MuhammedAli

https://archive.org/details/QaharEAsmaniByAllamaMushtaqAhmadNizamiVol1 Is kitab ki volume 2 dastyab heh agar kissi kay pass ho to share karay, thank you.

Information About Debate And About This Written Account Of Debate: Please note actual discussion tool place in first week of November 2017 and following account is being written in june 2018, that’s roughly 7 months after the discussion. Brief notes were made to help guide the memory on the same day of discussion. With aid of these notes my response would be written. Unfortunately I did not write chronology of discussion but rather his Daleel with notes how I responded. And it has been too long to accurately remember how this discussion developed. So instead I am going to write it as a response while trying to keep to original notes. Another point worth remembering is that recorded discussion is missing first 40 to 60 mins of discussion. My nephew, Rizwan aka mini-Shaykh, started recording after I had said: I wish this was recorded. Just before this comment of mine Faisal was forced to agree to Islamic understanding that Mawlid can be celebrated. And I wished that it is recorded so he doesn’t back track or claim he didn’t say that. Every Innovation Is Misguidance Even If People See It As Something Good: Even though in the initial speech he said it was innovation and it takes to hell-fire. Faisal began with Hadith every newly invented matter is innovation, every innovation is misguidance, every misguidance takes to fire: “It was narrated from Abdullah bin Mas'ud that the Messenger of Allah said: "Verily there are two things - words and guidance. The best words are the words of Allah, and the best guidance in the guidance of Muhammad. Beware of newly-invented matters, for every newly-invented matter is an innovation and every innovation is a going-stray.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H46] He gave Mawlid as an example of innovation which takes to fire. He emphacised the Kull/Every in Hadith to argue. Every means every, and is not subject to exclusions. In other words he argued everything not Sunnah and but practiced by Muslims is innovation therefore evil, and takes to hell-fire. I cannot recall if he employed the following statement of Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in his first turn. Or if it was in in response to my saying; Mawlid is composed of acts of Ibadaat and Sunnahs and Muslims consider it as good therefore it is good: “Then He looked at the hearts of His servants after Muhammad, and He found that the hearts of his companions were the best among them. Thus He made them into the ministers of His Prophet, fighting for the sake of His religion. And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah. And the Companions unanimously chose to take Abû Bakr – Allâh be pleased with him – as the successor (to lead the Muslims after the Prophet).” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] Faisal quoted the following statement of Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu): "Every innovation is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good." [Ref: Related by al-Bayhaqee in al-Madkhal ilas-Sunan (no.191) and also Ibn Nasr in as-Sunnah (p.24). ‘Its isnaad (chain of narration) is as authentic as the sun’] And he ended proudly with, KHLAS! Which means, finished! An expression which Arabs employ to denote there is nothing to add to what was said and everything that needed to be said has been said. Implying that he won the war without even fighting a battle. Response Already Given But Account Of Discussion Has To Be Written: Logically speaking the answer to this Hadith was already given in, here, because the explanation of it is exactly same. But I wanted to write it as seperate acount. This Hadith was explained in my following article in Feb 2013, here, that would be roughly four years before the discussion. In another article this statement of Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was comprehensively addressed. And it was dedicated to refuting literalism of Hadith from Sahih Ahadith of Bukhar, here, in June 2014. Notes on this Hadith read; broke literalism via Ibn Umar fine innovation statement, and via Abdullah Ibn Masoud Hadith Muslims consider good is good, kull linguistic argument, takhsees Tirmadhi erroneous innovation, Takhsees via Ahadith of Aysha … principle, sanction, harmony. Please take note following is not be exact representation but explanation of how I deconstructed his argument, presented here in form of detailed response. Prophetic Words And Statement Of Ibn Umar: It would be unthinkable to assume Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made a statement about innovation proof of which wasn’t in prophetic Sunnah. It is logical to assume he formed his statement based on prophetic teaching and in this context Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said: "Every innovation is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good." [Ref: Related by al-Bayhaqee in al-Madkhal ilas-Sunan (no.191) and also Ibn Nasr in as-Sunnah (p.24). ‘Its isnaad (chain of narration) is as authentic as the sun.’] In this light I would assume Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made his statement in light of following and similar: “The truest of word is the Book of Allah and best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad. The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.'” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] So one way of understanding it would be to understand the prophetic words and then interpret Ibn Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) statement in that light. Other is to see what Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) himself practiced and taught. Note I will insert bits and bobs which were not part of my response then. Abdullah Ibn Umar Innovating And Practicing Good Innovations: Hadith of Bukhari states person sitting against the wall was Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and he was asked and he said it was innovation: “… and I entered the Mosque (of the Prophet) and saw Abdullah bin Umar sitting near the dwelling place of Aisha and some people were offering the Duha prayer. We asked him about their prayer and he replied that it was an innovation.” [Ref: Bukhari, B27, H4] In the following Hadith, it was recorded that Muhammad was asked, but it seems narrator got confused with and said Muhammad, in actuality it was Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) like previous Hadith establishes:“Ibn Ulayyah narrated to us, Jarir narrated, al-Hakim bin A'raj narrated; I asked Muhammad about Salat ad-Duha, while he was sitting near the house of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). He said: It is an innovation and what a fine innovation it is!" [Ref: Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Kitab Of Prayer – Salat ad-Duha, H3] In another Hadith Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said [out of many innovations Salat al-Duha] is most beloved [Nawafil] prayer to him: "Narrated Muamar, narrated al-Zuhri, narrated [by Ibn Umar’s son] Sa'lim, [that his father] Ibn Umar said: At the time Uthman was killed no-one considered it desirable and the people did not innovate anything that is dearer to me than that prayer." [Ref: Musannaf Abd ar-Razzaq, Book Of Salat (No.2), Chapter al-Duha, H4868] Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said: "Narrated Hadrami, the freed slave of the family of Al-Jarud: From Nafi: ‘A man sneezed beside Ibn Umar and said: 'al-hamdulillah was-salamu ala rasulillah.’ So Ibn Umar said: I too say: ‘al-hamdulillah was-salamu ala rasulillah.’ But this is not what the Messenger of Allah taught us. He taught us to say: 'Al-hamdulillah ala kulli hal.’" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B41, H2738] In words Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) acts of innovated form Hamd to sneezing. Another Hadith establishes that Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anh) introduced innovation into Talbiyah. Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) tells of Talbiyah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “Abdullah Ibn Umar reported that the Messenger of Allah entered upon the state of Ihram near the mosque at Dhu'l-Hulaifa as his camel stood by it and he said: Here I am at your service, O Lord; here I am at your service: here I am at Thy service. There is no associate with you. Here I am at your service. All praise and grace is due to you and the sovereignty (too). There is no associate with you. They (the people) said that Abdullah Ibn Umar said that that was the Talbiya of the Messenger of Allah.” Then narrator adds that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made following additions to it: “Nafi said: 'Abdullah made this addition to it: Here I am at your service; here I am at your service; ready to obey Thee. The Good is in Thy Hand. Here I am at your service. Unto Thee is the petition and deed (is also for Thee).” [Ref: Muslim, B7, H2668] Note the addition is innovated form of Talbiyah which isn’t prophetic Sunnah. Companions Of Prophet Introducing And Practicing Good Innovations: i) Ibn Umar’s father, Umar Ibn al-Khattab (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is reported to have said about entire month of Taraweeh [remember Sunnah is three days]: “On that, 'Umar remarked نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. what an excellent innovation this is) but the prayer which they do not perform, but sleep at its time is better than the one they are offering.” [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] ii) Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is reported to have said: “Thus He made them into the ministers of His Prophet, fighting for the sake of His religion. And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah. And the Companions unanimously chose to take Abû Bakr – Allâh be pleased with him – as the successor (to lead the Muslims after the Prophet).” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] This statement cannot be about things already taught in Quran or Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) because in them we find what is goodness and evilness. And if we Muslims declare something Haram and it is Halal Quran and Hadith… it will never be good in sight of Allah. Similarly if we the Muslims, as whole, say a Halal is Haram, then our saying it is Haram will not make it evil. Therefore this statement of Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud is about innovated practices regarding which we have no clear instruction and the majority of Ummah has deemed to be Halal/Haram, or good/evil. iii) In another Hadith a companion innovates a new hamd in presence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and angels loved it: “One day we were praying behind the Prophet. When he raised his head from bowing, he said: ‘Sami`al-lahu liman hamidah.’ A man behind him said, "Rabbana wa laka l-hamdu, hamdan kathiran taiyiban mubarakan fihi" When the Prophet completed the prayer he asked: ‘Who has said these words?’ The man replied: ‘I.’ The Prophet said: ‘I saw over thirty angels competing to write it first.’ Prophet rose (from bowing) and stood straight till all the vertebrae of his spinal column came to a natural position.” [Ref: Bukhari, B12, H764] Note angels only do what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) commands them. And angels competing to write it down indicates it was so good and approved by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that they all wanted to write it. iv) In another Hadith it is recorded third Adhan was introduced by Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu) which was not part of Jummah during time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu), nor during Khilafat of Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu): “Narrated Az-Zuhri: I heard As-Saib bin Yazid, saying: "In the lifetime of Allah's Messenger, and Abu Bakr and Umar, the Adhan for the Jumua prayer used to be pronounced after the Imam had taken his seat on the pulpit. But when the people increased in number during the caliphate of Uthman, he introduced a third Adhan (on Friday for the Jumua prayer) and it was pronounced at Az-Zaura' and that new state of affairs remained so in the succeeding years.” [Ref: Bukhari, B13, H39] This establishes third Adhan was an innovation which did not exist during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In a Hadith, which details matyrdom of Khubaib (radiallah ta’ala anhu), establishes that he introduced the tradition/innovation of performing two Raka’at Nawafil before a Muslim is killed: “They allowed him and he prayed two Rak`at and then said: "By Allah! Had I not been afraid that you would think I was worried, I would have prayed more." Then he (invoked evil upon them) saying: "O Allah! Count them and kill them one by one, and do not leave anyone of them"' … Abu Sarva, 'Ubqa bin Al-Harith went up to him and killed him. It was Khubaib who set the tradition [of praying two Raka’at before execution] for any Muslim to be martyred in captivity. The Prophet told his companions of what had happened (to those ten spies) on the same day they were martyred.” [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H325] “They allowed him and he offered Two rak`at and then said, "Hadn't I been afraid that you would think that I was afraid (of being killed), I would have prolonged the prayer. O Allah, kill them all with no exception." (He then recited the poetic verse): … Then the son of Al Harith killed him. So, it was Khubaib [who set the tradition] for any Muslim sentenced to death in captivity, to offer a two-rak`at prayer [before execution]. Allah fulfilled the invocation of `Asim bin Thabit on that very day on which he was martyred.” [Ref: Bukhari, B52, H281] Hadith makes it clear that Khubaib (radiallah ta’ala anhu) introduced this good Sunnah/Biddah and others followed him. Concluding Statement Of Ibn Umar Cannot Be Taken Literally: In light of all this; Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) saying Salat al-Duha is fine innovation, and it is most beloved Nawafil prayer to him out of all innovated practices. And he himself saying Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught following response to sneez: 'Al-hamdulillah ala kulli hal.’ Yet despite this he practices innovated form of response, which is: ‘al-hamdulillah was-salamu ala rasulillah.’ His practice and statements make it clear Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not mean his statement literally. In addition to this Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud said what ever [innovated things] which Muslims consider good are good in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Umar Ibn al-Khattab (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said about innovated form of Taraweeh – of entire month, in which entire Quran is recited – is excellent innovation. A companion in presence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) innovated Tasbih and it was approved. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not censore or rebuke him if he had stopped him physically, or spoke out and prevented the companion, we could have said it was evil innovation from companion because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not approve of it. The lowest degree of Iman is to say in heart it is wrong … who expects Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) acted on third option? No Muslim! From all these, and much more, it can be seen that statement of Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) could not been about absolutely every innovation. Otherwise it would be to blame him, companions, and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) of doing evil. All these innovations/practices are in agreement with following prophetic saying: “He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice, way, tradition, precedent) 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] Kullu Does Not Mean Absolutely Everything But Evrything Of A Type: In language every/kullu is never used in its haqiqi meaning when it is used for creation and their affairs … to mean absolutely everything, without exclusion … rather it is limited by context envoriment. If father says to son, give me all the water, we will take it to in context, of either water of jug, or glass, or bucket, but never would we assume he asked for entire water on earth … or entire water of universe in form of ice on other planets. Kullu/Every is limited restricted by some factor even if this factor is not mentioned explicitly in the sentence. A Possible Taweel Of Statement Of Ibn Umar: It was established Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed innovations are fine/excellent and he himself acted on innovations which he deemed good. Therefore naturally it must be that his following statement is about EVIL/REPREHENSIBLE innovations: "Every [sinful, evil, reprehensible] innovation is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good." [Ref: Related by al-Bayhaqee in al-Madkhal ilas-Sunan (no.191) and also Ibn Nasr in as-Sunnah (p.24). ‘Its isnaad (chain of narration) is as authentic as the sun.’] If we do not make this Taweel then alternative is a companion of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was misguiding people … he said something else and practiced the opposite of what he said … and this is simply not attainable. Or that companion of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was confused about what true Islam is. Nor is this option reasonable. We the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah follow methodology of bringing reconciliation between what may seem apparently contradictory. And we have the best opinion of companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) therefore the best and only viable option is Taweel mentioned above. Finally kullu/every used in statement of Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is limited to a particular context … and we have established Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed in excellent/fine innovations and acted on them … therefore his statement must be in context of evil/reprehensible innovations … this is to say that Takhsees of kullu/every limits it to sinful, evil, reprehensible, blameworthy, innovations and not absolutely every innovation. Understanding Ibn Umar Via Prophetic Statements: In following Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said that a erroneous innovation [is] which does not please Allah and Messenger [because it would be composed of sinful, Kufr, Shirk activities] and one who innovates a erroneous innovation and those who act on it will be equally sinful: “And whoever introduces an erroneous innovation, which Allah is not pleased with nor His Messenger, then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it, without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2677] Therefore the following prophetic is to be understood in context of erroneous innovation, which does not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “The truest of word is the Book of Allah and best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad. The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.'” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] And if the implication of Hadith of Tirmadhi are inserted as further explanation of prophetic words found Hadith of Nisai then it would read as follows: “The truest of word is the Book of Allah and best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad. The worst of things are those that are newly invented [which Allah is not pleased with nor His Messenger]; every newly-invented thing is an [erroneous] innovation and every [erroneous] innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.'” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] In light of this explanation statement of Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is to be understood as following: "Every [erroneous] innovation [which Allah is not pleased with nor His Messenger] is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good." [Ref: Related by al-Bayhaqee in al-Madkhal ilas-Sunan (no.191) and also Ibn Nasr in as-Sunnah (p.24). ‘Its isnaad (chain of narration) is as authentic as the sun.’] In addition to this, entire statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) that, every innovation is misguidance, can be understood in light of following prophetic statement narrated by Umm ul-Momineen Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha): “Narrated Aisha: Allah's Messenger said: "Whoever introduces into our matter that which is not a part of it, will have it rejected.” [Ref: Bukhari, B49, H861] “… he (Qasim bin Muhammad) said: All of them could be combined in one house; and then said: 'A'isha informed me that Allah's Messenger said: He who does an action which is not from us that is to be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] In other words entire prophetic statement, every innovation is misguidance, is about innovations which are composed of rejected amr (i.e. matter) and amal (i.e. action). If this is understanding is inserted into text of every innovation is misguidance Hadith it would read as follows: “The truest of word is the Book of Allah and best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad. The worst of things are those that are newly invented [but composed of rejected matters and actions]; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation [composed of rejected matters and actions] is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.'” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] And this understanding if inserted into statement of Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) will result his statement meaning: "Every innovation [composed of rejected matters and actions] is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good." [Ref: Related by al-Bayhaqee in al-Madkhal ilas-Sunan (no.191) and also Ibn Nasr in as-Sunnah (p.24). ‘Its isnaad (chain of narration) is as authentic as the sun.’] Note both interpretations of Prophetic words and Ibn Umar’s statement are valid. And in reality boil down to same thing. Thus it would be absolutely correct to combine both interpretation into one and it would reas as follows: "Every [erroneous] innovation [composed of rejected matters and actions, which Allah is not pleased with nor His Messenger] is misguidance, even if the people see it as something good." [Ref: Related by al-Bayhaqee in al-Madkhal ilas-Sunan (no.191) and also Ibn Nasr in as-Sunnah (p.24). ‘Its isnaad (chain of narration) is as authentic as the sun.’] Concluding And Contextualizing The Point: Note Faisal quoted the Hadith to argue and establish absolutely every innovation is misguidance and takes to hellfire. Therefore no innovation can be good. Using this statement of Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) he attempted to refute the natural implications of following saying of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice, way, tradition, precedent) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it ...” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] It has been established Ibn Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) statement does not mean what he claimed it means, as it is evidenced above. And it was already established that the prophetic statement about reward for introducing good Sunnah in Islam means reward for introducing good innovation in Islam because what is part of Islam me/you cannot introduce in it. And if we introduce in Islam then it must be first not part of Islam and that is innovation therefore his refutation and proof for his defintion of innovation does not exist. And Islamic definition stands established. From practice and teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), companions, likes of Imam Shafi (rahimullah), Imam Nawavi (rahimullah) and other luminaries of Islam. All he and his Wahhabi kind have is; Shaykh Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali’s (rahimullah) distorted version of his defintion of Biddah, emphasis on DISTORTED. Usage Of Title Shaykh And Warning Against Using It For Heretic: Recently, June 2018, a brother read account of discussion with Faisal aka Shaykh (hafidha-ullah), here. He enquired if the person being called Shaykh was actually a Shaykh and I told him I called, the mubtadi, Shaykh in sarcasm. He quoted me Hadith and referrenced it to Mishkat ul Masabih, in which Abu Ishaq is reported to have said, one who shows respect to Ahlul Biddah has helped the mubtadi destroy Islam. Note I haven’t been able to find exact referrence nor entire Hadith, if it is Hadith. Even if its not Hadith these words have wisdom. He said, that you calling him Shaykh even though in sarcasm, is giving him degree of respect, and unknowingly you’re helping him destroy Islam. I made Tawbah and I seek refuge in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) from misguidance of Iblees. To set the record straight. Person who discussed with me is named Faisal. He is spawn of Satan of Najd and is a elequent liar. His best trait is that he is from people who invent lies with their mouths and say; this is from Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), or this is from a Sahabi. He is a distorter of Ahadith and omitter whose habbit is not to quote parts of Ahadith which expose him. He is all-out, total, absolute jahil mutliq who didn’t even know difference between, singular, Sahabi, and plural Sahabah. He was using plural form of word for a Sahabi i.e. sahabah. He is far from being a Shaykh. I have met Qadiyanis and Christians with more academic worth, integrity, and upright moral campus then Faisal. Insha Allah! Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will humiliate and degrade him amongst his peers. All his lies/distortions were for sake of respect and upholding standing amongst his peers while knowing too well he is lieing and distorting Hadith. And I pray to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that He degrades him in sight of his peers if he does not become a upright Muslim. I will not again address him as Shaykh not even sarcasticly and what I can amend I will. After much thought I remembered the verses of Quran: “And Allah would not let a people stray after He has guided them until He makes clear to them what they should avoid. Indeed, Allah is Knowing of all things.” [Ref: 9:115] Faisal is from a nation (qawm) whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) showed the path of Islam and he followed it briefly but Allah misguided him back to Wahhabism. Hence the verse applies to him. In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: "What is with you two groups concerning the hypocrites? While Allah has made them fall back (into error and disbelief) for what they earned. Do you wish to guide those whom Allah has sent astray? And he whom Allah sends astray - never will you find for him a way (of guidance).They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah . But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper." [Ref: 4:88/89] Even though he left Wahhabism and accepted Islam he chose its misguidance over Islam.

Why Hadith of Good Sunnah Wasn’t About Prophetic Sunnah Of Giving Sadqah: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said about innovated good Sunnahs that they will earn reward for iniator and actor: “He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice, way, tradition, precedent) 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] Faisal said this Hadith is about prophetic Sunnah of Sadaqah. Later he changed the goal post and said it was about silver coins being used for the first time and not about good innovation. And while explaining his position he said the statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is about employing new money denomination i.e. notes to give Sadqah. Even though Faisal’s coin point is unfounded and basless because it is established Prophet and his companions used coins to give Sadqa before this event. Anyhow his point was coins were new thing like using notes would be new at present. In light of this what he was arguing that companion introduced an innovation like he would be introducing a innovation by giving Sadqah with money notes. This is besides the point. Lets get to my explanation and refutation of his argument that this Hadith referrs to prophetic Sunnah of giving Sadqah. He said: companions had forgotten Sadqah was Prophetic Sunnah and only one companion remembered and he gave Sadqah. And the statement was about him because he started it. Note the following is part of audio discussion. Right in the beginning of it. Companions Forgot And Prophet Said About Companion Who Re-introduced It: My first point to counter him -which I intended to make was but I didn’t get to complete was – I had to change course; if all the companions forget a prophetic Sunnah and just one companion remembers it is a Sunnah and he acts on it. Has he then introduced that prophetic Sunnah into Islam? Thinking person will realize that answer is, NO, because forgetfull and reviving a prophetic Sunnah is one thing but introducing a Sunnah in Islam is another. It can be said Sahabi was reviving a Sunnah but Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would not say he was introducing into Islam a Prophetic Sunnah. Introducing into Islam means what is not part of Islam. And how can a companion introduce a prophetic Sunnah into Islam which Prophet has already introduced into Islam. Therefore the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) were not about prophetic Sunnah but good Sunnah which is not already part of Islam. My other point was … I give greet everyone with, As-salamu alayqyum, and introduce everyone to prophetic Sunnah of greeting. My question was to Faisal. Have I introduced a good Sunnah into Islam? Faisal pretended to not to understand it. And arrogantly and ignorantly refused to listen to my response. Luckily near the end I had oppurtunity to make the same point. I explained just if a group of people doesn’t know Islamic method of greeting and me teaching them doesn’t prove mean that I have introduced a good Sunnah in Islam because it was introduced in Islam by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Here the words of Hadith are anyone who introduces good Sunnah in Islam. This indicates the reward being told for something which is not already part of Islam. And something which isn’t part of Islam and being made of Islam is INNOVATION. Therefore your Taweel is false and invalid. Contextual Relevance Argument: Prophetic Words Are Connected With Context Of Event: His argument boils down … Prophetic statement is connected with historical event. My counter argument was if the first part i.e. good Sunnah part of Hadith is connected with context and precisely to Sadqah then what does the following part referr to: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this ..." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) introduced an evil Sunnah in Islam? And which evil Sunnah was that? At first he pretended not to understand the question being asked but my nephew Kamran joined to simply what I was demanding an answer for. Being stuck he resorted to it reffers to every innovation is misguidance. Lol! I called that monoply game rule … land on Hadith of good/evil Sunnah … do not understand evil Sunnah instead go straight every innovation is misguidance. This was igenious but was new level of his stupidity. Any how my point was … if second part of Hadith was not connected to context then and you make Taweel of it because the detail of second part doesn’t first into context … then detail of first part don’t fit into context either … therefore there is no reason to limit it to context … because good Sunnah in Islam was not introduced in the event. This prompted Faisal to revise his position and brought in the silver coin being new things … and notes … lol and with these two examples he hanged himself because he established what I wanted him to confess. I had told my nephew Rizwan that remind me about the coins and notes example of his cause I will explain to him how his buddy refuted himself. Note his coin notes point was made after I stopped giving him the respect he didn’t not deserve i.e. I stopped discussing with him. On the same day or on the day after I went through implications of Faisal’s point and how it supports Islamic understanding. And with grace of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) he agreed with Islamic point. Faisal The Fake Wana Be Academic Debater And StrawMan: During discussion with Faisal I said number of times … position of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah is … he interjected nearly every time … you mean Barelwi ... he termed my statement as … STRAWMAN tactic. This was laughable because he fancied himself of some what of debater. And thought by using such termonology he would portray himself to be academicly achieved person. But I had to keep the discussion on important topic so I ignored his stupidity. Straw-man is … while quoting position of opposition person adds a weakness so he can nock the misrepresented position … Abdullah believes Allah is absolutely the One and undivisible but Amr says Abdullah believes Allah is three-in-one and this is wrong … and goes on to refute Abdullah via verse , do not say trinity (4:171), that’s StrawMan, here. Called STRAWMAN because it easy to knock out … olden times dummys were made with straw and swordsmen trained using them. So saying was … I am not strawman. Meaning I am not going to stand and get hit … I will fight back. I hope you see why strawman was used to indicate this logical fallacy. So Faisal was being smart even though I knew too well he is exposing his ignorance and revealing his fake-ness. Accusing Me Of Ad-Hominem Attack In Reality: Ad-Hominem attack is attempt to undermine person by discrediting character integrity and standing of person either overtly or covertly. My saying we Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah … can be misconstrued as covert form of ad-hominem attack … because when I claim to be from Ahlus Sunnah and claim this is position of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah … he and his understanding is being excluded from Ahlus Sunnah … so this can be misconstrued form of ad-hominem. Is that truly a ad-hominem attack? Its utter rubbish … he just doesn’t have the intelligence to understand why it wasn’t ad-hominem. Suppose there is Wahhabi, Deobandi, Shia, and Sunni. They all present different beliefs but they all claim these are teachings of Islam. Does that mean when Shia, or Wahhabi, or Deobandi, lists his belief and says this is Islam he is saying others are not following Islam? And others guilty of ad-hominem attack? No because their definition of Islam is different … they share core teachings … and they have another defintion of Islam. Each of these has claimed to be following Islam according to their own definition of Islam. When I said this is the teaching of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah … the definition of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah … was of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. When Wahhabi says … we Ahlus Sunnah … he is using Wahhabi definition to judge who is and what beliefe is part of his version of Ahlus Sunnah. See what ad-hominem actually is, here. Ad-Hominem Attack But So What Then: To confuse Ad-Hominem with StrawMan is patently stupid. Its even more stupid when you consider that there was no need to employ these terminologies because disucssion was taking place in front-room of a house. And audience was few taxi drivers, few school and college drop-outs [I am in this class], few who couldn’t speak English, between two to three with university degrees ... so the setting wasn’t university debate hall. Where social academic pressure demands professional and academic language to impress listeners. OK! If he had employed it correctly the embrassment was survivable. Even then it would have come out as … he is trying too hard to impress … He got the term wrong but what if he had got the terminology right, ad-hominem, then what? Would I have been refuted? Like I pointed out Faisal didn’t understand why it was an Ad-Hominem attack. And I don’t blame him because it requires some degree of knowledge to understand why it wasn’t Ad-Hominem. OK! Lets suppose I actually did truly use AD-HOMINEM attacks. Then do I loose the debate? Does Faisal win? No! Is Ad-Hominem attack a sin, or a crime in Islam? Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) discredits the character of a Khabees who insulted Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “And do not obey every worthless habitual swearer/abuser. Scorner, going about with malicious gossip. A preventer of good, transgressing and sinful. Cruel, moreover, and an illegitimate pretender. We will brand him upon the (nose which looks like pigs) snout.” [Ref: 68:10/13, and 16] Would that be a AD-HOMINEM attack, Mr Faisal? Now what? Are you going to argue Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) committed logical fallacy? Yes Ad-Hominem is logical fallacy. Save your moral rage and sit down dude before you hurt faith in Islam. There were many times he employed Ad-Hominem attacks against me … few have been recorded in audio. If he denies them I will post the transcript of and referrence the time he was guilty of it. Logical Fallacies Committed By Faisal: Faisal the was guilty of following logical fallacies: Ad-Hominem, here, Appealing To Authority, here, Special pleading, here, Ambiguity, here, False Cause, here. Each of these logical fallacies were committed AT THE VERY LEAST once. Some of the logical fallacies mentioned and not mentioned are absolutely fine in sight of Islamic law. Appeal to authority, and bandwagon are legitimate Islamicly. Bandwagon, going with majority, appealing to authority of senior scholars such as Mujadideen, Mujtahideen etc an so is ad-hominem, infact ambiguity is also fine … When Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) were immigrating to Madinah … Mushrikeen stopped them outside to question who was with Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and he said: he is going to guide me to straight path … they assumed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was guide … in reality he meant straight path of Islam. So even though Faisal is guilty of these logical fallacies in modern academic sense apart from False-Cause and special pleading. None of these, apart from mentioned negatively, if employed legitimately are unethical or sinful in sight of Islamic law.Yet the reality is Faisal employed them deceptively. He accused me of StrawMan … and he didn’t even know what it meant. In reality he was alledging of an Ad-Hominem attack which in reality wasn’t so because definition of Ahlus Sunnah I ascribe to excludes omits his Wahhabi understanding. He appealed to authority of Imam Shafi (rahimullah) … arguing his, i.e Faisal’s, understanding is in accordance with Imam Shafi (rahimullah) … yet truth was established against him. Imam Shafi (rahimullah) ascribes to understanding of Biddah which the Jamhoor/majority ascribe to, which is position what I hold to. And there is no record available on internet where Imam Shafi (rahimullah) explained the Hadith. He was guilty of special pleading … which is changing goal posts … and entire debate is proof of this one. False cause … he assumed the context of Hadith was connected with prophetic statement and evidence and common sense is clearly against it. Ambiguity … he said companion gave silver coins in Sadqah which none had done before … then he said its new but from Shari’ah: “The good practice here (in the statement of Hadith) was specifically the silver or the gold coins. That was the good practice. [His friend interjected: ‘The companion introduced new way of giving Sadaqah.’] Exactly! No one gave to these specific people before. Do you understand? No one gave coins to the people. So it was new action but it was from Shari’ah.” [Ref: Audio recording from 00:48:55 onwards to 00:49:22] There are two meanings here … one that it was part of Islam as prophetic Sunnah. Or a Ijtihadi innovation introduced into Shariah i.e. Islam as part of its law. Both interpretations are problematic for him. If he said it means first then he would negate his claim that it was new thing and if he said second then he would establish the point innovated things can become part of Islam. This would refute him. So instead of saying clearly either of the two … he said it in between so he can make Taweel if need be … not realising no Taweel will allow him to escape, as I have established. Undeniable Fact: An Observation About Faisal’s Goal Changing: In the beginning Faisal said Mawlid and all innovated practices of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah are misguidance and those who practice them go to hell-fire due to them. I quoted Hadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) celebrated Mawlid every Monday by fasting. He replied it was fasting on Monday what you do is yearly. I replied; Hadith establishes that celebration of Mawlid is Sunnah, it indicates a day on which it is to be celebrated, and it shows how it is to be celebrated. I said celebrating the Mawlid is Sunnah and you cannot object and will cannot legitimately object to idea of celebrating Mawlid. What you can object to is the day it is celebrated and the way it is celebrated but not to the idea of celebrating Prophet’s Mawlid because itself is Sunnah. He said it is innovation because the way it is celebrated. So I asked him if Mawlid is Haram due to not being Sunnah? He said it is Haram. I asked him if something had to be Sunnah for it to be permissible? He replied in affirmative. Then I argued even though you say this but you use tooth brush and paste … how is that Halal because it is not part of Sunnah. At that time he agreed … even though it was not Sunnah it is permissible. And I concluded just as abandoned Sunnah of Miswak/Siwak and you use tooth brush and paste even though these are not Sunnah but you said both – brush paste - are permissible. Please referr to following link to see other evidences were used. In the same way celebrating Mawlid concept is Sunnah but the way and the day we celebrate it isn’t but it is still permissible because it is not composed of Haram, Kufr, and Shirk. He said but Prophet did it on Monday by fasting. I said: Yes! Monday and via fasting. And this is Sunnah and Sunnah is the best way to celebrate it. He said: Then its fine. I said: Do you agree non-Sunnah way of celebrating is fine also but best way is prophetic way? He acknowledged this he agrees with. It was some time after this … between 2 and 5 minutes after I said: I wish this was recorded. Because Faisal agreed to it and then went on to deny everything he agreed to. And that comment of mine prompted Rizwan to record. Note all discussion on Mawlid was before this. Discussion came to conclusion but he asked how was this discussion connected with Hadith of good/evil Sunnah. And while I was sumarising in choronological order … the development of discussion … and why and what lead to this discussion and how it is connected … he interjected and this resulted the discussion to continue even after resolution. The audio recorded account misses the summary … and starts at a time when he was arguing to regain lost ground. Real Reason Why I Discussed With Faisal: Day before my nephew Rizwan used all the arguments which Faisal brought into discussion day after. And al-hamdulillah he listened and argued his point of view. And my methodology of teaching is through question and answer. I ask a crucial question and expect answer to the question. And using that answer I continue my response. In this way both, questioner and answerer, are fully aware and focusing, discussion quickly comes to end. My nephew listened more and talked less, there was a degree of respect in this. As a result I got to completely present my position. Points were fairly simple and precise he could not argue against the sound rationale so he said he agrees but he will make final decision after his friend Faisal is defeated in discussion. I told him there is no chance of me engaging him in discussion because I know he will not listen and he has ego problem. He is the leader of pack of idiots and as such he will not give up even when he knows he is wrong simply because it will become matter of prestige. And there is no point talking to Faisal and waisting my and your time. But over the night I thought about the issue ,and came to conclusion that friends shape social and religious understandings, and Rizwan needs to see reality of his buddy, so I decided to engage with his friend. Al-hamdulillah! A awsome unveiling of liar and deceptive Iblees it was. Advice For Those Who Discuss Deen With Faisal: My advice for anyone who engages Faisal in any religious discussions is to always demand he quote HADITH OR VERSE directly from book. And demand interpretation of scholars of Islam who pre-dated 1750 AD. And not just one … but understanding of few … always go to different publishers to make sure Wahhabis have not omitted anything deliberately. Wahhabis, especially the ones running, Darus Salam Publishers, always edit books of classical scholars and remove and insert bits which go against their belief and insert their own teachings in it. There is entire book published exposing this fraud of Wahhabis. I have more faith in integrity and honesty and truthfulness of Kafirs then of Faisal. They attack Islam but do not distort texts of Islam they only put their own stories on that text. Faisal is far worse then these people … not only he distorted the meaning of Hadith like all the Wahhabis … he went a step ahead of Wahhabis … he distorted the text of Hadith. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says about Christians … they write the book with their own hands and say this is from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Faisal changes wording of Hadith … practically invents a Hadith … and says this is from Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Any how people do not trust him.

I have made improvements to translation of Hifz ul-Iman. I noted did not translate an important part ... and some structural modifications were made to ensure it is closer to original Urdu: “A certain individual, Zayd, stated prostration is of two types, worship, respect, and when on to state Amr believes prostration of respect for other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is permissible. And believes Tawaf (i.e. circumbulation) around the graves (of Awliyah-Allah) is permissible. Evidence of permissibility … And says Ilm Al-Ghayb is of two types: bil-Zaat [of one’s ownself]; in this meaning only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Aalim ul-Ghayb, none else. And ba-wasta [through means, alternative; bil-Ardh; granted by another] and in this meaning RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was Aalim ul-Ghayb. How is Amr’s this evidence (and what is legal ruling on Amr’s) these actions and belief?” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page2, here] The underlinned parts were improved

I have made improvements to translation of Hifz ul-Iman. I noted did not translate an important part ... and some structural modifications were made to ensure it is closer to original Urdu: “A certain individual, Zayd, stated prostration is of two types, worship, respect, and when on to state Amr believes prostration of respect for other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is permissible. And believes Tawaf (i.e. circumbulation) around the graves (of Awliyah-Allah) is permissible. Evidence of permissibility … And says Ilm Al-Ghayb is of two types: bil-Zaat [of one’s ownself]; in this meaning only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Aalim ul-Ghayb, none else. And ba-wasta [through means, alternative; bil-Ardh; granted by another] and in this meaning RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was Aalim ul-Ghayb. How is Amr’s this evidence (and what is legal ruling on Amr’s) these actions and belief?” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page2, here] The underlinned parts were improved

I have made improvements to translation of Hifz ul-Iman. I noted did not translate an important part ... and some structural modifications were made to ensure it is closer to original Urdu: “A certain individual, Zayd, stated prostration is of two types, worship, respect, and when on to state Amr believes prostration of respect for other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is permissible. And believes Tawaf (i.e. circumbulation) around the graves (of Awliyah-Allah) is permissible. Evidence of permissibility … And says Ilm Al-Ghayb is of two types: bil-Zaat [of one’s ownself]; in this meaning only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Aalim ul-Ghayb, none else. And ba-wasta [through means, alternative; bil-Ardh; granted by another] and in this meaning RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was Aalim ul-Ghayb. How is Amr’s this evidence (and what is legal ruling on Amr’s) these actions and belief?” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page2, here] The underlinned parts were improved

...

8.0 - Man From Najd Enquires About Fundamental Requirements Of Islam: “Glad tiding of Jannah(paradise) for Najd Man: Hadith-42: Narrated Talha bin 'Ubaidullah: A man from Najd with unkempt hair came to Allah's Apostle and we heard his loud voice but could not understand what he was saying, till he came near and then we came to know that he was asking about Islam. Allah's Apostle said, "You have to offer prayers perfectly five times in a day and night (24 hours)." The man asked: "Is there any more (praying)?" Allah's Apostle replied: "No, but if you want to offer the Nawafil prayers (you can)." Allah's Apostle further said to him: "You have to observe fasts during the month of Ramadan." The man asked: "Is there any more fasting?" Allah's Apostle replied: "No, but if you want to observe the Nawafil fasts (you can)." Then Allah's Apostle further said to him: "You have to pay the Zakat (obligatory charity)." The man asked: "Is there any thing other than the Zakat for me to pay?" Allah's Apostle replied: "No, unless you want to give alms of your own." And then that man retreated saying: "By Allah! I will neither do less nor more than this." Allah's Apostle said: "If what he said is true, then he will be successful (i.e. he will be granted Paradise)." (Bukhari,Volume 1, Book 2, Hadith 44) Hadith-43: "Yahya related to me from Malik from his paternal uncle Abu Suhayl ibn Malik that his father heard Talha ibn Ubaydullah say, "Once one of the people of Najd came to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. He had dishevelled hair and although his voice could be heard we could not make out what he was saying until he drew nearer and then we found he was asking about Islam. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said to him, 'There are five prayers during the day and the night.' He said, 'Do I have to do anything else besides that?' The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, added, 'And fasting the month of Ramadan.' He said, 'Is there anything else I have to do?' He said, 'No, except what you do of your own accord.' The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, mentioned zakat. The man said, 'Is there anything else that I have to do?' He said, 'No, except what you do of your own accord.' He continued, "The man went away saying, 'By Allah, I won't do any more than this, nor will I do any less.' The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, 'That man will be successful, if he is telling the truth.'" (Muwatta Imam Malik, Book 009, Hadith 97) Comments: SubhanAllah Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wassalam) gave glad tiding to that Man.” 8.1 - Hadith Of Man From Najd And What Does It Establish: These Ahadith establish that a man from Najd visited Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and enquired about obligations in Islam. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told him that as a Muslim he is obligated to perform five prayers, fast in month of Ramadhan, and give compulsory charity. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was asked if there is anything else that he needs to do Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said there is no more oligatory practice but he can engage in Nawafil; prayer, fasting, and charity. The man left saying; he will do no more then compulsory requirement and no less. Upon that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said if this man adheres to this he will be successful in hereafter. Note Prophet said IF this man adheres to what he said he will adhere to. This exactly isn’t glad tiding of Jannah. Infact this glad tiding, if it is, is for all Muslims who do the bare minimum required from them. The glad tidings would be definiately established if brother Abdullah proves that Najdi man adhered to what he said he will practice. And I truly hope he did because his entry to paradise wouldn’t make my entry any harder or easier. The key point I am making is brother Abdullah is for no reason deriving a meaning from Hadith which doesn’t exist. It has been conditioned by, if he adheres to these, and Najdi’s saying I will do no more no less, isn’t proof that he acted on his utterance. If brother Abdullah proves the identity of man and proves he did then he would be justified in saying a Najdi man was given glad tidings of paradise. Otherwise its just over stretching a conditional statement to paint Najd in positive light to induce in idiots good feelings about Najd. 8.2 - Headless Chicken Game Over Najd And The End Result: From the very beginning brother Abdullah has been attempting to prove Najd is/in Iraq but at the end he quotes this Hadith of Najdi man in order to elevate the status of Najd. If Najd is as he believes and if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) gave glad tidings of Najdi man glad tidings of paradise then natural conclusion is a Iraqi man was given glad tidings of paradise. Of course I don’t believe this Hadith is about Iraq nor I believe man was given glad tidings of paradise but the distorter of Ahadith aka brother Abdullah does believe it. So after all the effort to demonize Iraqis technically he shot himself in the head. Hang on a second, ofcourse I, and brother Abdullah, and every sane person will understand; this alleged merit of Najdi earning glad tidings of paradise wasn’t intended for a Iraqi but it was intended for actual/real Najd from which his sweet-heart Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab and Wahhabism emerged. What this demonstrates is brother Abdullah is fully aware of where historical Najd was and is but in order to protect Wahhabism from damage he like most Wahhabis choose to distort the Ahadith of Najd which indicate a group (or an era) of Satan will start from Najd. There are many Ahadith which can be utalized to establish where Najd is. It isdefinitely not Iraq and they will be brought into discussion in following article as a last article of three, here. 8.3 - A Fundamental Position About Najd, Banu Tamim, Iraq, And Iraqis: Not every person of Iraq, Najd, and Banu Tamim is going to hell nor every person of them is going to paradise. Not everyone of them was Khariji and not everyone of them was free from Kharijism. Those who adhered/adhere to correct creed and practiced/practice their religion as instructed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), taught by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and within the frame work of Ijtihad they can hope to receive Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) mercy and surely will be successful in hereafter. And out of Iraqis, Tamimis, Najdis; the one’s who followed the teaching of Khawarij and demonstrated their belief via Mushrik’ing of Muslims, rebellion, murder of Muslims, or supporting such teachings they are people of hell. Such people are Khawarij where-ever they maybe and where-ever they are from. As par Ahadith such people are dogs of hellfire and disbelievers. Fundamentally the Khawarij emerged from Najd as well as Iraq and from there they propogated their teachings throughout the world. Every strain of Wahhabism and Kharijism, where ever in the world it maybe, via one or other route traces its origin back to Najd and Iraq. 8.4 - Wahhabism, Wahhabis, Past, And The Present: Wahhabism was rebellion against; Jammah of Muslims and Uthmanic Khilafat. They declared Muslims are Mushrik (i.e. worst type of Kafir) for acts which were sins and and not even sins. The killing of Muslims was made Halal by them just like their theological ancestors killed and charged that companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are Mushriks. This was very against what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said in following Hadith: “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 action/deed.” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B14, H2170] The actrocities Wahhabis committed in order to spread their Kharijism are in their own history books which can be researched. At present the dance of death, destruction by Wahhabi terror organisations namely al-Qaidah, ISIS, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab, TTP, and myrids of other groups killing Muslims are all broadcasted by media and by themselves. 9.0 - Tribulations Emerged From Iraq Therefore Najd Is None Other Than Iraq: “Every kind of fitnah took place in Iraq … 1) Fitnah of the battle of Jamal (which made the Sahaabah fight with each other). 2) Fitnah of the battle of Siffeen (in which more than 30,000 sahaabah were martyred). 3) Fitnah of the Khawaarij (they emerged from Kufa and other places in IRAQ). 4) Fitnah of the Shias (all of them emerged from IRAQ). 5) The Karbala tragedy where Imam Hussain was betrayed by his own Shias (it happened in IRAQ). 6) Several authentic Ahadeeth point to IRAQ as the horn of Devil (Qarn us shayateen). Therefore, The word Najd referred as a place of fitnah is none other than IRAQ … a) Fitna e Khawarij came from Iraq. Those who martyred Usman e Ghani (radiallahu anh) were from Iraq. c) Hazrat Ali (radiallahu anh) was martyred in Iraq. d) Hazrat Hussain (radiallahu anh) was martyred at Karbala i.e. in Iraq) Hazrat Umar Bin Khattab (radiallahu anh) was martyred by Piruzan also known as known as Abu Lulu, he was slave of Mughira Ibn Shu'ba the governor of Busra. 9.1 - The Ground Reality And Things To Come: It was previously mentioned after Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) departed from earthly life Najd in particularly and Arabian Peninsula in general rose upon in rebellion and arms. Note the events he mentions took place some twenty-five years after departure of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but events to be mentioned by me were right after departure of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). You can soon as the news reached them that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has passed away they took up arms and rebellion against rule of first Khalifah for all sorts of reasons. Brother Abdullah mentioned figures of fatalities to portray Iraq as the mother of all evil that transpired in early Islamic history and I am compelled to respond in kind to put evil in coffers of Najdis as well. But before that some rectifications need to be made because brother Abdullah a prolific distorter of truth is at it again. 9.2 - Uncovering Some Lies And Telling Some Truth: Brother Abdullah stated every tribulation transpired in Iraq. He mentions battle of Jamal took place in Basrah which is in Iraq. Battle of Siffin took place in Syria on banks of river Euphrates and today it is known as Raqqa. Note at present Raqqa was infamous capital of Wahhabi terrorist group ISIS. Sneakily brother Abdullah made it part of Iraq. Anything goes for defence of Salafi Minhaj of Kharijism including truth - right out the window. Next in line is the truth that Khawarij emerged from Iraq. Technically Khawarij emerged Syria because after battle of Siffin when Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) accepted arbitration than the Qurra (i.e. Quran reciters) broke away from his army and became known as Khawarij (i.e. disserters). Anyhow they did finally appear in Iraq in Harura (near Baghdad) so it would be correct to apply the Hadith on their Iraqi appearance but the founding fathers of Kharijism (see section 0.3) and the people who filled the ranks of Khariji army were Tamimis most and other inhabitants of Najd, here. It is correct that battle of Karbala in which Imam Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was slain took place in Iraq. Summing it up - so in his first point there was truth, second was a lie, third; Khawarij emerged from Syria but also in Iraq therefore partially correct, Najdis get blame for Khawarij because the leadership of Khawarij was from Najd; Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi (actual name Abdullah, also known as Hurqus Ibn Zuhayr), Abdullah Ibn Wahb al-Rasibi al-Azdi. Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamim was from Banu Mudhar and the Wahb al-Rasibi from Banu Rabia. Two groups of Satan coming togather for form a Fitna and the second time this happened was when the Saud family and Shaykh Ibnul Wahhab joined forces to create another major Fitna called Wahhabism. The rest I don’t need to respond because it has been repeated to many times. 9.3 - The Tribulations In Form Of Apostasy And Rebellion: To begin with it is important that readers have good look on the following map to figure understand where actual Najd is, here. And also have good look at the following map, here. Battle of Buzakah between armies lead by Khalid Ibn Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Tulayha Ibn Khuwaylid Ibn Nawfal al-Asadi. Tulayha Ibn Khuwaylid claimed Prophet-hood. Muslim army was six-thousand strong against fifteen-thousand of Tulayha’s followers out of which thirty percent of apostates were killed. On Muslim side the causulties were low around a thousand. Fortunately Tulayha Ibn Khuwaylid accepted Islam and died a righteous Muslim as a Tabi. Battle of al-Yamamah; Musaylmah the liar of Najd also claimed Prophet-hood and as are result twenty-thousand Muslims died as apostates in battle which he himself was killed and some twelve hundred from Muslim side also died. This was second time Najd had claimed life of seventy Hufadh of Quran. The first time being when the tribes betrayed the Muslims killing them at well of Mau’na. Battle of Zafar again thousands of Muslims became apostates and rebelled against Khilafat resulting death at very least two-thousand apostates and around five-hundred Muslims died. I could not find anything regarding battle of Naqra and about battle of Ghamrah, battle of Hajr or battle of Butah. Note the casualties on Muslim side were not high in figures but when you contemplate the apostates were Muslim and abandoned Islam and died apostates then it was a great tragedy. Muslims can balance the two facts and judge for themselves that if apostasy and eventual death of around fifty thousand former Muslims in Najd is greater tribulation or death of sixty-five thousand Muslims. However you decide to look at it the fact is is Islam lost over a hundred thousand Muslims; some lost their lives only and other their Islam and lives. And if basis of harm to Islam and life of Muslims was criteria for determining where Najd is then would a sane person not agree that Islam lost more in Arabian Peninsula and in Najd then in Iraq. Surely tribulation of apostasy was greater then wars between Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). My personal view is thousand righteous Muslims being killed is lesser evil then fifty abandoning Islam but readers are free to choose their pick. The bottom line is there were tribulations in Najd also and severe enough that people lost their Islam and died apostates. Only tribulation and fighting and war basis brother Abdullah cannot fit the Ahadith of Najd on Iraq because the very same in fact worse tribulations emerged in actual historical Najd. Tribulation Of Wahhabism In Najd: One of the greatest tribulation which appeared in Najd is Wahhabism. Its founder Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab claimed, in his time, in all of Arabia, only he alone knows what Tawheed was and what Shirk was, and everyone else including his teachers were ignorant of it.[8] This was a massive Takfir of entire Muslims of Arabian Peninsula and in fact of entire Ummah because the orthodox Islam of world was unanimous in their understanding of Tawheed/Shirk. Nullifying the Tawheed/Shirk belief of Muslim of Arabia by default implied there was no Tawheed/Muwahid in entire world. This was the corner stone of belief on which Wahhabism came to existance and the very beliefe which resulted in death of hundreds of thousands of Muslims in and in surrounding regions of Najd. And even going far as attacking Iraq and TransJordan where they killed ten thousand people or so in surprise raids. They waged relentless war upon Muslims of Arabian Peninsula and showed no mercy to Muslim men, women, and even children. On account that these Muslims were actually polytheists (i.e. worst type of Kafirs) and therefore their killing/blood was permissible. They demolished the Masajid/Madaris and killed anyone they thought was against them much like their modern ISIS brothers. Entire Arabian Peninsula suffered at their hands and this suffering seemingly came to an end after they gained control of entire Arabian Peninsula after first world war.[9] 9.5 – Khariji Revolts And Some Facts About Them: In Iraq there were many Khariji revolts such as Basrah but the instigators and planners and executers of all these revolts major share of forces were from Banu Tamim who had migrated to Iraq after its conquest during the Khilafat of Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Northern region of Iraq – al-Jazira – was also inhabited by members of tribes of Banu Rabia, Banu Mudhar, and Bakr Ibn Wail, here. These were people who migrated and settled in Iraq from central Saudi Arabia. Originally these tribes were settled around the modern Saudi capital Riyadh which is our Najd, here. There were two rebellions in al-Jazira; one in 794/795 AD lead by Al-Walid Ibn Tarif al-Shaybani and the other 866/896 AD whose leaders were Musawir ibn Abd al-Hamid al-Shari, Harun ibn Abdallah al-Bajali. Khawarij also revolted in Ahwaz -; now part of Iran, also known as Zanj rebellion. It was ocastrated by components Azraqiyyah Khariji sects followers from Banu Tamim, Rabia and Mudhar. The leaders of rebellion were; Abu Ahmad al-Muwaffaq, Abu al- Abbas Ibn al-Muwaffaq, Musa Ibn Bugha, Abu al-Saj, Masrur al-Balkhi, and Ahmad ibn Laythawayh. Nafi Ibn al-Azraq al-Hanafi al-Handhali after whom the Khariji sect Azraqiyya was named moved with his remaining followers to Ahwaz. So even though these tribulations did not take place in Arabian Najd the people involved were from Najd just like Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said they will appear from Najd. They appeared in Najd and showed their evil in Iraq. Similar to Qurra becoming abandoned Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) at Siffin in Syria but demonstrated their evil in Iraq. The fact of matter is in almost major Khariji rebellion tribes of Najd and those who migrated from Najd were heavily involved. Therefore the origin of tribulations in Iraq was from Najd of Arabian Peninsula even though the tribulations manifested in Iraq. 10.0 - Unlucky Thirteen Najds: “Allamah Zubedi said and Allamah Hamumui he pointed out the list of Najds: 1) Najd Yamen. 2) Najd Iraq. 3) Najd Hijaaz. 4) Najd Khal. 5) Najd Al-Shari. 6) Najd Azaar. 7) Najd Al-Aqaab. 8) Najd Kabkab. 9) Najd Mari. 10) Najd Alwaz. 11) Najd-e-Aja. 12) Najd Barqq. F) Fitna of Inkaar e Hadeeh. So many Fitnas related to one place and that is IRAQ.. so Noble Prophet mentioning is IRAQ as a core place of Fitna has been proved at the later stages. Conclusion: It is crystal clear from above Ahadeeth that East refers to Iraq not Saudi Arabia.” [Ref: Taj ul-Urus Min Jawahir ul-Qamus, Vol.2 pg.511. Mawjam Al-Bildaan Vol.19 Pg.265.] Shameless Lieing And Attributing Lies Works Of Scholars: Brother Abdullah claimed in Mujam al-Buldan and in Taj ul-Uroos Najd (of) Iraq is mentioned but brother Abdullah has lied. The display of confidence in lieing/deception is amazing. He is a very bad liar at that. A smart liar would actually be constructive in his art of lieing; invent authors, books, and even printers so his lie cannot or at the very least difficult to caught out. But brother Abdullah is enemy of himself in more then one way decided referrence his lie to scholars of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “… the Messenger of Allah said: Were people to be given everything that they claimed, men would (unjustly) claim the wealth and lives of (other) people. But, the onus of proof is upon the claimant, and the taking of an oath is upon him who denies.” [Ref: Forty Ahadith – Nawavi, Hadith 33] He published his article on; Friday, 9th December, 2011, and he allegedly quoted from these books. All he needs to do is to produce scanned image of front cover and of page where he got the information with clear name of publisher/printer for both books pre-dating his article. It can be said with complete confidence there is no such mention Najd (of) Iraq in Mujam al-Buldan of Shaykh Yaqut al-Hamawi (rahimullah) and not Taj ul-Uroos of Shaykh Muhammad Murtaza al-Hussaini al-Zubaidi (rahimullah). Following sections provide comprehensive exposition. Mu’jam Buldan: UnMasking Lie And The Deception Of Iblees Of Najd: On page 262 following five Najd are mentioned; i) Najd Barq (in al-Yamamah), ii) Najd Khal, iii) Najd Ufar, iv) Najd Kabkab, v) Najd Marb'a. On page 265 following Najd are mentioned; i) Najd al-Waza, ii) Najd A'ja, iii) Najd Barq, iv) Najd Khal, v) Najd al-Shar'ra, vi) Najd ul-Ufar, vii) Najd al-Aqab, viii) Najd KabKab, ix) Najd Marb'a, x) Najd Yaman (i.e. Yemen). One thing it will be obvious is that Najd Iraq from both lists is missing which brother Abdullah claimed was part of it. From these two lists of Najd we bring unique ones togather; i) Najd Barq, ii) Najd Khal, iii) Najd Ufar, iv) Najd Kabkab, v) Najd Marb’a, vi) Najd al-Waza, vii) Najd A’ja, viii) Najd Shar’ra, ix) Najd al-Aqab, x) Najd Yaman. This is what our cretin brother Abdullah quoted from Mu’jam al-Buldan: “1) Najd Yamen. 2) Najd Iraq. 3) Najd Hijaaz. 4) Najd Khal. 5) Najd Al-Shari. 6) Najd Azaar. 7) Najd Al-Aqaab. 8) Najd Kabkab. 9) Najd Mari. 10) Najd Alwaz. 11) Najd-e-Aja. 12) Najd Barqq.” Shaykh Yaqut al-Hamawi (rahimullah) mentioned ten Najds but cretin deceptively decided to add two more to the ten to make grand total of twelve. The two additions being Najd Iraq and Najd Hijaz. Not just that but Najd Azaar is not mentioned in Mu’jam al-Buldan. Please see following link it contains scanned copies of entire section on Najd and also provides link for online version of Mujal al-Buldan, here. Taj Ul-Uroos: The Lies Of Liar Finally Will Catch Up To Him: Coming to Taj ul-Uroos Min Jawahir ul-Qamoos of Allamah Zubaidi Naqshbandi (rahimullah). Shamela.ws has online version of Taj ul-Uroos. In part nine entry on Najd (نجد) can be seen. What it precisely states is matter of another article to come. Until then rest assured; brother Abdullah has lied even this time. There is no mention of Najd in Iraq, or Najd of Iraq. What Allamah Zubaidi (rahimullah) actually stated supports position of Muslims and refutes brother Abdullah but for now it would suffice to say there is no mention of Najd Iraq, or Najd of Iraq, here. He actually defined the boundary of Najd saying Najd is between Tihamah, Yemen, Levant (i.e. greater Syria) and low lands of Iraq. Also I managed to find printed version and following is link to everything related to Najd, here. Many Najds Cannot Refute Islamic Argument: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was seated on pulpit of Masjid Nabvi when he faced direction of East, pointed toward East, he pointed toward direction of sunrise, here, toward house of Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha), here, toward region of Najd, Najd means elevated land (i.e. mountanous terrain), here. And then apply these findings upon the Najd and Iraq to see which of two is Najd. And which Najd it is out of ten mentioned by Allamah Yaqut al-Hamawi (rahimullah) in his Mu’jam al-Buldan. If we apply these facts then we will come to conclusion that Najd mentioned is Najd of central Arabian Peninsula surrounding Saudi capital city of Riyadh. Applying Truths Upon Najds And The End Result: Allamah Yaqut al-Hamawi (rahimullah) said stated Najd Barq is in al-Yamamah and in light of all the information derived from Ahadith it can be safely said that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) intended Najd Barq of al-Yamamah. And this happens to be the precise direction from which Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab appeared with his terrorist Khariji murdering bandits. And I am not the only one of this opinion a Wahhabi scholar of my home town Mirpur Azad Kashmir wrote the following:“The oppressed Imam (Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab) was from that Najd which has been mentioned as Najd Barq which is part of valley of Yamamah ... ”[10] [Ref: Uth’tay Hen Hijab Akhir, Page24, by Professor Mirza Zahid Hussain Sumnati, translted from Urdu.] Following maps depict the a place in al-Yamamah, here, here. Readers should note that al-Yamamah was a vast area these maps only point to where apostasy wars were fought. Al-Yamamah historically was composed of major part of central Arabia, here. Conclusion: Qurra (i.e. Quran reciters) left the party of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) after he accepted arbitration at Siffin (i.e. modern Syrian city of Raqqa). And they were said to have left/deserted and thus Arabic word Khariji was employed for them. Due to their slogan Hukm (i.e. judgment) is for only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) they were also called al-Muhakimmah. These Kharijis marched back to Iraq and camped at Harura and due to village they were called Haruriyyah. The man-power of Khawarij was from Najd. The argument of Wahhabiyyah that afflictions appeared in Iraq therefore Najd of the Ahadith of group of Satan is Iraq is also refuted with this over whelming evidence because according to Ahadith Najd is not just place of afflictions it is also place which gives rise to tribulations. This is evidenced by fact that Kharijis existed during the time of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). It is recorded in many Ahadith he said about Dhil Khuwaisirah, leader of Khawarij, that he has companions so pious my companions if you were to compare your Salah, fasting, Quran recitation to them you would be ashamed of yourself yet they have gone out of Islam like an arrow leaves the bow/target. This Dhil Khawaisirah was from Banu Tamim and Banu Tamim was tribe of central Arabia, here. Even though Khariji rebellion took place in Iraq the men who filled the ranks of Khariji army over-whelmingly were from Najd. After the departure of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) from earthly life Najd specificly and Arabian Peninsula in general was engulfed tribulation of apostasy. Following map depicts route taken by Khalid Ibn Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to bring order in Khilafat, here. And some eleven hundred years later when the Wahhabism engulfed the Arabian Peninsula in death, destruction, and rape: Ibrahim Pasha (rahimullah) gave the Muslims of Arabian Peninsula respite from Khariji rebellion by defeating them in battles; following was the route taken by him, here. Route taken by Khalid Ibn Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu), Ibrahim Pasha (rahimullah), and Khawarij being from region of Najd should score home the truth of Prophetic words; tribulations would emerge from East.[11] At the present Saudi Wahhabiyyah may not be millitarily involved in tribulation of East but everything has been sponsored by Wahhabi kingdom: From first Iraq war to Wahhabi ISIS concentration camp aka Khilafat in Syria/Iraq and to civil war in Libya and Yemen all has been ochestrated by Saudi Wahhabi kingdom. Thus is remains epict centre of tribulations in the Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Contrary to claim that Iraqis were the group of Satan aka Khawarij Sahih Hadith establishes the Iraqis were not the Khawarij but they were the people who had stood by Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and had put an end to Khawarij (Abu Sai'd then said: People of Iraq it is you who have killed them.)[12] and earned pleasure of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) by killing them (Wherever you meet them kill them, for their killing will bring a reward for him who kills them on the day of Resurrection).[13] When all facts are considered; name of Najd, linguistic meaning of Najd, topographical map of Najd/Iraq, Najd being in East, toward direction of sunrise and house of Aysha’s (radiallah ta’ala anha). And with the facts that Banu Tamim, Rabia, and Mudhar were situated in direction of East in region of Najd and Khawarij majority was composed of members of these three and other Najdi tribes. Then there can be no room left for a seeker to argue against truth of Islam and seeker would believe like Muslims believe. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi FootNotes: - [01] Readers should note upto Handhala is tribal names, then individual names. Shaykh Abdul Wahhab (rahimullah) was father of Shaykh Muhammad. And Shaykh Muhammad started the Wahhabi sect. And evidence for this is that Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab belongs to Hanzali tribe and he was native of Uyainah and later moved to Dirriyah and both these were located North West of Saudi capital Riyadh. - [02] Banu Murrah is also spelt Murra. On the link given it is amongst the tribes listed in centre of Arabian map: Sa’d, Fazarah, Murrah and Ashja. - [03] Employ following route to trace tribal lineage of Banu Fazarah: Adnan, Ma'ad, Nizar, Mudar [also spelt; Mudhar], Ailan, Qais, Sa'd, Ghatafan, Raith, Baghid, Dhabyan, Fazarah. - [04] Please trace the tribal geneology from beginning; Adnan, Ma'ad, Nizar, Mudar [also spelt; Mudhar], Ilyas, Mudrikah, Khuzaimah, Kinananah, An-Nadr, Ma'lik, Fihr [aka Quraish], Ghalib, Lu'ayy, Ka'ab, Murrah, Mudlij. - [05] Banu Ashja can be traced via: Adnan, Ma'ad, Nizar, Mudar [also spelt; Mudhar], Ailan, Qais, Sa'd, Ghatafan, Raith, Ashja. - [06] A point might be made that Hadith says Banu Mudhar and not Banu Tamim so how and why are you applying it upon Banu Tamim? Firstly the Hadith states tribes of East … and Banu Tamim is in East of Madinah therefore they are included in prophetic words. Secondly there is wisdom employing Banu Mudhar and not Banu Tamim. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said I have been given short statements encampassing widest possible meanings (i.e. jawami al-kalim). If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) only mentioned Banu Tamim then other off-shoots of Banu Mudhar would escape prophetic; harshness and mercilessness statement. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) made statement about the Banu Mudhar so all those that branched from it are to be considered as ruthless, harsh and merciless. And fact is Banu Tamim and all branches of Banu Mudhar were embroiled in Khariji apostasy but Banu Tamim played prominent role in its formulation and Banu Tamim continues to play major role in modern Khariji movements. - [07] “’And Allah will not mislead a people after He hath guided them, in order that He may make clear to them what to fear (and avoid)- for Allah hath knowledge of all things.’ (9:115) Bukhari relates from Abdullah ibn Umar (Allah be well pleased with him): ‘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.’” [Ref: Fath ul Bari, Chapter of Killing the Khawarjites and Mulhideen, Volume 16, Page No. 164] In Commentory of Chapter Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani (rahimuhullah) writes in Fath ul Bari under this Hadith: “‘Imam Tabri (rahimullah) has mentioned this Hadith in Musnad of Ali with the chain of Bakeer Bin Abdullah in Tahdhib al Athaar. He asked Nafi that what was the opinion of Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) regarding Haruriya (Khawarij)? He replied that he (Ibn Umar) used to consider them worst creations of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because they applied ayahs revealed for disbelievers on believers. (Imam Ibn Hajr al Asqalani) said: This Hadith has “SAHIH” chain. It is also proven from the Sahih Marfu Hadith of Imam Muslim which he narrated from Abu Dhar (radiallah ta’ala anhu); regarding charectersitcis of Khawarij the Hadith states: ‘They are a creation of worst kind.’ And Imam Ahmad (rahimullah) has also narrated a similar Hadith from Anas Bin Malik (rahimullah) with a strong chain. Imam Bazzar (rahimullah) has narrated the Hadith from Aisha (radiallah ta’ala anha) who narrates from Prophet (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) that he said: ‘They will be the worst of my Ummah and they will be killed by the best of my ummah.’ The chain of this Hadith is Hassan.” [Ref: Fath ul Bari, Sharh Sahih ul-Bukhari, Volume No. 16, Page No. 168-9, Published by Dar Taybah, Beirut, Lebanon, here] - [08] "And I inform you about myself - I swear by Allah whom there is none worthy to worship except Him - I have sought knowledge and those who knew me believed that I had knowledge while I did not know the meaning of La Ilaha illa Allah at that time and did not know the religion of Islam before this grace that Allah favored. As well as my teachers (Mashayikh) no one among them knew that. And if someone from the scholars of al-Aridh (the lands of Najd and surrounding areas) claims that he knew the meaning of La Ilaha illa Allah or knew the meaning of Islam before this time, or claims on behalf of his teachers that someone from them knew that, then he has lied and said falsehood and deceived the people and praised himself with something he does not possess." [Ref: al-Durar al-Saniyyah, 10/51, Translation by, Abu Sulayman.] - [09] Readers are advised to read on early Wahhabi history. The best source for Wahhabi history is their own earliest sources their they gloatingly tell the gory truth. In modern books especially in English they have started to civilize their out-look and moderated the use of truth to portray a civil image of Wahhabism and its rise. - [10] From other parts of his book it becomes evident; Professor Sumnati believes Shaykh of Najd was actually resident of Rabb ul-Khali (i.e. empty quarter). And his position isn’t due to evidence or due to claim of Shaykh Najdi’s family instead Professor has taken it upon himself to lie to protect Shaykh of Najd from criticism. This is the reason why Professor Zahid Hussain Sumnati is lieing flatly about direction of al-Yamamah: “The oppressed Imam (Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab) was from that Najd which has been mentioned as Najd Barq which is part of valley of Yamamah and is in South West (of Madinah).” [Ref: Uth’tay Hen Hijab Aakhir, Page24, by Professor Mirza Zahid Hussain Sumnati, translted from Urdu.] Entirity of Rabb ul-Khali region is dessert with no grazing land, no water, nothing but sand and therefore its empty of human or animal habitation. Wahhabi biographers of Shaykh of Najd have stated his birth was Uyaynah and epic centre of his Khariji mission was Dirriyah, here. Both of which are stones throw away from Saudi capital Riyadh. This can be verified independently via internet and their own biographical data published on life of Shaykh of Najd. Please referr to the maps in the following article which point Uyaynah and Dir’riyyah, here. - [11] “Ibn Umar narrated that the Messenger of Allah stood on the Minbar and said; ‘The land of tribulation is there.’, and he pointed to the East: Meaning: ‘Where the sun rises from the group of Satan." Or he said: ‘The horn of the sun.’" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2268] “Narrated Ibn Umar: I heard the Prophet saying: ‘Afflictions will emerge from here.’, pointing towards the East.” [Ref: Bukhari, B63, H217] - [12] “Abu Sa'id al-Khudri said that the Messenger of Allah made a mention of a sect that would be among his Ummah which would emerge out of the dissension of the people. Their distinctive mark would be shaven heads. They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures. The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them. The Apostle of Allah gave an example/description (of their Iman) . Or he said: ‘A man throws an arrow at the prey (or he said at the target), and sees at its iron head, but finds no sign (of blood there), or he sees at the lowest end, but would not see or find any sign (of blood there). He would then see into the grip but would not find (anything) sticking to it.’ Abu Sai'd then said: People of Iraq it is you who have killed them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2324] - [13] “Ali said: When I mention a tradition to you from the Messenger of Allah (May peace be upon him), it is dearer to me that I fall from the heaven than I lie on him. But when I talk to you about matters between me and you, then war is a deception. I heard the Messenger of Allah (May peace be upon him) say: Towards the end of the time there will be people who are young in age and from Islam as an arrow goes through the animal aimed at, and their faith will not pass their throats. Wherever you meet them kill them, for their killing will bring a reward for him who kills them on the day of Resurrection.” [Ref: Abi Dawud, B41, H4749]

