MuhammedAli

Introduction: Muslims believe Najd mentioned in Ahadith is part of Arabian Peninsula and now roughly comprimises modern Saudi province of Najd. The Khawarij/Wahhabi believe Najd is in Iraq, and others amongst them say it is part of Iraq but not Iraq as whole. Objective is to use the maps to establish where Najd is. Please note Najd is spelt Nejd, Nedjed and Nejed. Please look around Saudi capital Riyadh/Riad to find location of Najd. Maps Indicating Location Of Najd: Conclusion: Old and new all maps depict location of Najd in Saudi Arabia. The Ahadith also precisely agree with what is established from these maps. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold that a Khariji sect will emerge from central Saudi Arabia. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed to the direction of East and named Najd as place of its origin. In middle of 17th century this group emerged lead by Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab. Seeing the prophesy was fulfilled and noting; creed of Tawheed/Shirk and deeds matched Khawarij, along side the description given by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fitted upon Shaykh of Najd, the Islamic scholarship warned the Muslims of his tribulation citing the Ahadith of Najd as proof. Supporters of Shaykh of Najd resorted to distorting the Ahadith which expose the reality of their sect. The core argument in defense is; Najd is not in Arabia but it is Iraq [or is part of Iraq]. Then they present various evidences in form of Ahadith, many of which are gross distortions of Ahadith, to establish their concocted narrative. BackGround And Way Of Response: Year and half ago a brother Syed Hammad Saifi mentioned another brother Muhammad Aamir Khan had written some articles on topic of Najd. Unfortunately I did not ask what and where these articles are. And told me that brother Abdullah, a supporter of Kharijism, from system_of_life responded to these articles, here. Brother Syed Hammad Saifi requested a response. I informed him everything which brother Abdullah has mentioned in the article comprehensively been refuted in various articles which number roughly twenty, here. And promised him something will be written in response to brother Abdullah’s distortions of Islam in future. In brother Abdullah’s article; there is material which is directly related to the topic of Najd and unrelated. Everything, related and unrelated all will be addressed in order of evidence quoted. 0.0 - Adu-Allah’s Opening Statement: “This Article is a brief response to those Sufis (Barewlis) who intentionally accusing the Ahle-Sunnah Wal-Jamaah of Hijaaz (Saudi Arabia). Abusing the great Scholars of Hijaaz (Saudi Arabia). They intentionally hide ing the Hadith related to Iraq and attributing those Ahadeeth to People of Hijaaz with intention of maligning them. Inshallah we shall expose these Liars.” [Ref: Alternative location of original article, here] 0.1 - Abdullah’s Opening Statement In Balance: He said Sufis (Barelwis) accuse and abuse the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah of Hijaz (Saudi Arabia). And we the Muslims conceal the Ahadith which indicate group of Satan will emerge from Iraq with intention of maligning the Shuyukh of Najd. It is important that the very foundation of distortion and lies is exposed for what it is. The following parts will address everything that needs to be addressed. There are numerous factual errors in what brother Abdullah wrote in his opening statement. These errors are due to absence of knowledge and by establishing them objective is to prove brother Abdullah is poorly educated. And poor education religious or secular makes poor scholars and poor scholarship. By this I do not intend to insinuate brother Abdullah is an Aalim the truth is far from it. 1.0 - Sufi And Barelwis Accuse: Readers should note there are three major factions, Sufis/Sunnis, Wahhabis, and Shia. And in between there are many shades of grey for each faction. If you take away, Wahhabis, Shias, Deobandis, from equation everyone else is Sufi and everyone of them is member of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. Even if one takes away Deobandis and Shias and puts them in pro-Wahhabi basket, this still leaves an over whelming majority of Sufi/Sunnis who are against the Wahhabis. What I am trying to get at is when he says Sufis are against his version of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. In reality he means everyone from Ummah is against his sect with exception of dozen or so Deobandis because none everyone falls into these major labels and shades of grey which originate from them. 1.1 - Identity Of Ahlus Sunnah And The Jammah: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “After I am gone, you will see great conflict. I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the path of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, and cling stubbornly to it.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H44] “Whoever among you lives will see great conflict. I urge you to adhere to what you know of my Sunnah and the path of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, and cling stubbornly to it.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H43] Ahlus Sunnah (i.e. people of tradition) in Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah (i.e. people of tradition and main-body) referrs to those who follow the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And Wal Jammah referrs to one who holds to the Jammah (i.e. main-group) of companions and of Muslims. The identity of second is established by the following sayin of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “It was narrated from Thawban that: The Messenger of Allah said: "A group among my Ummah will continue to follow the truth and prevail, and those who oppose them will not be able to harm them, until the command of Allah comes to pass." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H10] And this taifa (i.e. group) is of majority which will be upon Haq when there are differences: “Anas bin Malik said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah say: ‘My Ummah will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said that majority is better then minority and then instructed the Muslims to stick to the Jammah: “Abu Dhār (Allah be pleased with him) reported from the Prophet (Peace be upon him) that, “Two are better than one, and three better than two; so stick to the Jama'ah for verily Allah, Most Great and Glorious, will only unite my Ummah on guidance." [Ref: M.I.Ahmad, Al-Ansar, Abu Zar Al Ghaffari, H20776] From all this it is clear Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah are those who follow the prophetic Sunnah, and Jammah of companions, and Jammah of Muslim, and they are; Ummah agreeing upon guidance. And they are majority and there is continuity of theological lineage. 1.2 - Wahhabiyyah Are Ahlus Sunnah, Or Barelwis: In light of what has been established from Ahadith the Wahhabiyyah cannot be deserving of title of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah because their belief system originated in 17th century and the core principles and teaching of this sect lack continuity. Also they as whole are and the Muslims amongst them are minority in Ummah who are disputing and rejecting the beliefs of majority. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed the Muslims to fallow the majority in following Hadith: “My Ummah will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] “Two are better than one, and three better than two; so stick to the Jama'ah for verily Allah, Most Great and Glorious, will only unite my Ummah on guidance." [Ref: M.I.Ahmad, Al-Ansar, Abu Zar Al Ghaffari, H20776] Note Hadith of Musnad Imam Ahmad (rahimullah) precisely establishes the majority is Jammah and also establishes majority Jammah is Ummah. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) wouldn’t have instructed the believers to follow the majority if they were not group of truth and if they were not the Jammah. In contrast to Wahhabiyyah, Barelwism/Sufism of subcontinent alone is enough in numbers to compose a majority against the Wahhabiyyah. If one was to include Sufism of Arabian Peninsula, Syria, Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Africa, Malaysia, and other countries … They share with Barelwis, the Ashari and Maturidi heritage. Qadri, Naqshbandi, Chishti and Soharwardi Sufi paths. Hanafi, Shafi, Hanbali, and Maliki fiqh.[1] Despite their perpherial differences a core teaching unites all these scholars upon prophetic Sunnah and come togather to compose over whelming majority, the Jammah, and they are Ummah agreeing upon guidance. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said regarding those who deviate from the Jammah and Ummah: "I saw the Prophet on the Minbar addressing the people. He said: 'After me there will be many calamities and much evil behavior. Whoever you see splitting away from the Jama'ah or trying to create division among the Ummah of Muhammad, then kill him, for the Hand of Allah is with the Jama'ah, and the Satan is with the one who splits away from the Ummah[2], running with him.'" [Ref: Nisai, B37, H4025] 2.0 - Saudi Arabia And Hijaz: He says Muslims accuse the scholars of Hijaaz (Saudi Arabia) … The fact is Hijaaz is not name for Saudi Arabia. Hijaz historically only composed of a small area of Arabian Peninsula and modern Saudi Arabia. Please see the following map for Hijaz, Arabia and Najd, here. This reveals brother doesn’t actually know what Hijaz is and what Arabia is. We have nothing but good to say about the scholars of al-Hijaz. We the Muslims condemn the Wahhabi/Khariji scholars of Najd, hereThe tribulation and sternness of Najdi/Wahhabi hearts is established from where they emerged and what they did to Muslims of Arabian Peninsula, including Hijaz, during their pillaging raids and conquests. They put the Wahhabi ] And out of all the Khawarij followers of Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab and his band of bandit Wahhabis, emerged with this distinguishing sign of shaven heads. Ref: Muslim, B5, H2338[ “Sahl b. Hunaif reported Allah's Apostle as saying: There would arise from the east a people with shaven heads.” One of tribulation was of a group of people with shaven heads:] Ref: Bukhari, B63, H217[ “Narrated Ibn Umar: I heard the Prophet saying: "Tribulationss will emerge from here." Pointing towards the East.”] Ref: Muslim, B1, H95[“The callousness of heart and sternness is in the East and faith is among the people of the Hijaz.” ) also said regarding inhabitants of Najd: sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam] Prophet (Ref: Bukhari, B88, H214[ “Narrated Ibn Umar: The Prophet said: … He said: "O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Sham (i.e. greater Syria)! O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen." The people said: "O Allah's Apostle! And also on our Najd." I think the third time the Prophet said: "There (in Najd) is the place of earthquakes and afflictions and from there comes out the side of the Qarn (i.e. horn, head, group, an era) of Satan." ) said: is in East of Madinah and regarding it Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallamNajd 2.1 - East And Najd In Ahadith: , whom he deceptively counted amoungst people of Hijaz. This will be explained in on coming parts of article in detail but here for introductory purposes somethings will be mentioned.ISIS companions to shame with their actrocities and rape and murderous rampage. And this is why the Muslim scholarship of world, except Wahhabi, condemns Wahhabism, and are totally against it. 2.2 - Hijaz In Ahadith Of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “The people of the West will continue to triumphantly follow the truth until the Hour is established.”[3] [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4722] “The callousness of heart and sternness is in the East and faith is among the people of the Hijaz.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H95] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said the people of Hijaz and in other words people of Western part of Arabia will hold to truth until the day of judgment and vast majority of the Muslims of Hijaz are members of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah, here. With aid of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the Muslims of Hijaz will remain upon way of Ahlus Sunnah and victorious our the group of Satan of Najd. Also note Hijaz is refuge of Islam: “That the Messenger of Allah said: "Indeed the religion with creep into the Hijaz just like a snake creeps into its hole, and the religion will cling to the Hijaz just like the female mountain goat cling to the peak of a mountain.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B38, H2630] 2.3 - The Contrast And The Deception: After noting the clear distinction and merits of people of Hijaz and truth regarding Najd and Wahhabism; the readers should imagine why the enemy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would attempt to pass the tribulation of group of Satan and their scholars as scholars of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah and of scholars of Hijaz. Brother Adu-Allah’s attempt in the science of Hadith is would be called Tadlees. Tadlees best can be destribed in modern magic (i.e. card tricks and stuff) terms of; misdirection, sleight of hand, and concealment. Where a narrator attempts to cover-up weakness of a Hadith by praising merits of a narrator or by with-holding information in order to create positive or negative image. In other words, the enemy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) attempted elevate Wahhabism by associating it with Hijaaz and by disassociating it from Najd. Tadlees is subtle but brother Abdullah’s attempt to make East into West is grand deception. 3.0 - Ahadith Of Iraq And Najd: Brother Abdullah said: “They intentionally hide the Hadith related to Iraq and attributing those Ahadeeth to People of Hijaaz Najd with intention of maligning them.” The truth of matter is; Ahadith which foretold emergence of group of Satan from Iraq are about Khawarij just as Ahadith of Najd are. But they are about two different locations therefore we do not mix the reports nor interpret one to mean the other. Meaning we don’t say because group of Satan emerged from Iraq therefore Najd means Iraq which the Wahhabis are attempting to do. Suppose there is report on TV: There was bomb explosion in London, Enland, university. Right after it, or week later, or month later there is another news report: In university of New Jersey, America, there was bomb explosion. Year later these two news reports are pulbished on a website. You the reader reads both of them. Due to bomb explosions in mentioned cities would you conclude; i) University of New Jersey and university of London are one and the same, ii) or knowing better you would distinguish between the two reports and believe these are two different bomb explosions in two different cities, two different countries. In context of my scenario, Abdullah, the Wahhabi enemy of knowledge and reason, is complaining why do the Muslims hide reports of London bomb attack when they attempt to find location of New Jersey. Any educated and sane person would realise nothing is being hidden. The report of London attack is not related to New Jersey attack. Hence using London attack report and its location to mean New Jersey is in fact London would be dumbness of epic proportions. See the location of Najd and Iraq, here. We leave it upon the illiterate fools to confuse/make Najd into Iraq. You can’t but appreciate for laughs the foolishness of Wahhabi logic. Group of Satan in Iraq and group of Satan in Najd means Iraq is Najd. Am educumated too, and my educumation (lol!) says if group of Satan in Iraq and group of Satan is in Najd then this means Najd is Iraq. Victory for educumation! If A is sweet and liquidy and B is sweet and liquidy then A is B. If lion is furry and has tail, and donkey is furry and with tail, donkey is lion. 4.0 - Accuse, Abuse, And Maligning Scholars Of Najd: He said the Muslims accuse the scholars of Najd. And we do indeed accuse them of being Khawarij and evidence of what vast majority of Muslims believe about them is in their own books. And world terrorism so called in the name of Islam is all Wahhabi supported and all man power is of Wahhabism except those who have been forced into joining them under pain of death as it happened in Syria under rule of Wahhabi branch of ISIS. Please listen to major scholar of Wahhabis/Salafis say ISIS are Wahhabi, here. 5.0 - Abdullah Quoting Surah Baqarah (2) Verse 42: Brother Abdullah quoted the following verse: ''Do not mix the Truth with Falsehood nor Conceal the Truth when you Know.” [Ref: 2:42] And he quoted this verse in an attempt to imply that members of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah mix the falsehood (i.e. Barelwi/Sufi teachings) with truth (i.e. Hadith) and conceal the truth [about Wahhabis]. And I am not going to comment on this. I rather let the readers decide on strength of evidence and sound argumentation to determine who is mixing the falsehood with truth and who was/is Mudallis (i.e. guilty of Tadlees). But what I will do is explain the verse in light of context and other verses of Quran. Then at the end of which I will establish brother Abdullah like all his Wahhabi, Salafi and Khariji co-religionists share trait which is unique to Khawarij and worst of creation. 5.1 - Context Of Surah Baqarah Verse 42: Allah (subhanhu wa ta’ala) stated: “And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know (it).” [Ref: 2:42] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) revealed this verse as part of following six verses: "O Children of Israel! Remember My favor which I have bestowed upon you and fulfill My covenant (upon you) that I will fulfill your covenant (from Me), and be afraid of Me. And believe in what I have sent down confirming that which is (already) with you, and be not the first to disbelieve in it. And do not exchange My signs for a small price, and fear Me. And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know (it). And establish prayer and give zakah and bow with those who bow (in worship and obedience). Do you order righteousness of the people and forget yourselves while you recite the Scripture? Then will you not reason? And seek help through patience and prayer, and indeed, it is difficult except for the humbly submissive (to Allah). Who are certain that they will meet their Lord and that they will return to Him." [Ref: 2:40/46] Context of this verse reveals it was revealed regarding the Bani Israel (i.e. Jews). 5.2 - Explanation Of Surah al-Baqarah Verse 42 In Light Of Quran: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know (it).” [Ref: 2:42] Now it is established verse was revealed with regards to Jews who were concealing the truth and mixing falsehood in truth. What the truth and the falsehood was; is yet to be determined. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: "Those to whom We gave the Scripture know him (i.e. Prophet Muhammad) as they know their own sons. But indeed a party of them conceal the truth while they know (it). The truth is from your Lord, so never be among the doubters." [Ref: 2:146/147] Alhasil the truth they conealed and distorted was regarding identity and Prophet-hood of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) while the Rabbai’s knew too well; Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Prophet from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “And when there came to them a Book (this Qur'an) from Allah confirming what is with them (i.e. Taurat) and the Injeel, although aforetime they had invoked Allah in order to gain victory over those who disbelieved, then when there came to them that which they had recognised, they disbelieved in it. So let the Curse of Allah be on the disbelievers.” [Ref: 2:89] They were waiting for his arrival and invoked Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for victory through Waseela (i.e. means) of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but disbelieved in his Prophet-hood and hid information from Jewish layity which would have helped them identify him as Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and mixed the truth with falsehood to hide the truth of his Prophet-hood. 5.3 - Mixing The Truth With FalseHood And Concealing The Truth: From previous two sections it would be obvious following verse was revealed with regards to Jews: “And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know (it).” [Ref: 2:42] And specially Jewish scholarly elitehiding information and distorting information which establishes Prophet-hood of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) even though they knew too well that he is Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Brother Abdullah applied and interpreted the verse in context of Muslims and employed it because he is of understanding; we the Muslims, the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah, mix falsehood with truth, and conceal truth. Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had following to say about those people who interpret verses revealed regarding disbelievers as if they are about Muslims: “... and the Mulhidun (heretical) after the establishment of firm proof against them:"And the statement of Allah: 'Allah will not mislead a people after He has guided them, until He makes clear to them what to avoid.' (9:115) And Ibn Umar used to consider them (the Khawarij and the Mulhidun) the worst of Allah's creatures and said: "These people took some verses that had been revealed concerning the disbelievers and interpreted them as describing the believers.” [Ref: Bukhari, Vol 9, Page 49, Chap 6: Killing The Khawari] Muslims now can decide; if brother Abdullah, theWahhabi, was mixing the falsehood of Wahhabi/Khariji methodology into truth of Quran, and hiding information regarding verse [to insinuate Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah are guilty of distortion and concealment] or not. With regards to insinuation that members of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah hide truth and distort it readers will have to wait till the completion of article to make a finale decision. 6.0 – DIY Tafsir And Sharh Of Quran And Hadith: What was required from brother Abdullah was that he explain and demonstrate why Najd isn’t the demonstrated Najd but it is Iraq. And to support his position he should have presented evidence of Hadith and maps to demonstrate his position. Then his position would have been established and we would have been under the burden to establish Islamic position and refute his Khariji distortion. What brother Abdullah has done is; what I have pointed to in section - 3.0. What he is attempting is to interpret Hadith with Hadith but DIY (i.e. Do It Yourself!) scholar doesn’t have any idea how to interpret Hadith or Quran. His effort is laughable because he is trying to apply rules of Tafsir (i.e. exegesis) on a matter of geography. Purpose of Tafsir is to bring clarity and remove ambiguity from a verse with another verse. And correct way to manage it is to employ relating set of verses to shed light on ambiguity. DIY scholars and Mujtahideen relying on Shaykh ul-Islam Wal Muslimeen Google (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) due to zero knowledge rules of Tafsir. Are interpreting name of one region to mean another region due to commonality of detail between Iraq and Najd –: i.e. emergence of group of Satan. The commanlity of detail can be used to establish both groups are same in theology but this detail cannot legitimately be employed to argue Iraq is Najd. To do so would be foolishness however appealing and convincing it may seem to DIY scholars. If two unrelated Ahadith or verses are employed and interpreted then the out come naturally would be defective and invalid. 6.1 - Demonstrating Correct Methodology Of Tafsir: Years ago I had discussion with a extremely extremist Wahhabi [aka Usmaniyyah, Captain]. And he quoted the following verse to argued it referrs to deceased AwliyahAllah including companions and Prophets including Prophet Isa (alayhis salam): “And those they invoke mindu’nillah (i.e. other than Allah) who create nothing, and they (themselves) are created. They are (in fact) dead not alive, and they do not perceive when they will be resurrected.” [Ref: 16:21] My counter argument was the verse was revealed regarding polytheists and their idol-gods. The ambiguity was made clear via following verse: “Yet have they taken mindu’nillah gods that can create nothing but are themselves created; that have no control of hurt or good to themselves; nor can they control death nor life nor resurrection.“ [Ref: 25:3] Alhasil a related verse was employed to clarify the ambiguity and this is Tafsir of best type. Coming to invalid methodology of interpreting; following Hadith is proof that Satan’s group (aka Khawarij) would appear from Najd: “They said again: "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said: "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] To say following Hadith clarifies ambiguity of Najd through usage of Iraq would be a monstoracity because regions and geographical locations are not interpreted to mean another through interpretation: “I asked Sahl bin Hunaif: "Did you hear the Prophet saying anything about Al-Khawarij?" He said: "I heard him saying while pointing his hand towards Iraq: "There will appear in it some people who will recite the Quran but it will not go beyond their throats, and ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H68] Correct way to interpret and find location and region of Najd should be something similar to following. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out." Or said: "... the group [from direction] of sun (rise) ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] Based on this Hadith following article was written to demonstrate Iraq cannot be Najd, here. And also sunrises from East hence following Hadith is related to it: “Verily, afflictions (will start) from here," pointing towards the east, "whence the side of the group of Satan comes out." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H714] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was residing on pulpit of Masjid of Nabvi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and from there he pointed toward house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) and this is precisely toward East, here, therefore following Hadith is also related to the two: “The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointing to Aisha's house (i.e. Eastwards): He said thrice: "Affliction (will appear from) here and from where the side of the Satan's head comes out (i.e. from the East).” [Ref: Bukhari, B53, H336] Maps and various Ahadith establish Najd is in Arabia and toward East of Madinah therefore it is connected with all the above Hadith: “They said again: "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said: "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] Alhasil all related Ahadith to Najd and East were brought togather and explained in light of each other to establish direction of Najd and location of Najd. 6.2 - Invalid Methodology Of Tafsir Of Quran And Sharh Of Ahadith: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated:“And (remember) when Allah will say: "O Isa , son of Maryam! Did you say unto men: 'Worship me and my mother as two gods besides Allah?'” [Ref: 5:116] This verse indicates a group/sect of Christians worshipped Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and his mother Maryam (salamullah alayha) as gods and on the day of judgment Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) will be questioned regarding it. In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Certainly you (disbelievers) and that which you are worshipping now besides Allah, are fuel for Hell! (Surely) you will enter it.” [Ref: 21:98] DIY scholar and DIY Tafsir would be prepared to send Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and his mother to hell-fire. After all one plus one is indeed adding up to hell-fire. Yet the fact is both these verses are true and both these verses are unrelated. One is regarding the idols which the polytheists of Arabia worshipped and other is about a Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and about a righteous worshipper of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). With regards Prophets Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: “It is not (possible) for any human being to whom Allah has given the Book and Al-Hukm (laws of religion) and Prophethood to say to the people: "Be my worshippers rather than Allah's." On the contrary (he would say): "Be you Rabbaniyyun because you are teaching the Book, and you are studying it." [Ref: 3:79] With regards to men/women those who were worshipped during their lives or after their death Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will ask them if they asked the people to worship them beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and if they answer the question in affirmative then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will send them to fire: “And if any of them should say: "Verily, I am an Ilah (i.e. god deserving of worship) besides Him." Such a one We should recompense with Hell. Thus We recompense the Zalimun (polytheists and wrong-doers).” [Ref: 21:29] If we rely on DIY scholars and DIY Tafsirs educated by Shaykh ul-Islam Google Ibn Yahoo Ibn Bing then you can imagine the destruction of Islam. Verses of Quran and Ahadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) must correctly be paired with related Ayaat/Ahadith to derive correct understanding. 6.3 – Brother Abdullah The Enemy Of Ahadith Of RasoolAllah: Brother Abdullah is DIY scholar and DIY Mufassir and Sha’reh. As a result the readers would readers would realize how mercilessly he is decimating teaching of Islam in order to protect Wahhabism. He will take two unrelated regions and based similarity in content of Hadith he will be declaring Najd is Iraq. My objective would be to separate Iraq from Najd and Najd from Iraq. Provide convincing geographical and evidence of Hadith to prove student of Shaykh Google Ibn Yahoo Ibn Bing is out of his depth and is sinking in ignorance of pre-Islamic era. 7.0 - Abdullah Quotes Ahadith Of Satan’s Group Appearing From Iraq: "Abdullah Ibn-Umar related that once, he saw the Prophet showing Iraq with his hand, and saying: "The Fitna (i.e. affliction) is here, the Fitna is here, the Fitna is here, three times, it is from here that will appear the devil's horns [alternative; devil’s group]." (Isnad considered Sahih by the Muhaddith Ahmad Shakir al-Masry) [Ref: Musnad-e-Ahmad, Vol10, P391, H6302, H6129] "Ibn Umar reported: The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said, “O Allah, bless us in our Syria. O Allah, bless us in our Yemen.” He repeated it and on the third or fourth time they said: “O Messenger of Allah and in our Iraq.” The Prophet said: “Verily, from there will appear upheavals and tribulations and from there will rise the horn of Satan [alternative; Satan’s group]." [Ref: Tabarani, al-Mujjam Awsaat, H4230] 7.1 - Commenting On Ahadith Quoted By Brother Abdullah: Ahadith state group of Satan will emerge from Najd and brother Abdullah hopes to interpret Najd with Iraq. More accurately; due to usage of Iraq in above Ahadith brother Abdullah is replacing Najd with Iraq. The logic behind it goes something like this; if from A is group of Satan and from B is group of Satan; therefore A is alphabet B. This explains the mechanism employed by brother Abdullah and simultaneously delivers a smack of sanity to his insanity. Before venturing further it is important to point out; words Satan’s group referr to Khawarij. Muslims and Wahhabis have no dispute in this regard but if anyone questions this ascription then please read the following article, here. Coming to first Hadith quoted by brother Abdullah; I will not comment on chain of narration because the over-all meaning of Hadith agrees with following authentic Hadith: “Narrated by Yusair bin 'Amr:I asked Sahl bin Hunaif: "Did you hear the Prophet saying anything about Al-Khawarij?" He said: "I heard him saying while pointing his hand towards Iraq: "There will appear in it some people who will recite the Quran but it will not go beyond their throats,and they will go out from (leave) Islam as an arrow darts through the game's body." [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H68] Even though the Hadith does not use words group (i.e. Qarn) of Satan the description is regarding Khawarij. And principle of science of Hadith is when a weak Hadith is narrated or coroborated by stronger the weakness is lifted due to stronger Hadith. The second Hadith quoted by brother Abdullah; its wording is fabricated. Meaning event described in the said Hadith never occurred. Instead one of the narrators confused Najd/East with Iraq either due to forgetfullness. Or due to events that transpired in Iraq with regards to Khawarij confused Najd Ahadith with Iraq and replaced Najd with Iraq. Ignoring the confusion/distortion of actual Hadith of Najd it has to be said over-all meaning of Khawarij appearing from Iraq is in agreement with authentic Ahadith but the event it describes never happened. 7.2 - Ahadith Establish No Dua For Najd And Dua For Iraq: From following Hadith it is clear that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) refused to invoke Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for region of Najd citing the emergence of group of Satan (aka Khawarij) for his refusal: “The Prophet again said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said again: "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] Even though Khawarij were to emerge from Iraq also Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did invoke Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for people of Iraq: “Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) looked toward Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, and made the Dua: O Allah accept their hearts on your obedience and place firmly your mercy around them.” [Ref: Tabarani, Mu'jam al-Sagheer, Chptr; Alif, Name; Ishaq, H273, here] Note Najd is absent from the second Hadith. What this alludes to is Najd had a special position and played a special role in tribulation of Khawarij due to which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not invoke Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) on behalf of Najd. And that special role will be elaborated in two following sections. 