MuhammedAli

Introduction: Opponents of Muslims believe historical Najd is in Iraq but the Muslims believe it is in Saudi Arabia and part of central province of modern Saudi state. Focus of this article would be to write a guide using which Muslims can refute the arguments of infidels. The Ahadith About Najd And Group Of Satan: Narrated Ibn 'Umar: The Prophet said, "O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Sham! O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen." 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 group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H214] Why The Quoted Hadith Is Important: Khariji sect is responsible for destruction of Muslims throughout the world, and it has been responsible for numerous systematic genocide of Muslim populations of earth starting from Saudi Arabia, from region called Najd. I dare to say hundred percent of world terrorism, associated with Muslims, is committed by the members of this sect. We know these famous terrorists as members of various groups, Al-Qaidah, ISIS, TTP, Boko Haram, and Al Shabab, few to mention. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold, from Najd group of Satan will emerge and he described their activities. And he refused to supplicate Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to bless people of Najd. It is important to know the precise location of Najd and the direction from which the group of Satan was to emerge because it will serve to protect the Islam of Muslims. Infidels have attempted to dilute the teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with their misguidance so their Khariji sect which emerged from Saudi Arabia’s province of Najd is not associated with the Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Hence objective is to provide prophetic guidance with which the Muslims can recognise where Najd is. Seventeen Points Which Help To Correctly Identify Najd: (a) Prophet was in Madinah, ( on the pulpit of Masjid Nabvi, © delivering a sermon about tribulations which Ummah would face, (d) he pointed toward house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha), see maps, here.[1] (e) According to another Hadith he faced toward East,[2] (f) he pointed toward East[3], (g) according to another Hadith he pointed toward East while standing at the door of Hafsa (radiallah ta’ala anha) or Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha)[4], (h) pointed toward the direction of sunrise[5], (i) sunrises between southern boundry of Kuwait, (j) and western boundary of Oman, (k) to indicate the direction from which group of Satan – Khawarij - will emerge he mentioned Najd by name, see maps - here and here[6], (l) in context of established regions of Sham (i.e. Greater Syria), Yemen - Najd also must have been major region cannot be a name of mud-hut in Iraq, here, (m) Najd means, raised, elevated land - Najd is mountainous terrain, here, here. East of Madinah, region around Riyadh, (n) Dhil Quwaisirah at-Tamimi was leader of Khawarij[7], (o) he had companions (i.e. like minded Khawarij) from his own tribes[8], (p) Banu Tamim was situated toward East of Madinah in direction of Riyadh, here, here and here. (q) Alhasil, Najd is in contexted by East, East is contexted by sunrise, sunrise is contexted by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointing toward house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha), and this direction is contexted by location of Banu Tamim in East from the tribe which Dhil Quwaisirah and his followers emerged. And from his descendents emerged second major Fitnah of Khawarij – once again from Najd – lead by Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, popularly known as Wahhabism/Salafism. Make Note Of Following Point: When an enemy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) tells you Najd is in Iraq. Check if his claim accords with all of the facts derived from prophetic guidance mentioned and refferenced above. If foolish one tells you Khawarij appeared in Iraq therefore Najd is in Iraq then check it with prophetic guidance if all the details mentioned above fit the claim. It is not impossible for few points to apply to a city, village, region on earth but you will never find all seventeen points applying to anything but historical Najd. In addition to refuting the claims of infidels this guide also serves the purpose of verifying Islamic position regarding Najd and it is important that Muslims verify the Islamic position instead of blind acceptance. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] “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 head of Satan comes out." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H714] House of Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) was/is in Madinah. It is were Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is laid to rest after his departure from earthly life. This Hadith establishes four points out of seventeen. - [2] “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 horns of Satan would appear.