Introduction: Wahhabi brand of Kharijism emerged from region surrounding Saudi Arabian capital Riyadh. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa alaihi was’sallam) had foretold the emergence of group of Satan (aka Qarn al-Shaytan) from Najd. And he precisely pointed toward direction of East and toward house of Hadhrat Aysha’s (radiallah ta’ala anha) from his puplit to point out the direction from which it would originate from, here. Historically this region was called Najd, here and here. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was pretty precisely pointing toward the village from which Wahhabism originated. Believers in Wahhabism attempt the disort these Ahadith and attempt to fit them on Iraq for one or other way. A Wahhabi brother wrote article an article in order to protect Wahhabism from implications of Prophetic words, here. A Guide To Three Articles Written In Responde To Brother Abdullah: In the first article, here, Ahadith numbered, 1 to 10, with exception of 6, and Ahadith 17 and 18 were responded to, here. Hadith-6 was repeated was repeated as Hadith-36 and Hadith-38 therefore it will be responded to in this article which will focus on responding to Ahadith from 19 to 43. Ahadith: 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 are to be adressed in following article, here. Note Hadith-16 will be ignored because it is repeat of Hadith 14. 0.0 - Blessings On Makkah And Madinah And Group Of Satan From Iraq: “Hadith-19: “The Hadeeth of Ibn Umar Reported by Abu Nu'aym in al-Hilya (6/133): ‘O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Madeenah, and bestow your blessings on our Mecca, and bestow your blessings on our Shaam, and bestow your blessings on our Yemen, and bestow your blessings in our measuring (fee saa'inaa wa muddinaa)." A person said, " O Messenger of Allaah and in our Iraaq" and so he turned away from him and said, "there will occur earthquakes, trials and tribulations and there will appear the horn of Satan.’ Shu'ayb al-Arna'ut declares it's isnaad to be saheeh as in his footnotes to Sharh as-Sunnah (14/206-207 fn. 2) And he too endorses the words of al-Khattaabee quoted above. Hadith-20: The Hadeeth of Ibn Umar reported in at-Tabaraanee in al-Awsat: ‘The Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhiwa sallam) prayed Fajr and then faced the people and said, "O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Madeenah, O Allaah bestow your blessings in our measuring, O Allaah bestow your blessings in our Shaam and our Yemen." A person said, "And Iraq O Messenger of Allah?" He said, "from there arises the horn of Satan and the trials and tribulations would come like mounting waves.’" 0.1 - Distinction Between Najd And Iraq: Hadith recorded in Al-Hilya (6/133) by Abu Nuaym (rahimullah) and reported by Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) states: “O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Madeenah, and bestow your blessings on our Mecca, and bestow your blessings on our Shaam, and bestow your blessings on our Yemen, and bestow your blessings in our measuring (fee saa'inaa wa muddinaa)." A person said: "O Messenger of Allaah and in our Iraq." And so he turned away from him and said: "there will occur earthquakes, trials and tribulations and there will appear the group of Satan.” Another Hadith narrated by Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and recorded by Imam Tabarani (rahimullah) states: “The Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu alayhiwa sallam) prayed Fajr and then faced the people and said: "O Allaah bestow your blessings on our Madeenah, O Allaah bestow your blessings in our measuring, O Allaah bestow your blessings in our Shaam and our Yemen." A person said: "And Iraq O Messenger of Allah?" He said: "From there arises the group of Satan and the trials and tribulations would come like mounting waves.” Ahadith quoted by brother Abdullah mention supplication being made for Makkah, Sham, Madinah, and Yemen. Yet in both Ahadith refusal of supplication is for Iraq. The refusal of supplication for Iraq is contradicted by another Hadith: “Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Propher looked toward Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, and made the Dua: O Allah accept their hearts on your obedience and place firmly your mercy around them.” [Ref: Tabarani, Mu'jam al-Sagheer, Chptr; Alif, Name; Ishaq, H273, here] In other words Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) made dua for Iraq but informed from there will emerge group of Satan. And fact of matter is Muslims do believe group of Satan emerged from Iraq and from Najd. These Ahadith establish emergence of two major groups of Satan. First emerged in Iraq and second in Najd. So this evidence of brother Abdullah does not contradict what we already believe and know. Point worth noting is that many Ahadith of Bukhari/Muslim mention Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) supplicating for sake of Yemen/Sham and refusal of supplication for Najd and telling group of Satan will emerge from it: “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] The distinction of Iraq is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) supplicated Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for Iraq but refused to do the same for Najd. Also one (i.e. Najd) is precisely East of Madinah and the other (i.e. Iraq) is pretty close to North. Najd means elevated land (i.e. mountainous terrain) and Iraq is all low land. Meaning of Najd fits onto central region of Saudi Arabia and not on Iraq. Also historically region of Najd was part of Arabian Peninsula, as established by maps, and Iraq was distinguished from Najd even by companions and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And group of Satan was to emerge from direction of sunrise, here. All this establishes they are two different places and Khawarij would emerge from Iraq and then Najd. 0.2 - The Flawless Logic And Rationalism Of Wahhabism: Ali says to Wahhabi: When you turn the corner you will see Ansar having breakfast with chapatis. Grab him by ear and bring him to me. Wahhabi turns the corner and spots horse eating paper grabs the horse by ear and drags him to Ali: Here is Ansar. Ali to Wahhabi: I said bring me Ansar. Wahhabi: You said Ansar will be eating chapatis around the corner and I saw the horse eating chapatis from plate and it proved horse is Ansar. See the result of excellent education and flawless logic. Wahhabi thought Ansar was horse because he saw him eat chapatis. The reason is detail that was suppose to identify Ansar was also found in the horse. Instead of thinking in the absence of Ansar horse ate the chapatis Mr Wahhabi thought horse was Ansar. Wahhabis employ their flawless logic for Ahadith of group of Satan. Group of Satan to emerge from Najd and group of Satan to emerge from Iraq therefore Najd is Iraq. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knows when will they arrive at conclusion; Iraq is Najd of Saudi Arabia. It is also a equal possibility in stupid’s methodological frame work. One said: We Salafis (aka Wahhabis) entertain Najd is Iraq because Hadith states group of Satan would emerge from Najd with tribulations and earthquakes. And many tribulations emerged from Iraq including Khawarij and nothing of consequence has ever happened in Najd of Arabian Peninsula. To begin with the answer; there were many rebellions and revolts from region which the Muslims claim is Najd. Undeniable fact and agreed by all parties, right after departure of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) from earthly life Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had to fight apostasy wars (aka Ridda wars), here. Khawarij emerged as a sect in the Khilafat of fourth Khalifah Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Therefore Iraqi tribulation was roughtly twenty-five years after where as tribulation Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had to deal was all over Arabian Peninsula but was more concentrated in Najd. Therefore the Hadith of tribulation can be applied upon traditionally accepted Najd as well. Following section also will point out tribulations that appeared in Arabian Peninsula including Najd. 0.3 - The First Major Sect Of Kharij –: Kharijis Emerging From Iraq: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold about two major factions of Khawarij. The first group/sect of Khawarij which emerged from Iraq their reality is; vast majority of Kharijis were men from Najdi tribes and out of them large numbers including leadership was from tribe of Banu Tamim, here. Haruria sect to whom Abdullah aka Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi belonged. He was amongst the Khawarij who fought against Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and was amongst the dead of Khawarij. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) regarding this man said he has companions, meaning companions who follow him. Leaders of these Khawarij was Abdullah Ibn Wahb al-Rasibi al-Azdi (also appellation al-Rasibi). Banu Azd is sub-tribe of Banu Rasib, here. Banu Azd were siutated in region of modern country of Oman and where up to present majority population is of Khariji. Note map above pointing various location of tribes has Banu Azd (of) Uman on Eastern extremity of Arabian Peninsula. Founder of Azariqa sect of Khawarij, Nafi Ibn al-Azraq al-Hanafi al-Handhali. Apellation al-Hanafi is ascription to Banu Hanifa also indicated on the tribal map. Ascription of Handhali is to Banu Handhala (also spelt Hanzala). Banu Hanzala and Banu Hanifa were situated in Najd but the Azariqa emerged as a sect in Basrah and moved to al-Ahwaz after conquering it, here. Incidently Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, the founder of Wahhabi sect of Khawarij is also from Banu Handhala, here.[1] Another major faction of Khawarij was called Najdat and their leader was Najda Ibn Amir al-Hanafi. He ruled al-Yamamah and Bahrayn in late 7th century AD. Al-Hanafi is ascription to Banu Hanifa proving this sect originated in Najd. Ajdrida founded by Abdul Karim Ibn Ajrad. I have been unable to find anything on his tribal connetions and same goes for Sufriyyah sects founders, Ziyad Ibn al-Asfar and Umran Ibn Hattan. Ibadhi sect of Khawarij was founded by Abdullah Ibn Ibadh al-Murri al Tamimi. And al-Murris is ascription to al-Tamimi to Banu Tamim and Murri ascription to Banu Murrah a branch, here,[2] which is an off-shoot of Banu Tamim. Ibadhi’s later plauged entire Muslim population and resulted in revolts and supression of revolts, here. All this goes on to establish that people of central Arabia, residents of region of Najd, played key role in Kharijism. Even though the earliest manifestation of Kharijism was from Iraq but its ranks and leaders were from central Arabian region of Najd and later manifestations of this sect plagued Najd and Arabian Peninsula in general. So the source of tribulations the inventors of almost all leaders of Khariji tribulation in Iraq were from central Arabia. And those who did not belong to region were definitely influenced by their thought. 0.4 - The Second Coming Of Khawarij -: From Saudi Central Region Of Najd: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold about emergence of group of Satan from East of Madinah in the region of Najd: “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] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold that from progeny of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi a group would emerge: “Then the Prophet looked at him while the latter was going away and said, "From the offspring of this who will recite the Qur'an continuously and elegantly but it will not exceed their throats. They would go out of the religion as an arrow goes through a game's body." [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H638] And these people are to appear near the end of time as if Dhil Khuwaisirah is one of them: "A people will come at the end of time; as if he is one of them, reciting the Qur'an without it passing beyond their throats. They will go through Islam just as the arrow goes through the target. Their distinction will be shaving. They will not cease to appear until the last of them comes with Al-Masih Ad-Dajjal. So when you meet them, then kill them, they are the worst of created beings." [Ref: Nisa’i, B37, H4108, here] Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi was a from East of Madinah and from region of Najd. To see how Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi fits into Najd and Khariji sect please referr to the following article, here. In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold about two groups of Satans 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] Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab originated from Banu Tamim and it is off-shoot of Banu Mudhar. The Saud family which allied with Shaykh of Najd and provided him the millitary support to establish and spread Wahhabism are from Banu Anizzah which is offshoot of Banu Rabia. All tribal lineage can be tracker, here. 0.5 - Fulfillment Of Prophecy Of Najd By Shaykh Of Najd: Banu Rabia and its offshoot Banu Anizzah, and Banu Mudhar and its offshoot Banu Tamim were located in central Arabia. At present it is area surrouding Saudi capital Riyadh. And point worth noting is that all these tribes were located in Najd. The two groups of Satan which united to make Saudi Arabia today were from offshoots of Banu Rabia and Banu Mudhar and this unholy alliance originated in Najd which continues upto present. This establishes all four Ahadith are connected with each other. And in light of historical events of middle 17th century they come togather to establish that the two mini-groups of Satan (i.e. Banu Hanzala and Banu Anizzah) united and a major group of Satan emerged from Najd in form of Wahhabism thus fullfilling the prophetic prophesy. 0.6 - Origins Of Wahhabism And Tribulations That Plagued Najd: The agreement between Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab aka Shaykh of Najd and Saud family meant; Saud will control the affairs of state and Shaykh of Najd will control affairs of Saudi state. Shaykh of Najd instilled in his followers the desire to fight and kill Muslims. He taught them the Muslims in surrounding areas are polytheists/disbelievers and not Muslims therefore Jihad is compulsory for all. Wahhabis took to his cause and started the process of raids leading to slaughter of thousands. Following is just record of battles which Saudi Wahhabi forces fought against armies, here. Following is a map of series of battles which Ibrahim Pasha fought against Wahhabis, here. The raids which Wahhabis carried out of Muslim towns and what they did to the Muslims of these towns can only be read in books of history. They massacared entire towns which they conquered. Raped, pillaged and enslaved Muslims under the pretexts these Muslims are not real Muslims but are polytheists therefore we are justified in our war against them. If it be possible Muslims should read; Rawdhat al-Afkar wal-Afham, popularly known as Tareekh al-Najd by Hussain Ibn Ghanam. This is a first hand witness account of what the Wahhabis did to people of in Najd and surrounding regions. And readers should read Unwan al-Majd Fi Tareekh al-Najd by Abdullah Ibn Bashir. Ibn Ghanam was companion of Shaykh of Najd and Ibn Bashir was half generation later but both wrote account of what they saw and was reported to them those who took part in Wahhabi raids against Muslims of Arabia. Their brutality and barbarity pales barbarity and brutatlity of modern spawns of Wahhabism aka ISIS, Al-Qaidah, Boko Haram, and Al-Shabab and TTP. Therefore the following Hadith perfectly fits on account of affilictions/tribulations upon Najd of central Arabia: "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] 1.0 - Abdullah’s Version Of Evil Of Iraqi’s And The Reality: “Hadith-21: “And he (the 'Iraqi) has told a lie in this matter.” (Reference: Muslim, B7, H2850) Hadith-22: Malik related to me that he heard that Umar ibn al-Khattab wanted to go to Iraq, and Kab al-Ahbar said to him: "Do not go there, amir al-muminin. There is nine-tenths of sorcery there and it is the place of the rebellious jinn and the disease which the doctors are unable to cure." (Muwatta.I.Malik Book 054, H30) Comments:-From the innovations that appeared in the east and specifically Iraaq, was many of the early deviant sects amongst them the Qadariyyah (as the first hadeeth in Muslim shows), the Jahmiyyah and their offshoots etc... Hadith-23: Narrated Jabir bin Samura:The People of Kufa complained against Sa'd to Umar and the latter dismissed him and appointed Ammar as their chief .They lodged many complaints against Sa'd and even they alleged that he did not pray properly. Umar sent for him and said, "O Aba Ishaq! These people claim that you do not pray properly."Abu Ishaq said: "By Allah, I used to pray with them a prayer similar to that of Allah's Apostle and I never reduced anything of it. I used to prolong the first two Rakat of Isha prayer and shorten the last two Rakat." Umar said: "O Aba Ishaq, this was what I thought about you." And then he sent one or more persons with him to Kufa so as to ask the people about him. So they went there and did not leave any mosque without asking about him. All the people praised him till they came to the mosque of the tribe of Bani Abs; one of the men called Usama bin Qatada with a surname of Aba Sa'd stood up and said: "As you have put us under an oath; I am bound to tell you that Sa'd never went himself with the army and never distributed (the war booty) equally and never did justice in legal verdicts." (On hearing it) Sa'd said: "I pray to Allah for three things: O Allah! If this slave of yours is a liar and got up for showing off, give him a long life, increase his poverty and put him to trials." (And so it happened). Later on when that person was asked how he was; he used to reply that he was an old man in trial as the result of Sa'd's curse. Abdul Malik, the sub narrator said that he had seen him afterwards and his eyebrows were over-hanging his eyes owing to old age and he used to tease and assault the small girls in the way. (Bukhari, B12, Vol1, H 722. Muslim, B4, H912) Hadith-24: It was narrated that Abu Razin said:"I saw Abu Hurairah clap his hand to his forehead and say: 'O people of Al-Iraq you claim that I tell lies about the Messenger of Allah. I bear witness that I heard the Messenger of Allah say: If the strap of the sandal of one of you breaks, let him not walk in the other until he fixes it.'" (Sahih) (Reference: an-Nasa'i 5370, Vol6, B48, H5372. Al-Adab Al-Mufrad, B41, H5) Comments: Astagfirullah Iraqis attributed a lies on Sahabas (Sa'd radiallah anh & Abu-Hurairah r.a) Astagfirullah ...” 1.1 - Hadith Twenty-One And Innovations A Reality Check: Hadith twenty-one , here, is regarding an Iraqi man who believes Ihram can be removed. And Hadith goes on to give details how companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) only removed Ihram after completion of Hajj. The Iraqi man claims he has been informed by a person who heard from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). He asks another companion to convey his messages to Urwa Ibn Zubayr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) about the matter. Yet the Iraqi not personally visiting the companion but conveys his messages via another companion indicates he had something to hide and was lieing: “… whereupon he (Urwa) said: Who is he (the Iraqi)? I said: I do not know, whereupon he said: What is the matter that he does not come to me himself and ask me? I suppose he is an Iraqi. I said: I do not know, whereupon he said: He has told a lie.” And at the end of Hadith same is repeated: “My mother informed me that she came and her sister, and Zubair and so and so for Umra, and when they had kissed the corner (the Black Stone, after Sa'i and circumambulation), they put off Ihram. And he (the Iraqi) has told a lie in this matter.” [Ref: Muslim, B7, H2850] Note Urwa Ibn Zubayr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not accuse the Iraqi of introducing innovation just lieing. Nor he concluded on basis of this Hadith Iraq is land of innovation. Mr Wahhabi employed this incident to make case innovations originated from Iraq. The fact is there was good and bad in every region of Khilafat. Innovations were introduced in Makkah, Madinah, Najd, Iraq, and Syria. Innovation of denying prophetic Ghayb knowledge was started by the hypocrites of Madinah. And if we take literalism of Hadith Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) in meanings employed by Wahhabis/Deobandis to refute Ilm al-Ghayb of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then she is also part of this innovation:“Narrated Masruq: Aisha said: "If anyone tells you that Muhammad has seen his Lord, he is a liar, for Allah says: 'No vision can grasp Him.' (6:103) And if anyone tells you that Muhammad has seen the Unseen, he is a liar, for Allah says: "None has the knowledge of the Unseen but Allah." [Ref: Bukhari, B93, H477, here] Yet there are numerous verses of Quran which attest to fact Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been granted Ilm al-Ghayb,72:26/27, and according to many Ahadith he has has seen Ghuyub; including :angels, hell, and paradise. And as par view of Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) even saw Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), a view which she opposed. Also Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) saw Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) believed he did not see Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but saw Gibraeel (alayhis salam) and she said anyone who claims so is a liar. Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed Salat ad-Duha is an innovation, or an aspect of it is an innovation but fact is that it is a prophetic Sunnah. Which proves Abdullah Ibn Umar’s view was an innovation. Now which ever view is correct the result is that other has innovated a beliefe a teaching which is not established and is an [evil] innovation. Yes they are companions and their sins forgiven and paradise gauranteed. They are Mujtahideen and their errors even are rewarded but in legal sense their teachings are innovations; innovations which we choose to brush under the carpet of valid Ikhtilaf. 1.2 - Hadith Twenty-One And The Insane Agenda: Innovations were introduced in all regions including in Makkah and Madinah and by companions and by munafiqeen and by evil people and Iraq and Iraqis were not unique in this. There were good and bad elements every where. On basis of bad ones entire people cannot be blamed. Due to presences of hypocrites in Madinah it cannot be declared land of hypocrites. There were righteous people and companions amongst the inhabitants of Madinah. If there is no reason to hold people of Makkah and Madinah in contempt on basis of innovations then there is no reason to have contempt for people of Iraq and Iraq. The good people in both regions have to be appreciated and the evil rebuked and corrected. Only reason brother Abdullah wants to demonise the Iraqis is because he wants to shift Najd from central Arabia to Iraq. And he has to make Iraqis extra evil for readers to believe him that Iraqis gave rise to group of Satan. Yet reality is that Khawarij were from Najdi tribes of central Arabia and according to Hadith Iraqis killed the Khawarij: “... be smeared by dung and blood. The sign by which these people will be recognized will be a man whose one hand (or breast) will be like the breast of a woman. These people will appear when there will be differences among the people (Muslims)." Abu Sa'id added: I testify that I heard this from the Prophet and also testify that Ali killed those people while I was with him. The man with the description given by the Prophet was brought to Ali. The following Verses were revealed in connection with that very person: 'And among them are men who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.” [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] ”A man throws an arrow at the prey (or he said at the target), and sees at its iron head, but finds no sign (of blood there), or he sees at the lowest end, but would not see or find any sign (of blood there). He would then see into the grip but would not find (anything) sticking to it. Abu Sai'd then said: People of Iraq. It is you who have killed them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2324] And not just that but the Iraqis are part of the group nearer to truth because they killed the Khawarij: “... Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a mention of a sect that would be among his Ummah which would emerge out of the dissension of the people. Their distinctive mark would be shaven heads. They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures. The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2324] 1.3 - Hadith twenty-Two, Magic, Sorcery, Jinn and Disease In Iraq: During the Khilafat of Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) parts of modern Iraq were conquered, here. It was in the Khilafat of Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) entire Iraq and regions surrounding it were brought under the rule of Islam, here. Hadith twenty-two states that a companion attempted to prevent Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) from visiting Iraq on basis that in Iraq there is sorcerry, Jinn and Disease which no one can cure. If indeed this was the situation would Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) have sent armies, part of which were Sahabah and Tabieen, to conquer Iraq? Would they want to expose the Muslims to dangers and harm which they didn’t want to face themselves? These Khulafah were not Barrack Obama, Donald Tramp and Tony Blair of their era; with no regard for lives of people under their command. The matter of fact is companions were part of armies and they fought and conquered Iraq and fourth Khalifah Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made Baghdad capital of his rule. The Hadith is very likely Da’if and maybe even fabricated. And if not its nothing more then a companion taking rumours and supersitious too seriously and fear mongering out of sincerity. The reality is if Iraq was such a evil place then all the things mentioned would have caused harm to native inhabitants of Iraq and probally done away with entire population. Yet Iraq has been civilisation central, empire central for thousand of years. There is no uncurable disease or sorcerry. Iraq is place for which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) invoked blessing and a blessed land: “Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Propher looked toward Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, and made the Dua: O Allah accept their hearts on your obedience and place firmly your mercy around them.” [Ref: Tabarani, Mu'jam al-Sagheer, Chptr; Alif, Name; Ishaq, H273, here] Once again the purpose was to demonize Iraq. To make it seem as it is holy of holies of all evil and innovations so Iraq can be reconciled with Najd on basis of afflictions, tribulations, trials and innovations. 1.4 - Hadith Twenty-Three Iraqis Complaining About Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqas: From the content of Hadith quoted at number twenty-three it is clear that Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqas was appointed governor of Kufa by second Khalifah Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu). He repeatedly received complaints regarding Sa’d (radiallah ta’ala anhu), one allegation levelled was; Sa’d (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not perform Salah correctly, and therefore he was removed him from his post. Upon return of Sa’d (radiallah ta’ala anhu) he was questioned about his practice of Salah and allegations were unfound. Further envoy was sent to investigate conduct and practices of Sa’d (radiallah ta’ala anhu). As evidenced by Hadith; all people of Kufa praised Sa’d (radiallah ta’ala anhu) accept when the evnoy reached mosque of Bani Abs. And from it a single man with the name of Usama Ibn Qatada under oath lied and Sa’d (radiallah ta’ala anhu) invoked Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to punish him if he has lied. According to Hadith the supplication was granted by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as demonstrated by details of Hadith. Note this one incident was used by brother Abdullah, the enemey of common sense, to justify that all Iraqis accused Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) of lieing. In reality it wasn’t even all of Kufa just a particular mosque belonging to Banu Abs. Who likely were displeased with Sa’d Ibn Abi Waqas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) for some reason. Would it be appropriate to point out sins of companions residing in Makkah, Madinah, and Arabian Peninsula in general to say people of Arabia are evil doers? What if Ahadith establish evil and rebellion of Arabs residing in central Saudi Arabian region of Najd; will they all be deemed evil and innovators, and liars? Take example of Musaylmah from al-Yamama; he claimed Prophet-hood and the Najdis of al-Yamama accepted his Prophet-hood claim and followed him in battle against Khilafat of Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu): “Narrated Qatada: We do not know of any tribe amongst the 'Arab tribes who lost more martyrs than Al-Ansar, and they will have superiority on the Day of Resurrection. Anas bin Malik told us that seventy from the Ansar were martyred on the day of Uhud, and seventy on the day (of the battle of) Bir Ma'una, and seventy on the day of Al-Yamama. Anas added, "The battle of Bir Ma'una took place during the lifetime of Allah's Messenger and the battle of Al-Yamama, during the caliphate of Abu Bakr, and it was the day when Musailamah Al-Kadhdhab was killed." [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H405] Following maps indicate location of al-Yamama in Arabian Peninsula, here, here, and following map points to location of al-Yamama in context of region of Najd, here. On basis of this would it be fair and intelligent to imply all people of Najd and al-Yamama were believers of Prophet-hood? Musailimah, the liar, claimed Prophet-hood when there was no Prophet after the last and final Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) hence the addition of al-Kadhab (i.e. the liar) with his name. If a Iraqi, or few, or dozen, or greater in number attributed lies to companions, and that makes the entire Iraqi-kind evil, and bad, and it entitles them being Qarn al-Shaytan (i.e. group of Satan); then surely Musailimah who claimed to be Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and lied about it, and those who accepted his claim are more evil. On this basis and the Khariji leadership being from Najdi tribes would it be legitimate to conclude Iraq is in central Arabia? No of course not; because Hadith states name of region as Iraq from where the group of Satan will emerge and as result of trials and tribulations will appear from Iraq. It would be stupid to determine location of Iraq and even Najd on basis of trials, tribulations, and afflictions and not on basis of names of region i.e. Najd and Iraq. Just imagine Sufi says: There is war in Syria. Mr Wahhabi the embodiment of ‘knowledge and learning’ and ‘the inheritor or true belief of Salaf as-Saliheen’ says: There is war in Afghanistan therefore meaning of Syria is Afghanistan because there is war in Afghanistan. Again we don’t determine identity of regions based on events but determine location and identity of regions based on names and apply the events to region. And all evidence points to Najd being in central Saudi Arabia; area surrounding Saudi capital of Riyadh. And we have to fit the trial and tribulation part of Hadith onto this region. 1.5 - Hadith Twenty-Four Abu Huraira Disowns Accusation Of Lieing: In Hadith number twenty-four it is stated Abu Huraira (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said to people of Iraq that you accuse me of lieing meaning fabricating Ahadith and attributing to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Likely reason why Iraqis thought Abu Huraira (radiallah ta’ala anhu) fabricated Ahadith is because he narrated too many Ahadith, which he himself says he is accused of, regarding every matter/situation. Imagine you can narrate a statement of certain Harry regarding every situation you find yourself in. Sooner or later people would accusr you of inventing and attributing statements to Harry. If not that they will definitely think you’re cuckoo for relating everything to Harry. His extra-ordinary capacity to remember was just too much for some Iraqis to believe and they accused him of lieing. Reason he was able to narrate Ahadith like this is because he spent most of his time with Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “Narrated Abu Huraira: People say that I have narrated many Hadiths (The Prophet's narration). Had it not been for two verses in the Qur'an, I would not have narrated a single Hadith, and the verses are: "Verily those who conceal the clear sign and the guidance which We have sent down . . . (up to) Most Merciful." (2:159/160). And no doubt our Muhajir (emigrant) brothers used to be busy in the market with their business (bargains) and our Ansari brothers used to be busy with their property (agriculture). But I (Abu Huraira) used to stick to Allah's Messenger contented with what will fill my stomach and I used to attend that which they used not to attend and I used to memorize that which they used not to memorize.” [Ref: Bukhari, B3, H118] And possessed a huge capacity to remember information accurately due to prophetic miracle that manifested for him: “Narrated Abu Huraira: I said to Allah's Messenger: "I hear many narrations (Hadiths) from you but I forget them." Allah's Apostle said: "Spread your garment." I did accordingly and then he moved his hands as if filling them with something (and emptied them in my garment) and then said: "Take and wrap this sheet over your body." I did it and after that I never forgot any thing. Narrated Ibrahim bin Al-Mundhir: Ibn Abi Fudaik narrated the same as above but added that the Prophet had moved his hands as if filling them with something and then he emptied them in the garment of Abu Huraira.” [Ref: Bukhari, B3, H119] He was Daniel Tammet, Kim Peek, when it came to knowledge of Prophetic Sunnah. His capability was just too great to accept without verification. If someone told you; I can quote to you entire encyclopedia after just a glance at each page most people would simply not believe. And if you narrate to them entire book based on claim you look at its each page for ten seconds most people and likely all will think you’re lieing. And Abu Huraira (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was narrating unbelieveable amount of Ahadith. People of Madinah were aware who Abu Huraira (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was and how he learnt such great deal but Iraqis on other hand might not have had full knowledge of extensiveness of his company of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and great ability of memorising information. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knows better! Important point is that it wasn’t, all the Iraqis, maybe there was just few who had accused him of lieing, and this is more logically acceptable. Abu Huraira (radiallah ta’ala anhu) would have only addressed the people who accused him. And if someone calims that it was entire Iraqi-kind then proof needs to be provided; all Iraqi-kind had gathered to accuse Abu Huraira (radiallah ta’ala anhu) of lieing and his statement was in reply to them. Otherwise the logical conclusion would be few Iraqis might have accused him of lieing due to his super-natural capacity of recalling words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) word or word. They can hardly be accused of malicious intent only that they were careful in taking Ahadith from people and Abu Huraira’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) phenominal memory made him suspect in their sight. Even if they had malicious intent the fact of matter is they were few individuals from Iraq and on basis of these few people one cannot demonise entire Iraqi population. 1.6 - Mentioned Ahadith And Their Worth: Brother Abdullah quoted these Ahadith in attempt to malign population of Iraq as inherently evil and irreligious. And after erecting this bogey-man image of Iraqis he was attempting to justify his earlier assertion that Najd is in fact Iraq and Iraqis are group of Satan. Reality is there are two major sects of Khawarij aka group of Satan; first appeared from Iraq and the other was to appear from Najd. The group of Shaytan emerging from Najd is none other than Wahhabism. All details of Ahadith come togather to precisely pinpoint the direction from which it was to originate. 2.0 - Hadith Twenty-Five: Martyrdom Of Third Khalifah Uthman Ibn Affan: “Hadith-25: “Narrated Qais: I heard Said bin Zaid bin 'Amr bin Nufail saying in the mosque of Al-Kufa. "By Allah, I have seen myself tied and forced by 'Umar to leave Islam before 'Umar himself embraced Islam. And if the mountain of Uhud could move from its place for the evil which you people have done to 'Uthman, then it would have the right to move from its place." (Bukhari, B58, H202) Imam Ibn Abdul Bar (368h-463h) said: “Allah knows best that the reason behind pointing of Prophet peace be upon him towards east regarding fitna is that the biggest fitna which was the key of troubles was the martyrdom of uthman bin affan radhiAllahanho, and that was the reason behind the war of Jamal and Siffeen, these troubles started from the east. Then Kharjities emerged from the land of Najd, Iraq and it's regions.” (Al-Istadkhar 8/519) 2.1 - History Lesson On Murder Of Uthman Ibn Affan: The rebellion was initiated by Egyptian, Al-Ghafiqi Ibn Harb al-Akki, a Yemeni who had migrated to Egypt. He was incharge of entire operation. He got support from Basra and Kufa and returned to Egypt and gathered eighteen-hundered men and they marched toward Madinah under pretext of Hajj. There they met leaders of Kufan and Basran men and togather they laid siege to Madinah which resulted in matyrdom of Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Egypt is North West of Madinah and Iraq is North East of Madinah. The discontent regarding Khilafat of Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was wide spread. The Hadith only mentions Kufans because Sa’id Ibn Zaid Ibn Amr Ibn Nufail (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was in Kufa and addressing Kufans. It is undeniable fact that Iraqis of Kufa, Basra, and participants from Egypt and Yemen took part in rebellion against Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu) but just to lay blame on Iraqis to supplement distortion of Hadith of Najd is shamelessness. 2.2 - Back Ground To Statement Of Ibn Abdul Barr: If I recall correctly Ibn Abdul Barr (rahimullah) wrote this in context Hadith which narrates words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) that Ammar Ibn Yasir (radiallah ta’ala anhu) will be killed by a rebellious group. According to a Hadith Ammar Ibn Yasir (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was killed by side of Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Implication of which is Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was rebel and those who sided with him. And according to prophetic teaching rebellion is Kufr and rebel goes out of Islam. Result of which was Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and those who sided with him were Kafirs which contradicted with prophetic saying; Hassan (radiallah ta’ala anhu) will unite two group of Muslims after much blood has been shed between them. And these two groups were of Hassan (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Indicating Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and his party was Muslim even after what transpired. In order to resolve the contradiction Abdul Bar (rahimullah) points out that genesis of all civil wars is event of matyrdom of Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu). His point is that evil Sunnah of rebellion and murder of Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and chain of evil resulting from it goes far as battles of Jamal and Siffeen and everything there after. And the blame of each death and event will rest with those who rebelled and murdered Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu). And in this context he lays the blame of death of Ammar Ibn Yasir (radiallah ta’ala anhu) on rebells who ended life of third Khalifah Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Saying that these rebels basicly started a chain of events which gave rise to all the tribulations that took place and he is right in this judgment because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated one who starts an evil Sunnah and those who follow it will all get equal blame/sin. With regards to his Taweel that murder of Ammar Ibn Yasir (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is to be blamed upon rebels who killed Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is theological interpretation but doesn’t remove the contradiction. Fact of matter is murderers of Ammar Ibn Yasir (radiallah ta’ala anhu) were Khawarij; they were part of Muawiyah’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) army like they were in Ali’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) army. And after the arbitration they seperated from both sides and joined forces against Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and attempted to assassinate Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). 2.3 - All Important Najd And Iraq, And Ibn Abdul Barr: The all important point is Ibn Abdul Barr (rahimullah) makes distinction between Iraq and Najd when he rights: “Then Kharjities emerged from the land of Najd and Iraq and it's regions.” Brother Abdullah dropped the translation of wa (i.e. and) from writing of Ibn Abdul Barr (rahimullah) in an attempt to make statement read Najd Iraq to indicate there is Najd in Iraq. At the end of his articles he lists twelve Najds and on number two you find Najd Iraq. Proving that brother Abdullah deliberately dropped the wa/and from statement of Imam Abdul Barr (rahimullah) to remove distinction between Najd and Iraq. Is has been established Ibn Abdul Barr (rahimullah) believed Najd and Iraq were two different places. And Khawarij emerged from both these places; Iraq and Najd. Distortion (i.e. Tehreef) of texts was habbit of Jews of Arabian Peninsula regarding whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “So do you (Muslims) wish for them (the Jews) to accept faith in you whereas a group of them used to listen to the Words of Allah, and then after having understood it, purposely changed it?” [Ref: 2:75] The verse points out that Muslims are expecting a group of people to believe in truth of Islam when the reality of these people is they knowingly distort texts to preserve their beleifs. This is indication that one who knowingly distorts texts has no integrity and no desire to believe in truth even if he comes to know it. With regards to brother Abdullah distorting the text I let the readers decide/think if they wish to sink with his scholarship and integrity or will they hold to rope of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). 2.4 - Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah And Delegation Of Abdul al-Qais: It is recorded in Hadith a delegation of Banu Abdul Qais visited Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and said: “Narrated Ibn Abbas: A delegation of the tribe of `Abdul Qais came to the Prophet and said, "O Allah's Messenger! We are from the tribe of Rabi`a, and the infidels of the tribe of Mudar stands between us and you; so we cannot come to you except during the Sacred Months. Please order us to do something (religious deeds) which we may carry out and also invite to it our people whom we have left behind." The Prophet said, "I order you to do four things and forbid you four others: (I order you) to have faith in Allah, and confess that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah, (and the Prophet gestured with his hand like this (i.e. one knot) and to offer prayers perfectly and to pay the Zakat, and to pay onefifth of the booty in Allah's Cause. And I forbid you to use (utensils used for preparing alcoholic drinks namely) Dubba', Hantam, Naqir and Muzaffat." [Ref: Bukhari, B24, H482] Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah has following to say regarding this delegation and who the infidels of Mudar are: "The delegation of 'Abd al-Qays was one of the best delegations ever to come to the Prophet (Allah bless and greet him) ... and they said: 'Between us and you there are those regions of the disbelievers of Mudar and they meant Najd and we cannot reach you except during a sacred month.'" [Ref: Majmu'a al-Fatawa ,Vol7, P598, by Ibn Taymiyyah] The following section will comprehensively shed light onto Najd and the disbelievers of Najd which were preventing Banu Abdul Qais from travelling to Madinah to meet Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah On First Jummah In Bharayn And On Najd: It is recorded in Ahadith: “Narrated Ibn Abbas: The first Jumua prayer which was offered after a Jumua prayer offered at the mosque of Allah's Apostle took place in the mosque of the tribe of Abdul Qais at Jawathi in Bahrain.” [Ref: Bukhari, B13, H17] “Narrated Ibn Abbas: The first Friday (i.e. Jumua) prayer offered after the Friday Prayer offered at the Mosque of Allah's Apostle was offered at the mosque of `Abdul Qais situated at Jawathi, that is a village at Al Bahrain.” [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H657] Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah narrates the Hadith and then comments on this Hadith: “Ibn Abbas said: "The first Jumu'a that gathered in Islam after the Jumu'a of Madina was that of Jawathi, one of the towns of al-Bahrayn. They said: 'O Messenger of Allah! Between us and you are those regions of the disbelievers of Mudar, and (we) cannot come to you except in a sacred month. Therefore give us a decisive order which we might put into practice and by which we shall call those who are behind us.'” Meaning: the people of Najd from them (tribes of) Tamim, Asad, Ghatafan, and others." [Ref:Majmu'a al-Fatawa, Vol7, P552, by Ibn Taymiyyah] Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah the man-love of Wahhabiyyah has reveals; the disbelievers of Banu Mudhar are tribes of Tamim, Asad and Ghatafan. In ‘others’ of Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah following are included: Banu Fazarah[3] is an off-shoot of Banu Mudhar via Ghatafan, here. Banu Murrah[4] is a offshoot of Banu Mudhar, here. Banu Ashja[5] is an off-shoot of Banu Ghatafan, here. Banu Sa’d is an off-shoot of Banu Mudhar. It is difficult to understand which Banu Sa’d would be pointed out on the map yet to be linked. My educated guess would be via route: Adnan, Ma'ad, Nizar, Mudar [also spelt; Mudhar], Ailan, Qais … Whatever the precise lineage of Banu Sa’d maybe the uncontestable fact is that it would be an off-shoot of Banu Mudhar. Following map precisely points on location of each of these tribes and explains the disbelievers in between Madinah and Banu Qais, here. Banu Saleem/Salim is an off-shoot of Banu Ghatafan via Banu Hawazin, Banu Thaqif, and Banu Salim, here.What this establishes is the land of Najd is inhabited by tribes of Banu: Tamim, Asad, Ghatafan, Murrah, Ashja, Sa’d, Fazarah, and Banu Saleem [also spelt; Salim]. If Najd was land of Iraq, or if Najd was in Iraq then burden of proof is upon the Wahhabiyyah to substantiate their claim. We the Muslims have established our position even from Imam of the Wahhabiyyah. 3.0 - Section To Follow And Its Relationship With Iraq And Group Of Satan: In the section to come brother Abdullah will attempt to paint Banu Tamim highly. Muslims believe Najd is in Arabian Peninsula and Bani Tamim were majorly involved in tribulation of group of Satan, aka horn of Satan, aka Khawarij. In contrast the Wahhabiyyah believe Najd is Iraq (others from them believe; it is in Iraq but not whole Iraq) and group of Satan emerged from Iraq. Muslims point out involvement of Banu Tamim in Khariji tribulation and point to land which Banu Tamim inhabited to further coroborate location of historical Najd. And part and parcel of this is pointing out bad and ugly traits of members of Banu Tamim which agree with nature and behaviour of Khawarij – i.e. rude, aggressive, uncivil, and merciless. To balance this and to portray Banu Tamim positively the Wahhabiyyah point to good traits of Banu Tamim and they tend to bash and smash Iraqis to make them look ultimate evil. So in the following section you will note brother Abdullah will sing praises of Banu Tamim because Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab the founder of Wahhabi sect belonged to this tribe. 3.1 – The Good Bad And The Ugly Of Banu Tamim: Under the heading, ‘Quran mentions evil of Bani Israel and some times their virtue but we cannot say every person children of Bani Israel was a sinner bad. In the same way we have wrecked bad Banu Tamim as well as pious Banu Tamim.’, brother Abdullah quotes following Ahadith: “Hadith-26: Narrated by Abu Huraira: I have loved the people of the tribe of Bani Tamim ever since I heard, three things, Allah's Apostle said about them. I heard him saying, These people (of the tribe of Bani Tamim) would stand firm against Ad-Dajjal." When the Sadaqat (gifts of charity) from that tribe came, Allah's Apostle said, "These are the Sadaqat (i.e. charitable gifts) of our folk." Aisha had a slave-girl from that tribe, and the Prophet said to Aisha: "Manumit her as she is a descendant of Ishmael (the Prophet)." (Bukhari, B46,H719, Muslim B31, H6133) Hadith-27: "Abu Huraira reported: There are some distinguishing features of Banu Tamim which I heard from Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) and my love for them is never on the decline after that and the words are: They are the bravest amongst people in the battlefield and there is no mention of (the word) Dajjal." (Muslim, B31,H6134) Hadith-28: "Abu Huraira reported: Since I heard three things from Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) my love for Banu Tamim is never on the decline (and these things are): I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying about them that they would put up stout resistance against Dajjal amongst my Umma. And he (the narrator) said: (When) the consignment of Zakat was brought to him, Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: This is the charity of our people, and there was one slave-girl in the house of 'A'isha and she was from the tribe of Banu Tamim; thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: Set her free, for she is from the offspring of Isma'il. The other hadith has been transmitted on the authority of Abu Huraira with a slight variation of wording." (Muslim, B31, H6133)” 3.2 – Every Child Of Banu Israel And Banu Tamim Is Sinful: Brother Abdullah wrote that he and we (maybe as; we Wahhabis) cannot say every member of Banu Tamim is sinful. His statement implies some elements of Banu Tamim and Banu Israel are sinless and this creed is only to be held for Prophets and Messengers. Yet we can confidently say every member of Bani Israel (excluding the Prophets) and every member of Banu Tamim was sinful. Every person is sinful but not every sinful person is bad in judgment of Shari’ah and this rule also applies to Banu Tamim as well. I suspect brother Abdullah’s command of English has failed him and what he wrote is not his actual belief. It does not impact positively or negatively upon his belief. I have rectified his error by crossing out words and by inserting in green words to convey what he intended. 3.3 – Harshness Of Banu Tamim Against Dajjal: In Hadith26 it is stated Banu Tamim will be harshed against Dajjal. It cannot be denied the harshest people against Dajjal will be from Banu Tamim but harshness of Banu Tamim against Dajjal is not a positive sign. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said harsness and mercilessness are qualities of Banu Rabia and Banu Mudhar and these tribes were located in East of Madinah and they are group of Satan: “The summit of unbelief is towards the East and the pride and conceitedness is found among the owners of horses and camels who are rude and uncivil …” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H87] “Verily Iman is towards this side, 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 the tribes of Rabi'a and Mudar.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H83] “Narrated Abu Masud: The Prophet beckoned with his hand towards Yemen and said, "Belief is there." The harshness and mercilessness are the qualities of those farmers etc, who are busy with their camels and pay no attention to the religion (is towards the east) from where the side of the group of Satan will appear; those are the tribes of Rabi`a and Mudar.” [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H670] “Narrated Ibn `Umar: I heard Allah's Messenger while he was facing the East, saying, "Verily! Afflictions are there, from where the side of the head of Satan comes out." [Ref: Bukhar, B88, H213] And note harshness and mercilessness of in this Hadith is mentioned negatively. Undeniable fact is Banu Tamim is was situated in East of Madinah in lands surrounding modern Saudi capital Riyadh and Banu Tamim is off-shoot of Banu Mudhar.[6] From this its clear that people of East including the tribes mentioned are harsh and rude by their nature. Therefore it cannot be argued; their harshness against Dajjal will be due to firmness of Iman, or correctness of their religious adherance, or for sake of Jihad. This becomes especially apparent if you couple it with what Dhul Khawaysira At Tamimi said to Prophet of Allah: 'Be just of Prophet of Allah.' This points to uncalled for harshness and due to misguided belief and due to barbaric nature. We can confirm that Banu Tamim will be the harshest tribe against Dajjal but the reasons for it can be disputed. Even if we take harshness of Banu Tamim against Dajjal in positive light in context of following Hadith: "Abu Huraira reported: There are some distinguishing features of Banu Tamim which I heard from Allah's Messenger and my love for them is never on the decline after that and the words are: They are the bravest amongst people in the battlefield and there is no mention of Dajjal." [Ref: Muslim, B31, H6134] Meaning they will be harsh against Dajjal because of their bravery it necessrily does not mean they would be brave due to Iman and spirit of Jihad fi sabi’lillah. Also there is no reason to believe entire Banu Tamim is evil/bad, or Khariji. There is good in every nation, every tribe, and every person. And it could be very likelyBanu Tamim, harsh to be against Dajjal, may belong to Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. Banu Tamim’s harshness against Dajjal can be a virtue if done with correct creed, intention, and for sake of Islam. And if done with typical Khariji fashion which Banu Tamim is known for then it is no merit rather a negative as the Ahadith hint. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knows better! 3.4 - Sadaqaat Of Banu Tamim And Meaning Of Prophetic Words: To begin with Prophetic tribal lineage starts from: Adnan, Ma'd, Nizar, Mudar, Ilyas, Mudrikah, Khuzaimah, Kinanah, an-Nadr/al-Nasr, Malik, Fihr/Quraysh, here. Banu Tamim’s tribal lineage is: Adnan, Ma'd, Nizar, Mudar, Ilyas, Tanjah, Tamim. From Ilyas onwards both tribal genealogies have common ancestors always back to Adnan. It is clear that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not mean that Banu Tamim is his Qawm (i.e. nation) in sense of ancestory. Ibn Bataal al-Maliki (rahimullah) in his Sharh Sahih al-Bukhar Li Ibn Bataal stated; Banu Tamim gave their best from their wealth as charity and due to which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was extremely pleased with Banu Tamim. And as a compliment said regarding Banu Tamim: “These are the Sadaqaat of our Qawm (i.e. nation).” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has used the best of Sadaqaat of Banu Tamim and played on words to imply; Qawm (i.e. companions, including Banu Tamim) gives best from their wealth in Sadaqaat. In context Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is praising entire Jammah of companions including Bani Tamim. It needs to be pointed out this was a time when Banu Tamim was under favour of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but the Banu Tamim changed and so did favour of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and their standing. They as whole went from good to bad during Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) life and worse after Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) passed away. They were actively supporting Musaylmah Ibn Kadhab and his rebellion during the Khilafat of first Khalifah Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu). And then went whole-sale Khawarij in the Khilafat of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Following sections will shed light onto this if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permitted. 3.5 Change Of Wind And Banu Tamim Become The Loosers: It is reported in Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said; Banu Aslam, Banu Ghifar, Banu Muzainah, Banu Juhainah, Banu Ashja are better then; Banu Tamim, Banu Amir, Banu Asad, Banu Ghatafan:“Abu Bakra reported from the Messenger of Allah that Aslam, Ghifar, Muzaina and Juhaina are better than Banu Tamim, Banu Amir and their allies Banu Asad and Ghatfan.” [Ref: Muslim, B31, H6128] “Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger as saying: The tribes of Ashja', Ghifar and Muzaina and from the tribe of Juhaina they are better than Banu Tamim, Banu Amir and the allies of Asad and Ghatfan.” [Ref: Muslim, B31, H6123] And in the following Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said; Banu Aslam, Banu Ghifar, Banu Muzainah are better then already meantion including Banu Amir Ibn Sa’sa’ah: “Abu Bakra reported on the authority of his father that Allah's Messenger said: What is your view if (it is said that) Juhaina, Aslam, Ghifar were better than Banu Tamim, Banu 'Abdullah b. Ghatfan and 'Amir b. Sa'sa'a' respectively (then what would be status of the latter one)? He said this in a loud voice. They said: Allah's Messenger, they would be definitely at a loss and disadvantage. Thereupon he said: They (the first group) are decidedly better than the others; and in the hadith transmitted on the authority of Abu Kuraib the words are: It you were to find that Juhaina, Muzaina and Aslam and Ghifar (are better than ...).” [Ref: Muslim, B31, H6130] “Narrated Abu Bakrah: That the Messenger of Allah said: "Aslam, Ghifar, and Muzainah are better than Tamim, Asad, Ghatafan, and Banu Amir bin Sa'sa'ah," prolonging his voice when saying it.” The companions then realized that these tribes have lost their standing and said: “So the people said: "They have been treacherous and have lost." He said: "So these are better than them." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B49, H4333] Their treachery was that they attacked the pilgrims of Hajj even though they had accepted Islam and had pledged alliance to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “Abu Bakra reported from his father that al-Aqra Ibn Habis reported that he came to Allah's Messenger and said to him: ‘How did the tribes of Aslam, Ghifar, Muzaina (and I think he also said Juhaina and the narrator is in doubt about it) owe allegiance to you, whereas they plundered the pilgrims?’” [Ref: Muslim, B31, H6126] Land of Najd remained land of bandits and high-way robbers until the Wahhabis and Saudis came about. And they continued to torment the Muslims of surrounding areas with their raids and rebellions until Saudi Wahhabiyyah was established and they remained the loosers uptil then and are greater loosers at present then in past. 3.6 - Delegation Of Banu Tamim Refuses Good Tidings: It is recorded in many Ahadith that a delegation from Banu Tamim came to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and he gave them good tidings: “Narrated Imran bin Hussein: A delegation from Banu Tamim came to the Prophet. The Prophet said: "Accept the good tidings, O Banu Tamim!" They said: "O Allah's Messenger! You have given us good tidings, so give us (something)." Signs of displeasure appeared on his face. Then another delegation from Yemen came and he said (to them): "Accept the good tidings, for Banu Tamim refuses to accept them." They replied: "We have accepted them, O Allah's Messenger!" [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H651] The good tidings were accepted by people of Yemen but delegation representing Banu Tamim wanted material wealth and refused. A Hadith mentions Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) distributing gold alloy between the chiefs of various tribes of Najd: “It was narrated that Abu Sa'eed Al-Khudri said: "When Ali was in Yemen, he sent some gold that was still enclosed in rock to the Prophet who distributed it among Al-Aqra Bin Habis Al-Handhali who belonged to Banu Mujashi, Uyaynah Bin Badr Al-Fazari, Alqamah Bin Ulathah Al-Amiri, who belonged to Banu Kilab and Zaid Al-Khail At-Ta'ee, who belonged to Banu Nabhan. The Quraish and the Ansar became angry and said: 'He gives to the chiefs of Najd and ignores us!' He said: 'I am seeking to win them over (firmly to Islam).' Then a man with sunken eyes, a bulging forehead, a thick beard and a shaven head came and said: 'O Muhammad, fear Allah!' He said: 'Who will obey Allah if I do not?” [Ref: Nisaee, B37, H4106] And I am of understanding the delegation which visited Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) from Banu Tamim were these same men. Who originally refused good tidings of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in favour of material wealth. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) later on went to distribute to them gold alloy sent by Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). And part of this delegation of Banu Tamim was Abdullah Ibn Hurqus aka Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi al-Najdi who is reported to have accused Prophet (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) unfairly distributing the gold alloy. Other Ahadith identify this man by his name. Anyhow it is established Banu Tamim refused good tidings (of Islam, Iman, kindness) for material wealth. And from Ahadith it is also established they became the loosers in judgment of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) when they raided caravans of pilgrims travelling for Hajj and when their delegation refused the good tidings. And the effect of their refusal and raids was demonstrated. 3.7 - Banu Tamim And Its Role In Reviving Khariji Apostasy: After the death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) Banu Mudhar and its off-shoot tribes; including Banu Tamim were involved in rebellions and they gave rise to false claimants of Prophet-hood; including Musaylmah Ibn Kazzab. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold group of Satan is in East (of Madinah) and told it will emerge from East. He also told group of Satan would emerge from Najd (land of Banu Mudhar and its off-shoot Banu Tamim). And Ahadith establish Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi and other Khariji leaders who fought against Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) were from Banu Tamim. Then throughout the centuries uptil middle of seventeenth century Banu Tamim and its branches were invovled in rebellions and revived Kharijism where ever they could. And they will continue to do so until last of their group appears in time of Dajjal and joins with Dajjal to fight against Muslims. And this would be true to following prophetic words: “Narrated Abu Bakra: The Prophet said: "Do you think that the tribes of Juhaina, Muzaina, Aslam and Ghifar are better than the tribes of Bani Tamim, Bani Asad, Bani `Abdullah bin Ghatafan and Bani Amir bin Sasaa?" A man said: "They were unsuccessful and losers." The Prophet added: "(Yes) they are better than the tribes of Bani Tamim, Bani Asad, Bani Abdullah Bin Ghatafan and Bani Amir Bin Sasasa." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H718] 3.8 - Freeing Of Slave Girl Because She Is Decendent Of Ismail (alayhis salam): A Hadith records following words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are recorded: “Narrated Amr Bin Maimun: Whoever recites (La ilaha illal-lah wahdahu la sharika lahu, lahu-l-mulk wa lahul- hamd wa huwa 'ala kulli shai'in qadir.) it ten times will be as if he manumitted one of Ishmael's descendants. Abu Aiyub narrated the same Hadith from the Prophet saying, "(Whoever recites it ten times) will be as if he had manumitted one of Ishmael's descendants." [Ref: Bukhari, B75, H413] Note there is no restriction of any particular tribe in this Hadith only clause is reward of it is like freeing a descendent of Prophet Ismail (alayhis salam). Therefore it applies to all the tribes and people which had been enslaved but were descendents of Prophet Ismail (alayhis salam). Brother Abdullah quoted following part of Hadith as proof of virtue of Banu Tamim: “Aisha had a slave-girl from that tribe, and the Prophet said to Aisha: "Manumit her as she is a descendant of Ishmael (the Prophet)." The fact is Hadith itself is evident; reason for which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) asked Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) to free the female slave was because she is descendent of Prophet Ismail (alayhis salam). In other words Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) demonstrated great respect for Prophet Ismail (alayhis salam). From this incident it may seem Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) distinguished Banu Tamim from other tribes. Yet the fact is Banu Tamim is not the only tribe descended from Prophet Ismail (alayhis salam). If one carrys out research into this it will reveal there were at minimum twenty-five tribes which descended from Prophet Ismail (alayhis salam). Had Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said free this slave-girl because she is from Banu Tamim then it would have been exclusive merit but words of Hadith were: “Aisha had a slave-girl from that tribe, and the Prophet said to Aisha: "Manumit her as she is a descendant of Ishmael (the Prophet).” [Ref: Bukhari, B46, H719] In other words if the slave-girl belong to any other tribe which had descended from Prophet Ismail (alayhis salam) then these words would have applied to that tribe also and do apply to all his descendants. And therefore Banu Tamim was not uniquely conferred this merit. Note it was established; Bani Tamim lost their standing and became loosers. 3.9 - The Criteria On Which True Merit Is Judged: True virtue/merit is in correct creed and acting upon injunctions of Shari’ah. Worship of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), charity, compassion, mercy, enjoining good and forbidding all that which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed. There is no true merit other then these, racial, tribal, color, national, and all other merits can be negated, become void if the fundamentals are incorrect. And with correct fundamentals any person of any standing, race, tribe, color, national, is better then a Fasiq and Kafir of any other race, color, tribe, standing. If Amr is descendent of a Prophet, Companion, even Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Amr is upon correct fundamentals then best way to honor respect the ancestor is to respect Amr and to treat Amr with kindness. With regards to Banu Tamim the good of them are to be loved and respected due to their adherance to Quran and prophetic teaching. And the evil from them are to be treated as they deserve and no quarter should be given and none should be expected from them because their barbarity and lack of mercy have been narrated and demonstrated by them. And to end with words which are tacitly approved Sunnah, andwords of companion: “… the tribes of Bani Tamim, Bani Asad, Bani Abdullah bin Ghatafan and Bani Amir bin Sasaa?" A man said: "They were unsuccessful and losers." 4.0 - Khawarij The Dogs Of Hell-Fire And Barelwis: “We often find Barelwi calling himself a dog. Let's see what Quran and Sunnah say about it: “It was narrated that Ibn Awfa said:"The Messenger of Allah said: 'The Khawarij are the dogs of Hell.'" (Sahih).” (Sunan Ibn Majah, Book 1, Hadith 173) 1-Parable of Disbeliever is that of a Dog: Allah Says,''And if We had willed, we could have elevated him thereby, but he adhered [instead] to the earth and followed his own desire. So his example is like that of the dog: if you chase him, he pants, or if you leave him, he [still] pants. That is the example of the people who denied Our signs. So relate the stories that perhaps they will give thought.''(Al-Quran Surah Araaf Ayat-176)” 4.1 - Attempt To Malign Muslims And Discredit Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah: In Urdu, person is called; Gad’dha (i.e. donkey) to mean stupid, or shay’rh (i.e. lion) to mean brave, or powerful, or loomar’h (i.e. fox) to indicate sly/shrewd person, or kutta (i.e. dog, rude usage) to indicate someone is foul mouthed. Muslims of subcontinent sometimes say: I am Sag e RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Meaning: I am dog of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). It is expression of humility, loyalty and guardianship. Dogs are very loyal to their owner/master, its an animal which is considered lowly, and guards the house of its master. And implication is: I am lowly but loyal to RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Brother Abdullah is using the Sag (i.e. dog, polite usage) to fit Hadith of Khawarij on Muslims of subcontinent via some weird logic. All praises are for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), the best of planners. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has setup Iblees incarnate and for His plan to demonstrate we will have to ignore the Hadith he quoted until an appointed time. Brother Abdullah’s heading: “Parable of disbeliever is that of a dog.” This demonstrates brother Abdullah was to apply a verse upon us Muslims which was revealed regarding the disbelievers. He quoted the following verse: “And if We had willed, we could have elevated him thereby, but he adhered [instead] to the earth and followed his own desire. So his example is like that of the dog: if you chase him, he pants, or if you leave him, he (still) pants. That is the example of the people who denied Our verses. So relate the stories that perhaps they will give thought. “ [Ref: 7:176] Applying the verses revealed for disbelievers upon Muslims and interpreting them as if they were about Muslims is one way to identify Khawarij according Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu): “And the statement of Allah: 'Allah will not mislead a people after He has guided them, until He makes clear to them what to avoid.'And Ibn Umar used to consider them (the Khawarij and the Mulhidun) the worst of Allah's creatures and said: "These people took some verses that had been revealed concerning the disbelievers and interpreted them as describing the believers.”[7] [Ref: Bukhari, V9, P49, Chap6: Killing The Khawarij And Mulhidun] Now coming to following Hadith of brother Abdullah: “It was narrated that Ibn Awfa said:"The Messenger of Allah said: 'The Khawarij are the dogs of Hell.'" [Ref: Majah, B1, H173] Indeed Khawarij are dogs of hell-fire. In actuality this applies to him because he applied verse of Quran revealed for Kafirs upon us Muslims. And generally this Hadith applies to Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab and all the Wahhabis because they all engage in this activity. And this is a sign, a characteristic of Khawarij. Their books are filled with such unjust applications; Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab’s; Kitab at-Tawheed is proof of this. Therefore the dogs of hell-fire are Wahhabis even if they don’t and won’t acknowledge it. 5.0 - Superficial And Fast Recitation Of Quran By Khawarij: “Hadith-29: “Yahya reported: I and 'Abdullah b. Yazid set out till we came to Abu Salama. We sent a messenger to him (in his house in order to inform him about our arrival) and he came … He (Yahya) then narrated that Abdullah b Amr b. al-As told him: I used to observe fast uninterruptedly and recited the (whole of the) Qur'an every night. It (the uninterrupted fasting and recital of the Qur'in every night) was mentioned to the Apostle of Allah or he sent for me, and I went to him and he said to me: I have been informed that you fast continuously and recite (the whole of the Qur'An) every night. I said: Apostle of Allah, it is right, but I covet thereby nothing but good, whereupon he said: It suffices for you that you should observe fast for three days during every month. I said: Apostle of Allah I am capable of doing more than this. He said: ... He (also) said: Recite the Qur'an during every month. I said: Apostle of Allah, I am capable of doing more than this, whereupon he said: Recite it in twenty days; recite it in ten days. I said: I am capable of doing more than this, whereupon he said: Recite it every week, and do not exceed beyond this, … The Apostle of Allah had told me: 'You do not know you may live long (thus and bear the hardships for a long time), and I accepted that which the Apostle of Allah had told me. When I grew old I wished I had availed myself of the concession (granted by) the Apostle of Allah.” (Ref: Muslim, B6 : H2588) Hadith-30: Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As: Wahb ibn Munabbih said: Abdullah ibn Amr asked the Prophet; In how many days should one complete the recitation of the Qur'an? He said: In forty days. He then said: In one month. He again said: In twenty days. He then said: In fifteen days. He then said: In ten days. Finally he said: In seven days. (Ref: Bukhari, Kitab as-Swalaat, 1390) Hadith-31: Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As: The Prophet said: He who recites the Qur'an in a period less than three days does not understand it. (Ref: Bukhari, Kitab as-swalaat, 1389) Hadith-32: Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As: The Prophet said: He who recites the Qur'an in a period less than three days does not understand it. (Ref: Abu Dawud, Book 6 : Hadith 1389) Hadith-33: Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-As:Yazid ibn Abdullah said that Abdullah ibn Amr asked the Prophet: In how many days should I complete the recitation of the whole Qur'an, Apostle of Allah? He replied: In one month. He said: I am more energetic to complete it in a period less than this. He kept on repeating these words and lessening the period until he said: Complete its recitation in seven days. He again said: I am more energetic to complete it in a period less than this. The Prophet said: He who finishes the recitation of the Qur'an in less than three days does not understand it. (Ref: Abu Dawud, Book 6,Hadith 1385) Hadith-34: Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-As: Wahb ibn Munabbih said: Abdullah ibn Amr asked the Prophet: In how many days should one complete the recitation of the Qur'an? He said: In forty days. He then said: In one month. He again said: In twenty days. He then said: In fifteen days. He then said: In ten days. Finally he said: In seven days. (Ref: Abu Dawud, Book 6, Hadith 1390) Hadith-35: “Narrated Zaid binWahb:Hudhaifa saw a person who was not performing the bowing and prostrations perfectly. He said to hi, "You have not prayed and if you should die you would die on a religion other than that of Muhammad." (Ref: Bukhari, Book 12, Volume 1, Hadith 757) Hadith-36: Narrated by 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 (i.e, Iraq) some people who will recite the Quran 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 Volume 9, Book 84, Hadith 68) Hadith-37: Zaid b. Wahb Jahani reported and he was among the squadron which wall under the command of Ali and which set out (to curb the activities) of the Khwarij. Ali said: O people, I heard the Messenger of Allah say: There would arise from my Ummah a people who would recite the Qur'an, and your recital would seem insignificant as compared with their recital, your prayer as compared with their prayer, and your fast compared with their fast. They would recite the Qur'an thinking that it supports them, whereas it is an evidence against them. Their prayer does not get beyond their collar bone; they would swerve through Islam just as the arrow passes through the prey. If the squadron which is to encounter them were to know (what great boon) has been assured to them by their Apostle they would completely rely upon this deed (alone and cease to do other good deeds), and their (that of the Khwarij) distinctive mark is that there would be (among them) a person whose wrist would be without the arm, and the end of his wrist would be fleshy like the nipple of the breast on which there would be white hair. … By Allah, I believe that these are the people (against whom you have been commanded to fight and get reward) for they have shed forbidden blood, and raided the animals of the people. So go forth in the name of Allah (to fight against them). … Abdullah b. Wahb al-Rasibi was at the head of the Khwarij when we encountered them. He (Abdullah) said to his army: Throw the spears and draw out your swords from their sheaths, for I fear that they would attack you as they attacked you on the day of Harura. They went back and threw their spears and drew out their swords, and people fought against them with spears and they were killed one after another. Only two persons were killed among the people (among the army led by Hadrat Ali) on that day. Ali said: Find out from among them (the dead bodies of the Khwarij) (the maimed). They searched but did not find him. Ali then himself stood up and (walked) till he came to the people who had been killed one after another. He ('Ali) said: Search them to the last, and then ('Ali's companions) found him (the dead body of the maimed) near the earth. He (Hadrat Ali) then pronounced ‘Allah is the Great!’ and then said, Allah told the Truth and His Messenger conveyed it. Then there stood before him Abida Salmani who said: Commander of the Believers, by Allah, besides Whom there is no god but He, (tell me) whether you heard this hadith from the Messenger of Allah. He said: Yes, by Allah, besides Whom there is no god but He. He asked him to take an oath thrice and he took the oath.” (Ref: Muslim, Book 5, Hadith 2333)” 5.1 - Recitation Of Quran According To Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Or increase a little upon it, and recite the Qur’an slowly in stages.” [Ref: 73:4] "Move not your tongue with it, to hasten with it." [Ref: 75:16] “This is a Book which We have sent down upon you, a blessed Book, for them to ponder upon its verses, and for men of intellect to accept advice.” [Ref: 38:29] Quran was sent so the Muslims can ponder over the verses of Quran and it is supposed to be recited slowly to achieve this. Brother Abdullah already has quoted Ahadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed that Quran be recited slowly and not rushed. Very fast recitation of Quran where pronounciation of words is wholesale mutilated to extent that mind cannot encampass what it has recited is a evil innovation. It was something which did not exist during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’allam) but it was a sign of a people to come: “Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah: The Messenger of Allah came to us while we were reciting the Qur'an, and there were among us bedouins and the non-Arabs. He said: Recite, all is well. In the near future there will appear people who will straighten it (the Qur'an) as an arrow is straightened. They will recite it quickly and not slowly.” [Ref: Abi Dawud, B3, H829] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated in another version of Hadith: “Recite it before there appear people who will recite it and straighten it as an arrow is straightened. They will get their reward for it in this world and will not get it in the Hereafter.” [Ref: Abi Dawud, B2, H830] Straightening of Quran referrs to making no distinction between similar sounding words and without paying heed to pauses and elongating recitation where it should be. Instead they would recite Quran flatly in fast speed paying no attention to any rule of Tajweed. And Prophet (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said they will only get reward in the world and not in hereafter. Unfortunately during Ramadhan some Qaris recite the Quran as Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) described. Those who do they should be politely and respectfully rectified. This is the teaching and Minhaj of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. 5.2 - General Summary Of Main Theme Of Quoted Material: From Ahadith twenty-nine to thirty-four Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) prohibits completing recitation of entire Quran any less then three days on grounds that any quicker would make it difficult for person to recite the Quran with understanding. These Ahadith by themselves have nothing to do with the topic of Najd or Khawarij. Hadith thirty-five says if prostration/bowing isn’t perfect then you will die on Fitrah of another and not on fitrah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In other words you will die doing a action which isn’t Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). But due to erroneous translation; a companion is made to say; if your bowing and prostration isn’t perfect then you would not be acting and dieing upon religion of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). This is very extreme because imperfect prostration and bowing cannot and will not nullify any Muslims religion. This is something a Khariji would say and not a companion of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And this translation of Hadith has been produced by brother Abdullah’s co-religionist Mohsin Khan so the Kharijism seeps into translation here and there. Ahadith thirty-six and thirty-seven on their own have no direct connection with location of Najd; like all the previous Ahadith. Even though individually none of these Ahadith have direct connection with the mentioned subject but brother Abdullah is employing them as whole to imply from key points of Ahadith twenty-nine to thirty-five mention trait of Khawarij in light of Ahadith thirty-six and thirty-seven. And Muslims (i.e. Barelwis) have these traits therefore they are Khawarij. 5.3 - Companion Reciting The Quran Too Fast: Hadith twenty-nine to thirty-four; a companions states he fasts whole month and recites entire Quran every night. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told him to fast three days a month, he sought more saying he is capable of more, so Prophet instructed him to; fast a day and miss a day. He also instructed the companion to complete recitation of entire Quran in forty days, thirty/twenty-nine days, twenty days, fifteen days, companion desired more then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) made concession for him to seven days and then permitted three days. From this it becomes clear that companion was reciting the Quran too fast and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said any faster then three day completion of Quran would mean you do not understand the Quran. And even brother Abdullah agrees with this because he titled the section as: “Recitation of Quran in Haste.” 5.4 - Khawarij Reciting Quran While Not Understanding It: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has said: “Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said: "The main source of disbelief is in the East. Pride and arrogance are characteristics of the owners of horses and camels, and those bedouins who are busy with their camels and pay no attention to Religion; while modesty and gentleness are the characteristics of the owners of sheep." [Ref: Bukhari, B54, H520] “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] To put it simply the owners of camels/horses in the East are the tribes of Rabia and Mudhar and they are busy with them and pay no attention to religion and these tribes are from where group of Satan aka Khawarij was to emerge. Problem with the Khawarij was not of reciting the Quran too fast it was them not properly being accquainted with principles of Tafsir. They had no paid attention to learning about the fundamentals which help understanding of Quran and only focused on recititation of Quran and result was Khawarij. For example in Hadith which brother Abdullah quoted following words are quoted: “They would recite the Qur'an thinking that it supports them, whereas it is an evidence against them.” [Ref: Muslim, Book 5, Hadith 2333] They quoted hukum is for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) against Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Did they recite it too fast or did they not understand the verse of Quran? Their understanding of verse was simply superficial/shallow. The verse merely stated as Ilah hukum is of only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) quoted verse in which it was established hukum can be of Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) creation but hukum as Ilah is only of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Following Ahadith are regarding same man for whom Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said needs to be found in Hadith-37 which Abdullah referrenced. And problem of them is superficial/glib recitation of Quran: “Should I not strike his neck? Upon this he said: No. Then he turned away, and Khalid the Sword of Allah stood up against him, and said: Prophet of Allah. shall I not strike off his neck? He said, No, and then said: A people would rise from his progeny who would recite the Book of Allah glibly and fluently. Umar said: I think he (the Holy Prophet) also said this: If I find them I would certainly kill them like Thamud." [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2320, here] “He again looked at him and he was going back. Upon this he (the Holy Prophet) said: There would arise a people from the progeny of this (man) who would recite the Qur'an glibly, but it would not go beyond their throats; they would (hurriedly) pass through (the teachings of their) religion just as the arrow passes through the prey. I conceive that he (the Holy Prophet) also said this: If I find them I would certainly kill them as were killed the (people of) Thamud.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2319, here] Their glib/superficial recitation is result of not devoting time to learn about Deen of Islam and not learning about fundamental principles which enable understanding of Quran. And had nothing to do with fast recitation of Quran. Every field requires understanding of fundamentals without which books of that field cannot and will not be understood by readers even if they read them fast or slow. Quite while back someone handed me their biomedical science dissertation for proof reading. Even though I could read the words and understood the symbols I read it in its entirity twice without understanding anything. I could have read it really fast, or slow, or spelt out each word, it wouldn’t have made any difference because I lacked prerequisite knowledge of subject. Same applies to the sheep and camel herders of Najd. They weren’t aware of Sunnah method of Tafsir and due to is were unable to understand the Quran correctly. And the Najdi Kharijis have still not learnt the methodology and they continue to apply verses of Quran revealed for disbelievers upon those who say; none has the right to be worshipped except Allah. And this was also sign of Khawarij to descend from Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamim: He again looked at him and he was going back. Upon this he (the Holy Prophet) said: There would arise a people from the progeny of this (man) who would recite the Qur'an glibly, but it would not go beyond their throats; they would (hurriedly) pass through (the teachings of their) religion just as the arrow passes through the prey.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2319, here] Alhasi glib recitation, and Quran not going below their throats is about Khawarij not understanding the Quran correctly. They will have shallow understanding of Quran and will assume it supports them: “They would recite the Qur'an thinking that it supports them, whereas it is an evidence against them.” [Ref: Muslim, Book 5, Hadith 2333] Glib and Quran not going below their throat does not referr to inability of understanding of Quran which results from fast recitation of Quran but it referrs to shallow superficial understanding resulting from lack of proper understanding of methodology of Tafsir. Rest assured one who has understood rules of Tafsir and is able to interpret Quran even if he recites three Qurans a day and even though he will not be able to establish link between various verses of Quran and understand it in depth. But whenever he sits down and recites it slowly and attempts to understand it through legitimate methodology of Tafsir then nothing will prevent him from understanding it as a verse should be understood. 5.5 - Brother Abdullah Attempted To Establish Ahlus Sunnah Are Khawarij And Failed: By establishing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) forbade fast recitation of Quran brother Abdullah hoped to imply because some of Barelwis recite the Quran fast therefore they are Khawarij. He failed to prove that Ahlus Sunnah are Khawarij because the Ahadith he quoted to base his argument are about glib and superficial recitation of Quran like my act of proof-reading the dissertation. Brother Abdullah is applying these Ahadith on fast recitation of Quran. The difference between the companion who recited the Quran so fast that he finished it in a day and Khariji glib recitation is that companion’s fast recitation would have unabled him to understand the Quran but whenever he had slowed down and pondered over the verses he would have understood them. Why? Why? Why? He knew the principles of Tafsir. Khawarij on other hand were/are incapable of understanding the Quran because they lacked proper know how of Tafsir because they loved their sheeps more then their religion. As a result they cannot and will not understand the Quran. And to this I would add Ahadith also because brother Abdullah, and countless others have demonstrated that they also cannot understand Ahadith properly. And best proof of it is brother Abdullah applying Hadith of glib recitation on fast recitation of Quran. More importantly he did not judge the matter in light of entire package of Ahadith which are related to Khawarij. It is not impossible for a person to fullfill one condition of a prophesy. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said name of Mahdi (rahimullah) will be as his name (i.e. Muhammad). It is not impossible to find a person with name Muhammad. I am Muhammad in name. Will that prove to you I am Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah)? Every sane person would agree that this alone is not qualification of Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah). There are other qualifications and for example he will be from progeny of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Fatimah (radiallah ta’ala anha), and there are others. Meeting one, or two, or three, or four criterias will not make someone Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah) until a person meets all the requirements. Rather all related criterias have to be met and every major trait known of Khawarij as to be demonstrated before the charge of Khariji can be levelled. Actions of brother Abdullah point to another fundamental difference between methodology of Muslims and Wahhabiyyah. If they see a Muslim prostrating to a grave they will assume grave-worship and issue edict of Mushrik/Kafir. No regard is given to belief of person, intention of person, or knowledge of person. Rather similarity of Zahiri action is suffient to be Mushrik in Wahhabism. The corner stone of Wahhabism is: SIMILARITY OF ZAHIRI ACTION ESTABLISHES SHIRK. Mushrik Hindu performsTawaf of his Idol. An idiot Muslim performs Tawaf around the grave. Wahhabi will say this is same action, grave id idol, both are Hindu Mushrikeen. Just one action and person becomes a Mushrik Hindu. Methodology employed by Wahhabiyyah to determine is very superficial and no regard is given to details. Fast Quran recited by Amr, and fast Quran recited by Khariji, Amr is Khariji. What about maybe Amr doesn’t know? And therefore lets talk to him and encourage him to follow prophetic Sunnah. Fatwah of Khariji/Mushrik is their first priority. And even if they hold the Fatwah it wouldn’t be because they consider you Muslim rather tactfully will avoid offending you to win a convert to Wahhabism. Point being made is Wahhabi methodology of judgment looks for similarity of action and not of belief and other aspects. Coming back to main point of discussion reciting the Quran. Brother Abdullah granted no concession for the fact that the Hadith; Khawarij will recite Quran glibly and it will not go below their throat is about Khawarij. And two the Hadith doesn’t mean what he assumed it means. Yet he had the audacity to apply the Ahadith of Khawarij upon Muslims whom he is well aware of are avowed enemies of Khawarij in belief, in Fiqh, and in principle methodology. When in reality he has demonstrated he has Khariji methodology of applying the Quranic verses revealed for disbelievers upon Muslims. And his superficial understanding of verses of Quran and Ahadith he quoted (i.e. Hadith 36/37) only goes on to establish brother Abdullah is on path of Khawarij of Najd. 4.1 - Attempt To Malign Muslims And Discredit Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah: In Urdu, person is called; Gad’dha (i.e. donkey) to mean stupid, or shay’rh (i.e. lion) to mean brave, or powerful, or loomar’h (i.e. fox) to indicate sly/shrewd person, or kutta (i.e. dog, rude usage) to indicate someone is foul mouthed. Muslims of subcontinent sometimes say: I am Sag e RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Meaning: I am dog of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). It is expression of humility, loyalty and guardianship. Dogs are very loyal to their owner/master, its an animal which is considered lowly, and guards the house of its master. And implication is: I am lowly but loyal to RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Brother Abdullah is using the Sag (i.e. dog, polite usage) to fit Hadith of Khawarij on Muslims of subcontinent via some weird logic. All praises are for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), the best of planners. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has setup Iblees incarnate and for His plan to demonstrate we will have to ignore the Hadith he quoted until an appointed time. Brother Abdullah’s heading: “Parable of disbeliever is that of a dog.” This demonstrates brother Abdullah was to apply a verse upon us Muslims which was revealed regarding the disbelievers. He quoted the following verse: “And if We had willed, we could have elevated him thereby, but he adhered [instead] to the earth and followed his own desire. So his example is like that of the dog: if you chase him, he pants, or if you leave him, he (still) pants. That is the example of the people who denied Our verses. So relate the stories that perhaps they will give thought. “ [Ref: 7:176] Applying the verses revealed for disbelievers upon Muslims and interpreting them as if they were about Muslims is one way to identify Khawarij according Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu): “And the statement of Allah: 'Allah will not mislead a people after He has guided them, until He makes clear to them what to avoid.'And Ibn Umar used to consider them (the Khawarij and the Mulhidun) the worst of Allah's creatures and said: "These people took some verses that had been revealed concerning the disbelievers and interpreted them as describing the believers.”[7] [Ref: Bukhari, V9, P49, Chap6: Killing The Khawarij And Mulhidun] Now coming to following Hadith of brother Abdullah: “It was narrated that Ibn Awfa said:"The Messenger of Allah said: 'The Khawarij are the dogs of Hell.'" [Ref: Majah, B1, H173] Indeed Khawarij are dogs of hell-fire. In actuality this applies to him because he applied verse of Quran revealed for Kafirs upon us Muslims. And generally this Hadith applies to Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab and all the Wahhabis because they all engage in this activity. And this is a sign, a characteristic of Khawarij. Their books are filled with such unjust applications; Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab’s; Kitab at-Tawheed is proof of this. Therefore the dogs of hell-fire are Wahhabis even if they don’t and won’t acknowledge it. 5.0 - Superficial And Fast Recitation Of Quran By Khawarij: “Hadith-29: “Yahya reported: I and 'Abdullah b. Yazid set out till we came to Abu Salama. We sent a messenger to him (in his house in order to inform him about our arrival) and he came … He (Yahya) then narrated that Abdullah b Amr b. al-As told him: I used to observe fast uninterruptedly and recited the (whole of the) Qur'an every night. It (the uninterrupted fasting and recital of the Qur'in every night) was mentioned to the Apostle of Allah or he sent for me, and I went to him and he said to me: I have been informed that you fast continuously and recite (the whole of the Qur'An) every night. I said: Apostle of Allah, it is right, but I covet thereby nothing but good, whereupon he said: It suffices for you that you should observe fast for three days during every month. I said: Apostle of Allah I am capable of doing more than this. He said: ... He (also) said: Recite the Qur'an during every month. I said: Apostle of Allah, I am capable of doing more than this, whereupon he said: Recite it in twenty days; recite it in ten days. I said: I am capable of doing more than this, whereupon he said: Recite it every week, and do not exceed beyond this, … The Apostle of Allah had told me: 'You do not know you may live long (thus and bear the hardships for a long time), and I accepted that which the Apostle of Allah had told me. When I grew old I wished I had availed myself of the concession (granted by) the Apostle of Allah.” (Ref: Muslim, B6 : H2588) Hadith-30: Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As: Wahb ibn Munabbih said: Abdullah ibn Amr asked the Prophet; In how many days should one complete the recitation of the Qur'an? He said: In forty days. He then said: In one month. He again said: In twenty days. He then said: In fifteen days. He then said: In ten days. Finally he said: In seven days. (Ref: Bukhari, Kitab as-Swalaat, 1390) Hadith-31: Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As: The Prophet said: He who recites the Qur'an in a period less than three days does not understand it. (Ref: Bukhari, Kitab as-swalaat, 1389) Hadith-32: Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-'As: The Prophet said: He who recites the Qur'an in a period less than three days does not understand it. (Ref: Abu Dawud, Book 6 : Hadith 1389) Hadith-33: Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-As:Yazid ibn Abdullah said that Abdullah ibn Amr asked the Prophet: In how many days should I complete the recitation of the whole Qur'an, Apostle of Allah? He replied: In one month. He said: I am more energetic to complete it in a period less than this. He kept on repeating these words and lessening the period until he said: Complete its recitation in seven days. He again said: I am more energetic to complete it in a period less than this. The Prophet said: He who finishes the recitation of the Qur'an in less than three days does not understand it. (Ref: Abu Dawud, Book 6,Hadith 1385) Hadith-34: Narrated Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-As: Wahb ibn Munabbih said: Abdullah ibn Amr asked the Prophet: In how many days should one complete the recitation of the Qur'an? He said: In forty days. He then said: In one month. He again said: In twenty days. He then said: In fifteen days. He then said: In ten days. Finally he said: In seven days. (Ref: Abu Dawud, Book 6, Hadith 1390) Hadith-35: “Narrated Zaid binWahb:Hudhaifa saw a person who was not performing the bowing and prostrations perfectly. He said to hi, "You have not prayed and if you should die you would die on a religion other than that of Muhammad." (Ref: Bukhari, Book 12, Volume 1, Hadith 757) Hadith-36: Narrated by 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 (i.e, Iraq) some people who will recite the Quran 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 Volume 9, Book 84, Hadith 68) Hadith-37: Zaid b. Wahb Jahani reported and he was among the squadron which wall under the command of Ali and which set out (to curb the activities) of the Khwarij. Ali said: O people, I heard the Messenger of Allah say: There would arise from my Ummah a people who would recite the Qur'an, and your recital would seem insignificant as compared with their recital, your prayer as compared with their prayer, and your fast compared with their fast. They would recite the Qur'an thinking that it supports them, whereas it is an evidence against them. Their prayer does not get beyond their collar bone; they would swerve through Islam just as the arrow passes through the prey. If the squadron which is to encounter them were to know (what great boon) has been assured to them by their Apostle they would completely rely upon this deed (alone and cease to do other good deeds), and their (that of the Khwarij) distinctive mark is that there would be (among them) a person whose wrist would be without the arm, and the end of his wrist would be fleshy like the nipple of the breast on which there would be white hair. … By Allah, I believe that these are the people (against whom you have been commanded to fight and get reward) for they have shed forbidden blood, and raided the animals of the people. So go forth in the name of Allah (to fight against them). … Abdullah b. Wahb al-Rasibi was at the head of the Khwarij when we encountered them. He (Abdullah) said to his army: Throw the spears and draw out your swords from their sheaths, for I fear that they would attack you as they attacked you on the day of Harura. They went back and threw their spears and drew out their swords, and people fought against them with spears and they were killed one after another. Only two persons were killed among the people (among the army led by Hadrat Ali) on that day. Ali said: Find out from among them (the dead bodies of the Khwarij) (the maimed). They searched but did not find him. Ali then himself stood up and (walked) till he came to the people who had been killed one after another. He ('Ali) said: Search them to the last, and then ('Ali's companions) found him (the dead body of the maimed) near the earth. He (Hadrat Ali) then pronounced ‘Allah is the Great!’ and then said, Allah told the Truth and His Messenger conveyed it. Then there stood before him Abida Salmani who said: Commander of the Believers, by Allah, besides Whom there is no god but He, (tell me) whether you heard this hadith from the Messenger of Allah. He said: Yes, by Allah, besides Whom there is no god but He. He asked him to take an oath thrice and he took the oath.” (Ref: Muslim, Book 5, Hadith 2333)” 5.1 - Recitation Of Quran According To Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Or increase a little upon it, and recite the Qur’an slowly in stages.” [Ref: 73:4] "Move not your tongue with it, to hasten with it." [Ref: 75:16] “This is a Book which We have sent down upon you, a blessed Book, for them to ponder upon its verses, and for men of intellect to accept advice.” [Ref: 38:29] Quran was sent so the Muslims can ponder over the verses of Quran and it is supposed to be recited slowly to achieve this. Brother Abdullah already has quoted Ahadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed that Quran be recited slowly and not rushed. Very fast recitation of Quran where pronounciation of words is wholesale mutilated to extent that mind cannot encampass what it has recited is a evil innovation. It was something which did not exist during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’allam) but it was a sign of a people to come: “Narrated Jabir ibn Abdullah: The Messenger of Allah came to us while we were reciting the Qur'an, and there were among us bedouins and the non-Arabs. He said: Recite, all is well. In the near future there will appear people who will straighten it (the Qur'an) as an arrow is straightened. They will recite it quickly and not slowly.” [Ref: Abi Dawud, B3, H829] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated in another version of Hadith: “Recite it before there appear people who will recite it and straighten it as an arrow is straightened. They will get their reward for it in this world and will not get it in the Hereafter.” [Ref: Abi Dawud, B2, H830] Straightening of Quran referrs to making no distinction between similar sounding words and without paying heed to pauses and elongating recitation where it should be. Instead they would recite Quran flatly in fast speed paying no attention to any rule of Tajweed. And Prophet (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said they will only get reward in the world and not in hereafter. Unfortunately during Ramadhan some Qaris recite the Quran as Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) described. Those who do they should be politely and respectfully rectified. This is the teaching and Minhaj of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. 5.2 - General Summary Of Main Theme Of Quoted Material: From Ahadith twenty-nine to thirty-four Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) prohibits completing recitation of entire Quran any less then three days on grounds that any quicker would make it difficult for person to recite the Quran with understanding. These Ahadith by themselves have nothing to do with the topic of Najd or Khawarij. Hadith thirty-five says if prostration/bowing isn’t perfect then you will die on Fitrah of another and not on fitrah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In other words you will die doing a action which isn’t Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). But due to erroneous translation; a companion is made to say; if your bowing and prostration isn’t perfect then you would not be acting and dieing upon religion of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). This is very extreme because imperfect prostration and bowing cannot and will not nullify any Muslims religion. This is something a Khariji would say and not a companion of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And this translation of Hadith has been produced by brother Abdullah’s co-religionist Mohsin Khan so the Kharijism seeps into translation here and there. Ahadith thirty-six and thirty-seven on their own have no direct connection with location of Najd; like all the previous Ahadith. Even though individually none of these Ahadith have direct connection with the mentioned subject but brother Abdullah is employing them as whole to imply from key points of Ahadith twenty-nine to thirty-five mention trait of Khawarij in light of Ahadith thirty-six and thirty-seven. And Muslims (i.e. Barelwis) have these traits therefore they are Khawarij. 5.3 - Companion Reciting The Quran Too Fast: Hadith twenty-nine to thirty-four; a companions states he fasts whole month and recites entire Quran every night. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told him to fast three days a month, he sought more saying he is capable of more, so Prophet instructed him to; fast a day and miss a day. He also instructed the companion to complete recitation of entire Quran in forty days, thirty/twenty-nine days, twenty days, fifteen days, companion desired more then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) made concession for him to seven days and then permitted three days. From this it becomes clear that companion was reciting the Quran too fast and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said any faster then three day completion of Quran would mean you do not understand the Quran. And even brother Abdullah agrees with this because he titled the section as: “Recitation of Quran in Haste.” 5.4 - Khawarij Reciting Quran While Not Understanding It: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has said: “Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said: "The main source of disbelief is in the East. Pride and arrogance are characteristics of the owners of horses and camels, and those bedouins who are busy with their camels and pay no attention to Religion; while modesty and gentleness are the characteristics of the owners of sheep." [Ref: Bukhari, B54, H520] “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] To put it simply the owners of camels/horses in the East are the tribes of Rabia and Mudhar and they are busy with them and pay no attention to religion and these tribes are from where group of Satan aka Khawarij was to emerge. Problem with the Khawarij was not of reciting the Quran too fast it was them not properly being accquainted with principles of Tafsir. They had no paid attention to learning about the fundamentals which help understanding of Quran and only focused on recititation of Quran and result was Khawarij. For example in Hadith which brother Abdullah quoted following words are quoted: “They would recite the Qur'an thinking that it supports them, whereas it is an evidence against them.” [Ref: Muslim, Book 5, Hadith 2333] They quoted hukum is for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) against Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Did they recite it too fast or did they not understand the verse of Quran? Their understanding of verse was simply superficial/shallow. The verse merely stated as Ilah hukum is of only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) quoted verse in which it was established hukum can be of Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) creation but hukum as Ilah is only of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Following Ahadith are regarding same man for whom Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said needs to be found in Hadith-37 which Abdullah referrenced. And problem of them is superficial/glib recitation of Quran: “Should I not strike his neck? Upon this he said: No. Then he turned away, and Khalid the Sword of Allah stood up against him, and said: Prophet of Allah. shall I not strike off his neck? He said, No, and then said: A people would rise from his progeny who would recite the Book of Allah glibly and fluently. Umar said: I think he (the Holy Prophet) also said this: If I find them I would certainly kill them like Thamud." [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2320, here] “He again looked at him and he was going back. Upon this he (the Holy Prophet) said: There would arise a people from the progeny of this (man) who would recite the Qur'an glibly, but it would not go beyond their throats; they would (hurriedly) pass through (the teachings of their) religion just as the arrow passes through the prey. I conceive that he (the Holy Prophet) also said this: If I find them I would certainly kill them as were killed the (people of) Thamud.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2319, here] Their glib/superficial recitation is result of not devoting time to learn about Deen of Islam and not learning about fundamental principles which enable understanding of Quran. And had nothing to do with fast recitation of Quran. Every field requires understanding of fundamentals without which books of that field cannot and will not be understood by readers even if they read them fast or slow. Quite while back someone handed me their biomedical science dissertation for proof reading. Even though I could read the words and understood the symbols I read it in its entirity twice without understanding anything. I could have read it really fast, or slow, or spelt out each word, it wouldn’t have made any difference because I lacked prerequisite knowledge of subject. Same applies to the sheep and camel herders of Najd. They weren’t aware of Sunnah method of Tafsir and due to is were unable to understand the Quran correctly. And the Najdi Kharijis have still not learnt the methodology and they continue to apply verses of Quran revealed for disbelievers upon those who say; none has the right to be worshipped except Allah. And this was also sign of Khawarij to descend from Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamim: He again looked at him and he was going back. Upon this he (the Holy Prophet) said: There would arise a people from the progeny of this (man) who would recite the Qur'an glibly, but it would not go beyond their throats; they would (hurriedly) pass through (the teachings of their) religion just as the arrow passes through the prey.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2319, here] Alhasi glib recitation, and Quran not going below their throats is about Khawarij not understanding the Quran correctly. They will have shallow understanding of Quran and will assume it supports them: “They would recite the Qur'an thinking that it supports them, whereas it is an evidence against them.” [Ref: Muslim, Book 5, Hadith 2333] Glib and Quran not going below their throat does not referr to inability of understanding of Quran which results from fast recitation of Quran but it referrs to shallow superficial understanding resulting from lack of proper understanding of methodology of Tafsir. Rest assured one who has understood rules of Tafsir and is able to interpret Quran even if he recites three Qurans a day and even though he will not be able to establish link between various verses of Quran and understand it in depth. But whenever he sits down and recites it slowly and attempts to understand it through legitimate methodology of Tafsir then nothing will prevent him from understanding it as a verse should be understood. 5.5 - Brother Abdullah Attempted To Establish Ahlus Sunnah Are Khawarij And Failed: By establishing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) forbade fast recitation of Quran brother Abdullah hoped to imply because some of Barelwis recite the Quran fast therefore they are Khawarij. He failed to prove that Ahlus Sunnah are Khawarij because the Ahadith he quoted to base his argument are about glib and superficial recitation of Quran like my act of proof-reading the dissertation. Brother Abdullah is applying these Ahadith on fast recitation of Quran. The difference between the companion who recited the Quran so fast that he finished it in a day and Khariji glib recitation is that companion’s fast recitation would have unabled him to understand the Quran but whenever he had slowed down and pondered over the verses he would have understood them. Why? Why? Why? He knew the principles of Tafsir. Khawarij on other hand were/are incapable of understanding the Quran because they lacked proper know how of Tafsir because they loved their sheeps more then their religion. As a result they cannot and will not understand the Quran. And to this I would add Ahadith also because brother Abdullah, and countless others have demonstrated that they also cannot understand Ahadith properly. And best proof of it is brother Abdullah applying Hadith of glib recitation on fast recitation of Quran. More importantly he did not judge the matter in light of entire package of Ahadith which are related to Khawarij. It is not impossible for a person to fullfill one condition of a prophesy. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said name of Mahdi (rahimullah) will be as his name (i.e. Muhammad). It is not impossible to find a person with name Muhammad. I am Muhammad in name. Will that prove to you I am Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah)? Every sane person would agree that this alone is not qualification of Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah). There are other qualifications and for example he will be from progeny of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Fatimah (radiallah ta’ala anha), and there are others. Meeting one, or two, or three, or four criterias will not make someone Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah) until a person meets all the requirements. Rather all related criterias have to be met and every major trait known of Khawarij as to be demonstrated before the charge of Khariji can be levelled. Actions of brother Abdullah point to another fundamental difference between methodology of Muslims and Wahhabiyyah. If they see a Muslim prostrating to a grave they will assume grave-worship and issue edict of Mushrik/Kafir. No regard is given to belief of person, intention of person, or knowledge of person. Rather similarity of Zahiri action is suffient to be Mushrik in Wahhabism. The corner stone of Wahhabism is: SIMILARITY OF ZAHIRI ACTION ESTABLISHES SHIRK. Mushrik Hindu performsTawaf of his Idol. An idiot Muslim performs Tawaf around the grave. Wahhabi will say this is same action, grave id idol, both are Hindu Mushrikeen. Just one action and person becomes a Mushrik Hindu. Methodology employed by Wahhabiyyah to determine is very superficial and no regard is given to details. Fast Quran recited by Amr, and fast Quran recited by Khariji, Amr is Khariji. What about maybe Amr doesn’t know? And therefore lets talk to him and encourage him to follow prophetic Sunnah. Fatwah of Khariji/Mushrik is their first priority. And even if they hold the Fatwah it wouldn’t be because they consider you Muslim rather tactfully will avoid offending you to win a convert to Wahhabism. Point being made is Wahhabi methodology of judgment looks for similarity of action and not of belief and other aspects. Coming back to main point of discussion reciting the Quran. Brother Abdullah granted no concession for the fact that the Hadith; Khawarij will recite Quran glibly and it will not go below their throat is about Khawarij. And two the Hadith doesn’t mean what he assumed it means. Yet he had the audacity to apply the Ahadith of Khawarij upon Muslims whom he is well aware of are avowed enemies of Khawarij in belief, in Fiqh, and in principle methodology. When in reality he has demonstrated he has Khariji methodology of applying the Quranic verses revealed for disbelievers upon Muslims. And his superficial understanding of verses of Quran and Ahadith he quoted (i.e. Hadith 36/37) only goes on to establish brother Abdullah is on path of Khawarij of Najd. 6.0 - Brother Abdullah’s Evidence Khawarij In Iraq: “Hadith-38: Narrated by 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 (i.e, Iraq) some people who will recite the Quran 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: Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 84, Hadith 68) Hadith-39: Narrated Ibn Abi Nu'm: A person asked 'Abdullah bin 'Umar whether a Muslim could kill flies.I heard him saying (in reply). "The people of Iraq are asking about the killing of flies while they themselves murdered the son of the daughter of Allah's Apostle . The Prophet said, They (i.e. Hasan and Husain) are my two sweet basils in this world." (Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 57, Number 96) Hadith-40: Zaid b. Wahb Jahani reported and he was among the squadron which wall under the command of Ali and which set out (to curb the activities) of the Khwarij. Ali said: O people, I heard the Messenger of Allah say: There would arise from my Ummah a people who would recite the Qur'an, and your recital would seem insignificant as compared with their recital, your prayer as compared with their prayer, and your fast compared with their fast. They would recite the Qur'an thinking that it supports them, whereas it is an evidence against them. Their prayer does not get beyond their collar bone; they would swerve through Islam just as the arrow passes through the prey. If the squadron which is to encounter them were to know (what great boon) has been assured to them by their Apostle they would completely rely upon this deed (alone and cease to do other good deeds), and their (that of the Khwarij) distinctive mark is that there would be (among them) a person whose wrist would be without the arm, and the end of his wrist would be fleshy like the nipple of the breast on which there would be white hair. … By Allah, I believe that these are the people (against whom you have been commanded to fight and get reward) for they have shed forbidden blood, and raided the animals of the people. So go forth in the name of Allah (to fight against them). … Abdullah b. Wahb al-Rasibi was at the head of the Khwarij when we encountered them. He (Abdullah) said to his army: Throw the spears and draw out your swords from their sheaths, for I fear that they would attack you as they attacked you on the day of Harura. They went back and threw their spears and drew out their swords, and people fought against them with spears and they were killed one after another. Only two persons were killed among the people (among the army led by Hadrat Ali) on that day. Ali said: Find out from among them (the dead bodies of the Khwarij) (the maimed). They searched but did not find him. Ali then himself stood up and (walked) till he came to the people who had been killed one after another. He ('Ali) said: Search them to the last, and then ('Ali's companions) found him (the dead body of the maimed) near the earth. He (Hadrat Ali) then pronounced ‘Allah is the Great!’ and then said, Allah told the Truth and His Messenger conveyed it. Then there stood before him Abida Salmani who said: Commander of the Believers, by Allah, besides Whom there is no god but He, (tell me) whether you heard this hadith from the Messenger of Allah. He said: Yes, by Allah, besides Whom there is no god but He. He asked him to take an oath thrice and he took the oath.” (Ref: Muslim, Book 5, Hadith 2333)”” 6.1 - Important Information About Quoted Ahadith: Hadith-38 has been used number of times; Hadith 6, Hadith-15, and Hadith-36. It will be comprehensively will be explained in another article along side Ahadith 11 to 17. Hadith-39 was employed earlier in brother Abdullah’s article as Hadith 5 and it was comprehensively explained in my previous response, here, in section 8.0 to 8.5. Hadith-40 was employed earlier as Hadith-37, and it was part of explaination in section 5.0 to 5.5 of this article. 7.0 - According To Brother Abdullah Hijaz Is Saudi Arabia: “Hadith-41: It is reported on the authority of Jabir b. Abdullah that the Messenger of Allah (may peace and, blessings be upon him) observed: The callousness of heart and sternness is in the East and faith is among the people of the Hijaz. (Sahih Muslim Book 001, Hadith Number 0095.) Comments: SubhanAllah! Even the above Hadith proves that Saudi Arabia is not referred as East but it's a blessed Land i.e Hijaz.” 7.1 - East As Direction And East As A Name: In his lattest quote it seems brother Abdullah is not taking East as direction but as name of region because he said: “SubhanAllah! Even the above Hadith proves that Saudi Arabia is not referred as East but it's a blessed Land i.e Hijaz.” It is true some times regions are recognised by the direction they are located at. In modern example we employ West to mean Europe and America even when sitting in Europe. The reason Europe and America became known as West is because both are West of Middle East and far East. And therefore people of East started to referr to both these regions as the West and eventually it became a common usage to mean said regions. If a man was sitting in Eithiopia and while talking about Arabia he pointed toward East then he would mean Arabia. Or if someone was in Arabia and said a man in Eithiopia pointed toward direction of East; in direction of Arabia then we know he would meant Arabia by East. But is it possible for a man sitting in Arabia to referr to Arabia as land of East without being influenced by any external influence? Never! Because an Arab who hasn’t been influenced by external ideas will not referr to Arabia as East. It simply isn’t possible for a healthy mind. Only way this is possible is when a country found in West of Arabia referrs to Arabia as land of East. Point I am trying to make is use of East by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as name of a region is simply not possible because he resided in Arabia and he was not saying East in relationship to Eithiopia, nor he employed East due to external influence. For brother Abdullah to even think that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) used East as a name of region is brainless of him. I cannot do, anything, but agree with brother Abdullah that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not mean Arabia by East because that would imply he used East as a name of region like we use the West for Europe and America. Instead Ahadith are evident that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) employed East as a directional indicator. 7.2 East As Direction And Not A Name Of Region: According to Ahadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) indicated direction: “Ibn Umar reported that Allah's Messenger came out from the house of 'A'isha and said: It would be from this side that there would appear the height of unbelief, viz. where appear the groups of Satan.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6941] Note words this side are indictive of speaker pointing toward a direction. In following Hadith it is established he pointed toward his wives house from pulpit of Masjid Nabavi: “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] See following article on this Hadith, here. And in the following Hadith group of Satan is said to emrge from direction of sunrise: “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out," or said, "... the side of the sun(rise) ..." [Bukhari, B88, H212] And that is direction of East and see following article, here, for a comprehensive explanation with visual aid. A Hadith records Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said while facing East: “Narrated Ibn `Umar: I heard Allah's Messenger while he was facing the East, saying: "Verily! Afflictions are there, from where the side of the head of Satan comes out." [Ref: Bukhar, B88, H213] And in another Hadith following is stated: ”Narrated Abu Masud: The Prophet beckoned with his hand towards Yemen and said, "Belief is there." The harshness and mercilessness are the qualities of those farmers etc, who are busy with their camels and pay no attention to the religion (is towards the east) from where the side of the group of Satan will appear; those are the tribes of Rabi`a and Mudar.” [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H670] Note tribes of Rabia and Mudhar are situated in East of Madinah. And it was the direction which prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was facing. Tribes of Banu Mudhar and Rabia were residing in East of Madinah in region of Najd. Regarding which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “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] Alhasil Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward direction of East and he did so from city of Madinah and by East a region in East of Madinah was intended. 7.3 - Saudi Arabia Is Brother Abdullah’s Hijaz: Earlier in the article while commenting on his Hadith-18 brother Abdullah wrote following: “It is crystal clear from above Ahadith that ''East'' refers to ''IRAQ''. If still Barelwis disagree 'East as Iraq' then they must go to Saudi Arabia (Hijaz) to Give Bayat to Imam Mehdi in Saudi Arabia not in Khurasan.” Please note the underlined indicates according to brother Abdullah Saudi Arabia is Hijaz. If there was any doubt regarding what he meant by his bracketed insertion now it is removed in Hadith-41: “SubhanAllah! Even the above Hadith proves that Saudi Arabia is not referred as East but it's a blessed Land i.e Hijaz.” 7.4 - Hijaz A Region In Arabia and Hijaz Is Not Arabia: Following map depicts al-Hijaz in two different eras, here, here, and here. Of course these maps of al-Hijaz should not be thought of to be accurate representation of historical Hijaz but should be used as a general guide for its location. Al-Hijaz linguistically means the barrier. According to some it is called so because on its Eastern side is Najd and on its Western side region of Tihamah. Tihamah is low-land, between one to hundered metres above sea level, and Red Sea coastal of Arabia, here, here, and finally a topographical map, here. Another opinion is that al-Hijaz is called so is because of its mountains. They are barrier between region of Najd in East and Hijaz in West. It is not important where the truth lies because general location of al-Hijaz was all that was required to, saying it generously, rectify mistake of brother Abdullah. 7.5 – Prophet Of Allah Making Dua For Hijaz: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said:“The callousness of heart and sternness is in the East and faith is among the people of (West in) the Hijaz.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H95] We already established in section 7.2 that East is direction of sunrise, region of Najd is in East, tribes of Mudhar/Rabia are in East, and group of Satan is to emerge from these tribe. Hijaz in relationship to Najd is West. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said about people of al-Hijaz: “The people of the West will continue to triumphantly follow the truth until the Hour is established.” [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4722] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said about people of al-Hijaz to whom religion of Islam will cling to desperately. Another meaning is that Hijaz will be last refuge of Islam in the world: “That the Messenger of Allah said: "Indeed the religion with creep into the Hijaz just like a snake creeps into its hole, and the religion will cling to the Hijaz just like the female mountain goat cling to the peak of a mountain.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B38, H2630] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said that residents of Hijaz will go and counquer Romans (i.e. Europe): “He said: ‘You will fight Banu Asfar (the Romans) and those who come after you will fight them, until the best of the Muslims go out to fight them, the people of Hijaz who do not fear the blame of anyone for the sake of Allah. They will conquer Constantinople with Tasbih and Takbir and will acquire such spoils of war as has never been seen before, which they will distribute by the shieldful.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4094] Due to these virtues of al-Hijaz brother Abdullah wanted to claim Hijaz for all of Arabian Peninsula. Readers should note the Wahhabis then and now consider the majority of Hijaz as polytheists. Following establishes Wahhabis of then/now considered the Muslims of Hijaz living at the time of Shaykh of Najd as polytheists, here. Even when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has said: :“The callousness of heart and sternness is in the East and faith is among the people of (West in) the Hijaz.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H95] “The people of the West will continue to triumphantly follow the truth until the Hour is established.” [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4722] 7.6 – Responding To Comment Of Pledging Allegiance To Imam Mahdi: For some unknown reason I did not actually comment on what brother Abdullah wrote while commenting on his Hadith-18 and therefore his following comment will be addressed here: “It is crystal clear from above Ahadith that ''East'' refers to ''IRAQ''. If still Barelwis disagree 'East is Iraq' then they must go to Saudi Arabia (Hijaz) to give Bayat to Imam Mehdi in Saudi Arabia not in Khurasan.” In the previous article, here, it was explained East in relationship to Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah) referrs to land of Khurasan and identity of Khurasan was established in section 9.3 to 9.5. Coming to what brother Abdullah wrote. He wrote the above because Ahadith indicate an army of black flags will come from East. And we established that it referrs to land of Khurasan which is almost due East of Madinah. It is recorded in a Hadith that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “It was narrated from Thawban that the Messenger of Allah said: "Three will fight one another for your treasure, each one of them the son of a caliph, but none of them will gain it. Then the black banners will come from the east, and they will kill you in an unprecedented manner." Then he mentioned something that I do not remember, then he said: "When you see them, then pledge your allegiance to them even if you have to crawl over the snow, for that is the caliph of Allah, Mahdi." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4084] Note the army and Imam al-Mahdi will come from East and Arabs are being instructed to pledge your allegiance to him when they arrive. This establishes that some Muslims will have to pledge allegiance to Imam al-Mahdi in Arabia. The army will be from Khurasan but Imam al-Mahdi will be an Arab living in Madinah and the army of black banners will give him allegiance in Makkah: “Narrated from Umm Salamah from the Prophet that he said: “There will be conflict with the death of a khalifah. (this Hadith skips through events spanning years) Then a man (Imam Mahdi) from the people of al-Madinah will come out, fleeing to Makkah. A group of men from the people of Makkah will come to him and bring him out by force, and give the bay’ah to him between the Rukn and the Maqam. An army will be sent against him from Sham, but they will be swallowed up by the earth in al-Bayda’ between Makkah and al-Madinah (this is the third Great Earthquake at the end of time). So when the people see that, the Abdal of Sham and the best of the people of ‘Iraq will come to him, and give him the bay’ah between the Rukn and the Maqam. Then, a man from Quraysh and his maternal relatives from Kalb (one of the Sufyani’s) will come and send an army against them, and they (i.e. the Mahdi and his companions) will be victorious over them.” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B…, H…] Of course the Muslims will give Bayyah to Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah) in Hijaz and specificly in Masjid al-Haram, between Maqam of Ibrahim (alayhis salam) and Yamani Rukn (i.e. Yamani corner). 7.7 – Iraq, ISIS, Black Flags, And The Wahhabis: Wahhabis distorted Ahadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to make Iraq into East. Maybe it was ‘Iraq is East’ belief of Wahhabis that made them join the Wahhabi ISIS Khilafat aka concentration camp of mass murder and genocide. And maybe joined in the hope that they will be part o black banners marching to Arabia under leadership of al-Baghdadi to establish the Khilafat of Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah). You can go to Iraq and give Bayyah to your al-Baghdadi’s and al-Zawahiri’s, and anyone else you want. The Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah) of Muslims will be an Arab and resident of Madinah. The army from Khurasan will aid him and establish his Khilafat and that army will utterly anahilate Wahhabism in Arabian Peninsula and those who fight to protect this enemy within.