7.3 - Emergence Of Satan’s Group From Najd And From Direction Of East: Identification of historical Najd is important because group of Satan was to originate from Najd. Islamic understanding of subject and location of Najd translates to; Wahhabism being the group of Satan which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). For the uninitiated, it is adivsed to see location of Najd on maps, here. It will be evident Najd is toward East of Madinah and Makkah and is central region of Saudi Arabia and it surrounds Saudi capital Riyadh. With this basic information please read the following Ahadith: “Narrated Ibn `Umar: (The Prophet) said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen." People said, "Our Najd as well." The Prophet again said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said again: "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] “O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen." The people said, "O Allah's Apostle! And also on our Najd." I think the third time the Prophet said, "There (in Najd) is the place of earthquakes and afflictions and from there comes out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H214] Ahadith about East which tell about emergence of group of Satan from direction of East: “Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: I heard Allah's Apostle on the pulpit saying, "Verily, afflictions (will start) from here," pointing towards the east, "whence the side of the group of Satan comes out." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H714] “Ibn Umar reported that he heard Allah's Messenger as saying (in a state) that he had turned his face towards the east: Behold, turmoil would appear from this side, from where the group of Satan would appear.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6938] One Hadith states East by pointing direction of sunrise: “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out," or said, "... the group [from direction] of sun (rise) ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] Alhasil the region of Najd and direction of East perfectly compliment each other. And emergence of group of Satan from Najd/East are about the same region. The only difference in one group of Ahadith direction is mentioned and in the other name of region is mentioned. Following article contains seventeen facts; if all put into perspective precisely establish the direction from where the group of Satan was to emerge, here. Alhasil all this reveals why a Wahhabi/Khariji would distort the truth and mix falsehood into Ahadith Najd. And would want Iraq to be Najd and not the land of their beloved Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab. 7.4 - Group Of Satan From Iraq And Group Of Satan From Najd: Briefly; it a group of Satan was to emerge from Najd and another one from Iraq. The first Satan’s group to abandoned Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) when after arbitration at Siffin and assembled as a separate faction at Harura [alternative name for Khawarij connected with; Haruriyyah] in Iraq. These people were mostly from tribe of Banu Tamim which was/is mainly situated in central Saudi Arabia, in other words in historical Najd. Abdullah aka Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamim was leader of Khawarij in Iraq - see map depicting location of Banu Tamim in Najd and evidence of Dhil Khuwaisirah being form Najd and him leading Khawarij of Iraq, here. Following article comprehensively explains in light of authentic Ahadith how and why Ahadith of Najd are connected, and how Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab is part of Khariji apostasy. To let the cat out the bag; it is not due to Iraq being Najd, here. From Ahadith of Najd and Iraq it becomes apparent there will be two [major] groups of Khawarij from Najd and both would originate from Najd: "… Messenger of Allah pointed towards Yemen with his hand and said: Verily Iman is towards this side, and harshness and callousness of the hearts is found amongst the rude owners of the camels (i.e. Rabia and Mudar) who drive them behind their tails (to the direction) where emerge the two horns of Satan, they are the tribes of Rabi'a and Mudar." [Ref: Muslim, B1, H83] Please note locations of tribes of Rabia and Mudhar were also depicted on the maps of previous section. Moving on; there were to appear many minor off-shoots of Khawarij in light of following Hadith: "There will emerge people (i.e. Khawarij) who will recite the Qur'an but it will not go any deeper than their collarbones. Whenever a group of them appears, they should be cut off (i.e. killed)." Ibn 'Umar said: "I heard the Messenger of Allah say: 'Whenever a group of them appears, they should be killed.' - More than twenty times - 'until Dajjal emerges among them.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H174] Alhasil the first group of Khawarij appeared in Iraq but the main source of man power and ideological leadership of Khawarij were from central Arabia and to be precise from province of Najd. The second major infestation of Khawarij was to appear from Najd. And when it appeared, in the beginning, almost entire man power of Khawarij was from Najd and from ranks of Bani Tamim. Please read the above linked article to properly and comprehensively understand how Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab at-Tamim the Najdi is part of earlier Khawarij yet created a unique blend of Kharijism (i.e. excessiveness characterised by Mushriking Muslims, accusing them of innovation) and Sunnism. Sooner or later articles establishing methodological and theological uniformity between Khawarij and Wahhabism will be published but following is only a starter, here. 8.0 - Abdullah Quoting Ahadith Of Flies And Mosquitoes: "Narrated Ibn Abi Nu'm: A person asked Abdullah bin Umar whether a Muslim could kill flies. I heard him saying (in reply): "The people of Iraq are asking about the killing of flies while they themselves murdered the son of the daughter of Allah's Messenger. The Prophet said: They are my two sweet basils in this world." [Ref: Al-Adab al-Mufrad, B5, H2] "Narrated Ibn Abi Na'm: I was present when a man asked Ibn Umar about the blood of mosquitoes. Ibn Umar said: "From where are you?" The man replied: "From Iraq." Ibn Umar said: "Look at that! He is asking me about the blood of Mosquitoes while they (the Iraqis ) have killed the (grand) son of the Prophet. I have heard the Prophet saying: "They (Hasan and Husain) are my two sweet-smelling flowers in this world." [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H23] "Ibn Fudail reported on the authority of his father that he heard Salim bin Abdullah bin Umar as saying: O people of Iraq! How strange it is that you ask about the minor sins but commit major sins? I heard from my father Abdullah bin Umar narrating that he heard Allah's Messenger as saying while pointing his hand towards the East: Verily, the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the group of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another." [Ref: Muslim B41, H694] “Ibn Fudail reported on the authority of his father that he heard Salim, bin Abdullah, bin Umar as saying: O people of Iraq! How strange it is that you ask about the minor sins but commit major sins? I heard from my father Abdullah bin Umar narrating that he heard Allah's Messenger as saying while pointing his hand towards the east: Verily. the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the group of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another; and Moses killed a person from among the people of Pharaoh unintentionally and Allah, the Exalted and Glorious said: "You killed a person but We relieved you from the grief and tried you with (many a) trial." (20:40). Ahmad bin Umar reported this hadith from Salim, but he did not make a mention of the words: "I heard". [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6943] 8.1 - Commenting On Hadith Of Killing Of Flies And Mosquitoes And Minor Sins: Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) mentions death of Hassan (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and quotes a prophetic statement indicating love of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and merits of these two companions. Therefore the setting of these quoted Ahadith is after poisoning of Imam Hassan (radiallah ta’ala anhu) which lead to his death and after the heart breaking events of Karbala had already transpired. And maybe the event of Karbala had recently transpired hence it was still fresh in mind of Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) which resulted the material we read in Hadith. It is also worth noting Khawarij became a departed from Jamah in Syria but were recognised as Khawarij in Iraq. And the event of Hadith took place long after appearance of Khawarij. Note Khawarijwere recognised as a distinct sect after arbitration of Siffin and during the life and Khilafat of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Finally brother Abdullah is attempting insinuating Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) applied the Hadith of East upon people of Iraq. This Hadith has already been explained in detail in the following article, here. 8.2 - Iraqis Concerned With Minor Sins And Group Of Satan: Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was asked about killing of flies/masquitoes (i.e. minor sin) and he said: “O people of Iraq! How strange it is that you ask about the minor sins but commit major sins?” Minor sins is killing of flies/mosquitoes and major sin is killing a believer. And in the context he is insinuating that people of Iraq you’re more concerned with minor sins yet you should be more worried about major sins in general and sin of mudering Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to be specific. 8.3 - Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) Put Into Trials Due To Unintentional Death: Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) says: “…and Moses killed a person from among the people of Pharaoh unintentionally and Allah, the Exalted and Glorious said: …” Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) unintentionally killed an Egyptian. He then went on to quote the verse related to it: “(And We favored you) when your sister went and said, 'Shall I direct you to someone who will be responsible for him?' So We restored you to your mother that she might be content and not grieve. And you killed someone, but We saved you from retaliation and tried you with a (severe) trial. And you remained (some) years among the people of Madyan. Then you came (here) at the decreed time, O Moses.” [Ref: 20:40] His intention is to insinuate; people of Iraq realise for killing of one person unintentionally Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) put Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) intro trial. You people of Iraq not only intentionally killed Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) but also members of his family [brutally and barbaricly]. And Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) killed a disbeliever and he was put into trial for many years of his life; you people of Iraq killed those who were beloved to Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and he quotes following prophetic words: "They (Hasan and Husain) are my two sweet-smelling flowers in this world.” Implying your trial and your suffering as result of killing of these Hassan (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) would be severe and harsh. 8.4 - Prophet Pointing Toward East Satan’s Group Will Emerge From It: Hadith narrates the following Prophetic words: “… he heard Allah's Messenger as saying while pointing his hand towards the east: Verily the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the group of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another and …” Note the referrence point of East is where Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was located and the people whom he was with when he uttered the above words and not where Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was. Even though the words of Hadith establish Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was not in Iraq but a Iraqi man had come to him [in Makkah]: “I was present when a man asked Ibn Umar about the blood of mosquitoes. Ibn Umar said: "From where are you?" The man replied: "From Iraq." Ibn Umar said: "Look at that! He is asking me about the blood of Mosquitoes while they (the Iraqis ) have killed the (grand) son of the Prophet.” [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H23] Ahadith establish he stood beside the pulpit [of Masjid Nabvi] and pointed direction of sunrise, toward East, and toward house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha): “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out," or said, "... the group [from direction] of sun (rise) ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] “Narrated 'Abdullah: The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointing to 'Aisha's house, he said thrice, "Affliction (will appear from) here," and, "from the side, where Satan's head will come out." [Ref: Bukhari, B53, H336] And we have already established that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward East, toward Najd, and Saudi capital of Riyadh. In this context if you interpret the following words Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) then it obviously mean Muslims/companions would fight each other after the group of Satan emerges from East: “Verily the turmoil would come from this side, from where appear the group of Satan and you would strike the necks of one another and …” And after the emergence of Khawarij, they murdered Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu), Muslims killing each other, Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) VS Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu), started. Another interpretation of same portion is that Muslims VS Khawarij will kill each other. And this will be explained in the last section. Alhasil in context of question about killing flies/mosquitoes Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is implying you should be more concerned about killing people and who you kill. 8.4 - Iraqis Were Not Group Of Satan But They In Fact Killed Khawarij: Kharijis subjected the Muslims of Iraq to barbaric murderous rampage and therefore Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) took the task of eliminating first spawns of Kharijism. In following Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explained the traits of companions of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi: “... Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a mention of a sect that would be among his Ummah which would emerge out of the dissension of the people. Their distinctive mark would be shaven heads. They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures. The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2324] “... be smeared by dung and blood. The sign by which these people will be recognized will be a man whose one hand (or breast) will be like the breast of a woman. These people will appear when there will be differences among the people (Muslims)." Abu Sa'id added: I testify that I heard this from the Prophet and also testify that 'Ali killed those people while I was with him. The man with the description given by the Prophet was brought to 'Ali. The following Verses were revealed in connection with that very person: 'And among them are men who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.” (Surah 9:58) [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] Note this Dhil Kuwaisirah at-Tamimi and his companions are very same Khawarij aka Satan’s group which emerged from Najd and fought against Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in Iraq. See following detailed article to this regard, here. Hadith establishes the group closer to truth was of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) but it was composed of Iraqis and the Iraqis had killed members of Satan’s group aka Khawarij: ”A man throws an arrow at the prey (or he said at the target), and sees at its iron head, but finds no sign (of blood there), or he sees at the lowest end, but would not see or find any sign (of blood there). He would then see into the grip but would not find (anything) sticking to it. Abu Sai'd then said: People of Iraq. it is you who have killed them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2324] 8.5 - Truth About Iraq And Falsehood Of Abdullah: Earlier it was established the Khawarij were over whelmingly from Bani Tamim. A tribe which was/is situated in Arabian Peninsula, East of Madinah, around modern Saudi capital Riyadh, which is precisely the historical Najd from which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold Satan’s group would emerge. They marched with Ali’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) army to Syria to fight Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and after arbitration became disillusioned with Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and parted his company. They then gathered in Iraq in village of Harura and due to their actrocities Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) confronted them in battle. The bulk of his army was composed of Iraqis because his capital was Baghdad. And it was the Iraqis who dealt the death blow to Khawarij [at Nahrawan]. All this establishes Iraqis were not Khawarij but the Iraqis were responsible for killing Khawarij. They in fact were from Najd and from Bani Tamim. Our brother Abdullah attempted to make Muslims believe Iraqis were Khawarij but the truth is Khawarij were outsiders who assembled in Iraq and were recognised as a new sect in Iraq. 9.0 - Hadith Of Dajjal In Iraq, Syria And In East: “We said: Yes. Thereupon he said: If it is so that is better for them that they should show obedience to him. I am going to tell you about myself and I am Dajjal and would be soon permitted to get out and so I shall get out and travel in the land, and will not spare any town where I would not stay for forty nights except Mecca and Medina as these two (places) are prohibited (areas) for me and … Behold he (Dajjal) is in the Syrian sea (Mediterranean) or the Yemen sea (Arabian sea). Nay, on the contrary, he is in the East, he is in the East, he is in the East, and he pointed with his hand towards the east.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H7028] Comments:- Just take a glance at World Map,Saudi Arabia comes no where between Syria and Iraq and now read the below Hadith.“Thereupon he said: I harbor fear in regard to you in so many other things besides the Dajjal. If he comes forth while I am among you, I shall contend with him on your behalf, but if he comes forth while I am not amongst you, a man must contend on his own behalf and Allah would take care of every Muslim on my behalf. He would be a young man with twisted, contracted hair, and a blind eye. I compare him to `Abd-ul-`Uzza b. Qatan. He who amongst you would survive to see him should recite over him the opening verses of Sura Kahf (xviii). He would appear on the way between Syria and Iraq and would spread mischief right and left. O servant of Allah! adhere (to the path of Truth). We said: Allah's Messenger, how long would he stay on the earth? He said: For forty days, one day like a year and one day like a month and one day like a week and the rest of the days would be like your days.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H7015] “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out," or said, "... the group [from direction] of sun (rise) ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: I heard Allah's Apostle while he was facing the East, saying, "Verily! Afflictions are there, from where the side of the head of Satan comes out." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H213] “Thawban said: If you see the black flags coming from Khurasan then go there even if you have to crawl because there is the Khalifah of Allah, the Mahdi." [Ref: Mustadrak al-Hakim, Book Of Tribulations H8578, here] Comments:- It is crystal clear from above Ahadith that ''East'' refers to ''IRAQ''.If still Barelwi disagree 'East as Iraq',then they must go to Saudi Arabia(Hijaz) to Give Bayat to Imam Mehdi in Saudi Arabia not in Khurasan.” 9.1 - Something Related And Unrelated To Above Content: I have only quoted in above Ahadith numbered by brother Abdullah as; seven, eight, nine, and ten. Following are being omitted because they add nothing new to his point: Ahadith number eleven, fourteen, sixteen, seventeen are about tribulation of East. And Ahadith number twelve, thirteen, fifteen are about Khawarij but do not explicitly referr to East. Despite this there is no objection on my part if they are applied upon tribulation of East because they do referr to Khawarij. Brother Abdullah distorting this Hadith kind of hurt because he made me realize how desperate and degraded human can become when there is no way out. And it was first time when I raised my hands in Dua for his guidance. May Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) open our eyes, and hearts, and minds to truth of Islam and guide us to straight path of Islam. Coming to his comment; I cannot comprehend why Saudi Arabia should be between Syria and Iraq. Or how it would help his cause. I assume he misread the Hadith. It says Dajjal will appear between Syria and Iraq. And Dajjal appearing between Syria and Iraq is possible ofcourse because borders of both countries are connected. After bit of head banging I think I figured what the relationship of comment to content is. According to Ahadith Dajjal will approach and appear in Arabia from a way which is between Syria and Iraq. And in this context he is saying that information of his second Hadith doesn’t fit into it. It is very likely brother Abdullah isn’t aware that modern Syria is only about sixty percent of what it originally was. Al-Sham comprimised of Lebanon, Israel, Jordon, and parts of present day Syria. If you put all these into context then Dajjal coming to Arabia from between Syria and Iraq would become apparent. 9.2 - Commenting On Hadith Of Dajjal In Iraq And East: Brother Abdullah is insinuating Iraq is East of Madinah because Dajjal is to come from Iraq and Prophet also said Dajjal will emerge from East. Putting one and one togather with healthy dose of logic he arrived at the sum of Iraq is East [therefore by Najd intended region was Iraq and due to this Ahadith of Najd referr to Iraq]. At the end of Hadith eighteen Abdullah stated: “It is crystal clear from above Ahadith that ''East'' refers to ''Iraq''. If still Barelwi disagree 'East as Iraq',then they must go to Saudi Arabia(Hijaz) to Give Bayat to Imam Mehdi in Saudi Arabia not in Khurasan.” Glad that he wasn’t insinuating but he stated what he believed. Even though Hadith clearly establishes East is direction of sunrise. And if you recall a resident of Madinah will never and can never see sunrise from Iraq. Revisit following link to refresh your memory why that would be so; here. 9.3 - Dajjal In East And Its True Meaning Explained By Prophet: It is stated in above quoted Ahadith and underlined; Dajjal will enter/visit every [major] city of world in forty days. This points to Dajjal going to all over the world; East, West, North, and South from place of his origin but the place of Dajjals origin is East: “Nay, on the contrary, he is in the East, he is in the East, he is in the East, and he pointed with his hand towards the east.” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explained what he meant by East in following Ahadith: “It was narrated that Abu Bakr Siddiq said: "The Messenger of Allah told us: 'Dajjal will emerge in a land in the East called Khorasan, and will be followed by people with faces like hammered shields.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4072] “Abu Bakr As-Siddiq said: "The Messenger of Allah narrated to us, saying: 'The Dajjal shall emerge from a land in the East called Khurasan. He is followed by a people whom appear as if their f aces are shields coated with leather.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2237] 9.4 - Imam Mahdi Coming From East And Khorasan: For some weird reason brother Abdullah the DIY Shaykh decided to quote following Hadith: “Thawban said: If you see the black flags coming from Khurasan then go there even if you have to crawl because there is the Khalifah of Allah, the Mahdi." [Ref: Mustadrak al-Hakim, Book Of Tribulations H8578, here] I haven’t been able to figure out how this would have helped his cause of Najd being Iraq and Iraq being East but whatever. My objective in quoting the following Ahadith would be to only establish Khurasan is East and it is only for purpose of attesting to what was already quoted: “It was narrated from 'Abdullah bin Harith bin Jaz' Az-Zabidi that the Messenger of Allah said: "People will come from the East, paving the way for Mahdi." Meaning (paving the way) for his rule.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4088] “It was narrated from Thawban that the Messenger of Allah said: "Three will fight one another for your treasure, each one of them the son of a caliph, but none of them will gain it. Then the black banners will come from the East, and they will kill you in an unprecedented manner." Then he mentioned something that I do not remember, then he said: "When you see them, then pledge your allegiance to them even if you have to crawl over the snow, for that is the caliph of Allah, Mahdi." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4084] And Khorasan is in East of Madinah:“Thawban said: If you see the black flags coming from Khurasan then go there even if you have to crawl because there is the Khalifah of Allah, the Mahdi." [Ref: Mustadrak al-Hakim, Book Of Tribulations H8578, here] Maps in the following sections depict location of land of Khorasan and where Khorasan is in relationship to Arabia. 9.4 - Ancient Land Of Khorasan Is In East Of Madinah: 9.5 - Dajjal In East Of Madinah In Land Of Khorasan Established: All the above establishes what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) meant when he said Dajjal will emerge from East. And he then himself explained; he meant Dajjal will emerge from East a land called Khurasan. And maps perfectly establish that indeed Khorasan is in almost exactly East of Madinah. And this evidence is enough to puncture the logical conclusion of our DIY Shaykh Abdullah. It is also important to point out for fourth time; brother Abdullah’s understanding is that Iraq is East is established via logic and not from factual interpretation of Hadith with Hadith. Propositions: i) Dajjal is to emerge from East. ii) Dajjal is to emerge from Iraq. Conclusion: Therefore Iraq is in East and will emerge from Iraq. This has nothing to do with interpreting Hadith with Hadith. Its pure logic of type that you would meet in online IQ tests. Two statements of esident of Saudi Arabia: i) There will be fight in East. ii) There will be fight in England. Conclusion: There will be in England because it is in East. This way of interpreting data completely ignores geographical locations of cities, provinces, countries and cardinal directions but purely based on bad understanding of logic. Interpretation of Hadith with Hadith refutes brother Abdullah’s position. Even though he assumes he is interpreting Hadith with Ahadith in reality he is only distorting the Ahadith with his faulty logic driven interpretations. Finally following article briefly explains Hadith of Dajjal coming from East and Iraq, here. And following one comprehsively explains why Dajjal will come to Iraq/Syria and you are strongly advised to read it, here. 9.6 - Final Word On Strategy Of DIY Shaykh Abdullah: DIY Shaykh Abdullah’s strategy is to take focus of Ahadith of Najd away from Saudi/historical province of Najd and put the all negativity toward Iraq is purely for basis of protecting Wahhabism and Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab. And to achieve this hook and crook is all good. This is not scholarship nor display of sincerity in studying religion. Rather this type of DIY scholarship tightly shuts the door on face of ray of guidance that had made it way to door seeker. Brother Abdullah quoted Ahadith numbered nineteen and twenty and they have already been addressed in section 7.0 to 7.4. And it is advised you referr to that section. Remaining Article Of Brother Abdullah And Its Reality: The material directly relating to making Najd into Iraq was upto mentioned Ahadith. The remaining article of brother Abdullah is basicly implying all the evil things happened in Iraq therefore Ahadith of Najd referr to Iraq. And that Banu Tamim are portrayed in positive light in some Ahadith and man of Najd was told of entry to paradise therefore Banu Tamim are not [all] Khawarij and bad. And people of Iraq are most/all are bad and most/all tribulation and Khawarij emerged from there therefore Ahadith of Najd are about Iraq. We have already demonstrated where Iraq is, and where Najd is, and how Bani Tamim of Najd were part of Iraqi Khawarij. Najd and Iraq cannot legitimately be blendered into one and same however eagerly DIY Shaykh wants it to be. The perpherial issues of brother Abdullah, if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills will be addressed in second article: Response To Abdullah The Khariji Of A’du-Allah- Evil And Virtues Of Iraqis-Najdis, And What It Is Established From Them. Conclusion: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward East, he mentioned direction of sunrise, and he pointed toward the house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) to pin point direction from which Satan’s group was to emerge. In addition to all he also mentioned name of region in direction of East, toward the direction house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) as Najd. Ahadith also indicate; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward Iraq and foretold emergence of Satan’s group from Iraq. Considering the name and location of Iraq and Najd it is evident both reffer to two different regions. Iraq Hadith referrs to first group of Satan and Najd Hadith referrs to second manifestation of Satan’s group from Najd. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi. FootNotes: - [1] Note all Barelwis, who adhere to teaching of Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (alayhi rahma) are Sufis and from Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah, in principle mehodology and core teachings, but not all Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah is Barelwi. Barelwism fundamentally is those to adhere to teaching of prophetic Sunnah and of Jammah under the guidance of Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat Imam Ahmad Raza Khan al-Qadri (alayhi rahma). And those who supported Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (alayhi rahma) against the Deobandis and Ahle Hadith [a non-conformist Wahhabi sect] heresies of these sects which originated in subcontinent. The sole distinguishing feature between Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah and Barelwism; is Takfir of Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (alayhi rahma) of Deobandi scholars; who insulted and disrespected Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), also believe in possibility (i.e. imkan) of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) lieing, stated finality of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would not be effected of another Prophet is born. To name them; Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi, Shaykh Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri, Shaykh Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi, and Shaykh Muhammad Qasim Nanotavi. Even though Fatawah Hussam al-Haramayn was attestted by scholars of Arab world during the life time of Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (alayhi rahma) it did not become a international controversy. The result of Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat’s (alayhi rahma) fatwah greatly impacted subcontinent and the antangonism between Barelwis and Deobandis remained and was transmitted to future generations. As a result Barelwis of subcontinent have certain positions regarding Deobandis [based on core principles of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah] which non-subcontinent members of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah may not hold. And this maybe due to either being misinformed by Deobandis or having absolutely no knowledge of their beliefs. But there is no doubt they would support Barelwi positions when they are informed about Deobandi beliefs like they supported Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (alayhi rahma) in his life time. - [2] The Wahhabism originated in middle of 17th century lead by Najdi Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab. He split from the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah and created band of bandits blundering Muslim cities and kill Muslims mercilessly because Shaykh of Najd had declared that over whelming majority of Muslims of Arabia are polytheists except his own followers. Note prior to this Wahhabism and its teaching didn’t exist. Their method of determining major Shirk was never heard before them nor did the belief; vast majority of Muslim Ummah is upon major Shirk and has fallen into innovation. Authentic Ahadith contradict both these teachings. - [3] (i) This means; Western part of Arabia, the region of Hijaz, its inhabitants will remain upon truth of Islam uptil the day of judgment. (ii) Wahhabism emerged in central Arabia, region surrounding Saudi capital Riyadh, and their leader accused the people of Makkah and Madinah and their scholars of being polytheists, and claim none other then him knows meaning of; There is none worthy of worship except Allah: “And I inform you about myself – I swear by Allah whom there is none worthy to worship except Him – I have sought knowledge and those who knew me believed that I had knowledge while I did not know the meaning of La Ilaha Illa Allah at that time and did not know the religion of Islam before this grace that Allah favored. As well as my Shaikhs (teachers) no one among them knew that. And if someone from the scholars of al-Arid (the lands of Najd and surrounding areas) claims that he knew the meaning of La Ilaha Illa Allah or knew the meaning of Islam before this time, or claims on behalf of his teachers that someone from them knew that, then he has lied and said falsehood and deceived people and praised himself with something he does not possess.“ [Ref: al-Darur al-Saniyyah, here] And he explicitly stated this and meaning of this is that he alone knew Tawheed and implication of which is everyone but him was disbeliever because Tawheed is fundamental requirement to be a Muslim absence of which means Kufr. iii) Compare what the Hadith states and what Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab, the Iblees of Najd has stated, and think for yourself and ask: Were the people of Hijaz upon truth of Islam, or was Shaykh of Najd upon truth of Islam?