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6938] - [3] “Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: I saw Allah's Apostle pointing towards the east saying, "Lo! Afflictions will verily emerge hence; from the (side of the head of) Satan appears." [Ref: Bukhari, B54, H499] “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: I heard the Prophet saying, "Afflictions will emerge from here," pointing towards the East.” [Ref: Bukhari, B63, H217] - [4] “Ibn `Umar reported that Allah's Messenger stood by the door (of the apartment of) Hafsa and, pointing towards the east, he said: The turmoil would appear from this side, viz. where the horns of Satan would appear, and he uttered these words twice or thrice and `Ubaidullah b. Sa`id in his narration said: The Messenger of Allah had been standing by the door of `A'isha.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6939] - [5] “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 of sun (rise) ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] Following Hadith describes people of East as, uncivil owners of camel and as people of tents, which is refference to people of Najd, because Najdis had large number of camels, and lived a beduin/nomads -: “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] Note, the Hadith 212, literally states, group of sun, but because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) used the phrase, direction of sunrise, in Hadith 91, educated guess is that he also meant the same here. That would mean, the group of sunrise, the group of Satan, are one and the same. - [6] “Narrated Ibn `Umar: (The Prophet) said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen." People said, "Our Najd as well." The Prophet again said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said again, "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the head of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] - [7] There are many names mentioned of leader of Khawarij. Harqus Ibn Zuhayr, Abdullah Ibn Dhil Khuwaisirah, and Abdullah Ibn Wahb Ibn Wahb Al-Rasibi: “Will you go to Mu`awiyah and the people of Syria, and leave them (i.e. Khawarij) behind among your children and property? I swear by Allah, I hope these are the same people, for they shed the blood unlawfully, and attacked the cattle of the people so go on in the name of Allah. Salamah b. Kuhail said: Zaid b. Wahb then informed me of all the halting places one by one, (saying): Until we passed a bridge. When we fought with each other, `Abd Allah b. Wahb al-Rasibi, who was the leader of the Khawarij, said to them: Throw away the lances and pull out the swords from their sheaths, for I am afraid they will adjure you as they had adjured on the day of Harura. So they threw away their lances and pulled out their swords, and the people pierced them with their lances. They were killed (lying one on the other). On that day only two persons of the partisans (of `Ali) were afflicted. `Ali said: Search for the man with the crippled hand. But they could not find him. Then `Ali got up himself and went to the people who had been killed and were lying on one another. He said: Take them out. They found him just near the ground. So he shouted: Allah is Most Great! He said: Allah spoke the truth, and His Apostle has conveyed. `Ubaidat al-Salmani stood up to him, saying: Commander of the Faithful! Have you heard it from the Messenger of Allah? He said: Yes, by him, there is no God but He. He put to swear thrice and he swore.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B41, H4750] - [8] “Narrated Abu Sa'id:While the Prophet was distributing something, 'Abdullah bin Dhil Khawaisira At-Tamimi came and said, "Be just, O Allah's Apostle!" The Prophet said, "Woe to you ! Who would be just if I were not?" 'Umar bin Al-Khattab said, "Allow me to cut off his neck ! " The Prophet said, " Leave him, for he has companions, and … 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 (or like a moving piece of flesh). 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 (i.e., 'Abdullah bin Dhil-Khawaisira At-Tarnimi): 'And among them are men who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.'” [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] This man was in contact with Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) as the following Hadith indicates: Abu Maryam said: “This man with the crippled hand was on that day with us in the mosque. We would sit with him by day and by night, and he was a poor man. I saw him attending the meals of Ali which he took with the people, and I clothed him with a cloak of mine. Abu Maryam said: The man with the crippled hand was called Nafi` Dhu al-Thadyah (Nafi`, man of nipple). He had in his hand something like a female breast with a nipple at it ends like the nipple of the female breast. If had some hair on it like the whiskers of cat. Abu Dawud said: He was known among the people by the name of Harqus.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B41, H4752]