Introduction: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold emergence of group of Satan out of region of Najd and from direction of East. In another Hadith he stated tribes of Rabia and Mudhar are two groups of Satan. These Ahadith referr to emergence of Kharijism from Najd. Another set of Ahadith indicate Kharijis were to emerge from Iraq also. The orthodox Islam applies Ahadith of Iraq on the first group of Kharijis which emerged in Iraq as a distinct sect. And understand the Ahadith of East/Najd to be referring to emergence of Wahhabism from Najd. Wahhabi propaganda machine has been churning out material to superimpose Ahadith of Najd on Iraq in effort to portray Iraq as Najd. Some Information On Trinity Of Articles On Najd: First article dealt with Ahadith from 1 to 10 and Hadith-6 was ignored. Hadith-17/18 were discussed but all in between were ignored, here. In this article Ahadith: 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 will be adressed. Hadith 16 will be ignored because it is repeat of Hadith 14. The referrence is absolutely same and so is the content the only notable difference is one Hadith states the Khawarij will have habbit of shaving heads and the other states habbit of shaving beards. With all things said I have five Ahadith to respond and explain in light of prophetic teaching. After which servant will establish the orthodox understanding where Najd is and how it is to be determined in light of prophetic teaching. As stated earlier Hadith-6 was ignored because it was repeated as Hadith-36 and Hadith-38. And therefore it was discussed in my second article which dealt with Ahadith from 19 to 43, here. 0.0 - Prophet Standing At Door Of His Wife Hafsa/Aysha Pointed To East: Hadith-11: “Ibn Umar reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) stood by the door (of the apartment of) Hafsa and, pointing towards the east, he said: The turmoil would appear from this side, viz. where the horns of Satan would appear, and he uttered these words twice or thrice and Ubaidullah b. Sa'ld in his narration said. The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) had been standing by the door of A'isha.” (Sahih Muslim Book 41 Hadith 6939) 0.1 – Pointing From Door Toward East In Context Of Related Ahadith: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has reported to have said: “Ibn Umar reported that Allah's Messenger stood by the door (of the apartment of) Hafsa and, pointing towards the East, he said: The turmoil would appear from this side namely where the groups of Satan would appear, and he uttered these words twice or thrice. And Ubaidullah bin Sa`id in his narration said: The Messenger of Allah had been standing by the door of A'isha.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6939] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward East and said afflictions would appear from where the groups of Satan would appear. And this also agrees with the following Hadith: “Narrated Ibn Umar: I heard Allah's Messenger while he was facing the East saying: ‘Verily! Afflictions are there, from where the side of the group of Satan comes out.’" [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H213] According to both these Ahadith afflictions would appear in East from the side where the groups/group of Satan would appear. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told who and where the group of Satan is: “’And then pointed towards the East and said: ‘Verily sternness and mercilessness are the qualities of those who are busy with their camels and pay no attention to their religion. [It is a place in East] where the two sides of the group of Satan will appear. Namely the tribes of Rabi'a and Mudar.’” [Ref: Bukhari, B63, H223] Not only Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told the direction of East from which the afflictions would appear but he also named the tribes from where the group/groups of Satan would emerge. 0.2 - Sunrises Between The Two Groups Of Satan: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said group of Satan would emerge from East. And he told who the two groups of Satan are namely Banu Rabia and Banu Mudhar. In the following Hadith he specificly pointed that sunrises between the two groups of Satan: “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] We already know who the two groups Satan in East are but another Hadith won’t harm the good cause: "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] Now we have to see where the the sunrises, here. And where Banu Rabia and Banu Mudhar were situated in Arabian Peninsula, here. Pay attention Southern and Northen sunrise boundaries coincide with location of Banu Rabia and Banu Mudhar. Allahu Akbar! The Messenger of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) precisely pointed the sunrise boundary as well as where Banu Rabia and Mudhar were located. Not surprisingly both these tribes were located in region of Najd, here, here, and here. 0.3 - Pointing Toward East Hadith In Context Of Pulpit To House Of His Wife: Once again Hadith quoted by brother Abdullah: “Ibn Umar reported that Allah's Messenger stood by the door (of the apartment of) Hafsa and, pointing towards the East, he said: The turmoil would appear from this side namely where the groups of Satan would appear, and he uttered these words twice or thrice. And Ubaidullah bin Sa`id in his narration said: The Messenger of Allah had been standing by the door of A'isha.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6939] It is recorded that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward East from pulpit of Masjid Nabvi: “Narrated Abdullah bin Umar: I heard Allah's Messenger on the pulpit pointing towards the East saying: ‘Verily, afflictions (will start) from here. Whence the side of the group of Satan comes out.’" [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H714] “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit (and pointed with his finger towards the East) and said: ‘Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from where the side of the head of Satan comes out.’ Or said: ‘… the side of the sun.’" [Ref: Bukhari, Book 88, Hadith 212] Abdullah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) presents the mentioned event in these two Ahadith in his own words saying; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) delivered a sermon and pointed toward the direction house of Aisha (radiallah ta’ala anhu): “Narrated Abdullah: The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon and said three times while pointing to Aisha's house: ‘Affliction (will appear from) here. From where the side of the Satan's group comes out.’” [Ref: Bukhari, B53, H336] Abdullah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) not only told the general direction of East he gave precise direction of East from which afflictions of group of Satan were to emerge. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed from where group of Satan would emerge and its afflictions with pin point accuracy, here. This is the exact direction of Saudi capital Uyaynah, Dirriyah, and Saudi capital Riyadh. Note Uyaynah is where founder of Wahhabism was born. Dirriyah is where he immigrated after people got tired of his hearing him say: You all are disbelievers/polytheists. This is also where he met Saud family and joined forced with them. Once they established their State they made Riyadh capital in Najd, here. The grand fact is Wahhabism originated fermented and infected Muslims of Arabia and world in general from Najd and this is why Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not make dua for Najd in following Hadith: “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 head of Satan.’" [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] This establishes that all the Ahadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been said to be pointing toward East, direction of sunrise, toward house of Aisha (radiallah ta’ala anha), and his refusal to invoke Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for inhabitants of Najd are interconnected. And once information and details are investigated they all go back to central Arabia and toward Saudi capital Riyadh. This happens to be historical Najd of Muslims established from Ahadith, lingustically, geographically, geologically and topographically. 1.0 - Hadith Of Apparently Righteous And Yet With Little Sign Of Islam: Hadith-12: “Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:I heard Allah's Apostle saying: "There will appear some people among you whose prayer will make you look down upon yours, and whose fasting will make you look down upon yours, but they will recite the Qur'an which will not exceed their throats (they will not act on it) and they will go out of Islam as an arrow goes out through the game whereupon the archer would examine the arrowhead but see nothing, and look at the unfeathered arrow but see nothing, and look at the arrow feathers but see nothing, and finally he suspects to find something in the lower part of the arrow." (Sahih Bukhari Book 61 Hadith 578) 1.1 - Ahadith Of Dhil Khawaisirah’s Companions: Hadith quoted by brother Abdullah is just one from vast collection on this incident. The following Hadith sheds more light upon the incident: "Narrated Ibn bbas: The Prophet said: "I have been made victorious with As-Saba (i.e. an easterly wind) and the people of Ad were destroyed by Ad-Dabur (i.e. a westerly wind)." Narrated Abu Said: Ali sent a piece of gold to the Prophet who distributed it among four persons: Al-Aqra' bin Habis Al-Hanzali from the tribe of Mujashi, Uyaina bin Badr Al-Fazari, Zaid At-Ta'i who belonged to (the tribe of) Bani Nahban, and Alqama bin Ulatha Al-Amir who belonged to (the tribe of) Bani Kilab. So the Quraish and the Ansar became angry and said: "He (the Prophet, ) gives the chief of Najd and does not give us." The Prophet said: "I give them so as to attract their hearts (to Islam)." Then a man with sunken eyes prominent cheeks, a raised forehead, a thick beard and a shaven head, came (in front of the Prophet ) and said: "Be afraid of Allah O Muhammad!" The Prophet said: "Who would obey Allah if I disobeyed Him? (Is it fair that) Allah has trusted all the people of the earth to me while, you do not trust me? Somebody who, I think was Khalid bin Al-Walid, requested the Prophet to let him chop that man's head off but he prevented him. "[1] [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H558] In narration by Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (radiallah ta’ala anhu) name and tribe of man is mentioned along with outward piety so excessive that companions would feel ashamed of themselves. Yet despite their excessive religiousity they would be people who have little to do with Islam: “Narrated Abu Sa'id: While the Prophet was distributing something Abdullah Bin Dhil Khawaisira At-Tamimi came and said: "Be just O Allah's Apostle!" The Prophet said: "Woe to you! Who would be just if I were not?" 'Umar bin Al-Khattab said: "Allow me to cut off his neck!" The Prophet said: "Leave him because he has companions, and if you compare your prayers with their prayers and your fasting with theirs, you will look down upon your prayers and fasting, in comparison to theirs. Yet they will go out of the religion as an arrow darts through the game's body. In which case if the Qudhadh of the arrow is examined, nothing will be found on it and when its Nasl is examined, nothing will be found on it; and then its Nadiyi is examined, nothing will be found on it. The arrow has been too fast to be smeared by excrement and blood.'"[2] [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] Incident which brother Abdullah quoted was about another brother of his from another mother called Abdullah Bin Dhil Khawaisirah who was from Banu Tamim. This Abdullah had companions who were apparently very pious. This establishes Abdullah Bin Dhil Khawaisirah and his companions were around even during the life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). 1.2 - Khariji Reality Of Dhil Khawaisirah, And His Companions: It is recorded that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said about Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah and his companions that: “Such people will come out at the time of difference among the (Muslim) people (i) and the sign by which they will be recognized, will be a man whose one of the two hands will look like the breast of a woman or a lump of flesh moving loosely.”(ii)[3] [Ref: Bukhari, H73, H184] Hadith sixty-seven quoted in previous section from Sahih of Imam Bukhari continued where it was left of and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is saying:“The sign by which these people will be recognized will be a man whose one hand will be like the breast of a woman.(i) These people will appear when there will be differences among the people." Abu Sa'id added: I testify that I heard this from the Prophet and also testify that Ali killed those people while I was with him.”(ii)[Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] 1.3 - Appeared When There Was Dissention Between Muslims In Syria: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said these excessively pious people with no/little sign of Islam on them will appear when there will be conflict between Muslims. And as foretold they appeared during the Khilafat of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) when armies of Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) were facing each other at Siffeen, modern Raqqa in Syria. The Qurra, literally (Quran) reciters; referrs to Khawarij, lead by their general Ashtar, without permission of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) attacked camp of Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and this started the battle. At that time the arbitration event had not taken place. During the battle Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) suggested arbitration to Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and he accepted. This angered a group of Khawarij because they wanted to fight on: “On that Abu Wail said, "We were at Siffin (a city on the bank of the Euphrates, the place where me battle took place between `Ali and Muawiya) A man said, "Will you be on the side of those who are called to consult Allah's Book (to settle the dispute)?" Ali said: 'Yes (i.e. I agree that we should settle the matter in the light of the Qur'an)!" ' Some people objected to Ali's agreement and wanted to fight.” [Ref: Bukhari, B60, H367] After Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) refused to accept the verdict of arbitration Qurra seperated from his army. The Qurra later moved to al-Harura in Iraq and to Nahrawan where the battle of Ali’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) took place. Note this information is uncontestable and no sane and dare to say insane Muslim would dispute this. 1.4 - Khawarij Identified In Iraq By Presence Of Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah: After Siffin Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) returned to Iraq and renewed effort to gather another army to rest control of Syria from Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). This was a time when Khawarij those had returned were raiding and killing Muslims living around them. Due to their actrocities Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) focused his effort toward Khawarij saying: “Salamah b. Kuhail said: Zaid Bin Wahb al-Juhani told us that he was in the army which proceeded to (fight with) the Khawarij in the company of Ali. Ali then said: O people! I heard the Messenger of Allah say: there will appear from among my community people who recite the Qur'an, and your recitation has no comparison with their recitation, and your prayer has no comparison with their prayer, and your fasts have no comparison with their fasts. They will recite the Qur'an thinking that it is beneficial for them, while it is harmful for them. Their prayer will not pass their collar-bones. They will swerve from Islam as an arrow goes through the animal shot at. If the army that is approaching them knows what (reward) has been decided for them at the tongue of their Prophet, they would leave (other good) activities. The sign of that is that among them there will be a man who has an upper arm, but not hand; on his upper arm there will be something like the nipple of a female breast, having white hair thereon.” There must have been hesitance in ranks of Ali’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) army to fight Khawarij due to their excessive piety and for this reason Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) seems to be justifying his decision. He further tells them what the Khawarij have done and tells them of his fear: “Will you go to Mu`awiyah and the people of Syria, and leave them behind among your children and property? I swear by Allah, I hope these are the same people, for they shed the blood unlawfully, and attacked the cattle of the people so go on in the name of Allah.” Then following order of Abdullah Bin Wahb al-Rasibi the Khawarij threw their spears and took out swords and were anahilated by army of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu): “Salamah b. Kuhail said: Zaid b. Wahb then informed me of all the halting places one by one, (saying): Until we passed a bridge. When we fought with each other: Abd Allah b. Wahb al-Rasibi, who was the leader of the Khawarij (he) said to them: ‘Throw away the lances and pull out the swords from their sheaths, for I am afraid they will adjure you as they had adjured on the day of Harura.’ So they threw away their lances and pulled out their swords, and the people pierced them with their lances. They were killed (lying one on the other). On that day only two persons of the partisans (of `Ali) were killed.” Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) instructed his companions to find man with defective hand and he found him at the amongst the Khariji dead right at the bottom of pile of dead: “Ali said: Search for the man with the crippled hand but they could not find him. Then Ali got up himself and went to the people who had been killed and were lying on one another. He said: Take them out. They found him at the near the ground (i.e. bottom of pile of dead bodies).[4] So he shouted: Allah is Most Great! He said: Allah spoke the truth, and His Apostle has conveyed.” [Ref: Abi Dawood, B41, H4750] “The man with the description given by the Prophet was brought to Ali. The following verses (9:58) were revealed in connection with that very person (i.e. Abdullah Ibn Dhil-Khawaisira At-Tamimi): 'And among them are men who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.'" [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] “Ubaidah narrated from Ali bin Abu Talib: That he mentioned the Khawarij and said: "Among them there will be a man with a defective hand, or a short hand, or small hand. If you were to exercise restraint I would tell you of what Allah has promised upon the lips of Muhammed for those who kill them." I said: "Did you hear that from Muhammed?" He said: "Yes by the Lord of the Ka'bah!' - three times." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H167] Abu Sa’id al-Khudri attests to what Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) told about Khawarij and bares witness that Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) fought [and killed them] in following Hadith : “Abu Said added: "I testify that I heard that from the Prophet and also testify that I was with Ali when Ali fought against those people. The man described by the Prophet was searched for among the killed, and was found, and he was exactly as the Prophet had described him." [Ref: Bukhari, H73, H184] Another Hadith about these Khawarij he states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold they would emerge when there is conflict in his Ummah, they would have shaven heads, group nearer to truth would kill them, and this group was of Iraqis commanded by army by Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu): “Abu Sa'id al-Khudri said that the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a mention of a sect that would be among his Ummah which would emerge out of the dissension of the people. Their distinctive mark would be shaven heads. They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures. The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them. The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) gave an example (to give their description) or he said: A man throws an arrow at the prey (or he said at the target), and sees at its iron head, but finds no sign (of blood there), or he sees at the lowest end, but would not see or find any sign (of blood there). He would then see into the grip but would not find (anything) sticking to it. Abu Sai'd then said: People of Iraq. it is you who have killed them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2324] 1.5 – Khawarij Were To Appear In Iraq Also: It is recorded in Hadith of Bukhari that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward Iraq and said a group of people would appear in Iraq who would recite Quran but it will not go beyond their throats. Indicating they will deprived of understanding Quran: “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] Note even though Hadith does not say group of Satan would emerge from Iraq their description matches group of Satan – Khawarij. 1.6 - Land Of Banu Tamim, Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah, His Companions And Najd: Briefly sumarizing the key points established so far: Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi was from tribe of Banu Tamim, during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah had excessively pious companions, in Syria the Qurra lead by Ashtar attacked army camp of Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) starting the battle of Siffin/, during the battle Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) suggested arbitration and Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) accepted, Khawarij disliked the idea and wanted to fight, Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) refused to accept result of arbitration, Khawarij seperated from his army with slogan judgment is for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) only, they marched back to Iraq and terrorized the local populace with their massacres and lootings, Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) fought them at Nahrawan, Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi matched the prophetic description by which Khawarij were to be recognised, he was found amongst the bottom of pile of Khariji dead, andgroup near to truth , the Iraqis, lead by Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) killed Khawarij. In context of this information it is important to point out that Banu Tamim’s native land was central Arabian Peninsula: here, here, here, and here. And this region was/is part of historical Najd, here, here, here, and here. Ultimately all the information boils down to fact; Kharijism in some form existed in Arabian Peninsula when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was alive. This goes on to establish first group of Khawarij had its man power and support from tribes of Arabian Najd especially Banu Tamim even though as a distinctive sect it emerged in Iraq like Ahadith relating to Khawarij emerging from Iraq establish. For a more detailed study please referr to following article, here. 1.7 - Khawarij Apeared In Iraq And To Appear In Najd: Section 1.1 to 1.6 as whole goes on to establishes that Kharijism appeared in Iraq but the theologically it was native to Najd. And natives of Najd especially belonging to tribe of Banu Tamim were adherents of it and they fought against Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Section 0.1 to 0.3 established group of Satan aka Khawarij was to emerge from East of Madinah in region of Najd. This conclusively establishes; the first Khariji sect appeared in Iraq as Ahadith establish. But the Ahadith which tell of group of Satan appearing from East and Najd are about second major sect of Khawarij. Following section will shed further light upon the subtle points which establish Islamic beliefe and refute brother Abdullah’s assertion. 1.8 - Prophet Said Regarding Off-Springs Of Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah: Following Hadith details of distribution of charity event, and Quraysh being unhappy over it, and Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi accusing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) of injustice: “So the Quraish and the Ansar became angry and said: He (the Prophet, ) gives the chief of Najd and does not give us." The Prophet said: "I give them so as to attract their hearts (to Islam)." Then a man with sunken eyes prominent cheeks, a raised forehead, a thick beard and a shaven head, came (in front of the Prophet ) and said: "Be afraid of Allah O Muhammad!" The Prophet said: "Who would obey Allah if I disobeyed Him? (Is it fair that) Allah has trusted all the people of the earth to me while, you do not trust me? Somebody who, I think was Khalid bin Al-Walid, requested the Prophet to let him chop that man's head off but he prevented him. " While Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said about his dissendents: "When the man left the Prophet said: "Among the off-spring of this man will be some who will recite the Qur'an but the Qur'an will not reach beyond their throats and they will renegade from the religion as an arrow goes through the game's body. They will kill the Muslims but will not disturb the idolaters. If I should live up to their time' I will kill them as the people of Ad were killed.” [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H558] It is established that first group of Khawarij appeared in Iraq but the group of Satan to appear from Najd was to appear from progeny of Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi and this group was none other then Wahhabism. Note the Hadith states they will leave the idol worshippers alone and kill Muslims. Meaning is their ‘Jihad’ would be directed toward Muslims and as foretold by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) it happened when Wahhabism flexed its millitary muscle. And continues to happen in, Syria, Iraq, Pakistani, Phillipine, Somalia, Mali, Yemen, and even Libya. Target of their ‘Jihad’ is Muslims. 1.9 - Ibn Abdul Wahhab From Off-Springs Of Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah: Muslim scholars and geneologists have stated Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab founder of Wahhabism was from descendants of Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi. If we consider the, impossible, he is not descendant of Dhil Khuawaisirah in biological sense there can be no doubt in core theology of Shirk, Tawheed, Biddah, accusing Muslim majority of Shirk, permitting the killing of Muslims, rebellion against state and Jammah of Muslims … in these aspects Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab and those followed him are all desecendants of their theological ancestor Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi. Note article on Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab at-Tamimi being biologically descendent of Shaykh Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi has been in progress for quite a while but progress has been bit slow. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills it will be completed. 2.0 – Hadith Of Haruriyyah And Kharijis In This Nation: Hadith-13: “Narrated Abdullah bin 'Amr bin Yasar: That they visited Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri and asked him about Al-Harauriyya, a special unorthodox religious sect, "Did you hear the Prophet saying anything about them?" Abu Sa'id said: "I do not know what Al-Harauriyya is, but I heard the Prophet saying: ‘There will appear in this nation he did not say: From this nation a group of people so pious apparently that you will consider your prayers inferior to their prayers, but they will recite the Quran, the teachings of which will not go beyond their throats and will go out of their religion as an arrow darts through the game, whereupon the archer may look at his arrow, its Nasl at its Risaf and its Fuqa to see whether it is blood-stained or not (i.e. they will have not even a trace of Islam in them).” (Sahih Bukhari Book 84 Hadith 65) 2.1 - Khawarij To Appear From Saudi Central Arabian Najd: It is recorded in that Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was asked about al-Haruriyyah, another name of Khawarij, he said the following: “That they visited Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri and asked him about Al-Harauriyya, a special unorthodox religious sect: "Did you hear the Prophet saying anything about them?" Abu Sa'id said: "I do not know what Al-Harauriyya is, but I heard the Prophet saying: "There will appear in this nation. He did not say: From this nation a group of people so pious apparently that you will consider your prayers inferior to their prayers, but they will recite the Quran, the teachings of which will not go beyond their throats and will go out of their religion as an arrow darts through the game, whereupon the archer may look at his arrow, its Nasl at its Risaf and its Fuqa to see whether it is blood-stained or not (i.e. they will have not even a trace of Islam in them).” [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H65] The phrase in this nation is obvious referrence to Arabia. And in following Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said people will be calling toward hell speaking Arabic: “There will be callers at the gates of Hell; whoever responds to them they throw them into it.” I said: “O Messenger of Allah, describe them to us.” He said: “They will be from our people, speaking our language.” I said: “What do you command me to do, if I live to see that?” He said: “Adhere to the main body of the Muslims and their leader. If there is no such body and no leader, then withdraw from all their groups, even if you bite onto the trunk of a tree until death finds you in that state.” [Ref: Ibn, Majah, B36, H3979] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “Will there be a bad time after this good one? He said: Yes. (A time will come) when there will be people standing and inviting at the gates of Hell. Whoso responds to their call they will throw them into the fire. I said: Messenger of Allah, describe them for us. He said: All right. They will be a people having the same complexion as ours and speaking our language.”[5] [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4553] This establishes that according to companion Khawarij were to appear in amongst Arabs and Hadith of Khawarij appearing in Najd perfectly compliment his statement. The Iraqis did not speak Arabic before conquest of Iraq and majority still does not. Therefore natives of Arabian Peninsula were intended and this is strenthened because Prophet said they will have Arab complexion and this is inclusive of color and facial features. Further Najdis in general and Banu Tamim to be specific are in direction of East and in region of Najd as evidence by following Hadith: “Ibn Umar reported that Allah's Messenger stood by the door (of the apartment of) Hafsa and, pointing towards the East, he said: The turmoil would appear from this side namely where the groups of Satan would appear, and he uttered these words twice or thrice. And Ubaidullah bin Sa`id in his narration said: The Messenger of Allah had been standing by the door of A'isha.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6939] “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 head of Satan.’" [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] And they are Arabs therefore in this nation is applicable to them, they spoke/speak Arabic, and have Arab complexion. All this leads to one natural and only sound conclusion; Najd is in Arabian Peninsula, Khawarij were natives of Arabia, went to Iraq, killed by Iraqis. Iraq became place of their appeance and Najd remains place of their origin. 3.0 - Shaven Head Sect Would Emerge From East Of Madinah: Hadith-14: “Narrated Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri:The Prophet said: "There will emerge from the East some people who will recite the Qur'an but it will not exceed their throats and who will go out of (renounce) the religion (Islam) as an arrow passes through the game, and they will never come back to it unless the arrow, comes back to the middle of the bow (by itself). The people asked, "What will their signs be?" He said: "Their sign will be the habit of shaving (their heads).” (Sahih Bukhari Book 93 Hadith 651) Hadith-16: “The people asked, "What will their signs be?" He said, "Their sign will be the habit of shaving (of their beards).” (Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 93, Number 651. Fateh Al-Bari, Page 322, Vol. 17th) 3.1 - Shaven Heads Or Shaven Beards: There are many Ahadith which establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said shaven heads and not beards. And following Hadith is just one proof of it: "Sahl bin Hunaif reported Allah's Apostle as saying: There would arise from the east a people with shaven heads." [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2338] There was and is no reason for Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani (rahimullah) to say that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said shaving of beard and it is unconcievable someone like of him would state this. Therefore suspicion is; like many times before brother Abdullah has lied. The issue is not related to the topic and it makes no sense in pursuing it further. 3.2 - Shaven Head Sect Is Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi And His Followers: To begin with please note this part of discussion is connected with Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi his followers and it should be understood in context of sections 1.1 to 1.6. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said a sect from East would arise with shaven 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] The leader of this sect visited Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and accused Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) of injustice: “The Quraish became angry and said: 'You give to the chiefs of Najd and that, so as to soften their hearts toward Islam.' Then a man with a thick beard, prominent cheeks, and a shaven head came and said: 'Fear Allah. O Muhammad! He said: 'Who would obey Allah if I disobeyed Him? (Is it fair that) He has entrusted me with all the people of the Earth but you do not trust me?' Then the man went away, and a man from among the people, whom they (the narrators) think was Khalid bin Al-Walid, asked for permission to kill him.”[6] [Ref: Nisaee, B23, H2579] “Narrated Abu Sa`id: Ali sent a piece of gold to the Prophet who distributed it among four persons: … So the Quraish and the Ansar became angry and said: "He (i.e. the Prophet, ) gives the chief of Najd and does not give us." The Prophet said: "I give them) so as to attract their hearts (to Islam)." Then a man with sunken eyes, prominent checks, a raised forehead, a thick beard and a shaven head, came (in front of the Prophet and said, "Be afraid of Allah, O Muhammad!" The Prophet said "Who would obey Allah if I disobeyed Him? (Is it fair that) Allah has trusted all the people of the earth to me while, you do not trust me?" Somebody who, I think was Khalid bin Al-Walid, requested the Prophet to let him chop that man's head off, but he prevented him.” [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H558] This man was none other then Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi al-Najdi. Ahadith also mention this man had companions who were outwardly very pious but people who have gone out of Islam. It is worth pointing out it is habbit of people to mould themselves in footsteps of the people they idolise. The Wahhabis have their own brand of head covering – cloth tied on head with donkey tail thing. Those who are devout Wahhabis and aspire to embody Wahhabism they tend to wear that regardless of where they are from in the world. Shaykh Ahmad Deedat (may Allah forgive him) wore net type white hat and his including Zakir Naik adopted it. Members of Ahlus Sunnah those who have a Shaykh/Pir tend to adopt the brand style of head gear their Shaykh/Pir wears. Dhil Khawaisirah was leader of Khawarij and those who idolised him also shaved their head to embody their leaders habbit. In another Hadith tucked up loincloth has been added along side shaven head: "A person from among his (Prophet's) Companions said: We had a better claim to this (wealth) than these (persons). This (remark) reached the Messenger of Allah upon which he said: Will you not trust me, whereas I am a trustee of Him Who is in the heaven? The news come to me from the heaven morning and evening. Then there stood up a person with deep sunken eyes, prominent cheek bones, and elevated forehead, thick beard, shaven head, tucked up loincloth, and he said: Messenger of Allah, fear Allah. He (the Holy Prophet) said: Woe to thee. Do I not deserve most to fear Allah amongst the people of the earth? That man then returned. Khalid b. Walid then said: Messenger of Allah, should I not strike his neck? Upon this he (the Holy Prophet) said: Perhaps he may be observing the prayer." [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2319] So in conclusion it needs to be said; the group of shaven head in East was Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi and his companions which even existed during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). This group was in East, in Najd, toward the direction of sunrise, and in context of Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointing toward house of his wife Aisha (radiallah ta’ala anha), toward precise direction of Saudi capital Riyadh. And this was same place where the first group of Khawarij germinated and the second major infestation also appeared lead by Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab. Please referr to maps and information mentioned earlier in the article. 4.0 - Prophet Pointed Toward Direction Of Iraq: Hadith-15: “Narrated by 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 (i.e, Iraq) some people who will recite the Quran 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.' " (Sahih Bukhari, Volume 9, Book 84, Hadith 68) 4.1 - Sahl Bin Hunaif Saw Prophet Pointing To Iraq Or Not: Sahl Bin Hunaif was a companion of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) who had taken part in battle of Badr.[7] Therefore his knowledge is source of guidance. Brother Abdullah quoted Hadith attributed to him to argue Khawarij appeared in Iraq. As it is already stated Khawarij originated from central Arabian Najd, marched to Syria with Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu), after battle of Siffeen separated from Ali’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) army, returned to Iraq, and met their doom at Nahrawan. In context of battle of Nahrawan this Hadith can be applied on Iraq but as long as fundamental fact is not denied that Khawarij originated from central Arabian Najd from Banu Tamim and their leader was Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi. It is worth pointing out this companion, Sahl Bin Hunaif (radiallah ta’ala anhu), is on record for pointing out Khawarij appeared from East of Madinah. 4.2 - Sahl Bin Hunaif Khawarij To Appear From East: Sahl Bin Hunaif (radiallah ta’ala anhu) narrated Hadith: “Yusair bin Amr reported that he inquired of Sahl b. Hunaif: Did you hear the Messenger of Allah making a mention of the Khawarij? He said: I heard him say (and he pointed with his hand towards the east) that these would be a people who would recite the Qur'an with their tongues and it would not go beyond their collar bones. They would pass clean through their religion just as the arrow passes through the prey.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2336] In this Hadith he gave description of train of Khawarij but in the following Hadith he pointed out Khawarij would appear from East: “Sahl bin Hunaif reported Allah's Apostle as saying: There would arise from the east a people with shaven heads.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2338] Combination of information mentioned in both Ahadith has been narrated in the following Hadith: “Narrated AbuSa'id al-Khudri: Anas ibn Malik: The Prophet said: Soon there will appear disagreement and dissension in my people; there will be people who will be good in speech and bad in work. They recite the Qur'an, but it does not pass their collar-bones. They will swerve from the religion as an animal goes through the animal shot at. They will not return to it till the arrow comes back to its notch. They are worst of the people and animals. Happy is the one who kills them and they kill him. They call to the book of Allah, but they have nothing to do with it. He who fights against them will be nearer to Allah than them (the rest of the people). The people asked: What is their sign? He replied: They shave the head.” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B41, H4747] 4.3 – The Conclusion On Ahadith Of Sahl Bin Hunaif: In conlusion it needs to be said that Khawarij resided in East of Madinah, in Najd, with shaven heads, recite the Quran but it doesn’t effect them, appeared when there was fighting amongst Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). The Khawarij were followers of Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi. He and his companions belonged to Banu Tamim and this Bani Tamim was situated in central Arabia in region surrounding Saudi capital Riyadh. So if one Hadith of Sahl Bin Hunaif (radiallah ta’ala anhu) establishes Khawarij appeared in Iraq the other establish that they would originate from the direction of East [of Madinah and from Najd]. Note there has been consistent pattern in my response; group of Satan was in Iraq but the breeding ground was central Saudi Arabian Najd. 4.4 - Khawarij Will Continue To Re-Emerge And End Of Times: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said from progeny of Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi [another] Khariji group will emerge: “A person from among his (Prophet's) Companions said: We had a better claim to this (wealth) than these (persons). This (remark) reached the Messenger of Allah upon which he said: Will you not trust me, whereas I am a trustee of Him Who is in the heaven? The news come to me from the heaven morning and evening. Then there stood up a person with deep sunken eyes, prominent cheek bones, and elevated forehead, thick beard, shaven head, tucked up loincloth, and he said: Messenger of Allah, fear Allah. He (the Holy Prophet) said: Woe to thee. Do I not deserve most to fear Allah amongst the people of the earth? That man then returned. Khalid b. Walid then said: Messenger of Allah, should I not strike his neck? Upon this he (the Holy Prophet) said: Perhaps he may be observing the prayer. Khalid said: How many observers of prayer are there who profess with their tongue what is not in their heart? Upon this the Messenger of Allah said: I have not been commanded to pierce through the hearts of people, nor to split their bellies (insides). He again looked at him and he was going back. Upon this he (the Holy Prophet) said: There would arise a people from the progeny of this (man) who would recite the Qur'an glibly, but it would not go beyond their throats; they would (hurriedly) pass through (the teachings of their) religion just as the arrow passes through the prey. I conceive that he (the Holy Prophet) also said this: If I find them I would certainly kill them as were killed the (people of) Thamud.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2319] Note Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi was part of first Khariji sect not the one from his progeny. Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab at-Tamimi is from progeny of Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamimi and he is the second group of Satan which was to emerge from Najd. The prophecies related to this re-emergence are as follows: “It was narrated that Anas bin Malik said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'At the end of time or among this nation (Ummah) there will appear people who will recite the Qur'an but it will not go any deeper than their collarbones or their throats. Their distinguishing feature will be their shaved heads. If you see them, or meet them, then kill them.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H175] The Wahhabis of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab shaved their heads just like their predecessors. The Islamic scholarship of his era considering the signs; killing of Muslims, declaring; them polytheists, people of innovation, rebellion against; Khilafah, Jammah of Muslims, emergence in Najd, East of Madinah, being from progeny of Dhil Khawaisirah, and sign of shaven heads; applied Ahadith upon founder of Wahhabism. Regarding mutations of this second manifestation Kharijism and mutations of Wahhabism Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said:“Abdullah [bin Mas'ud] narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: ‘In the end of time there will come a people young in years, foolish in minds, reciting the Qur'an which will not go beyond their throats, uttering sayings from the best of creatures, going through the religion as an arrow goes through the target.’" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2188] “It was narrated that 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud said: ‘The Messenger of Allah said: 'At the end of time there will appear a people with new teeth (i.e. young in age), with foolish minds. They will speak the best words ever uttered by mankind and they will recite the Qur'an, but it will not go any deeper than their collarbones. They will pass through Islam like an arrow passes through its target. Whoever meets them, let him kill them, for killing them will bring a reward from Allah for those who kill them.’" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H168] And in another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) indicated some twenty mutations of Kharijism [in other words Wahhabism] would appear and each one of them would be cut off until last of them joins Dajjal [and Israeli state] and fights against Muslims: “It was narrated from Ibn Umar that:The Messenger of Allah said: ‘There will emerge people who will recite the Qur'an but it will not go any deeper than their collarbones. Whenever a group of them appears, they should be cut off (i.e. killed).’ Ibn Umar said: ‘I heard the Messenger of Allah say: 'Whenever a group of them appears, they should be killed.' (He said it) more than twenty times - until Dajjal emerges among them.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H174] 5.0 - Iraq Is Not Najd But Both Are Two Separate Regions: After so much evidence to establish Islamic position it is best to establish Iraq and Najd are two different regions and where Najd is. Hadith records Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) took part in a battle in Najd: “Narrated Ibn Umar: I took part in a Ghazwa towards Najd along with Allah's Messenger and we clashed with the enemy, and we lined up for them.” [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H455] If Najd was Iraq then it would imply Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) took part in battle of Iraq. Yet fact is Prophet (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) passed from earthly life long before even conquest of Iraq started. The undeniable proof Najd and Iraq are two different places is in the following Hadith: “Narrated Salim bin Abdullah from his father:I heard Allah's Messenger saying: "The Miqat for the people of Medina is Dhul-Hulaifa; for the people of Sham is Mahita; (i.e. Al-Juhfa); and for the people of Najd is Qarn. And said Ibn Umar: "They claim, but I did not hear personally, that the Prophet said: "The Miqat for the people of Yemen is Yalamlam." [Ref: Bukhari, B26, H603] “It was narrated that Aishah said: "The Messenger of Allah designated Dhul-Hulaifah as the Miqat for the people of Al-Madinah, Al-Juhfah for the people Ash-sham and Egypt, Dhat Irq for the people Al-Iraq, Qarn for the people of Najd and Yalamlam for the people of Yemen." [Ref: Nisaee, B24, H2657] Common sense dictates of Iraq was Najd then why two places of Miqat. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) sent an expedition toward Najd: “Narrated Nafi from Ibn Umar: Allah's Messenger sent a Sariya towards Najd, and Abdullah bin Umar was in the Sariya. They gained a great number of camels as war booty. The share of each one of them was twelve or eleven camels, and they were given an extra camel each.” [Ref: Bukhari, B53, H362] In a single expedition each participant got elevan/tweleve camels each. If the expedition was numbering in hundereds or even tens one can imagine the amount of camels required. Banu Rabia and Mudhar are said to be busy with their camels in following Hadith: “Narrated Abi Mas`ud: The Prophet said: "From this side from the east, afflictions will appear. Rudeness and lack of mercy are characteristics of the rural bedouins who are busy with their camels and cows (and pay no attention to religion). Such are the tribes of Rabi`a and Mudar." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H702] Indicating they have possibly had huge numbers of camels and they could have been the target of raid. Note both of these tribes are on Eatern extremity of Arabian Peninsula, here. Alternatively another Hadith records ad-Dahna being home of camels: “He said: Write down ad-Dahna for them, boy. When I saw that he passed orders to give it to him I became anxious for it was my native land and my home. I said: Messenger of Allah he did not ask you for a true border when he asked you. This land of Dahna is a place where the camels have their home, and it is a pasture for the sheep. The women of Banu Tamim and their children are beyond it.” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B19, H3064] Ad-Dahna is name of dessert in central Arabia, here, and here. In the following map/stamp of Arabia you will see camel where the two tribes are and ad-Dahna is roughly, here. All this proves is Najd is in Arabia and East the land of camels of Rabia and Mudhar is precisely where the Muslims believe and not as Wahhabis say. In another Hadith it is stated: “Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Messenger sent some horse men to Najd and they brought a man called Thumama bin Uthal from Bani Hanifa. They fastened him to one of the pillars of the mosque.” [Ref: Bukhari, B8, H458] Bani Hanifah is tribe of central Arabia and its native land was around Saudi capital Riyadh, here. This has established that Najd and Iraq are not one and the same, and two Najd is in Arabia. Conclusion: Brother Abdullah’s position has been Najd is Iraq because Khawarij emerged from Iraq. Yet it has been established leader of Khawarij, Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamim and his Khariji companions of Banu Tamim were alive in time time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and resided in central Arabia surrounding Saudi capital of Riyadh. They had distinguishing feature of shaved heads like Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khawaisirah. From central Arabia these Najdis went to Syria with Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to fight against Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Due to their self righteous attitude they were displeased with the decision of arbitration and decided to abandon camp of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). They returned to Iraq and made Harura epic centre of their missionary activies and raided villages in Iraq on account the Muslims are polytheists and it is permissible to kill them. Note this was very same justification which Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab employed to justify raiding and killing of Muslims of Najd and Arabia in general. Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) assembled an army and put the Khawarij to sword in a battle at Nahrawan. Dhil Khawaisirah at-Tamim was amongst the dead of Khawarij proving he was a Khariji and so were his apparently righteous companions who would have embrassed the companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) due to their deeds of worship. Ahadith establish Kharijism originated from Arabian Peninsula from Najd, which is in East of Madinah. And in light of Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointing toward house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) from pulpit of Masjid Nabvi this would be perfect East and toward Uyaynah; birth town of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, Dirriyah; missionary epic centre of Wahhabism, and Riyadh. Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab is from the progeny of Dhil Khawaisirah and leader of second major mutation of Kharijism. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi. FooNotes: - [1] "Narrated Ibn bbas: The Prophet said: "I have been made victorious with As-Saba (i.e. an easterly wind) and the people of Ad were destroyed by Ad-Dabur (i.e. a westerly wind)." Narrated Abu Said: Ali sent a piece of gold to the Prophet who distributed it among four persons: Al-Aqra' bin Habis Al-Hanzali from the tribe of Mujashi, Uyaina bin Badr Al-Fazari, Zaid At-Ta'i who belonged to (the tribe of) Bani Nahban, and Alqama bin Ulatha Al-Amir who belonged to (the tribe of) Bani Kilab. So the Quraish and the Ansar became angry and said: "He (the Prophet, ) gives the chief of Najd and does not give us." The Prophet said: "I give them so as to attract their hearts (to Islam)." Then a man with sunken eyes prominent cheeks, a raised forehead, a thick beard and a shaven head, came (in front of the Prophet ) and said: "Be afraid of Allah O Muhammad!" The Prophet said: "Who would obey Allah if I disobeyed Him? (Is it fair that) Allah has trusted all the people of the earth to me while, you do not trust me?" Somebody who, I think was Khalid bin Al-Walid, requested the Prophet to let him chop that man's head off but he prevented him. When the man left the Prophet said: "Among the off-spring of this man will be some who will recite the Qur'an but the Qur'an will not reach beyond their throats and they will renegade from the religion as an arrow goes through the game's body. They will kill the Muslims but will not disturb the idolaters. If I should live up to their time' I will kill them as the people of Ad were killed.” [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H558] - [2] “Narrated Abu Sa'id: While the Prophet was distributing something Abdullah Bin Dhil Khawaisira At-Tamimi came and said: "Be just O Allah's Apostle!" The Prophet said: "Woe to you! Who would be just if I were not?" 'Umar bin Al-Khattab said: "Allow me to cut off his neck!" The Prophet said: "Leave him because he has companions, and if you compare your prayers with their prayers and your fasting with theirs, you will look down upon your prayers and fasting, in comparison to theirs. Yet they will go out of the religion as an arrow darts through the game's body. Wn which case if the Qudhadh of the arrow is examined, nothing will be found on it and when its Nasl is examined, nothing will be found on it; and then its Nadiyi is examined, nothing will be found on it. The arrow has been too fast to be smeared by excrement and blood. The sign by which these people will be recognized will be a man whose one hand will be like the breast of a woman. These people will appear when there will be differences among the people." Abu Sa'id added: I testify that I heard this from the Prophet and also testify that Ali killed those people while I was with him. The man with the description given by the Prophet was brought to Ali. The following verses (9:58) were revealed in connection with that very person (i.e. Abdullah Ibn Dhil-Khawaisira At-Tamimi): 'And among them are men who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.'" [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] - [3] “Narrated Abu Said Al-Khudri:While the Prophet was distributing (spoils of war as charity) one day, Dhul Khawaisira, a man from the tribe of Bani Tamim said: "O Allah's Apostle! Act justly." The Prophets said: "Woe to you! Who else would act justly if I did not act justly?" 'Umar said (to the Prophet ): "Allow me to chop his neck off." The Prophet said: "No, for he has companions (who are apparently so pious that) if anyone of (you compares his prayer with) their prayer, he will consider his prayer inferior to theirs, and similarly his fasting inferior to theirs, but they will desert Islam (go out of religion) as an arrow goes through the victim's body (games) in which case if its Nasl is examined nothing will be seen thereon, and if its Nady is examined, nothing will be seen thereon, and if its Qudhadh is examined, nothing will be seen thereon, for the arrow has gone out too fast even for the excretions and blood to smear over it. Such people will come out at the time of difference among the (Muslim) people and the sign by which they will be recognized, will be a man whose one of the two hands will look like the breast of a woman or a lump of flesh moving loosely." Abu Said added: "I testify that I heard that from the Prophet and also testify that I was with Ali when Ali fought against those people. The man described by the Prophet was searched for among the killed, and was found, and he was exactly as the Prophet had described him." [Ref: Bukhari, H73, H184] - [4] His body at the bottom of pile indicates two things; he was in the front rows of Khariji army and after he was killed others came from back rows came forward to engage Ali’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) army. It also indicates the army of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not advance forward after killing the first rows but waited for the Khawarij to come for them resulting scenario of dead bodies on top of each other. - [5] “It has been narrated on the authority of Hudhaifa b. al-Yaman who said: People used to ask the Messenger of Allah about the good times, but I used to ask him about bad times fearing lest they overtake me. I said: Messenger of Allah, we were in the midst of ignorance and evil, and then God brought us this good (time through Islam). Is there any bad time after this good one? He said: Yes. I asked: Will there be a good time again after that bad time? He said: Yes, but therein will be a hidden evil. I asked: What will be the evil hidden therein? He said: (That time will witness the rise of) the people who will adopt ways other than mine and seek guidance other than mine. You will know good points as well as bad points. I asked: Will there be a bad time after this good one? He said: Yes. (A time will come) when there will be people standing and inviting at the gates of Hell. Whoso responds to their call they will throw them into the fire. I said: Messenger of Allah, describe them for us. He said: All right. They will be a people having the same complexion as ours and speaking our language. I said: Messenger of Allah, what do you suggest if I happen to live in that time? He said: You should stick to the main body of the Muslims and their leader. I said: If they have no (such thing as the) main body and have no leader? He said: Separate yourself from all these factions, though you may have to eat the roots of trees (in a jungle) until death comes to you and you are in this state.” [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4553] Part of Hadith quoted by me in the article referrs to a time way after the period of Salaf as-Saliheen so it cannot be applied upon first group of Khawarij. - [6] “It was narrated that Abu Sa'eed Al-Khudri said: "When he was in Yemen, Ali sent a piece of gold that was still mixed with sediment to the Messenger of Allah, and the Messenger of Allah distributed it among four people: Al-Aqra' bin Habis Al-Hanzali, 'Uyaynah bin Badr Al-Fazari, 'Alqamah bin 'Ulathah Al- 'Amiri, who was from Banu Kilab and Zaid Al-Ta'I who was from Banu Nabhan. The Quraish" - he said one time: became angry and said: 'You give to the chiefs of Najd and that, so as to soften their hearts toward Islam.' Then a man with a thick beard, prominent cheeks, and a shaven head came and said: 'Fear Allah. O Muhammad! He said: 'Who would obey Allah if I disobeyed Him? (Is it fair that) He has entrusted me with all the people of the Earth but you do not trust me?' Then the man went away, and a man from among the people, whom they (the narrators) think was Khalid bin Al-Walid, asked for permission to kill him. The Messenger of Allah said: 'Among the offspring of this man will be some people who will recite the Qur'an but it will not go any further than their throats. They will kill the Muslims but leave the idol worshippers alone, and they will passes through Islam as an arrow passes through the body of the target. If I live to see them. I will kill them all, as the people of 'Ad were killed."' [Ref: Nisaee, B23, H2579] - [7] “Narrated Ibn Maqal: Ali led the funeral prayer of Sahl bin Hunaif and said: ‘He was one of the warriors of Badr.’" [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H341]