Please delete this article. I have posted updated version and with new title.

Introduction: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Hadhir Nazir. The opponents of Islam assume that Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Hadhir as well as Nazir on every spec of Earth. And this misconception has lead the opponents to present few rational arguments as refutation of Hadhri Nazir without even realising their argument does not apply to Islamic belief. So objective of this article is to explain what Hadhir Nazir mean and how Hadhir Nazir is to be understood. Meaning Of Hadhir Nazir And Its Application: Hadhir Nazir is employed instead of Shahid (i.e. witness). Hadhir is linguistically means present and means presence with a body, in line with creation’s characteristic – i.e. material and dimensions. Hadhir when it referrs to Jism (i.e. body) of RasoolAllah (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then it is in literal/linguistical meanings – present with clay body. When it referrs to Ruh (i.e. soul) of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then it referrs to presence of Ruh with material which Ruh is made (i.e. Noor). Nazir means seeing and it referrs to seeing of eyes. When Nazir is used for bodily eyes of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then it is referring to sight dependent upon sunlight. When it is used for Rooh of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then it is not it is not literal/lingustical but spiritual sight and this sight is dependent upon Noor from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and not sunlight. Also bare in mind Shahid is inclusive of hearing and even though hearing is not indicated linguisitcally in words Hadhir Nazir hearing should be implied by default. In context of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) supernatural and natural hearing of Jism (i.e. body) and Rooh (i.e. soul). Manner In Which One Can Be Shahid/Shaheed (Hadhir Nazir) : A person is Hadhir as far as his hands can reach and on the spot he is standing, or sitting, or resting on but he is Nazir at ranges beyond his physical reach. Therefore it would be accurate to say person is Hadhir in a place but Nazir as far his vision reaches or he can hear. Consider radar as an example it is present in a place – suppose Manchester Airport - yet it can track planes which are hundreds of miles from its physical location – suppose – France, Germany, and Spain. Even though the radar may not be at the place where the plane is currently flying but its capability of tracking the plane miles away would make it a ‘witness’. Witness in the sense; the information acquired from it will be trusted and will be used to make judgments for air traffic. Just as a actual witnesses testimony would be relied upon to make a judgment in court. Point is that a witness does not need to, and is not Hadhir, in every place with body. Rather being in close proximity to the event, or being in a position from where one can see/hear the events unfold is sufficient to be witness. And within limited capacity all living and hearing/seeing creatures are Hadhir Nazir (i.e. witness). In context of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) it means Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi wa’sallam) is Hadhir where his body/soul is Hadhir and Nazir/Sami as far as he can see and hear. In context of belief of Hadhir Nazir this translates to; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessing (i.e. seeing, and hearing) of good/bad deeds of all nations before his birth and witnessing of good/bad deeds of Muslim Ummah and Jinn/Mankind. For details please see following article; here. Conclusion: Linguistic meaning of Hadhir Nazir is present and observing. It is derivative of Shahid/Shaheed (i.e. witness) hence it would be inclusive of hearing. Hadhir Nazir have different meanings depending upon what it referrs to. It is not essential for a Hadhir Nazir (i.e. witness) to be Hadhir at every where with body. Rather presence at a location and observing the event unfold would be suffient to fullfill the criteria of a witness. Implication of which is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not need to be present physically/spiritually all over the earth rather he can witness the deeds being at a location. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Typically it is assumed that Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to be Hadhir Nazir with jismani (i.e. bodily) sense. But reality is Ahlus Sunnah believe him to be Hadhir Nazir in number of ways. And this article will shed some light on the details. Hadhir Nazir And Its Categories: Hadhir Nazir is another way of saying witness. Every kamil (i.e. perfect) witness in essences and attributes is Hadhir (i.e. present), Nazir (i.e. observing) and hearing. There are four ways in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is believed to be Hadhir Nazir: i) Nooraniyyah, ii) Roohaniyyah, iii) and Jismaniyyah. Nooraniyyah and Roohaniyyah involve continously witnessing deeds before and after birth. Jismaniyyah is connected with witnessing of the deeds by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) around him and supernaturally witnessing deeds of all of his Ummat to come till the day of judgment. Hadhir Nazir Nooraniyyah: Nooraniyyah, for lack of better word, means LIGHT. Please note, every Noor is visible light. Angels are Noor but not visible light and they are a form of light which cannot be detected and will never be detected with instruments. Nooraniyyah is referring to Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah – the reality of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) – which according to scholars of Ahlus Sunnah and Hadith is; Noor of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was the first creation created by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It was divided into four parts one was kept and other three were used to create the remaining creation. And in this sense the living and the dead matter [dead from our perception of life but in reality it is also alive and worships Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala] are all connected with their source [the Noor from where they were seperated]. Ulamah explain just as a limb is connected with body and body/soul knows what the limb does in the similar sense Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is connected with the creation and he was/is aware of actions of Jinn and mankind. As well as all the happenings in the universe. Hadhir Nazir Jismaniyyah: Jismaniyyah referrs to body (i.e. jism) of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and is related to his earthly life. There are two types of witnessing: i) Natural, ii) and supernatural. Natural witnessing is seeing with eyes hearing with ears of events which take place around the person. Supernatural, as evidenced by Ahadith, is seeing all the good/bad actions of his entire Muslim Ummah during in his life time. Hadhir Nazir Roohaniyyah: Roohaniyyah is related to Ruh (i.e. soul) of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). It has two components: i) Before birth, ii) and after death. First -: Soul of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) existed after its creation and it observed the good/bad actions of all nations before birth of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) while adressing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) about past events questions: Have you not seen? Did you not see? Ulamah have explained this is because soul of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has seen good/bad actions of nations before his birth. And Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) refferences so Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) can recall events so he can closely relate the verses to events which the verses referr to. Second -: It involves observing the deeds iia) of believing Ummah iib) and Ummah to which he was sent to guide – i.e. mankind. In the case of (iia) Rooh of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) without middle observes good/bad deeds and as evidenced by Ahadith angels also present to him good/bad deeds of his Ummah after his departure from earth. With regards to (iib) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) directly observes their good/bad deeds [just like the first group] because he has been sent to mankind as a witness (i.e. Shahid/Shaheed) which nessceiates witnessing of good/bad actions to be a truthful witness. Conclusion: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is believed to be witness (i.e. Hadhir Nazir) over the actions of Jinn and mankind in three ways. Nooraniyyah is connected with being personally aware of deeds of mankind as one is aware of one’s limbs. Roohaniyyah is connected with witnessing of soul of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) of events before and after his birth and death. And Jismaniyyah is related to earthly life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) where he ordinarily and supernaturally witnessed the good/bad deeds of his Ummah. Note the evidences for each is different and if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills all three categories will be explained in light of relating evidences. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Aqeedah of Hadhir Nazir is a disputed subject amongst the various factions of Muslims. A group of Muslims believe it is fully in accordance with teaching of Quran and Sunnah. The disbeleiving faction holds to position that it is against teaching of Quran/Sunnah and to believe in Hadhir Nazir is Kufr and major Shirk. And their this judgment is extremism and it only invalidates their own Islam. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills the legal rulings regarding disbeliever of Hadhir Nazir from Islamic perspective will be presented along side its status in Islamic theology. Being Sent As A Witness And It’s Implications and It’s Ruling: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated that Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as Shahid (i.e. witness) in following verses: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] Fundamentally this verse means Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sent as a hearing and seeing type of witness during his earthly life. And following verse without interpretative modifiers (i.e. other verses of Quran and Ahadith) fundamentally means Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sent to people of his time as a hearing/seeing witness: "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] In his earthly life’s context negating his hearing and seeing of his immediate surroundings would be Kufr. With interpretative modifiers these verses expand the hearing and seeing to Muslim Ummah and mankind. Fundamental requirement to be Muslim when these verses are quoted is to affirm hearing/seeing in limited sense. Status According To Islamic Scholarship: First and foremost it is important to point out that Hadhir Nazir related to Fadhail (i.e. merits) of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and it is established by Zanni evidences. It is principle of Muhaditheen to employ Daif (i.e. weak) Ahadith for Fadhail along side fair and authentic Ahadith. And this is not to say that Hadhir Nazir is established from Daif Ahadith. Rather to point out that in principle even Daif Ahadith can be used. As such it is not part of fundamental creed and it is not from essentials of Islam. The Ruling For One Who Disbelieves: Therefore rejection of Hadhir Nazir will not expel a disbeliever from Islam. But it is established soundly and it is deemed valid teaching/belief by Jamhoor (i.e. majority) of Ummah regarding which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Abu Dhār (Allah be pleased with him) reported from the Prophet (Peace be upon him) that, “Two are better than one, and three better than two; so stick to the Jama'ah for verily Allah, Most Great and Glorious, will only unite my Ummah on guidance." [Ref: M.I.Ahmad, Al-Ansar, Abu Zar Al Ghaffari, H20776] “Anas bin Malik said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah say: ‘My Ummah will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] These two Ahadith instruct the Muslims to follow the majority. Therefore by virtue of majority holding to this belief of Hadhir Nazir it is further strenthened. And this majority is of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah (i.e. people of Prophetic Sunnah and of group). And rejection of it therefore will lead to misguidance and expulsion Jammah into heresy. Conclusion: Belief that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is hearing and seeing witness and had witnessed events (i.e. deeds) that had taken place before his birth. And continues to oberserve the deeds of Muslims and mankind is established from Zanni and Tafsiri evidences as such rejection of it is not Kufr and does not invalidate Islam of an individual who dispbelieves in it. But Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent as a witness means he was hearing and seeing the events taking place around him. Rejection of this results in natural meaning of being sent as Shahid and therefore it is Kufr and it would invalidate beliefe in Islam. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi.

