual or great multitude of people may define as worship is not worship. It is an innovation and is to be rejected. How can those who have innovated their own ways to worship their gods be guilty of worshiping their gods when their methods of worship are innovations? How can they be judged as worshippers of idols/gods?

    Wahhabi: What the hell would they be if not Mushrikeen for worshipping their false gods!

    Sunni: OK! I will try to be clearer.

    Wahhabi: OK!

    Sunni: We both agree issuance of three Talaq in an instant is an innovation. We both agree ritual-acts of polytheists such as Hindus, or worshippers of Satan are acting on innovations. You agree?

    Wahhabi: Yeah!

    Sunni: On issue of innovative three Talaq you say marriage contract is intact. When a Hindus performs ritual-acts for their idol/gods to worship them you say this innovated act is ritual-act of worship of an idol and proof of their Shirk. Also when a Jahil Muslim prostrates to a grave, or performs Tawaf around a grave; you charge them of engaging in Shirk; even though you acknowledge their action is an innovation. If innovation is rejected and rejected three Talaq keeps Nikkah intact then how does rejected [misguiding] innovation invalidate Islam of Muslim for an alleged act of Shirk? And how does rejected [misguiding] innovation result in Hindu being guilty of worshiping his idol god?

    Wahhabi: Hindu takes idol as his god so he is guilty of Shirk anyway.

    Sunni: I didn’t say he isn’t I asked is he guilty of worshiping idol-god due to his innovated acts of worship with which he worships his idol? Secondly a Muslim who doesn’t profess Ilahiyyah/Rububiyyah for anyone and you merely on basis of some actions judge them to be Mushrik would he be Mushrik and guilty of worshiping creation on account of his innovation?

    Wahhabi: You’ve turned out to be bigger MORON then I thought you were. You’re being even more stupid then typical Barelwi Mushrikeen.

    Sunni: Why are you getting abusive Brother? I am only testing your knowledge of Ibadah and Biddah.

    Wahhabi: You call this testing my knowledge. You’re supporting and defending Shirk with this. You want me to acknowledge Shirk is not offensive in Shari’ah. You’re enemy of religion of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).

    Sunni: I am not supporting Shirk. I am merely trying to establish you’re a nobody who has no knowledge of Quran/Sunnah.

    Wahhabi: Moron! Ask me another question. I do not want to answer this question and become a party indirectly supporting Shirk.

    Sunni: Question was and is – if rejected innovation doesn’t invalidate Nikkah then how rejection can innovation invalidates Islam of a Muslim. And how can a Hindu be guilty of worshiping an idol due to his rejected innovation?  Let me spell this out: You have two choices: i) Innovated three divorces end marriage despite being innovation just as innovated acts of worship dedicated to idols amount to worship and end belief in Islam. ii) Or alternatively hold to position that three Talaq in one instant does not end marriage contract because it is innovation and also profess ritual-acts performed by polytheists as token of worship are not worship because these are innovations. You cannot and should not be inconsistent. Innovation in one place is good enough to invalidate belief in Islam. And then same innovation in another incident isn’t good enough to end marriage. Why this contradiction?

    Wahhabi:  Do you know what you’re saying moron? It sounds like you have bloody lost your mind.

    Sunni: Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah is consistent in methodology; we hold to position that innovative ritual-acts of worship performed by Mushrikeen are acts of worship and proof of Shirk. If a Muslim was to perform these innovated ritual-acts after affirming Ilahiyyah/Ma’budiyyah to worship an idol, grave, tree, Wali, Nabi with belief and intention of worship then his belief in Islam be void. And this is no different from judgment that innovative three Talaq in an instant voids marriage contract.

    Wahhabi: Talaq is an innovation which does not invalidate belief in Islam so how can I charge someone of Kufr/Shirk. Are you stupid or something? Worshipping Ghayrullah is an innovation which does invalidate belief in Tawheed because of which we charge you Mushrikeen of Kufr/Shirk.

    Sunni: Brother you’re missing the point. When you believe innovation is rejected and cannot be accepted then even if it is innovation misguidance, or innovation Kufr/Shirk, it is rejected. And as par your rule such innovation should not be used to invalidate belief in Islam.

    Wahhabi: You’re ***cking stupid. I can’t believe you are introducing doubts in matters which are clear cut Kufr/Shirk. You’re agent of Shaytan. I am not discussing with you. Dumb-donkey you will only ruin my Eman. You’re Mushrik, a filthy Kafir. You deserve to be killed as an apostate. D**kh**d hope you rot in hell. You S.O.B. [He signed out.]

    Sunni: What triggered you! I am sorry Brother if I was hitting too hard but seriously you didn’t have to scream this loud in pain. Ouch!

    Wahhabi: Salam Alaykum. Can you unblock me on WhatsApp? [Via E-Email he requested I unblock him. I unblocked him.]

    Sunni: Salam Alaykum.

    Wahhabi: Wa Alaykum Salam. I misunderstood your intent so I just want to apologize. I thought you were insinuating Shirk isn’t Shirk because it is innovation.