Introduction: It is widely believed by Muslims; Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi was influenced by Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab of Najd. During a discussion Deobandi brother accused Mufti Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi (rahimullah) of being dishonest and to said Mufti Naeemi (rahimullah) considers Deobandis as Wahhabis yet our scholars have declared Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab Khariji and heretic. We do not follow him therefore he is decieving public. My response was that originally: Shaykh Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi issued pro-Wahhabi fatwah, saying beliefs of Wahhabi movement were good. It was Shaykh Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri and Shaykh Hussain Ahmad Madani gave negative verdicts regarding Shaykh of Najd. Then Shaykh Manzoor Ahmad Naumani gave pro-Wahhabi judgment. In all honesty the verdict of Deobandism regarding Shaykh of Najd is divided and official position on Najdi Shaykhs preaching is: Choose position based on envoriment. A course of action Shaykh Ilyas Ghuman also suggested to his students in one of lectures. I reasoned Wahhabi label for Deobandi’s is based on two reasons: i) Due to conformity of understanding of Tawheed and Shirk, ii) and Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi being influenced by Shaykh of Najd’s preaching. He asked me to cite a example of belief in which Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi was influenced by Shaykh of Najd. After just one piece of evidence was presented, i.e. majority of Muslims is Mushrik, the discussion changed toward what Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi actually believed. Note the contention Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi was influenced heavily by Shaykh of Najd was reasoned in footnote one of this article. Important Information About Content Of Article: If any part of a sentenced is crossed out it is to indicate that original does not say or allude to this hence crossed out. At times such places would be corrected by me and the correction would appear in green. Blue writing in (black brackets) is where I have inserted one part of Hadith into another to convey accurate meaning of Hadith. Most Are Mushrik According To Ibnul Wahhab And Shaykh Dehalvi: Shaykh al-Najd wrote: "And I inform you about myself - I swear by Allah whom there is none worthy to worship except Him - I have sought knowledge and those who knew me believed that I had knowledge while I did not know the meaning of La Ilaha illa Allah at that time and did not know the religion of Islam before this grace that Allah favored. As well as my teachers (Mashayikh) no one among them knew that. And if someone from the scholars of al-'Aridh (the lands of Najd and surrounding areas) claims that he knew the meaning of La Ilaha illa Allah or knew the meaning of Islam before this time, or claims on behalf of his teachers that someone from them knew that, then he has lied and said falsehood and deceived the people and praised himself with something he does not possess." [Ref: al-Durar al-Saniyyah, 10/51, Translation by, Abu Sulayman, here.] Shaykh of Najd says no one beside him knew meaning of la ilaha il-Allah. Implication of which is that Shaykh believes everyone is Mushrik or atleast vast majority of people of Arabia were Mushrik at the time of Shaykh of Najd. And Shaykh of Najd and those who follow his teachings believe in ‘true’ Tawheed and ‘truly’ have understood Shirk. Therefore natural conclusion is Shaykh of Najd believes majority is Mushrik and those who believe him – minority – were Muwahideen. Coming to teaching of Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi; Shaykh Dehalvi writes: “First one should listen to is; a lot of Shirk is spreading amongsts people and pure Tawheed is rare. Yet most people do not understand the meaning of Tawheed and Shirk and claim to have Eman (i.e. faith) but in reality are caught in Shirk. So firstly meaning of Tawheed and Shirk should be understood so good and bad from perspective of Quran and Hadith can be known.One should listen, that most people in time of their hardship call upon Pirs and Prophets, Imams and matyrs, angels and fairies, and seek from them their desired, and vows for them, and for fullfilment of their needs give Nazr and Niaz, and for the dispelling of evil attributes their sons to them. One (from amongst polytheistic masses) names his son Abdul Nabi, one Ali Baksh, one Hussain Baksh, one Peer Baksh, one Madar Baksh, one Salar Baksh, one Ghulam Mohy Al-Din, one Ghulam Mohayn Al-Din, and to ensure their survival (of their sons) one keeps hair-lock in name of so, and one wears bracelet/neclace, one dresses up in particular clothes, one puts a chain (around the wrist), one dedicates an animal for someone, one invokes in time of difficulty, one takes an oath (of by name of human) in discussions, conclusion – all that which the Hindus enact for their idols so do these masquerading Muslims enact for saints, Prophets, leaders (i.e. Imams), Matyrs, angels and fairies. And yet continue to claim to be Muslims, subhan-Allah, (from) this face, and such a claim (of being Muslim), honourable Allah truthfully said in chapter Yusuf: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] Meaning most people who claim to have Iman they are caught-up in Shirk. Then if there was someone to explain to them and says to them, you claim to have Eman and engage in actions of Shirk, so why do you combine these two paths (of Tawheed and Shirk)? They respond to him: ‘We do not committ Shirk but we make apparent our creed about Prophets and Awliyah. We would have been polytheists if we had taken these Prophets, Awliyah, Pir, Matyrs,as equals with Allah. This we don’t believe but we believe they are Allah’s subjects and His creation. And He has granted them power of excercising authority. With His will they exercise in world authority and invoking them is like invoking Allah, and seeking help from them is like seeking help from Him. These people are beloved to Allah as such they can do as they please and they are our intercessors and representatives in His court. To find them is to find God. And to invoke them is to gain nearness of Allah. And more we believe in them that much more we get closer to Allah.’ And they utter such type of none-sense.” [Ref: Taqwiyatul Iman, Page 7/8, here.] It seems Shaykh Dehalvi spelt out what Shaykh of Najd said in slight of words. Shaykh Dehalvi said Tawheed is rare and most people do not understanding meaning of Tawheed which is characterised by la ilaha il-Allah. And most people claim to have Iman but in reality have fallen into Shirk. Implications of this is exactly in accordance with what Shaykh of Najd believed; majority is Mushrik, and minority who believes as Shaykh Dehalvi believes are upon Tawheed and Muslim. Argument In Defence Of Shaykh Dehalvi: Deobandi argued word akthar (اکثر) is used in following meanings; frequent, very much, great many, most, often, and generally, here. He also referrenced Darus Salam Published, English version of Taqwiyatul Iman in which disputed word was translated to mean ‘many’, here. He argued therefore the following should be translated: “First one should listen to is; a lot of Shirk is spreading amongsts people and pure Tawheed is rare. Yet generally do not understand the meaning of Tawheed and Shirk and claim to have Eman (i.e. faith) but in reality are caught in Shirk.” Of course if this translation is correct then his point will be established that Shaykh Dehalvi did not believe most/majority of Muslims are/were Mushriks during his life time. I replied: First of all the word ‘generally’ means commonly, predominantly. Something which isn’t generally available is predominantly unavailable, commonly not available so you loose the argument. Secondly the word nayab (نایاب) in Urdu is used in the following meanings; rare, unprocurable, unobtainable, not available, scarce, and precious, here. If something is rare/scarce then it means its not widely available and Shaykh stated Tawheed is scarce/rare therefore naturally Shirk is in majority. Hence in context of nayab (نایاب) word akthar (اکثر) can only mean most/majority and even if you use translate it with generally the meaning of predominantly/commonly is part of it. Argument From Tawheed Is Precious To Muslims: He argued saying; word nayab (نایاب) is in meaning of precious and therefore it should be translated to mean: “First one should listen to is; a lot of Shirk is spreading amongsts people and pure Tawheed is precious. Yet generally do not understand the meaning of Tawheed and Shirk and claim to have Eman (i.e. faith) but in reality are caught in Shirk.” He argued: Tawheed is precious because it is corner stone of Islam and Iman of a Muslim therefore it is correct translation. I replied: It is true that Tawheed is fundamental belief without which every belief and every action will be rejected and Shirk invalidates Islam. Contention is did Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi mean precious in sense you explained it! Granted nayab can mean precious but reciousness of something can also be associated with rareness. In English word precious in its adjective form is used to mean rare. And same is true in case of Urdu when it is said; this manuscript is nayab. The Nayab-ness, or preciousness, of manuscript could be due to its rarity. Anyhow we need to see if this is what the author intended in the statement. The Referrenced English Translation And My Take On It: The translation you referrenced has translated the disputed part as: “Polytheism is generally widespread among the people and the concept of monotheism is in scarcity. Many people who claim to be bearers of faith do not understand meanings of Tawheed and Shirk.” [Ref: Taqwiyatul Iman, English version, by Darus Salaam, Page25, here.] They translated the word nayab (نایاب) to mean scarce and this boils down to mean word akthar (اکثر) means majority/most. If in their translation scarce is right translation then many does not need to be wrong because it is quite possible that translator used many to mean majority because in English many can be used for majority, here, and this would support my assertion. It is not unlikely that translator intended many in meaning of majority because right after chapter 2 of Quran verse106 he translated akthar (اکثر) to mean majority: “Those who profess to have faith in Allah while their actions reeking of polytheism: It means the majority (i.e. akthar) of people who out-wardly profess to have faith in Allah are in fact entangled in quagmire of polytheism.” [Ref: Taqwiyatul Iman, English version, by Darus Salaam, Page25, here.] At minimum: If many in meaning of; multitude, large quantity, without meaning of majority is correct then scarce is wrong. And if scarce is right then many without meaning of majority is wrong. Now translator has translated aksar in meaning of majority and has conveyed the meaning Muslims in majority are caught up in Shirk. This does indicate that at the very least according to translator majority of Muslims are guilty of Shirk and don’t understand what Tawheed and Shirk is. Natural Meaning Of Statement, Taweel, And New Strategy: The natural meaning of what Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi wrote agrees with what the translator conveyed. And meaning which you’re attempting to drive from it is forced but there is a degree of uncerntaintity which isn’t enough to cast doubt on the natural meaning but enough introduce a weak Taweel. I want to move away from the linguistic argument and move to historical context. Historical Context Of Taqwiyatul Iman And The Present: Historically Shaykh Dehalvi wrote Taqwiyatul Iman against majority of Muslim population of subcontinent. Even at present beliefs and practices which he declared to be polytheistic are/were held by vast majority of Muslims of subcontinent. Deobandism and Ahle-Hadithism originated due to him and they are still a minority in Pakistan, India, Afghanistan, and in Bangladesh. Entire Taqwiyatul Iman is targetting beliefs and practices of vast majority of orthodox Muslims and proof you need to continue reading the entire quoted material and then connect info with current and than reality and if you’re truthful in your judgment you will come to conclusion which I have already: “One should listen, that most people in time of their hardship call upon Pirs and Prophets, Imams and matyrs, angels and fairies, and seek from them their desired, and vows for them, and for fullfilment of their needs give Nazr and Niaz, and for the dispelling of evil attributes their sons to them. One (from amongst polytheistic masses) names his son Abdul Nabi, one Ali Baksh, one Hussain Baksh, one Peer Baksh, one Madar Baksh, one Salar Baksh, one Ghulam Mohy Al-Din, one Ghulam Mohayn Al-Din, and to ensure their survival (of their sons) one keeps hair-lock in name of so, and one wears bracelet/neclace, one dresses up in particular clothes, one puts a chain (around the wrist), one dedicates an animal for someone, one invokes in time of difficulty, one takes an oath (of by name of human) in discussions, conclusion – all that which the Hindus enact for their idols so do these masquerading Muslims enact for saints, Prophets, leaders (i.e. Imams), Matyrs, angels and fairies. And yet continue to claim to be Muslims, subhan-Allah, (from) this face, and such a claim (of being Muslim), honourable Allah truthfully said in chapter Yusuf: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." …” [Ref: Taqwiyatul Iman, Page 7/8, here.] He replied: On historical basis, if Barelwism was majority, then it can be implied that Shaykh Dehalvi was writing about majority of Muslim nation of sub-continent but it isn’t obvious as you claim. Your point that Barelwism during his time held position of majority is debatable because in the context of word nayab (نایاب) it is said; Shirk is spreading and Tawheed is nayab: “First one should listen to is; a lot of Shirk is spreading amongsts people and pure Tawheed is nayab.” If Shirk is already spread and Tawheed is rare then Shirk doesn’t need to spread. Statement of Shaykh is based on fact that Muslims are Muwahideen and Shirk is beginning to spread in them. Therefore akthar (اکثر) means many and not most/majority. Responding To Argument Tawheed Was There And Shirk Was Spreading: I replied: Urdu version of Taqwiyatul Iman published by Darus Salam, page 41, modern rendering by Maulvi Ghulam Rasool Mehr, here, records statement: “Aam tor par logoon mein Shirk pehla huwa heh. Tawheed nayab hay.” Translates to mean: “Polytheism has generally spread amongst people. Tawheed is rare.” General spread of something denotes meaning of majorly spread. Alternative translation would be: “Polytheism is widepsread amongst people. Tawheed is rare.” Both translation convey meaning of polytheism being the order of day and Tawheed being scarce. English translation which you referrenced earlier has words: “Polytheism is generally widespread among the people and the concept of monotheism is in scarcity. Many people who claim to be bearers of faith do not understand meanings of Tawheed and Shirk.” [Ref: Taqwiyatul Iman, English version, by Darus Salaam, Page25, here.] It does not say will be scarce which establishes Shaykh believed or at the very least people who share belief of Shaykh Dehalvi believe that Shaykh wrote Tawheed is nayab in his life time. Implication of which is he believes Tawheed was actually already nayab. It negates your assertion that he considered Muslims as Muwahideen. Also Shaykh Dehalvi wrote: “… Shirk logoon mein bhot pehal raha heh, aur asal Tawheed nayab, lekin …” Tranlates to mean: “… a lot of Shirk is spreading amongsts people and pure Tawheed is rare …” Asal means actual, real, genuine, and pure. If pure Tawheed is nayab then which Tawheed is established? Fake-Tawheed, Tawheed combined with Shirk! And he then goes on to highlight the Shirk of Muslims who don’t know Tawheed, nor understand Shirk: “One should listen, that most people in time of their hardship call upon Pirs and Prophets, Imams and matyrs, angels and fairies, and seek from them their desired, and vows for them, and for fullfilment of their needs give Nazr and Niaz, and for the dispelling of evil attributes their sons to them. One (from amongst polytheistic masses) names his son Abdul Nabi, one Ali Baksh, one Hussain Baksh, one Peer Baksh, one Madar Baksh, one Salar Baksh, one Ghulam Mohy Al-Din, one Ghulam Mohayn Al-Din, and to ensure their survival (of their sons) one keeps hair-lock in name of so, and one wears bracelet/neclace, one dresses up in particular clothes, one puts a chain (around the wrist), one dedicates an animal for someone, one invokes in time of difficulty, one takes an oath (of by name of human) in discussions, conclusion – all that which the Hindus enact for their idols so do these masquerading Muslims enact for saints, Prophets, leaders (i.e. Imams), Matyrs, angels and fairies. And yet continue to claim to be Muslims, subhan-Allah, (from) this face, and such a claim (of being Muslim), honourable Allah truthfully said in chapter Yusuf: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." …” [Ref: Taqwiyatul Iman, Page 7/8, here.] In reality he doesn’t believe they are Muwahideen in purest sense he believes they are following Tawheed contaminated with Shirk which he explicitly stated: “Then if there was someone to explain to them and says to them, you claim to have Eman and engage in actions of Shirk, so why do you combine these two paths (of Tawheed and Shirk)? They respond to him: …” [Ref: Taqwiyatul Iman, Chapter (1) Explanation Of Tawheed And Shirk, Page 7/8, here.] And Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab too stated in his pamphlet size booklet published as Qawaid al-Arba that polytheists in reality affirmed aspect of Tawheed while mixing it with Shirk. Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi basicly put the implications of first three principles of Qawaid al-Arba, in his own words.[1] Your point does not prove that Shaykh believed Muslims were true Muwahideen but only points that Shaykh believed Muslims had elements of Tawheed mixed with Shirk and more Shirk is creeping into their already Shirki beliefs/practices. Change Of Battle Field Once Again: He wanted to respond but I stopped him and asked I would like to continue. I continued: I just want to ask you something before I continue: You agree all the beliefs/practices which Shaykh Dehalvi deemed polytheistic were of majority at least during his life time? He replied: It is debatable. I enquired: So you believe the Sufism/Barelwism became majority after his life time? He replied: Well it would seem so, in light of his following statement that the the current majority is result of missionary activity of Barelwis: “… a lot of Shirk is spreading amongsts people and pure Tawheed is nayab.” I replied: What if I can prove clearly that Shaykh Dehalvi believed Muslims of his time were all polytheists and Kafirs who returned to religion of their forefathers. Will you then accept Shaykh Dehalvi believed majority of Muslims, except those who followed his teaching, were Mushrik/Kafir? He said: If it can be established with clear evidence I would have no objection. Every Momin And Every Muslim Is Dead Only The Worst Kafirs Remain: I referrenced him the following portion, Shaykh Dehalvi writes: “Muslim mentions and quotes: “Aisha reported: I heard Allah's Messenger as saying: The (system) of night and day would not end until the people have taken to the worship of Lat and Uzza. I said: Allah's Messenger, I think when Allah has revealed this verse: "He it is Who has sent His Messenger with right guidance, and true religion, so that He may cause it to prevail upon all religions, though the polytheists are averse (to it)" (9:33), it implies that is going to be fulfilled. Thereupon he said: It would happen as Allah would like. Then Allah would send the sweet fragrant air by which everyone who has even a mustard grain of faith in Him would die and those only would survive who would have no goodness in them. And they would revert to the religion of their forefathers.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6945] Meaning which honorable Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated in Surah Tawbah that He sent His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with guidance and true religion to make it dominate/victorious over all religions even if the polytheists dislike it. Honorable Aisha (radiallah ta’ala anha) understood that this true religion will remain till the day of judgment. Honorable (Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said its domination will be established as much as Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will wish. Then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) himself will send a wind which will take the life of all good people i.e. in whose hearts there is even tiniest faith, will die and only those people will remain in whom there is no goodness. Meaning those who would not have no respect for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) nor desire to walk on the prophetic path. In fact they will revert to practices of their forefathers. This way they will fall into Shirk because most forefathers of old have been polytheist and foolish. Any who will walk on their path and adopt their customs will become polytheist. From this Hadith it is learnt that near the end of time Shirk of ancients will establish itself and it happened as Messenger of God said. Meaning like the Muslims behave polytheisticly with their Prophets, saints, Imams, and martyrs in the same way ancient polytheism is spreading. And (Muslims) believe in idols of Kafirs and act on their customs, like consulting a Brahmin (i.e. Hindu-Priest) …”[2] [Ref: Taqwiyat ul-Iman, Shah Ismail Dehalvi, Page62/63, here] I said to him; brother Shaykh Dehalvi believes the cold musky wind has already blown and people of Iman/Islam all have died. He replied: Brother you have assumed that death of Muslims with grain worth of faith means there is no degree of faith less then that. Shaykh means that only little faith have remained. I replied: Brother Ahadith make it clear that the wind which will blow will take life of every Momin and every Muslim: “… and the milch sheep would give so much milk that the whole family would be able to drink out of that and at that time Allah would send a pleasant wind which would soothe (people) even under their armpits, and would take the life of every Momin and every Muslim (i.e. فَتَقْبِضُ رُوحَ كُلِّ مُؤْمِنٍ وَكُلِّ مُسْلِمٍ) and only the wicked would survive who would commit adultery like asses and the Last Hour would come to them.” [Ref: Muslim, B041, H7015, here] And this Hadith is also recorded in Sunan Ibn Majah, here. I said: Brother Shaykh Dehalvi believed Momins and Muslims are dead. Natural meanin implication of which is he along those who followed him and everyone else in his time and thereafter are Kafirs of worst type. If we believe what the Messenger said then Shaykh Dehalvi not only made Takfir of entire Ummah but himself and those who followed him. I continued: Of course Shaykh Dehalvi doesn’t believe he and those who follow him are Mushrikeen/Kafir because he believes he knows Tawheed and understands Shirk like his followers. Shirk by reverting polytheism of ancient ancestors is for rest of Ummah which included the over whelming majority of Muslims and excluded a minority of his followers. Summing Up The Discussion And Silencing Opposition: In light of this we Muslims are justified to take position that Shaykh Dehalvi believed majority of Muslims around him were Mushrikeen like Shaykh of Najd. Therefore nayab didn’t mean precious but it meant rare. He replied: I can see the reason why you have taken the position that Shaykh Dehalvi believed majority of Muslims were Mushrikeen during his life time. I asked: Am I justified in holding to the understanding? He replied: Justified in light of evidence but I do not believe Shaykh Dehalvi purely believed what has become evident. I believe Shaykh didn’t fully understand the Hadith and wasn’t aware of Ahadith relating to the topic such as what you quoted (i.e. wind blowing and taking life of all Muslims and Momins). I replied: Brother Shaykh Dehalvi didn’t stop there he went on to list all the beliefs and actions which he deems polytheistic and which invalidate Islam and some these are beliefs and practices of majority. He replied: Based on the type of beliefs he considered polytheistic I can agree that he was targetting majority but not from what you quoted. I replied: If he was targetting majority then why would you not agree that in the quotes he targetted majority. The translation which you quoted in English even there nayab has been translated to mean rare/scarce. He said: I will have to think about this. I will get back to you regarding it. I said: Brother I will look forward to having a convincing response from you. He came back arguing Shaykh Dehalvi did say Muslims with iota of faith have died. He did not say Muslims alive during his time are Kafir/Mushriks. I asked: If Shaykh Dehalvi said Muslims have reverted to religion of their fore-fathers would that be construed to mean Kufr/Shirk of Muslism alive his time? He replied in affirmative. So I went on to quote the remaining part in which Shaykh wrote Muslims of then India have reverted to polytheism of Hinduism and Zorastarianism: “And (Muslims) believe in idols of Kafirs and act on their customs, like consulting a Brahmin (i.e. Hindu-Priest), enquiring about omens, believing in (auspicious and inauspicious) times,worshiping; goddess, (Hindu place) cremation, Hanuman, Loona Chamari, invoking during the time of Kalwa, celebrating Holi and Diwali, (persian new year i.e.) Nowruz, Maharjan … all practices are of Hindus and Zorastarians that have become tradition amongst Muslims. And from this we learn that in Muslims path of Shirk has mixed to such an extant that they have abandoned Quran and Hadith; instead have started to emulate practices of their fathers and grandads.” [Ref: Taqwiyat ul-Iman, Shah Ismail Dehalvi, Page62/63, here] He had no way out so he quit the discussion. Fault Of Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi In Light Of Prophetic Teaching: Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi taught and his believers agree that majority of Muslims in reality is engaged in Shirk. They do not know what Tawheed is and what Shirk is and Tawheed amongst Muslims is rare/scarce. If we go on the Hadith of wind blowing and taking life of ever person with spec worth of Eman; which is inclusive of every Muslim and Momin and what he said; “… and it happened as Messenger of God said.” then current whole Ummah is Kafir. And if we go by possible Taweel; in his time the whole Ummah had become Kafir and due to his efforts Tawheed was revived, then it would mean those who followed his version of teachings are Muwahideen and everyone else is believer in contaminated/impure version of Tawheed. And this would mean the majority without knowing proper understanding of Tawheed and Shirk is claiming to be Muslim when the reality is that they are not because they lack fundamental pre-requsite of Islam i.e.Tawheed: “… in discussions, conclusion – all that which the Hindus enact for their idols so do these masquerading Muslims enact for saints, Prophets, leaders (i.e. Imams), Matyrs, angels and fairies. And yet continue to claim to be Muslims, subhan-Allah, (from) this face, and such a claim (of being Muslim), honourable Allah truthfully said in …” [Ref: Taqwiyatul Iman, Page 7/8, here.] The expression, aisa moonh, or this face, or such a face, in Urdu is associated with impossibility. It is said; aisa moonh aur yeh car. Indicating you’re so unworthy of your car. In the context Shaykh Dehalvi implied in context of all beliefs he detailed as polytheistic; they’re unworthy of claiming to be Muslim due to all the Shirk in their beliefs and practices. Verdict Of Prophetic Teaching On Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi’s Teaching: Islamic teaching taught by majority of Muslim scholarship and laity, known as Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah, contradict teaching of Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi. Muslims believe majority of Ummah and most definitely Ummah as a whole is protected from misguidance of innovation and anything greater then it such as Shirk because they are under protection of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala😞 “Ibn Abbas narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: "Allah's Hand is with the Jama'ah." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2166] “Ibn Umar narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: 'Indeed Allah will not gather my Ummah (upon deviation, and Allah's Hand is over the Jama'ah, and whoever deviates, he deviates to the Fire.’) Or he said: ('Indeed Allah will not gather) Muhammad’s Ummah upon deviation, and Allah's Hand is over the Jama'ah, and whoever deviates, he deviates to the Fire.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2167] In another Hadith one who deviates from Jammah dies death of Jahilliyah (i.e. pre-Islamic era of Kufr): “One who found in his Amir something which he disliked should hold his patience, for one who separated from the main-body of the Muslims even to the extent of a handspan and then he died would die the death of one belonging to the days of Jahiliyyah.” [Ref: Muslims, B20, H4559] The enemy of religion of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), at worst, wished to preach the notion Islamic Tawheed is no longer in existance and, at best, Noor of Tawheed is a flickering candle of Tawheed in storm of polytheists claiming to be Muslims. The Conquest And Domination Of Islam: And this teaching of, Muslims no longer being alive, was at a time when Islam has not reached its peak stated in the Hadith which he quoted. And return of Islamic rule as a force to be reckoned with was and is yet to take place. This global spread and domination of Islam would take place after return of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam), and birth of the righteous Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). And after their Khilafat is established, and Islam has reached its global domination once again, then after this the said wind will blow taking life of all Muslims and Momineen, and judgment day will be established on the disbelievers. In simple words events which were to unfold after Imam al-Mahdi (rahimullah) and Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) he said have already materialised. This teaching of Shaykh Dehalvi was/is an evil innovation, as well as Takfir of entire Ummah, or at the very least majority of Ummah. Following two articles explain why judgment will be established upon disbelievers, here, here. Charging The Jammah Of Polytheism And Leaving the Jammah: Not only Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi left the Jammah of Muslims he had the odacity to accuse the Jammah of being Mushrikeen. Can there be doubt he died upon death of ignorance of Kufr in any heart of a believer? In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “Anas bin Malik said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah say: ‘My Ummah will not agree on misguidance, so if you see them differing follow the great majority.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] And in another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is recorded to have said: “Abu Dharr (Allah be pleased with him) reported from the Prophet (Peace be upon him) that:"Two are better than one, and three better than two; so stick to the Jama'ah for verily Allah, Most Great and Glorious, will only unite my nation on guidance." [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Kitab Al-Ansar, Abu Zar Al Ghaffari, Hadith 20776] The majority of Muslims during the life time of Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi then believed and now believe; Muslims Ummah as whole and majority of Ummah has remained free from Shirk only people deviod of correct understanding of Tawheed and Shirk believe contrary to it. It is important to point out Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has said: “Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Messenger said: "If a man says to his brother: ‘O Kafir!' Then surely one of them is such (i.e. a Kafir). " [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H125] “It is reported on the authority of Ibn Umar that the Apostle (may peace and blessings be upon him) observed: When a man calls his brother an unbeliever, it returns (at least) to one of them.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H116] The Enormity Of Shaykh Dehalvi’s Statement: A man who deemed, in worst case scenario, the entirity of Ummah, in best case scenario, majority of Ummah not knowing pure Tawheed, and said they have fallen into major Shirk. Can such a person be a Muslim on grounds of prophetic words? And one who believes as Shaykh Dehalvi believed and defends what Shaykh Dehalvi taught can such a person be upon true Islam? In accordance with following prophetic words has he/she deviated a hand span from Jammah to earn death of Jahilliyah or not: “… one who separated from the main-body of the Muslims even to the extent of a handspan and then he died would die the death of one belonging to the days of Jahiliyyah.” [Ref: Muslims, B20, H4559] I leave the impartial readers to judge the truth of matter. Allah guides whom He wills and misguidances whom He wills. Conclusion: Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi in best case scenario believe majority of Muslims in his time were polytheists because they did not understand pure Tawheed and as result they were guilty of Shirk. This happens to be a teaching of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab also. Natural reading of Shaykh Dehalvi’s controversial statement gives meaning of majority of Muslims have fallen into major Shirk and Tawheed is rare. Shaykh Dehalvi employed word (اکثر) to denote most/majorityin his statement and word (نایاب) in meaning of rare/scarce. Both of meaning which were disputed by Deobandi supporter of Shaykh Dehalvi but eventually he had to concede the understanding is valid after Shaykh Dehalvi’s another controversial statement was brought into discussion. Despite this acceptance the understanding is valid unfortunately Deobandi Brother has refused to accept the reality. Instead he held to his Taweel and makes excuse of ignorance for Shaykh Dehalvi. And this habbit of resorting to Taweel and defending Kufr is true to Deobandism and is old as Deobandism. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi FootNotes: - [1] Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi and traces of influence of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s pamphlet Qawaid al-Arba. The statement of Qawaid al-Arba which served the basis for Taqwiyat ul-Iman’s explanation/expansion will be coded with same color. This will point out which statement Shaykh Dehalvi took from Qawaid al-Arba and expanded it in Taqwiyat ul-Iman. End. Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s statement: 1st: “The first principle is that you know the kuffaar, whom the Messenger saws fought, used to affirm that Allaah, the Most High, was the Creator and the Disposer of all the affairs but that did not enter them into Islam and the proof is His, the Most High's, saying, …” 2nd: “The second principle: That they (the mushrikeen) say: "We do not call upon and turn towards them except to seek nearness and intercession (with Allaah)". So the proof against seeking nearness (through awliyaa) is His, saying, …” 3rd: “The third principle is that the Prophet (may Allaah's peace and blessings be upon him) encountered people differing in their worship. Amongst them were people who worshipped the angels, some who worshiped the prophets and the righteous men and others who worshipped stones, trees, the sun and the moon. The Messenger of Allaah (may Allaah's peace and blessings be upon him) fought them and did not differentiate between them.” [Ref: Qawaid al-Arba, by Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, here.] Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi’s statement: “First one should listen to is; a lot of Shirk is spreading amongsts people and pure Tawheed is rare. Yet most people do not understand the meaning of Tawheed and Shirk and claim to have Eman (i.e. faith) but in reality are caught in Shirk. So firstly meaning of Tawheed and Shirk should be understood so good and bad from perspective of Quran and Hadith can be known.One should listen, that most people in time of their hardship call upon Pirs and Prophets, Imams and matyrs, angels and fairies, and seek from them their desired, and vows for them, and for fullfilment of their needs give Nazr and Niaz, and for the dispelling of evil attributes their sons to them. One (from amongst polytheistic masses) names his son Abdul Nabi, one Ali Baksh, one Hussain Baksh, one Peer Baksh, one Madar Baksh, one Salar Baksh, one Ghulam Mohy Al-Din, one Ghulam Mohayn Al-Din, and to ensure their survival (of their sons) one keeps hair-lock in name of so, and one wears bracelet/neclace, one dresses up in particular clothes, one puts a chain (around the wrist), one dedicates an animal for someone, one invokes in time of difficulty, one takes an oath (of by name of human) in discussions, conclusion – all that which the Hindus enact for their idols so do these masquerading Muslims enact for saints, Prophets, leaders (i.e. Imams), Matyrs, angels and fairies. And yet continue to claim to be Muslims, subhan-Allah, (from) this face, and such a claim (of being Muslim), honourable Allah truthfully said in chapter Yusuf: "And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him." [Ref: 12:106] Meaning most people who claim to have Iman they are caught-up in Shirk. Then if there was someone to explain to them and says to them, you claim to have Eman and engage in actions of Shirk, so why do you combine these two paths (of Tawheed and Shirk)? They respond to him: ‘We do not committ Shirk but we make apparent our creed about Prophets and Awliyah. We would have been polytheists if we had taken these Prophets, Awliyah, Pir, Matyrs,as equals with Allah. This we don’t believe but we believe they are Allah’s subjects and His creation. And He has granted them power of excercising authority. With His will they exercise in world authority and invoking them is like invoking Allah, and seeking help from them is like seeking help from Him. These people are beloved to Allah as such they can do as they please and they are our intercessors and representatives in His court. To find them is to find God. And to invoke them is to gain nearness of Allah. And more we believe in them that much more we get closer to Allah.’ And they utter such type of none-sense.” [Ref: Taqwiyatul Iman, Page 7/8, here.] End. Red: Qawaid and Taqwiyat do not deem Muslims as Muwahideen even though they affirmed belief in Tawheed. Both Shuyukh explain in their entirity of their quoted material why the Muslims are not actually Muwahideen, nor Muslims in their quoted material. Purple: Shaykh Ibnul Abdul Wahhab quotes a excuse which polytheists employed to justify their belief of Ilahiyyah for their idols and their worship. And note What Shaykh Dehalvi wrote in underlined parts. Sky-Blue: Shaykh Ibnul Abdul Wahhab lists all which allegedly what the Muslims worship and so does Shaykh Dehalvi in his Taqwiyat ul-Iman. To be precise Shaykh Dehalvi goes further and explains how else Shirk is committed by Muslims - via naming, dressing, and performing certain actions. And all these points are based on one or another chapter of Kitab al-Tawheed of Shaykh Ibnul Abdul Wahhab. End. Scholars have opined book Taqwiyat ul-Iman originally was written in Arabic as Risala ash-Shirk and published as such and in second or third print the name was changed to Taqwiyat ul-Iman. They argue it was not actual work of Shaykh Dehalvi but work of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab. And Shaykh Dehalvi only translated it into Urdu and published it. Being written in Arabic seems to be strong possibility because the Urdu reading of Taqwiyat ul-Iman is very strange and lacks flow which gives impression it was not originally written in Urdu. When Taqwiyat ul-Iman is compared other Urdu works of Shaykh Dehalvi the clarity, smoothness of Urdu expression in those books is obvious, indicating that Shaykh Dehalvi writing style was not peculiar but wrote Urdu perfectly fine. This strengthens the understanding that Taqwiyat ul-Iman was translation of Arabic. By considering the similarity of Qawaid al-Arba and how it fits well into first chapter of Taqwiyat ul-Iman natural conclusion is atleast the source of ideas of these two was same. In my understanding Shaykh Dehalvi was heavily influenced by Shaykh Ibnul Abdul Wahhab and this cannot be rejected by impartial observant. End. In the best case scenarior Shaykh Dehalvi was influenced by Shaykh Ibnul Abdul Wahhab and wrote Taqwiyat ul-Iman as explanation and promotion of Shaykh al-Najd's Wahhabism. And the worst case scenario; Shaykh Dehalvi brought from Arabia a unpublished work of Shaykh Ibnul Abdul Wahhab, translated it to Urdu, and made his own additions to make it relevent to subcontinent and published it as his own work in entirty. - [2] Following is Wahhabi translation of Taqwiyat ul-Iman: “It has been narrated by Aishah (May Allah be pleased with Her) that she heard Allah's Prophet (peace be upon Him saying: "The day and night shall continue to chase each other until Al-Laat and Al-Uzza (names of two idols) are not worshipped again." She asked him, "O Allah's Prophet! Since Allah has revealed the verse, 'He it is Who sent His Messenger (Muhammad (Peace be upon Him)) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islamic Monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religions even though the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, and disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and in His Messenger Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) hate (it).' I was predominantly of the view that this religion shall prevail until the end (without receding)." The Prophet (Peace be upon Him) answered that this religion shall continue to thrive with the same magnificence as long as Allah wills it to be. Then Allah will send down a blissful and chaste breeze which, (in its wake) shall take away the lives of all who even possess merely an iota of Iman (Faith) in their hearts. Only the bad and vice-ridden people shall be spared to exist who will revert to the religion of their fore-fathers." (Muslim) It implies that the sense which `Aishah (May Allah have mercy on her) inferred from the verse of Sural Al-Bara'ah (At-Taubah) is that Islam shall prevail until the Doomsday. The Prophet (Peace be upon Him) stated that Islam's supremacy shall persist as long as Allah wills it to be. Then Allah will send down a blissful and chaste breeze which will end the lives of all those having the least amount of Faith whereas the vice-ridden and irreligious people shall be spared to live on. The hearts of these people shall be devoid of the respect of Allah nor interest in following the path of Messenger dignity the Prophet (Peace be upon Him) nor shall they have any interest in religion. They shall eagerly snap on the customs and rituals of their grand-fathers who were none other than the ignorant polytheists. A man who adopts the ways of the polytheists will naturally become one of them. Thus it becomes known to us that the old polytheism shall also be wide-spread during the concluding periodic phase of the world. Presently, all kinds of Shirk (both the ancient and new ones) are rampant among the Muslims. What the Prophet (Peace be upon Him) prophesied) earlier seems to be coming true now (Urdu original;) so pay-ghambar khuda kay farmanay kay mowafiq huwa (translation of original;) so it happened in accordance with utterance of Messenger.. For instance, the Muslims are treating Prophets, saints, Imam and martyrs etc. polytheistically. Similarly the old polytheism also seems to be gaining ground as the Muslims deify and believe in the idols peculiarly belonging to the polytheists and follow their rituals, i.e. consulting pundits about the future events …” [Ref: Taqwiyat ul-Iman, Shah Ismail Dehalvi, Dar us-Salam, Riyadh, Pages 58/59, here.] Please note Dar us-Salam’s translator deliberately has altered original and these places are just couple of examples. In reality the translator, following on the Sunnah of Wahhabism - of distorting texts to conform to their beliefs - has deliberately mistranslated many portions of the book. To the point; crossed-out writing was what the translator dishonestly inserted and in green is my translation directly from original.