Introduction: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated in Quran; Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a Shahid/Shaheed (i.e. witness). One sent as a witness is sent to witness with eyes/ears. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent to mankind hence natural conclusion is that he witnesses deeds of entire mankind. Deobandis/Salafis believe he indeed is sent as a witness to mankind but does not see/hear the actions of mankind. In other words they believe he is witness but ascribe no quality to him which establish that he is witness. Its like believing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Rabb (i.e. Lord) without qualities of Rububiyah. Or believing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Khaliq (i.e. Creator) without believing He creates. Affirmation of word but without believing the natural meaning. Muslims believe in the word and its implications. And as result we believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fullfils the criteria which he needs to be a witness. To put it simply he sees and hears the actions of those whom he was sent as a witness – i.e. mankind. Heretical Reasoning For Their Belief: I had stated in a discussion: “Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) is Shahid (i.e. witness) and a witness must posess two qualties; Hadhir (i.e. present phisically) as well as Nadhir (hearing, seeing). And without these qualities one can not be a truthful witness. Our belief is that Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) is Hadhir in his heavenly resting place in Madinah ash'shareef but soul is able to move as soul of Musa (alayhis salam) was able to move from place to place while keeping touch with the body of Musa (alayhis salam) and Nadhir upon his Ummah. Ability of Hadhir Nadhir is a mojzaati qudrat which …” With regards to underlined a Deobandi brother with the name of Mustafvi wrote the following while discussing with me on topic of Hadhir Nazir: “It is true that your above mentioned two qualities have some weight but these two are not compulsory in all the cases. One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” [Ref: Mustafvi, Private Discussion, Publicised, Post 1.] Mustafvi brother in context of my evidences is attempting to argue that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not need to directly witness events as they happen rather he can/will bear witness upon being informed by truthful/reliable witnesses of his Ummah. This establishes hearing/seeing is not essential to be a witness rather receiving news of event is enough to bear witness. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills this position would be criticised within Shar’ri boundaries. Note arleady this quote was addressed in another response, here, and this response will focus another aspect. The Baseless Deobandi/Salafi Position: Neither Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and nor the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated in Quran or Sunnah that a witness is one who has been informed by another nor said witness can bear witness upon being informed by another. This principle of heretics is based on elevating their self to status of gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “Have you seen the one who takes as his god his own desire?[1] Then would you be responsible for him?” [Ref: 25:43] And are worshiping their own whims and desires instead of submitting to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Making religion of Islam how they want it to be instead of making themselves into image of Islam. There is no evidence whatsoever which establishes or suggests - in Dunya or Aakhira - that if Zayd saw x y z happening and Zayd truthfully informs Amr of x y z then Amr would also become a witness of the event. Nor there is evidence which establishes or suggests - in Dunya or Aakhira - that Amr would be deemed as first hand witness due to receiving news from Zayd. Belief that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will qualify to be a witness upon being told by his Ummatis can only be valid if the mentioned rule can be established from Quran and Sunnah. Witnessing Of No-Witness And Its Worth: Take the following scenario into account: Zayd has been accused of murder. Amr and Bakr hear the news from Khalid that Zayd has murdered Akhtar. Amr and Bakr are truthful and upstanding members of community. Amr and Bakr testify in court Zayd has killed Akhtar. Note the two witnesses criteria has been met by witnessing of Amr and Bakr. In court of Shari’a will Zayd receive capital punishment or any punishment due to witnessing of Amr and Bakr? Well in light of following the head of Zayd would role like a football: “One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” A intelligent person even with basic understanding of Islamic judicial system will know; Zayd will not be charged or punished because of Amr and Bakr’s testimony unless Khalid bear witness and then takes an oath [to fulfill the criteria of two witnesses] that he saw Zayd committ the murder. Amr and Bakr’s testimony is nill and void in murder case. Same scenario but different dispute, with addition of Uthman: Khalid and Uthman both saw the murder taking place. Khalid wasn’t aware that Uthman witnessed the murder and saw Khalid at the crime scene. Khalid denies being at the crime scene in court. Uthman claims Khalid also witnessed the murder. In this case Amr and Bakr can truthfully testify that Khalid informed them of the murder. In other words Amr and Bakr would be coroborating the account of Uthman. Once truth of matter is established that Khalid was afraid of bearing witness but he was witness. Supportive evidence of Amr/Bakr will establish Khalid was also witness to murder then Zayd will receive punishment. But Amr’s and Bakr’s witnessing to murder on account of being informed by Khalid is nill and void. Their testimony will only become cause for Khalid to be summoned by court to give testimony but it will not serve basis for judgment of murder case. Apart from following Deobandi/Salafi rule being completely and absolutely against the established procedures of Islamic legal system: “One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” This rule opens door injustice: Truthful/Trustworthy members of community end up believing in town gossip [and without verifying it] report the incident to police and when incident is presented to Qadhi they testify Akhtar stole x y z. The result would be Akhtar getting his hand chopped off. Firstly in this judgment Islamic requirements of eye-witnesses werent met. Secondly being truthful/trustworthy is not sole requirement for witnessing rather the fundamental requirement is witnessing the events with eyes/ears. Islamic judicial systems first requirement is witnessing and then truthfulness trustworthiness would be considered. Thirdly the victim of crime has to exist and his complain has to be genuine. Mere testimony of truthfull and trustworthy bearded Arabic speaking Tasbih rolling Muslims is not enough against another believer/disbeliever. Prophets Will Testify Against Their Own Nations: Truthful Prophets will testify in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that they delivered the message given to them but Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will ask them to produce witness. It is recorded in Hadith that Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam) will testify in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that he delivered the message given to him by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to his nation. And his Ummah will negate this and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will ask Nuh (alayhis salam) to bring forth witness in his own defence: “Allah's Messenger said, "Noah will be brought (before Allah) on the Day of Resurrection, and will be asked: 'Did you convey the message of Allah?" He will reply: 'Yes, O Lord.' And then Noah's nation will be asked: 'Did he convey Allah's message to you?' They will reply: 'No warner came to us.' Then Noah will be asked: 'Who are your witnesses?' He will reply: 'Muhammad and his followers.' Thereupon you …” [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H448] The above Hadith only gives example of Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam) and his Ummah. In actuality Ummah f every Prophet will be questioned and every single one of them would deny reicieving the message from their Prophet and we the Muslims and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will testify they delivered the message:“So how (will it be) when We bring from every nation a witness and we bring you (O Muhammad) against these (people) as a witness?” [Ref: 4:41]“And thus we have made you a just community that you will be witnesses over the people and the Messenger will be a witness over you. And We did not make the qiblah which you used to face except that We might make evident who would follow the Messenger from who would turn back on his heels. And indeed, it is difficult except for those whom Allah has guided. And never would Allah have caused you to lose your faith. Indeed Allah is, to the people, Kind and Merciful.” [Ref: 2:143] Please note these truthful and trustworthy Prophets of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are testifying in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that they have delivered the message given to them by Him. If following rule was true then wouldn’t Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) accept the testimony of His trustworthy and truthful servants:“One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) asking His truthful and trustworthy servants the Prophets to produce a witness in support of their claim is suffient evidence to refute the invented innovated principle. There are roughly hundered twenty-four thousand Prophets/Messengers and this amounts to roughly same numbers of reasons why this principle is wrong. Conclusion: Brother Mustafvi’s statement is completely without basis. There are no textual evidences which support bearing witness without seeing/hearing the event. Islamic legal system will not use the testimony of two truthful witnesses who haven’t seen the events to which they bear witness even if they claim they have been informed by two more first hand witnesses. And the greatest evidence against brother Mustafvi’s understanding is witnessing of Prophets against their own nations and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) demanding witness from them. If truthful/trustworthy person bearing witness was legitimate concept then who would be more truthful/trustworthy then the Prophets? But despite their truthful/trustworthiness Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will not accept their testimony and will demand witnesses to coroborate his testimony. Alhasil this concept of brother Mustafvi is invalid and against established teaching of Islam. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] “Then Allah tells His Prophet that if Allah decrees that someone will be misguided and wretched, then no one can guide him except Allah, glory be to Him: “Have you seen him who has taken as his god his own vain desire?” Meaning whatever he admires and sees as good in his own desires becomes his religion and his way.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 25:43]

Introduction: Deobandi brother with the name of Mustafvi made a statement in order to argue against Islamic belief of Hadhir Nazir. This article will focus on the statement and try to understand on which basis brother Mustafvi made the statement and how his statements could be interpreted in light of creed of Hadhir Nazir. Please note he might not have intended the details derived and beliefs attributed to him from his statement [in 1.0 and refuted in 1.1 to 1.2] because it is very unlikely he would be familiar with the topic of Hadhir Nazir comprehensively as a educated believer would be. But despite possibility of lack of knowledge his statement is being interpreted as if he was fully aware of all in’s and out’s this belief and implications of his statement. Objective is to comprehensively explore all possible angles of topic of Hadhir Nazir and his statements happens to be a mean to one such detail. The only material directly related to his statement and to him is from 0.1 to 0.2. 0.0 - My And Brother Mustafvi’s Statements: In my discussion with brother Mustafvi on topic of Hadhir Nazir I had written the following: “Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) is Shahid (i.e. witness) and a witness must posess two qualties; Hadhir (i.e. present phisically) as well as Nadhir (hearing, seeing). And without these qualities one can not be a truthful witness. Our belief is that Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) is Hadhir in his heavenly resting place in Madinah ash'shareef but soul is able to move as soul of Musa (alayhis salam) was able to move from place to place while keeping touch with the body of Musa (alayhis salam) and Nadhir upon his Ummah. Ability of Hadhir Nadhir is a mojzaati qudrat which …” He responded with the following: “It is true that your above mentioned two qualities have some weight but these two are not compulsory in all the cases. One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” [Ref: Mustafvi, Private Discussion, Publicised, Post 1.] 0.1 - Chain Of Transmission And Its Major Components: To be a truthful and trustworthy person witnessing of event is essential. If Bakr is truthful and trustworthy and he witnesses x y z and informs Amr x y z has happened. Then for his truthfulness and trustworthiness to be established it is important that event has taken place and that Bakr witnessed it for himself. Even though the chain of transmission of Khabr (i.e. news/report) may not from eye-witness to eye-witness but it is reiable because Bakr has witnessed it and on account of his eye-witnessing it has passed from eye-witness to truthful to truthful. This is how chain of transmission in Hadith works. A authentic Hadith via many narrators it goes back to a companion who heard and saw Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) acted in such a fashion or utter the words of Hadith. Alhasil -: A truthfull and trustworthy individual witnesses a event and then transmits this information to a truthfull person. Then this report is transmitted continously from truthful to truthful. And this report will be trustworthy and truthfull, and is to be believed.’[1] Note this is the foundation on which brother Mustafvi made his statement. 0.2 - Error In Brother Mustafvi’s Statement: Brother Mustafvi’s statement is based on valid principle from principles of Hadith but his statement is incorrect because he inserted into it his error. Firstly the very basic error is that he does not mention witnessing by an eye-witness. One who originates the Khabr must be eye witness to the event he reports otherwise he is lieing or at least spreading rumours as actual events. Secondly one who hears a Khabr does not become witness to the event nor he qualifies to testify as an eye-witness, or as a non-eye-witness. Note which he claims having truthful Khabr qualifies the knower of news as a witness and can bear witness: “One can be a witness without being present physically and can give witness on the basis of his knowledge provided to him by some truthful and trustworthy.” There are thousands of Sahih (i.e. authentic) Ahadith and there are Mutawatir [is grade above, authentic] Ahadith but none claims to be witness on basis of them. Nor can claim to qualify as an eye-witness of event narrated in Hadith. Being informed by another and testifying on account of it is testimony of one’s own faith.[2] And its worth in court of law is no greater then it. 1.0 - Two Contexts His Statement Can Be Interpreted: There are two ways brother Mustafvi’s statement can be interpreted: i) From Prophet Adam (alayhis salam) to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). ii) And from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to the present. Note brother Mustafvi’s statement was written in effort to refute Islamic belief of Hadhir Nazir. Therefore in the 1st case it implies, brother Mustafvi believes, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was informed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) what the nations did before he was sent as last/final Nabi and he will bear witness on account of this learnt knowledge . And in the 2nd case it means, brother Mustafvi believes, we the Ummah will educate Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) about what nations did after him and he will testify on account of what we tell him. In both cases Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) direct witnessing of the events has been removed and replaced with being informed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and by his own Ummah. In other words Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) directly witnessing events is being negated. 1.1 - The Error Of Brother Mustafvi’s Understanding: There is no evidence to suggest that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be bearing witness on account of being informed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Or in other words will be giving testimony of his faith in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This is Qiyas (i.e. analogy) based on Hadith which states Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will testify in defence of Prophets upon being informed by last/final Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “… It will be said to him: ‘Did you convey the message to your people?’ And he will say: ‘Yes.’ Then his people will be called and it will be said: ‘Did he convey the message to you?’ They will say: ‘No.’ Then it will be said: ‘Who will bear witness for you?’ He will say: ‘Muhammad and his nation.’ So the nation of Muhammad will be called and it will be said: ‘Did this man convey the message?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’ He will say: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message, and we believed him.’ This is what Allah says: ‘Thus We have made you, a just (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4284] Qiyas was/is not foundation of Islamic creed. Nor there is proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will testify on account of being informed by his own Ummah regarding events transpired after him. Again this is also based on Qiyas and both of these are against clear emphatic teachings of Quran. 1.2 - Islamic Verdict On 1st Scenario: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “So how (will it be) when We bring from every nation a witness and we bring you (O Muhammad) against these (people) as a witness?” [Ref: 4:41]“And thus we have made you a just community that you will be witnesses over the people and the Messenger will be a witness over you. And We did ...” [Ref: 2:143] “Allah named you Muslims previous (scriptures) and in this (revelation) that the Messenger may be a witness over you and you may be witnesses over the people.” [Ref: 22:73] The Ummah will bear witness in defence of Prophets. Note following Hadith explains what type of testimony they will give: “He will say: ‘Muhammad and his nation.’ So the nation of Muhammad will be called and it will be said: ‘Did this man convey the message?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’” Then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will question the Ummah about how they know Prophets delivered the message to their nations and they will say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed them of it: “He will say: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message, and we believed him.’ This is what Allah says: ‘Thus We have made you, a just (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4284] This establishes Ummats testimony is of their Iman. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) does not question Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): Who informed you? Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) ensured that Muslims know Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has not witnessed the events regarding which they have testified. For Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) this route is not taken and this indicates Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had witnessed these events spiritually.[3] And proof of this is are those verses in which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) within context of historical events says: “Have you not seen[4] how your Lord dealt with Aad.” [Ref: 89:6] “Have you not seen how your Lord dealt with the companions/army of elephant.” [Ref: 105:1] “Have you not seen those elders of the children of Israel after the time of Moses …” [Ref: 2:246] And these verses are supported by Hadith a narrated in Musnad of Imam Ahmad (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala): “عرضات الأنبيا أممها و اتباعها من أممها” Which means: “Presented before me were [all] Prophets and their nations along side [their believing] followers.” This goes on to establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessed the deeds of those before him and use of, ‘ألم تر’ , is referrence to seeing if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Alhasil the first belief of brother Mustafvi is refuted. Islamic Verdict On 2nd Scenario: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Indeed, We have sent you as a witness and a bringer of good tidings and a warner.” [Ref: 48:8] "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] And he is sent to mankind: "Whatever of good reaches you, is from Allah, but whatever of evil befalls you, is from yourself. And We have sent you as a Messenger to mankind, and Allah is Sufficient as a Witness." [Ref: 4:79] He is a Prophet sent to mankind as a witness like Musa (alayhis salam) was sent to Firawn: "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is sent as a hearing and seeing witness to mankind like Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) was sent to Fir’awn. Note one who is sent as a witness must witness over whom he was sent to witness and without his witnessing he is not witness. Yet Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is witness and sent as a witness. Hence his witnessing of deeds of mankind is established from ever since he was sent as last/final Prophet and Messenger. There are number of Ahadith which establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has witnessed everything: "Then I saw Him put his palms between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of his fingers between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me and I recognized everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? [...]" [Ref: Tirmadhi, Vol5, H3246, Tafsir Surah Sad] "Narrated Hakim Bin Nafi, Saeed Bin Sinan, narrated Abu Zahriyat, Kathir Bin Murra Abu Shajara al-Hadhrami, Ibn Umar said: Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Kitab al-Fitan, 1st Chapter, Hadith No. 2, by Hafidh Naeem Bin Hammad al-Marwazi] On account of this knowledge Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed all that was to transpire from beginning of creation till the entering of people in paradise/hell: “Narrated Umar: One day the Prophet stood up amongst us for a long period and informed us about the beginning of creation (and talked about everything in detail) till he mentioned how the people of Paradise will enter their places and the people of Hell will enter their places. Some remembered what he had said, and some forgot it.” [Ref: Bukhari, B54, H414] Alhasil all this evidence goes on to refute the notion mentioned in second belief of brother Mustafvi. Conclusion: If brother Mustafvi’s statement is interpreted in light of science of Hadith even then it fails to meet the criteria because the originator of chain must be witness the event and then to narrate it to others. If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) bore witness without witnessing himself then the rule of chain originator being first hand witness to event is broken. Yet verses of Quran and Hadith of Musnad Ahmad establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessed Prophets and their nations and their beleiving followers and their actions. In light of this the chain originator is actual witness and he narrated and Ummah believed and bore witness. But whole objective of inventing ‘bearing witness without witnessing the events’ was to negate actual witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) which has failed even if your philosophy of bearing witness without witnessing the event was believed. Even then it would be true for the Ummah and not for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Also if Ummah informing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) about what transpired after him is considered in light of your rule then implication is Ummah has seen it and it will inform Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). This was invented with objective to refute actual witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Yet the Quranic verses and quoted Ahadith establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) himself witnesses and had witnessed the deeds of all happenings till the judgment day. If we disregarding the fact Ummat informing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is without scriptural support. Even then it would imply, Ummat witnessed the events, and they informed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), who also had witnessed the events himself. Therefore scenario would be similar to angels presenting deeds of people to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) despite the fact that He is already aware of them. Or similar to, angels presenting to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’salam) salutations of his Ummah despite the fact that good/bad deeds were already seen by him and are seen by him. Alhasil however the ball is rolled the witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) cannot be refuted. Hence it would be better to let go of innovative concept of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) testifying for what is established from textual evidences. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] A example: Truthful and trustworthy people have transferred Quran and authentic Ahadith and on basis of information in these we believe and testify; there is no Ma’bud (i.e. deserving of worship) except Allah and Prophet Muhammad is Messenger of Allah. Note this testimony is of ones own Iman (i.e. faith) and not of an out side event. Testimony of faith only the person can express none else because one is aware of his own belief. Hence person testifying as such is first hand witness. - [2] Like it is in the case of following Hadith: “He will say: ‘Muhammad and his nation.’ So the nation of Muhammad will be called and it will be said: ‘Did this man convey the message?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’ He will say: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message, and we believed him.’ This is what Allah says: ‘Thus We have made you, a just (and the best) nation, that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4284] Note the Ummah will testify and the Ummah of Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam) will question the testimony of Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Ummah would be questioned who informed you and they will say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Note He will not question Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) testifying against Ummah of Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam). Ummah will bear testimony on basis of their own faith in truthfullness and trustworthiness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). - [3] Two logical conclusions can be made because of this: i) RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be testifying on account of being informed like his Ummah. And there was no difference between testimony of Ummah and RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) hence there was no need to pursue it further. ii) Testimony of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was in result of actually witnessing the events therefore Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) did not pursue to negate his actual witnessing. But Ummah had testified on account of being informed by RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) ensured it was pointed out. Resolution -: Firstly please note Qiyas is not foundation of creed and to believe in first contention is to put faith in Qiyas. This is why I only mentioned the second contention in my main article. Secondly there are numerous places in Quran where Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) mentions events which had transpired long before birth of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In some cases Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) while adressing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) begins the narrative with: “Did you not see!” And this is to attest that he saw and he is being reminded. From this scholars of Ahlus Sunnah assume position; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessed the events prior to his brith and he is being asked to recall the events. Alhasil -: This goes on to establish the Islamic position taken in the article. - [4] The older translations of Quran in English and Urdu translated the words, ‘ألم تر’ , to denote seeing but new Wahhabi translation, Sahih International, has started the tradition of translating these verses: “Have you not considered …” The objective is to do away with the natural meaning of words due to the implications. They, insha Allah, will never succeed in distortion of Quran because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has made it clear that he saw the Prophets and their nations before him.

