Amar Iqbal [02 December 2017 22:20]: Ok no problems however for me it's more productive to discuss the subject matter then batter over emails which is more time consuming but Khair. In addition such topics are not a priority for me with the concurrent reality of the ummah as we see Syria is bombed daily and hospitals destroyed on an industrial scale - with everyone in them -but we have become numb to it; torture, rape and live executions occur in Iraq in the name of fighting terrorists (who did the same) and we remain unmoved; entire populations of Rohingya in towns and villages are ethnically cleansed and at best we donate some money. Guantanamo remains open, prisons fill with Muslims convicted of newly created and ever-increasing crimes of thought as recently Saudi Arabia has arrested over 60 scholars and activists since September alone, Muslims are targeted daily through oppressive laws, anti-Muslim hatred on the streets and a vile media that populises all of the above. And yet - please forgive me - when the speakers famous throughout the Muslim world for addressing and teaching about every Islamic matter EXCEPT for the above, our masses swoon and fall over themselves because of the way the make us feel and how their understanding and knowledge causes our minds and hearts to avoid the bitter reality. As a result we place our trusts not only in the personalities - although that is partially true - but, crucially, it is how they make us feel about ourselves that is the most important part for the masses. Seeking knowledge, of course, is an obligation upon all of us and that continues until the grave. But what use is that knowledge unless its beneficial, applicable and appropriate to the time, circumstance and need? Prayers are prescribed at their specific times, obligatory fasting is only in Ramadan, Zakat was collected once yearly etc and, the oppressive and abused are defended, supposedly, when their rights are violated. And that is our problem. Why is that a talk by famous speakers and scholars, who are generally free to travel around the world, unhindered, speaking in matters of ritual purification, marital problems, angels, jinns and exorcisms - which all have their place in Islam - attract far more attendance than, say, an event to highlight and oppose the imprisonment of people without trial in Guantanamo and secret detention sites or, to challenge laws and measure that unfairly target Muslims? There is a sickness that has permeated our hearts and some of these well-intentioned speakers and scholars have caused it to grow within us, unabated. That sickness is wahn - a belief that life is eternal and death will never rely affect us and hence, love of the former and hatred of the latter. Our state as a people is not due to lack of numbers. The Prophet (s) foretold that we would be many, “like the filth of the floodwater” when our lands would be carved up and our hearts filled with terror and cowardice. We should never place our hopes solely in individuals. Rather, it must be solid principles that we follow and, we must be prepared to defend them - in the knowledge that we may lose wealth, time, freedom and life in protecting them. Until then, we await the birth of our true guides and leaders whose lectures, speeches, classes and sermons are not governed or limited by fear but are inspired by faith, fortitude and defiance of evil and courage in its face. Waslaam. Amar Iqbal:Can you please add this email and not omit from your article ... “Note: Brother Amar sent another E-Mail where he in some detail pointed out the the sufferings Ummah is afflicted with but nothing related to the topic of innovation hence it is being omitted.”Waslaam MuhammedAli: Salam alayqum. My apologies for late response ... sure i will add it. It will be accompanied with brief comment from me. MuhammedAli: With regards to your email sent 2nd December 2017: (1) In a Gharib (Da’if) Hadith it is recorded that: “… the Messenger of Allah said: "Beware of the believer's intuition, for indeed he sees with Allah's Light." Then he recited: Surely in this are signs for those who see.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B47, H3419] All you have written sounds good. Gives impression you truly and genuinely care about plight of Ummah. Yes it sounds good when I say we should unite and be one Ummah and we should follow Quran and Sunnah and not scholars … Ummah is suffering … Muslims are being killed … tortured … bombed until they become collateral damage … but reality is this is just showmanship. Just a trap to lure the idiots thinking you/I want best for the Ummah. The reality is most use such rhetoric to distance listener from familial sectarian belief. Its sounds so beautiful … We must follow the Quran and Sunnah and none else. We must unite and be one Ummah forget the scholars they have divided us. Then right after saying this; person goes on to brain-wash his listeners to follow teaching of his sect. Their slogan is do not divide into sects … and they quote la tafarraqu and qullu muhdasatin bidda as opening part of their khutba but propagate teachings that go against the Jammah of Muslims (i.e. the main body of Muslims) and they introduce evil innovations into Islam and yet claim to purify religion of Islam. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: "In the last days of this world there will appear some young foolish people who will use (in their claim) the best speech of all people (i.e. the Qur'an) and they will abandon Islam as an arrow going through the game. Their belief will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have practically no belief), so wherever you meet them, kill them, for he who kills them shall get a reward on the Day of Resurrection." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H808] This kind talk is just show manship and conversion strategy. Idealistic dialogues that reach to core of every Muslim’s hearts are used to win hearts and minds of listeners. And this is actually sign of Khawarij. Hadith of Khawarij … they will have best of speech (i.e. Quran and Sunnah of RasoolAllah) … but will have nothing to do with them … Hadith describes them young and foolish. (2) Brother reflect over what you say and what are your motives. We should read our behavior/actions. And then read Quran and Hadith. Of course I am not saying what you wrote was for show manship. We do certain things and don’t realize why we do them because Shaytan clouds our senses and confuses us. Shayateen whisper into our heart erroneous ideas and we feel these are our thoughts without realizing these thoughts only become our thoughts/actions after we accept their suggestions. And I feel compelled to point out all which you wrote is purely to damage control. Failing to authenticate and furnish your belief and understanding of innovation. You made excuse … you prefer to discuss in person … writing is time consuming … yet you spent more time writing your latest post then anything else before it. Point is brother, Amar, Shaytan has to justify to you; why you should not believe this and ignore it. Your failure to defend your belief was not taken as proof of invalid/incorrect understanding of Ahadith of Good Sunnah in Islam and erroneous understanding of innovation. To cover up Shaytan made you feel/think the issue isn’t important; the suffering of Ummah was/is more important. If you and I truly felt for Ummah as we should, I don’t think I or you would be sitting here and doing our 8-12 hour shifts for roti and salan and occasional roast chicken. We would be out there and doing everything for our brothers and sisters. Without any disrespect or detracting any sincerity from your feelings I will say the show of concern for Ummah is just façade to cover-up Wahhabism’s deficient understanding of subject of innovation. Brother Amar I looked up to you and still have great deal of respect for you. Your down to earth nature and humility has always been inspirational and due to which I have always held you in respect. But I cannot blunt the sharpness of truth or at the very least what I understand to be truth out of respect and love I have for you. The best act of kindness someone can do for me is tell me truth and guide me to what is straight path of Islam. Any how my brother deen is important and we should not take it lightly. Shaytan is mine and your enemy don’t let him win and make the right decision to follow what is evidently established over what has become beloved to you. You have been instructed like all Muslims: “O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best (way) and best in result.” [Ref: 4:59] (3) Every Abdullah’s priority is his hereafter and should be hereafter. With wrong creed/belief even if we truly care about Ummah nothing will be accepted. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told the Khawarij will be so punctual in their prayer, fasting, Quran recitation that even the companions would be embarrassed by their outwardly piety. Yet they will go out of Islam like an arrow leave the bow. Meaning they will have little sign of Islam on them and according to another Hadith they will leave Islam never to return to it. Point I am making is foundation of our care and love is right belief/creed and if that foundation is incorrect our genuine concern and hurt at the suffering of Ummah will not benefit you or me. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed the Ummah will be divided into 73 sects out of which 72 are in hell. One from them will be entered to paradise. In this situation to prioritize suffering of Ummah over your own/my hereafter would be foolish. Imagine you’re or I am standing quick-sand and you’re pre-occupied in ensuring safety of others and not having enough concern about your own safety. Abdullah your safety and your hereafter is your priority and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will not excuse defect in belief. And understanding corrupt understanding of innovation is itself an evil innovation which will take to hell-fire. (4) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “The similitude of believers in regard to mutual love, affection, fellow-feeling is that of one body; when any limb of it aches, the whole body aches, because of sleeplessness and fever.” [Ref: Muslim, B32, H6258] And in this context we too feel the pain at the suffering of Muslims at the hands of disbelievers and alleged-believers in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Myanmar, Kashmir, Palestine, Somalia, Yemen, Libya and Mali. In following areas; Kashmir, Palestine, Syria, and Iraq, Myanmar originally the killers were/are disbelievers. At the present in; Syria, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya, and Mali the cause of destruction of Muslims is alleged-Muslims and precisely Wahhabis. It started in Najd in 17th century, and you know what Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and his followers did the hundreds of thousands of Muslims women, children, men, old, and young, and thousands of Muslim scholars who opposed Kharijism of Shaykh of Najd. And what we are experiencing is continuation of that brutality and Wahhabi barbarity. Muslims are being declared Kafir/Mushrik for one reason or another, spilling of their blood is made permissible, their property and women are made halal for sexual pleasures even if they were/are married. The Muslims are stuck between the Kafirs and the Wahhabis, the alleged-Muslims. Of course the suffering of Muslims by the hands of alleged-Muslims and Kafirs is something that bathers me, it hurts me, it eats me inside and it does the same to every Muslim who truly believes in Islam. What bathers me even more is that one who claims to be Muslim and accuses Muslims of Shirk and Kufr; like Khawarij accused Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) of Shirk. And kills the Muslims like Khawarij made killing of companions Halal for themselves even though Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “Anas bin Malik narrates from the Prophet who said: Three things are the roots of faith: To refrain from (killing) a person who says “there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah” Not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits and also not to declare him out of Islam due to any of his action/deed.” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B14, H2170] (5) The Western world in past played the dance of death of destruction in lands of Muslims for sake of religious reasons at present its economic reasons. And they see Islam and a true Muslim as enemy to their way of life. And deem a stable and powerful Muslim and non-Muslim (i.e. Russia, China) country to be threat to their way of life, their economic prosperity, and well-fare of their subjects (be they Muslim, or non-Muslims), and will do everything to ensure their isn’t challenge to this. And to ensure their interests are best served if they have to step on few Muslims in Iraq, or Syria, or Afghanistan, its not a big deal to them because they are not answerable to them they are answerable to populations of their own nations. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as informed the Jews and the Christians collectively will not be happy with you until you follow their deen. Note to appease both, you don’t become Christian, or Jew simultaneously; you become Westernized; dress like them, wines, women; enjoy theirs and share your own and they will be happy with us. Point is this is struggle destined to take place and nothing you and I can do to prevent it. And until that don’t happen they will continue to display their dominant military power and continue to experiment on live targets and declare them to be collateral damage. Most importantly this is how Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) destined it to be. And nothing can change what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) destined you and I both have to make the best of situation we find our selves and be the best Muslim we can be. The One and the Only can change the situation if He wills and His will is contrary to our. And He does not change His will until people change themselves. And for that reason it is important for us to change us become a Ummah learn the right religion the religion of Islam and let go of all isms, wahhabism, sufism, shiaism, and be Muslims as we are supposed to because the only religion accepted in court of Allah is Islam not; Wahahbism, Deobandism, Salafism, Shiaism. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said; hold to the rope of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and be not divided. Yet we’re divided and the heretical scholars have succeeded in doing so and this is despite the fact that religion accepted by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Islam. And Prophet explained this accepted religion of Islam is of the main body of Muslims, the Jammah, the great majority. (6) The failure of Islamic scholarship to address the current political affairs if of course of concern but not a major issue. Talk is cheap and actions speak louder then words. And words achieve nothing where actions are needed. And Ummah is not in position to unite nor the minions of Iblees will allow it to unite. The need of hour is unity and to act as one body but will the Shias leave their Shiaism and will the Wahhabis consider anyone other then their own self Muslim and Muwahid to stand with them? Will the Wahhabis (Isis, al-qaidah, TTP, Al-Shabab, Boko Haram, and operating under countless other names) stop bombing and suicide bombing schools, wedding halls, mosques, markets, busses, filled with children, women, men, old, young; to allow peace and prosperity to return to Muslims so we can gather our miserable lives and be in position to strive for betterment of Ummah? Or will I stop believing the only solution to unity and peace in Ummah is Jihad against the very foundation of all ills in the Ummah; total, absolute, complete, destruction of Wahhabism and Wahhabis? Will I stop believing this when the final solution by Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is kill them where ever you find them and one who kills them will earn reward? Will you understand Tawheed enough to realize that Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab didn’t understand Tawheed. And the Ahadith he employed to prove Muslims have fallen into Shirk only holistically come together to mean … after death of Muslims, the Arabs would return to worship of idols which their pre-Islamic ancestors worshiped? And will you abandon Wahhabism; its Mushriking everyone, its halaling of everyone’s blood and property, and women? Answer is; no, no, no, and no. (7) Coming to suffering of Ummah: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “It has been narrated on the authority of Ibn 'Umar that the Prophet said: Beware. every one of you is a shepherd and every one is answerable with regard to his flock: The Caliph is a shepherd over the people and shall be questioned about his subjects (as to how he conducted their affairs). A man is a guardian over the members of his family and shall be questioned about them (as to how he looked after their physical and moral well-being). A woman is a guardian over the household of her husband and his children and shall be questioned about them (as to how she managed the household and brought up the children). A slave is a guardian over the property of his master and shall be questioned about it (as to how he safeguarded his trust). Beware, every one of you is a guardian and every one of you shall be questioned with regard to his trust.” [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4496] Prophet said a man is shepherd of his household, woman of house and children, Khalifah/king of his subjects. As Ummati’s Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has not burdened us with responsibility of going to far and wide to provide food, shelter, clothing, for Muslims and the Hadith is proof of this. Khalifah will be questioned and is responsible for his subjects. And man is responsible and will be questioned regarding his household, and others are also responsible and will be questioned with regards to what was entrusted to them. My and yours; Our primary responsibilities are our families, wife, mother, son, daughter, their education … Shariah has not asked us to leave them to their devices and serve the Ummah instead. This leaves our concern for Muslims and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: "The Muslim is the brother of the Muslim, he doesn't oppress him and doesn't put him into ruin, and whoever is concerned for the needs of his brother, Allah is concerned for his needs, and whoever relieves a Muslim of a burden, Allah will relieve him of a burden from the burdens of the Day of Judgment and whoever covers (the faults of) a Muslim, Allah will cover (his faults) on the Day of Judgment." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B15, H1426] Yes we feel the pain when Ummah suffers and that is natural because of the bond we have each other as one body: “The similitude of believers in regard to mutual love, affection, fellow-feeling is that of one body; when any limb of it aches, the whole body aches, because of sleeplessness and fever.” [Ref: Muslim, B32, H6258] But we are not responsible and answerable for well-fare and prosperity of Ummah. Yes we are aware of their suffering and our comfort but fretting about their suffering will not resolve anything. The best way we can help them is through our charity. Note we cannot leave our families because we are responsible for them and will be held accountable for negligence. So we must earn for them and do what is our responsibility. This leaves our brothers and sisters who are suffering … we are not responsible and will not be held accountable for them … but we can give them charitable donations to alleviate some of their difficulties. Given the Shari restriction charity is best and perfect solution: "Whoever relieves a Muslim of a burden from the burdens of the world, Allah will relieve him of a burden from the burdens on the Day of Judgment. And whoever helps ease a difficulty in the world, Allah will grant him ease from a difficulty in the world and in the Hereafter. And whoever covers (the faults of) a Muslim, Allah will cover (his faults) for him in the world and the Hereafter. And Allah is engaged in helping the worshipper as long as the worshipper is engaged in helping his brother." [Tirmadhi, B1, H1930] (8) And with regards to dealing with those who inflict the suffering upon Muslims … Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has put them in position of power due to their hard work and effort. And made their stick longer and has taught them more ways of striking us with it and there is nothing I or you can do to prevent it but to bare it with patience and perseverance. And all this suffering is due to abandonment of Islam and prophetic teaching. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “There is nothing (in the form of trouble) that comes to a believer even if it is the pricking of a thorn that there is decreed for him by Allah good or his sins are obliterated.” [Ref: Muslim, B32, H6241] And the suffering, pain, torture and death via illness, bombs, all is expiation of sins of Muslims. Those who suffer at the hands of Kafirs and alleged-Muslims have their sins expiated. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “He (a Muslim) who dies of an abdominal disease is a martyr, and he who dies of plague is a martyr." [Ref: Muslim, B71, H629] "The martyrs are five: Those who die of the plague, stomach illness, drowning, being crushed, and the martyr in the cause of Allah" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B5, H1063] "Whoever is killed over his wealth, then he is martyr." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B14, H1419] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “If a man's property is wrongfully targeted, and he is killed, he is a martyr.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B20, H2582] Subhan-Allah! Cruise missile wrongly targeting Abdullah’s house … the collateral damage of disbelievers is martyr. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Whoever fights to protect himself, he is a martyr. Whoever fights to protect his family is a martyr." [Ref: Nisai, B37, H4099] And there are other Ahadith which define what is martyr. And you should know that: “Our Prophet has informed us our Lord's Message that whoever of us is martyred, will go to Paradise.” [Ref: Bukhari, B93, H621] “…and whoever is killed over his religion, then he is a martyr, and whoever is killed over his blood, then he is martyr …” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B14, H1421] The suffering of Ummah and their deaths caused by natural and un-natural ways is way of forgiveness of Muslims. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is merciful to believers and has devised His plan for forgiveness of those who say; none has the right to be worshipped except Allah. The little suffering in earthly life compared to eternal suffering of hell … is a bargain. Have faith in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and in his grand plan for Muslims and don’t despair. (9) With regards to Islamic scholarship not addressing the current political affairs and focusing on practical aspects of Islam and diverting the focus of Muslims from sad situation Ummah is in. My brother indeed Ummah is suffering and result is of abandonment of practice of Islam. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: "(Religious) knowledge will be taken away (by the death of religious scholars) ignorance (in religion) and afflictions will appear; and Harj will increase." It was asked, "What is Harj, O Allah's Messenger?" He replied by beckoning with his hand indicating "killing." [Ref: Bukhari, B3, H85] “From among the portents of the Hour is that the religious knowledge will betaken away (by the death of religious Scholars) and general ignorance (of religion) will appear; and the drinking of alcoholic drinks will be very common, …” [Ref: Bukhari, B82, H800] In this context scholars are struggling against a tide of ignorance and foolishness where a Muslim doesn’t even know how to perform Salah and how to perform funeral prayers properly. Sign of day of judgment is lifting of Quranic knowledge and then even the script. And in another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “You must acquire this knowledge before it is taken away, and its taking away means that it will be lifted up.' He joined his middle finger and the one that next to the thumb like this, and said: 'The scholar and the seeker of knowledge will share the reward, and there is no good in the rest of the people.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H228] And if this knowledge is of basics such as ritual prayers then I am afraid it must be learnt. And if it is of other matters then it is essential we learn before knowledge is lifted. We all should learn according to what our need is and what is most important. One who doesn’t know how to perform Salah or properly perform Wudhu. Or Fiqh issues related to purity which are essential for valid Salah what good is him learning Arabic grammar or about actively getting into political affairs? Point knowledge has to be according to our needs. When situation of Ummah is that we cannot agree upon shar’ri definition of innovation. We cannot even agree on what Tawheed is and what Shirk is. What your side deems to be Shirk and makes a Muslim into Mushrik and spilling of his blood becomes Wajib that belief in teaching of another is perfectly in agreement with Tawheed. When we have such fundamental differences where we don’t even agree on Tawheed and Shirk anymore. And we have steeped into new level of ignorance of religious knowledge then what is more important learning about Jihad and getting swords ready Jihad or learning basics on which our hereafter and every act of worship hinges! Suppose I deem a belief to be major Shirk and believe it invalidates Islam of anyone who holds this notion. And declare anyone who holds this belief to be Kafir/Mushrik or believe if all avenues of guidance were exhausted for the person then he would be Kafir. And suppose I am wrong at my belief and I have gone to wage Jihad and die upon this error. Do you think this fundamental error will be over-looked? Someone who doesn’t even know Tawheed properly or Shirk properly how’s that person a Muslim? Especially one who spent his life declaring people Kafir/Mushrik for his own error. Priorities my brother, priorities. People need to get their priorities straight in order of importance; aqeedah and fiqh. Knowledge of these matters is extremely essential and it is important for Islamic scholarship to spread the correct understanding. Scholarship changing their focus to political fields … where few thousand die via bombs … and all unite to campaign and give speeches and all deal with current affairs and abandon the basics which are essential for hereafter will only result in entire Ummah going to hell. Imagine entire or majority Islamic scholarship focusing on current political affairs and manage to save lives of few thousand or even a few millions in few decades. But at what cost … allowing the people to die in ignorance of Tawheed … Shirk … ignorance of way of performing … wudhu … Salah … death of millions at cost of hereafter of billions. (10) Righteous Muslims and scholars always have and will continue to stand tall in defense of Islam. And will tell Islam as it is even if the disbelievers hate it. It is the Noor of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and it will be perfected and will dominate all as much as Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills. They do not and will not wait for another to come and do what is their responsibility. Jihad is obligation under leadership of a righteous leader and Khilafat established on principles taught by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and upheld by Khulafah ar-Rashideen. Imperialistic domination and rule of world is destiny of Islam and it will happen even if there is a single day for judgment. Qital of disbelievers for extension of boundaries of Islamic rule over the world is something which a true and knowledgeable Muslims aspires and desires. But under leadership of Khalifah ar-Rashid not Ayman al Zawahiri, bin Laden, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi other Khariji disbelievers. Not under leadership of those who love to fight and look forward to kill but whose natural disposition is dislike of killing/war. The following verse talks about disposition of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) toward killing/qital: “Fighting/killing has been enjoined upon you while it is hateful to you. But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is bad for you. And Allah Knows, while you know not.” [Ref: 2:216] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated Muslims are gentle with each other and harsh against disbelievers but in George Orwells illuded Wahhabi Khilafat the atrocities and barbarity which the Muslims suffer at the hand of these alleged-Muslims is far from kindness and love and compassion of prophetic Sunnah. Where even minor offences are punished by death. And the Wahhabi alleged-Muslims do everything to eradicate the Noor of Allah from Hitler’s concentration camp called Khilafat. They accuse Muslims of Kufr/Shirk like it happened in Saudi Wahhabiyyah in middle of 17th century under leadership of Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab, and then proceed to whole sale slaughter. The most recent example of this was in Iraq in city of Mosul where five hindered Muslim scholars were killed in first day of Wahhabi take over. And they exclusively targeted Muslim scholars and not Wahhabis. And they did this because they believed these Muslim scholars are Mushrik and they the Wahhabis are Muslims. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Anas bin Malik narrates from the Prophet who said: Three things are the roots of faith: To refrain from (killing) a person who says “there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah” Not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits and also not to declare him out of Islam due to any of his action/deed.” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B14, H2170] And they clearly negate this prophetic teaching. I firmly believe Jihad against the disbelievers and hypocrites aka alleged-Muslims, not just the Jihad with pen, or tongue, or wealth, but Jihad with sword but under leadership of righteous Khulafah and those who establish the rule of Islam. Where mercy, compassion, justice, fear of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), rule of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is upheld, and all live in peace and tranquility. And where the rights if minorities and their lives, property, honors, women are protected. Where a disbelieving woman isn’t kidnapped and raped and sold into sexual slavery for being non-Muslim. What would my Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would have felt if he had heard the monstrosities committed in the name of Islam. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was presented a woman of polytheists. Her head was uncovered and he instructed she is covered. And a companion said: Ya RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) she is polytheist and not Muslim. Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: Is she not even a daughter of someone? And here we are grabbing non-combatant women and selling them into sexual slavery. That is Khilafat people call to and people fight for. Khilafat was of Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman and Ali (Allah be pleased with them all) and in absence of such righteous leadership and such Khilafat Rashidah to pick up sword is foolishness putting yourself in destruction.