Introduction: Over a year ago I wrote an article explaning how Hadith of good and evil Sunnah means innovated good/evil Sunnah, here. While writing the article I noted Salafi Shaykh and a sister were attempting to make distinction between evil/sinful innovation and evil/sinful Sunnah. While I was re-reading the article in order to revise the article I noted what the distinction between evil/sinful Sunnah and Biddah is non-existant. This article will explain and point out correct understanding with regards to this subject. Hadith To Be Focus Of This Discussion: “He who introduced some good Sunnah 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. And he who introduced some evil Sunnah 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 their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Brief BackGround: Brother Abul Fadl enquired: “I know there is disagreement about Bid'ah Hasanah and Dalâlah. I would like to know how the opponents of Bid'ah Hasanah interpret and understand "sunnah sayyi'ah"? BarakAllâhu fîk and thanks in advance.” [Ref: Abul Fadl, post 1] Shaykh Aymen Bin Khaled replied saying Sunnah sayyi’ah is understood to be sinful actions: “Scholars identify "sunnah sayyi'ah" as sins whereas "Bid'ah" can be sinful and can be not sinful. If you know Arabic view: … elsewise, what I have said sums up the fatwa. Wallahu A'lam.” [Ref: Ayman Bin Khaled, post 2] Sister Um Abdullah also responded to this question, similar to what Shaykh Aymen stated, in a lengthy post: “Wa alaykum assalam wa rahmatullah. Bidah in the language is categorized to good and bad (the five categories of bidah stated by some shafi'i scholars falls under this, just check the examples they gave for each category and it will be clear), but bidah in deen/worship is all bad, and what makes a bidah in deen is a long detailed topic that can't be discussed in one post. And what is fatwa says is that if it has a daleel in shari'ah then it good bidah, which means that it is bidah in language not in shari'ah, because if it has daleel from shari'ah it wouldn't be a bidah in shari'ah because it is already part of shari'ah, and bidah is something that is new to shariah, that was not part of it, then was added to it, and not something that already exists in shari'ah. As for sunnah sayi'ah, it is every sin/evil that is done which people follow the person in doing it. And sunnah hasanah is opposite, it is every good deed done which people follow hte person in doing it, like in story of the hadith, the good deed was sadaqah. And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good inshari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” [Ref: Um Abdullah M, post 4] Sunnah Hasanah And In Context Of Hadith: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “He who introduced some good Sunnah 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] Reward is for a type of good Sunnah which is not already in Islam but is to be introduced in Islam. And this is definition of innovation according to Muslims and even sister Umm Abdullah: “…and bidah is something that is new to shariah, that was not part of it, then was added to it, and not something that already exists in shari'ah …” Therefore Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told of reward for innovating and introducing good Sunnah into Islam. Shaykh Aymen And Sister Um Abdullah: Shaykh wrote: “Scholars identify evil Sunnah as sins whereas innovation can be sinful and can be not sinful. If you know Arabic view: … elsewise, what I have said sums up the fatwa. Wallahu A'lam.” Firstly Shaykh states innovation can be sinful and not be sinful but so can the Sunnah be sinful and not be sinful. Please consider the following evidence: “He who introduced some good Sunnah 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. And he who introduced some evil Sunnah 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 their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Therefore this is cannot be the feature which distinguishes between Sunnah and Biddah. Shaykh will not protest to this because Hadith establishes the parts he did not mention regarding Sunnah. Sister Um Abdullah Stated: “As for sunnah sayi'ah, it is every sin/evil that is done which people follow the person in doing it. And sunnah hasanah is opposite, it is every good deed done which people follow the person in doing it, like in story of the hadith, the good deed was sadaqah.” Yet according to Ahadith evil innovation is same: “And whoever بِدْعَةً ابْتَدَعَ (i.e. introduces an innovation) that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it, withot that detracting from the burden of those who act upon it in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] “And whoever introduces a ضَلاَلَةٍ بِدْعَةَ (i.e.reprehensible innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] Therefore what sister Um Abdullah stated does not and cannot be correct understanding of what evil Sunnah is. Son Of Prophet Adam And His Evil Sunnah/Biddah Of Murder: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have stated: “Narrated Abdullah: Allah's Messenger said, "Whenever a person is murdered unjustly, there is a share from the burden of the crime on the first son of Adam for he was the first to start the Sunnah (i.e.tradition) of murdering." [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H552] Based on the fact that son of Prophet Adam (alayhis salam) will inherit the sin from every murder he has introduced an evil Sunnah/Biddah: “And whoever introduces an evil innovation that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it, withot that detracting from the burden of those who act upon it in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah 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 their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] And therefore the conclusion regarding sinful/evil Biddah and sinful/evil Sunnah would be: Evil Biddah/Sunnah is sinful action, which did not exist before, but is practiced in immitation after it has originated. Another way a sinful act can become evil Sunnah/Biddah when it is deemed permissible in Islam. Examples of these types of evil Sunnahs/Biddahs would be photos, paying and taking interest on money and goods person believes there are ‘valid’ exceptions. Conclusion: Good and evil Sunnahs are those innovations which has bee introduced and made part of Islam. And the reward and sin told in the Hadith is for adhering to innovated good/evil Sunnah which did not exist in Islam as prophetic Sunnah or instruction of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in Quran. There is no clear distinction between Hadith of good/evil Sunnah in Islam and innovation and evidence establishes one is the other. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi.

Updated. Refuting The Claim; Hadith Of Good/Evil Sunnah Refers To Reward Worthy Actions And Sinful Actions. Introduction: In the first week of August, 2016, I contacted a Salafi, talib ul ilm (seeker of knowledge), to ask if he has any information on the Hadith of, whosoever introduces a good Sunnah in Islam he/she is assured reward like those who follow it, and whosoever introduces a evil Sunnah in Islam than he/she will bear the burden of sin just as those who followed it. Knowing the reasons why I am requesting information he shared with me a link of AhlalHdeeth forum, here, and link of IslamToday, here, thinking it negates/refutes Islamic understanding. He followed it with plea; read posts ponder over them, it will take time to make sense, and don’t be quick to dismiss what following wrote: Abul Fadl,1, 3 Ustad Ayman bin Khaled wrote in post 2, and sister Um Abdullah wrote in posts 4. I informed the brother, I never have closed the gate of guidance upon myself. I fear Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) displeasure and worry about the end in hereafter. And told him, if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills, I will be just to the material you have passed on to me. After directing his attention to extensive written material already available I enquired if he would be interested in reading any material related to the Ahadith? He excused himself citing busy schedual. But promised, if I personally write something in response to the material he could look into the matter and give me his honest verdict. It seemed he was under impression I would direct him to material written by others. And the reality was all material was written by me but I did not feel to spell this out for him because it would appear, I am begging for attention. So decided I will respond to the material presented in the links. And al-hamdu lillah it was a good decision because both links make my job easy. Authors of material spell out what innovation is all I need to do is to draw their attention toward how the Hadith fits theirs/mine definition of innovation. Note in this article material found at Ahlalhdeeth forum will be addressed, and material of Salafi Muftis at IslamToday will be dealt in the following article, here. The Material In On Which Disscussion Will Be Based: A certain Abul Fadl quoted Hadith of good/evil Sunnah in its entirity and wrote: “I know there is disagreement about Bid'ah Hasanah and Dalâlah. I would like to know how the opponents of Bid'ah Hasanah interpret and understand "sunnah sayyi'ah"? BarakAllâhu fîk and thanks in advance.” [Ref: Abul Fadl, post 1] Shaykh/Ustad Ayman bin Khaled responded to Abul Fadl: “Scholars identify "sunnah sayyi'ah" as sins whereas "Bid'ah" can be sinful and can be not sinful. If you know Arabic view: … elsewise, what I have said sums up the fatwa. Wallahu A'lam.” [Ref: Ayman Bin Khaled, post 2] Abul Fadl got back and wrote the following: “BarakAllâhu fîk brother. I heard that Salafi's opposed the categorizing of Bid'ah in hasanah and dalâlah, is this view of bid'ah hasanah- and dalalah accepted as a valid ikhtilâf among them or did I misunderstood the fatwa? It could be because I still need to work hard on my Arabic.” [Ref: Abul Fadl, post 3] Sister Um Abdullah responded to brother Abul Fadl with following: “Wa alaykum assalam wa rahmatullah. Bidah in the language is categorized to good and bad (the five categories of bidah stated by some shafi'i scholars falls under this, just check the examples they gave for each category and it will be clear), but bidah in deen/worship is all bad, and what makes a bidah in deen is a long detailed topic that can't be discussed in one post. And what is fatwa says is that if it has a daleel in shari'ah then it good bidah, which means that it is bidah in language not in shari'ah, because if it has daleel from shari'ah it wouldn't be a bidah in shari'ah because it is already part of shari'ah, and bidah is something that is new to shariah, that was not part of it, then was added to it, and not something that already exists in shari'ah. As for sunnah sayi'ah, it is every sin/evil that is done which people follow the person in doing it. And sunnah hasanah is opposite, it is every good deed done which people follow hte person in doing it, like in story of the hadith, the good deed was sadaqah. And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good inshari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” [Ref: Um Abdullah M, post 4] I did read the entire thread number of times to make sure content gets registered and I can mull over the implications of it. And even though my Salafi brother did not instruct me to read the following post of Shaykh Ayman bin Khaled but because brother Abul Fadl directed post to him and Shaykh responded I have included it: “In simple terms; the dispute over categorizing bid'a is theoritical and all scholars from both sides agree on the application of it. So, examining such topic will bring no benefit at all to anyone in terms of good deeds or adding beneficial knowledge that is practiced by average Muslims. This is said while making a note that all scholars mention such topics while emphasizing on the known principle, taking the safest view is the best to do and the most praised act. Wallahu A'lam” [Ref: Ayman Bin Khaled, post 7] Post seven of Shaykh Ayman bin Khaled demonstrates his correct understanding of subject but has a misguiding element. There were more exchanges between members but I will end it here. Hadith Of Whosoever Introduces A Good/Evil Sunnah In Islam: “Jarir b. Abdullah reported that some desert Arabs clad in woollen clothes came to Allah's Messenger. He saw them in sad plight as they had been hard pressed by need. He (the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) exhorted people to give charity, but they showed some reluctance until (signs) of anger could be seen on his face. Then a person from the Ansar came with a purse containing silver. Then came another person and then other persons followed them in succession until signs of happiness could be seen on his (sacred) face. Thereupon Allah's Messenger said: He who introduced some good Sunnah 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. And he who introduced some evil Sunnah 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 their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] “The Messenger of Allah said: He who introduces good precedent in Islam, there is a reward for him for this (act of goodness) and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards; and he who introduces an evil precedent in Islam, there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2219] “The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever sets a good precedent in Islam, he will have the reward for that, and the reward of those who acted in accordance with it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. And whoever sets an evil precedent in Islam, he will have a burden of sin for that, and the burden of those who acted in accordance with it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest."' [Ref: Nisa’i, B23, H2555] 0.0 – Explaining Important Statement Of Sister Um Adullah: Following statement of sister Um Abdullah is about innovative actions, practices, ideas: “And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good in shari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” [Ref: Um Abdullah M, post 4] In other words she is saying, if judgment, on something innovative, is required to see if it is good or bad in Shari’ah, than its reality is, as Shari’ah declares it to be, good/bad. Shari’ah judges goodness/evilness of innovations based on existance of evidence and she states this in following statement:“And what is fatwa says is that if it (i.e. innovation) has a daleel in shari'ah then it good bidah, which means that it is bidah in language not in shari'ah, because if it has daleel from shari'ah it wouldn't be a bidah in shari'ah because it is already part of shari'ah …” You will agree that sister Um Abdullah’s statement can only refer to innovated, actions, practices, ideas. Therefore technically she would accept an innovation if it accorded the prophetic teaching. Because if y is already part of Shari’ah than it is not an innovation. And if something was not dealt in religion of Islam either by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or by RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) than it is innovation. And if innovated act/custom of y requires judgment from perspective of prophetic teachings to see if it is good/bad; then it was not part of religion and it is innovation which it requires Ijtihadi judgment. And if you agreed with the last point then you have no reason to disagree with my initial underlined point. 0.1 – Innovation In Religion Is All Bad Or Maybe Some Is Bad: Please bare in mind, here I will address sister Um Abdullah’s claim briefly. Without going too much into supporting evidence, but when I deal with Shaykh Ayman’s material, than detailed exposition will follow. Sister wrote: “Wa alaykum assalam wa rahmatullah. Bidah in the language is categorized to good and bad (the five categories of bidah stated by some shafi'i scholars falls under this, just check the examples they gave for each category and it will be clear), but bidah in deen/worship is all bad, and what makes a bidah in deen is a long detailed topic that can't be discussed in one post.” Innovation is something which was not part of prophetic teaching and it later did not became part of religion when it was completed/perfected. Sister Um Abdullah agrees with what I have stated: “… and bidah is something that is new to shariah, that was not part of it, then was added to it, and not something that already exists in shari'ah.” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “He who introduced some good Sunnah 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] The Hadith indicates, reward being told is for a good Sunnah which is not already part of Islam. And what is not part of Islam but one is permitted to make part of Islam to earn reward is, innovation. In light of this prophetic statement, saying of sister, “… but Biddah in deen/worship is all bad, …” is incorrect because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) permitted introduction of good innovated Sunnahs in to Islam by telling there is reward for them. 0.2 – Innovation In Worship Is Not All Bad: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was leading prayers and when he said: “Sami Allahu liman hamidah.” A Sahabi said: “Rabbana wa lakal-hamd, hamdan kathiran tayyiban mubarakan fih.” After finsihing the prayer Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) enquired who uttered the words and a Sahabi admitted to uttering them. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told him: “I saw thirty-some angels rushing to see which of them would write it down first." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B12, H1063] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught Tasbih and it ends with: “Rabbana wa lakal-hamd.” The companion made the following addition to it: “Hamdan kathiran tayyiban mubarakan fih.” Once again words of sister Um Abdullah defining what an innovation is: “… and bidah is something that is new to shariah, that was not part of it, then was added to it, and not something that already exists in shari'ah.” In light of meaning of innovation, the companion introduced an innovation into worship. And this refutes the claim of sister that all innovations in worship are bad: “… but Biddah in deen/worship is all bad, …” Another point, originally the addition of companion and by its nature, the addition was an innovation. After Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) became pleased with it than it became a Sunnah. Therefore not every innovation into worship is evil in fact innovation can be so good that it can become prophetic Sunnah. 0.3 – Restoring Balance To Insanity Regarding Innovation: Sister Um Abdullah wrote regarding innovation: “… if it has daleel from shari'ah it wouldn't be a bidah in shari'ah because it is already part of shari'ah …” And before this sister wrote: “… that if it has a daleel in shari'ah then it is good bidah …” Question begs to be asks, how can something which has daleel from Shariah is good innovation in your methodology? You just stated with evidence it is part of Shariah and not innovation and than you termed something which has evidence as good innovation. It is either innovation or no-innovation. With existance of evidence means it is already part of Shari’ah hence its not innovation, but it is Shari’ah, full-stop. Without evidence it innovation. Salafi classification doesn’t have room for good innovation - it has; innovation, and Shariah. And there is no room for, good innovation, or linguistic innovation, in Salafi classification either like she claimed here: “…if it has a daleel in shari'ah then it is good bidah, which means that it is bidah in language linguistic sense not in shari'ah, …” Our sister is just flapping around like a fish out of water in the hope says something useful and convincing. There was and is no need for her to explain the position of Fuqaha Shafiyyah because they adhere to different defintion. She hardly knows her own definition to know Shafi defintion of innovation is another feet. And then to attempt reconciliation between two requires greater knowledge and insight then she posseses. 0.4 - Innovation With Evidence Is Shar’ri Or Linguistic - Innovation: Sister said: “… that if it has a daleel in shari'ah then it is good bidah …” And she also wrote: “… if it has daleel from shari'ah it wouldn't be a bidah in shari'ah because it is already part of shari'ah …” Note she said, if innovation has evidence it is not innovation because it is part of Shari’ah. But good innovation, she states has to have evidence of Shari’ah. If her both statements are true than logical out come has to be that good innovation is part of Shariah. 0.5 - Inconsistant Ramblings Of Sister Um Abdullah: She writes: “Bidah in the language is categorized to good and bad (the five categories of bidah stated by some shafi'i scholars falls under this, just check the examples they gave for each category and it will be clear), …” If Biddah in linguisitic sense is good/bad, and it is divided into five categories by Shafi scholars. Than did they not use their definition to judge matters of religion? When it is obvious they used their definition to judge matters of Islam than how can their definition of innovation be good/bad in linguistic sense? Sister Um Abdullah herself wrote: “And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good inshari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” If the judgments of Shafi scholars good/bad come under the category of Shari’ah, and what they judge to be good/evil it is good/bad in Shariah than how can their definition of innovation and classification of innovation be not part of Shariah? How can it be possible to judge matters of religion with something which is not part of religion? For their judgments to be part of Shariah their definition and classifications must also be part of Shariah. And they did indeed take their definition as part of Shariah. And what can be derived from her own rule sister Um Abdullah should take their definition as part of Shariah: “And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good inshari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” 1 + 1 = 2, its mathematics, and it was solved using rules of mathematics. Or was it solved/judged to be, 2, using rules of English grammar or rules of mathematic? I am only being sarcastic, peeps. Point being made is that a judgement to be made on something has to relate to field. If judgment is being made, innovated y is prohibited in Islam, than the tool/rules of judgment has to be from Islam to prohibit it, and in this context, concept of innovation. 0.6 - Resolving The Problem And Falling Into Another Misguidance: The Fuqaha of Ahnaf and Shafiyyah both believed their defintions of innovation are Shar’ri definitions. And the rule which sister Um Abdullah adheres to should have lead her to believe defintion of innovation of Fuqaha Shafiyyah is Shar’ri definition. Otherwise she should either let go of following: “Bidah in the language is categorized to good and bad (the five categories of bidah stated by some shafi'i scholars falls under this, just check the examples they gave for each category and it will be clear), …”. Or she should let go of her following rule: “And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good inshari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” Or else she would be contradicting her ownself. She can’t let go of the second because its teaching passed on from companions: “Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud said, “Verily, Allah looked at the hearts of the servants and He found that the heart of Muhammad, was the best among them, so He choose him for Himself and He sent him with His message. Then He looked at the hearts of His servants after Muhammad, and He found that the hearts of his companions were the best among them. Thus He made them into the ministers of His Prophet, fighting for the sake of His religion. And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah. And the Companions unanimously chose to take Abû Bakr – Allâh be pleased with him – as the successor (to lead the Muslims after the Prophet).” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] If she had thought through what was written by her she would have realised her misguidance. In case she lets go of her linguistic rubbish then she would acknowledge Shar’ri existance of good/evil innovations. And if she lets go of her rule; judgment on something being good/bad is of Shariah; then she would negate existance of Shar’ri existance of good/bad innovations. She also would be guilty of negating a principle which Fuqaha of; Ahnaf, Hanabilah, Shafiyyah, Malikiyyah have agreed upon. The safest path would be to acknowledge Shar’ri legality of existance of good/bad innovation, accept statement of Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and give-up making excuses where none can do. 0.7 - Sister Um Abdullah On Evil Sunah: It is stated in Hadith: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently, he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this without their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] With regards to evil Sunnah sister Um Abdullah writes: “As for sunnah sayi'ah, it is every sin/evil that is done which people follow the person in doing it.” Sister here intends, every sin/evil which is defined by Shari’ah, like Shaykh Waheed al-Zaman has stated in his Mukhtasir Sharh of Sahih Muslim; see quote, here. In other words sister means, evil Sunnah is; every sinful action which has been defined by Quranic teaching or prophetic teaching to be evil/sinful, and which a person is seen comitting and people imitate the sinful action. If her point is valid than it is equally applicable for innovation because there are Ahadith which use word, innovation instead of Sunnah, and the meaning of these Ahadith is exactly same as meaning of evil Sunnah: “And whoever بِدْعَةً ابْتَدَعَ (i.e. introduces an innovation) that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it, withot that detracting from the burden of those who act upon it in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] “And whoever introduces a ضَلاَلَةٍ بِدْعَةَ (i.e evil innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] No her explanation of what evil Sunnah is not valid because it is omitting key component: Acknowledgement that evil/good Sunnah in Hadith are evil/good innovations; innovated evil/good Sunnahs. Her explanation of what evil Sunnah and Hadith of Ibn Majah and Tirmadhi leads to logical conclusion; evil Sunnah and evil Biddah are one and the same. 0.8 – Setting In Islam An Evil Precedent: Sister is just repeating the words her scholars without giving thought to if they fit into the Hadith or not. If portion of Hadith in discussion is about only sins which Quranic and prophetic teaching has defined sinful than following underlined words were uncalled for and play no part in the Hadith: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which …” Sinful action which is immitated by others, is not being introduced into Islam, is not a precedent set/introduced in Islam, because it is already defined by Islam to be sinful/evil. The Hadith talks about a evil Sunnah, or sinful action, which has no precedent in Islam prior to being set/introduced. I will explain, suppose I am drink alcohol of finest quality, my true Salafi buddy, the only true Muwahid on earth, and only one with true understanding of Quran and Hadith, gets inspired by me, and decides to defile his self with it. Question is did he immitate an action of mine which had no precedent in Islam, or there was already a precedent set – before prohibition: “Narrated Jabir: Some people drank alcoholic beverages in the morning (of the day) of the Uhud battle and on the same day they were killed as martyrs, and that was before wine was prohibited.” [Ref: Bukhari, B65, H4618] And after prohibition command was revealed: “Narrated Anas: The Prophet lashed a drunk with date-leaf stalks and shoes. And Abu Bakr gave a drunk forty lashes.” [Ref: Bukhari, B81, H767] So even though I maybe the influence and be responsible for advertising it. I am not, introducing into Islam an evil precedent. Or in other words, I am not setting an evil precedent in Islam. 0.9 - Setting/Introducing Evil Precedent In Islam: The Hadith indicates evil Sunnah for which the burden of sin will be equally shared between the initiator and its actor thereafter is not already part of Islam. In other words that evil Sunnah already has not been declared to be evil in Islam. Suppose a Sufi Shaykh, and worse effect; a Sufi who is Ashari/Maturidi, after every Fajr Salah finds and beats the Wahhabism out of Wahhabi. Being true definition of hate he; shaves all his hair leaving only those in private areas, makes him drink Hindu cows urine, makes him bark like a dog, and force feeds him infidel delicacy known as Pork sandwich. And he calls it Wahhabi humanising. The terrorist Sufi Shaykh than goes to his mosque and preaches his deciples to engage in Wahhabi humanising. This starts tradition of Wahhabi hunt, and the evil Sufis go, and do what their Shaykh has instructed, inflicting all humiliations upon their ‘peacful/harmless pacifist Wahhabis’ in precise order which their Shaykh has been doing. This Sunnah of Sufi Shaykh has no judgment in Islam from prophetic Sunnah because Wahhabism nor did this Sunnah of Sufi Shaykh exist at the time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The collective judgment of Muslims regarding this custom of Sufi Shaykh is that it is an evil Sunnah and therefore in light of following Hadith it will be evil Sunnah in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as well: “And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] And this way it will be an innovated into Islam as an evil Sunnah and those who acted on it will be equally responsible like their Sufi Shaykh because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently, he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this without their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Sister Um Abdullah stated: “And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good inshari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” And her this statement is true and it establishes collective judgment of Muslims about something being good/evil makes it so in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Shari’ah. Therefore collective judgment of Muslims about Wahhabi humanising gives logical verdict that it is an innovation, or innovated evil Sunnah, which did not exist in prophetic teaching. 0.10 – Sister Um Abdullah On Good Sunnah: Regarding good Sunnah sister Um Abdullah writes: “And sunnah hasanah is opposite, it is every good deed done which people follow the person in doing it, like in story of the hadith, the good deed was sadaqah.” Sister Um Abdullah connected part of good Sunnah with the context of Hadith by saying: “… like in the story of the Hadith, the good deed was Sadaqah.” It is common among the Salafi’s to negate the generality of principles in this Hadith to by contextualising it. Implication of which is; Sadaqah is prophetic teaching/Sunnah, nothing new is being introduced into Islam, and no innovation has been introduced into Islam. This understanding of sister Um Abdullah negates the natural meaning of Hadith therefore it cannot be correct and why it is so is to follow. 0.11 – Introducing Good Sunnah In Islam Statement Of Hadith And It’s Explanation: The Islamic position is on the related Hadith is; both principles, whoever introduces good/evil Sunnah, stated in this Hadith are not limited to context of event. If they were restricted to context than evil Sunnah portion of Hadith would have connection with action/actions of companion/companions: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently, he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this without their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] It is obvious there is no relationship with evil Sunnah and actions of companions. And if this portion is conveniently disconnected from context of even then question is why should we be compelled to connect following to context of Sadaqah: “He who introduced some good Sunnah 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] There is nothing to suggest and conclude why one is not related to context and other is. If one is contextually relevent then so must be other. Cherry picking to suite sectarian interest is academically dishonest. 0.12 – Good/Evil Sunnah In Islam And A Possible Interpretation: Considering the implications of the prophetic words (i.e. innovated good/evil Sunnahs not already being part of Islam) its most likely that practice of Sadaqah became part of Islam when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) encouraged to give Sadaqah to the poor Muslims and companions acted on it. And after all the event had transpired Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) received revelation to announce the two principles. This explanation puts everything into perspective. It establishes that principle is connected with context and it supports the natural implications of Hadith. This leads to conclusion; Sadaqah was a innovated good Sunnah into Islam. This caroborates evil Sunnah portion of Hadith is refering to evil innovated Sunnahs into Islam. Therefore naturally the part of good Sunnah refers to innovated good Sunnahs in Islam, which were not already part of Islam. 0.13 - Short Statements Comprehensive Meaning Of Good/Evil Sunnah: It is recording: "Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah's Apostle said: "I have been sent with the shortest expressions bearing the widest meanings, and I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the world were ... " [Ref: Bukhari, B52, H220] "Muhammad said, Jawami'-al-Kalim means that Allah expresses in one or two statements or thereabouts the numerous matters that used to be written in the books revealed before (the coming of) the Prophet." [Ref: Bukhari, B87, H141] Numerous Ahadith from Sahih Bukhari and Muslim attest that Prophet (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been given capacity to express widest meanings possible in few statements. If the above interpretation, mentioned in 0.12, is valid and supported then any other interpretation which agrees with fundamental meaning of two principles stated in following Hadith, even if not based context are valid: “He who introduced some good Sunnah 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. And he who introduced some evil Sunnah 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 their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] One such interpretation would be that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) employed the event to and its context to inform the believers that your innovated good/evil Sunnahs not already part of Islam but introduced by you will earn you reward/blame. 1.0 - Shaykh Ayman Bin Khaled On Meaning Of Hadith Of Good/Evil Sunnah: Shaykh Ayman bin Khaled writes: “Scholars identify "Sunnah sayyi'ah" as sins, whereas "Bid'ah" can be sinful and can be not sinful. If you know Arabic view: … elsewise, what I have said sums up the fatwa. Wallahu A'lam.” In the context of Hadith Shaykh is saying; following part of Hadith refers to sinful actions: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah (i.e. sinful action) 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 their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] What Shaykh did not consider is that Hadith states, whoever introduces evil Sunnah into Islam, implication of which is, the evil Sunnah being introduced into Islam is not already part of Islam. And anything not part of Islam but is made part of Islam then it is innovation being made part of Islam. Therefore evil Sunnah being introduced into Islam has to be an innovation which in this Hadith is being reffered as ‘Sunnah Say’yah’. 1.1 - Refuting Shaykh Ayman Bin Khaled’s Understanding With Evidence: Shaykh writes: “Scholars identify "Sunnah sayyi'ah" as sins, whereas "Bid'ah" can be sinful and can be not sinful. If you know Arabic view: … elsewise, what I have said sums up the fatwa. Wallahu A'lam.” Hadith states: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden ...” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Note the implications of prophetics words, introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam, is that the evil Sunnah is not already in Islam and the burden initiator and actor will have bare is for an evil Sunnah not already in Islam. Therefore the following saying of Shaykh and his scholars is incorrect: “Scholars identify "Sunnah sayyi'ah" as sins…” Sins which his group of scholars are stating are already declared Haram and deemed sinful in teaching of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and these are already in Islam. 1.2 - Sins Can Become Innovation If Conditions Are Met: Sins can become (evil) innovations and evil Sunnahs but when certain conditions are met. And without which sins cannot be deemed evil Sunnahs introduced in Islam. In a Hadith it is stated: “And whoever introduces an innovation (in Islam) that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it ...'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] Even though Hadith does not explicitly stated ‘in Islam’ it is to be assumed into text. And following Hadith means the same: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah 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) …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] In the Hadith, the said evil Biddah/Sunnah is, innovated single action which is against prophetic teaching such as veiwing pornography. Or innovated evil Sunnah/Biddah composed of combinations of prohibited and sinful actions such as Wahhabi humanising. Also until sin it is practiced by an individual believing it is sin then it remains a sin. When a sin is committed believing it is permissible in Islam and it is immitated by others who also believe it to be permissible in Islam then it becomes an innovated evil Sunnah, in other words (evil) innovation. But Shaykh Aymen and his scholars do not believe this Hadith is referring these. Rather they believe the Hadith is referring to all sinful actions taught by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). 1.3 - Granting The Shaykh His Interpretation And Its Implication: Shaykh Aymen and his bunch of Salafi scholars claimed, evil Sunnah refers to sins, and in my own words sinful actions. There is no reason to completely reject the understanding of Shaykh and the Shuyukh he adheres to. Obviously we cannot reject the natural meaning of Hadith. Hence I do affirm following interpretation of Hadith is correct: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah (i.e. sinful action) 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 their's being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] In the context of Shaykh’s stated meaning of Hadith, and actual meaning of Hadith, which I explained in previous three sections the meaning of Hadith is; And he who introduced into Islam a sinful action which is followed after its invention [thus becoming an evil innovation/precedent than] the one who introduced the sinful action and one who followed it will be equally responsible. Or it could mean; And he who introduced into Islam an evil innovation/precedent [in form of a sinful action] which is followed after, the initiator and the actor will bear equal burden on judgment day. Both interpretations virtually mean the same thing but linguistically there is confirmation of second interpretation in text of Hadith: “And whoever. introduces an innovation that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it, withot that detracting from the burden of those who act upon it in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] The following Hadith is with following underlined addition: “Whoever introduces an innovation with which Allah and his Messenger are not pleased, he will have a (burden of) sin equivalent to that of those among the people who act upon it, without that detracting from their sins in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H210] But the following version of Hadith there is addition of word Dhalalah (i.e. evil): “And whoever introduces reprehensible innovation with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] 1.4 - The Logical Outcome Of Discussion So Far: Shaykh turned the ‘Sunnah Say’yah’ toward, sinful actions, and logical opposite of ‘Sunnah Hasanah’ would be, rewardworthy of actions and I have inserted this into following portion of Hadith: “He who introduced some [rewardworthy action as] good Sunnah 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] If Islamic position in section, 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 are also put into context of this portion of Hadith than Hadith would give meaning of: He who introduced into Islam a reward-worthy innovation/precedent [in form of a rewardworthy action] which is followed after, the initiator and the actor will earn equal reward on judgment day. And in context of Hadith good/evil Sunnah the Ahadith of, Ibn Majah – H209, H210, and Tirmadhi – H2677, are proof that linguistically word Sunnah can be a perfect subsitute for word Biddah. And the natural meaning of mentioned portion of Hadith is of innovative good Sunnah. 1.5 – Understanding Shaykh Ayman’s Statement As Whole: Shaykh wrote: “Scholars identify "Sunnah sayyi'ah" as sins, whereas "Bid'ah" can be sinful and can be not sinful.” Shaykh Ayman’s sinful innovation is Shar’ri innovation. In other words, if something is termed innovaiton according to Shaykh’s definition then it is innovation according to judgment of Shari’ah. And the innovation which Shaykh states is ‘not sinful’ is linguistic innovation. Meaning it is something new, newly invented, it could be anything made from materials … mobile phones, cars etc. And therefore these things are not connected with religion hence their invention and innovations in techonology cannot be sinful, because they are innovations of linguistical sense. 1.6 – Responding To Shaykhs Definition Of Innovation: Firstly, Islamicly innovations are of two types, praiseworthy and blameworthy. Both type are Shar’ri innovations because both type of innovations require Shar’ri judgment for permissbility and impermissibility. If it is permissible it is good and it is Shari’ah. If it is prohibited it is bad hence they are part of Shari’ah. And this principle is attested by sister Um Abdullah: “And judgement on something being good or bad is shari'ah, if it is considered good inshari'ah then it is good, and if shari'ah declares it bad, then it is bad.” Imam Shafi (rahimullah) also has stated: ‘Whosoever declares something good has made it part of the sharee’ah.’ [Ref: Al-Risalah, Page 507, by Imam al-Shafi] And ultimately this is based on Hadith: “… and He found that the hearts of his companions were the best among them. Thus, He made them into the ministers of His Prophet, fighting for the sake of His religion. And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] And I see no reason why Shaykh Ayman would dispute it. Shar’ri innovations are good as well as evil. And there is not a single thing which falls into linguistical innovation category simply because if a innovation requires judgment good/bad then the innovation and the judgment both are connected with Shariah. Secondly: Prophetic saying one who innovates evil innovation with which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) nor RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are pleased the innovator and actor both will be equally responsible was presented but it is being repeated again: “And whoever introduces a ضَلاَلَةٍ بِدْعَةَ (i.e.reprehensible innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] And this Hadith Tirmadhi is further supported Sahih Muslim Ahadith in tone of; whoever introduces evil Sunnah in Islam. In light of this Hadith, innovation which is sinful, is evil/bad innovation. Or a sinful innovation is which does not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) nor RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi wa’sallam) is evil. In both cases we have Shar’ri recognition of existance of evil innovation/precedent. The meaning of Hadith of evil Sunnah in Islam [its natural meaning was explained in section 1.0/1.1] and the rationale via which it was derived indicates that good Sunnah in Islam part of Hadith tells of reward for introducing good innovation into Islam. And it would be correct to say prophetic Sunnah does recognise existance of good precedent/innovation. 1.7 – An Attempt To Distort Prophet Teaching: Shaykh does not mention nor does Shaykh believe that Islam recognises and tells of reward for good innovations. And nor does he believe that prophetic Sunnah recognises sinful innovations as evil innovations and prophetic teaching tell initiator and actor, both bearing equal burden. Shaykh Ayman and his Shuyukh have attempted to distort the natural meaning of Hadith with their bogus interpretation. Had they held to natural meaning (i.e. innovative evil/good Sunnahs) and gave it the meaning of sinful/reward-worthy actions it would have been acceptable but their negation of natural meaning puts them at odds with Islamic understanding. 1.8 – Dispute Theoritical And Application Agreed Upon: Shaykh Ayman states in response to Abul Fadl: “In simple terms; the dispute over categorizing bid'a is theoritical and all scholars from both sides agree on the application of it.” As far as the dispute goes between Mujtahideen and major scholars past over categorisation is not conceptual but substantial. It is an issue of valid and invalid Ijtihad. Double reward or single. Comprehensive understanding of definition innovation or minimilistic. And of prophetic teaching of innovation versus innovated teaching of innovation. Second Shaykh Ayman is correct in his saying that despite in differences the application these diferring definitions are in agreement. That is to say if both definitions are applied upon a matter both will produce same result. Suppose a cult originates, ISIS, and they believe suicide in certain context is permissbile, and they do believe it. One group will label their actions as evil innovation and the other will deem it as Shar’ri innovation and both will deem it sinful and Haram. Another example would be celebrating and commemorating Mawlid of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). One group would say it is good innovation/practice and other will say the activities which it is composed of are from prophetic Sunnah therefore it is innovation in linguistic sense not Shar’ri innovation. Hence it is permissible and there is reward for it because of the good of Islamic practices is in it. But Islamic and Salafi definition of innovation produces different results for Mawlid and that is because they have copied the basic frame work from Shaykh Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali (rahimullah) and patched it with poison of Wahhabism. Now if definition employed by Salafis is correct than Muslims who oppose them with categorisations of good/evil have innovated definition, their Ijtihad is invalid, and their definition does not accord prophetic teaching. And definition of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah accords with all available evidence therefore Salafi definiton of innovation does not accord with prophetic teachings and this is no small matter. 1.9 – Wahhabi VS Hanbali, Shafi, Hanafi, And Maliki: Shaykh stated both sides agree on the application of two definitions and by this he meant Salafi and scholars of classical era then Shaykh is distorting the reality. Fuqaha Shafiyyah do not agree with Wahhabi Neo-Hanbalism nor their application of defintion of innovation. If both parties agreed with the application and classification of innovation was theoretical as Shaykh claims than their judgments on issues would be in agreement. As an example, neo-Hanbali Wahhabis deem celebration of prophetic birthday as Shar’ri innovation and its equivlent in Shafi defintion is evil innovation. Yet the renown Shafi jurists such as; Imam Nawavi (rahimullah), Hafidh Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani (rahimullah), Imam Suyuti (rahimullah), and many more have deemed it good innovation. The truth of matter is Fuqaha Shafiyyah are in agreement with Fuqaha Ahnaf on application of definition innovation. Even the Maliki Fuqaha are in agreement with regards to Mawlid being good innovation. The only connection with scholars of past in regards to application of definition of innovation the Wahhabi neo-Hanabilah have is Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah and his rabid students. And Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah was a loner in his Madhab and his contempory scholars rejected his Ikhtilaf. Just like Hanbali contempories of Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab rejected him and his scholarship. Conclusion: A combination of Shar’ri transgressions/sins makes an evil Sunnah and when this evil Sunnah is immitated/followed as a custom/practice it becomes an innovation. Prophet (sallallahua layhi wa alaihi was’sallam) is reported to have informed Muslims that for introducing good Sunnah into Islam there is reward and told of sin for setting evil precedent (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam. And a Sunnah which was not part of Islam but; (i) is made part of Islam is innovation, (ii) set in Islam by anyone other than Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is innovation. And which ever Sunnah accords with and is composed of all that is Halal, Ibadah, Tarbiyah, Saqaqah, an Muslism collectively judge to be good innovated Sunnah is also a good innovated Sunnah in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And whatever Muslims deem to be evil innovated Sunnah, due to being Kufr, Shirk, Haram, Zanb (i.e. sin), or being composed of these practices, is evil innovated Sunnah in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Wama alayna ilal balalghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: During a discussion on subject of Hadhir Nazir a Wahhabi brother demanded proof from Quran, or Hadith, or Salaf that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would testify about deeds of members of his Ummah [and mankind in general]. I asked if it is established will you then believe as you suppose to believe in Hadhir Nazir or will you continue to make Taweel of verse 33:45? His response was he will believe providing criteria is met. Note there is context of huge discussion on Hadhir Nazir and this demand of his and agreement is culmination of gradual build up toward a concrete resolution. And I took him up on this and presented to him Tafsir of Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) of verse in discussion. He was caught unprepared and resorted excuses which eventually I chased down to zero (i.e. until there was nothing left to adress). Chapter 33 Verse 45 And Ibn Kathir: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a witness, a bearer of glad tidings, and as a warner." [Ref: 33:45] “’… as witness …’ means; a witness to Allah's Oneness, for there is no God except He, and a witness against mankind for their deeds on the Day of Resurrection. [Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala] said: “… and We bring you as a witness against these people …” (4:41) This is like the Ayah: “… that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you.” (2:143) [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 33:45] I Wanted Evidence Of Nation Not Mankind To Mankind Not Nation: His first response was; Ibn Kathir said Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be witness against mankind for their deeds and not Ummah. I replied: How would you take the Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) from Jinn and Mankind? Are we not part of mankind? He said: I am sorry. I actually wanted evidence for mankind but by mistake I said Ummah. I said well I have provided you with precisly that in this case then. While introducing myself to him I told had told him I am not Arabic speaker. Hoping to take advantage of this Wahhabi said: Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) used word Ummah (i.e. nation) and not Al-Naas (i.e. the mankind). Ibn Kathir Used al-Nas Not al-Ummah: He wasn’t aware my high level of Urdu can be passed as rudimentary level of Arabic. So I quickly caught him up with his lie but he put the blame of lie on a ‘trusted’ brother. I said: Brother in online Tafsir which can be view, here. Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) employed al-Nas and not word Ummah. And I quote his words: “أي لله بالوحدانية، وأنه لا إله غيره، وعلى الناس بأعمالهم يوم القيامة، وجئنا بك على هؤلاء شهيداً كقوله” I continued: Brother you do know al-Nas means mankind and not al-Ummah (i.e. nation)? Being familiar with art of converting books and scholars of past after their deaths to beliefs of Wahhabism and to Wahhabism I was thinking the worst but fortunately nothing materialised of that sort. I asked him if he would comply with what he agreed with me but he did not respond to it. Instead he said: A Salafi brother had informed him the interpretation and he trusted him. The trusted brother I assume was just also scrambling a response instead of actually referrencing Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah). It is quite possible to interpret the verse Ummah in light of: “Thus have We sent you to a community before which [other] communities have passed on so you might recite to them that which We revealed to you, while they disbelieve in the Most Merciful.” [Ref: 13:30] Even then Ummah would be mankind because he has been sent to mankind. Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is of two types: i) Ummah of invitation – i.e. Mankind, ii) Ummah of believers – i.e. those from mankind who became Muslims. And in 13:30 is referring to the first out of two. Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) Made Mistake In His Understanding: He replied saying: Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) made mistake in his understanding. There is no indication in the verse that it is about mankind. I asked him: Is it possible that you’re are making mistake in understanding the Tafsir due to lack of knowledge of Tafsir? He said: Brother how can he be right when there is no proof of his Takhsees in this verse? Imam Jalal al-Din Suyuti On Verse 33:45: I didn’t answer his question and instead posted his Tafisr: “O Prophet! Indeed We have sent you as a witness against those to whom you have were sent and as a bearer of good tidings for those who affirm your sincerity of Paradise and as a warner for those who deny you of the punishment of the Fire.” [Ref: Tafsir al-Jalalayn, 33:45, here.] And said: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent to Jinn and mankind. Therefore Imam Jalal al-Din Suyuti (rahimullah) Tafsir implies the mentioned. He again repeated: This Tafsir again does not agree with evidence of Quran therefore it is incorrect. I asked: Will you believe as you agreed or not? He replied: How can I leave Quran and believe errors of men. There is no obedience of men when they are against teaching of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). I said: Brother you’re saying that you, a nobody, is right and these two scholars of great learning are wrong? He said: Brother I don’t want to argue on who is right or wrong. I just want evidence from Quran, or Hadith of their understanding and that is all. Failed To Crush Him Under Books: I intended to crush him under the Tafasir of commentators of Quran who interpreted the verse to mean same as Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) but his reaction to Imam Jalal al-Suyuti’s (rahimullah) Tafsir had no moderating effect. Noting that brother is believer of: I am better then he. I abadoned my plan to crush him under books. Instead I went back to his desired course of action. Methodology Of Tafsir And Beginning Of End: I said: Brother proof of his Tafsir and Takhsees does not need to be in the same verse. Can it not be that the evidence of his Takhsees is another verse? I He said: It is possible one verse explains another but brother there is not a single verse which states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent to mankind as a witness. I said: Had Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) phrased it so explicitly in another verse then dispute would have been resolved. Yet it is possible to derive this meaning from Quran without stretching any verse but before I get to that stage somethings need clarification. I asked him: Does Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) need to explicitly state something for it to be true or implicit mention is enough? He said: If explicit is mentioned in another part of Quran then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) does hint toward it implicitly. By stating this golden nugget my Wahhabi brother effectively committed suicide. All needed was me dancing during his funeral and his grave. So I went ahead and wrote the following Tafsir of verse in dispute. Explicitly Stated: Allah Sent Quran And Prophet To Mankind: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a witness, a bearer of glad tidings, and as a warner." [Ref: 33:45] Now question is to whom he has been sent as a witness? Arabs, people of Makkah, Madinah, or mankind? The answer is in the following verses in which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent to mankind: “O mankind, the Messenger has come to you with the truth from your Lord, so believe; it is better for you.” [Ref: 4:170] “Say: ‘O mankind, indeed I am the Messenger of Allah to you all; to whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth. There is no deity except Him; He gives life and causes death.’ So believe in Allah and His Messenger, the unlettered prophet, who believes in Allah and His words, and follow him that you may be guided. “ [Ref: 7:158] With Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) also sent Quran to mankind as a Burhan (i.e. proof): “O mankind, there has come to you a conclusive proof from your Lord and We have sent down to you a clear light.” [Ref: 4:174] In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) referrs to Quran as Muwahiz (i.e. instruction): “O mankind, there has to come to you instruction from your Lord and healing for what is in the breasts and guidance and mercy for the believers. “ [Ref: 10:57] A Verse Explains Another: To Mankind And Witness: I replied brother Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “And We have not sent you except comprehensively to mankind as a bringer of good tidings and a warner. But most of the people do not know. “ [Ref: 34:28] In this verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) made referrence to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with you but specified that he has been sent to mankind. For purpose of delivering good news to mankind and delivering warning of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In the following verse, which is part of our discussion, the ambiguity of you has been removed because there is referrence to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with phrase, ya ayyu al-Nabiyyu (i.e. O Prophet): "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a witness, a bearer of glad tidings, and as a warner." [Ref: 33:45] And direct referrence to mankind to whom he was sent is removed but indirect reference is made via: “… a bearer of glad tidings, and as a warner." In other words, in verse 34:28 referrence to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is indirect and to mankind is direct. And in verse 33:45 referrence to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is direct but to whom he has been sent is indirect. Conclusion is that both verses explain each other and comprehensive understanding that can be drived from them is: i) “And truly We have not sent you O Prophet except comprehensively to mankind as a witness, as a bringer of good tidings, and a warner. But most of the people do not know.“ [Ref: 34:28 and 33:45] Or alternatively you can use 33:45 as base and insert data of 34:28 to on it: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you not as a witness except comprehensively to mankind a bearer of glad tidings, and as a warner but most of the people do not know." [Ref: 33:45 and 34:28] In both cases through correct methodology of Tafsir and the one you stated yourself Tafsir of Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) and Imam Jalal al-Din Suyuti (rahimullah) is substantiated. Blind Couldn’t See Noor Of Islam At The End Of Tunnel: His next response was limited to: Jazakallah Khair. I said: Brother have I satisfied your demand of evidence? I didn’t get any response for two days and the suspense was killing me. Then he replied: Brother Razavi after reading your recent response I consulted few Tulab ul-Ilm (i.e. seekers of knowledge) and they have verified your explanation of verse. As such I feel no shame in accepting my fault and I am truly humbled by my lack of knowledge. I replied: Brother this is why I continued to impress on you; you’re opposing two giants of Ummah. Then I asked him: As we agreed your demand has been met and all important question is: Will you now believe in Hadhir Nazir as you said you will? There was no response for few days and then he replied: I am embrassed to say I will not. In reponse to him I wrote: Brother you have undermined your integrity you’re aware agreements oral or written are binding. He said: I am aware and ashamed of my conduct. May Allah forgive me. My last post consisted of: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) guides whom He wills and leads astray whom He wills. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. For a week there was nothing written by him and then he wrote about his desire to discuss subject of Istighathah and I refused. Instead I gave him link of following discussion, here. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi.