Sahih Muslim Shareef ki Hadith heh pari bi thee magar kafi maghz mari ki phir say nahin mil saki. Matan yad nahin raha sirf mafoom yad heh.

Introduction: Originally my plan was to target the key points of discussion regarding the Hadith of; whoever introduces good/evil Sunnah in Islam. I didn’t want to chase these issues down to their logical ends in discussion and even in the first article solely because they undermine the integrity/standing of Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) with his Peer and people sitting. It has been practice of Sufia to lead a Talib/Seeker to door of guidance and allow the Talib to realize where he has been brought and give him the decision to enter it on his own accord. My objective never was to debate but to educate and best way education is without humiliation and embrassing. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) considered himself to be my equale and wanted to DEBATE as an equale. And I saw Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) nothing more then misguided seeker and needing guidance and better understanding of Deen. As such point attempt was made to educate through questions and answers by slowly nudging and prodding Shaykh (hadfidha-ullah) toward making him realize his error. Hope was if there is enough respect from Shaykh for me it would be settled within half an hour like it was sorted with mini-Shaykh (hafidha-ullah), a day before our discussion. But lack of respect for prophetic teaching and elders got in the way. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Ibn Abbas narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: "He is not one of us who does not have mercy upon our young, respect our elders, and command good and forbid evil." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B1, H1921] And where Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) gave bit of respect as mini-Shaykh pointed out he gained the goodness through it at the end of discussion. Anyhow after much thinking I have decided there were many things said by Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) which need to be checked because they are heretical and silence upon them will only strengthen heresy. Originally I felt silence was better and let the issues die and people will forget all the misguidance of Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) especially on the issues which none disputes. There has been this nagging thought in my mind that I initiated the discussion and even if one person take his misguidance then I am responsible. Therefore I will address all he said that was incorrect or atleast all the misguidance of his I can recall. My objective is not to embrass the Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) rather to perserve the true teaching of Islam and refute the distortions. And I pray to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that Shayh (hafidha-ullah) sees errors of his way and repents. I devoted then and I devote my time now as an act of mercy/compassion for young Shaykh (hafidha-ullah). I see where his misguidance will take him and the most compassionate/merciful act I can do for Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) is spend my time pointing out his errors so he repents and adopts what is right. It would be cruel and heartless thing to do to not to strive for his guidance when I have the knowledge and time to invest. And sign of righteous Muslim is that he desires for his brothers what he desires for himself and I desire nothingless then guidance for all and myself. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: Religion is Naseehah (i.e. sincerity/advice, or sincere advice). And this article is nothing more then sinere and genuine effort for Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) to realize his errors and repent. How our Shaykh (hafidha-ulla) takes it is entirely up to him. My reward is with my Lord and ultimately all is for His pleasure and defence of His Deen. Siwak, Muswak Is Part Of Deen: During our discussion Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) said Mawlid is innovation in deen it is misguidance. And when it was told that everything is part of Deen. He resorted to and said; x, y, z are not part of Deen. Call it tactical move or genuine issue of lack of knowledge. Tactical move meant he was able to say Siwak is not part of Deen. And this was a shocking statement because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) repeated instructed the companions to use Siwak: “It was narrated that Hudhaifah said: "We were commanded to use the siwak when we got up to pray at night." [Ref: Nisai, B20, H1624] “Narrated Anas: Allah's Messenger said, "I have told you repeatedly to use the Siwak.” [Ref: Bukhari, B13, H13] “Abu Ayyub narrated that:The Messenger of Allah said: "Four are from the Sunan of the Messengers: Al-Hayat, using Attar, the Siwak, and marriage." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B6, H1080] Can a believer imagine Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) put extra emphasis on something which is not Deen. And a Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) who is living Tafsir of Quran and the best of examples and a Nabi who speaks Wahi (i.e. revelation) that Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) extra emphasis on something which is not Deen and using it regularly himself: “Your companion has neither gone astray nor has erred. Nor does he speak of (his own) desire. It is only a Revelation revealed.” [Ref: 53:62] “There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of Allah an excellent pattern for anyone whose hope is in Allah and the Last Day and [who] remembers Allah often.” [Ref: 33:21] And Hadith states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was walking/living Tafsir of Quran then how can his Siwak usage not be part of Deen! May Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) give Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) taufeeq for repentance, ameen. Everything Is Part Of Islam Or Not: The reason why Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) said Siwak is not part of Deen is because he was asked you say we should practice prophetic Sunnah and leave what is permissible (i.e. Mawlid). Yet you yourself leave the prophetic Sunnah of Siwak and you use tooth paste/brush. Having no place to hide he said; Siwak is not part of Deen therefore the use of tooth paste/brush is not a problem. We already established that Siwak is part of Deen. Hadith of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was living Quran. Which naturally would mean everything Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was connected with Deen. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “Abdullah Ibn Mas’ud said, “Verily, Allah looked at the hearts of the servants and He found that the heart of Muhammad, was the best among them, so He choose him for Himself and He sent him with His message. Then He looked at the hearts of His servants after Muhammad, and He found that the hearts of his companions were the best among them. Thus He made them into the ministers of His Prophet, fighting for the sake of His religion. And whatever the Muslims view as good is good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they view as evil is evil in the sight of Allah. And the Companions unanimously chose to take Abû Bakr – Allâh be pleased with him – as the successor (to lead the Muslims after the Prophet).” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Mukthireen, Ibn Mas’ud, H3589] In other words whatever innovated matter the Fitrah of [majority of] Muslims deems good is good in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And whatever innovated matter the [majority of] Muslims consider to be evil is in sight of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). How can what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) deems good/evil is not part of Deen of Islam! Is he not the legislator of religion! Here the only difference is that his judgement becomes apparent via understanding of majority of Muslims. Note even though the above Hadith did not say majority but majority is to be understood due to the following: “One who found in his Amir something which he disliked should hold his patience, for one who separated from the main body of the Muslims even to the extent of a handspan and then he died would die the death of one belonging to the days of Jahiliyyah.” [Ref: Muslims, B20, H4559] “I heard the Messenger of Allah (subhanhu wa ta’ala) say: ‘My nation will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, Vol.1, B36, H3950] “Abu Dharr (Allah be pleased with him) reported from the Prophet (Peace be upon him) that,"Two are better than one, and three better than two; so stick to the Jama'ah for verily Allah, Most Great and Glorious, will only unite my nation on guidance." [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Kitab Al-Ansar, Abu Zar Al Ghaffari, Hadith 20776] So understanding of majority is guidance and what the majority see good/evil it is good/evil in judgment of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And what He sees good/evil is religion even though its not directly established from Quran/Hadith. Kissing The Four Corners Of Kabah: Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) attributed Hadith to Sahih of Imam Bukhari. He said Amir Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) kissed four corners of Kabah and Umar Ibn al-Khattab (radiallah ta’ala anhu) rebuked him for going against prophetic Sunnah and for introducing an innovation into religion. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) also said; Amir Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) stopped his practice. I have not found this Hadith any where in Sahih al-Bukhari but in Musnad of Imam Ahmad (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala): "Ibn Abbas said he did tawaf of Baytullah with Muawiyah. Muawiyah kissed all the corners of the Kabah. Ibn Abbas said: Why are you kissing these corners when Prophet did not kissed? Muawiyah replied: Nothing in Baytullah should be left. Ibn Abbas replied The life of Prophet is best moral for you. Muawiyah said: You are truthful." [Ref: Msnd Imam Ahmad, H1880] And the grading of Hadith is questionable; Hassan li-ghayrihi (i.e. good due to others). Implications of which is; Hadith itself is weak but others contribute and make it Hassan (i.e. good). Also it was pointed out Amir Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) abandoned the practice, if he did, then it was because prophetic Sunnah is better/superior. Which precisely argument of Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is. In other words Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) didn’t object to it due to it being innovation but due to a superior/better option of prophetic Sunnah being left. Therefore even though the action of Amir Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was permissible it was not Sunnah. Ijtihad Point Not Made In Discussion: In the starting of discussion with Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) issue of Ijtihad of Amir Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) came up. And objective was to use it to prove innovation in Deen is permissible but point got tangled and subject changed due to details branching off to new discussions. Even though there are tons of points that can be made and were made during discussion but I want to make the point of Ijtihad in here because it never made. It would have only taken thirty second with a sincere person but it couldn’t be made in two hours of discussion due to insincerity and lack of co-operation from opposition. Even though what I wanted to say would have been means of his guidance Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) proved to be his own worst enemy. And Shaykh (hadfidha-ullah) tried to debate where as my objective was to educate without humiliation and causing embrassment to him in presence of his peers. Issue Of Ijtihad And Its Reality: Prophetic teachings are part of Islam and what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructed in Quran is already part of Islam. Ijtihad is done on issues which are not teaching of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in Quran and what is not already prophetic Sunnah. Therefore Ijtihad is way of introducing innovation into teaching of Islam. If Ijtihad is invalid [Mujtahid will get no sin] then Ijtihad of Mujtahid erroneous [Ijtihadi] innovation. And if Ijtihad of Mujtahid is valid then by default then Mujtahid’s Ijtihad is correct/good [Ijtihadi] innovation in Islam. In this light Ijtihad of Amir Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was innovation. Not getting involved in, if it was valid/invalid, point is his Ijtihad establishes he believed innovations can be introduced. Note if we say no innovation can be made into Islam then teaching of Ijtihad fundamentally would contradict with every innovation is misguidance. Ijtihad teaches introducing innovation and if literalism of; every innovation is misguidance isn’t restricted then Ijtihadi innovations are misguidance as well. In other words two teaching of Prophet (sallallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) contradict. And rule is when there is ambiguity follow what is clear and emphatic and leave what is ambiguous for rasikhoon fil-ilm (i.e. people of understanding) to interpret the ambigous. Ijtihad and its teaching are clear. Ambiguity is in Hadith of; every innovation is misguidance. Note Muslims and Wahhabis/Salafis believe in Ijtihad our understanding of innovation perfectly compliments Ijtihad because we Muslims believe; good/valid innovations via Ijtihad can be made part of Islam. The understanding of Wahhabis/Salafis on subject of innovation [because they believe there can no innovation] contradict with teaching of Ijtihad [because it teaches there has to be innovation]. Therefore those who oppose the Muslims should fear Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and instead of arguing with Muslims should attempt to reconcile the contradiction within their own belief. If they feel their understanding on subject of innovation is correct than they should argue with Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) for underminding them by teaching of Ijtihad. Discussion On Haram And Halal And Mawlid: Sometime in the beginning of discussion with Shaykh (hafidha-ullah). He said Mawlid is an innovation and therefore not permissible. Islamic position was it is permissible because nothing HARAM in it and in support of Islamic understanding following Ahadith were quoted: “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] 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 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. Wahhabi And Sunni Way Of Establish Permissibility: When Muslims and Wahhabis/Salafis dispute over on permissibility of a practice typical Wahhabi/Salafi tactic is to demand evidence from prophetic Sunnah. Their argument goes something like this; prove Mawlid from Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The fact is permissibility of a practice is not dependent upon practice being prophetic Sunnah. Rather if parts of a practice are from prophetic Sunnah even if the wholistically the practice isn’t prophetic Sunnah then practice is permissible. Suppose there is a practice called Mehfil. In practice of Mehfil people gather they all recite Surah each, perform 4 Nawafil, are fasting, they all give charity to poor, they all give food to poor persons, and they all gift clothes to poor people, and they all clean the Masjid, they learn about Tawheed, Ibadah, Shirk, Biddah, etc and all strive to bring one new person every week on Mehfil day so new person can do good deeds and get reward. Even though this practice of Mehfil is not prophetic Sunnah but it is composed of all that is Islamic and prophetic Sunnahs. Therefore it doesn’t come into category of Mutashabihat (i.e. doubtful). Permissibility is judged via parts and not by whole. In other words when the Muftis of Islam judge something which has not been adressed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or by His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) they see if the juzz (i.e. parts) of it are from Sunnah. And if a practice is established via parts as from prophetic Sunnahs then it is deemed permissible because its parts are from prophetic Sunnah even though the whole practice itself is not prophetic Sunnah. Permissible Is Fine But Sunnah Is Better: Earlier with in the discussion point was made that prophetic Sunnah is best but non-prophetic practices are permissible and there is reward for them. We came to agreement on part of it but Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) contiued to say; then act of Sunnah. It was pointed to him that if Sunnah is better then why do you use tooth brush and tooth paste? His best fall back was because it is not part of Deen. Later on he himself acnowledged everything is connected with Deen and therefore Deen but few minutes later went back on his words. Near the end Shaykh al-Akbar forced him to agree with everything being part of Deen. In other words Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) agrees tooth paste and brush are part of Deen. The question is; Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) why do you leave the Awla/superior for innovation of infidels of West? OK! Point of lizard eating came into discussion some how but I will connect it here. Hadith records: “It was narrated from Khalid bin Walid that a grilled mastigure was brought to the Messenger of Allah and placed near him. He stretched out his hand to eat (some of it), then those who were present said: “O Messenger of Allah, it is the flesh of a mastigure.” He took his hand away, and Khalid said to him: “O Messenger of Allah, is a mastigure unlawful?” He said: “No, but it is not found in my land and I find it distasteful.” He said: “Then Khalid bent over the mastigure and ate some of it, and the Messenger of Allah was looking at him.” [Ref: Bukhari, B28, H3241] “Narrated Ibn Umar: The Prophet said: "I do not eat mastigure, but I do not prohibit its eating." [Ref: Bukhari, B67, H444] Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was and is surely best and superior no doubt. But despite this Khalid Bin Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did what was permissible and did not act on prophetic Sunnah. This proves even though Sunnah is superior but one engages in what is permissible without incurring blame. Now if the prophetic Sunnah was the only way to achieve success in here after then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would have prevented Khalid Bin Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) but he allowed him to engage in what is halal without objection. Yet the Salafis/Wahhabis object to all that is HALAL in various innovated practices by Muslims. In fact it is recorded in Ahadith that a companion altered the Tasbih of 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] Normally the Imam would say; sami al-lahu liman hamidah. And the Muqtadi’s (i.e. performing Salah behind Imam i.e. follower) response would be; rabbana wa lakal hamd. Companion changed the prophetic Sunnah not just silently but loudly which even the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) heard. Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is surely the best and superior to all but companion of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) introduced an innovation which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) loved and the angels loved also. The Nabi of mercy was alive can you imagine if that happened if the Wahhabis were in the Masjid. They would have killed that companion by just telling him, qullu biddatan dhalalah, qullu biddatan dhalalah. But the Nabi of mercy (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was alive and well. Who had the more right to tell the companion that; qullu biddatan dhalalah, Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) or Nabi Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? But he didn’t. If the companions and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) were following understanding of innovation which the Wahhabis/Salafis follow then what would have happened? It didn’t happen because they didn’t follow Wahhabi/Salafi understanding of Biddah. If companions had, then companion wouldn’t have innovated, other companions wouldn’t have remained silent, the angels would have been upset/angry, and the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would have been angry with the companion. This wasn’t the case then question is: What does that prove? That Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and companions were following Salafi/Wahhabi understanding of innovation? Does this incident not prove Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), his companions, angels, and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) taught the methodology of innovation which is now held by Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah i.e. Barelwi? Leaving this aside; we agree prophetic Sunnah is better then everything yet the companion innovated. Note his innovation wasn’t out side of Deen. He altered Tasbih of Salah which would be innovation in Deen even according to Wahhabi/Salafi understanding. So what basis did the companions added his Tasbih into Deen? Let me answer it with the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice, way, tradition, precedent) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] He made Ijtihad and via which introduced a good innovation/practice into Deen. One thing is clear that it was good innovated Sunnah of companion but Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) approved of it and therefore it became a prophetic Sunnah. This refutes notion that Xpractice has to be prophetic Fehli Sunnah (i.e. Prophet’s Sunnah in action) or Qawli Sunnah (i.e. Prophet’s Sunnah in speech) for it to be permissible. It also sheds light on Amir Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) issue. For sake of argument if lets suppose Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed there can be no innovation with regards to what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did i.e. kissed two corners. This incident of changing the Tasbih and adding to it in presence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) establishes Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was wrong because innovation was made in his presence and he approved of it. But the fact was made clear even during our discussion; Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) argued his point from perspective of prophetic Sunnah being superior to Ijtihad. Sunnah Taraweeh And Innovation In Taraweeh: When Hadith of Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) saying; Taraweeh was excellent innovation. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) said he said this in linguistic sense because Taraweeh was prophetic Sunnah. There is no denial Taraweeh was/is prophetic Sunnah but for only three days. He then out of mercy abandoned it. To abandon Taraweeh was better because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) abandoned it after three days. Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) revived a Sunnah which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) abandoned. Note he wasn’t reviving a forgotten Sunnah he was reviving a abandoned Sunnah. Forgotten can be revived because it was not suppose to be forgotten. Abandoned can’t be revived cause Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) didn’t want to practice it. So reviving that was innovation but if someone wants to argue I can let that go. Three day Taraweeh was prophetic Sunnah but 26/27 additional days wasn’t so he innovated into Taraweeh. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) could not have read entire Quran in three days during Taraweehs in our Taraweehs entire Qurans are finished which is innovation number two. It would only be linguistic innovation if nothing of Sunnah was altered. I mean he revived Taraweeh of three days and he said its excellent innovation. If this was the case then no innovation would be made into prophetic Sunnah and statement would have been understood in linguistic sense. Abdullah says: Surah Ikhlas is excellent innovation. We know Abdullah believes its part of Quran and revealed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). We interpret his statement in light of his belief and come to conclusion his statement only means revelation of Surah Ikhlas was excellent new Surah. Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) added extra 26/27 days to Taraweeh, and entire Quran is recited in it, yet it is still linguistic innovation. Linguistic Innovation And Its Reality And Correct Understanding: Following discussion would be according to Hanbali/Wahhabi definition of innovation. So Shar’ri innovation should be interpreted to mean evil [shar’ri] innovation from Sunni definition perspective. I believe Hajj is part of Islam. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructed it and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught it. I say: Hajj is innovation. Did I mean Hajj is linguistic innovation or Shar’ri innovation? My saying Hajj is innovation is linguistic sense because in Shar’ri sense I don’t believe it is innovation because for it to be Shar’ri innovation I have to believe it is not prophetic Sunnah and it is not what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) commanded in His Book. Suppose I believe Hajjd is innovation but also believe neither Allah nor His Messenger instructed it but it was innovated in 3rd century. Now if I say Hajj is innovation. Have I made the shar’ri judgment or not? You would be right Shar’ri judgment because Hajj is form of worship not legislated from my perspective. Similarly Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) knew very well that what he has issued is not linguistic innovation it was Sunnah for three days but he innovated entire month Taraweeh and entire and more Quran is recited in it. And his statement is in accordance with Hadith of Good Sunnah in Islam: “He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice, way, tradition, precedent) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Sahih Muslim mein Hadith heh, Aisha (radiallah ta'ala anha) rawayat karti hen, kay Allah kay Nabi chaltay/zinda Quran thay ... bot talash keeya nahin mila. Please madad keren.