Introduction: An individual with the online nick of Qatadah on AhlalHdeeth forum wrote: “I need some help, alot of people use these ahadith to claim that in this ummah - the majority of the people won't commit shirk.” Please take note, he used, in this Ummah, and connected it with the, majority of the people, indicating that he believes majority of Muslims are polytheists. He then refferences the following Hadith: “By Allah! I am not afraid that you will associate with Allah (i.e. idol-gods as partners to worship them) after my death, but I am afraid that you will compete with one another for the worldly things." [Ref: Bukhari, B23, H428] Then he goes to question: “Many sufis use the first two narrations to prove that the majority of ummah won't commit shirk. So is it true that the majority of the ummah does not commit shirk?” His belief becomes apparent from his questions; that he believes majority of Muslims are polytheists. Qatadah’s intention was to seek clarification because evidence presented to him by Muslims contradicted his established/cherished belief. The members resorted to quoting him commentaries of two major scholars. Shaykh Ibn Hajar (rahimullah) said according to this Hadith, companions would not commit shirk after death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). On other hand Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) is on record to have interpreted it to mean, Islamic nation would not apostate as a whole and it is saved from it by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In the same thread a clever clot with nickname of Abu Alqamah also responded with following Hadith: “The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) smiled when he saw them, then he said: 'I think that you heard that Abu 'Ubaidah has arrived with something?' They said: 'Yes O Messenger of Allah! 'He said: 'Then receive good news, and hope for what will please you. By Allah! It is not poverty that I fear for you, but what I fear for you is that the world will be presented for you just as it was presented for those before you,then you will compete for it, just as they competed for it, and it will destroy you, just as it destroyed them.'” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B11, H2462] He went on to reference Takhreej of a Pakistani Khariji, Shaykh Zubair Ali Za’i, and then posed a question: “So will [Shaykh Habib Ali Al-] Jifri and his fellow Mushriks say that poverty is impossible for the Ummah?” His rehtorical un-said statement was, if poverty is impossible for Ummah then so is Shirk! Implying that poverty is not impossible for Ummah [because it is demonstratable] hence major Shirk in Ummah is also not impossible. Important Information Material Being Targetted: Abu Alqamah seems to be original author of this because he is the earliest source using the material. This argument presented by Abu Alqamah has been used as a counter argument on many forums. Hence it is important that it is adressed in the light of Quran and Ahadith. Indicating The Path Ahead: It was imperative to refute the claim majority of Muslims have fallen into major Shirk and establish Islamic position from evidence of Ahadith before responding to Abu Alqamah’s argument. To properly understand the answer it is important readers acquaint themselves with the following two articles, first one establishes the principles on which the objection will be explained, here, and the second one resulted the principles, and contains explanation of related Ahadith, here. Three Essential Principles: i) What Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not fear, is for two reasons, a) it will not take place, b) or it may take place, and if it does, it will not negatively impact on Eman (i.e. faith) and Amaal (i.e. actions) of a significant majority. ii) What Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fears because it will be a major Fitnah in his Ummah and it will negatively impact on Eman (i.e. faith) and Amaal (i.e. actions) of his followers. iii) If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fears a tribulation more then another, he fears it more because it will cause greater harm to Eman and Amaal, of his Ummah. Discussing The Hadith Which Qatadah Refferenced: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said, he does not fear Shirk for us but he fears his Ummah hoarding wealth, competing for wealth. What would be more damaging to his Sahabah/Ummah? The appearance of major Shirk or tribulation of wealth? What will you be more worried about, Comapanions/Muslims hoarding wealth or major Shirk? Yet the Messenger of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was worried about his Sahabah/Ummah hoarding wealth. Does he not have more right to be worried about Eman of his Sahabah/Ummah then you being worried about major Shirk? He has more right and more care for his Sahabah/Ummah then you could ever have then why was not he worried about something so important? Will you not be rational and agree that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) informed him and he knew his Sahabah/Ummah, as whole, will not fall into major Shirk, with exception of few here and there? Common sense dictates what damages most should be cause of greater concern. And lack of concern for major Shirk is proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was informed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that over whelming majority of Ummah will remain free from major Shirk. Detailed Analysis Of What Imam Ibn Hajar Said: Imam Ibn Hajars interpretation – no shirk in companions – is for group of Sahabah - and via Qiyas establishes that Hadith means, there will be no Shirk in Ummah. Note Imam Ibn Hajar (rahimullah) applied this Hadith to whole group of companions not majority. And Imam Ibn Hajar (rahimullah) while commenting on related Ahadith also stated that it refers to Ummah as whole, the main body, the