Introduction: Deobandis and Wahhabis believe the miraclous ability granted to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to witness deeds of entire mankind during and after his life popularly known as Hadhir Nazir is major Shirk. Member of Deobandi sect, and a staunch follower of rabid Deobandi Mufti, Zar Wali Khan attempted to educate me that according to mentioned Mufti Hadhir Nazir is Shirk. I questioned him to find out: How it is Shirk? He gave me link of edict issued by a Deobandi Mufti, Waseem Khan, from Dar ul-Uloom Trinidad and Tobago. This enemy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), like all the staff, are exports of India/Pakistan. Deobandi instructed me to read the article to find out reason why it is Shirk. I responded saying I rather not read such a long article and have you tell me. He didn’t/couldn’t answer my question so I decided to share with him an article which explains why creed of Hadhir Nazir cannot be considered Shirk, here. And then decided at a later stage I will look into the article to his justification of Shirk. Not surprisingly the poor sod of Mufti didn’t justify his charge of Shirk which is a typical of Deobandi and Wahhabi academia. They preferr to tell you it is Shirk, religiously illiterate folks believe them, and both don’t need to learn principles of determining Tawheed and Shirk. 0.0 - Typical Inadequate Knowledge Of Tawheed And Shirk: This article was based on age old lies told to students of Deobandi Madrassas. Most of them never investigate the beliefs of opponents independently and trust the information provided to them by their teachers. And these Muftis live and die issuing edicts of Mushrik and Kafir based on information given to them. Those who do venture out in field of research they are inhibited by sense of loyalty to SECT and preconcieved notions therefore it is tainted by preconcieved notions. To compound the problem these Muftis during their student days are not taught in-depth methodology of determining Tawheed and Shirk. Instead they are taught basic Tawheed/Shirk and then given general guidance in form of rules to determine Tawheed and Shirk. The student is told Shirk is affirmation of Ilahiyyah and equality in attributes of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). But student is not taught thirteen principles which explain how equality is to be established for Shirk to be warranted. Instead something like the following is taught: If a belief, or practice, is composed of x, y, and z then it is Shirk. And if in according to a, b, c, d then Tawheed is affirmed. 0.1 Principles Primed For Declaring Beliefs And Practices Shirk: It is worthy pointing out principles taught to them are geared to make a belief/practice Shirk and its practioner Mushrik. And to achieve this Mushrik/Shirk making effort the fundamental methodology of determining Shirk/Tawheed with aid of thirteen principles is by-passed. Instead invented principles are taught which have no backing from Quran or Ahadith. Almost all such Wahhabi/Deobandi principles are invented to target specific beliefs and practices of rival sects. And therefore have little to, nothing to do, with educating students about methodology of Tawheed/Shirk. Instead the principles taught are primed for one objective only to defend the sect and to prepare a soilder for cause of the sect. Islamic methodology in comparision to their methodology of determining Shirk/Tawheed is such that even the opponents cannot and will not challenge. The problem with Wahhabi/Deobandi principle methodology is that it does not allow the student to understand how and why Shirk has occurred? Or in which attribute there is equality and which principle out of thirteen has established the equality if at all? As such they are ill-equipped to judge matters not explicitly mentioned in Quran or in books of Ahadith as Tawheed/Shirk. Result of which is they issue edicts of Shirk and Mushrik when there is no justification to do so. Mufti Waseem Khan is just another programmed parrot to regurgitate what he has swallowed during his student days and currently is soildering for Deobandism. 0.1 - Essential Read On Islamic Methodology Tawheed And Shirk: Those unaware of in-depth understanding of methodology of determining Tawheed and Shirk should read following two basic articles, here, here. And once these two are grasped then following should be attempted, here, it is bit more complex but is the most important out of all linked articles. It demonstrates twenty-six principles which are employed to determine equality/inequality between Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His creation; half of which are for the Creator and other half for His creation. These first three articles would suffice for reader to correctly understand and determine methodology how belief can be in accordance with teaching of Tawheed or Shirk. In this case belief of Hadhir Nazir. The following two articles are not important but will address two key points which confuse the opponents of Islam, here, here. If all of these articles are studied then, if Allah wills, the response to Deobandi Mufti’s drivel would be easily accessible. 1.0 - Brief Detail Of Tawheed And Shirk: Tawheed fundamentally is there is no Ilah except Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). He is Alone, without mother, father, wives, sons, and daughters, and without as His Ilah partners. He is the One and the Only in His Essence and Attributes. In principle Shirk is fundamentally diametric opposite of mentioned Tawheed. To believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has a partner Ilah, or to believe a creation is Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Shirk. To believe a creation possesses, one or more attributes, like Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) possesses His attribute or attributes is Shirk. 1.1 - Demonstration Of Detail In Which Shirk Is Warranted: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Living. Without being dependent upon any means or anyone. He was Living from eternity and will be Living to eternity. And this is Tawheedi belief. To believe Jesus has lived from eternity is Shirk. To believe Jesus will live to eternity is Shirk. To believe Jesus live independent;of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and of means created by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Shirk. In all these cases a creation has been made partner of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in attribute of Living and major Shirk as occurred. This is a small sample out of great detail all which establishes uniqueness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). 1.2 - Equality In Detail Is Reason Of Shirk Not Similarity Of Name, Or Attribute: If it is believed Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) was born in six hundered years before Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and will eventually die and will be burried next to final resting place of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). He had a beginning and an apparent end then no Shirk has occurred. The reason for this is that Living of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and living of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) is different in detail even though the words are same. The conclusion is that Shirk is not warranted on similarity of name of attriubte but equality in detail. Even though the He is Living and he is living yet their living is not same therefore no Shirk. And this is general rule for all attributes of creation and Creator. 2.0 – Two Routes To Major Shirk: Shirk can be determined from: i) Direct and explicit affirmation of Ilahiyyah: Verbally affirming some creation is an Ilah -; i.e. Amr is Ilah instead, or Amr is Ilah besides, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). ii) Indirect and implicit affirmation of Ilahiyyah: Amr believes that in certain attribute/attributes a creation equals Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in a particular attribute/attributes -; i.e. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was the Living from eternity past and Amr was living from Eternity past. There is no other route of major Shirk and all principles legitimate and illegitimate establish major Shirk via these two routes. So if we Muslims are guilty of major Shirk it will be due to one of it or not at all. 2.1- Muslim Teaching Regarding Affirming Ilahiyyah For Creation: With regards to the 1st, we Muslims do not affirm Ilahiyyah for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And as Muslims believe; to hold belief that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is the Ilah, or a Ilah partner of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is major Shirk which invalidates belief in Islam. The 2nd category, indirect and implicit affirmation of Ilahiyyah in this regard position of Ahlus Sunnah is same as before: One who affirms Ilahiyyah indirectly, by assigning to a creation, attribute/attributes in meanings which are unique for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), has committed major Shirk. As a result belief in Tawheed and Islam has been nullified and person is no longer Muslim. 3.0 - Hadhir Nazir In Nutshell And Attributes Connected With It: i) Shahid/Shaheed have popular meaning of witness but linguistically words Shahid/Shaheed are also unsed in meaning of Hadhir and Nazir. Another way of understanding it is: Every witness must be Hadhir (i.e. present) and Nazir (i.e. seeing). Words Shahid/Shaheed do not linguistically denote hearing but it is inclusive of hearing. Muslims believe the blessed body of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Hadhir all times in his heavenly final resting place but spiritualy witnesses the deeds of Jinn and mankind as they take place. In addition to this the angels also present deeds of his Ummatis to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). We believe witnessing by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is a miraclous merit conffered to him by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In a nutshell belief of Hadhir Nazir is in accordance with thirteen principles related to creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). ii) There are three key attributes connected with Hadhir and Nazir: a) Hadhir, b) Nazir, c) Sama’at. Hadhir means presence and correlates with existance. Presence means existance and existence means presence. No presences means no existance. Nazir with ability of seeing. As mentioned Arabic words connected with Hadhir Nazir are Shahid (i.e. witness) and Shaheed (i.e. witness). A witness is not always required to see but sometime hear. Due to this Sama’at (i.e. hearing) is naturally part and parcell of Shahid/Shaheed, and therefore of Hadhir Nazir. We Muslims believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has a: a) al-Wujud and also is possessor of following two attributes: b) al-Sami, c) al-Baseer. We believe in the existance (i.e. wujud) and presence of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in accordance with all His attributes. Al-Baseer (i.e. the seeing) correlates with Nazir (i.e. seeing). And He is al-Sami (i.e. the hearing) which correlates with Sama’at (i.e. hearing). 4.0 – Tawheed And Shirk Of al-Shahid, al-Sami, And al-Baseer: i) Tawheed is to believe in such a degree of perfection that His attributes cannot be improved. His attributes of al-Shahid (i.e. present), al-Sami, and al-Baseer are perfect beyond improvement. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is, al-Shahid, al-Sami and al-Baseer from eternity. He is not dependent upon eyes and light to see. He hears without ears, without dependency on waves. He is not dependent upon means which any of His creation is dependent upon to see and hear. His Hearing and Seeing encampases all. His Hearing and the Seeing are His Own and not conferred by another. Nor He requires permission from of a superior to employ them. Nor there is an equale to Him, or a superior then Him. There is no before Him and there is no after Him. There is no with Him and there is no without Him. He Hears all and Sees all. ii) Shirk is to give this unimprovably perfected attribute to a member of His creation. That is to say that a being was hearing and seeing from eternity. And example of this would be Trinitarian Christians who believe Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) is the God and son of God since eternity. This is major Shirk on three accounts: They explicitly affirmed Ilahiyyah for a creation, believed a creation to have existed from eternity as God. And finally affirmed all attributes of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) existed from eternity and these are inclusive of hearing and seeing. In short to believe a creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) sees all, hears alll without any of means which His creation is dependent upon is Shirk. Or a creation employs hearing/seeing without being subject to permission of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and both these attributes are creation’s own, and not conferred by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is also Shirk. 5.0 - Tawheed And Shirk In al-Shahid: al-Hadhir, al-Nazir, and al-Sami: i) Once there was no creation and there was the Only, the One Ilah, except Him there was no Ilah, or creation. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not exist. Then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) created him. He created his Noor, his soul, and through his righteous mother sent him as a last and final Prophet to mankind as a Shahid and Shaheed. Our this belief is in accordance with Tawheed because through this belief we have negated existance of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) from eternity. Attributes and actions all are dependent upon existance of essence and without essence these cannot pre-exist. In other words if we had affirmed belief; the very essence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi wa’sallam) was from eternity then naturally all his attributes/actions would have been believed to have existed from eternity. By negating eternal existance of prophetic essence we by default negate eternal attributes for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). ii) We Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnesses (via hearing, seeing) actions of Jinn and mankind. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) also sees/hears actions of Jinn and mankind but He also sees/hears actions of angels and every spec and atom, everything smaller then and greater then these. Shirk is equality with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in His attributes and clearly there is no equality in quantity of hearing/seeing by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Is there equality between the Creator and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? If not then how can the charge of major Shirk be justified? iii) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) granted to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) the extra-ordinary capability of witnessing (via hearing, seeing) the deeds of Jinn and mankind. And his witnessing is dependent upon permission from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and whenever He will desire Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will cease to witness them. This is consistent with belief of Tawheed because Muslims none granted to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the ability of witnessing and He requires permission of none to witness nor His witnessing will come to an end. Conclusion: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Shahid, it gives meaning of Hadhir Nazir, and we believe he sees actions of Jinn and mankind because he was sent to be witness over. His this ability is with permission of and with power granted to him by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It is limited and restricted. It had a beginning and he will cease to be Hadhir Nazir over Jinn and Mankind when Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills it so. In nutshell we Muslisms do not affirm any belief explicitly or implicitly which can be construed to warrant charge of Shirk. As Muslims we believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the Only, the One Ilah, and none beside Him deserves worship. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is al-Shahid, al-Sami, al-Baseer without equal. He was al-Shahid, al-Sami, al-Baseer from eternity and will remain to eternity. There was no beginning to His station of al-Shahid, al-Sami, al-Baseer and nor there will be an end. He is al-Shahid, al-Sami, al-Baseer unlimitedly and unrestrictively. And He was and is al-Shahid, al-Sami, al-Baseer without permission of another. There is no equality in belief of Muslims in station of Shahid of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Without exlicit affimration of Ilahiyyah or equality in attributes there is no Shirk nor charge of Shirk against those who say la ilah-ha il-allah is legitimate. And this Mufti, described in 68:5/15, and his ilk can say what they wish. The reality is, his Takfir of Muslims returns upon him, invalidating his own Islam, as per prophetic teaching. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi.

Introduction: A student attending South African seminary Dar ul-Uloom Zakariyyah. He introduced himself via email and showed interest in gaining first hand knowledge of subject of Hadhir Nazir. I passed to him links of some of my articles on topic and two important books on topic. Including Hayat al-Nabi, here, and Taskeen al-Khawatir Fi Mas’ala al-Hadhir Wa al-Nazir, here. Both of these books have been authored by Allamah Syed Ahmad Saeed Kazmi (rahimullah). The first mentioned is indirectly related to subject of Hadhir and Nazir while the second is directly on the topic. These two are complex books and require great deal of learning and intellectual capacity to understand. Upon investigation it was discovered the said seminary is Deobandi. About a month later Deobandi brother contacted me and wished to discuss the subject via WhatsApp. The resulting discussion was pleasant and academic. Parts of it were oral discussion and parts were in written. Hadhir Nazir What It is And Types Of It: [He asked me brief description of Hadhir Nazir and below was response to him.] There are three key components of Hadhir Nazir: i) Bashariyyah, ii) Roohaniyyah, iii) Nooraniyyah; also known as Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah. Hadhir Nazir is a belief; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) granted Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) supernatural ability to witness events during his life and spiritually after his passing from this world. Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah: It is a belief that all creation originated from portion of Noor which was separated from Noor of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and then this was divided into parts and creation was created from these parts. Therefore all parts of creation are connected with Noor of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and through this interconnectivity Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is aware of deeds of men and Jinn. [This lead to discussion on evidences of Hadhir Nazir. In somewhat detail I went through with foundational evidence on the subject. On the Nooraniyyah he attempted to resist so I took the path of Tanqeed and passed to him links of Deobandi elders who affirmed Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah. Nashr al-Teeb of Shaykh Thanvi, here. It was followed by reference Shaykh Nanotavi’s Qasaid e Qasmi, here. And finally Shaykh Dehalvi’s Kalam Shah Ismail Shaheed, here, and reference of Yak Roza, here. These four were followed by a ten year old article of mine in which Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah was discussed in great detail. It was first posted on AhlalHdeeth.org but unfortunately it is not been published on IslamiMehfil. I pointed out Awaliyah of Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam is established from Quranic verses and Hadith and Nooraniyyah points to Awaliyah like it does to Nooraniyyah. This indirectly supports the Hadith of Awal creation being Noor of Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam which was also quoted by Shaykh Thanvi in his Nashr al-Teeb. He requested time to look into the subject of Nooraniyyah. And a week and half later came back saying I am not entirely convinced due to many reasons but I am willing to move onto from traditional battle ground to scientific. He said Shaykh Kazmi rahimullah stated via Nooraniyyah Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam was/is aware of deeds and happenings of universe. Scientifically all matter is not living and nor it is linked together to pass the information. To be honest it makes no sense either. In response I informed the brother that he has opened up a very interesting and a novel subject of discussion. It is a discussion for which I am not prepared for and I will have to provide a written response. The following was my written response.] Unscientific: Dead Matter Connected With Organic Matter: All matter organic and in-organic is living and Quran established it. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Then He directed Himself to the heaven while it was smoke and said to it and to the earth: "Come [into being] willingly or by compulsion." They said: "We have come willingly." [Ref: 41:11] The verse of Quran attributes life to earth and smoke (i.e. gas) because it responded to demand of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). We deem material of vast majority of universe to be life-less but Islamicly it too is living a life but beyond our comprehension. Do note all organic matter fundamentally is inorganic. When inorganic matter is employed in a certain framework the product created is organic material. Therefore there is no reason to question capacity matter to give and transfer information to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah Makes No Sense: Hadhir Nazir part of Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah can be best understood with following example. All parts of human body are connected to brain via various means and serves as command and control Centre. Any trauma, touch, cold, and hot felt by human internally or externally its report is received by the brain. In similar fashion belief of Hadhir Nazir connected with Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah is that all matter organic or seemingly inorganic all is in someway connected with source which originated it. Think of operating system installed on your computer i.e. Windows XP. The fundamental requirement for your computer to function is an operating system. And every other software installed will be in someway connected to this operating system. This operating system is always aware that another XSoftware has been installed on it because XSoftware has been integrated with Windows XP. The Noor of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is the operating system of creation. Everything installed on operating system even though it is not part of operating system gets connected with it to function. Operating system is always aware of the hardware and the software installed computer. Similarly the Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah is the hardware and operating system of creation and due to it Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is aware of all that takes place. [He later said he understood what Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah is without the need of these examples. Brother said Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah does not make sense to mean he scientifically does not make sense. I took his statement to mean he cannot grasp how Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah functions. It was just a misunderstanding and there was no need for this. Yet I have decided to keep it part of this write-up because it may help others to understand.] Spooky Action At A Distance And Its Implication For Hadhir Nazir: Albert Einstein’s spooky action at distance now branded as Quantum Entanglement is; paired particles separated by large distances instantaneously effects and causes the other to act. Professor Michio Kaku explains what Quantum Entanglement is, here. Professor Michio says when two paired particles are separated placed thousands of light year apart develop a umbilical cord connection develops. And something important takes place: y particle – faster than light - instantaneously is aware of stimulation received by z and acts accordingly. Professor Michio Kaku acknowledges Albert Einstein was incorrect in his statement that nothing can transfer faster then light because Quantum Entanglement proves instantaneous transfer of information over distances which light would take thousands of years to travel. He also says that now the scientist community has revised the statement to: No usable information can be transferred faster then speed of light. And insha-Allah ta’ala ul aziz just like Albert Einstein was wrong so will be Professor Michio Kaku in his assertion, it is just matter of time. Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah first thing which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) created was Noor of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) divided this Noor into two. One part was Noor of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and the other went through transformations to result creation. Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah in reality is roughly Quantum Entanglement on very large scale with useful information being transferred between the creation and what is known as Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah. Scientist community has just managed to unearth a toe of Quantum Entanglement and maybe in coming decades and centuries it will go on to establish interconnectivity of entire creation. [He said brother I understand the key point in what you have written. What you have wrote is theoretically possible but its pure speculation about what they may come to discover in future and it is leap of great faith believe it. Rather then focusing on scientific theories we should discuss textual side of issue. In response to Deobandi brother I said that I agreed with his conclusion; theoretical plausibility do not prove/refute a textually established/refuted teaching. Concrete scientific facts and textual proofs from religious texts are needed. My objective was only to establish a possibility of communication between two objects with no apparent connections. I am not well versed into the subject either. I am not aware if Quantum Entanglement is a theoretical possibility, or actual naturally observed/occurring phenomena by particle physicists.] Wahhabi, Deobandi, And Orthodox Beliefs Of Being Sent As Witness And Witnessing: [During our discussion I had stated that Deobandis and Wahhabis believe in Hadhir Nazir station of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam to some degree. He asked if I can share with him who believes what. I briefly stated the facts I could recall but also wrote the following.] Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) directly witnesses the deeds of believers and disbelievers of mankind as they happen. And this belief is termed as Hadhir Nazir. The members of Wahhabi sect disbelieve in this merit of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Educated elite of Deobandis believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is shown the deeds of his Ummah by angels but oppose direct witnessing of events as they happen. Muslims believe he will testify in court of Allah(subhanahu wa ta’ala) on day of judgment in defense of Prophets, members of his Ummah and mankind in general. And believe his testimony would be based on fact that he was first hand witness. Wahhabis and Deobandis believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will testify in defense of Prophets not having actually witnessed the events. Wahhabis do not believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would testify regarding deeds of mankind which transpired before his birth. And he may testify about events which he saw during his life but definitely not after his death. An elite from Deobandis believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would testify on actions of Ummah but would be informed by angels and members of Ummah that x, y, z, has transpired after his death. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) on account of this information would testify on actions of members of his nation. Just like the Wahhabis, the Deobandis also do not believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would bear witness on actions of mankind in anyway. [He asked: How I have come to know who believes what. He was told that some notions I learnt and believed while I was part of these two sects. And even though some of the beliefs are not stated in books of these sects but the fact that these are established from Sahih/Hassan Ahadith is enough justification that they would be believe in them.] True Witness And A Liar Bearing Witness: [He said Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam being sent as Shahid and Shaheed does not necessitate he must see and hear the events. And then he followed this statement with incident mentioned in Hadith. I said: Brother the implications of this dispute are far greater then the subject of Hadhir Nazir itself. Unfortunately the side holding to belief hasn’t fully expounded all reasons why one should believe it. And the sides opposing it have not tried to understand it in more depth. They have been engaged providing/refuting textual proofs on the subject. The issue is more then the subject of Shahid/Shaheed. Firstly the Adil i.e. justice of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala comes into question if a being is presented as a witness but has not seen/heard the events yet testifies and Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala accepts witnessing of a non-witness. Secondly the truthfulness and uprightness of Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam would be in question that he would bear witness even when he has not seen/heard. No Muslim would hold to position which negates Adil of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala and truthfulness and uprightness of moral conduct of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam. After this discussion I wrote following material and sent it to him.] i) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) sent Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has a Shahid and Shaheed (i.e. witness). Quran explains he would testify in defends of Prophets, would bear witness on actions of his Ummah and mankind in general. To be truthful witness the requirement is direct witnessing. And therefore belief of Hadhir Nazir in nutshell is directly witnessing of actions of Jinn and mankind as they transpire. In this context Muslims believe to say he would testify without witnessing the events is to say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would be bearing false witness. To say; Ummah will inform him, or Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has/will inform him; of events and on account of this he would testify does nothing to remove the false witnessing assertion and to even hold any of the belief evidence is required. And fact is that there is no proof in Quran or Hadith that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would testify on account of being informed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), or by his own Ummah. Rather all evidence points to direct witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). This is in accordance with truthfulness and dignity of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) which is negatively effected by Deobandi belief on topic of witnessing. ii) Day of judgment, the greatest court to be established, where nothing but truth will be accepted, and where the presiding Judge is the most Compassionate, the most Merciful, and the all-Knowing, all-Seeing, all-Hearing, the first hand Witness of all evidence to be presented in His court, and Just above all. To say he would accept the testimony of those who have not witnessed the events is contempt of His court, His justice, His judgment, and of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). [In the next session he said brother Ali paradise isn’t granted on due to Adil of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala but through his mercy. And he quoted Hadith in which Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam said paradise will be granted due to mercy of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala even to him. In response to this I pointed out brother there is no dispute on this point of yours. The point of contention is if Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala accepts witnessing of a individual who has not actually witnessed the events would that go against His Adil. You believe He will accept such witnessing and I believe Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala would not because it goes against notion of Adil. He said he will have to seriously think about subject of Hadhir Nazir and its implications on Adil of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala and Sidq of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam. And I did not attempt to compel brother into submission because I have come to realize everyone has to fight their own Kafir demons to come to belief. It is always not just about rational, logical, and textual evidences but other elements effect decisions too.] Ummah Can Testify Without Witnessing So Can Prophet: [In the previous days session he quoted Hadith in which it was stated Ummah of RasoolAllah sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam would testify in defense of Prophets. And I wanted to address this Hadith and point out an important detail which brother maybe was unaware – underlined below.] On the day of judgment Ummah of every Prophet would deny that a Messenger was sent for them. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will ask the Prophets to provide proof they delivered the messages entrusted to them. Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will testify on the day of judgment but Ahadith explain that when they will be questioned how can you bear witness in defense of Prophets when you have not seen the events yourself. The Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would reply Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has informed us that Prophets had delivered the messages entrusted to them. This establishes the witnessing of Ummah would be similar to witnessing of Khuzaymah Ibn Thabit (radiallah ta’ala anhu): Of a believer who has trusted the information given to him by the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and testimony of his is of his faith in truthfulness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Hadith records Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would then proceed to testify in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). There will be no objection from the disbelievers on judgment day that Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had not directly witnessed the event. This is indicates Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has witnessed the events and the disbelievers believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessed their deeds. [He disagreed with my conclusion but agreed with what was established from text Hadith. He said that he is not textually compelled enough to believe that there was no objection to witnessing of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam. Nor is he willing to assume that lack of evidence to contrary establishes logical deduction that Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam witnessed directly without a intermediary. I replied: Brother if a verse states x and another states y and while explaining x I assume into it text of y without specifying it you will not deduce my Tafsir is baseless rather you will understand that another verse has been incorporated into Tafsir without making direct reference to it. My conclusion was not based on ONLY lack of objection emanating from disbelievers of past but based on evidence of Hadhir Nazir from Quran and Ahadith which we have discussed in detail. And in light of truthfulness and best of character of RasoolAllah sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam and due to lack of evidence of objection. In short my conclusion was in light of whole subject and evidence of it not just lack of objection from disbelievers. Again I did not press the point and asked him to end discussion.] Receiving A Truthful Report Doesn’t Make You Witness Of Event: [In our third day session he said brother we rely on the Ahadith which have been transmitted by witnesses. Then why should Ummah and Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam not rely on testimony of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam and he on testimony of his Ummah? My oral response was that if truthful report is sufficient ground for testifying in court or on judgment day then why didn’t Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala accept the witnessing of Ummah of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam? If this was criteria then Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala due to testimony of last final Ummah would have decided the case in favor of Prophets. Yet Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam had to testify in defense of Prophets and to support the testimony of his Ummah. Also the truthful Prophets VS lying disbelievers but Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala did not decide the case in favor of Prophets. They said Ya Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala we delivered the messages you gave us but a truthful Prophet reporting back to Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala isn’t believed. Brother could not muster a worthy response to counter argument and said he will get back to me. On the same day I followed him up with following written content.] Fundamental requirement is that a truthful witness must see/hear about events he would testify about in court or else it is false testimony. Even a true report transmitted by Xtruthfull to Ytruthfull will not make Ytruthfull a witness to event. A Sahih, or a Mutawatir Hadith transmitted by a companion who had witnessed the words being spoken by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and then truthfully transmitted will not make Tabi a witness. Therefore Muslim Ummah bearing witness in defense of Prophets on account of being informed by Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Or Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessing on judgment day after being informed by Ummah, or by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) does not make him a witness. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a witness and will be called to bear witness. Hence being sent as a witness, and to bear witness both require witnessing first hand with eyes/ears. Anything less is implicit attribution of ignorance to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and implicit accusation that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would deceptively be a witness when in reality he was not. [There was no discussion for few days apart from greetings. Then he sought clarification about underlined. I explained; Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala sent Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam as a Shahid/Shaheed. To believe he was sent as Shahid and does not have to see deeds of those to whom he was sent to is implying Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala did not know meaning of Shahid/Shaheed, or that He made mistake by employing it. He said brother we believe he is Shahid/Shaheed but not meaning you associate with it. I replied my dear brother Qadiyanis believe Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam is Khatam al-Nabiyeen but don’t ascribe to it the meaning of last/final Prophet. What good is belief in the Arabic word when the natural meaning of it is being rejected and instead of natural meaning a distorted meaning is being ascribed to it and believed? He didn’t answer the question. I continued: Qadiyaniyyah are disbelievers for rejecting consensus understanding of Khatam al-Nabiyeen and Deobandiyyah do not reject the fundamental meaning of Shahid/Shaheed but definitely reject the natural implications of fundamental meaning when these verses are employed to interpreted in light of other verses of Quran. This is not Kufr but definitely removes the Deobandis from Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah and into fold of people of innovation. He disliked that Deobandis were being equated with Qadiyanis and were declared ahlul biddah.] Taweel Of Fundamental Creed Is Incorrect: [He said brother we do not reject valid Tafsir of Quran and Hadith. We too explain the verses of Shahid/Shaheed in light of Quranic evidences. I had to leave to attend my son, Muhammad Ibrahim Ahmad, so at night I wrote him the following response.] Taweel of what is fundamentally established via Qiyas is invalid. We believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is all-knowing and is aware of everything taking place. When Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) enquired from Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) what have you got in your hand he replied staff. On basis of question of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and the information given by Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) would it be acceptable to make Taweel of fundamental creed; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) being aware of everything at all times. To believe; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) isn’t aware of all happenings all times? And to support this new innovated creed should I employ; angels present our deeds to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because He does not see events as they transpire. Taweel of fundamental creed on grounds of Qiyas is just not acceptable. Creed regarding Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent as Shahid/Shaheed is that he was sent as a hearing/seeing type of witness of mankind and has witnessed all deeds regarding which he would testify. [Following day he posted audio message saying; brother it is not Taweel but Tafsir. I waited for his call and said to him: Your methodology of Tafsir turns the apparent of combinations of verses toward another meaning through Qiyas of another verse. And objective of your Tafsir/Taweel is to negate the natural meanings. Our method of Tafsir is to build upon the natural meaning of verse. He replied even IF it is Taweel Deobandis and Barelwis both believe Taweel of verses is permissible. I said brother it is true we believe in Taweel. There are two types of Taweel; i) which negates literal reading of a text, ii) which gives another meaning of literal reading of text but objective is not to negate literal reading. The first is regarding those verses about whom Taweel is absolutely essential and their literalism is impossible. Like it is in the case of some of attributes of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala and literalism of these would denote humanly parts to Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala. And therefore we have two schools of Ahlus Sunnah one practices Tafweed and other Taweel. The second phrases such as ya ahlul kitab, literalism is o people of book and refers to Jews/Christians. Taweel would be O educated people from Jews and Christians. In the literal reading addressed are entire Jews/Christians nations and in Taweel only the educated of these two are being addressed. Quran is Jawami al-Kalim therefore both can be accepted and should be accepted as valid. Taweel of this type expands understanding of verse of Quran without negating fundamental meaning of it due to Jawami al-Kalim nature of Quran. You and your scholars are applying the first type of Taweel methodology to cancel the natural meaning of verse and we are saying there is no need for that in context of this verse because Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala is able over what we believe it is not impossible. Why apply Taweel methodology of impossible, i.e. of hand of Allah, upon the verse of; O Prophet we have sent you as Shahid … Hand for Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala is impossible therefore Taweel of hand of Allah is required because hand denotes four fingers and a thumb and Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala is not creation and not human being. Taweel which negates literal meaning of verse is for those verses whose literalism is impossible. You cannot apply that upon verse in which it is stated Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam has been sent as Shahid because there is no need of Taweel of the natural meaning of verse. He said brother you’re the first one to distinguish between Taweel in this fashion. I said brother I am glad I have contributed something positive to your knowledge. He laughed saying he meant it in negative sense. I asked have I said anything wrong he had to acknowledge he could not dispute with any of it. I said brother my original comment was about making Taweel of fundamental beliefs and not Taweel of verses. Point was we don’t make Taweel of fundamental beliefs by employing other verses and Qiyas is not your or our methodology.] Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Muslims believe companions requested Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to witness their good deeds because they held the notion; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sent as a Shahid/Shaheed (i.e. witness). Connected to this belief was that being sent as a witness entails sent to observe and hear. This witnessing is inclusive of good and bad deeds of those whom he has been sent to. And they also believed whatever Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnesses he will testify in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) on the day of judgment. Deobandi Brother Argued Witnessing In The Hadith Was Legal: Deobandi with login name of Haq3009 at IslamiMehfil forum presented following Hadith as evidence: “Narrated An-Nu`man bin Bashir: My mother asked my father to present me a gift from his property; and he gave it to me after some hesitation. My mother said that she would not be satisfied unless the Prophet was made a witness to it. I being a young boy, my father held me by the hand and took me to the Prophet . He said to the Prophet, "His mother, bint Rawaha, requested me to give this boy a gift." The Prophet said: "Do you have other sons besides him?" He said: "Yes." The Prophet said: "Do not make me a witness for injustice." Narrated Ash-Shu`bi that the Prophet said: "I will not become a witness for injustice." [Ref: Bukhari, B48, H818] In response to him a comprehensive answer was given which can be read, here. A Deobandi brother contacted me in IslamiMehfil via PM and quoted the following portion out of my explanation: “Why did the companion wanted to make him Witness for the event in the first place? The answer is they believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is witness upon their deeds as a result they wanted to make him eye witness to act of father being good to his son. Then on the judgment day he will testify to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that they did good deeds. Father wanting to gift his son is good deed but to ignore the others is sinful and injustice. As a result when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) would be bearing witness against these people in the court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It was for this reason Messenger (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: "Do not make me a witness for injustice.” He wrote that this witnessing was of legal type: “This Hadith is evidence for making others a witness to transactions which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructed in verse 2:282 of Quran. There is nothing in the Hadith from which you can deduce companion believed what I have underlined in your quote, this is just your assumption. If it was witnessing of deeds then why would Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) refuse to be witness over it! Your interpretation of data does not agree with Hadith.” A detailed response was given to him to establish why the Hadith was request to be witness over a good deed. And it established that indeed companion held to the belief ascribed to them. Witnessing Of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): If it was legal type of witnessing then two witnesses would have been called and not just Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as the Quranic verse instructs: “And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called (for evidence).” [Ref: 2:282] This is enough to refute your point. Also if the witnessing was legal type then companion and his wife would have asked family members of recepient to be witness and more likely brothers and sisters of recipient. Why particular about Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessing the bestowal of gift? Also Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not refuse to be witness but he said do not make me witness to injustice. And this was on the grounds; on the day of judgment I will be witness against you and will testify that you committed this injustice. Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) stated and quoted verses relating to topic: “’… as witness …’ means; a witness to Allah's Oneness, for there is no God except He, and a witness against mankind for their deeds on the Day of Resurrection. [Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala] said: “… and We bring you as a witness against these people …” (4:41) This is like the Ayah: “… that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you.” (2:143) [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 33:45] However you play the end result is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed them to not to make him witness over a injustice because he is sent as a witness to witness their deeds and on judgment day he will be witness against them. Truth Of Matter And Justified Argument: You’re right in saying that there is nothing in the Hadith which explicitly establishes what the companion believed. Yet my assumption of their belief was best possible understanding based on teaching that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a witness to witness, confidence that they believed in what was revealed, and habbit of companions making Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witness over their good deeds, here. And absence of two witnesses, companion being particular about Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and most probable cause for inviting him to be witness over the affair. Reasonable Assumption And Best Opinion About Companions: The Hadith in discussion employs the word Prophet while referring to Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but not Rasool. Would it be correct to assume the companion and his wife believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was Rasool also? And that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is only worthy of worship and there is nothing like Him? If Hadith explicitly had to state Rasool for you to believe that companion and his wife believe he is Rasool of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then you have to agree there is no indication they believed he was Rasool of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Are you going to accuse them of disbelieving in Messenger-ship of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? Or will you do what is reasonable and just, and assume they believe all that is in Quran until proven otherwise? I am Muslim and I have best opinion of followers of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). They were/are the best of Ummah raised from amongst mankind. They believed as they suppose to believe and acted as they should have acted. Even though you cannot comprehend I am justified in assuming and attributing beliefs to companions based on what is established from Quranic text. Conclusion: Companions in general including the parents of Numan Ibn Bashir (radiallah ta’ala anhu) requested Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to be witness over their good deeds because they believed he will witness for them in hereafter. In the case of Hadith in discussion the parents were depriving of their other children of property and giving one child preferential treatment which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said was injustice and asked them to not to make him witness it. Reason being that he will testify in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that they committed a transgression to which he is witness. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: During a discussion on subject of Hadhir Nazir and in explanation of verse, O Prophet truly We have sent you as a Shahid/Witness, Wahhabi argued this verse is connected with verses in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is said to be witness over his Ummah in defence of Prophets. And it has no connection with Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessing deeds of his own Ummah [or mankind ing eneral]. He attempted to de-link the verse from Ummah because Islamic teaching is; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will witness the deeds of mankind, including his Ummah, and will testify in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And this in essence establishes the belief which has come to be known as Hadhir Nazir. Therefore focus of this article would to establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) actually witnesses actions and will testify as such. 0.0 - Jawami al-Kalim Nature Of Quran And Prophetic Utterances: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said he has been given Jawami Al-Kalim and he explained; few sentences expressing vast meanings and indeed this is nature of Quran: “Narrated Abu Huraira: I heard Allah's Messenger saying: "I have been sent with Jawami al-Kalim, and I was made victorious with awe (caste into the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping the keys of the treasures of the earth were brought to me and were put in my hand." Muhammad said: Jawami al-Kalim means that Allah expresses in one or two statements or thereabouts the numerous matters that used to be written in the books revealed before (the coming of) the Prophet.” [Ref: Bukhari, B87, H141] In light of this it should be noted that it is possible to interpret verses of Quran in many ways, and all interpretations can be valid if they have sustantiating evidence, and do not contradict a apparent meaning of verse which cannot not be reconciled with the interpretation. 1.0 - Prophet Of Allah Sent As A Witness To Mankind: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a witness, a bearer of glad tidings, and as a warner." [Ref: 33:45] Being sent as a Warner entails the one being sent as Warner warns and if he gives no warning of impending harm, loss of property, or life, or anything else then he isn’t a warner. And same applies to bearer of glad tidings. Muslims would agree that he warned mankind of punishment of hell-fire and gave glad tidings of paradise to mankind if they believe and do righteous deeds. In this context of being warner/giver of glad tidings to mankind Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated he has sent Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as a witness and therefore natural meaning would be he has been sent as a witness to see/hear. And he is sent to as warner and giver of glad-tidings to mankind therefore his station of Shahid/Shaheed is for entire mankind just as his warnings and glad-tidings and entire Islam is for mankind. Being been sent as a witness to a convention the natural meaning is to observe the events of convetion and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent to mankind as a witness to witness the deeds of mankind. Hadith establishes direct witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): "It is reported by Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Mawahib al-Laduniyyah bil-Manahi al-Muhammadiyyah, Vol7, Page204] 1.1 - Interpretation Of 33:45 By Imam Suyuti And Shaykh Ibn Kathir: Imam Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (rahimullah) had following to say on the verse: “O Prophet! Indeed We have sent you as a witness against those to whom you have were sent and as a bearer of good tidings for those who affirm your sincerity of Paradise and as a warner for those who deny you of the punishment of the Fire.” [Ref: Tafsir al-Jalalayn, 33:45, here.] Note Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a Nabi/Rasool to entire Jinn and mankind. In this context Imam (rahimullah) has stated that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a witness against entire mankind and this agrees with what Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) stated. Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) commenting in his Tafsir indicates on the day of judgment Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be a witness against mankind for their deeds: “’… as witness …’ means; a witness to Allah's Oneness, for there is no God except He, and a witness against mankind for their deeds on the Day of Resurrection. [Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala] said: “… and We bring you as a witness against these people …” (4:41) This is like the Ayah: “… that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you.” (2:143) [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 33:45] 2.0 - Allah And Messenger Of Allah Observe Deeds Of Ummah: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated that He and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will see the deeds of hypocrties: “They will make excuses to you when you have returned to them. Say, "Make no excuse - never will we believe you. Allah has already informed us of your news. And Allah will observe your deeds, and His Messenger; then you will be taken back to the Knower of the unseen and the witnessed, and He will inform you of what you used to do." [Ref: 9:94] In light of historical context the verse states when the Muslims return from battle the hypocrites will present excuses to you in an attempt to justify why they have not taken part in battle. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been instructed to say to them that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has already informed him about reality of Iman and they are to be told do not make excuses about your absence from Jihad. As stated Quran is short but comprehensive in meaning. It can also be interpreted to mean that; O hypocrites of Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) time and of every era you can do your deeds Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will observe your deeds then you will be brought back in presence of your Lord and He will inform you of all that you did. Another evidence which explains why Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) observes the deeds: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a witness, a bearer of glad tidings, and as a warner." [Ref: 33:45] For those who are reluctant to accept second interpretation please note it is attested by commentators in a similar verse to 9:94 where Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And say: "Do deeds for Allah will see your deeds, and His Messenger, and the believers. And you will be returned to the Knower of the unseen and the witnessed, and He will inform you of what you used to do." [Ref: 9:105] Imam Jalal ad-Din al-Suyuti (rahimullah ta’ala) has stated about this verse: “And say to them [the hypocrites], or to people in general: ‘Act as you will for God will surely see your actions and so will His Messenger and the believers and you will be returned through resurrection to the Knower of the unseen and the visible that is to God and He will tell you what you used to do and so requite you for it.’” [Ref: Tafsir al-Jalalayn, 9:105, here.] This establishes Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will see the actions of hypcrites and Mulsims. Note the verse isn’t restricted to context of an era. It is open to all ages and instruction in it is applicable to all Muslims therefore the detail of verse applies to all Muslims including seeing of actions of by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and believers. 2.1 - Good And Bad Deeds Of Ummah Presented To Prophet: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and we talk to you, and my demise is also a great good for you (because) your deeds will be presented to me. If they are good, I will praise Allah, and if they are bad, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you.” [Ref:Narrated by Ibn Hajar Asqalani, through Harith, in al-Matalib ul-aliyah, 4: 22-3 #3853] “Bakr bin ‘Abdullah also reported that the Holy said: My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and you are responded. And when I will die my demise will be a great good for you. Your deeds will be presented to me, if I see goodness, I will praise Allah, and if I see wrongs, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you." [Ref: Ibn Sa‘d related in at-Tabaqat-ul-kubra 2:194, Ali bin Abu Bakr Haythami related in Majma al-Zawa’id 9:24] This establishes he is aware of the deeds and affairs of his Ummah after he passed away. 3.0 - Companion Wants To Make Prophet A Witness: It is recorded in Hadith that a companion wanted to gift a property to his son and he wanted Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to be witness the good deed take place: “Narrated An-Nu`man bin Bashir: My mother asked my father to present me a gift from his property; and he gave it to me after some hesitation. My mother said that she would not be satisfied unless the Prophet was made a witness to it. I being a young boy, my father held me by the hand and took me to the Prophet . He said to the Prophet, "His mother, bint Rawaha, requested me to give this boy a gift." The Prophet said: "Do you have other sons besides him?" He said: "Yes." The Prophet said: "Do not make me a witness for injustice." Narrated Ash-Shu`bi that the Prophet said: "I will not become a witness for injustice." [Ref: Bukhari, B48, H818] Companion inviting Prophet (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to be witness over his good deed establishes the companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) held to belief that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is witness over them in sense of witnessing their deeds. Following article is related to topic and Hadith, here. 3.1 - Companion Dedicates A Well And Makes Prophet A Witness: It is recorded in Hadith a companion gave a garden in charity on behalf of his deceased mother and made Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witness to it: “It was narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that a man said: "O Messenger of Allah, my mother died; will it benefit her if I give in charity on her behalf?" He said: "Yes." He said: "I have a garden and I ask you to bear witness that I am giving it in charity on her behalf." [Ref: Nisai, B30, H3685] Companion specificly making Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) a witness of his good deed indicates companion has a particular belief due to which he did so. It is common knowledge Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has appointed angels to write good/bad deeds of believers and nothing goes miss from their accounts. In this light it cannot be said companion feared Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would not be aware or the angels would not record the deed. The only plausible and logical reason for making Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witness the good deed would be; he believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness of his deeds in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his witnessing carrys special weight in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Hadith in Sahih of Imam Bukhari (rahimullah) gives greater detail about identity of companion and incident: “Narrated Ibn Abbas: That the mother of Sa`d bin Ubada the brother of Bani Saida died in Sa`d's absence, so he came to the Prophet saying: "O Allah's Messenger! My mother died in my absence, will it benefit her if I give in charity on her behalf?" The Prophet said: "Yes." Sa`d said: "I take you as my witness that I give my garden Al-Makhraf in charity on her behalf." [Ref: Bukhari, B51, H24] 3.2 - Prophet Said To Abu Talib Recite Shahadah And I Will Testify On Your Behalf: Hadith records Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said to his uncle Abu Talib to recite Shahadah but he refused: “Narrated Abu Hurairah, may Allah be pleased with him: "The Messenger of Allah said to his uncle: 'Say: None has the right to be worshiped except Allah. And I may bear witness with that, on your behalf, on the Day of Judgement.' So he said: 'If it weren't that the Quraish would insult me (by saying): ‘He only said it out of fright then I would delighted your eyes.' Then Allah the Mighty and Sublime revealed: Verily, you guide not whom you like, but Allah guides whom He wills.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B44, H3188] Note Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said he will bear witness in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) if Abu Talib recites the Shahadah. In another Hadith there is additional detail mentioned: "Narrated Sa`id bin Al-Musaiyab from his father: When the time of the death of Abu Talib approached, Allah's Messenger went to him and found Abu Jahl bin Hisham and Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya bin Al-Mughira by his side. Allah's Messenger said to Abu Talib: "O uncle! Say: None has the right to be worshipped but Allah. A sentence with which I shall be a witness for you before Allah. Abu Jahl and Abdullah bin Abi Umaiya said: "O Abu Talib! Are you going to denounce the religion of Abdul Muttalib?" Allah's Messenger kept on inviting Abu Talib to say it while they kept on repeating their statement till Abu Talib said as his last statement that he was on the religion of Abdul Muttalib and refused to say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' Then Allah's Messenger said: "I will keep on asking Allah's forgiveness for you unless I am forbidden (by Allah) to do so." So Allah revealed (the verse) concerning him." [Ref: Bukhari, B23, H442] Both these Ahadith prove Islamic belief that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a witness to observe/hear deeds and willl testify on behalf of Muslims in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Conclusion: Section 1.0 explains the verse in light of other verses to imply that it is inclusive of entire mankind. And 1.1 quotes interpretation of verse 33:45 of Imam Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (rahimullah) and of Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah). They have indicated that RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) on the day of judgment will testify on deeds of mankind which is inclusive of his own Ummah. Section 2.0 to 2.1 establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) observes the good and bad deeds of his Ummah. Section 3.0 to 3.2 establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was made to bear witness to some of good deeds on the grounds that he would testify in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). There are number of conclusions that can be drawn from this information.This first and connected to main objective of article is; verse 33:45 and verses like it are about Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent as a witness to observe deeds of mankind so on the day of judgment he can bear truthfully bear witness by meeting criteria of a witness - hearing and seeing of deeds. Ofcourse he did witness everything during his life time as the Hadith established in 1.0. We Muslims also believe after departure of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) from earthly life Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) conferred upon him supernatural ability to witness deeds of Jinn and mankind without a intermediatry that are to happen till the day of judgment. In additions to this angels present records of deeds to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and this is another way he is made aware of happenings of events but not the only way. Over-all witnessing of deeds of Ummah and mankind in general has been established. Wama alayna ilal balalghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Shaykh Madani defends his senior Shaykh Ashrat Ali Thanvi saying; as per rules of Tashbeeh it can only be in a single quality. And he argues Tashbeeh in Hifz ul-Iman is in category of Baaz and not in quantity of Baaz [Ilm al-Ghayb]. He believes if itna was used instead of aisa then then statement of Hifz ul-Iman would be objectionable but aisa of Tashbeeh is used. Also he stated quantity of prophetic knowledge is not being discussed in Hifz ul-Iman. All of these excuses are being exmployed to vindicate Shaykh Thanvi from blame of Kufr and insulting Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). This article will attempt to look into matter if Shaykh Madani was successful in his effort or has failed miserably. “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); Ghayb knowledge like-this is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] 0.1 - Shaykh Madani’s Deception Under Microscope: Shaykh Madani has stated about Hifz ul-Iman’s statement: “Even if we ignore this then please consider this; that honorable Mawlana Thanvi has stated word aisa but did not state word itna. If it was word itna then it would have occasioned objection, may Allah forbid, that knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been equaled with knowledge of other things. If this is not pure foolishness then what else is it. Even if we over look this; even then word aisa is of Tasbih and it is apparent that if something is compared with someothing then comparision is not in all aspects.” [Ref: Shahab as-Saqib, by Shaykh Hussain Ahmad Madani, Page281/282, here.] He negates usage of itna because he understands if it was itna instead of aisa then statement would establish eqaulity in quantity of prophetic knowledge and the mentioned creations. In another place Shaykh Madani writes: “Therefore you will find many examples of this where Tashbeeh is only between a single quality where objective is to assimilate mushabah (i.e. compared with) and mushaba bihi (i.e. compared to). And where there is no intention to compare other things. In this place (meaning in statement of Hifz ul-Iman) it is absolutely not possible that quantity of knowledge of Ghuyub are being compared because he himself says that all knowledges relating to Prophet-hood were all held by RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And these things (of knowledge) are not for Zaid, Umar, Bakr, and others. In here word itna (i.e. this-much) has not been employed. In fact comparision is in baazi’at (i.e. limitedness) because if from qull (all) Ghayb even one thing is omitted even that would be baaz.” [Ref: Shahab as-Saqib, by Shaykh Hussain Ahmad Madni, Page 282/283, here.] Shaykh Madani; Aisa is for Tashbeeh and goes on to say Tashbeeh is not in every aspect and in this Shaykh Thanvi agrees with Shaykh Madani. And then Shaykh states therefore the Tashbeeh is in Nafs (i.e. category) of Baaz and not in quantity of Baaz. And in another place Shaykh writes:“Any person even with slight sense of understanding statement; such a person would clearly say that aisa is pointing toward word baaz and discussion is about of it (baaz). Therefore in context of statement and context of discussion both clearly establish that Tashbeeh is in the Nafs (i.e. implies; category) of baaz and not in quantity of Baaz; that it be subjected to criticism/opposition.” [Ref: Shahab as-Saqib, by Shaykh Hussain Ahmad Madni, Page 283, here.] 0.2 - Objective Of Shaykh Madani Plain And Simple: There are two objectives of Shaykh Madani: i) He is attempting to argue; in principle Tashbeeh is in a single trait and not in many traits therefore the Tashbeeh is only in category of Baaz. In other words aisa returns to category of Baaz and not to Baaz Ilm of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And he is attempting to refute quantity argument. If his argument is believed then Tashbeeh would mean; type and quantity of prophetic knowledge of Ghayb is possessed by mentioned creations. ii) Aisa is for Tashbeeh and Itna is for quantity; and due to gramatical structuring if it was itna in statement then Tashbeeh of Baazi’at would return to RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Shaykh Thanvi would be saying; prophetic quantity of knowledge is possessed by the mentioned creations. So Shaykh Madani is attempting to refute this by denying Aisa not meaning Itna. Unfortunately for Shaykh Aisa is used in meaning of Itna and in sense of Tashbeeh. 1.0 - Tashbeeh In Two Aspects - Hifz Ul-Iman’s Statement Is Exception To Rule: If we grant Shaykh Madani the argument; Tashbeeh is in single aspect and not in many traits. He states that Tashbeeh is in category of Mutliq Ilm al-Ghayb (i.e. Nafs of Baazi’at) and not in quantity of Mutliq Ilm al-Ghayb. Islamic response to Shaykh Madani would be; if the controversial statement of Hifz ul-Iman is read apparently, without diving into depth, and if statement is understood in parts and not as whole, then Tashbeeh is in two places. The first and apparent [and the easily acessible] Tashbeeh is between category of Baaz of mentioned creations and of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In second and the actual Tashbeeh is between Baaz quantity of knowledge of Ghayb known to RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and quantity of Ghayb knowledge of mentioned creations. It is correct that Tashbeeh is always in a single aspect and it is between where ‘the compared’ and ‘the compared to’ have a common ‘trait’. Shaykh Thanvi and Shaykh Madani should have known and are educated better because statement of Hifz ul-Iman even if Tashbeeh is in Nafs of Baazi’at (i.e. category of Baaz) even then due to negation of Takhsees (i.e. speciality, or uniqueness) of prophetic knowledge of Ghayb in Nafs of Baazi’at the natural meaning would be Tashbeeh in equal quantity between ‘the compared’ and ‘compared to’ because Takhsees could only be negated by Shaykh Thanvi if assumed prophetic knowledge was equal in Nafs of Baazi’at to creations mentioned by Shaykh Thanvi or less then knowledge Ghayb knowledge of mentioned creations. If he believed prophetic knowledge was definitive as well as greater in quantity then he could not have negated Takhsees. His negation of Takhsees establishes there is another Tashbeeh but less apparent and it is of equality in quantity in category of Baaz not just only in category of Baaz. Even though the second Tashbeeh has been mentioned as second in reality there is just one Tashbeeh because Tashbeeh of equal quantity is part of same statement and because quantity however great/little it maybe it is still in category of Baaz. Imagine it as many parts coming togather to make a car. Despite the large quantity of parts they all assemble to make one car. In similar fashion Shaykh Thanvi’s statement has two parts and both come togahter to establish actual meaning of his statement; Tashbeeh of equal qauntity in category of Baaz. 1.1 – Equality Due To Exageration Or Equality Due To Detracting: It is established Shaykh Thanvi’s statement establishes equality between prophetic knowledge of Ghayb and of Zayd, Amr, infants, lunatics, animals and quadrupeds. This high lights another problem; which the minions of Iblees will have to answer to. Incase Shaykh Thanvi believes prophetic knowledge of Ghayb is of countless matters of Ghayb (note; countless in human counting but still limited). Then the established equality will be in; Shaykh elevated the lower creations, with Zanni knowledge, of few matters of Ghayb, to rank of prophetic knowledge of Ghayb, which is Qatti, and consists of all that is in perserved Tablet and greater. In this case Shaykh Thanvi would be guilty of bolstering knowledge of Zayd, Amr, infants, lunatics, animals and quadrupeds via exagerating/mubalgha to negate merit of prophetic knowledge of Ghayb. And that does not mean anything good. Imagine in order to refute merit of Shaykh Thanvi a certain Dharbangi bolster the standing of Iblees and says; there is nothing special about Shaykh Thanvi’s piety even Iblees is pious like him. Zanni cannot be equal of Qatti and one with knowledge of perseved tablet cannot be equal to one who knows few matters of Zanni Ghayb knowledge. Just like a Muslim who only says; none has the right to be worshipped except Allah; is better then Iblees even if other righteous actions are not considered. Other alternative is that Shaykh believes; prophetic knowledge of Ghayb is insignificant and knowledge of mentioned creations is insignificant also hence there is equality. And this is no better alternative for the reasons of quantity and quality mentioned before i.e. Qatti and of perserved tablet. 1.2 - Logic Behind Islamic Understanding Of Tashbeeh In Hifz ul-Iman: Islamic response to Shaykh Madani would be; Aisa can be returned for Tashbeeh to; i) Baaz Ghayb, ii) knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In the first scenario Aisa is returned to Baaz Ghayb for Tashbeeh: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if Baaz2 knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); Aisa1 Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] Question is; whose knowledge is this limited (i.e. Baaz) Ghayb referring to? And Shaykh knows and acknowledges it referrs to limited knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and of Zayd Amr; infants, lunatics, animals and quadrupeds. Incase the minions of Iblees incarnate negate this fact then please see the following section 2.0. And we already know Takhsees of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was negated in statement of Shaykh Thanvi. And negation of Ilm al-Ghayb’s merit for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) can only be, in context of Hifz ul-Iman’s statement, if Shaykh Thanvi also; compared (or; made Tashbeeh of) Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knowledge of Ghayb with Zayd Amr; infants, lunatics, animals, quadrupeds and came to conclusion his knowledge was equale in quantity to mentioned creations. Therefore there are multiple Tashbeehs in statement of Shaykh Thanvi from this perspective. In the second scenario Aisa is returned to RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and to be specific to his Ghayb knowledge for Tashbeeh: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor2 (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); Aisa1 Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] There are two possibilities: A) If Tashbeeh of Aisa returns to Ilm Ghayb of creations via Hadhoor then Tashbeeh is between prophetic knowledge of Ghayb and knowledge of Zayd, Amr, infants, lunatics, animals and quadrupeds. B) If Tashbeeh of Aisa returns to Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb via Hadhoor then Tashbeeh is between prophetic Baaz knowledge of Ghayb and between Zayd, Amr, infants, lunatics, animals and quadrupeds: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor2 (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); Aisa1 Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” In case of A one has to imply Baaz to fully understand the statement and in case of B one has to imply; Zayd, Amr, infants, lunatics, animals and quadrupeds. And in both cases the Takhsees of Ghayb knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is being negated. And negation of it can only be if there is Tashbeeh between: 1) Ghayb knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Zayd, Amr, infants, lunatics, animals and quadrupeds. 2) And if there is Tashbeeh in equal quantity of Ilm al-Ghayb. There are multiple Tashbeehs in statement of Shaykh Thanvi which no sane person can deny. And all have to be accounted to understand the statement properly. 2.0 - Response To: Itna Would Be Problematic But It Is Aisa: If the statement of Hifz ul-Iman is read and understood as whole; even then like the previous section; Tashbeeh is in quantity of Baaz prophetic knowledge of Ghayb and between quantity of mentioned creations. Readers should note that Shaykh Madani is actually attempting to refute the very point that Tashbeeh isn’t in quantity of Baaz Ghayb. The reason Shaykh Madani negates this understanding is; he argues statement is not in meaning of Itna; if it was then it would be problematic because there would be equality in quantity: “… that honorable Mawlana Thanvi has stated word aisa but did not state word itna. If it was word itna then it would have occasioned objection, may Allah forbid, that knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been equaled with knowledge of other things…” Due to Tashbeeh in quantity of Baaz Ghayb; Aisa cannot only be in comparative meaning of likeness (i.e. misl) but it is also in comparative meaning of Itna (i.e. this-much): “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); Itna Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because …” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] Please note; usage of Aisa in context of quantity being compared by default establishes Aisa is in meaning of Itna. Continuing; even though Shaykh Madani negates the statement is in meaning of Itna and is-Qadr (i.e. this-much) yet other major Deobandi scholars have understood it to be in meaning of Itna/Is-qadr. 2.1 - Aisa In Meaning Of Itna: Madani VS Naumani And Darbhangi: Shaykh Thanvi in his Bast al-Banan which is a follow-up five page book from Hifz ul-Iman hinted toward aisa being used in meaning of itna but without implying Tashbeeh: “From this discussion we learn that in the mentioned statement knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has not been compared/equaled with knowledge of Zayd, Umru and others. And the word aisa is not used every time for Tashbeeh. According people who speak the lanugage they use it popularly in; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is aisa powerful. So in this is there intention to compare the power of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with another? No! Not at all …” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman –with- Bast Al Banan, pages 24, by Shaykh Thanvi, here.] Following Shaykh Thanvi’s lead; Shaykh Naumani is reported to have said in debate that aisa is in meaning of itna: “And now you’re saying that even though word jaisa is not used there aisa has been used therefore the tashbeeh/comaprision is established. In fact this is even your deception. Listen! If word aisa (i.e. like this) is within context of word jaisa (i.e. like this) then it is for tashbeeh (i.e. comparision) but if aisa is without jaisa then tashbeeha (i.e. comparision) is not definitive. In popular usage it is said; ‘God is aisa all-mighty powerful.’ Now in this sentence word aisa is without jaisa and therefore not in tashbeeh but here it is used without meaning of tashbeeh, in meaning of itna. And by this (i.e. itna) intended meaning is all baaz Ghayb knowledge which Zaid believes is proof/reason for application of (words) Alim ul-Ghayb (upon Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’salam).” [Ref: Fatah Bareilly Ka Dilkash Nazara, By Mawlana Rafaqat Hussain, Pages67/68, here.] Shaykh Naumani in following example presented two examples in which aisa is used to mean itna: “You have asked me to provide evidence of aisa being used in meaning of itna linguistically and in popular culture. Indeed this demand of yours is legitimate. Listen! Ameer Minahai (the blessed) in his; Ameer ul-Lughaat, Volume two, page 302 has presented a perfect/detailed research on usage of word aisa. And has mentioned few meanings. From all of them one meaning which I have mentioned. In this situation following is his statement: ‘AISA; (means) itna, is-qadr. SENTENCE: Aisa mara keh adh mowa kar deeya.[1] POETICAL VERSE: Us bada-kash ka jism hey aisa lateef wa saaf.[2] Zana par ghuman hey moj e sharab ka.’ (Barq). There you go now I have established from linguistics that aisa is used without Tashbeeh in meaning of itna.” [Ref: Fatah Bareilly Ka Dilkash Nazara, By Mawlana Rafaqat Hussain, Pages77/78, here.] Also Shaykh Darbhangi says aisa has been used in meaning of itna/is-qadr:“It should be clear that (word) aisa (i.e. like) is not only used in anagolous (i.e. manand) and comparative (i.e. misl) meanings but (in Urdu language its usage) is also in meaning is-qadr and itna (i.e. this-much). (And these words itna/isqadr) which are intended meaning in this statement. It is unknown for what purpose such a clean/clear and straight-forward meaning is distorted.” [Ref: Taudhi ul-Bayan Fi Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Murtaza Hassan, Page6, here.] “Despite this (Khan Sahib Barelwi rahimullah and his followers are) saying that word aisa is used comparision. How much of this is justice? In the disputed statemend word aisa is in meaning of is-qadr and itna (i.e. this much). Then how is there tashbeeh (i.e. comparision)? The conclusion is that; as much knowledge was assumed for application of Aalim ul-Ghayb that is also true for Zaid, Umar, and Bakr. In this there is no tashbeeh (i.e. comparision) nor disrespect.” [Ref: Taudhi ul-Bayan Fi Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Murtaza Hassan, Page19, here.] In 1.0 it was established through sound reasoning aisa is in meaning of itna. Readers should note; Shaykh Naumani gave referrences and examples in which aisa has been used to mean itna. 2.2 - Shaykh Madani Negates Itna And The Reason Behind It: Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) alleged that Shaykh Thanvi equaled prophetic knowledge to creations mentioned by Shaykh Thanvi: “From them is a fanatical supporters of Gangohi called Ashraf Ali Thanvi. He has written small pamphlet; not even of four pages long. In which he explicitly stated knowledge of Ghayb like of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) like it is possessed by every infant, every lunatic, in fact every animal and every quadruped. And followin is (Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi) the cursed’s statement: ‘If it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then issue needing to be enquired is: Is this baaz from Ghayb or qull Ghayb; if baaz from knowledge of Ghayb is intended then what is so unique about Hadhoor’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knowledge of Ghayb; knowledge like this is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; but every infant, lunatic, all animal and quadrupeds. And if all knowledge of Ghayb is intended, from which none of detail (of Ilm al-Ghayb) is excluded, then falsehood of this (belief) is proven from textual and logical evidences.’ I say look at the effect of Allah’s seal (placed on his heart) how he establishes equality between RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and between creation.” [Ref: Faisla Kun Munazra, Pages, 149, 150, 151, here.] Shaykh Madani mentioned this on page 277 of his book. And charge of Kufr issued by Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat was on basis of equality in quantity of knowledge. In Shihab as-Saqib Shaykh Madani is attempting to refute this charge of that Shaykh Thanvi established equality in quantity in Ghuyub of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and of creations mentioned in Hifz ul-Iman’s statement. And in this context Shaykh Madani negates Itna in following statement: “Even if we ignore this then please consider this; that honorable Mawlana Thanvi has stated word aisa (i.e. like this) but did not state word itna (i.e. this-much). If it was word itna then it would have occasioned objection, may Allah forbid, that knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been equaled with knowledge of other things. If this is not pure foolishness then what else is it. Even if we over look this; even then word aisa is of Tasbih (i.e. comparision) and it is apparent that if something is compared with someothing then comparision is not in all aspects.” [Ref: Shahab as-Saqib, by Shaykh Hussain Ahmad Madani, Page281/282, here.] This leads to conclusion; according to Shaykh Madani Itna’s usage would have established equality in quantity of knowledge [and he believes its absence negates charge of equality in quantity]. Now there isn’t explicit usage of Itna in Hifz ul-Iman but there is equality in quantity of knowledge, see 1.0, underlined. And therefore grametical usage of aisa is in meaning of Itna. Note even though Itna wasn’t used but the meaning which Shaykh Madani assumed for Itna (i.e. equality in quantity) is present in Aisa hence Shaykh Naumani’s Taweel of Aisa meaning Itna is valid. And with Itna established via Aisa then Fatwah of Kufr issued by Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat, which Shaykh Madani attempted to refute by negating equality in quantity of knowledge remains valid. 3.0 - Response To Shaykh’s Claim Tashbeeh Is In Category Of Limited Ghayb: Shaykh Madani claims; Tashbeeh was in category of Baaz and not in quantity of prophetic knowledge. When ever there is Tashbeeh; the Tashbeeh is between two things, living or dead, and a quality, or trait, or characteristic which both share. If it is said; Ali is powerful like a lion. The basic premise is; Ali is like lion. And the likeness is in being powerful. If one says: No! No! The Tashbeeh is not between Ali and lion because the word like in the sentence returns to powerfullness and not to Ali. Any sane person would realize the Tashbeeh by nature is between two beings it cannot be between a trait and a person. The fundamental of Tashbeeh are two beings who share a trait. If a being is missing then there is no Tashbeeh. If it is said; Ali is powerful like. And no other being is mentioned then sentence is wrong. And if another is mentioned but claims phrase; Ali is powerful like lion doesn’t mean; Ali is like a lion in power. Then be confident in declaring the distorter as a minor Dajjal. Similarly in context of Hifz ul-Iman’s Tashbeeh; there is mention of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and mentions of creations, and a common quality between Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and creations, and that quality is Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb. Therefore the basic premise is; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is like; Zayd, Amr, infants, lunatics, animals quadrupeds. And this likeness is in that they share quality of Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb. And if one only says: No! No! The Tashbeeh is in quality of Baazi’at and not with RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then he is actually negating Tashbeeh because he negates the fundamental requrement of Tashbeeh – i.e. sharing of trait between two beings. 3.1A - Incident Of Mother Of Believers And She Took Tashbeeh And Equality: It is recorded in Ahadith:“Narrated Aisha: The things which annul prayer were mentioned before me (and those were): a dog, a donkey and a woman. I said: ‘You have compared us (women) with donkeys and dogs. By Allah!” [Ref: Bukhari, B9, H493] “Narrated Aisha: Do you make us (women) equal to dogs and donkeys? While I used to lie in my bed, the Prophet would come and pray facing the middle of the bed. I used to consider it not …” [Ref: Bukhari, B9, H486] The fact that Umm ul-Momineen Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) took offense when women were mentioned with amongst the list of animals (i.e. dog, donkey). Note even though the speaker did not compare women with the animals and nor did the companion say; women are unclean like the mentioned animals yet she implied Tashbeeh/comparision and took offense because she felt women were being considered impure like the mentioned animals. 3.1B – Hifz ul-Iman Statement Is Offensive Irrespective: Comparatively to Aysha’s (radiallah ta’ala anha) incident, Shaykh Madani claims, Tashbeeh was in category of Baaz and not in Baaz quantity of prophetic knowledge. In other words Shaykh Madani acknowledges there is obvious Tashbeeh in category of Baaz knowledge of Ghayb. Statement of Hifz ul-Iman reads as follows: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); Aisa Baaz Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] In Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) case; words did not denote Tashbeeh in impurity of animals but women were only mentioned along side dog and donkey and she implied Tashbeeh of impurity and equality. Shaykh Thanvi explicitly uses words which denote Tashbeeh. And Tashbeeh, in words of Shaykh Madani, in category of Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb with mentioned animals. When obvious facts are that Tashbeeh is category of Baaz then wouldn’t it just be wise to acknowledge that Tashbeeh in category of Baaz is insulting and disrespectful even if the Tashbeeh is not in quantity of Baaz! Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) was very finely tuned to understand insult and disrespect as the example demonstrates. Just by the fact that Shaykh Thanvi mentioned Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in the list of, Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds, would have been enough for her to take note of insult/disrespect. To even think she would have accepted prophetic knowledge being compared even in Nafs of Baazi’at with the mentioned is unthinkable. Conclusion: Shaykh Madani referrenced principle of Tashbeeh saying; Tashbeeh is in single trait, quality, attribute and not more then one. And he goes on to cite number of examples of on page two-hundered-eighty-two. And this principle is indeed true but Shaykh Thanvi’s statement is contructed in such a fashion where it is impossible to avoid Tashbeeh in quantity of Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb. And it is Tashbeeh of equal quantity between Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and creations which Shaykh Thanvi mentioned. Shaykh Madani understanding is; if itna was used instead of aisa then statement would have been justifiably criticised but aisa has been used. According to Shaykh Naumani’s Taweel, for which he has a valid basis, aisa has been used in meaning of itna but his saying itna is without Tashbeeh in statement of Hifz ul-Iman is just an attempt at pious deception. And it was established that how and why aisa means itna, and its usage would be with Tashbeeh. So Shaykh Madani’s pack of lies was undermined by negation of Takhsees, by Shaykh Naumani’s demonstration how aisa is employed, and by his own assumption that itna would establish equality in quantity. Therefore the Kufr in statement of Hifz ul-Iman and Fatwah of Kufr on Shaykh Thanvi remains without a valid Taweel. And one who defends Kufr of a Kafir is also Kafir. And Shaykh Madani is like Shaykh Thanvi. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi FootNotes: - [1] It can mean: Struck him so-much that nearly killed him. And means: Struck in like-this that nearly killed him. The context determines how the phrase is to be understood. In the context of example; it is employed in meaning of itna/is-qadr hence the first meaning is intended. - [2] It roughly means: ‘That alcahol drinkers body is so-much delicate and blemish-less.’ Better rendering of it in English would be: ‘That alcahol drinkers body is so delicate and belmeish-less.’ Yet the problem for Shaykh Naumani is; in the poetical verse of looser aka Barq; even if aisa is taken to mean itna; the goal of refuting Tashbeeh cannot be achieved because Barq is comparing blemishless-ness and delicateness of figure with female figure. This proves even itna can be used for Tashbeeh. So if statement of Hifz ul-Iman is in meaning of itna even then Tashbeeh contextually cannot be negated.