Misguided Follower Of Evil Sunnah Distorting The Truth About Hadith Of Good Sunnah In Islam. Introduction: Muslims believe Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam establishes Muslims are guaranteed reward for those good Sunnahs which they have innovated and made part of Islam. The supporters of heresy traditionally have argued this Hadith of good Sunnah is regarding a Sunnah which is already part of Islam and to be about prophetic Sunnah of Sadaqah. But there as been a tiny progress and one from them has argued it refers to innovated Sunnah of giving Sadaqah with [silver] coins. He argued evil Sunnah part f Hadith refers to Hadith of; every innovation is misguidance. 0.0 - About The Discussion Which Resulted This Article: This article will be responding to a brother who challenged Islamic understanding in a discussion. During this discussion Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) resorted to distorting the text of Hadith: He replaced Sunnah (i.e. way, precedent, tradition, practice) with Amal (i.e. action) and distorted the wording of Hadith in such a way; it indicated as if said Hadith is referring to a action of Islam (i.e. prophetic Sunnah). Noting he has stooped too low to preserve his theological position then it was decided to withdraw from discussion because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has said: “And when they hear ill speech, they turn away from it and say: "For us are our deeds, and for you are your deeds. Peace will be upon you; we seek not the ignorant." [Ref: 28:58] But this happened at a time when all avenues and arguments were satisfactorily responded to and believers saw the Noor of Islam shine and dispel the darkness of innovation. 1.0 - Ahadith Relevent Focus Of Discussion: “Mundhir b. Jarir reported on the authority of his father: While we were in the company of the Messenger of Allah in the early hours of the morning, some people came there (who) were barefooted, naked, wearing striped woollen clothes, or cloaks, with their swords hung (around their necks). Most of them, nay, all of them, belonged to the tribe of Mudar. The colour of the face of the Messenger of Allah underwent a change when he saw them in poverty. He then entered (his house) and came out and commanded Bilal (to pronounce Adhan). He pronounced Adhan and Iqima, and he (the Holy Prophet) observed prayer (along with his Companion) and then addressed (them reciting verses of the Holy Qur'an): '" 0 people, fear your Lord, Who created you from a single being" to the end of the verse," Allah is ever a Watcher over you" (iv. 1). (He then recited) a verse of Sura Hashr:" Fear Allah. and let every soul consider that which it sends forth for the morrow and fear Allah" (lix. 18). (Then the audience began to vie with one another in giving charity.) Some donated a dinar, others a dirham, still others clothes, some donated a sa' of wheat, some a sa' of dates; till he (the Holy Prophet) said: (Bring) even if it is half a date. Then a person from among the Ansar came there with a money bag which his hands could scarcely lift; in fact, they could not (lift). Then the people followed continuously, till I saw two heaps of eatables and clothes, and I saw the face of the Messenger glistening, like gold (on account of joy). The Messenger of Allah said: He who sets a good precedent in Islam, there is a reward for him for this (act of goodness) and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards; and he who sets in Islam an evil precedent, there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2219] "Jarir b. Abdullah reported that some desert Arabs clad in woollen clothes came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him). He saw them in sad plight as they had been hard pressed by need. He (the Holy Prophet) exhorted people to give charity, but they showed some reluctance until (signs) of anger could be seen on his face. Then a person from the Ansar came with a purse containing silver. Then came another person and then other persons followed them in succession until signs of happiness could be seen on his (sacred) face. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice, way, tradition) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And he who introduced some evil practice in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their's being diminished in any respect." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] 1.1 - Misguided Brothers Position On The Important Part Of Ahadith: Initially he said following part of Hadith referrs to prophetic Sunnah of Sadaqah: “He who introduced some evil Sunnah (i.e. practice, way, tradition, precedent) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Then he changed his goal post and said companion gave coins [of silver] therefore this use of coins for Sadaqah was the new Sunnah in Islam, none gave coins before this. He was asked: What does the evil Sunnah part of Hadith refer to in context of historical event? After being pressured to accept that the evil Sunnah part of Hadith has no relevance to historical context. He replied evil Sunnah in Islam part of Hadith refers to following words Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam😞 “The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] What he implied was Hadith of; whoever introduces evil Sunnah in Islam referred to Hadith of; every innovation is misguidance Hadith. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) then emphasised generality of the Hadith. At one point Shaykh explicitly said there is no Takhsees/distinction of evil innovation in words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In the beginning of discussion on Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam he claimed that the following prophetic statement is restricted to its context; “He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured…” And his this argument was refuted during the discussion but I feel it is important to address it here as well. Please note where ever his position will be represented it will be done in my own words but his position will be represented accurately. With this said; I will begin with his last point first and then continue in the reverse order. 2.0 - Contextualising General Statements To Negate Generality: Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) employed tactic of; the prophetic statement is to be interpreted in the context of the event. And this was responded with if this is the case then Ahadith of reward of deeds depends upon intentions is in context of marriage and migration as it is evidence here: “Narrated 'Umar bin Al-Khattab: I heard Allah's Messenger saying: "The reward of deeds depends upon the intentions and every person will get the reward according to what he has intended. So whoever emigrated for worldly benefits or for a woman to marry, his emigration was for what he emigrated for." [Ref: Bukhari, B1, H1] It was argued will you restrict this prophetic statement to its context or will you apply its ruling upon all other actions not mentioned by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in the context of Hadith? I cannot recall what his exact response was but rest assured it was less then sensible and it went along the line of: It depends. The thumb rule employed by all great scholars is; if they interpret a general statement in the context they do not negate its generality and continue to apply it upon non-contextual matters as well. In other words they do not restrict general statements of Hadith in the context of event nor restrict its injunctions to people present at the event. But if idiots want to be idiots lets be idiot with them. You beat em now join em and its best way to teach em a lesson. 2.1 - Ahadith Of Every Innovation Restricted To Context: It was said in previous section that we’re going to play dirty with the dirty ones. Round one of mocky fights. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) made statement every innovation is misguidance in context of following Hadith: "It was narrated from Abdullah bin Mas'ud that: The Messenger of Allah said: "Verily there are two things - words and guidance. The best words are the words of Allah, and the best guidance in the guidance of Muhammad. Beware of newly-invented matters, for every newly-invented matter is an innovation (Bid'ah) and every innovation is a going-stray. Do not let the desire for a long life causes your hearts to grow hard. That which is bound to happen is close to you, and the only thing that is far away is that which is not going to happen. The one who is doomed to Hell is doomed from his mother's womb, and the one who is destined for Paradise is the one who learns from the lessons of others. Killing a believer constitutes disbelief (Kufr) and verbally abusing him is immorality (Fusuq). It is not permissible for a Muslim to forsake his brother for more than three days. Beware of lying, for lying is never good, whether it is done seriously or in jest. A man should not make a promise to a child that he will not keep. Lying leads to immorality and immorality leads to Hell. Truthfulness leads to righteousness and righteousness leads to Paradise. It will be said of the truthful person: 'He spoke the truth and was righteous', and it will be said of the liar, 'He told lies and was immoral.' "For a person continues to tell lies until he is recorded with Allah as a liar." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H46] “It was narrated that Jabir bin 'Abdullah said: "When the Messenger of Allah delivered a sermon, his eyes would turn red, he would raise his voice and he would speak with intensity, as if he were warning of an (enemy) army, saying, 'They will surely attack you in the morning, or they will surely attack you in the evening!' He would say: 'I and the Hour have been sent like these two,' and he would hold his index and middle finger. Then he would say: 'The best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad. The most evil matters are those that are newly-invented, and every innovation (Bid'ah) is a going astray.' And he used to say: 'Whoever dies and leaves behind some wealth, it is for his family, and whoever leaves behind a debt or dependent children, then they are both my responsibility.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H45] Note; to see related Ahadith see footnote one. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) wished to restrict prophetic statement of good Sunnah in Islam to context of event. But Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) will not be consistent in his methodology when it comes to these Ahadith. He applied and will continue to apply the above Ahadith without limiting/restricting to context which resulted the following statement: “The truest of word is the Book of Allah and best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad. The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.'” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] And to restrict the Hadith of; every innovation is misguidance to context would mean Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) would have no argument against innovated good Sunnahs such as Mawlid. Simply because the basis/grounds of objection against Mawlid has been restricted to context and there remains no legal/Shar’ri basis of objecting to Mawlid. 2.2 - People Without Methodology And Their Reality: The core problem is that people have already decided what ultimate truth is and have fallen in love with their own beliefs. As result everything has become fair to them when it comes to proving/arguing their own position. A honest and objective Muslim seeking the guidance of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would adopt a methodology of interpreting Hadith: (i) contextually (ii) non-contextually, (iii) or combination of both, and then he would consistently apply his methodology upon all Ahadith. Whether he chooses wrong or right methodology but his consistency would establish his sincerity and true desire to learn truth. Those who deceive themselves switch between the three depending upon need. It is tactical decision to switch from one methodology. Normally both parties would hold to same methodology but Wahhabis/Salafis change methodology when they are put in tough spot. In rare cases, due to lack of knowledge and conditioning which has resulted in firm belief upon a notion, an individual may flap around like fish out of water, trying hard to defend what is cherished by him. Sign of knowledgeable and sincere truth seeker is consistent methodology. And when he gets knocked down then he gets up revises his methodology and starts the research again. This way directly/indirectly consistently acknowledges his mistakes. This was methodology I was upon and all seekers of truth of Islam should be on. 3.0 - Evil Sunnah Hadith Is Directing To Hadith Of Every Innovation Is Misguidance: What he said and what he demonstrated were two completely different things. Coming to what he demonstrated but not said. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice, way, tradition) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) said these words refer to following prophetic words: “The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] And what he intended and demonstrated [via his interpretation] that Hadith of evil Sunnah is directing toward the Hadith of every innovation is misguidance. As part of this he completely ignored Hadith of evil Sunnah and instead Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) went on to emphasise the generality of every innovation is misguidance. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) assumes Ahadith are game of monopoly with the rule: When you land on Hadith of evil Sunnah, skip explanation and do not understand it, instead go to Hadith of every innovation is misguidance, then emphasis the generality of every/qullu. 3.1 Hadith Of Evil Sunnah In Islam And Takhsees: Coming to what he said and what it means. Whenever a scholar connects a scholar XHadith with another it is to interpret both in light of each other. Our Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) likely just heard or read it being employed some where and employed it in our discussion without knowing what it actually understanding what it implies. What he said is; Hadith of evil Sunnah interprets Hadith of; every innovation is misguidance. It was immediately pointed out to him; Shyakh (hafidha-ullah) you’re making Takhsees (i.e. specification) of generality of following Hadith; every innovation is misguidance. Note Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden ..." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Prophetic Sunnah is already part of Islam and his Sunnah cannot be evil. The evil Sunnah mentioned this Hadith is not part of Islam. Innovation is not part of Islam. Therefore evil Sunnah in here is innovated evil Sunnah. It is established the Hadith itself is talking about evil innovations which are made part of Islam. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) said the evil Sunnah part of Hadith refers to Hadith of every innovation is misguidance: “The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.”[1] [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] Alhasil if the Hadith of evil Sunnah referrs to innovation and Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) directed it toward Hadith of every innovation is misguidance then meaning should be obvious for intelligent people; Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) without knowing is actually making Takhsees of generality of following Hadith: “The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] In other words Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) is saying; every newly-invented thing; innovated evil Sunnah is innovation, every innovation is misguidance. But being Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) he never understood nor realized implications of his own utterance. 3.2 - Qullu/Every In Hadith For Every Innovation Is Misguidance: Just as directed by the Salafi Monopoly game rule, if you land on evil Sunnah Hadith, you must not try to understand it instead go straight to Hadith of every innovation is misguidance Hadith. We skip evil Sunnah Hadith and come to following: “The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] Please note Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) is maker of all rules and we must obey. First step we will focus on usage of every in this Hadith. Position of Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) in this regard is; every/qullu is inclusive of all and exclusive of none. Muslim understanding is qullu/every is not always used in its Haqiqi (i.e. actual/real) meaning. It is in most cases restricted by context of environment, personality, region, etc. If one says: Ali drank all the water. Even though the statement is general but all/qullu is restricted to either context of glass, or a water of jug, or bottle, but it will never be understood to mean Ali drank all the water of sea and rivers. In a verse of Quran it is stated: “Allah has power over all/qulli things.” [Ref: 2:148] Even in this verse qulli/every is not used in its Haqiqi meaning. It is still limited and restricted by certain context. Can Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) create a uncreated Creator? The question and its answer makes it evident all in the verse is not literally all/qulli but qulli which is according to majesty of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). So there is no reason to assume every/qullu in the quoted Hadith is without Takhsees. No sane Muslim would argue it is unrestricted and applies to every innovation because Bukhari and Muslim are innovations. If every/qullu was without restriction; then good-bye to Sahih of Imam Bukhari (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). It is established qullu/every is not absolutely every and Hadith therefore cannot be absolutely every innovation is misguidance. And every innovation not being misguidance is also established from statement of Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu😞 “Then on another night I went again in his company and the people were praying behind their reciter. On that Umar remarked: What an excellent innovation this is but the prayer which they do not perform, but sleep at its time is better than the one they are offering.'” [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] 3.3 - Shaykh’s (hafidha-ullah); Every Innovation And His Game Of Linguistic Innovation: Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) made claim that Hadith of; introducing evil Sunnah in Islam, is referring to Hadith of; every innovation is misguidance. It was explained to him; Hadith of every innovation is restricted by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to every evil/erroneous innovation. After I had disengaged him in discussion he disregarded the explanation and continued to emphasise literalism of Hadith. If we take the Hadith of; every innovation is misguidance, absolutely literally then nothing is excluded from it: Not Bukhari, not Muslim, not a mobile phone, not Shaykh’s (hafidha-ullah) favourite; Pizaa, not even the delicious Donner Kebab with hot chilli sauce because all these are innovation hence inclusive in; every/qullu innovation is misguidance. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) would say they are not part of Deen they are linguistic innovations therefore these are not intended. Note even though Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) made Takhsees (i.e. specification) generality of; every innovation is misguidance, via Ahadith of evil/erroneous innovation/practice, Shaykh disregarded it. I want to do unto Shaykh’s (hafidha-ullah) understanding what Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) did to Islamic understanding even though our understanding is justified and his Taweel has no basis. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) says the mentioned items are innovations but in Lughvi (i.e. linguistic) sense because they are not part of Deen. Therefore the Hadith doesn’t refer to them. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) if there is no Takhsees generality of evil innovation in Hadith of; every innovation is misguidance; then Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) where is there Takhsees of Lughvi in this Hadith? Where did you get this Takhsees of Lughvi innovation because according to the literalism of Hadith nothing is excluded, not even Lughvi innovations. And secondly where is your evidence for Takhsees of Lughvi Innovation? You do know even; for any kind of Takhsees (i.e. specification) of Mutliq (i.e. general) evidence is required, don’t you? Note Takhsees of Islamic position is based on prophetic words and evidence of it was submitted. Secondly dear Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) even though you claim there is no Takhsees in Hadith of; every innovation is misguidance and your saying; these (i.e. Kebabs, Bukhari, Muslim, Pizza) are all linguistic innovation and therefore Hadith does not refer to them. Means you are in reality making Takhsees of every/qullu to a context, Deen/Shariah, which proves our point that there is Takhsees in this Hadith and it is not unlimited/unrestricted but restricted and limited. Our understanding is that it referrs to evil Sunnahs/Biddahs because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) indicated evil Biddahs/Sunnahs in other Ahadith. And we interpret Hadith of; every innovation is misguidance; in light of those Ahadith. 3.4 - Every Innovation Misguidance Restricted By Prophetic Teaching: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “Whoever introduces an innovation with which Allah and his Messenger are not pleased, he will have a (burden of) sin equivalent to that of those among the people who act upon it, without that detracting from their sins in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H210]“And whoever introduces an erroneous innovation which Allah is not pleased with, nor His Messenger, then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it, without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2677] The second Hadith establishes evil innovation concept. And evil innovation is something which neither Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) nor Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be pleased. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward evil innovation in following Hadith: “And he who introduced some evil practice in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their's being diminished in any respect." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] The bearing of burden of sin is regarding an evil Sunnah which has not been declared evil Sunnah in Islam by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and not by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Therefore it is referring to innovated evil Sunnah which was not part of Islam. And this Hadith is also proof of Takhsees of generality of every innovation is misguidance Hadith because it establishes innovated evil Sunnahs are sinful. Therefore prophetic saying; every innovation is misguidance is in context of erroneous innovation and innovated evil Sunnah. Following depicts the Takhsees of generality and restriction of every to context of evil innovation and innovated evil Sunnah:“The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an (erroneous) innovation (and evil Sunnah) and every (erroneous) innovation (and evil Sunnah) is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] 3.5 - Understanding Every Innovation Is Misguidance In Context Of Prophetic Teaching: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated: “Narrated Aisha: Allah's Messenger said: "Whoever introduces into our matter that which is not a part of it, will have it rejected.”[2] [Ref: Bukhari, B49, H861] Hadith states introducing innovations into matter (i.e. religion) of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) which is not already part of it will be rejected. There are two forms of Islam Bunyadi (i.e. fundamental) and Ijtihadi (i.e. strived/struggled for). This Hadith is about Bunyadi (i.e. fundamental) Islam. In other words if someone was to introduce an innovation and says it is prophetic Sunnah, or as explicit teaching of Quran, then that will be rejected. And in this context innovations which are made part of fundamental teaching of Islam Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as stated: “The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing (in fundamental Islam) is an innovation and every innovation (in fundamental Islam) is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] In another Hadith it is reported Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated: “… he (Qasim bin Muhammad) said: All of them could be combined in one house; and then said: 'A'isha informed me that Allah's Messenger said: He who does an action which is not from us that is to be rejected.