Salam alayqum, Account say chalay jana aur istimal mein nah lana toh samajh mein ata heh magr delete ki request kis waja say. Janab khayriat toh heh?

Blue underlined mawad kee taraf tawajoh: Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat ki ibarat mein, zameer yeh aur woh kis taraf lotahoon? Yeh Quran ki ayaat kay mutaliqa mazmoon par ya thanvi kay asool; mutliq fadheelat kay ahata ki taraf? Dosra ... Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) ko ashya mein/sha'i mein gina gaya ... mein janta hoon kay Ahle Sunnat aur Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat kay yeh nazria nahin kay Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) sha'i heh ... keun kay unoon nay bey-deen likh kar ibarat shoroon ki heh ... kohi esa firqa heh joh Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) ko ashya mein ginta ho aur woh firqa musalmanoon say mansoob ho?

salam alayqum, kafi kitaben hen is mozoo par ... thora intizar karen in sha allah jald mill jahen gi ...

Salam alayqum, Dr Saeed Sahib aur moteram Khalil Rana Sahib ki wazahat kay mutabiq mein nay is ibarat ka English mein tarjumah yoon keeya heh: “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. And how the boastful ignormous could not understand that Zayd and Umru and names of others he mentioned; if they know a matter of Ghayb even then it would gained through speculation. And definitive (knowledge of) matters of Ghayb is purely for Prophets (alayhis salam). And definitive knowledge of Ghayb if it is known by non-Prophets then it is through Prophets informing them and not through anyone else. And have you not seen how your Lord has stated: ‘Allah reveal to you the unseen. But Allah chooses of His messengers whom He wills, so believe in Allah and His messengers.’ [Ref: 3:179] ‘The knower of the unseen (i.e. Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala) does not disclose His Ghayb to anyone, Except whom He has approved of messengers, and indeed, …’ [Ref: 72:26/27] See how this man left the Quran and lost his faith. And ended up enquiring what is difference between Prophet and animals (in regards to Ghayb). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) sets seal on heart of every deceptively arrogant (person) like this. Notice how he restricted; limited knowledge (i.e. علم مطلق) and unlimited knowledge (i.e. مطلق علم): And he (Shaykh Thanvi) did not differentiate between knowing of one or two matters (of Zanni Ghayb by; Zaid, Amr, lunatics, animals, infants) and of those matters (of Ghayb known by RasoolAlllah sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) which are beyond enumeration.” [Ref: Hussam Al Haramayn Ala Munharil Kufr Wal Mayn, Pages 87/88] Baqi ka tarjuma jari heh ... Mein koshish mein hoon kay Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat ka Thanvi kay mutaliq joh material heh us ka tarjuma karoon. English mein ek tarjuma para joh samaj say bahir aur rooh e mazmoon say khali heh ... parh kar yeh pata nhin chalta kay joh zameer heh woh kis ki taraf heh aur maqabal o mabad mein kia talluq heh... koshish heh kay brackets mein izafaat kay saath tarjumein ko asaan banaya jahay ... aur aam fehm banda thori mehnat say samaj sakkay. In sha Allah kissi ahle ilm say is pooray mazmoon ki Sharh likhwa kar woh bi tarjumah kar doon ga ...

Ala Hadhrat nay farmaya: "phir khiyal karo us nay keun-kar mutliq ilm aur ilm mutliq mein hasr kar deeya aur ek do har janay ..." Meri samaj mein yeh nahin aya kay mutliq ilm aur ilm mutliq mein kia farq heh ... bazahir toh donoon ek hee hen. Dosra Thanvi nay hasr kesay keea ... meri samaj mein yeh ibarat nahin aa rahi. In points ki wazahat kay saath agar kohi Ala Hadhrat ki ibarat ko asaan Urdu mein pesh kar deh toh bot mahirbani hogi.

Is ka jawab pehlay bi deeya thah ... kay esi kohi baat nahin. Deobandi ya Wahhabi esay sawalat kartay hen. Aksar log title par kar chalay jatay hen aur shuba rehta heh ... jis ka nateeja hota heh kay gappoon mein is ko discuss kartay hen ya bayan kartay hen aur issue pehal jata heh. Misaal kay tor par, Thanvi haram zada thah ya nahin? is ko thread ka title bana denh. peech kuch nah likhen ... agar pachas banday is ko paren aur apas mein is question ko share karen kay sawal huwa thah kay thanvi haram zada heh ya nahin ... toh 40wen taq janay say pehlay yeh sach ho jahay ga ... aur sawal kay bajahay is ko haqiqat kay tor par pesh keeya jahay ga. syscological studies say sabat heh kay joh baat shuba kay tor par pesh kee jahay woh haqiqat mein lee jaati heh.