    Sunni: Was that all or is there anything else?

    Wahhabi: I was intending to respond to something’s if you’re interested.

    Sunni: Don’t have too much hopes of response from me. If you write something worthy of responding to me will via E-Mail.

    Wahhabi: Would you be interested in an exchange on subject of Ilm ul-Ghayb? Forget Ilm al-Ghayb topic just refute or explain my evidence so it does not contradict with your position. That was your own principle.

    Sunni: You’re not getting respect of exchanging knowledge [on subject of Ilm al-Ghayb] with me twice.

    Wahhabi: Lolz. I have apologized Brother Ali. I felt really bad afterwards.

    Sunni: Truth is Brother you started abusing me because you could not meet academic challenge. Nor you could live with truth of Islam destroying your office of legalizing illicit Nikkah bureau. Your Khariji kind has always resorted to threats to life, killing, abusing, and making Takfir of Muslims. You are no different. The best I could do for you were to attempt to educate you about prophetic teaching and I have done that. Best you could do was abuse, insult me and you have done that throughout this discussion. I tolerated it because of my intention was for your betterment and best for my hereafter. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is best of planners. Truth came it conquered and exposed the weakness of Kufr. Nothing from your argument silenced me except your abuse. You should consider abusive tirades as your strongest argument. Salam Alaykum. [I blocked him after this message.]

    Polytheist Insults Revelation Of Quran And Prophet Muhammad:

    A Mushrik said Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) repeats magical stories of pre-Islam era and what he claims is from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in reality is invention of human/creation. So he belittled revelation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and insinuated Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is guilty of lies and deception. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with eight other qualities mentions two in following verse: “Cruel, moreover, and an illegitimate pretender.” [Ref: 68:13] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) reveals insulter of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is illegitimate. Why am I telling you this? What connection does it have with the subject?

    Ghayr-Muqallideen Scholarship Directly/Indirectly Insulting:

    Trait of Khawarij and certainly of Wahhabis is that they are directly and indirectly in insult Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Authors of insulting statements are guilty of direct insult of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Shaykh Shah Ismail Dehalvi in his books Taqwiyat ul-Iman and Sirat e Mustaqeem clearly and knowingly authored statements which were insulting Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but in guise of championing Tawheed. And an example of indirect would be using insulting statements written by Shaykh Shah Ismail Dehalvi and defending such statements arguing/believing there is nothing wrong with them. Vast majority of Ghayr-Muqallideen are guilty of indirect insult/disrespect. Irrespective of direct/indirect involvement reality is both sides are insulting and argue in defence of their insults.

    Apples Of Then And Now Not Falling Far From Tree:

    Wahhabi Ghayr-Muqallideen do not believe three Talaq in one sitting amounts to end of marriage. Consequently when such incident occurs Wahhabi keeps his illicit relationship with his ex-wife. Any children born after three Talaq technically are illegitimate. These Ghayr-Muqallideen insulters/Gustakh choosing three Talaq not ending marriage is quite telling about their inner state. Quranic verses points to an illegitimate person choosing path of insult and in context of Ghayr-Muqallideen we have insulters choosing path illegitimacy. An apple doesn’t fall far from tree.

    Conclusion:

    Ghayr-Muqallideen of Pakistan believe all-three Talaq delivered in one breath, in one sitting, in an instant are one. Yet it was established from Ahadith that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) legitimized end of marriages when such incidents took place. The only true exception exercised by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) – where three Talaq intentioned three became one – was in case of virgin woman getting such Talaq. He made such Talaq as one and which Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) even revoked during his Khilafat. And we are commanded to follow Sunnahs of rightly guided Caliphs. Evidence employed by Ghayr-Muqallideen is of a companion divorcing his wife three times and he was asked how many Talaq he intentioned he said just one. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) made him take oath and returned his wife to him. Ahadith establish Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu), Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and everyone else judged three Talaq to be three and invalidate Nikkah due to it. Other Wahhabi argument is that three Talaq in one sitting is an evil misguiding innovation hence it cannot be used to judge validity of Nikkah because it was supposed to be rejected. My response to Wahhabi was Istighathah according to you is an evil misguiding Shirki innovation yet you invalidate Tawheed and Islam of Muslims due to it. Why misguiding innovation should be employed in one instance to invalidate Islam/Tawheed but not to invalidate Nikkah. If innovation was rejected in meaning that it cannot be used to make a judgment then in both cases it should be rejected similarly. And even though three Talaq in one sitting is a misguiding innovation but despite this Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu), Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu), rightly guided Caliph invalidated Nikkah. This difference between Sahabis and Wahhabis is because Sahabis understood what innovation is; how it is to be rejected; but same cannot be said about Wahhabis. Evil innovation is rejected in hereafter by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and innovator will not get reward for it. It is also to be rejected by Muslims because it should not be acted/believed instead we Muslims should act/believe in teaching of Quran/Sunnah. Rejection of misguiding innovation does not require that we reject it absolutely. Evil innovation is accepted as evidence; and judgment based on it is valid and accepted.

    Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen.
    Muhammed Ali Razavi.

×
×
  • Create New...