Introduction: This article will focus on Deobandi, specificly Shaykh Naumani’s argument; statement of Hifz ul-Iman uses aisa and it is without jaisa therefore it is not for sake of Tashbeeh/comparision. This article present translation of debate between Allama Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) and Shaykh Naumani. It was published as, Nusrat Khuda-dad: Munazra Bareilly Ki Mufassil Rudad, and it was compiled by Mawlana Muhammad Hamid Shafi. Please note this is Islamic perspective of account and Deobandi account of debate will be also translated. Hifz ul-Iman’s Statement Subject Of Debate: Q:“A certain individual, Amr, stated prostration is of two types, worship, respect, and when on to state Amr believes prostration of respect for other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is permissible. And believes Tawaf (i.e. circumbulation) around the graves (of Awliyah-Allah) is permissible. Evidence of permissibility … Amr also stated Ilm al-Ghayb is bil-Zaat (i.e. of Self), in this meaning only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Aalim ul-Ghayb (i.e. Knower Of Ghayb). And ba-wasta (i.e. bil-Ardh, through means) and in this meaning RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was Aalim ul-Ghayb. How is Amr’s this evidence (and what is legal ruling on Amr’s) these actions and belief?” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page2, here] A: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); aisa Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb. Now if Zayd decides (and says) yes I will call all of them (with title of) Aalim ul-Ghayb (one should ask Zayd) … [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] Allamah Sardar Ahmad’s And Shaykh Naumani’s Positions: Allamah Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah), and anyone with ability to read Urdu, and not brainwashed in Deobandism, believe statement of Shaykh Thanvi is written comparatively because aisa (i.e. like-this) in context of the statement is of Tashbeeh/comparision. And knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is being compared with detestable creations mentioned in the statement. Therefore Shaykh Thanvi is guilty of insulting of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Shaykh Manzoor Naumani is of belief that aisa in the statement of Hifz ul-Iman is not of Tashbeeh because Shaykh Thanvi did not use jaisa (i.e. like-it, like of, like) but it is in meaning of itna (i.e. this-much). Also Shaykh Naumani believes IF statement of Hifz ul-Iman was as Allamah Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) believes it is then he too would consider it insulting and Kufr. Allamah Ahmad’s Speech With Aisa And Jaisa: Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi in Hifz ul-Iman has divided Ilm al-Ghayb into two categories. Qull Ilm al-Ghayb (i.e. all hidden knowledge): From which not one thing is excluded (it is Qull Ilm al-Ghayb). And second is Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb (i.e. some hidden knowledge); however little it maybe (it would still be Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb). Then for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) he stated Qull Ilm al-Ghayb is intellectually and evidentially wrong. Now (Qull Ilm al-Ghayb) is no longer an option for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) except Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb; regarding which he said clearly that: ‘… then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); aisa Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds (i.e. scorpions, owls, donkey, etc) …’[01] Therefore the meaning of the statement is clearly evident that jaisa ilm (i.e. knowledge like-of) honorable Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) possesses; aisa (knowledge) every child, every lunatic, in fact all animals, quadrupeds possess’s. Every Muslim is aware in this cursed statement Hadhoor’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knowledge has been disrespected.” [Ref: Nusrat Khuda-dad Munazra Bareilly Ki Mufassil Rudad, pages; 197/198, here.] Shaykh Naumani’s First Rebuttle - Aisa Is Without Jaisa: “You have stated that meaning of Hifz ul-Iman’s statement is; jaisa knowledge of Ghayb is possessed by RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) aisa is possessed by every insane, in fact all animals, quadrupeds. حاشا و كلا. If this is the meaning of the statement even then I would consider the statement to be Kufr because in it would be clear insult of Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). But this is not the meaning of statement of Hifz ul-Iman because in the statement of Hifz ul-Iman the word jaisa has not been used. This word (jaisa) you add to (the statement of Hifz ul-Iman) yourself. In statement of Hifz ul-Iman word used is aisa not jaisa. Maulvi Sardar Ahmad Sahib neither reason nor honesty has come near you yet. When reason and honesty was being distributed then I think you was sleeping. Enemy of reason in the statement of Hifz ul-Iman where is jaisa? Hifz ul-Iman’s statement is as follows: ‘if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); aisa Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds …’ If in this statement jaisa was used then it would have been as follows: ‘Jaisa Ghayb knowledge is possessed by RasoolAllah (salallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) aisa is also possessed by Zayd, Umar, every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds.’ This (statement with jaisa); it would have been according to me; and in fact according to Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib also, there would have been definate disrespect and derogration.” [Ref: Nusrat Khuda-dad Munazra Bareilly Ki Mufassil Rudad, pages; 199/200, here.] Allamah Ahmad’s First Rebuttle -: Aisa With/Without Jaisa Means Same: “All praises are for Allah! Maulvi Manzoor Sahib has attested to my position. But in fact by presenting Thanvi Sahid he has certified my claim. My claim was; Hifz ul-Iman’s meaning is unclean and one who believes it is out of Islam and is from those who degrade’s the grand status and is disrespecter of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Maulvi (Naumani) Sahib and (Shaykh) Thanvi Sahib has explicitly stated the same. This is confessional statement: … (poetical line not translated) … Honorable listenters listen carefully. Maulvi Manzoor Sahib is saying that according to Maulvi Ahsraf Ali Thanvi Sahib in the following statement there is insult and subject is impure: ‘Jaisa knowledge of Ghayb matters; is of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); aisa is of every child and every insane but in fact every animal and every quadruped possesses.’ Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi’s unclean statement is as follows on which the dispute is based on: ‘if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); aisa Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds (i.e.calf, ownl donkey etc) …’ People of justice should focus on the fact that Hifz ul-Iman’s statement subject/meaning is same which Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi is declaring to be impure in his Bast al-Banan. Arguing over the word usage is not way of people of knowledge (when the meaning is exactly the same). By ignoring argument based on word play every person will be compelled to agree the meaning of both statement is in total agreement and in them there is no disagreement in meaning. In both sentences same meaning has been conveyed. For example one person says: ‘Jaisa face is of Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi aisa face is of an owl and donkey.’ Second person says: ‘This face of Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi; what is so special about it; aisa face is also of an owl and donkey.’ Every intelligent and justice peferring Deobandi-Wahhabi would said the meaning of these two statements is exactly same. And in both (statements) insult Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi. Even though in the first statement word aisa and jaisa both have been employed. And in the second only aisa is used but not jaisa. In this fashion Hifz ul-Iman’s filthy statement and Bast al-Banan’s unclean statement’s meaning is same. Even though Hifz ul-Iman’s statement uses word aisa and not jaisa. And in Bast al-Banan’s statement aisa and jaisa both are present[02]. Ever after this much explanation one yet does not comprehend the insult in statement of Hifz ul-Iman and to decieve the Muslims say that in the statement of Hifz ul-Iman word used is aisa and not jaisa therefore there is no insult. Then (it has to be said) he is sworn enemy of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and avowed ally of Shaykh Thanvi. For him (a statement of) aisa with absence of jaisa establishes insult of Shaykh Thanvi but it does not occur to him that the word aisa is used without jaisa. Yet for him (statement of Shaykh Thanvi) must have combination of aisa and jaisa for it to be insult of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And if there is no jaisa (in the statement) but only aisa then there is no insult.” [Ref: Nusrat Khuda-dad Munazra Bareilly Ki Mufassil Rudad, pages; 202/204, here.] Shaykh Naumani’s Second Rebuttle -: You’re Inserting Jaisa Into Hifz ul-Iman: “Why do you add the word jaisa into statement of Hifz ul-Iman to create the meaning of disrespect. See the statement is completely free of blame: ‘if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); aisa Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds …’[03] For you there is no room to embellish (statement of Hifz ul-Iman). The meaning conveyed in Hifz ul-Iman exactly the same meaning has been stated in your Ala Hadhrat’s (rahimullah) books. But what cure do I have for (your) immodesity and shamelessness!” [Ref: Nusrat Khuda-dad Munazra Bareilly Ki Mufassil Rudad, pages; 208, here.] Allamah Ahmad’s Second Rebuttle: Example Of Aisa Insulting Without Jaisa: “Honorable Maulvi! During my earlier speech I had quite clearly/detailedly established that statement of Hifz ul-Iman is insulting even if jaisa is absent and there is only aisa but you did not respond to my that point/speech. Instead you repeated what was already refuted. This is clear proof of your (attempt) to avoid (the subject matter). I will give another example in support of my claim. (If) a person says this: ‘What is so special about baaz knowledge of Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi; aisa knowledge is even possessed by insane, and animals, and donkeys.’ If any Deobandi says in response to it that in this statement Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi is being insulted because the meaning of statement is; jaisa knowledge Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi possesses aisa knowledge is also possessed by insane, animals, donkeys. And the one who made the statement says in this statement word aisa has been used not jaisa . You’re unnecesserily adding the word jaisa into the statement to make the statement insulting. Will the Deobandis accept his Taweel? And if not, and (you will) definitely will not (accept this Taweel). Then why do you invent this Taweel for filthy statement of Hifz ul-Iman? A (Taweel) which is not even acceptable to you. Wahhabis! The truth of matter is in your heart there is no respect for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) so that you understand insult (of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam).” [Ref: Nusrat Khuda-dad Munazra Bareilly Ki Mufassil Rudad, pages; 210/211, here.] Shaykh Naumani’s Third Rebuttle: Aisa In Meaning Of Itna And Is-Qadr: “In statement of Hifz ul-Iman aisa is not used for comparision. In this statement if aisa was used for sake of comparision then I would also attest that Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is being disrespected and therefore it is Kufr. But aisa in this statement has been used in meaning of itna and is-qadr. Meaning aisa (as itna) is for stating quantity. Famous Urdu poet Ameer Meenahi in his popular book, Ameer ul-Lughat, vol two, page 302, presents his research on aisa saying: Aisa (meaning) itna, is-qadr. Sentence; ‘aisa mara ad mowa kar deeya. And; Us badah kash ka jism heh aisa lateef wa saaf, zana par ghumah heh moj sharab ka.’ (poet; Barq). After this he presents three more meanings of aisa for which there is no need. In addition to this, people of (Urdu) language consistently in their usage say; ‘Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) aisa qadir heh.’ May Allah forgive! Is the intention to compare power of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with power of another? In the statement (of Hifz ul-Iman), like it, word aisa has not been used for comparision but in this statement the word aisa has been used in meaning of itna and is-qadr. Yes, aisa is also used for comparision but for it word jaisa is needed. And because in the statement of Hifz ul-Iman word aisa is present and not jaisa therefore in it aisa is not for comparision. By introducing word jaisa into (statement of Hifz ul-Iman) you have given proof of your dubious (character). And provided evidence for being a looser and distorter.” [Ref: Nusrat Khuda-dad Munazra Bareilly Ki Mufassil Rudad, pages; 213/214, here.] Allamah Ahmad’s Third Rebuttle: Aisa, Itna And Jaisa And Hifz ul-Iman: “You have wasted your time in giving few meanings of word aisa. What was the need for this? Who says that word aisa is only used in meaning of comparision. Every Urdu speaker/literate (person) knows that aisa sometimes is used for comparision, some places to inform of quantity, and in some places for admiration/praise. Here the debate is over, only on point, in which meaning word aisa has been used in statement of Hifz ul-Iman. I say that in this statement aisa is for comparision and you say here the word aisa is for mention of quantity; meaning (you say) aisa is in meaning of itna and is-qadr. And I say insult (of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) still remains. (Not only that) but has become even more clear and obvious. Listen to this I will read (statement of) Hifz ul-Iman: ‘if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); (aisa in meaning of) itna Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds (i.e.calf, ownl donkey etc) …’ Now every Urdu literate/speaker, should get verdict (literally; fatwah) from his heart (which is full) of faith, that in this (statement); is there disprespect of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? Now the meaning of this statement is clearly that knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is itna (in quantity) jitna (i.e. as-much) as children, insane, animals, and quadrupeds. It is speciality of Wahhabi sect that (they) clearly disrespect the eminence of Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and abuse (him) to their heart content. You made Taweel to avoid and protect (from charge of) Kufr. Yet due to your Taweel the disrespect has become more evident. All this is display of your shameless Wahhabism. It seems Kufr is in love with Wahhabism. Now remains your sentence: ‘Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) aisa qadir heh.’ In it rightly word aisa is not for comparision but what connection does this statement has got with statement of Hifz ul-Iman? This (example of yours) is not like-example (of statement of Hifz ul-Iman where aisa is used) but Hifz ul-Iman’s like-example would be like; if a disrespectful and mannerless person like your Thanvi Sahib says: ‘If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute power to holy being of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this power; all powers are zaati and atahi, or baaz; if baaz powers are intended; then in this what is so unique about Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala); aisi powers are even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds. And if qull powers are intended then this is intellectually and textually false because Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) power is zaati not atahi power.’ Tell me in this statement aisa is for comparision or not? Your honor has invented a new principle; until aisa is not with word jaisa it will not be for comparision, and there will be no comparision (in Hifz ul-Iman of prophetic knowledge of Ghayb with of infants, lunatics, animals, qaudrupeds, until jaisa is part of it) nor there will be disrespect. You seem to be ignorant of Urdu phraselogy. Firstly tell me who has written this principle (and where)? Secondly even if your point is taken on board then for asia to be of comparision jaisa is lafzi qarina: (A matter of principle is) when word of comparision is omitted even then meaning of comparision remains. As an example if someone says:’Zaid shey’r heh.’[04] (Meaning would be:) ‘Zaid Shey’r jaisa bahadur heh.’[05] How can the meaning of comparision can be negated when lafz qarina is omitted (because jaisa can be justifiably assumed into meaning of statement as demonstrated in example). It could be that instead of jaisa there maybe another qarina of comparision and there is in this statement. Meaning negation of speciality (of prophetic Ghayb knowledge and of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and affirmation of partnership (of Zayd, Amr, infants, lunatics, animals, quadrupeds in baaz knowledge of Ghayb).[06] Thirdly principle/president of your seminary of Deobandi Maulvi Hussain Ahmad on page 111 of his book al-Shihab as-Saqib regarding the same unclean statement wrote: “… word aisa is utterance of comparision …”[07] You stated word aisa without jaisa is not of comparision and yet president of your (seminary of) Deoband is saying that in this statement aisa is of comparision. Even though there is no jaisa. So tell out of you two who is a liar and who is truthful? Fourthly if a person says: ‘Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi knowledge; aisa is of animals and quadrupeds.’ In this aisa is of comparision or not? If it is (of comparision) then according to what rule/principle it is (not) so? And in this is there insult directed toward Maulvi Ashraf Ali or not? If you say there is (insult directed toward Shaykh Thanvi) then in this (sentence) there is aisa without jaisa. And if you say no (there is not insult) then do you give permission (to us) that (we) publish regarding Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi similar statements? Will you and any other Deoband will not find it displeasing? You say that: ‘If in this statement aisa was used for sake of comparision then there would be disrespect for Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and therefore it is Kufr.’[08] And yet principle of your (seminary of) Deoband says that aisa is for comparision like it has already (been proven). Listen to another; on page 113 of Shahab al-Saqib it is stated: “Therefore in context of statement and context of discussion both clearly establish that tashbeeh (i.e. comparision) is in the nafs (i.e. implies; category) of baaz and not in quantity of baaz; that it be subjected to criticism/opposition.”[09] Be just; you say that if aisa in the statement is of comparision it would be insulting and Kufr and your principle (of seminary of) Deoband is saying that aisa is of comparision. The understanding (of aisa) which principle of Deoband is stating according to this reason you accepted Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi is Kafir.[10] Say Maulvi Manzoor what is your opinion (regarding this)? […] (7) Sign this transcript: ‘If baaz knowledge is intended then in this what is so special about Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi? Aisa (in meaning of itna and is-qadr) knowledge is possessed by Zaid, Amr, in fact every infant, lunatic, in fact all animals and quadrupends.’” [Ref: Nusrat Khuda-dad Munazra Bareilly Ki Mufassil Rudad, pages; 215/219, here.] Shaykh Naumani’s Fourth Rebuttle: Aisa Without Jaisa Is Insulting Shaykh Thanvi: “My faith is that one who insults my master (Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is certainly Kafir. You have in this turn employed insulting words for Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib: ‘Aisa knowledge of Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib is also possessed by animals and quadrupeds.’ Any person who utters words like this against the dignity of Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi such (person) is insulter and should get his head examined. […] And the example which you gave me signing for Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi, it is extremely disrespectful of Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib. One who insults Maulana Thanvi Sahib in this manner such person is an idiot and ignorant.” [Ref: Nusrat Khuda-dad Munazra Bareilly Ki Mufassil Rudad, pages; 220/221, here.] Allamah Ahmad’s Fourth Rebuttle: “You have repeatedly claimed Hifz ul-Iman’s state is free of blame. This sentence of yours is not answer to all of my (seven) questions nor you saying this will make it blameless. First you claimed if aisa is without jaisa then (aisa) is not for comparision. I refuted your this point and proved in presence of this gathering that aisa in statement of Hifz ul-Iman is of comparision and in it is clear insult and disrespect of Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but in order to decieve the public you did not openly acknowledge it. Now when I gave example of Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi Sahib (in a statement which was) with aisa but without jaisa then you was (and) in fact the entire group of people with you (on podium) is in distress. Even though in this example word is aisa and with it not is word jaisa. Here you do not listen/accept any excuse and nor you remember/employ (your) rule of aisa without jaisa. What’s the reason? Matter is that you and your entire sect of Wahhabism has founded faith on Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi (and not on Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam).[11] For this reason you and in fact entire sect of Wahhabism does not tolerate insult of Maulvi Ashraf Ali Thanvi for even a minute but for holy honour of Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) you and your sect of Wahhabism’s leaders have published abundant of insults and disrespects and abuse. These you did not find displeasing. In order to decieve the attendees of meeting you outwardly say that one who insults Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Kafir. Is this edict of yours for others? Can your leaders direct insults toward illuminated Hadhoor, intercessor of day of gathering (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as they wish?Can they disrespect (him), disparage him for them is not (is this teaching of yours)? I wish your heart had even spec worth of faith then today you would not have defended one who has insulted Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). At one instance you say one who insults the blessed soil of purified Madinah is Kafir and then in another instance you say; a person who says knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is of mad (people), animals, quadrupeds; you consider him to be your mentor and leader. Give up this double standard and repent.” [Ref: Nusrat Khuda-dad Munazra Bareilly Ki Mufassil Rudad, pages; 222/223, here.] Conclusion: In the first turn, Allamah Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) employed jaisa while explaining the statement of Hifz ul-Iman. In first rebuttle Shaykh Naumani objected to usage of aisa arguing addition of jaisa turns the statement of Shaykh Thanvi to statement of comparision. In his first rebuttle Allamah Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) replied addition of jaisa while explaining the statement of Hifz ul-Iman does not change its meaning. And then he went to quote form statement of Hifz ul-Iman with addition of jaisa and also quoted the original statement of Hifz ul-Iman with aisa. And appealed to common sense of people to decide if both statements mean the same or not. In addition he formed a stated with jaisa regarding Shaykh Thanvi and similar meaning statement with aisa to demonstrate aisa without jaisa is of Tashbeeh and insult is implied. To which, as par Sunni account of debate, Shaykh Naumani did not reply in the following rebuttle. In the second rebuttle Allamah Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) again formed statements of aisa without jaisa which were insulting Shaykh Thanvi to lure Shaykh Naumani into his pre-planned trap. And in his fourth rebuttle Shaykh Naumani rather stupidly went on to confirm statement of Allamah Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) even with, aisa and without jaisa, is insulting Shaykh Thanvi. With this confession Shaykh Naumani undermined entire basis of his defence argument. In the third rebuttle of Shaykh Naumani he attempted to capitalise on the fact that aisa without jaisa can be used in various meanings. And since there is no jaisa one is without justification to insert it in the text of Hifz ul-Iman. In third rebuttle of Allamah Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) he argued absence of jaisa is not proof of its absence. He argued with examples in which aisa is used but not jaisa yet implications of the statement are explained with usage of jaisa. In other words jaisa is omitted but is supposed into text when aisa statement is explained. It is similar to writing, harf akhir, yet it is read as harf -e- akhir, point is if hamza (i.e. pronounced as, ay) is omitted from writing it is supposed to be assumed into text. When the statement is of Tashbeeh due to usage of aisa then jaisa is to be read into original text . He also went on to argue negation of speciality of one over another can only be if x is compared with z and conclusion arrived is; one is not better over the other -; in other words Tashbeeh can be implied from context. And we find statement of Hifz ul-Iman is such a statement in which speciality of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is being negated hence the jaisa aspect can definitely be established from statement even though its omitted. At the end of third rebuttle Allama Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) presented to Shaykh Naumani statement, where aisa was used without inclusion of jaisa, which he wanted Shaykh Naumani to attest as sign of agreement but Shaykh Naumani refused to sign the agreement stating it is insulting Shaykh Thanvi. Yet he could not agree to this and invented out of thin air rule, aisa without jaisa is not of Tashbeeh, but he did not and could not apply the same for his Shaykh Thanvi. Lastly Allamah Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) quoted Shaykh Madani, who was senior and teacher of Shaykh Naumani, and Shaykh Madani considered statement of Shaykh Thanvi statement of Tashbeeh even though it was without jaisa. The discussion between Allamah Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) and Shaykh Naumani establishes from linguistical principles point view that statement of Shaykh Thanvi is of comparision. And therefore it is insulting and Kufr and one who believes it and defends it is after correct knowledge regarding it has been imparted to him/her regarding it then if such a person continues to defend it is Kafir. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi FootNote: - [01] I have reason to believe Maulana Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) did not insert these but rather these words were inserted by compiler to give example of what is included in each category. After reading the account number of times I have not noted any protest from Shaykh Naumani. And if these were the words of Maulana Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) at very least Shaykh Naumani would have mentioned them at the very least once. If Shaykh Naumani can cry foul over addition of jaisa while explaining statement of Hifz ul-Iman this would have been greater cause for crying foul. Due to this I am confident these are insertions of compiler and therefore the statements should be read without words in brackets. - [02] The statement Muhadith Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) is pointing to is what Shaykh Murtaza Hassan Darbhangi referrenced to Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat’s (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) Hussam ul-Haramayn; it uses aisa and jaisa. And it’s translation is being quoted: “Honorable Mawlvi Ahmad Raza Khan (Barelwi) has stated and has attributed to you in Hussam al-Haramayn that in Hifz ul-Iman you explicitly stated; Ghayb knowledge jaisa (i.e. like) of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) aisa (i.e. like-it) is also possessed every infant and madman, in fact by every animal, and every quadruped . Therefore following matters are need of clarification: …” Ref: Hifz ul-Iman -with- Bast al-Banan, Pages; 20/21/22, here.] - [03] The complier of debate Mawlana Muhammad Hamid al-Shafi did not quote the statement of Hifz ul-Iman. Yet the Urdu sentence and its translated form indicates it was quoted hence it is being inserted into text. Also if quote is not inserted then Muhaddith Sardar Ahmad’s (rahimullah) speech does not connect to Shaykh Naumani’s 2nd rebuttle. Implication of which is statement is without jaisa therefore no insult. - [!] It seems Sunni compiler of debate deliberately omitted insults of Shaykh Naumani directed toward Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). In Deobandi account of debate Shaykh Naumani used aisa phrased statements to insult Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (rahimullah) and admitted even though statement is without jaisa it is still insulting. Whatever the reason for omission the confession is being quoted from Deobandi account of debate. Please note in Sunni debate account Shaykh Naumani’s insults directed toward Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) are omitted but the confession that Shaykh Thanvi is being insulted by Allamah Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) is mentioned in fourth rebuttle of Shaykh Naumani. - [04] Translates to: ‘Zaid is lion.’ - [05] Translates to: ‘Zaid is corageous like a lion.’ - [06] In simple words; Shaykh Thanvi negated speciality of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in having knowledge of Ghayb because he said knolwedge like of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is also possessed by other creations. For him to negate the speciality he had to compare the the type and quantity of Ghuyub known to both parties (Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam VS Zayd, Amr, infants, lunatics, animals, quadrupeds) and after comparing and reaching conclusion knowledge of both parties is equale and of same type he could negate speciality of prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). - [07] “Even if we ignore this, even then honorable-Sir, consider this; honorable Mawlana is employing word aisa in statement, not word itna. If it was itna (i.e. this-much) then there would have been possbility, may Allah forbid, that knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been quantitively-equaled with knowledge of other things. If this is not pure foolishness then what else is it. Even if we over look this; even then word aisa is of Tasbih (i.e. comparision) and it is apparent that if something is compared with someothing then comparision is not in all aspects.” [Ref: Shahab as-Saqib, by Shaykh Hussain Ahmad Madani, Page281/282, here.] - [08] The closest to what Mawlana Sardar Ahmad attributed to Shaykh Naumani is following -: found in beginning of third rebuttle: ‘In this statement if aisa was used for sake of comparision then I would also attest that Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is being disrespected and therefore it is Kufr.’ I assume Mawlana Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) was just conveying the meaning. And it is expected that it would be difficult to remember everything and quote verbatim. Or even if Mawlana Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) quoted Shaykh Naumani verbatim the compiler has conveyed the meaning of what Shaykh Naumani said. - [09] “And for this reason word aisa (i.e. like-this) and baaz (i.e. some/limited) has been used. See this is the statement: “…if baaz from knowledge of Ghayb is intended then what is so unique about Hadhoor’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knowledge of Ghayb; knowledge like this …” Therefore aisa (i.e. like-this) hints toward the mentioned baaz (i.e. limited/some). That baaz knowledge which is in possession of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not even mentioned (in Hifz ul-Iman). And we will explain this ahead even more. Any person even with slight sense of understanding statement; such a person would clearly say that aisa is pointing toward word of baaz and discussion is about of it (i.e. baaz). Therefore in context of statement and context of discussion both clearly establish that tashbeeh (i.e. comparision) is in the nafs (i.e. implies; category) of baaz and not in quantity of baaz; that it be subjected to criticism/opposition.” [Ref: Shahab as-Saqib, by Shaykh Hussain Ahmad Madni, Page283, here.] - [10] The conclusion of Mawlana Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) does not follow/agree with what he established. It is illogical to conclude that Shaykh Madani wrote it is for comparision and conclude Shaykh Naumani agrees that Shaykh Thanvi is Kafir. More logical and rational conclusion would have been: ‘Shaykh Madani understands the statement of Hifz ul-Iman in sense of Tashbeeh/comparision and his understanding of statement according to you (i.e. Shaykh Naumani) is Kufr therefore Shaykh Madani guilty of Kufr according to you.’ Or he could have modified the last part and ended it with a question: ‘Shaykh Madani understands the statement of Hifz ul-Iman in sense of Tashbeeh/comparision and his understanding of statement according to you (i.e. Shaykh Naumani) is Kufr. Now my question to you is: Is Shaykh Madani guilty of Kufr/Kafir?’ If Mawlana Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) made the statement he made mistake. But I believe he did not because his scholarly credentials and his calibre of scholarship was too high for this amatur blunder. This is only place where I find myself disagreeing with Mawlana Sardar Ahmad’s (rahimullah) understanding/conclusion. - [11] Allamah Sardar Ahmad (rahimullah) has implied that Shaykh Naumani and his clan of Deobandis has based their faith in Islam due to accepting Shaykh Thanvi as Prophet of Allah (subanahu wa ta’ala) and not on basis of believing Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).