Earlier while writting account from memory I had confused some details and forgot others over the time I have tried to recall accurately as possible in what sequence the events transpired. After much thinking following section has been revised. I just wish the discusion was recorded in its entirity. It would have been a great way of dealing with all relevent issues. Best of my articles and research has been in produced after debates/discussions because it opens up so many topics to write about. And provides such a wealth of material from opponent it makes it s much more easier to churn out material but unfortunately time and opportunity was wasted which I am doing best to capitalise on as best as my memory serves. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Discussion On Haram And Halal And Mawlid: He was asked: Is mawlid permissible or prohibited? He said it is Haram. I quoted the following Hadith: “It was narrated that Salman Al-Farisi said: “The Messenger of Allah was asked about ghee, cheese and wild donkeys. He said: ‘What is lawful is that which Allah has permitted, in His Book and what is unlawful is that which Allah has forbidden in His Book. What He remained silent about is what is pardoned.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B29, H3367] “Allah has prescribed certain obligations for you, so do not neglect them; He has defined certain limits, so do not transgress them; He has prohibited certain things do do not do them; and He has kept silent concerning about other things out of mercy for you, and not because of forgetfulness, so do not ask questions concerning them.” [Ref: Sunan Darqutni, Vol2, Page137] “What Allah has made lawful in His Book is halal and what He has forbidden is haram, and that concerning which He is silent is allowed as His favor. So accept from Allah His favor, for Allah is not forgetful of anything. He then recited, "And thy Lord is not forgetful." [Ref: Musnad Al Bazzar] I said to Shaykh (hafidha-ullah): The Haram and Halal have been clearly stated by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And I said to him Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said burden of evidence is upon claimant. Therefore give me evidence which establishes it is Haram. He said Mawlid is an innovation and therefore not permissible. Islamic position was; it is permissible because nothing HARAM in it. It would be Haram if it was composed of Haram. Secondly the Haram/Halal are said to be stated clearly and emphaticly and not implied; like you have implied Haram-ness of Mawlid. And there is no Hadith which prohibits Mawlid celebration, or commemoration. To establish permissibility in the light of Ahadith it was pointed out Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are silent (i.e. not declared Haram or Halal) on Mawlid therefore it can be celebrated because there is no sin for it. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) presented the following Hadith to undermine what I stated: “What is lawful is evident and what is unlawful is evident, and in between them are the things doubtful which many people do not know. So he who guards against doubtful things keeps his religion and honour blameless, and he who indulges in doubtful things is liable to indulge in unlawful things, just as a shepherd who pastures his animals round a reserve will soon pasture them in it. [Ref: Bukhari, B10, H3882] Focus of discussion changed because trying to establish detail of Hadith of Bukhari and I was unable to point out his incorrect understanding of Hadith. So here it goes: Mawlid is not doubtful because it is composed of all that it permissible and good of Islam. Mutashabihat mentioned in the Hadith of Bukhari are those modern inventions and some old regarding which have no specific injunction of Haram/Halal in in Quran and Sunnah i.e. eating elephant, prawns and modern sexual fads. All aspects which make up Mawlid are from prophetic Sunnah. Walking, talking, smiling, food, zikr, Quran recitation, religious sermons, giving charity, flags, and marches are all from prophetic Sunnah. Hence nothing in it is doubtful in it. And to refute permissibility of Mawlid through the Hadith of Mutashabihat is proof that Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) has very shallow understanding of texts he has read. Therefore the mutashabih Sunnah would be which is composed of all that is new and has no connection with prophetic Sunnah in part or as whole. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Salam alayqum, Yeh Shah Wali-Allah rahimullah wali baat darust nahin. Shah Ismail Dehalvi jab Hajj par gaya toh wapis Wahhabi ho kar aya thah ... ghaliban Mawlana Umar Ucharvi (rahimullah) say naam likhnay mein khata ho gai jis ki islah ka moqa nah milla. Agar Mawlana rahimullah nay esa haqiqi mantay huway bi likha ho toh phir bi kissi ghalt fehmi ki bina par hoga. Shah Wali Allah rahimullah kay aqahid o nazriat ka un ko ilm nahin huwa hoga. Shah Wali-Allah rahimullah kay aqaid o nazriat ahle sunnat walay hee hen aur un ki kutub say esa sabat heh. Jab haqaiq un kay Wahhabi honay kay khilaaf hen toh phir Mawlana Umar Ucharvi rahimullah kay farman ko ghalt fehmi par hi mahmool keeya ja sakta heh. Ham donoon qabil e qadr hastiyoon ka adab kartay hen aur sachay aur suchay Sunni mantay hen. Aur kissi ghalt fehmi ki bunyad par un kay Sunni honay ka inqar nahin kartay.

Qasim Nanotavi ki ibarat kay tarjumen mein bil zaat ki jaga sayyidi Ala Hadhrat nay aslan ka lafz likha ... magar bey-imanoon ko ihtiraz huwa. Manzoor Nomani nay bila waja ... bil zaat kuch fadheelat nah hogi ... kay jumley mein bil arz mafoom mukhalif leeya ... yehni bil zaat fadheelat nahin bil arz zeroor heh ... aur issee bunyad par baqiyoon nay bil zaat kay tarjumein aslan par ihtiraz keeya ... magar bey-imanoon ko sharm nah aahi ... kuch ka lafz tamam fadheelat ka munkir karta heh bil arz aur bil zaat ka ... jistera jumla ... aap ko yaar kuch aqal nahin ... toh mana huwa bilqul aqal nahin ... yeh nahin kay thori heh ya aur wali heh yeh wali nahin ... yehni Nomani ka jawaz bil arz bil qul mardood heh keun kay kuch zaati aur arzi donoon ki nafi kar chuka. Is kay ilawa bil-zaat ko jis mana mein istimal keeya gaya aur jis ka dawa heh Nanotavi Sahib ko ... asl, aslan [yehni bunyad/bunyadi] bi kutub fiqha mein issee mafoom mein istimal huwa heh aur hota heh. Bey-asal jis ki foundation/bunyad ghalat ho, yehni walidul haram ho. Is kay ilawa sayyidi Ala Hadhrat nay bi lafz asal ba-mana bunyad/bunyadi istimal keeya heh ... jistera sher mein heh; yahi heh asal e alam mada ijaad khalqat ka ... aur Nanotavi nay bi bil-zaat ko bunyadi Nabi jis say awal koi nah ho hee bataya heh ... Abh mein research kar raha thah toh Tahzir Un Naas ka ek naya addition chapa heh jis mein ilm e Nabi ko asli (bil-zaat) aur auroon kay ilm ko arzi (bil arz) bataya gaya heh ... arzi ka mukhalif zaati heh jis par asli ka label lagaya gaya heh ... abwaab ki fehrist mein 16 number par aya heh aur safa 18 par is ki tafseel heh ... safa 18 par Nanotavi nay ilm e RasoolAllah ko haqiqi bataya aur ba-fehm fehrist qaim karnay walay kay asli, bil arz ka mukhalif toh bil zaat heh is leyeh joh bi ho bil zaat ka mana jaiz hoga. Is say Nomani ki hadiyoon ko in sha Allah aag ahay gi kuen kay yeh mantiq Nomani heh bil zaat say bil arz akhaz keeya toh kia bura keeya agar musalman nay bil arz say bil zaat akhaz kar leeya. Is bey-iman kay ham mazboon par Islam ki haqqaniat aur wazia huwi aur zalim khud zaleel huwa. Is new edition ka link yeh heh ... https://archive.org/stream/Tahzirun-Naas#page/n2/mode/1up

Safa 131/132 bi parnay kay qabil heh ... is mein Tazir un Naas kay masla imkan nazeer kay baray mein kuch arz huwa heh. Qasim Nanotavi ki ghalt fehmi dekhyeh ... muhaal bil zaat awaliat yehni Nooraniat ki waja say heh keun kay misl woh hoga jis ki awaliat bi sabat ho. Jistera ek aur Ilah ka awal Ilah hona muhaal bil zaat heh istera kissi aur makhlooq ka awal makhlooq hona muhaal heh ... aur awaliat RasoolAllah ki shaan heh toh phir muhaal bil zaat huway ... aur agar satti nazr say dekha jahay toh imtinah bil ghayr wada e bari ta'ala ki waja say heh ... magr haqiqat mein wada illahi kay RasoolAllah sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was'sallam jesa peda nah karoon ga ... is ko shamil heh keh aap jesa awal e makhlooq aur sabab tamam makhlooq peda nah karoon ga ... toh is nazr say yeh muhaal bil zaat huwa keun kay joh awal makhlooq kay sabab say peda huwa woh awal makhlooq nahin ... aur muhaal bil zaat ki shart awaliat heh jis say maqabal aur jis ka ma-bad nah ho sakay.

Qasim Nanotavi nay likha thah Ambiya Ilm Mein mumtaz hotay hen amal mein Ummati barabar ya bar jatay hen. Neechay wali kitab kay safa 74 par likhta heh ilm ladunvi ka talluq tawqa say heh ... Khidr alayhis salam taqwa mein ziyada thay aur Musa alayhis salam kam jis waja say Khidr alayhis salam par teen waqiat ka ilm ladunvi hasil huwa ... Musa alayhis salam sirf Wahi walay ilm mein behtr thay ... aur keun kay Khidr alayhis salam taqwa mein behtr thay is waja say uneh ziyada ghaybi ilm hasil huwa ... https://archive.org/stream/TOOBAA-RESEARCH-LIBRARY.FaraidEQasmiyaMakateebHazratAllamaQasimNanotaviRh.A/faraid-e-qasmiya-makateeb-hazrat allama qasim nanotavi rh.A#page/n47/mode/1up

Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen

Agar Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat aur Jamhoor ka awaliyat e Nabuwat wala nazria heh toh phir mujjay kohi bi ihtiraz nahin. Sirf Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat say hi is ka sabat hona meray leyeh kafi daleel heh. Agar yahi ho toh phir is ka matlab yeh huwa kay ... Qasim Nanotavi wala nazria joh Nabuwat bil zaat ka heh aur Ambiyah ko RasoolAllah say Nabuwat milli darust hoga. Sirf Khatam un Nabiyeen ka mana Nabuwat bil zaat hona darust nah hoga aur ijmah kay khilaf khatam un nabiyeen ka mana nabuwat bil zaat karna kufr hoga. Aur us ki ibaraat Nabi peda ho toh phir bi khatamiat mein farq nah ahay ga ... waghayra kufr hoon gi. Is ki asal Quran ki ek ayat mein banti heh ... Quran ki shaan jawami al kalim bayan huwi heh ... Quran mein Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala nay Nabi e kareem ko Nabiyil ummi farmaya ... Ummi um say heh jis ka mana walida jesay Quran mein Musa alayhis salam kay wastay Ummi ka lafz istimal huwa ... mubalgha mein asal Nabi (i.e. foundational Nabi) ka mana banta heh aur jis say awaliyat sabat ho jati heh. Hasil yahi heh kay Jamhoor ka nazria joh bi heh woh darust heh aur ussi par chalna chahyeh. Takfir kay wasteh kissi kay pass jawaz nahin agar karta heh toh apnay zehni fatoor ko aur ka aqeeda bata kar raha heh. Masla Ijtihadi aur firohi aur fazail ka heh ... Behtreen rah yahi heh kay is maslay ko chor deeya jahay aur donoon giroon ki naik niyyati ko saraha jahay. Joh awaliat ka hami heh woh is mein joh fadheelat ki bina par heh aur joh mukhalif heh woh khatam e nabuwat kay difa mein. Joh bi ho donoon jammatoon mein say kissi ka nazria bi Kufr taq nahin jata.