majority. Imam Nawavi (rahimullah) is refferenced as interpreting the Hadith for in favour of majority of Ummah – majority will be free from Shirk. Alhasil we have established majority will be free from major Shirk. Commenting On The Hadith Quoted By Qatadah In Light Of Principles: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not fear Shirk for his entire group of Sahabah and for majority of his Ummah. The principle is, what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not fear, is for two reasons, a) it will not take place, b) or it may take place, and if it does, it will not negatively impact on Eman (i.e. faith) and Amaal (i.e. actions) of a significant majority. Major Shirk has taken place in the Muslim Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Only a insignificant minority has become polytheists by adopting other religions. It has not taken place at all in the group of Sahabah and they remained free from it. In the same Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated, he feared that we the Muslims will compete with each other to gather wealth. Lets try to understand this in the light of the following principle, what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fears because it will be a major Fitnah in his Ummah and it will negatively impact on Eman (i.e. faith) and Amaal (i.e. actions) of his followers. Striving to gather the wealth of world was a Fitnah which the earliest Muslims had fallen into and it effected their actions and belief but only a little. But tribulation of wealth is a type of Fitnah which intensifies with progression of time and effect of it upon actions and belief are severe each passing era. Regarding the harm of wealth upon Sahabah Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is also reported to have said: “Abu Darda' said: "The Messenger of Allah came out to us when we were speaking of poverty and how we feared it. He said: 'Is it poverty that you fear? By the One in Whose Hand is my soul, (the delights and luxuries of) this world will come to you in plenty, and nothing will cause the heart of anyone of you to deviate except that. By Allah, I am leaving you upon something like Bayda (white, bright, clear path) the night and day of which are the same.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H5] In another Hadith it is stated in Hadith that effect of wealth will lead people further and further from religion of Islam: “The Day of Judgement has come close, and mankind will only increase their desire for this world, and they will only go farther and farther away from Allah." [Ref: Mustadrik al-Hakim, V4, H324] And this hadith is not obviously not about companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), maybe serveral generations after – in the era of scholars exhorting people to practice Zuhd due to material excess. And regarding the last era of Muslims Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said:“… the world will be presented for you just as it was presented for those before you,then you will compete for it, just as they competed for it, and it will destroy you, just as it destroyed them.'” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B11, H2462] This establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) feared the harm of wealth because it takes people away from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And this Fitnah is intensifying in its effect of distancing Muslims from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Hadith Quoted By Abu Alqamah In Light Of Stated Principle: The application of Hadith quoted by Abu Alqamah can be upon Ummah as whole, or just companions, but correct understanding is inclusive of companion and Muslims Ummah as whole. Abu Alqamah quoted the following Hadith in full – but I will quote related part only: “By Allah! It is not poverty that I fear for you, but what I fear for you is that the world will be presented for you just as it was presented for those before you,then you will compete for it, just as they competed for it, and it will destroy you, just as it destroyed them.'” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B11, H2462] In light of the following principle, what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not fear, is for two reasons, a) it will not take place, b) or it may take place, and if it does, it will not negatively impact on Eman (i.e. faith) and Amaal (i.e. actions) of a significant majority. In other words, poverty will not negatively effect the belief and actions of majority of Muslims. Poverty will effect a minority but it will not distance them from religion of Islam and this is why Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not fear it but instead feared wealth because it will distance people from Islam. Directly Adressing Abu Alqamah’s Statement: Tamheed, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said, a wind will blow which will take life of all believers, Satan will come to the people and incite them to revert to religion of their forefathers and they will do so. And the Jahalat is, applying the Khaas (i.e. specific) on entire Muslim Ummah via Qiyas. Applying Ahadith which were for Kafirs living after the blowing of wind to Muslims living before blowing of cool/musky wind is Jahalat. Applying Ahadith which are about Kafirs upon Muslims