[3]” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] Meaning; if a Muslim does an action which is not teaching of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or teaching from prophetic Sunnah then that innovated action would be rejected because it is not part of Islam. Suppose I wish to worship Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) by performing a pose performed in Yoga it will be rejected because its not part of what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught as means of worship. And in this context the following words can be interpreted: “The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing (i.e. action) is an innovation and every innovation (of action) is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] Note H861 of Bukhari uses the word Amr (i.e. matter). And this Amr was explaind in H4267 by Amal (i.e. action). Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) employed Amal to remove the possible ambiguity which maybe resulted through Amr. 3.6 - Every Innovation Made Part Of Fundamental Islam Is Evil Innovation: It is established innovation into fundamental Islam [introduced as instruction of Allah or Sunnah of RasoolAllah] would be rejected. Why it will be rejected? For that we need to read following Hadith: “And whoever introduces an erroneous innovation which Allah is not pleased with, nor His Messenger, then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it, without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2677] Alhasil innovation into fundamental Islam is evil/erroenous innovation and it does not please Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) therefore it will be rejected. Hence the following Hadith is in fact referring to evil/erroneous innovations which are made part of fundamental Islam: “The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented (such as evil Sunnah) is an innovation and every (evil/erroneous) innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] Please note I have presented many interpretation of these Ahadith all of them are valid and all parts/interpretations can be assembled to make a comprehensive understanding of Ahadith employed to derive it:“The worst of things are those (Sunnahs) that are newly invented (and introduced into fundamental Islam); every newly-invented thing (Sunnah in fundamental Islam) is an (erroneous/evil) innovation and every innovation (in fundamental Islam) is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.” [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] 4.0 - Prophet Has Been Given Ability Of Few Words Expressing Comprehensive Meanings: Hadith records: “I heard Allah's Messenger saying: "I have been sent with Jawami al-Kalim and I was made victorious with awe (caste into the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the earth were brought to me and were put in my hand." Muhammad: said, Jawami'-al-Kalim means; Allah expresses in one or two statements or thereabouts the numerous matters that used to be written in the books revealed before (the coming of) the Prophet.” [Ref: Bukhari, B87, H141] Therefore the numerous interpretations should not be considered contradictions as idiots would tell you. Instead understand that Sharh of Hadith is according to the evidence which it is employed to interpret it. One (1) by itself means one. If it is coupled with for purpose of addition with two (2) then out come is three (3). If one (1) is coupled with seven (7) out come would be eight (8). Meaning the out come changes depending on with what one (1) is coupled with. In similar fashion the interpretation of Hadith changes depending on with which Hadith the XHadith is coupled with. 5.0 - Good Sunnah In Islam Part Of Hadith And Misguided Brother: As stated earlier initially Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) said good Sunnah in Islam part of Hadith referrs to context. He specificly stated it referrs to Sadaqah. It was pointed out to him that Sadaqah is prophetic Sunnah and it was already part of Islam. But the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) indicate the reward being told is for a good Sunnah in Islam not already part of Islam. Therefore following prophetic statement referrs to innovated good Sunnahs and reward is for innovated good Sunnahs: “He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice, way, tradition, precedent) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Fact is that the companions acted on prophetic Sunnah of giving Sadaqah. You claim the good Sunnah part of Hadith referrs to companions reviving/practicing Sadaqah. Yet the prophetic statement of good Sunnah in Islam is indicating reward he told was for something not already part of Islam. Therefore the statement doesn’t fit into context. It was followed; if companions giving Sadaqah resulted the good Sunnah in Islam statement. Then what was the evil Sunnah in Islam acted on by companions which resulted following statement: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their's being diminished in any respect." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] He rightly said this statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not conntected with the context. And wrongly said it says: ting! ting! go to Hadith of every innovation is misguidance. It was said him; if the second statement does not fit into context because companions acted on no evil Sunnah. We have already established; good Sunnah statement referrs to an innovated Sunnah which is not part of Islam and Sadaqah was already part of Islam. Therefore it doesn’t referr to context either just like the evil Sunnah in Islam statement: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others) ..." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] As a Muslim it was made clear to him that both statements have no absolute relevance to the context but these statements were made in context of the event but are unrelated to it. And after being hemmed to produce a response. A squeek of response was heard; companion introduced a new Sunnah in Islam by giving Sadaqah with [silver] coins. He also gave example of manz (lol!) giving notes to needy to further explain his point that he would be starting good Sunnah in Islam of giving Sadaqah with notes. 5.1 - Burden Of Coins Is Too Heavy To Establish: Our educated Shaykh (hadfidha-ullah) made the claim companion was first one to start the Sunnah of giving coins in Sadaqah and rest of companions followed him. People should fear Allah(subhanahu wa ta’ala) when they invent things which have no basis to defend their theological positions. Our Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) claimed this and he is under the Shar’ri burden to prove it: “’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] If he fails and I know he can never do it. Then he should repent for spreading misguidance regarding which he knew too well this is not true. Untrue statement issued in ignorance will be excused through mercy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but one who deliberately invents facts which have no factual existance is sinful and is his actions ar inexcuable sin. Due to being under peer pressure our Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) started to distort the words so it referrs to strictly to Sadaqah and companion who gave coins of silver. May Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) grants all of us sincerity for our Deen and make us strive for our hereafter and not for prestiege of this world and make our discussions for sake of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). 5.2 - Coins BackFire And Shaykh Deprives Companions Of Their Reward: Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) said prophetic statement of good Sunnah is regarding companion who gave Sadaqah with coins cause he started Sunnah of giving Sadaqah with coins. If that is the case then statement was regarding him and those who followed giving Sadaqah with coins. What about those who gave Sadaqah to poor Muslims but not in form of coins as it is established from following part of Hadith: “Some donated a dinar, others a dirham, still others clothes, some donated a sa' of wheat, some a sa' of dates; till he (the Holy Prophet) said: (Bring) even if it is half a date. Then a person from among the Ansar came there with a money bag which his hands could scarcely lift; in fact, they could not (lift). Then the people followed continuously, till I saw two heaps of eatables and clothes, and I saw the face of the Messenger glistening, like gold (on account of joy).” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2219] If Shaykh is truthful in his claim then does it not imply those who did not give Sadaqah with coins will get no reward and only those who gave with coins will get it? The Prophet of mercy (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) deprives his companions of their reward if Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) is truthful. 5.3 - Companion Started The Good Sunnah In Islam Of Giving Coins: After being hemmed in from all directions his massive comeback which made him chuckle and smile was that good Sunnah in Islam was that companion a new Sunnah of giving Sadaqah with coins. When he made this point I had disengaged from discussion and did not deem it worthy to engage him again. This does mean Shaykh’s (hafidha-ullah) earlier position that good Sunnah in Islam part of Hadith referrs to Sadaqah was incorrect. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told: "Narrated Abdullah: The Prophet said, "None is killed unjustly, but the first son of Adam will have a part of its burden." Sufyan said: "..a part of its blood because he was the first to establish the Sunnah of murdering" [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H423] Note the word Sunnah is used yet the description indicates son of Prophet Adam (alayhis salam) started the innovation of killing human beings. And he will be held responsible for every murder that takes place on earth. Hence the word Sunnah does and can give meaning of innovation due to context. Anyway lets go to words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) before coins are adressed: “He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice, way, tradition, precedent) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Islamic position is; prophetic Sunnah is already part of Islam. Reward being told in this Hadith is for what is not yet part of Islam but can be made part of Islam. Therefore the reward is for good innovation and to be precise innovated good Sunnahs. Our Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) said the companion who came to give bag of coins containing silver introduced a new way of giving Sadaqah by giving Sadaqah with coins. Our response is that Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) this does not support your position and refute our. In fact this establishes Islamic position because if a companion introduced new method of giving Sadaqah by using coins then a new innovation of good Sunnah was introduced in Islam. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would said the following in context of new innovation/Sunnah of giving Sadaqah with coins: “He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice, way, tradition, precedent) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it ...” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] This good innovated good Sunnah of giving Sadaqah with coins doesn’t refute the Islamic understanding instead it proves Islamic position. Islamic argument was the prophetic statement referrs to new innovated good Sunnah which already was not prophetic Sunnah. By saying coins was good Sunnah which no one ever acted before Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) unknowingly has refuted himself and proven Islamic position. 5.4 - Prophetic Words Were Regarding Good Sunnah Of Coins: My objective is education and therefore every feeble and impossiblity will also scrutinized so Shaykh (hadfidha-ullah) and others have best chance of guidance. For the sake of argument lets agree with Shaykh (hafidha-ullah); Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) made the statement regarding the coins because the companion was first person to use silver coins to give Sadaqah. What you should note is Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) if he wanted to make it specific to only coins he then would have said so in following words or similar: “The man who gave Sadaqah with silver coins has started good Sunnah of in Islam ...” Or he could have said: “The companion who introduced good Sunnah of giving Sadaqah with silver coins in Islam …” But Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) decided to make a general statement not limited to context. He said: “He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it ...” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Surely if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was capable make a specific statement if he wanted to but he didn’t. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) would not even dare to say; because he couldn’t, he didn’t know the words so none else should dare. The reason is simple the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) wanted to convey vast meanings because he has been sent with gift of Jawami al-Kalim: “... Allah's Messenger said: "I have been sent with short expression widest possible meaning (i.e. jawami al-kalim), and have been made victorious with awe (cast in my enemy's hearts), and while I was sleeping, I saw that the keys of the treasures of the world were placed in my hand.” [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H378] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was perfectly cabaple of using words which would limit and restrict understanding of his utterance in context of; silver coins, or dates, or clothes, and other edible items. And he was perfectly able to restrict implications of his utterance to the historical event but he didn’t. Even if we allow the lie of Shaykh (hafidha-ullah); Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) made the statement about coins. Then Islamic belief would be established that the statement is about innovating good Sunnahs into Islam. This means companion and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not believe every innovation is misguidance like Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) believes. And it also means the statement tells others that there is reward for innovating good Sunnahs into Islam. 5.5 - Matter Of Principle Regarding Generality And Interpretation: Even if we interpret the statement in context it cannot be limited and restricted due to the interpretation. In other words the contextual interpretation cannot limit/restrict the generality of prophetic words. The Haqiqi (i.e. real/true) meaning of; introducing some good Sunnah in Islam will always remain intact. And this is of innovation of good Sunnah in Islam will earn reward for one who introduces and those who follow and equal burden of sin for who innovates an evil Sunnah and those who follow. Any sort of interpretation contextual or thematic or linguistical cannot and will not alter the natural meaning of prophetic statement of good/evil Sunnah nor limit/restrict them. Only an idiot devoid of science of Tafsir would attempt to restrict generality of Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) words to context because of contextual interpretation. The prophetic statement of good/evil Sunnah is not only proof of reward for innovating good Sunnahs into Islam but it is also instruction proof for permissibility of Ijtihad and earning reward for it. And we already established Ijtihad regarding what is not prophetic teaching is innovation and valid Ijtihad is good innovation. 6.0 - Shar’ri Innovation And Its Types: Shar’i innovations are of three types: (i) good innovation, (ii) evil innovation. Hadith of good and evil Sunnah is proof of this because it tells of reward for innovating good Sunnah in Islam and tells of equal sin for innovating evil Sunnah in Islam. What is in Islam is part of Shari’ah and to make good/evil Sunnahs part of Islam is to make them part of Shari’ah. (iii) Linguistical innovation is which by its very nature is not good or bad from perspective of Shari’ah but it becomes part of Shari’ah due to Haram (i.e. prohibited) and Halal (i.e. permissible). 6.1 - Islamic Understanding Of Hadith Of Good And Evil Sunnah: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice, way, tradition, precedent) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it ...” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] And we Muslims say this Hadith is referring to innovation of good Sunnahs into Islam. Our reasoning is; prophetic Sunnah is already part of Islam. Hence by reviving a prophetic Sunnah we introduce nothing Sunnah into Islam which was not already part of Islam. Therefore the prophetic statement cannot be referring to prophetic Sunnah of giving Sadaqah and it must be referring to innovations introduced as good Sunnahs. Coming to evil Sunnah part of Hadith - it is stated: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this ..." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Evil is what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and what Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) decalred as evil/sinful. This part of Hadith is referring to evil innovations because words of Hadith indicating prophetic statement is regarding a Sunnah which is not already declared evil by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and not by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Therefore evil Sunnah part of Hadith must be referring to an evil Sunnah not already declared haram, or Shirk, or Kufr in Quran or Hadith. 6.2 - Evil Sunnah Statement In Perspective Of Ahadith Of Innovation: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: "Whoever introduces an innovation with which Allah and his Messenger are not pleased, he will have a (burden of) sin equivalent to that of those among the people who act upon it, without that detracting from their sins in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H210] “And whoever introduces an erroneous innovation which Allah is not pleased with, nor His Messenger, then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it, without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2677] Note both these Ahadith mean exactly the same as evil Sunnah Hadith. If evil Sunnah can mean evil innovation then there is no good and justifiable reason to say good Sunnah Ahadith do not referr to good innovation. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’salam) said: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this ..." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Our Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) applied the evil Sunnah part of Hadith to Hadith of every innovation is misguidance. Why selectively apply one part to innovation and not the other to innovation? If evil Sunnah is referring to innovation then good Sunnah is referring to good innovation and Ahadith in which companions deemed certain practices as good innovations will be quoted ahead. 6.3 - Companions Support Understanding Of Innovating Good Sunnah: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: "Whoever starts a سُنَّةَ خَيْرٍ (i.e. good Sunnah) which is followed, then for him is a reward and the likes of their rewards of whoever follows him, there being nothing diminished from their rewards." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2675] “The servant does not introduce سُنَّةً صَالِحَةً (i.e. righteous Sunnah) which is followed after him. The rest of the hadith is the same." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6468] "The servant does not introduce سُنَّةً صَالِحَةً (i.e. good Sunnah) which is followed after him. The rest of the hadith is the same." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6468] “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] These Ahadith differ in wording but all come togather to overwhelmingly establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had told his companions there is reward for innovating good Sunnahs into Islam. And companions did innovate good Sunnahs into Islam: “Ibn Ulayyah narrated to us, Jarir narrated, al-Hakim bin A'raj narrated; I asked Muhammad about Salat ad-Duha, while he was sitting near the house of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). He said: It is an innovation and what a fine innovation it is!" [Ref: Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Kitab Of Prayer – Salat ad-Duha, H3] "Narrated Muamar, narrated al-Zuhri, narrated [by Ibn Umar’s son] Sa'lim, [that his father] Ibn Umar said: At the time Uthman was killed no-one considered it desirable and the people did not innovate anything that is dearer to me than that prayer." [Ref: Musannaf Abd ar-Razzaq, Book Of Salat (No.2), Chapter al-Duha, H4868] “On that, 'Umar remarked نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. what an excellent innovation this is) but the prayer which they do not perform, but sleep at its time is better than the one they are offering.” [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] Please note that reward is for engaging in what is part of Islam i.e. Shari’ah. Hence these statements were made in context of Shari’ah and to be specific in context of Hadith of following words: He who introduced some good Sunnah (i.e. practice, way, tradition, precedent) in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it ...” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Alhasil: The companions said their innovations are good because they understood there is reward for them and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has told there is reward for innovated good Sunnahs. Conclusion: Hadith of; every innovation is misguidance; is restricted to a specific type of innovation. It is restricted to evil innovation and every evil innovation is misguidance and means of taking to fire of hell. Ahadith of good Sunnah and evil Sunnah in Islam indicate good and evil innovations introduced as good/evil Sunnahs into Islam. And the reward/sin for following these innovations is same for the innovator and for the one who follows such innovated good/evil Sunnahs. Shaykh (hafidha-ullah) refuted himself with coins/notes response because it still does mean an innovative good Sunnah was introduced into Islam. Wama alayna ilal balalghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi. FootNotes: - [1] “It was narrated that Jabir bin 'Abdullah said: "In his Khutbah the Messenger of Allah used to praise Allah as He deserves to be praised, then he would say: 'Whomsoever Allah (SWT) guides, none can lead him astray, and whomsoever Allah sends astray, none can guide. The truest of word is the Book of Allah and best of guidance is the guidance of Muhammad. The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is going astray, and every going astray is in the Fire.' Then he said: 'The Hour and I have been sent like these two.' Whenever he mentioned the Hour, his cheeks would turn red, and he would raise his voice and become angry, as if he were warning of an approaching army and saying: 'An army is coming to attack you in the morning, or in the evening!' (Then he said): 'Whoever leaves behind wealth, it is for his family, and whoever leaves behind a debt or dependents, then these are my responsibility, and I am the most entitled to take care of the believers.'" [Ref: Nisai, B19, H1579] “Jabir bin Abdullah said: When Allah's Messenger (may peace he upon him) delivered the sermon, his eyes became red, his voice rose, and his anger increased so that he was like one giving a warning against the enemy and saying: "The enemy has made a morning attack on you and in the evening too." He would also say: "The Last Hour and I have been sent like these two." And he would join his forefinger and middle finger; and would further say: "The best of the speech is embodied in the Book of Allah, and the best of the guidance is the guidance given by Muhammad. And the most evil affairs are their innovations; and every innovation is error." He would further say:, I am more dear to a Muslim even than his self; and he who left behind property that is for his family; and he who dies under debt or leaves children (in helplessness), the responsibility (of paying his debt and bringing up his children) lies on me." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] - [2] “Narrated Aisha: Allah's Messenger said: "If somebody innovates something which is not in harmony with the principles of our religion that thing is rejected." [Ref: Bukhari, B49, H861] This translation is widely available over internet but the one being quoted in main article is literal. - [3]“I asked Qasim b. Muhammad about a person who had three dwelling houses and he willed away the third part of every one of these houses; he (Qasim b. Muhammad) said: All of them could be combined in one house; and then said: 'A'isha informed me that Allah's Messenger said: He who did any act for which there is no sanction from our behalf, that is to be rejected. [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267]