Woh laga rahay hen laganay denh. Bhoj bi wohi uthahen gay. Yeh masla firohi heh ... aur fazail say ... Hadith Adam alayhis salam say RasoolAllah kay Nabi awal honay ki daleel nahin leeh ja sakti aur nah mein nay kabi para heh. Is Hadith say sirf yeh mana nikalta heh kay jab Adam (alayhis salam) kay jism e mubarak kii takhleeq ho rahi thee RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ko mansub Nabi milla huwa thah. Allah ta'ala nay Quran mein Misaqun Nabiyeen ka farmaya heh ... Allah nay Nabiyoon ki Arwah ko jama farmaya ... Adam (alayhis salam) kay jism e aqsad say yeh pehlay ki baat heh toh phir yeh sabat huwa kay Nabiyoon ko Nabuwat pehlay milli huwi thee ... aur Adam alayhis salam ki takhleeq baad mein shoroon huwi. Abh agar Hadith par ghor keeya jahay toh awaliat bahasiyat Nabi sabat nahin hoti. Joh Ulamah [agar kohi hen toh] Nabuwat mein bi awaliat kay qail hen un ka jawaz hoga ... joh is kay munkir hen un ka bi jawaz hoga ... aur donoon jammatoon ki taweelen Kufr say ikhtilaf ko door karteen hen agar kohi is par Takfeer karta heh toh yeh ghulu aur kam fehmi heh. Mein nay Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat ka Kalam para huwa heh ... Muhammad Mazhar e kamil ... is waja say auroon ko be yahi taqeed karta hoon kay peren. Aur is'see waja say mein awaliat e Nabuwat ka qail nahin. Mujjay nahin lagta kay kohi bara masla heh ya Takfir karnay wala masla heh ... ziyada tar yeh ghalt fehmiyan hoon gi ya jis par takfir ki ja rahi heh woh mukhalif ka aqeeda nahin hoga. Agar munazroon ka josh nah hota aur do char hosh kay Mawlvi hazrat beth jatay toh yeh saray ikhtilafat hal ho jata. Behtr yahi heh kay

https://sunnah.com/bukhari/97/59 https://sunnah.com/bukhari/60/19 https://sunnah.com/muslim/12/188 https://sunnah.com/urn/1077550 https://sunnah.com/nasai/37/136

Feroz ul Lughat mein Be'sat ka mana behijna hee heh.

Salam alayqum, Khadim nay kabi esi Hadith nahin pari ... Hadith mein aya heh kay woh musalmanoon ko qatal keren gay aur kafiroon ko chor denh gay magar jis ka aap nay zikr keeya heh woh pehlay kabi nahin suni nah pari ... agar huwi toh ahle ilm hazrat pesh kar denh gay.

Salam alayqum Aqeedah e Khatam e Nabuwat par kohi anch nahin aati. Yeh un ki ghalt fehmi heh. Mein nay kahi dafa Qadiyaniyoon say tehreeri behas ki kabi kohi problem nahin huwi aur nah apna aqeedeh mein tarmeem karna pari. Yeh un ko waswasa heh kay Jamhoor e Ahle Sunnat Alam e Arwah mein Nabi maan kar Qadiyani kay khilaf difa nahin kar saktay.

Salam alayqum, M.Zeeshan Imtiaz bhai mein waqif hoon kay yeh ihtirazaat kahan say ahay. Yeh qabil e lehaz tab hotay jab alam e arwah mein Nabi ko Wahi nah huwi ho. Wahi ka kitabi hona zeroori nahin. Allah farmatay heh kay woh Nabiyoon say farishtoon kay zariyeh baat karta heh toh phir ... jab arwa say sawal huwa mein tumaray aakhir mein Nabi behjoon ga wada kartay ho iman laho gay aur support karo gay toh sab nay iqrar keeya ... yeh kalam bazariya farishtay huwa aur yeh waqia toh Quran mein heh ... abh Wahi toh ho gai. Aur agar Nabi kay leyeh Wahi zeroori ho toh bi sabat ho jaati heh ... sirf kitabi sabat nahin hoti. Kitabi wahi ka sabat hona bi zeroori nahin keun kay alam e arwah mein Ummat kay pass behjay nahin gay thay ... aur wahi joh kitab ki ho ya us say mutalqa ho insaan ki hasiyat say milti heh. Is tera Hadith ka mowaqif bi qaim raha aur nazriat ahle Sunnat bi apni jaga qaim rahay. Aakhar mein, yeh masla fazail say heh, aqahid say nahin, aur jamhoor is par raazi hen is leyeh darust heh. Allamah Saeed Assad Sahib aur un kay ustad e moteram Allamah Ashraf Sialvi Sahib (rahimullah) Ahle Sunnat kay Ulamah mein say hen aur un kay namoon kay saath Maulana, Allamah laganay say aap ko dozakh nahin behja jahay ga. Dosri baat mein yahan par hazaar dafa likh chuka hoon aur phir likhta hoon. Joh ikhtilafat Ulamah e Ahle Sunnat kay apis mein hen, aur agar aap mukhalif ko Sunni bi nah maneh balkay Kafir aur Firawn bi maneh, aur Dajjal akbar say bara Dajjal azam maneh, tab bi agar woh Aalim Ahle Sunnat say mansoob ho aur mashoor ho kay yeh Ahle Sunnat say heh toh un kay ikhtilafat ko public mein discuss nah keren. Ek; yeh masla pehlay ga aur woh logh bi choose karnay par majboor hoon gay jin ka is say talluq nahin aur agar kissi nay ghalat decision banahi toh panga aap ka thah ... best tareeka yeh heh kay joh Ulamah Ahle Sunnat ki jamhoor say ikhtilaf kartay hen un ko ignore kar deeya jahay aur dua karni chayheh ya Allah in ko jaldi utha leh aur jannat mein buland darja dena.

Following Addition Has Been Made. ----------------------------------------------- What Is Part Of Islam And What Is Not Part Of Islam: Shaykh believes certain prophetic Sunan including Siwak/Miswak are not part of Deen. Yesterday I was sitting down and thinking: Imam Bukhari (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) collected over around ten thousand Ahadith and so did many other Muhadditheen. Why would Imam Bukhari (rahimullah) travel throughout Islamic world to learn Ahadith and record them in His collection. Picture this: I know Yoga has nothing to do with Islam but I walk it, camel it, horse it, all the way to India to learn Yoga so I can write a manual of Yoga in FIQH section of my book and make it part of my TAFSIR of Quran. Can you imagine a sane individual doing this? Why would Imam Bukhari (rahimullah) labour so pains takingly traveling all over the Islamic world to gather … verify … write … teach … something which was not part of Islam? Its obvious Imam Bukhari (rahimullah) and Imam Muslim (rahimullah) and all the Muhaditheen were crazy and our Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) knows the true Islam. That was sarcasm. Our Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) is reviver of Islam. Again: Sarcasm! Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) follows simple rule; whenever caught out, say its not part of Islam, cite your self as proof of your position. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) is upon this methodology: We follow the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Salaf; the pious predecessors. But when a Muslim says; Jihad is part of Islam and prophetic Sunnah is to take part in Jihad with sword, spear, shield, horse, camel etc … therefore AK47, RPG, Grenades, are innovation and not way of Salaf and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Then say: Weapons are not part of Islam therefore AK47 is fine. O Muslims reason with them: Salah is part of Islam and the method was taught by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Jihad is part of Islam and method and the equipment to be used in it were taught by him through his example and example of his companions. If method is not part of Deen then Ruku, Sujud, Qiyam, etc … are not part of Salah and not part of Islam. Also where do you draw line in something not being part of Islam and being part of Islam. Islam was perfected and completed. So where did Allah or his Prophet give us a teaching/rule via which we can judge something to be part of Islam and not part of Islam. Clearly if something was part of Islam and other was not part of Islam then wasn’t it important for Allah and His Messenger to define boundary. What if I say Qiyam is Salah is not part of Islam/Salah. How do we judge if it is part of Islam/Salah or not? There is no such instruction because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his companions, Imam Bukhari, and other Muhaditheen, never distinguished between prophetic Sunnah being Islam and not Islam. There is not a single scholar who ever took a prophetic Sunnah and said this is not Islam. Our Shaykh (hadfidha-ullah) is minion of Iblees and spawn from group of Satan of Najd (i.e. Khawarij) and he like his kind will continue to undermine the unity and agreements - Ijmah - of Ummah like his ancestors. Shaykh’s Objection To My Usage Of Word Sunnah: During discussion whenever I quoted the Hadith of Good Sunnah (i.e. practice) the word Sunnah was used in original language instead of its English quivlent i.e. practice, precedent, tradition. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) continously interferred and questioned usage of word Sunnah while I quoted the Hadith. In past during my discussions when I used the word practice instead of Sunnah. The idiots argued O you were being deceptive by using word practice when in reality it says Sunnah and they argued O it means prophetic Sunnah. So experience taught me to anounce the actual word so there is no arguing over what word is being used. Its one less point to argue over if word Sunnah is anounced while quoting the Hadith. Little did I know there are idiots I was yet to encounter. After his consistent pestering I switched to practice instead of Sunnah. But Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) had another plan. Shaykh Uses Sunnah To Mean Action: Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) originally wanted me to use practice and I did. Realizing that Shaykh (hadfidha-ullah) had no reason to betty bicker he thought of novel way: He said Sunnah means action. Anyone who knows Arabic knows Sunnah does not mean action but amal means action. The reason Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) resorted to this was because Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) wanted to limit/restrict the application of word Sunnah to action of companion who gave bag of silver as Sadaqah. And if one takes it to mean; whoever introdcues good action in Islam … even then nothing of Islamic belief would be refuted because then good action being introduced into Islam would be innovated good action could not have been part of Islam. And this too establish that there is rewared for innovated good actions in Islam even though if the actions are not part of Islam already. Coming to meaning of Sunnah. Sunnah has been used for a single action such as smile of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). As well as multiple actions, four Rakat Sunnat Salah/Namaz is Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) yet it is composed of many actions. It is absolutely fine to apply Sunnah upon a action but to say it means action isn’t because the generality of Sunnah will be negated then with action. Better fit would be plural form i.e. actions but that would be wrong because Sunnah is singular and Sunan is plural. It would be wrong to translate a singular (i.e. Sunnah) to a plural (i.e. actions). Shaykh tried to distort the natural meaning of Hadith to perserve his heretical and Wahhabi beliefs but batil will never be victorious over Islam. Significance Of Sunnah Meaning Practice V.S. Action: By distorting the word Sunnah to mean action Shaykh’s (hafidha-ullah) primary objective was to restrict the prophetic statement into the context but it also worked for his position in another way. I cannot say with hundered percent confidence that Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) thought of this but it is something which could have gone through his mind. Mawlid and various innovated innovated good Sunnahs are amalgamation of prophetic actions/Sunan. By translating it to mean action Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) would be underhandedly preventing its application innovated good Sunnahs such as Mawlid, Geeyarweenh, and other practices because all are fusion of acts of worship, charity, education, etc. This seems to be very real motive why Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) would go to lengths to distort the meaning of Sunnah to mean action.