Introduction: Shaykh Naumani believes aisa in statement of Shaykh Thanvi is in meaning of Itna and Yeh. And it is not used in sense of Tashbeeh. According to Shaykh Naumani Aisa in meaning of Tashbeeh is Kufr. Islamic position is aisa on its natural meaning is of Tasbeeh and therefore prophtetic knowledge of Ghayb is being compared/Tashbeeh with those mentioned by Shaykh Thanvi. And if aisa is returned to baaz, via itna, or via Tashbeeh even then in both cases prophetic knowledge is being Tashbeeh’ed via baaz to creations which Shaykh Thanvi mentioned. 0.0 - Shaykh Thanvi’s Statement In Dispute: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); aisa Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb. Now if Zayd decides (and says) yes I will call all of them (with title of) Aalim ul-Ghayb (one should ask Zayd) …” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] 0.1 - Shaykh Naumani Aisa Meaning Itna And Yeh: Shaykh Naumani argues his case Aisa means Itna in following: “And now you’re saying that even though word jaisa is not used there aisa has been used therefore the tashbeeh/comaprision is established. In fact this is even your deception. Listen! If word aisa (i.e. like this) is within context of word jaisa (i.e. like this) then it is for tashbeeh (i.e. comparision) but if aisa is without jaisa then tashbeeha (i.e. comparision) is not definitive. In popular usage it is said; ‘God is aisa all-mighty powerful.’ Now in this sentence word aisa is without jaisa and therefore without tashbeeh but here it is used without meaning of tashbeeh, in meaning of itna. And by this (i.e. itna) intended meaning is baaz Ghayb knowledge which Zaid believes is proof/reason for application of (words) Alim ul-Ghayb (upon Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’salam).” [Ref: Fatah Bareilly Ka Dilkash Nazara, By Mawlana Rafaqat Hussain, Pages67/68, here.] With regards to usage of Aisa in meaning of Yeh he states: “Even now if you have not understood meaning of statement (of Hifz ul-Iman) then try to understand it this way that word aisa is used in meaning of yeh (i.e. this/it). And by it all baaz knowledge of hidden (i.e. Ghayb) is indicated. And usage of aisa in meaning of yeh is published and clear and is part of popular Urdu expression. For example if a person says; ‘I will strike Zaid.’ Another says; ‘Don’t take aisa (i.e. this) action.’ Which means that don’t you ever take this action. You should understand/assume as that in this statement of Hifz ul-Iman, which is part of discussion, word yeh (i.e. this) is instead of aisa.” [Ref: Fatah Bareilly Ka Dilkash Nazara, By Mawlana Rafaqat Hussain, Pages90/91, here.] He states both Yeh and Itna referr to Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb and why he chose Itna and Yeh in following:“I have hope that after this explanation, a worst then ignorant person will have no confusion/doubt regarding the statement (of Hifz ul-Iman). Any how Hifz ul-Iman’s word aisa if it is understood in meaning of itna even then meaning is clear and if meaning of yeh (i.e. this) is taken from it even then meaning (of statement of Hafiz ul-Iman) is clear. And in both instances (i.e. itna/yeh) baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended.” [Ref: Fatah Bareilly Ka Dilkash Nazara, By Mawlana Rafaqat Hussain, Pages91, here.] After stating that Yeh and Itna both return to Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb he states that route to reach to Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb would be different but destination is same. And therefore Ghayb knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) cannot be intended due Aisa meaning Yeh/Itna: “And only difference is of explanation and of topic but result of both is one and the same. But from this (baaz) knowledge (equal quantity) of RasoolAllah (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) cannot be intended (meaning of Hifz ul-Iman’s statement) at all.” [Ref: Fatah Bareilly Ka Dilkash Nazara, By Mawlana Rafaqat Hussain, Pages91/92, here.] “Listen to it with attention! I have already stated that statement of Hifz ul-Iman the quantity of Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) isn’t being discussed but in fact the actual discussion is addressing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with title Aalim ul-Ghayb.” [Ref: Fatah Bareilly Ka Dilkash Nazara, By Mawlana Rafaqat Hussain, Pages 100, here.] Shaykh Naumani negates Tashbeeh and affirms Aisa in meaning Itna and Yeh. And he returned Itna/Yeh to Baaz knowledge of Ghayb because his objective is to refute the argument; Shaykh Thanvi equaled the quantity of Prophetic knowledge. 1.0 - Tashbeeh In Statement Of Hifz ul-Iman: Common sense dictates statement like of Hifz ul-Iman there has to be Tashbeeh. To negate or to affirm a merit in statement like of Hifz ul-Iman one has to be compared with another. And to say: There is nothing righteous about Thanvi: Men like Thanvi are no better then Ibleesiyeen incarnate. Comparision has to be made to come to this conclusion. Another example: There is nothing special about this apple; it is sweet like that apple. One apple is being compared with another to negate is speciality. Point is to negate speciality of one apple one was compared with the other. Shaykh Thanvi negated speciality of Prophetic knowledge of Ghayb and equated Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to animals, lunatics, infants in knowledge of Ghayb: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); aisa Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] And he could not negate his speciality if he had not compared prophetic knowledge with the creations he mentioned. When Tashbeeh is fundamental part of statement then there is no other alternative to but to agree that Aisa is of Tashbeeh. He said Aisa is in meaning of Itna and Yeh and not of Tashbeeh. Even this does not change anything; in the statement speciality of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is being negated and for it comparision between two parties is fundamental hence Itna/Yeh has to be of Tashbeeh: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended for prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); Itna/Yeh Baaz Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is being compared to lunatics, infants, animals, everyday Joe’s in his knowledge of Ghayb. 1.1 - Equality In Quantity Has To Be Established To Negate Speciality: Suppose A and B are being compared in knowledge and speciality/uniqueness of A is negated. Speciality and uniqueness of knowledge known to A can be negated; if there is equality in quantity of knowledge. Or if the knowledge possessed by A is less then knowledge known to B. If Amr believes A’s knowledge is greater in quantity and the type of knowledge known to A is unique/special to A then Amr cannot legitimately negate speciality of A. Rather greater quantity and the type of knowledge known to A establishes his speciality and uniqueness. Coming to the statement of Shaykh Thanvi; he negated speciality of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in knowing Ghayb with following words: “…if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); aisa Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds…” Statement indicates Shaykh Thanvi believes the quantity and the type of knowledge of Ghayb known to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is equal/less then creations he mentioned in Hifz ul-Iman. If he believed the Ghuyub types known to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are unqiue to him in comparision to mentioned creations and the quantity known to him is greater he would not have negated speciality because then speciality and merit would be established over Zayd, Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds. Undeniably this establishes Shaykh Thanvi compared the two equal quantities to negate speciality/uniqueness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in knowing Ghayb. 1.2 - Aisa In Meaning Of Itna/Yeh Or Of Tashbeeh: Shaykh Naumani wrote Aisa is of not Tashbeeh but it is in meaning of Itna/Yeh. Knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is being compared with knowledge of Zayd, Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; to negate speciality of Ghayb knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then how can Aisa not be of Tashbeeh? If there was actually no Tashbeeh in statement of Hifz ul-Iman then Aisa without Tashbeeh would have been respectable. Coming to home of Shaykh Naumani and his teacher; Shaykh Madani reveals the reality of Aisa: “If it was word itna (i.e. this-much) then it would have occasioned objection, may Allah forbid, that knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been equaled with knowledge of other things. If this is not pure foolishness then what else is it. Even if we over look this; even then word aisa is of Tasbih (i.e. comparision) and it is apparent that if something is compared with someothing then comparision is not in all aspects.” [Ref: Shahab as-Saqib, by Shaykh Hussain Ahmad Madani, Page281/282, here.] Shaykh Madani after giving number of examples in which Tashbeeh is made and only a single quality/merit is compared he goes on to say Aisa and its Tashbeeh in Hifz ul-Iman’s statement is in Baaz knowledge of Ghayb: “Therefore you will find many examples of this where Tashbeeh is only between a single quality where objective is to assimilate mushabah (i.e. compared with) and mushaba bihi (i.e. compared to). And where there is no intention to compare other things. In this place (meaning in statement of Hifz ul-Iman) it is absolutely not possible that quantity of knowledge of Ghuyub are being Tashbeeh’ed/compared because he himself says that all knowledges relating to Prophet-hood were all held by RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And these things (of knowledge) are not for Zaid, Umar, Bakr, and others. In here word itna (i.e. this-much) has not been employed. In fact Tashbeeh/comparision (in Hifz ul-Iman) is in baazi’at (i.e. limitedness) because if from qull Ghayb even one thing is omitted even that would be baaz.” [Ref: Shahab as-Saqib, by Shaykh Hussain Ahmad Madni, Page282/283, here.] Therefore according to Shaykh Madani the teacher of Shaykh Naumani; Aisa in statement of Hifz ul-Iman is of Tashbeeh. And with this Shaykh Madani has refuted his student and established position of Muslims. Any how if we ignore Aisa in sense of Tashbeeh in statement of Hifz ul-Iman and take it to mean Itna/Yeh in light of Shaykh Naumani’s Taweel and it returns to Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb. In this context Baaz Ilm of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is being compared with; Zayd, Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; to negate/refute speciality/uniqueness of Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) Baaz Ghayb knowledge. In conclusion it needs to be said that Aisa is of Tashbeeh; be it Aisa without Taweel of Itna/Yeh, or be it in meaning Itna/Yeh; Tashbeeh is fundamentally part of Aisa and all it’s meanings i.e. Itna, Is-Qadr, and Yeh. 2.0 - Yeh And Itna Return To Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb: Shaykh Naumani believes both Yeh/Itna return to mention of Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb therefore Ghayb knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) isn’t being discussed in statement of Hifz ul-Iman and Tashbeeh isn’t possible. Following is reflection of what Shaykh Naumani believes: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); itna/yeh baaz Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] If Itna returns to Baaz then Tashbeeh is in quantity of Baaz knowledge of Ghayb known to RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Baaz Ghuyub known to mentioned creations. Implication of which is; Baaz Ghayb knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is like the mentioned creations. If Zameer (i.e. hint) of Yeh is returned to Baaz knowledge of Ghayb then implications are; from Baaz the type of Ghayb knowledge known to RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) also known to mentioned creations. And all these Taweelat are just as insulting and disrespectful. And belittle Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) via his knowledge of Ghayb. Islamic perspective is that Taweel of Aisa to Itna/Yeh directly returns to mention of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his Ghayb knowledge, and then returns to Baaz: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor2 (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); itna/yeh baaz1 Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] And if hint of Itna is returned to mention of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in the statement then implication Tashbeeh is between the quantity of prophetic knowledge of Ghayb and quantity of mentioned creations. And implications of this would be that Shaykh considers prophetic knowledge of Ghayb to be equal with mentioned creations and therefore he negates speciality of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). If hint of Yeh is turned to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in the statement then Tashbeeh is of type of Ghuyub known to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Ghuyub known to creations. And in this context of Itna/Yeh; Baaz is inserted as part of essential details. 2.1 - Explaining The Out Come Of Shaykh Naumani’s Taweel : In simple format Shaykh Naumani’s Taweel would translate into: Itna/Yeh > Baaz > Ghayb Knowledge > Prophet = Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds. And Islamic position would translate to: Itna/Yeh > Prophet’s > Ghayb Knowledge = Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds. Islamic understanding of his Itna/Yeh establishes Tashbeeh in equal quantity of prophetic knowledge of Ghayb and of creations mentioned in the statement. Shaykh Naumani’s Taweel negates explicit equality in quantity but affirms Tashbeeh in Baaz Ghayb even though he rejects the existance of it.[See 1.0, and 1.1] Due to these facts Deobandi Taweel or Islamic scholarships understanding; both are two sides of same coin called disrespect. No sane Muslim would choose one over another. Conclusions: Shaykh Naumani’s Taweelat result the following order: Itna/Yeh à Baaz > Ghayb Knowledge > Prophet = Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds. And Ahle Sunnats understanding of statement of Hifz ul-Iman is as follows: Itna/Yeh > Prophet’s > Ghayb Knowledge = Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds. And both routes lead to insult and disrespect of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Shaykh Naumani’s Taweel; Aisa in the statement of Hifz ul-Iman is in meaning of Itna/Yeh and not of Tasbeeh is ignoring fact; there is actual Tashbeeh being made between Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and the creations mentioned to negate speciality of Ghayb knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Therefore Aisa in meaning of Tashbeeh requires no Taweel. Rather it perfectly fits into context of statement of Hifz ul-Iman. And Shaykh Madani is legitimately held to position that Aisa is of Tashbeeh. This is proof of Deobandi refuting Deobandi. And lies of liars being exposed by allies of Shaykh Thanvi. And even if the Taweel of Aisa is made to mean Itna/Yeh Tashbeeh remains fundamental part of both because change of Aisa to Itna/Yeh does not remove the Tashbeeh being made jus the nature of Tashbeeh is changed. Itna denotes Tashbeeh in quantity of Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb and Yeh denotes Tashbeeh in types of Ghayb and quantity of Baaz. And according to Shaykh Naumani Tashbeeh in statement of Hifz ul-Iman would make the statement of Hifz ul-Iman Kufr. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Shaykh Naumani took Aisa in meaning of Itna and Shaykh Dharbangi took it to mean Itna and Is-Qadr. And both stated in statement of Shaykh Thanvi Aisa is not of Tashbeeh. Shaykh Thanvi did not define Aisa to mean Itna/Is-Qadr but gave example of usage of Aisa laid the foundation of which lead both Shuyukh to determine Aisa is in meaning of Itna/Is-Qadr. Shaykh Naumani, as far I am aware, gave few examples of his own to establish Aisa is in meaning of Itna. In light of their examples and linguistic usage of Aisa we see if Shaykh Naumani’s Aisa in meaning of Itna and Shaykh Dharbangi’s Is-Qadr is free of blame. Or they have further compounded the problem for themselves. 0.0 - Controversial Statement Of Hifz ul-Iman: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); Ghayb knowledge like-this is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb. Now if Zayd decides (and says) yes I will call all of them (with title of) Aalim ul-Ghayb (one should ask Zayd) … [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] 0.1 - Aisa In Meaning Of Itna, Is-Qadr And Yeh: Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi while explaining his statement of Bast al-Banan gave underlined example to demonstrate Aisa is not used in meaning of Tashbeeh: “From this discussion we learn that in the mentioned statement knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has not been compared/equaled with knowledge of Zayd, Umru and others. And the word aisa is not used every time for Tashbeeh. According people who speak the lanugage they use it popularly in; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is aisa powerful.[1] So in this is there intention to compare the power of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with another? No! Not at all …” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman –with- Bast Al Banan, pages 24, by Shaykh Thanvi, here.] Based on this Shaykh Murtaza Hassan Darbhangi argued Aisa is in meaning of Itna/Is-Qadr: “It should be clear that (word) aisa (i.e. like) is not only used in anagolous (i.e. manand) and comparative (i.e. misl) meanings but (in Urdu language its usage) is also in meaning is-qadr and itna (i.e. this-much). (And these words itna/isqadr) which are intended meaning in this statement. It is unknown for what purpose such a clean/clear and straight-forward meaning is distorted.” [Ref: Taudhi ul-Bayan Fi Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Murtaza Hassan, Page6, here.] “Despite this (Khan Sahib Barelwi rahimullah and his followers are) saying that word aisa is used comparision. How much of this is justice? In the disputed statemend word aisa is in meaning of is-qadr and itna (i.e. this much). Then how is there tashbeeh (i.e. comparision)? The conclusion is that; as much knowledge was assumed for application of Aalim ul-Ghayb that is also true for Zaid, Umar, and Bakr. In this there is no tashbeeh (i.e. comparision) nor disrespect.” [Ref: Taudhi ul-Bayan Fi Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Murtaza Hassan, Page19, here.] Based on Shaykh Thanvi’s usage of Aisa Shaykh Naumani also took Aisa to mean Itna: “And now you’re saying that even though word jaisa is not used there aisa has been used therefore the tashbeeh/comaprision is established. In fact this is even your deception. Listen! If word aisa (i.e. like this) is within context of word jaisa (i.e. like this) then it is for tashbeeh (i.e. comparision) but if aisa is without jaisa then tashbeeha (i.e. comparision) is not definitive. In popular usage it is said; ‘Khuda aisa qadir e mutliq heh.’[!] Now in this sentence word aisa is without jaisa and therefore without tashbeeh but here it is used without meaning of tashbeeh, in meaning of itna. And by this (i.e. itna) intended meaning is baaz Ghayb knowledge which Zaid believes is proof/reason for application of (words) Alim ul-Ghayb (upon Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’salam).” [Ref: Fatah Bareilly Ka Dilkash Nazara, By Mawlana Rafaqat Hussain, Pages67/68, here.] In another place Shaykh Naumani gives another example in which Aisa can be used to mean Itna: “You have asked me to provide evidence of aisa being used in meaning of itna linguistically and in popular culture. Indeed this demand of yours is legitimate. Listen! Ameer Minahai (the blessed) in his; Ameer ul-Lughaat, Volume two, page 302 has presented a perfect/detailed research on usage of word aisa. And has mentioned few meanings. From all of them one meaning which I have mentioned. In this situation following is his statement: ‘AISA; (means) itna, is-qadr. SENTENCE: Aisa mara keh adh mowa kar deeya.[2] POETICAL VERSE: Us bada-kash ka jism hey aisa lateef wa saaf.[3] Zana par ghuman hey moj e sharab ka.’ (Barq). There you go now I have established from linguistics that aisa is used without Tashbeeh in meaning of itna.” [Ref: Fatah Bareilly Ka Dilkash Nazara, By Mawlana Rafaqat Hussain, Pages77/78, here.] In conclusion Shaykh Thanvi laid the foundation of Aisa to mean Itna and Shaykh Naumani and Shaykh Dharbangi spelt out the implication of example to mean Itna/Is-Qadr. Therefore when the injunction is issued all three would be guilty of same crime of Islamic law. 1.0 - Itna Is For Equality In Quantity – Itna Marbles You Have: Thanvi owns three marbles. Nanotavi owns three marbles. Both of them are debating over who owns greater quantity of marbles. Enter Sajid Khan, the Pathan, with weak Urdu. Sajid Khan doesn’t know proper usage of Itna, Itni and Itnay due to his weak Urdu. Yet both, Shaykh Thanvi and Shaykh Nanotavi, agree to make him judge. Sajid Khan says to Shaykh Thanvi to place in a single line on the floor: O O O. After Shaykh Thanvi is done Sajid Khan tells Shaykh Nanotavi; now you place your marbles next to Shaykh Thanvi’s marbles. Shaykh Nanotavi completes the difficult task: OO OO OO. Sajid Khan looks at both Shaykh Thanvi and Shaykh Nanotavi and enquires do you have any more marbles? Both say: No! Being smart and educated Sajid Khan points out; one of Shaykh Thanvi’s marble is next to Shaykh Nanotavi’s marble and this establishes quantitive equality. He looks at Shaykh Nanotavi and says to him: ‘Teen marble Thanvi kay pass thay aur itna marble tumaray pass heh.[4] Then why are you two arguing who has greater quantity of marbles!’ Sajid Khan is right because jitna (i.e. as-much) marbles Shaykh Thanvi owned Itnay[5] were owned by Shaykh Nanotavi. End. Therefore we come to conclusion; Itna in Urdu is used when there is equality in quantity of two items. 1.1 - Itna Is Not For Quantitive Disparity – Three He Has And Itna Five I Have: Shaykh Dehalvi and Shaykh Gangohi are best friends. Both decide to pool equal amount of money and purchase eight commonly crows roast feast at home. Shaykh Gangohi being bit dishonest and avid eater of crows commonly found in subcontinent; appropriates five crows for himself and hands three to Shaykh Dehalvi. Shaykh Dehalvi argues with Shaykh Gangohi that he is being cheated by Shaykh Gangohi even though he pooled equal amount of money. Both take their dispute to Sajid Khan, the Pathan, with good Urdu. Shaykh Dehalvi presents case; we brought eight common-crows, each one Kg. And says he has been given three common-crows and Shaykh Gangohi has kept five for himself even we both paid equal amoung of money toward the purchase. Shaykh Gangohi says: ‘Mein jhoot nahin bolta, mera ihtibar keren, Shaykh Dehalvi kay pass teen Zagh e maroofan heh, itna hi panch mein nay apnay pass rakha heh.’[6] Sajid Khan asks both to show the bags and counts three and five and then says: Shaykh Gangohi you are liar. In your bag you have five plump and delicious crows and in Shaykh Dehalvi’s bag there are three mouth wateringly sumptuous crows. Shaykh Gangohi says: ‘Mein nay kab kaha meray pass teen crow hen. Mein nay toh itna kaha heh, aur itna toh size wasteh istimal hota heh; mein nay itna bara amrood khaya.’[7] Sajid Khan: My dear Shaykh Gangohi you stated: ‘… Shaykh Dehalvi kay pass teen Zagh e maroofan heh, itna hi panch mein nay apnay pass rakha heh.’ Itna denotes you have kept same quantity, this is reason for which you was accused of lieing, and your lie is exposed because you acknowledged you kept five. Itna cannot be used in context where there is imbalance of quantity. Itna is used to denote sameness of quantity. Gramatically if the quantity of crows was four each then your following statement would accurately reflect usage of Itna: ‘I am not lieing, trust me, Ismail Dehalvi is in possession of four common-crows, as-much (as him) I have kept four for my self.’ Sajid Khan continues: You said; Itna was used by you to denote size and not quantity. The dispute is about quantity and not size so your statement about size in context of quantity would make no sense. I say it politely; you’re lieing to cover-up your previous lie. End. Therefore we come to conclusion; when there is inequality in quantity of two items Itna cannot be used. 1.2 - Itna Used In Quantitive Equality And Not In Context Of Disparity: When Itna is used in context of two quantities, being compared with each other, or merit of one is being negated by mention of another, then equality in quantity must exist otherwise, usage of Itna would be gramatically incorrect. Please note even if the figures of quantity have not be declared like in the following equality in quantity is implied by default: ‘Nothing special about Thanvi’s knowledge; this-much knowledge even child has.’ Or if out of two parties ones quantity is declared and the others is not mentioned even then Itna would establish equality of quantity. 2.0 - Out-Come Of Itna Being For Quantitive Equality: Shaykh Naumani’s understanding that Aisa is in meaning of Itna. It has been established that Itna when it is used in context of two quantities then there is quantitive equality in both quantities. Also the speciality of prophetic knowledge of Ghayb is being negated by Shaykh Thanvi. In the context of statement; negation of speciality of prophetic Ghayb could only be if Shaykh Thanvi believed there is equality in quantity: “… intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); itna Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something…” As such Shaykh Thanvi’s example of; “Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) aisa qadir heh.”, Shaykh Naumani’s Itna and Shaykh Darbhangi’s Is-Qadr are of equality in quantity. And this meaning is supported by context of statement becaue Shaykh negated Takhsees of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and this negation of Takhsees can only be correct if the type of Ghayb and quantity of Ghayb is is believed to be same for both parties. Otherwise party with greater knowledge would have Takhsees over party with lesser quantity of knowledge. So it must be that Shaykh Thanvi believed equality in quantity of knowledge. Lastly Shaykh Madani al-Deobandi, aka the mini-gun of insults, has following to say about Itna: “Even if we ignore this, even then honorable-Sir, consider this; honorable Mawlana is employing word aisa in statement, not word itna. If it was itna (i.e. this-much) then there would have been possbility, may Allah forbid, that knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been quantitively-equaled with knowledge of other things. If this is not pure foolishness then what else is it. Even if we over look this; even then word aisa is of Tasbih (i.e. comparision) and it is apparent that if something is compared with someothing then comparision is not in all aspects.” [Ref: Shahab as-Saqib, by Shaykh Hussain Ahmad Madani, Page281/282, here.] According to Shaykh Madani Itna is of equality of quantity. 2.1 - Fatwah Of Kufr On Equality Of Quantity Issued By Shaykh Thanvi: According to Shaykh Naumani; Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi was asked about one who establishes equality in quantity of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and the mentioned creations in Hifz ul-Iman’s controversial statement. Shaykh Thanvi replied: “Honorable Mawlvi Ahmad Raza Khan (Barelwi) has stated and has attributed to you in Hussam al-Haramayn that in Hifz ul-Iman you explicitly stated; Ghayb knowledge jaisa (i.e. like) of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) aisa (i.e. like-it) is also possessed every infant and madman, in fact by every animal, and every quadruped . Therefore following matters are need of clarification: … (iv) If you have not explicitly stated such topic/meaning, nor indicated (meaning) is derivitive of your statement, nor your intention, then such a person who believes (as ascribed to you), or explicitly or implicitly says (this); do you believe is Muslims or Kafir?” (i) In response to your letter I say this; I have not written this khabees (i.e. impure) subject/meaning in any of my books. And far be me writing it; danger of it didn’t even cross my heart. (ii) This subject/meaning is not inherent-effect of any of my statement therefore at the end I would like to say: (iii) When I deem such topic/meaning filthy and my heart has felt no danger of what has been stated above then how can it be my intended meaning? (iv) Any person believes as such, or without believing it explicitly or implicitly utters this, I deem such a person to be out of Islam (because) this person belies definitive evidences and insults/detracts (the merits of one who is) pride of tribe Adam (i.e. Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’salam). This is the answer to your questions. Now at the end …” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman -with- Bast al-Banan, Pages; 20/21/22, here.] Shaykh Naumani presents his understanding of the edict in his own words: “There you go now I have established from linguistical (analysis) that aisa is also used in meaning of itna without warranting tashbeeh (i.e. comparision). And in Urdu poetical popular expressions it has been used as such. I had stated that author of Hifz ul-Iman honorable Mawlana Ashraf Ali himself deems such a person Kafir who says knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is equal (in quantity) with animals and lunatics. And in support of this I quoted statement of Bast al-Banan.” [Ref: Fatah Bareilly Ka Dilkash Nazara, By Mawlana Rafaqat Hussain, Pages78, here.] According to Shaykh Naumani one who establishes quantative equality between the Ghayb knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and the creations which Shaykh mentioned such a person is Kafir according to Shaykh Thanvi and himself. 2.2 - The Conclusion Of Itna And Is-Qadr Taweel Of Aisa: Sections 1.0 to 1.2 establish that Itna is used where there is equality in quantity. Shaykh Naumani and Darbhangi took aisa in statement of Hifz ul-Iman to mean itna/is-qadr and we have established they are for equality in quantity. According to Shaykh Thanvi and Shaykh Naumani himself equal quantity warrants Kufr. If aisa is in meaning of Itna/Is-Qadr in Hifz ul-Iman then equality in quantity would be established. Hence Shaykh Naumani, Shaykh Darbhangi, would be Kafirs in judgement of Shaykh Thanvi. And Shaykh Thanvi would be Kafir in judgment of Shaykh Naumani and Darbhangi because both believe his statement uses aisa in meaning of itna/is-qadr. So instead of good the result is their own evil has caught them in the web of their own deceit and distortions. 3.0 - Itna In Light Of Shaykh Thanvi’s And Shaykh Naumani’s Examples: Shaykh Thanvi used following to justify Taweel of Aisa: “Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) aisa qadir heh.” Based on Shaykh Thanvi’s example; Shaykh Naumani said Aisa is in meaning of Itna and gave following example to justify its usage: “Khuda aisa qadir e mutliq heh.” Shaykh Naumani also gave following example to justify Aisa mean Itna: “Aisa mara keh adh mowa kar deeya.” He also quoted poetical verse of certain poet with name of Barq: “Us bada-kash ka jism hey aisa lateef wa saaf. Zana par ghuman hey moj e sharab ka.” In addition to these following can be examples of Aisa being in meaning of Itna: ‘Aisa meetha malta.’ Another example: ‘Mirza Qadiyani aisa Kafir thah.’ In all these places Aisa is in meaning of Itna and it is being used to highlight significance and greatness of a quality. And normally these type of sentences are followed by another statement which indicates greatness of quantity being implied. And one example of this is the poetical verse quoted by Shaykh Naumani: “Us bada-kash ka jism hey aisa lateef wa saaf. Zana par ghuman hey moj e sharab ka.”[8] Poet says; body of that alcahol drinker is so delicate and blemishless that in my imagination [or understanding] it is akin to alcahol and a woman. Poet is equating purity and delicateness of a person to beautiful blemishless woman and alcahol. Shaykh Naumani gave another example: “Aisa mara keh adh mowa kar deeya.” And the following portion indicates greatness of quantity: “Aisa mara keh adh mowa kar deeya.” Another example would be: ‘Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) aisa qadir e mutliq heh keh us nay tamam qaynaat aur us mein hayat banahi. Aur idol aisa bey-qudra keh makhi nahin bana sakta balkay agar kuch cheen leh toh aisa la-char hey keh wapis bi nahin la sakta .’[9] Please note in this example Allah’s greatness in quantity is that He created everything. And idol’s helpness/powerlessness establishes it has greatly low quantity of power to the point of inability to do anything. Therefore usage of Aisa in meaning of Itna in phrases employed by Shaykh Naumani is to highlight the greatness of quantity and superiority of person possessing quality. 3.1 - Itna Of Great Quantity and Itna Of Greatly Insignificant Quanity: Shaykh Naumani believes Aisa in statement of Shaykh Thanvi is not of Tashbeeh. He instead purposed Aisa is in meaning of Itna -; again without Tashbeeh, and Itna is not of equality, and in the statement prophetic knowledge of Ghayb is not being discussed[10] in the following: “… aisa/Itna Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds …” In light of usage of Aisa/Itna in examples of Shaykh Naumani as demonstrated in previous section and his belief underlined in this section the result is that Ghayb knowledge of following is greater in quantity: “… aisa/itna (i.e. great quantity of baaz) Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds…” And in the context of what preceded before this statement it would mean; Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knowledge of Baaz Ghayb lacks speciality because Zayd, infants, lunatics and animals possess great quantity of Baaz knowledge of Ghayb: “… if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); aisa/itna (great quantity of baaz) Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds…” Best way to understand it is to punctuate the statement again and pause for one second right before the next sentence begins and then proceed to read it: “If baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? Aisa/Itna (great quantity of baaz) Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds.” What can be more insulting then this that Shaykh Nuamani’s Taweel exalts knowledge of random idiots, lunatics, infants, animals and all while negating speciality of prophetic Ghayb. 3.2 – Shaykh Naumani’s Taweel In Perspective Of Truth: Now Shaykh Naumani’s supporters may argue he believes knowledge of creations mentioned by Shaykh Thanvi is insignificant compared to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); like in the following therefore great quantity of baaz insertion in brackets is unjust. We will say that accessment of his Itna/Aisa was made in light of his examples which I quoted but if you want to change the Itna/Aisa to greatly insignificant quantity be my guest. Before we respond to this it important to note that even though Shaykh Naumani said Aisa/Itna is not of Tashbeeh, nor equality in quantity is intended, nor Prophetic Baaz knowledge of Ghayb is being discussed the truth is in the statement of Shaykh Thanvi. And it refutes the distortion of Shaykh Naumani: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); Aisa/Itna Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb. Now if Zayd decides (and says) yes I will call all of them (with title of) Aalim ul-Ghayb (one should ask Zayd) … [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] If Shaykh Naumani intended Itna/Aisa of insignificance then the statement would read: “… aisa/itna (greatly insignificant baaz quantity) Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds…” And because contextually speciality of prophetic Ghayb knowledge is being negated/refuted by Shaykh Thanvi. Therefore it must be that Shaykh Thanvi employs equality between knowledge for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and for creations; Zayd, Amr; infants, lunatic, animals, quadrupeds. If he considered greater quantity for prophetic knowledge then how would it be possible for him to negate speciality because greatness of quantity and quality establishes speciality. Hence if Itna/Aisa was of insignificance then contextually same Itna/Aisa of insignificance is for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); like in the following: “… if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); aisa/itna (greatly insignificant baaz quantity) Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds…” And this would mean that Shaykh Naumani deliberately lowered the great prophetic knowledge to negate speciality even when he knew it wasn’t the case. And this is worse for Shaykh Thanvi and worst Taweel for Shayh Naumani. Conclusion: In statement of Shaykh Thanvi Aisa is used for Tashbeeh and if Taweel of Aisa is made to mean Itna then Itna is also of Tashbeeh. Takhsees of prophetic knowledge of Ghayb is being negated hence comparision (i.e. Tashbeeh) via Aisa/Itna is fundamental for it. And this Tashbeeh is clearly being made linguistically. In the statement Itna is of equality in quantity; be that equality in insignificant quantity of baaz or great quantity of baaz. Shaykh Thanvi, Shaykh Naumani, Shaykh Darbhangi all believe, if in statement of Shaykh Thanvi, there was equality in quantity then it would be Kufr. And this precisely has been established. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi. FootNotes: - [1] Urdu: “Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) aisa qadir heh.” Means: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is so powerful. Or it can mean: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is so-much powerful. - [!] Means: ‘God is aisa (i.e. this-much) all-mighty powerful.’ - [2] Ad means half and mowa means death. Therefore literally it means: Struck so-much that (he put him) in half death state. It can mean: Struck him so-much that nearly killed him. And means: Struck in like-this that nearly killed him. It can also mean: Beat up so-much mean knocked him unconcious, or paralysed. Note meanings are derived from what the word ad-mowa can referr to. - [3] It roughly means: ‘That alcahol drinkers body is so-much delicate and blemish-less.’ Better rendering of it in English would be: ‘That alcahol drinkers body is so delicate and blemish-less.’ - [4] ’Teen marble Thanvi kay pass heh aur itna marble tumaray pass heh.’ It means: ‘Thanvi owns three marbles and this-much marble are yours also.’ It was pointed out; Sajid Khan has weak Urdu and he used Itna but he should have used Itnay plural to denote more then one marble. Weak Urdu story was invented so Itna fits into Shaykh Naumani’s Itna. Itna to Itnay, single to plural, would not have changed the verdict of quantitive equality. [5] Itnay is plural, if the item discussed was single item, then itna would be used but item was more then one hence Itna. - [6] Statement: ‘Mein jhoot nahin bolta, mera ihtibar keren, Shaykh Dehalvi kay pass teen Zagh e maroofan heh, itna hi panch mein nay apnay pass rakha heh.’ Means: ‘I am not lieing, trust me, Shaykh Dehalvi is in possession of three crows, as-much (as him) I have kept five for my self.’ - [7] Statement: ‘Mein nay kab kaha meray pass teen crow hen. Mein nay toh itna kaha heh, aur itna toh size wasteh istimal hota heh; mein nay itna bara Aamb khaya.’ Means: ‘When did I say I have three crows. I used Itna and Itna is used for size; I ate this-much big mango.’ - [8] To easily access the poetical verse read it: Jism hey aisa lateef wa saaf us bada-kash ka. Moj e Sharab ka zana par ghuman hey. - [9] Translation: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is so-much poweful; He created all the universe and all life in it. And idol is so-much powerless that it can’t even creat a fly infact if she snaches something from it that it is so-much helpless it cannot bring it back. - [10] “And when I (Shaykh Naumani) refuted your arguments and established that aisa is also employed for purpose of comparision as well as of itna. And in statement of Hifz ul-Iman it (i.e. aisa) has been used without implying tashbeeh (i.e. comparision) -; in meaning of itna. Then you demanded from me evidence in which aisa has been used without indicating comparision and in meaning of itna (i.e. this much). Therefore I established it from linguistical (analysis) and from popular poetical expressions to which you could not respond. And now in this speech of yours you have adopted a novel (position) that by taking aisa (this-much) in meaning of itna (i.e. this-much) our (Barelwi) position is established. And meaning of statement of Hifz ul-Iman becomes: ‘Knowledge of ghayb as-much (in quanity) was of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) that-much knowledge (in quantity) is possessed by every Zaid, Umar, and animals, and lunatics.’ I am surprised that do you really understand/believe this or are you deliberately trying to misguide people. […] Anyhow if you have not understood my position so far then try to understand now. In Hifz ul-Iman aisa is in meaning of itna. And by it (meaning; aisa/itna) limited knowledge of Ghayb is intended and meaning of statement (of Hifz ul-Iman) is as follows: Those who attribute to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) title of Aalim ul-Ghayb because limited of knowledge of Ghayb and if this is their principle that whoever who knows few matters of Ghayb […] meaning limited Ghayb knowledge is known to all. Anyhow in this statement word aisa has been used in meaning of itna and from it limited knowledge of Ghayb is intended not (limited) knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam).” [Ref: Fatah Bareilly Ka Dilkash Nazara, By Mawlana Rafaqat Hussain, Pages 89/90, here.]

Updated. Various Interpretations Of Hifz ul-Iman’s And Implications Of These Interpretations. Introduction: Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi wrote Hifz ul-Iman in which he insulted/disrespected Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) by comparing knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to knolwedge of regular Joe’s knowledge along side of infants, lunatics, quadrapeds and carnivores. Scholars of Islam requested and pleaded him to repeal the statement from Hifz ul-Iman and repent but instead he indirectly encouraged his supporters to defend him and make excuses on his behalf. This article will briefly address their efforts and if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits me each of his supporter will receive a due response in time. This is just the beginning greater plans to unravel. Insha Allah. Literal Translation Of Statement From Hifz ul-Iman: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); Ghayb knowledge like-this is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] Aisa/Like In Meaning Of Quantity: Typically Deobandis, such as Shaykh Murtaza Hassan Chandpuri, Shaykh Manzoor Nomani, argued; Shaykh Thanvi’s statement aisa/like-this is to be understood in meaning of itna (i.e. this much) is-qadr (i.e. this-quantity), yeh (i.e. this) and it was not used comparatively. According to this Taweel (i.e. interpretation) the statement of Shaykh Thanvi would read: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); itna (i.e. this-much) Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] This is no less offensive because if the statement is understood in context of itna, is-qadr, then the quantity of Ghayb of Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is being equaled to qauntity of every day Joe’s knowledge of Ghayb along side infants, mad-man, every animal quadrapeds, and carnivores. Aisa/Like In Sense Of Comparision/Tashbeeh: In opposition to both of the above another Deobandi scholar; Shaykh Hussain Ahmad Madani argued aisa/like-this is used comparatively if it was in meaning of itna (i.e. this much) then it would be offensive. According to him aisa/like-this was used for sake of comparison (i.e. tashbeeh). If the statement is in this meaning then it is to be understood like: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); comparatively aisa (i.e. like-this) Ghayb knowledge is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] In this sense the statement means; Ghayb knowledge like [ba-wasta, transltd; via means][1] in comparison to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is also possessed by Zayd, Amr, infants, lunatics, every animal; quadrapeds and carnivores. Implications Of Aisa In Meaning Of Itna And Tashbeeh: Implication of first is; quantity of prophetic knowledge is same as the mentioned in list. People in wordly knowledge aren’t even equale but Shaykh Thanvi made prophetic knowledge equal to the mentioned in list. And not wordly knowledge, but in knowledge of Ghayb, every bit of which establishes speciality of a Prophet. Not only he attributed to them knowledge of Ghayb he attributed equality to them if aisa is in meaning of itna. Implication of second is; the type of prophetic knowledge which suppose to be unique to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not unique to him but the mentioned also share it with him there for he’s not unique/special. And this is Kufr on three accounts; i) comparing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to the mentioned which includes detestables, ii) negating speciality of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) iii) and negating speciality of prophetic knowledge of Ghayb. Ghayb knowledge is special to every Prophet and to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as well and it is inclusive of Wahi. To say it is not special but others share is to negate the very purpose of his Prophet-hood. Conclusion: If aisa/like-this is interpreted to mean itna/is-qadr (i.e. this-much, this-quantity) then knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is being equaled to knowledge of mentioned and implication is that he is no different from knowledge of mentioned in quantity. If statement is interpreted in context of – tashbeeh – then it is comparing the knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with the mentioned and pointing out that he is no different to mentioned due to his knowledge. However the statement of Hifz ul-Iman is interpreted in both statements his knowledge is being compared to the mentioned. In the first case – itna/is-qadr – comparison is implied and knowledge is clearly equaled to mentioned. In the second case – aisa/like – being for TASHBEEH the comparison is obvious in types of Ghuyub. However one roles the dice insult and disrespect of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) cannot be removed from statement of Shaykh Thanvi. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi - [1] “Shar’ri application of mutliq Ghayb (i.e. boundless Ghayb) is upon Ghayb which cannot be established by evidence and for which there is no mean or way of comprehension. On this (stated) foundation it has stated: "None in the heavens and earth knows the unseen except Allah …” (27:65) and: “And if I knew the unseen, I could have …” (7:188) And knowledge which is via means (i.e. ba-wasta) on this [type of knowledge] application of (word) Ghayb is need of qarina (i.e. evidential support).” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page14, here].

Updated. Shaykh Madani’s Explanation Of Hifz ul-Iman: Comparision Is In Category Of Limitedness Not In Quantity Of Limited Knolwedge. Introduction: Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi a major scholar of Deobandism in his Hifz ul-Iman wrote something which no believer would find acceptable. Ever since it was penned Shaykh Thanvi himself and his supporters have sort to explain away the obvious insult/disrespect directed toward Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Out of many Shaykh Hussain Ahmad Madani, a major Deobandi scholar wrote to defend Shaykh Thanvi and published Al-Shihab as-Saqib, best described as Gali Nama (i.e. master piece of abuse). 0.0 - Islamic Belief Regarding Ilm al-Ghayb Of Prophet: Muslims believe Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been granted Baaz from knowledge of Ghayb. In words of Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala); Prophet Muhammad’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knowledge of Ghayb is a drop from limitless ocean of Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knowledge. And despite this his knowledge of Ghayb is unique and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is special in his knowledge of Ghayb. 0.1 - Glimpse Of Types Of Ghuyubs Known To RasoolAllah: It is unique because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) showed him paradise and hell. He saw the grapes of paradise and saw parts of hell destroying each other. He saw Amr bin Luhai in hell and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told he started the Sunnah of freeing animals in the name of idol gods.[1] Prophet (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold; Syria, Iraq, and Yemen will be conquered by Muslims and Muslims will leave Madinah.[2] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed the companions; he can see them behind him just like he can see them when they are infront of him. Nor their concentration in prayer and nor was their bowing is hidden from him.[3] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed about two people being tortured in the graves when he passed by them. And this is report of Ghayb relating to present. He told they are not being punished for minor sins. One being punished for backbiting and other for not being careful and allowing urine drops to soil his clothes. Note he knew their sins of past due to which they were being punished.[4] And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was shown his entire Ummah and the good and bad deeds of his entire nation during his life time.[5] Just from a glimpse it becomes evident prophetic knowledge of Ghayb is unique. And there is no regular Joe, or infant, or lunatic, or animal, or insect with such knowledge of Ghayb. 0.2 - Quantity Of Ghuyub Known To RasoolAllah: Good and bad actions of Ummah were shown to RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) during his life time and are presented to him after his passing away.[6] Consider the billions of Muslims and this should tell a Muslim the amount of Ghuyub is known by RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Also Ahadith establish everything was revealed to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) when Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) placed knowledge in chest of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam).[7] And therefore Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told everything from beginning of creation till entry of people to paradise/hell.[8] And this was because Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was witnessing all that is happening.[9] 1.0 - Actual Statement Of Shaykh Thanvi In Discussion: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); Ghayb knowledge like-this is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page15, here] 1.1 - Shaykh Hussain Ahmad Madani’s Taweel: Shaykh Madani argued in defence of Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi; he compared some baaz (i.e. limited/some) with baaz and not quantity of baaz knowledge. In context of Shaykh Thanvi’s statement his explanation would be reflected as follows: “… if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); baaz Ghayb knowledge like-this is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds …” In other words Shaykh Madani is saying; instead of comparing the quantity of baaz knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with baaz quantity of mentioned creations; Shaykh Thanvi just compared baaz knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with baaz knowledge of mentioned creations without comparing great quantity of prophetic knowledge with minute knowledge of others. 1.2 – The Right Questions And the Important Answer: Question arises what would be the outcome if this interpretation of Shaykh Hussain Ahmad is right and believed? And what does it mean regarding character of Shaykh Thanvi if this interpretation is true? Would Shaykh Madani earn a badge of honor and Shaykh Thanvi go free of blame of insulting Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? Lets begin with telling you; don’t have your hopes too high about Shaykh Madani’s scholarships and definitely not his smarts (i.e. intelligence). 1.3 - Shaykh Madani’s Taweel In Hifz ul-Iman: Note words in green are not part of original TEXT but are inserted to convey interpretation of Shaykh Madani. In light of Shaykh Madani’s Taweel the statement will be read: “If according to Zaid it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then matter needs to be enquired; is intended meaning of this Ghayb; baaz Ghayb or qull Ghayb (of Allah); if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); baaz Ghayb knowledge like-this is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds; because every person knows something which is hidden from another person. (If knowing Ghayb is criteria of attributing title;) then we should call everyone of them Aalim al-Ghayb.” Even though the natural meaning conveys comparision between Baaz quantity of prophetic Ghayb and Baaz Ghayb of creations he mentioned; please ignore it. Just pretend and go along; Shaykh Madani was correct in his understanding. 1.4 - Shaykh Madani’s Taweel And Its Application On Shaykh Thanvi: As per interpretation of Shaykh Madani the implications are; Shaykh Thanvi wants to negate uniquesness of prophetic knowledge of Ghayb by comparing category of Baaz with Baaz. Without getting into detail of how much each Baaz translates to for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and for mentioned creations. And without comparing the type of knowledge of Ghayb which is established for RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The following demonstrates what Shaykh Madani is saying: If it is some knowledge then what is so special/unique about Shaykh Thanvi’s some knowledge? Knowledge like of Shaykh Thanvi is known to every idiot, dumb mummal, Kafir, and even Fir’awn had some knowledge. Or if someone wants to negate uniqueness of Shaykh Thanvi’s knowledge by saying: What is so unique about Shaykh Thanvi’s limited knowledge of Islam even infants possess limited knowledge of Islam. Please note quantity of limited/some isn’t being compared but just the Nafs (i.e. being, or word) of Baaz (i.e. limited, some) is compared. Question; Is this fair way of determining uniqueness of Shaykh Thanvi’s knowledge? 2.0 - Response To Argument: Compared In Limitedness Not In Quantity: Shaykh Madani’s argument is; Shaykh Thanvi compared limited knowledge without making, directly or indirectly, the quantity of limited knowledge part of his statement found in Hifz ul-Iman. Shaykh Madani either lacked the smarts (i.e. intelligence) or was just being typical Deobandi. And my accessment is smarts was not his problem but his love/respect of Shaykh Thanvi exceded the love and respect of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Because even those who have spent two years in Madrassa will be able to tell you speciality and uniqueness cannot be established and cannot be negated without inserting quantity, type and quality of knowledge into equation. If Shaykh Thanvi had not questioned the speciality/uniqueness and had not compared prophetic knowledge of Ghayb with lunatics, infants, animals, Zaid, Amr and not negated speciality of prophetic knowledge: Then quantity argument of Shaykh Madani would have been valid. 2.1 - Shaykh Thanvi’s Equality In Limited Knowledge Established: If Shaykh Thanvi’s statement was without aisa (i.e. like-this) and following part of sentence was omitted: “… in this what is so unique about Hadhoor …”. Then it would have been worded in following way: “… if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended then in this; what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); baaz Ghayb knowledge like-this is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds …” It would have been acceptable and Shaykh Madani’s point would have been valid that Tashbeeh is in Nafs (i.e. category) of Baaz and not in quantity of Baaz. But Shaykh Thanvi questioned uniqueness of prophetic knowledge and compared it with; Zaid, Amr, lunatics, animals, quadrupeds and infants in limitedness of Ghayb. And all this to negate speciality/uniqueness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his prophetic knowledge. To determine or to negate speciality/uniqueness of prophetic knowledge Shaykh Thanvi had to compare the quantity etc. If he believed prophetic knowledge of Ghayb was far greater then Zaid, Amr, lunatics, infants, animals then there would be speciality/uniqueness of prophetic knowledge and and he would have automatically come to conclusion that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is unique and special in his knowledge. Shaykh Thanvi denied speciality/uniqueness of prophetic knowledge and that can only be it if he considered/believed the prophetic knowledge to be equal to mentioned creations: “… if baaz knowledge of Ghayb is intended; then in this what is so unique about Hadhoor (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam); baaz Ghayb knowledge like-this is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; every infant, lunatic, all animals and quadrupeds …”Al-Hasil -: Equality in quantity, type and quality of knowledge is indirectly was implied by Shaykh Thanvi to come to his conclusion. If he had not implied equality into his text his conclusion could not have been against speciality but pro-speciality/uniqueness. The principle of determining speciality/uniqueness in knowledge and Shaykh Thanvi’s conclusion is source of equality in quantity argument. 3.0 - Moral Question And Principle Of Establishing Uniqueness: To establish uniqueness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his knowledge of Ghayb it is wrong to compare his superior knowledge with knowledge of inferiors. The correct method is to compare lowers knowledge with superiors knowledge. In other words to establish uniqueness one should not do as follow; infant knows Tajweed and Shaykh Thanvi knows Tajweed therefore Shaykh Thanvi is not special. The right course of action is that; Shaykh Thanvi knows, Tajweed, Tafsir, Hadith, Arabic, rules of Sarf and Nawh etc. The child only knows Tajweed but due to all other knowledge Shaykh Thanvi is unique in his knowledge. In other words uniquesness in knowledge is determined by quantity of knoweldge and type of knowledge and not through word play; category of Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb vs category Baaz Ilm al-Ghayb. The speciality of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is established by type of Ghuyub he knows and quantity of these Ghuyub and quality of these Ghuyub. 3.1 - Blame On Shaykh Thanvi Through Interpretation Of Shaykh Madani: It is obvious uniquesness/speciality of one individual’s knowledge over another is established through the type of Ghuyub known to him and quantity of Ghuyub. What type of person would use such under handed tactic to negate speciality/uniqueness Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his Ghyb knowledge over insignifcants mentioned by Shaykh Thanvi? What I mean is you need to consider: What kind of Iblees would not use quantity and type knowledge to determine uniqueness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) over lunatics, infants, animals, and quadrupeds: A person who loves and respects Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? Or Shaytaan al-Laheen who deliberately wants to insult Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) using this under-handed tactic? And suppose Shaykh Madani wrongly understood the intent of Shaykh Thanvi then just imagine what kind of Iblees would understand the statement in such a way and consider it acceptable? A righteous believer or cursed Iblees? I leave the judgment for the readers. 3.2 - Equating Prophetic Knowledge With Knowledge Of Insignificants: According to Shaykh Madani; Shaykh Thanvi compares baaz prophetic knowledge of Ghayb with baaz knowledge of Ghayb of infants and lunatics. It is true having baaz knowledge of Ghayb is not unique but the type and quantity Ghayb knowledge which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been granted is unique to Prophets and especially to him. Knowledge of Quran/Wahi was Ghayb and was unique to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Which infant, or lunatic, or animal, or regular Joe shared any part of it without his delivering it? And some evidence relating to this was already presented. Using Shaykh Madani’s logic if someone says; what is so unique about face of Shaykh Thanvi; face like of this even is possed by Zayd, Amr, infants, lunatics, animals, pigs, dogs, and donkeys. Expectedly Deobandi’s would be upset and accuse me of following the Sunnah of Shaykh Madani. But my defence would be in accordance with logic of Shaykh Madani: I merely compared Nafs of face with faces of mentioned and not type of faces; therefore no insult was meant because having face is not unique. Natural implication of which is that Shaykh Thanvi’s face is like the faces of mentioned. Rest assured none of them will buy tolerate or accept this Taweel because one of their own is being insulted. But Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is insulted their hearts don’t even percieve it and they preferr distortions of their scholars over what they know to be truth. Conclusion: To begin with; to equate Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and to argue there is no uniqueness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) over the insignicants mentioned is disrespectful. Shaykh Thanvi’s statement of Hifz ul-Iman if judged in light of Shaykh Madani’s Taweel then Shaykh Thanvi is guilty of employing unwarranted methodology of underminding merit and speciality of prophetic knowledge of Ghayb. And a Muslim can imagine what type of person would go to such length as to compare Baaz without comparing quanity of Baaz Ghayb knowledge of Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with animals, infants, and lunatics! All this so he can establish there is nothing special about Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his knolwedge: A righteous believer who loves/respects Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? Or a disgusting Kafir impersonating to be Muslim; with no love/respect for the Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) guides whom He wills. Wama alayna ilal balalghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi FootNotes: - [1] “Narrated Aisha: Once the sun eclipsed and Allah's Messenger stood up for the prayer and recited a very long Sura and when bowed for a long while and then raised his head and started reciting another Sura. Then he bowed, and after finishing, he prostrated and did the same in the second rak`a and then said, "These (lunar and solar eclipses) are two of the signs of Allah and if you see them, pray till the eclipse is over. No doubt, while standing at this place I saw everything promised to me by Allah and I saw (Paradise) and I wanted to pluck a bunch (of grapes) therefrom, at the time when you saw me stepping forward. No doubt, I saw Hell with its different parts destroying each other when you saw me retreating and in it I saw `Amr bin Luhai who started the tradition of freeing animals (set them free) in the name of idols." [Ref: Bukhari, B22, H303] - [2]“Sufyan b. Abd Zuhair reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Syria will be conquered and some people will go out of Medina along with their families driving their camels. and Medina is better for them if they were to know it. Then Yemen will be conquered and some people will go out of Medina along with their families driving their camels, and Medina is better for them if they were to know it. Then Iraq will be conquered and some people will go out of it along with their families driving their camels, and Medina is better for them if they were to know it.” [Ref: Muslim, B7, H3200] - [3] "It was narrated from Anas that the Prophet used to say: "Make your rows straight, make your rows straight, make your rows straight. By the One in Whose Hand is my soul! I can see you behind me as I can see you in front of me." [Ref: Nisai, B10, H814] "It was narrated from Anas that: The Messenger of Allah said: 'Bow and prostrate properly, for by Allah I can see you from behind my back when you bow and prostrate.'" [Ref: Nisai, B12, H1118] "Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu'z Zinad from al-Araj from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah ( may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: "Do you see the direction I am facing here? By Allah, neither your concentration nor your ruku is hidden from me. I can see you behind my back." [Ref: Muwatta.I.Malik, B9, H73] - [4] "Bahr bin Marrar narrated that his grandfather Abu Bakrah said: "The Messenger of Allah passed by two graves, and he said: 'They are being punished but they are not being punished for anything major. One of them is being punished because of urine, and the other is being punished because of backbiting.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H349] “Narrated Ibn Abbas:Once the Prophet went through the grave-yards of Medina and heard the voices of two humans who were being tortured in their graves. The Prophet said, "They are being punished, but they are not being punished because of a major sin, yet their sins are great. One of them used not to save himself from (being soiled with) the urine, and the other used to go about with calumnies (Namima)." Then the Prophet asked for a green palm tree leaf and split it into two pieces and placed one piece on each grave, saying, "I hope that their punishment may be abated as long as these pieces of the leaf are not dried." [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H81] - [5] “It was narrated from Abu Dharr that the Prophet said: "My nation was shown to me with their good deeds and bad deeds. Among their good deeds I saw a harmful thing being removed from the road. And among their bad deeds I saw sputum in the mosque that had not been removed." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B33, H3683] - [6] “It was narrated from Abu Dhār that the Prophet said: "My nation was shown to me with their good deeds and bad deeds. Among their good deeds I saw a harmful thing being removed from the road. And among their bad deeds I saw sputum in the mosque that had not been removed." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B33, H3683] “Narrated Sulayman bin Harb, Hammad bin Zaid, Ghalib al Qattan, Bakr bin Abdullah al-Muzani: RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: My life is good for you [because] Hadith are narrated for you and you narrate them. When I die then in my death there is good for you [because] your actions are presented to me. If I see goodness I will praise Allah and if I see otherwise I will seek forgive for you from Allah.” [Ref: Khasa’is Ul Kubra, Imam Suyuti, pages 391/392.] - [7] "Narrated Abdur Rahman ibn A'ish: Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said: I saw my Lord, the Exalted and Glorious in the most beautiful form. He said: What do the Angels in the presence of Allah contend about? I said: Thou art the most aware of it. He then placed His palm between my shoulders and I felt its coldness in my chest and I came to know what was in the Heavens and the Earth. He recited: 'Thus did we show Ibrahim the kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth and it was so that he might have certainty.' (6:75)" [Ref: Tirmadhi, Vol5, H3245, Tafsir Surah Sad] "Then I saw Him put his palms between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of his fingers between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me and I recognized everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? [...]" [Ref: Tirmadhi, Vol5, H3246, Tafsir Surah Sad] - [8] “Narrated Umar: One day the Prophet stood up amongst us for a long period and informed us about the beginning of creation (and talked about everything in detail) till he mentioned how the people of Paradise will enter their places and the people of Hell will enter their places. Some remembered what he had said, and some forgot it.” [Ref: Bukhari, B54, H414] “Narrated Hudhaifa: The Prophet once delivered a speech in front of us wherein he left nothing but mentioned (about) everything that would happen till the Hour. Some of us stored that our minds and some forgot it. (After that speech) I used to see events taking place (which had been referred to in that speech) but I had forgotten them (before their occurrence). Then I would recognize such events as a man recognizes another man who has been absent and then sees and recognizes him.” [Ref: Bukhari, B77, H601] - [9] "Narrated Hakim Bin Nafi, Saeed Bin Sinan, narrated Abu Zahriyat, Kathir Bin Murra Abu Shajara al-Hadhrami, Ibn Umar said: Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Kitab al-Fitan, 1st Chapter, Hadith No. 2, by Hafidh Naeem Bin Hammad al-Marwazi]

Updated. Refuting Shaykh Thanvi’s Claim Made In Hifz ul-Iman, Ba-Wasta, Knowledge Cannot Be Ghayb And Deeming It So Is Shirk. Introduction: Shaykh Thanvi of Deobandi sect wrote knowledge which is gained through another cannot be deemed Ilm al-Ghayb and this belief is need of evidential support. Muslims believe knowledge which reaches through means of another, such as Jibraeel (alayhis salam), is also Ghayb. And Deobandi Shaykh also stated to say a creation has knowledge of Ghayb is prohibited because due to absence of evidence there is danger of falling into Shirk by attributing knowledge of Ghayb to a creation. We Muslims believe Shirk does not become Tawheed by presence or Tawheed become Shirk due to absence evidence. Rather what is Shirk will remain Shirk even if there was evidence and Tawheed would remain Tawheed if there was no evidence. Also to establish that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) granted Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) the knowledge of Ghayb and to attribute Ilm al-Ghayb to beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not Shirk there is danger of Shirk nor it is prohibited. Question Asked Bakr And Answer Given By Shaykh Thanvi: Q: “A certain individual, Amr, stated prostration is of two types, worship, respect, and when on to state Amr believes prostration of respect for other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is permissible. And believes Tawaf (i.e. circumbulation) around the graves (of Awliyah-Allah) is permissible. Evidence of permissibility … Amr also stated Ilm al-Ghayb is bil-Zaat[1] (i.e. of Self), in this meaning only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Aalim ul-Ghayb (i.e. Knower Of Ghayb). And ba-wasta (i.e. with means) and in this meaning RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was Aalim ul-Ghayb. How is Amr’s this evidence (and what is legal ruling on Amr’s) these actions and belief?” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page2, here] A: “Shar’ri application of mutliq Ghayb[2] (i.e. boundless Ghayb) is upon Ghayb which cannot be established by evidence and for which there is no mean or way of its comprehension. On this (stated) foundation it has stated: "None in the heavens and earth knows the unseen except Allah …” (27:65) and: “And if I knew the unseen, I could have …” (7:188) And knowledge which is via means; on this (type of knowledge) application of (word) Ghayb is need of qarina (i.e. evidential support). Then attributing Ilm Ghayb to creation, without supporting evidence, due to danger of Shirk is prohibited and impermissible.” [Ref: Hifz ul-Iman, by Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Page14, here] The Erroneous Foundation Of Shaykh Thanvi: Generally it is believed all that is seen, or heard, touched, … cannot be Ghayb and all that is heard from another cannot be Ghayb. Shaykh Thanvi has based his following statement on the mentioned point: “And knowledge which is via means; on this (type of knowledge) application of (word) Ghayb is need of qarina (i.e. evidential support).” Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) granted Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aaalihi was’sallam) knowledge of Ghayb through angels. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “(Allah, He is) Knower of the unseen, and He does not disclose His Ghayb to anyone. Except whom He has approved of messengers, and indeed, He sends before each messenger and behind him observers.” [Ref: 72:26/27] There are other verses but one will suffice just as many. Note implication of the verse is when it reaches to His Messenger it is still Ghayb even though it has come through Jibraeel (alayhis salam). If being delivered by another is reason Ilm al-Ghayb is not Ilm al-Ghayb then should Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) have said that He reveals His Ghayb to a chosen Messenger? Alhasil in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knowledge sent via Jibraeel (alayhis salam) to Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is still al-Ghayb. And Shaykh Thanvi can go to hell to convince a believer of truthfulness his position but Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has decided the matter for believers. Note not all knowledge of Ghayb of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was through Jibraeel (alayhis salam) in form of Wahi. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) saw paradise and heard its sounds and tortures of grave. Therefore to negate Ilm al-Ghayb is senseless. And application of Ghayb for knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is established. Refuting Notion; Seeing, Hearing, Informed Of Something Is Not Ghayb: Of course whatever has been seen, or heard, or one is informed of is not Ghayb in normal sense. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) saw hell and paradise, saw Musa (alayhis salam) performing Salah in his heavenly resting place. He had to see, hear, and get informed by Gibraeel (alayhis salam) to know Ghayb. For Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to have knowledge of Ghayb the Ghayb had to be disclosed to his sight, hearing, and had to be informed. When the Muslims say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been granted the knowledge of Ghayb it is not because Ghayb is Ghayb from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but it is Ghayb from mankind. All that is Ghayb for mankind; such as paradise, hell and punishment of grave, this Ghayb is known to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallma). Meaning Ghayb knowledge of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not Ghayb from him but Ghayb from rest of mankind. And that which was Ghayb from mankind; was known, seen, and heard by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). This explains why Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) called Wahi delievered via Jibraeel (alayhis salam) as Ghayb. Its not Ghayb from Jibraeel (alayhis salam) and not Ghayb from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) referred to it as Ghayb because Wahi was Ghayb from all mankind in his life time. Alhasil there is no reason to disbelieve in prophetic knowledge of Ghayb or to attribute Ghayb to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Without Evidence There Is Danger Of Shirk: Shaykh Thanvi wrote: “Then attributing Ilm Ghayb to creation, without supporting evidence, due to danger of Shirk is prohibited and impermissible.” In other words Shaykh Thanvi’s belief is in absence of evidence there is danger of committing Shirk if one attributes knowledge of Ghayb to RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) therefore it is not permitted to attribute Ilm al-Ghayb to RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam).[3] Readers should note Shaykh Thanvi’s reasoning is; lack of evidence leads to danger of Shirk, and danger of Shirk leads to prohibition of attributing Ilm al-Ghayb to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Please note evidence refuting Shaykh’s prohibitive injunction has been already presented and discussed. Muslims believe presence and absence of evidence for a belief does not make it Tawheed or Shirk. Suppose if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) willed to have a son/daughter. And Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) mentioned this in Quran saying I have a son. Will the presence of evidence for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) having a son make believing in son of Allah a Tawheedi belief? No! Because attributing a partner, son, father, mother, daughter, and wife is all Shirk and even if there was a verse in Quran instructing us to believe in son of Allah it still would be Shirk. The only difference would be that in current Islam Shirk is sin and punishable by eternal fire. In hypothetical context refusing to believe in Shirki belief of Allah having a son would be punishable. Tawheed and Shirk could have become part of Islam but presence or absence of evidence for one or the other would not have turned one into the other. Fundamentally Tawheed is to believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the One, and the Only Ilah (i.e. God). And Shirk is to believe there are other Ilahs (i.e. gods) beside Him. Attributing Ilm al-Ghayb does not mean one believes RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is a god beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And this is true on basic level of Tawheed and Shirk mentioned in the section and for in-depth level. If there was no evidence for attributing Ilm al-Ghayb to RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) at worst one would be guilty of reprehensible innovation but nothing more. It seems Shaykh Thanvi had defective understanding of Tawheed and Shirk or at the very least didn’t properly understand how Shirk is warranted. Conclusion: Presence of evidence for Ilm al-Ghayb of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) or its absence will not make it Tawheed or Shirk because Tawheed and Shirk are not dependent upon existence or non-existance of evidence in Quran/Hadith. Shirk is attributing a god/gods partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and not having proof for attributing Ilm al-Ghayb to RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has nothing to do with it. Knowledge of Ghayb received through another and means of eyes, ears, is termed Ghayb because it is Ghayb from mankind. And RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knows Ghayb which was Ghayb for mankind. Textually Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) called the Wahi Ghayb even when it was being sent through Gibraeel (alayhis salam) which is further proof that Ghayb exposed to hearing, seeing of another (i.e. Gibraeel alayhis salam) and received via another is still Ilm al-Ghayb. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi FootNotes: - [1] Bil-Zaat (read, biz-Zaat) knowledge of Ghayb, in Urdu Zaati, knowledge is which is inheritently part of someones knowledge and not been granted to person by another or via gained via means. Bil-Zaat is unique for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). - [2] Mutliq knowledge of Ghayb, ghayr muntahi (i.e. limitless) referrs to limitless knowledge of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It is inclusive of all that has happened, is happening, will happen, and is inclusive of limitless knowledge of possibilities (i.e. Mumkinaat). - [3] From his belief it can be assumed that he believes if there was/is evidence supporting Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has knowledge of Ghayb then there would be no danger of Shirk hence it would be permissible to say RasoolAllah (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has knowledge of Ghayb.