Salam alayqum. Admin/Mod team ki tawajoh kay leyeh. Mein nay 226 articles likhay hen. Aur yeh sabhi mein nay forum par post kar deeyeh thay. Magr aaj apnay articles ka index page banaya toh maloom huwa kay sirf 190 articles forum par hen aur 36 articles missing/delete hen. Shahid forum kay upgrading kay doran kuch huwa ho. Allah kay shukr say mein articles save karta rehta hoon. Is leyeh nuqsan kuch nahin huwa magar Admin/Mods ko masla check karna chahyeh kay kia heh.

... Below ...

Mawlana Haq Nawaz Jhangvi kohi rahimullah, rahmatullah, kay qabil nahin. Yeh bi qattr Deobandi thay.

Salam alayqum. Yeh Allamah Saeed Ahmad Qadri sabiqa Deoband walay nahin. Yeh Firqa gohar-Shahi kay Saeed Ahmad Qadri hen.

Introduction: Wahhabi’s believe the Ahadith which indicate east as the direction and province of Najd as place of emergence of group of Satan/Khawarij are about Iraq. In contradiction to their belief, the Muslims believe the vast majority of adherents of early Khawarij were from Arabia – from the sub-tribes of Banu Rabia and Banu Mudhar. One will question – why does a Wahhabi believe those Ahadith are about Iraq? Answer is, Wahhabi’s and their Wahhabism emerged from Najd, fulfilling all the conditions which identify them as a Khariji sect, so to do damage control they declared the Ahadith of Najd/east were in reality about Iraq/north.[1] To decide between position of Muslims and their opponent the Wahhabi’s it is important to take into account the Hadith of - group of Satan is to emerge from the direction of sunrise. If one is living in Madinah and sees the sun rising from the direction of Iraq then applying the Hadith of east/sunrise to Iraq would be acceptable. If it is not possible to see the runrise from Iraq while standing in Madinah then application of east/sunrise Ahadith to Iraq is a innovation which takes to hell-fire. Group Of Satan Is Sect Of Kufr: Regarding Khawarij (i.e. group of Satan) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “... Messenger of Allah remarked: The summit of unbelief is towards the East and the pride and conceitedness is found among the owners of horses and camels who are rude and uncivil, people of the tents, and tranquillity is found among those who rear goats and sheep.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H87] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “Narrated 'Abdullah: The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointing to 'Aisha's house, he said thrice, "Affliction (will appear from) here," and, "from the side, where Satan's head will come out." [Ref: Bukhari, B53, H336] He was precisely pointing toward region of Riyadh, which is toward central Arabian province of Najd, read. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) came out of Hadhrat Aysha’s (radiallah ta’ala anha) house and while pointing toward east said: “Ibn Umar reported that Allah's Messenger came out from the house of 'A'isha and said: It would be from this side that there would appear the height of unbelief, viz. where appear the groups of Satan.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6941] This establishes Khawarij are Kuffar. Group Of Satan Appearing From Direction Of Sunrise: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was making dua for Yemen and Sham. Amongst the gathering people of Najd were present they requested that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) also make dua for Najd but Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) refused and said he will not make dua for Najd because group of Satan will emerge from Najd: "The People said, "And also on our Najd." He said, "O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Sham (north)! O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen." The people said, "O Allah's Apostle! And also on our Najd." I think the third time the Prophet said, "There (in Najd) is the place of earthquakes and afflictions and from there comes out the side of the head of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H214] Najd is east of Madinah and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: I heard Allah's Apostle while he was facing the East, saying, "Verily! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H213] In another Hadith it is recorded Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Narrated Salim's father: The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out," or said, "... the side of the sun (rise) ..." [Bukhari, B88, H212] Both are possible, if Prophet (sallallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out.”, this is supported Hadith and if he said: “Afflictions are there from the side of the sunrise!”, this also is supported by evidence. He reportedly has said: “Abu Huraira said: I heard the Prophet (may peace and blessings be upon him) saying: There came the people of Yemen, they are tender of feelings and meek of hearts. The belief is that of the Yemenites, the sagacity is that of the Yemenites, the tranquillity is among the owners of goats and sheep, and pride and conceitedness is among the uncivil owners of the camels, the people of the tents in the direction of sunrise.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H91] So far we have established from direction of east, the direction of sunrise, from the province of Najd group of Satan will emerge and the people of sunrise/east are uncivil owners of camels. The following hadith establishes people of east/sunrise are merciless and they are preoccupied with their camels and pay no attention to religion and group of Satan will appear from their direction: "True belief is Yemenite yonder but sternness and mercilessness are the qualities of those who are busy with their camels and pay no attention to the Religion where the two sides of the group of Satan will appear. Such qualities belong to the tribe of Rabi`a and Mudar." [Ref: Bukhari, Bo54, H521] This conclusively establishes the group of Satan is to emerge from east of Madinah in province of Najd from the direction of sunrise. Extremities Of Sunrise And Sunsetting: The following image explains the diagram used on suncalc website, image: Please do click on the link provided above. Then slide the time bar from zero to twenty. As the time changes so does the position of the sun. Next cycle the date from 1st January to 1st of every month in any year and note the place of sunrise and sunset change. You will also note that position of sunrise/sunset does not exceed the yellow arch but moves from south to north and back to south and then back to north, cycle continues. By zooming in and out of the map you will see precise locations of sunrise and sunset as well as general direction of sunrise/sunset. Sunrise And Sunset From Madinah: The following images point to position of sunrise and sunset during different months of 2014. Note every month the place of sunrise/sunset changes, note the change of dates on the images: The following picture displays the northern boundary of sunrise: Conclusion: This establishes it is impossible for one living in Madinah to see the sunrising from the direction of Iraq and it is obvious that sunrises from Yemen and between Riyadh and Buraydah region of Arabian peninsula. Hence the Ahadith which say the group of Satan will emerge from east from the direction of sunrise and from Najd cannot be referring to Iraq but they are about Najd which is precisely east from city of Madinah. The only fully fledged faction to emerge from east, as a sect, from the direction of sunrise, and from the province of Najd, from al Uyayna and al Dirriyah, fulfilling all the conditions which help the Muslims to identify them as group of Satan (i.e. Khawarij) are Wahhabi’s. This is the group of Kufr about which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said, the summit of Kufr is in east [of Madinah]. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Salam alayqum, agar nuqsan mein aur profit mein aap apni investment kay mutabiq shareek hen to phir jaiz heh jistera shares mein hota heh. Meri advice yahi heh kay aap istera ki website mein pesay invest nah karen aap ka nuqsan hoga. Yeh logoon nay apni rozi roti kay wastay baghayr maal kay upar maal hasil karnay ka silsila shoroon keeya huwa heh jis ka hasil nuqsan heh.

Salam alayqum, Allah ki lanat Deobandiat aur Wahhabiat par. Yeh karnama haram zada ghaan e Deoband hee anjam deh saktay hen jesay in kay uqabir kartay ahay hen. Joh banda is hadd taq gira shahid hi Alla ussay Islam par mawt deh. Yahi kuch Deobandiyoon kay be-asal o asool uqabir kartay ahay hen, Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (alayhi rahma) nay Shaykh Murtaza Hassan Darbangi ki be-asliyat ka wazia suboot pesh keeya, Abhas e Aakhira, parh kar dekh lenh. Allah ta'ala Musalmanoon kay iman o Islam ko mafooz rakhay. Ameen.

@Mushtaq Salam alayqum. Allah ta'ala aap ko is kaar e khayr ki bot jaza deh. Aap nay Deobandi'at kay faraad ka banda beech bazaar phora heh.

Salam alayqum, meray bhai, agar ek do rawayat zaeef hoon toh bi harj nahin keun kay is ki bees pachees rawayat mein say panch das toh sahih hoon gi. Mein asool e Hadith nahin janta magar sahih rawiyoon say kazzab ki rawayat ko taqwiyat zeroor milti heh. Aur Muhaditheen ka asool heh kay zaeef Hadith bi agar tadad mein ziyada ho toh darja Hassan par paunch jaati heh. Yeh toh Sahih Ahadith, Bukhari, Muslim ki rawayaat say sabat heh. Yahi uppar wali rawayaat idhr hen: here, here, here, here, here <-- Is aakhiri link mein Dhil Khuwaisira kay Khariji lashkar mein honay ka zikr bi heh. Pehli teen rawayat bukhari ki aur aakhiri do Muslim ki. Panchoon ki asnaad neechay hen. 1): حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ، حَدَّثَنَا هِشَامٌ، أَخْبَرَنَا مَعْمَرٌ، عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ، عَنْ أَبِي سَلَمَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ، قَالَ بَيْنَا النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقْسِمُ جَاءَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ 2): حَدَّثَنِي عَبْدُ الرَّحْمَنِ بْنُ إِبْرَاهِيمَ، حَدَّثَنَا الْوَلِيدُ، عَنِ الأَوْزَاعِيِّ، عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ، عَنْ أَبِي سَلَمَةَ، وَالضَّحَّاكِ، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ، قَالَ بَيْنَا النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم يَقْسِمُ 3): حَدَّثَنَا أَبُو الْيَمَانِ، أَخْبَرَنَا شُعَيْبٌ، عَنِ الزُّهْرِيِّ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنِي أَبُو سَلَمَةَ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، أَنَّ أَبَا سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيَّ ـ رضى الله عنه ـ قَالَ بَيْنَمَا نَحْنُ عِنْدَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ 4): حَدَّثَنِي أَبُو الطَّاهِرِ، أَخْبَرَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ وَهْبٍ، أَخْبَرَنِي يُونُسُ، عَنِ ابْنِ شِهَابٍ، أَخْبَرَنِي أَبُو سَلَمَةَ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، عَنْ أَبِي سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيِّ، ح . وَحَدَّثَنِي حَرْمَلَةُ بْنُ يَحْيَى، وَأَحْمَدُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ الْفِهْرِيُّ، قَالاَ أَخْبَرَنَا ابْنُ وَهْبٍ، أَخْبَرَنِي يُونُسُ، عَنِ ابْنِ شِهَابٍ، أَخْبَرَنِي أَبُو سَلَمَةَ بْنُ عَبْدِ الرَّحْمَنِ، وَالضَّحَّاكُ الْهَمْدَانِيُّ، أَنَّ أَبَا سَعِيدٍ الْخُدْرِيَّ، قَالَ بَيْنَا نَحْنُ عِنْدَ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ 5): حَدَّثَنِي أَبُو الطَّاهِرِ، وَيُونُسُ بْنُ عَبْدِ الأَعْلَى، قَالاَ أَخْبَرَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ وَهْبٍ، أَخْبَرَنِي عَمْرُو بْنُ الْحَارِثِ، عَنْ بُكَيْرِ بْنِ الأَشَجِّ، عَنْ بُسْرِ بْنِ سَعِيدٍ، عَنْ عُبَيْدِ اللَّهِ بْنِ أَبِي رَافِعٍ، مَوْلَى رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم In asnaad mein aap ka bayan keeya huwa rawi nahin. Baqi mein nay is website par, www.Sunnah.com par search keeya toh aap ki rawayat kay mutabiq 9 Ahadith milleen joh juzzi ya qulli tor par aap ki pesh karda Hadith kay mowafiq hen. Aur aap in sab rawayat ko uppar wali panch kay saath is link par visit kar ka dekh saktay hen, here. Mein kafi arsa pehlay Wahhabi thah phir Deobandi huwa aur Kharijiat kay mozoo par tehqeeq kee thee aur sabat huwa Wahhabi hi Khariji hen aur yeh ek waja thee meri Wahhabiyat chornay ki. Is waja say yeh mazmoon aur us kay mutalliq rawayat joh kutub Ahadith mein hen is say waqif hoon. Agar mazeed madad darkar huwi toh request karyeh ga.

Salam alayqum, Yeh banda Khawarij kay lashkar mein thah. Hadhrat Amir Muawiyah (radiallah ta'ala anhu) say joh jang Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta'ala anhu) ki jang huwi yeh woh wali jang nahin. Yeh woh jang heh joh Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta'ala anhu) aur Khawarij kay darmiyan mein huwi thee. Yeh banda (i.e. Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi, an-Najdi) Khariji thah aur Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta'ala anhu) kay khilaaf lara thah. Hadith mein aata heh kay doh jammatoon (Hadhrat Ali aur Hadhrat Muawiyah) say ek giro niklay ga aur joh giro haq par hoga (i.e. Hadhat Ali ki jammat) woh unneh (i.e. khawarij) qatal karay gi. Hadith mein ata heh kay Khawarij nay Nahrawan kay maqam par Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta'ala) say jang ki aur sab qatal huwa sirf ginti kay das khariji kay bachay. Yeh banda Nahrawan ki jang mein qatal huwa. Aur shoroon mein yeh Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta'ala anhu) ka supporter aur ghaliban uneeh ki fauj mein thah magar jab Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta'ala anhu) nay Hadhrat Amir Muawiyah (radiallah ta'ala anhu) say rabtay huway aur Abu Musa al-Ashari (radiallah ta'ala anhu) waghera ko munsif chuna gaya toh yeh banda aur baqi Khawarij Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta'ala anhu) kay khilaaf ho gay. Aur nateejan jang huwi Nahrawan par.

Yeh Hadih Sahih heh balkay mutawatir heh yehni Sahih say bi Sahih ... is ko zaeef kehnay wala parlay darjay ka jahil ho sakta heh ... Wahhabi ko choren ... aap befikr ho kar issay daleel banahen. Is'see matan ki Ahadith Sahih Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmadhi, Nisai, Ibn Majah, mein bari tadad say rawayat mein hen. Mein ek andazay say kehta hoon kay 25 say zayada rawayat hoon gi is Hadith ki taeed mein.

Salam alayqum. Janab joh dawa karta heh us say pehlay daleel manga karen aur joh daleel ho ussay pesh keeya keren. Hazaroon banday kia kia baktay hen har kissi ki ko agar baghayr daleel wali bakwas ka jawab denay lagay toh phir aur kaam kissi nay kia karna heh. Pir Mehr Ali Shah Golarvi rahimullah nay kissi bi jaga Deobandi Ulamah ko acha nahin likha. Khawaja Ghulam Fareed rahimullah Deobandiyoon kay apni zindgi mein sakht mukhalif thay. Un kay marnay kay baad logoon nay un ko Deobandi aur Deobandiyon ka ham-nawa banaya heh. Jab taq woh zinda thay wo Sunni aur Ahle Sunnat kay muhafiz thay. Unoon nay Sunni Ulamah ki kutb ki aur Fatwoon ki ta'eed bi ki thee aur munazroon mein jahan par judge muqarrar huway wahan par un ka fesla Ahle Sunnat kay haq mein deeya. Magar jab banda zinda nah raha toh us ko kohi kuch bana sakta heh. Misaal kay tor par Syed Saifullah Shah Farooqi, Sabiq Deobandi thay joh Wahhabi huway, phir Allah ka karam huwa aur Sunni ho gahay, magar Wahhabi un ki video upload kartay hen kay yeh hamara heh Barelwi tha abh Wahhabi huwa heh. Aur yeh doka baazi aur faraad baazi aap kay zamanay mein ho rahi heh. Maulana Saeed Ahmad Qadri pehlay zamanay mein Deobandi thay ... bad mein kissi mauzoo par munazra huwa toh Sunni ho ga'hay. Wahhabi abi taq un ki kitaboon ko phblish kar rahay hen kay yeh hamara heh aur koshish kar rahay hen kay yeh hamara heh. Halanh kay Maulana Sahib nay taqreeri ilanaat bi keeyeh aur internet par mojood hen. Mujjay bi is ka pata heh aur joh ilm rakhtay hen un ko bi pata heh, magar ainda 25/50 saloon mein yeh recording Ghayb ho jahay gi aur phir Deobandi kahen gay jistera abh kehtay hen kay us kay Sunni honay ki kohi daleel nahin. Woh toh Deobandi thah, raha aur is'see per mara. Is zamanay kay banday apna maqsid hasil karnay ki khatir kuch bi kar saktay hen aur kartay hen. Agar kissi Sunni Maulvi nay us zamanay mein la-ilmi mein ya rawayati mulaqatoon mein kissi Wahhabi ko salam kalam keeya aur meethay bol bolay toh ussay aaj kay dawr mein Deobandi/Wahhabi bana leeya gaya. Doobtay ko tinkay ka sahara aur Wahhabi/Deobandi ko shubay, jhoot aur farad ka. Yahan par abh sab kuch chalta heh. Jhoot jhoot nahin raha aur sach jhoot ho chuka heh. Imandar bey-iman heh aur bey-iman imandar. Yahi qayamat ki nishani thee aur yahi ho raha heh. Behtreen tariqa yeh heh kay Zaatun kay chakr say nikal kar batoon par fesla karen. Yehni is baat par mat tawajoh denh kay Deobandi kehta heh falan nay is ki ta'eed ki. Balkay tawajoh is par denh kay joh baat likhi heh woh ghalat heh ya sahih. Agar ghalat heh toh, Pir kia Ghawth bi ho toh darust nahin ho sakti aur joh sahih ho ussay Sahabi ka kehna bi ghalat nahin kar sakta. Zaaton kay chakroon mein paren gay toh sari zindgi Maulviyoon ki safahiyan pesh kartay rahen gay aur safahiyan talab kartay rahen gay. Batoon kay chakr mein paray toh ek doh wazahatoon mein fesla ho jahay ga aur jaan choot jahay gi sari zindgi ki maghz mari say.

Is ka hissa dohim to kab ka publish huwa heh. Yeh new to nahin ho sakta.