Amar Iqbal [12 November 2017 07:22]: Salaam. Hope your in good health and Emaan. You have not explained the concept of good bida and where this is derived from. Many quote Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) however this is untrue to attribute the concept being portrayed. Waslaam Muhammed Ali [On 26 Nov 2017, at 12:53]: Salam alayqum. Brother Amar I have revised my earlier articles to improve content and in addition to this if you recall you mentioned Imam Nawavi (rahimullah) said Hadith referrs to prophetic Sunnah and reviving prophetic Sunnahs. As promised I have addressed that claim of yours. Its has taken long because I have been getting caught into discussions which required immediate response hence it has been on ignore nearly four/five years. Please read the following article with regards to Imam Nawawi's statement and how you have misunderstood or atleast have been lied to: Brother Amar Iqbal’s Understanding Of Hadith Of Good Sunnah Refuted And Position Of Imam Nawawi Explained. I will insha Allah briefly comment on your lattest and put it into perspective. If there are any other schoalrs, prior to Najdi Shaykh's emergence, who you hold in esteem and believe they have supported your position on Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam please refference them and I promise to respond promptly. Also you do claim to be following Salaf but I noted you quoted Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta'ala) as proof of your belief. Anyhow your response is eagerly being awaited. Amar Iqbal [Mon 27/11/2017 21:23]: Waslaam. You have titled it: Brother Amar Iqbal’s Understanding Of Hadith Of Good Sunnah Refuted And Position Of Imam Nawawi Explained.You had no permission to publish my emails as it was a private ongoing discussion. Muhammed Ali [Tuesday, 28/11/2017 10:20]: Salam alayqum. (1) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) stated: "Narrated Abdullah bin Amr: That the Prophet said: There are four things that whoever has them, then he is a hypocrite, and whoever has one attribute from among them, then he has an attribute of hypocrisy,until he leaves it: Whoever lies whenever he speaks, he does not fulfill whenever he promises, he is vulgar whenever he argues, and whenever he makes an agreement he proves treacherous." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B38, H2632] Brother as I recall neither you nor I discussed publishing of our discussion. Nor we ever talked about that i/you would secure your/my permission before publishing material. If I had stated or we had agreement; I would secure your permission at any time and then publish; then i am bound by my word as it is sign of a Munafiq to betray a agreement. Also our discussion was private but no secrect. Had it been so I would be guilty of divulging secret and guilty of Shar'ri offense. Bottom line is; I was and I am under no obligation to withdraw the content. Therefore I will not remove the content but I can try and ask the admin/mods to remove referrence which identifies you. Coming to private and on going discussion. If i recall correctly your words were; 'with all due respect you're not interested in what you have to say but what Salaf have stated' which was technically end of discussion. All I had was what Allah's Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) said, and meanings which I translated into my own words to convey understanding of prophetic words. You did not respond to anything I had written. Not that you didn't have anything to say but because what I wrote wasn't from Salaf therefore you refuse to grace it with a response. Hence there was no on going discussion. Thereafter I sent you number of emails, roughly four, none were responded to. So discussion had ended because you wanted me to quote you Salaf [yet you quoted me Imam Nawawi rahimullah, who is from Khalaf and not Salaf]. Even if this was a ongoing discussion this is no reason to withold the information and not publish it. If I had published your unfinished response you would be justified in objecting to me publishing it. The responses you sent me there were complete hence if they are already online it will not effect our ongoing discussion and any further exchanges also will eventually go on forum. My objective is to share knowledge with others and people to learn from my and your mistakes. I am more then happy to be proven wrong in public and my errors to be exposed in public. I see nothing but benefit for myself in doing this. (2) With regards to referrences from Salaf. In reality I had quoted the Salaf, the Prophet, and Ahadith narrated by his companions which you didn't ponder over I assume; one can't get more follower of Salaf then that. Even though I have no claim that I am exclusively following Salaf, which you have, and therefore you’re under burden to provide proof of your belief from Salaf because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said burden of proof is upon the claimant: “’On the authority of Ibn Abbas; 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.’A hasan hadeeth narrated by al-Baihaqee and others in this form, and part of it is in the two Saheehs.” [Ref: Forty Ahadith – Nawavi, Hadith 33] My claim is, way of prophetic Sunnah and Jammah of Ummah which is inclusive of three generations that followed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam). And as principle; we follow the first three generations, but when there is ambiguity and no clear guidance to a problem from Quran, prophetic Sunnah, and three generations, we then referr to tasreehat (i.e. clarifications) of Ulamah of Ummah. And then we apply these understandings on practical example of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) and his companions to see if the clarification fits into their practice. In case of Ahadith of good Sunnah in Islam. Even though there is no clear explicit interpretation of it from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) nor from his companions but we have an interpretation that it sanctions into Islam innovated good Sunnahs. We test this interpretation by applying it incidents that took place during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam). A companion innovated a new Tasbih in Salah: “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 it was not Sunnah but became Sunnah after it was approved. This teaches companions innovated good Sunnahs into Islam and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) accepted them and so did Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). So even though we have no explanation from Salaf of Hadith of; whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam; but our interpretation is caroborated by this incident. Leading us to conclude that prophetic words; whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam; would be understood by companions as; whoever intrdouces innovated good Sunnah in Islam. So missing information can be implied when the beginning and end are known but information in between is missing. And even though the missing isn’t what Salaf stated but it fits into overall conclusion therefore it has to be correct. Following would explain my point easily and would be easily accessible : 1 + 4 + 5 – 3 + ? x 2 + 5 - 11 = 10. To solve the missing value we have to do bit of detective work. (1+4 =5), (5+5=10), (10-3=7), the last known value is seven and because ? has to be added to seven and then multiplied by two … to get the figure of ten. Suppose ? is assumed to be five, so it would be: 1 + 4 + 5 – 3 + 5 x 2 + 5 - 11 = 18. And this is wrong because it should be ten. Through devaluing five to four, to three, to two, to one, trial by error or a method, one will eventually arrive at the missing value which is one and demonstrated in the following: 1 + 4 + 5 – 3 + 1 x 2 + 5 - 11 = 10. Now even though the missing value wasn’t stated when it is figured and fits into the equation then we know for certaintity it is correct. In similar fashion the missing information can be implied and when it fits into practical life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his companions then it is correct and it would considered methodology and teaching of Salaf even though there is no explicit statement but it is implied. Alhasil I did provide you evidence from Salaf and I have explained how a position can be understanding of Salaf even though their explicit statements in support of it are missing. On subject of innovation and Ahadith of good Sunnah in Islam. We have: whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam + Tasbih of Salah = innovated in Islam good Sunnah, or innovated in Islam good Sunnah of Tasbih. In this way we can verify and figure out the missing information and prove that Salaf also had same understanding on subject of innovation as we the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah have and they must have believed the Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam is referring to innovated good Sunnahs in Islam. Muhammed Ali [Tuesday, 28/11/2017 10:56]: Salam Alayqum. Brother Amar on 12th Nov you sent an email. Can you further elucidate on the following: "You have not explained the concept of good bida and where this is derived from." Did you mean it in the following sense: “You have not proven concept of good innovation from Quran and prophetic Sunnah.” Or did you mean to say: “You have not explained what is good innovation made-up of and from where the practices which compose a good innovation are derived from.” There is ambiguity and I would like to have clarification of what you meant so I can address it. Would you like me to address both or just the one you intended. Please point out what you intended. You also stated: "Many quite Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) however this is untrue to attribute the concept being portrayed." But you have not explained why what Umar (radiallah ta'ala anhu) said is not proof for good innovation. If Amr says Surah Ikhlas is not proof of Tawheed. This is his denial and not proof. And it is in need of justification and proof of some type. Rejection of something being not so is never proof that it is not so. Muhammed Ali [Thursday, 30/11/2017 16:58]: Salam Alayqum, Brother Amar I would wait for another three days and in between if I do not recieve a response to my querry and if i do not get notified about your response. Many more capable then yourself have adressed the difficulty in Ahadith of good Sunnah in Islam and they have been responded to. To mention some names, Shaykh Waheed Al-Zaman, here, Shaykh Salim al-Qarni and Shaykh Abd al-Rahman al-Ajlan, here, and Shaykh Aymen Bin Khaled, here. There isn't much that I have not heard before on this topic but rarely someone does come up with something ingenious. You may feel your position has been badly represented. Rest assured evidences relating to it and in support of your position have been addressed before and three articles just are example. I would appreciate an academic response or at least an acknowledgment that you will respond in next three days. After you inform me then you can be at your leasure and respond to, anything I have written, in time which best suites you. If I do not get some sort of response in three days I will proceed to upload my lattest explanation; which explains how my response was evidence from Salaf. As well as write up a response to two possibilities which you might have enquired about and regarding which I sought clarification. Ammar Iqbal [Thu 30/11, 19:26]: Waslaam. I invite you to sit down with me to discuss the topic and you can bring your Arabic books with you etc. Muhammed Ali [01/12/2017 19:47]: Salam alayqum. Brother I will have to turn down your offer. I no longer discuss/debate in person. After thousands of hour being spent on it nothing productive was achieved. I preferr to write because even if immediate person doesn't benefit others will. I am too busy with my academic pursuits and family life and cannot spare time for anything else. If we happen to meet by chance as we did in past then in sha Allah we will discuss it. I will proceed with my response and once completed it will be emailed to you and then posted online. Allah Hafiz. Muhammed Ali: (1) In your email dated 12th Nov 2017 you stated: “Many quote Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) however this is untrue to attribute the concept being portrayed. Waslaam.” What you wrote is unintelligble and confusing. Best way to understand it is to reconstruct it within frame work of what a Salafi might say. Following is my best effort: (a) “Many quote: “…excellent innovation …”. statement uttered by Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) however it is incorrect to attribute to Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) the concept of good innovation which is being portrayed by them. Waslaam.” (b) “Many quote words of Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to support concept of good innovation however it is wrong to deduce from his words the support for the concept of good innovation which is apparently being portrayed by his words. Waslaam.” (c) “Many quote Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) however this statement of his is not untrue to attribute the concept of good innovation being portrayed by them. Waslaam.” There was no real need to for textual criticism as far as I was concerned but readers would have struggled therefore I did my best to put your statement in perspective of traditional Salafi/Wahhabi belief. All three boil down to two justifications; (a) Taraweeh was prophetic Sunnah, (b) and therefore Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said it is excellent innovation in linguistic sense. (2) We need to establish what linguistic innovation is and how to figure out if someone said good innovation in linguistic innovation. (a) There is obvious way; Bakr believes Islam allows good Shar’ri innovations. His belief is known and documented. When he says; Mawlid is an excellent innovation then we interpret his statement in context of his belief. In case of Bakr; he said Mawlid is an excellent innovation in Shar’ri sense. There are other ways to establish if something is innovation in legal sense or linguistic sense. And it is by taking note of in what context the statement was made about. (b) Suppose Amr says; Hajj is an excellent innovation taught by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and by His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Note it is clear that Amr believes Hajj isn’t innovation of Ummatis by innovation taught by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And technically in legal sense of Islamic law innovation is something which isn’t taught by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). By computing basic information and with compassion the more likely probability is that Amr made his statement in linguistic sense. Of course those who have malice and are blinded by sectarianism will distort it to mean something else but if one has best opinion of a Muslim’s belief, knowledge, and intentions then he will reach to best and natural mentioned conclusion. (c) Bakr isn’t aware performing Salat ad-Duha is prophetic Sunnah. Bakr enters Masjid and observes Amr performing Salat ad-Duhan and says; what an excellent innovation. Even though Bakr is incorrect in his judgment but his verdict tells that Bakr believes innovations can be excellent and can be practiced even if they are not prophetic Sunnahs. The reason is simple; if Bakr didn’t believe in good innovation concept he would not judge something to be excellent innovation. He would have said it is an innovation and every innovation is misguidance. (d) Suppose Bakr is aware that when prayer leader (i.e. Imam) says; sami Allahu liman hamidah the Muqtadi (i.e. follower) is supposed to say; rabbana wa lak al-hamd. Yet he decides to say: "Rabbana wa laka l-hamdu, hamdan kathiran taiyiban mubarakan fihi."[1] Zaid hears him utter these words and says; this is a good innovation. Note these words are not prophetic Sunnah. Bakr’s statement is an innovation. The alteration is made in Deen and in Salah (i.e. Tasbih of Salah). Therefore this statement of Zaid is Shar’ri judgment and the saying of good innovation is about Shar’ri good innovation. Note this last example of determining innovation is related to Umar Ibn al-Khattab’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) statement. (3) Taraweeh as we both know is Prophetic Sunnah and to be precise three day Taraweeh under leadership of a Qari/Imam is prophetic Sunnah. On fourth day Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not attend the Masjid -: Following Hadith sheds light on the incident: "Allah's Messenger went out in the middle of the night and prayed in the mosque and some men prayed behind him. In the morning, the people spoke about it and then a large number of them gathered and prayed behind him (on the second night). In the next morning the people again talked about it and on the third night the mosque was full with a large number of people. Allah's Messenger came out and the people prayed behind him. On the fourth night the Mosque was overwhelmed with people and could not accommodate them, but the Prophet came out (only) for the morning-prayer. When the morning-prayer was finished he recited Tashah-hud and said, "Amma ba'du, your presence was not hidden from me but I was afraid lest the night prayer should be enjoined on you and you might not be able to carry it on."So, Allah's Apostle died and the situation remained like that." [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H229] The three days of Taraweeh mentioned in the Hadith of Bukhari was lead by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And the three days performed were in the last ten days of Ramadan and to be precise on 23rd, 25th, and 27th of Ramadan -: As following Hadith establishes: "It was narrated that Abu Dharr said: "We fasted Ramadan with the Messenger of Allah, and the Prophet did not lead us in Qiyam until there were seven days left of the month (i.e. 23rd of Ramadan) then he led us in Qiyam until one-third of the night had passed. Then when there were six days left (i.e. 24th of Ramadan) he did not lead us in Qiyam. When there were five days left (i.e. 25th of Ramadan) he led us in praying Qiyam until half the night had passed. We said: 'O Messenger of Allah (SA), why don't you lead us in praying Qiyam for the rest of the night?' He said: 'If a man prays with the Imam until he leaves, that will be continued for him as if he spent the whole night in prayer.' Then, when there were four days left (i.e.26th of Ramadan) he did not lead us in praying Qiyam. When there were three days left (i.e. 27th of Ramadan) he sent for his daughters and women, and gathered the people, and he led us in praying Qiyam until we feared that we would miss Al-Falah. Then he did not lead us in praying Qiyam for the rest of the month." Dawud (one of the narrators) said: "I said: ' What is falah?' He said: 'Sahur.'"[2] [Ref: Nisai, B13, H1365] This establishes prophetic Sunnah of Taraweeh is for three days; 23rd, 25th, and 27th and congregational practice of Taraweeh was abandoned by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). There is no record which indicates prophetic Sunnah of Taraweeh changed during Abu Bakr’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) time but in Umar Ibn al-Khattab’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Khilafat he revived portion of prophetic Sunnah (i.e. 23rd, 25th, and 27th night Taraweeh). And through it innovated following good Sunnahs in Islam; (a) instructed that Taraweeh should be performed for entire month of Ramadan, (b) consecutively from beginning to end of Ramadan, (c) entire or more Quran is completed in Ramadan by Qari/Imam, (d) and under leadership of an Imam. And following Hadith is evidence of it: “Malik related to me from Ibn Shihab from Urwa ibn az-Zubayr that Abd ar-Rahman ibn Abd al-Qari said, "I went out with Umar ibn alKhattab in Ramadhan to the mosque and the people there were spread out in groups. Some men were praying by themselves, whilst others were praying in small groups. Umar said, 'By Allah! It would be better in my opinion if these people gathered behind one reciter.' So he gathered them behind Ubayy ibn Kab. Then I went out with him another night and the people were praying behind their Qur'an reciter. Umar said, نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. How excellent this innovation is!) But what you miss while you are asleep is better than what you watch in prayer.' He meant the end of the night, and people used to watch the beginning of the night in prayer."[3] [Ref: Muwatta Malik, B6, H3] Note he said it is an excellent innovation. Of course he did not say this regarding the prophetic Sunnah aspect of Taraweeh (i.e. 23rd, 25th, and 27th). Rather he said it about whole month of Taraweeh and it being performed in congregation for entire month. And these aspects are indeed innovations and therefore his saying; Taraweeh of entire month under leadership of an Imam is excellent innovation were not linguistical innovation rather his words were regarding Shar’ri good innovation which is a good Sunnah in Islam. Please referr to 2d to understand the rationale supporting the judgment. Alhasil his statement is proof; Islam there is room for good innovations and Islam recognises classification of innovation into good/excellent innovation and that Umar (radillah ta’laa anhu) believed innovations can be excellent. Regarding Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) the rightly guided Caliph Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “After I am gone, you will see great conflict. I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, and cling stubbornly to it.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H44] Hence you’re under Shar’ri burden to accept Sunnah of rightly guided Caliph and believe as he believed about innovations. Muhammed Ali: In E-mail dated 12th Nov 2017 you stated: "You have not explained the concept of good bida and where this is derived from." Regarding which I sought clarification, Email 28th/11/20177 – 10:56, about what you meant but I have received no response and therefore I will proceed to respond to both possibilities. It was quite possible you intended the following: “You have not proven concept of good innovation from Quran and prophetic Sunnah.” Before starting please note in my previous E-mail rule mentioned in 2C applies to this context so please familiarize yourself with it. Note the rule applies to following part of response the scenario details mentioned may not fully fit into here because in 2C I was merely trying to establish the rule not to use the incident as proof. (1a) In the previous E-mail it was established how statement of Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was/is proof of classification of innovation into good/excellent in the following words of his son Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) will be explained. And then words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed Salat ad-Duha is not prophetic Sunnah: “Narrated Muwarriq: I asked Ibn `Umar: "Do you offer the Duha prayer ?" He replied in the negative. I further asked, "Did `Umar use to pray it ?" He (Ibn `Umar) replied in the negative. I again asked, "Did Abu Bakr use to pray it?" He replied in the negative. I again asked, "Did the Prophet use to pray it?" Ibn `Umar replied, "I don't think he did." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H27] What he is indicating is; Salat ad-Duha is innovation which the following Hadith also confirms: “Narrated Mujahid: Urwa bin Az-Zubair 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] The Ulamah have said he believed it is innovation to perform it in congregation, others said he deemed it innovation to perform it regularly, others said he said it is innovation because it was being performed in Masjid, and others said he deemed it innovation as whole because he believed it was never performed by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). I say it is not important in which detail he considered it innovation but the fact is that he did consider one aspect of it as innovation or whole of it as innovation. Irrespective of his true belief at very least he considered something of Salat ad-Duha as innovation and regarding it he said it is fine/excellent innovation: “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, 3] "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 Razzaq, Vol3, Pages 78/79] (1b) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “He who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً (i.e. good Sunnah in Islam), there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Innovation is not already part of Islam and prophetic Sunnah is already part of Islam. And the reward being told is for a good Sunnah which is not already part of Islam but will be introduced into Islam. Therefore the Prophetic words referr to innovating a good Sunnah and making it part of Islam via Ijtihad. Alhasil reward for innovator and actor is for a innovation of good Sunnah. (2) It is quite possible you meant the following: “You have not explained what is good innovation made-up of and from where the practices which compose a good innovation are derived from.” If this is what you stated then answer is very simple: Innovated good Sunnah [or else; good innovation] is composed of various prophetic Sunnahs such as acts of worship, charity, righteous deeds, and everything about them is agrees with Islamic teaching which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has taught. If someone deems Yoga to be an act of worship and decides to worship Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) considering it good innovation then it is rejected because it isn’t sanctioned act of worship. But if someone recites Surah Ikhlas x100 and performs two Rakat Nawafil, gives Sadaqah to a poor person, and then supplicates Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for his need. And he does all this to gain pleasure of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) so when he invokes Him he is granted what he needs from Him. Even though this entire process of pleasing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and seeking need from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is innovation but the tools employed are prophetic teachings. Such as actions of charity and worship therefore it would be good innovation. It really makes no difference if he calls his practice Khatam Ikhlas because the permissibility isn’t judged on name/label but by content. And also a practice can be permissibile even it is not prophetic Sunnat because permissibility is judged by what it is composed of and not if it is prophetic Sunnat. If permissibility was judged by a practice being prophetic Sunnah then use of tooth brush/paste, modern weapons in Jihad would be Haram and sinful innovation because they are not prophetic Sunnahs. Note: Brother Amar sent another E-Mail where he in some detail pointed out the the sufferings Ummah is afflicted with but nothing related to the topic of innovation hence it is being omitted. Footnotes: - [1] “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] - [2] “It was narrated that Abu Dharr said: “We fasted Ramadan with the Messenger of Allah and he did not lead us in praying Qiyam (prayers at night) during any part of it, until there were seven nights left. He led us in praying Qiyam on the seventh night until approximately one third of the night had passed. Then on the sixth night which followed it he did not lead us in prayer. Then he led us in praying Qiyam on the fifth night which followed it until almost half the night had passed. I said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, would that we had offered voluntary prayers throughout the whole night.’ He said: ‘Whoever stands with the Imam until he finishes, it is equivalent to spending the whole night in prayer.’ Then on the fourth night which followed it, he did not lead us in prayer, until the third night that followed it, when he gathered his wives and family, and the people gathered, and he led us in prayer until we feared that we would miss the Falah.” It was asked: “What is the Falah?” He said: “Suhur.” He said: “Then he did not lead us in prayer at night for the rest of the month.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B5, H1327] “It was narrated that Abu Dharr said: "We fasted with the Messenger of Allah in Ramadan and he did not lead us in praying Qiyam until there were seven days left in the month, when he led us in praying Qiyam until one-third of the night had passed. Then he did not lead us in praying Qiyam then there were six days left. Then he led us praying Qiyam when there were five days left until one-half of the night had passed. I said: "O Messenger of Allah! What if we spend the rest of this night praying Nafl?" He said: "Whoever prays Qiyam with the Imam until he finishes, Allah (SWT) will record for him the Qiyam of a (whole) night." Then he did not lead us in prayer or pray Qiyam until there were three days of the month left. Then he led us in praying Qiyam when there were three days left. He gathered his family and wives (and led us in prayer) until we feared that we would miss Al-Falah. I (one of the narrators) said: "What is Al-Falah?" He said: "The suhur".” [Ref: Nisai, B20, H1606] - [3] “Abdur Rahman bin 'Abdul Qari said, "I went out in the company of 'Umar bin Al-Khattab one night in Ramadhan to the mosque and found the people praying in different groups. A man praying alone or a man praying with a little group behind him. So, 'Umar said, 'In my opinion I would better collect these (people) under the leadership of one Qari (Reciter)’. So, he made up his mind to congregate them behind Ubai bin Ka'b. Then on another night I went again in his company and the people were praying behind their reciter. 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.' He meant the prayer in the last part of the night. (In those days) people used to pray in the early part of the night." [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227]

Salam alayqum. ----------------------- 1 - Mawlana Saeed Ahmad Assad nay Noor Bashr kay munazray mein jawab deeya thah ... Nabuwat ka mansub mila magr mansub par kaam aakiri Nabi bana kar behja gaya toh phir shoroon huwa. Jistera police walay ko job Lahore ki millay aur rahay Karachi mein ... position to milli magr duty apnay station par hi ja kar deh sakta heh. 2 - Janab Quran mein aya heh kay shahid ki makhi (i.e. Bee) ko Wahi hoti heh toh kia us ko wahi huwi toh woh Nabi ho gahi? Aur Jibraeel alayhis salaam aah kar us ko kitab ka ilm detay hen? Jab Hadith say wazia huwa kay aap Nabi thay pedaish say pehlay toh phir Nabi kay wastay Wahi kitabi ki shart kesi. Dosri baat aur kia zeroori heh kay Nabi ko Wahi kitabi ho toh Nabi heh Quran say wazia heh kay Wahi ka kitabi hona lazam nahin. Is kay ilawah Alam e Arwah mein kis ko khabr kia kia Wahi huwa arwah e Ambiyah ko. Wahi kitabi ka zeroori hona us waqt heh jab Nabi ilaan e Nabuwat karay aur baseehat e bashr dunya mein behja gaya ho. 3 - Ambiyah say pehlay milli ya baad mein, is behas ki zeroorat nahin keun kay maqam e khatamiat sab kay akhir mein milla aur sab say akhir mein behjay gahay. Misaal kay tor par ... das football player select hoon ... Shahid un mein 7th number par chuna gaya ho ... aur sab say akhir mein behja gaya ho ... aur us kay pitch par ajanay kay baad kaha jahay kay yeh aakhiri player heh toh ... us ki selection saatwen number par huwi toh kissi ko ihtiraz hoga? RasoolAllah ka khatam honay ka mansub sab kay aakhir mein bhejnay kay baad mila selection say to is ka talluq hi nahin. Selection say mein tab pansen jab Hadith ho mein aakhiri Nabi thah jab Adam alayhis salam is halat mein thay ... Ala Hadhrat rahimullah ka farman siyaq o sabaq mein parna paray ga. Jahan taq mujjay pata heh Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat rahimullah bi Nabuwat alam e arwah mein milnay ka nazria rakhtay thay ... kaheen par un say yeh Hadith naqal keeya huwa para heh. Keun kay is ibarat ki doh implications hen; agar sab say pehlay milli toh phir baqi Ambiya ko nabuwat milnay ka inqaar lazam ata heh ... aur agar zameen kay lehaz say dekha jahay toh phir ihtiraz banta heh kay agar pehlay milli thee toh phir Ala Hazrat nay zameen par Nabuwat kay milnay ka likha keun. Jahan taq Ala Hazrat ki ibarat ka wazia mafoom heh toh unoon nay yeh wazahat ki heh kay dunya mein Nabi behjay janay kay baad aur khatamiat kay ilaan kay baad kissi aur ko Nabuwat nahin mil sakti. Abh yeh ihtiraz huwa kay Ala Hazrat nay dunya par milnay ka bayan keeya heh agar pehlay milli hoti toh yeh nah likhtay. Is ka jawab meray pass nahin, ahle ilm hazrat denh gay. Istera Qasim Nanotavi ki ibarat Kufr huwi. Isa alayhis salam ki nabuwat khas bani Israel wasteh thee. Aur hamaray Nabi ki tamam insaniat kay wastay. Hamaray Nabi ki Nabuwat nay un ki Nabuwat ko mansookh kar diya keun kay jin kay pass woh bhejay gay thay uneeh kay pass hamaray Nabi bi bhejay gay hen. Un ka title aur maqam e Nabi qaim heh magar Nabuwat khatam ho chuki. Abh woh Ummati hi ban kar ahen gay. Khatam un Nabiyeen ka bazahir mana Nabiyoon ka khatim, akhir, pechla ... Yeh un Nabiyoon ka aakhiri hona heh joh sahib e Nabuwat thay, yehni Sahib e Nabuwat Nabiyoon kay akhar mein anay wala. Note karyeh ... Rasool/Nabi ka lafzi mana ghayb ki khabr batanay wala nahin. Magar yeh shar'ri mana heh. Is'see tera khatamun nabiyeen ka lafzi mana aur shar'ri manay mein farq zeroori heh.

Salam alayqum, Mein nay pari nahin. Magr andaza heh kay biddat ki tareef mein ikhtilaf par hogi ya jamhoor ki istilah biddat say different hogi joh aaj kal bazahir Wahhabi istimal kartay hen. Biddat ki tareef mein ikhtilaf Ijtihadi Ikhtilaf heh. Yehni aqsar Sunni Ulamah: Biddat Hasanah aur Biddat Zalalah ki taqseem kartay hen. Magr kuch Ulamah is taqseem kay qail nahin. Un kay nazdeeq har biddat gumrahi heh aur Mawlid waghayra Sunnat Hasanah say hen jin ki ijaad ka aur amal ka sawab heh. Woh Mawlid ko Biddat Hasanah nahin tehratay balkay Sunnat Hasanah say gintay hen. Yeh kohi khaas ikhtilaf nahin aur nah radd ki zeroorat heh. Wahhabiyon nay in ki definitions ko hijack kar kay apnay taraf say gumrah kun izafahaat keeyeh hen jin apna maqsid pura kartay hen. Wahhabiyon say asal ikhtilaf un kay apnay gumrah kun izafahaat hen ya yoon keh lenh kay un ki defintion say ikhtilaf sirf Wahhabiyon kay gumrahi kay izafahaat ki waja say heh. Mein ba-zaat e khud Shaykh Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali rahimullah ki tareef ko istimal karta hoon. Yehni har biddat gumrahi wali ... shoroon say yahi seekhi thee ... magar Wahhabi ghaleez izafahaat say paak heh is waja say Mawlid, Khatam, Geeyarweenh par ihtiraz nahin ... Biddat woh heh joh ghayr shar'ri ya gunahoon say bani ho aur har biddat gumrahi heh. Magar Mawlid mein toh kuch bi Sunnat kay khilaf nahin is leyeh woh Biddat nahin. Jab biddat nahin toh phir ihtiraz ki koi baat nahin. Abh yeh toh teh pa gaya kay biddat nahin abh sawaal heh kay toh phir kia heh. Woh Sunnat e Hasanah heh. Sunnat is waja say keun kay Sunnat e RasoolAllah sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam ka majmua heh aur Hasanah is wajah say kay yeh achai heh ... keun kay Sunnatoon par amal heh toh achai huwi. Meri aksar Wahhabiyon say discussion is'see definition par hoteen hen ...

Yeh sirf drama heh ... tamasha ... is kay apnay maulvi Ummat kay jamhoor/majority ko Mushrik/Kafir likh chukay ... yeh banda uneeh kay mazhab ki taraf bulata heh, uneeh ki Takfir e Ummat ki taraf bula raha heh, sirf itihad e ummat ka drama kar kay, aur Sunni bewaqoof aur jahil is kism ki batoon mein aa jatay hen.-jatay hen aur phir ek doh saal Deobandi ho jatay hen aur phir Ismail Dehalvi ki Takfir: Tawheed rare/nayab ho chuki kalmah parnay walay aksir logh mushrik hen ... phir is patti par char chata heh ...