is Jahalat. Applying Ahadith which are specific to Arabs upon entire Muslim Ummah of many nationalities is Jahalat. Abu Alqamah the Khariji stated: “So will [Shaykh Habib Ali Al-] Jifri and his fellow Mushriks say that poverty is impossible for the Ummah?” We Muslims say, neither falling of a Muslim, or a small minroity into major Shirk is impossible, nor poverty is impossible. And such was not claimed by any Muslim scholar. An insignificant minority falling into major Shirk and minority suffering due to poverty has had no major negative impact on the belief and actions of Muslim Ummah as whole. The impossibility is any of these two negatively effecting the Eman and Amaal of majority of Muslims. Yet your minority Kharijism presents itself as group of Tawheed and charges the protected majority as people of Shirk. The impossibility is of majority of Muslims on earth, of past, of present, and of future falling into major Shirk and poverty. Yet leader of your Khariji sect, Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, nullified the creed of Tawheed of entire Ummah that preceeded him by saying no one prior to him knew meaning of, there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah.[1] The impossibility is, the Muslims of Arabian Peninsula as whole engaging in idol worship. Yet despite this Shaykh of Najd accused the Muslims of entire Arabian Peninsula of being Mushriks under the pretext that they are worshiping idols - graves, trees, Jinn, angels. And those who followed his Satanic cult escaped this Takfir. And those who did not accept the teaching of his Satanic cult he made their blood Halal for his followers, looting of their properties, enslaving their women and children. And his followers relentlessly conducted raids on towns inhabitated by Muslims, they killed hundreds of thousands of Muslims, looted property of Muslims, enslaved and raped thousand of Muslim women based on this charge of Shirk. The impossibility is falling of Arab Muslims into idol-worship – i.e. Al-Lat, Al-Uzza, Dhil Al Khalasa – and returning to religion of their forefathers before the blowing of wind. Yet even though this has not happened and Muslims have not reverted to worship of mentioned idols.Nor these Ahadith are for Muslims of Arabia. These Ahadith foretell of Arab disbelievers becoming polytheists after blowing of cool musky wind which will result in death of all Muslims and Satan will incite the remaining disbelievers to revert to polytheism. The All Important Questions And Bare Facts: Did we the Muslims ever state major Shirk impossible for minority from Ummah, O Abu Alqamah? Has any scholars of Islam ever stated no Muslim will ever fall into major Shirk in context of the Hadith quoted earlier? Muslims and Islamic scholars have always rejected the idea; the majority of Muslims and the Muslim Ummah as whole, has fallen into major Shirk. And this is fundamental dispute between Muslims, and Khariji Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab and his followers. Proponents of his teachings in past and at present charge the over whelming majority of Muslims of major Shirk – directly or indirectly. Directly, the sub-continentian protegy of, Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, Shaykh Shah Ismail Dehalvi in his Taqwiyatul Iman in the opening chapter of book clearly stated majority of Muslims are polytheists but claim to be Muslims, here. Directly, grandson of Shaykh of Najd, author of Fath Al Majeed, also testifies to this fact in his own way, here. Indirectly, Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab declared many practices and beliefs of Muslims as major Shirk. These beliefs prior to him, during his life time, and there after have been practices and beliefs of majority of Muslims of earth. Shaykh of Najd in his excess even went to claim that prior to him no one knew Tawheed and he claimed to haved revived Islam after extinction of it. Which is a veiled attempt to claim Prophet-hood for himself and whole-sale Takfir of entire Muslims of earth.[2] Anyway objective was to establish that dispute between Muslims and Wahhabis was/is over if majority of Muslim population of earth is Mushrik or not? Muslims arguing for no, and Khawarij arguing for yes. Evidence Of Opponents Of Islam And Its Explanation: Khawarij quote many Ahadith to argue their case. One such Hadith is where Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “… and the Last Hour will not come before the tribes of my Ummah attach themselves to the polytheists and tribes of my Ummah worship idols. There will be among my people thirty great liars ..." [Ref: Abu Dawood, B30, H4239] They argue, Prophet used the words, my Ummah, and therefore he meant, Muslims. Hence Hadith establishes Muslims will attach themselves to polytheists and worship idols. “The (system) of night and day would not end until the people have taken to the worship of Lat and 'Uzza.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6945] They say, his Ummah will worship, Lat and Uzza, the idol-gods of pre-Islamic era, including worship of Dhi Al-Khalasa, the patron idol-god of Bani Daws: "Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The Last Hour would not come until the women of the tribe of Daus would be seen going round Dhi al-Khalasa (for worship) and Dhi al-Khalasa is a place in tabala, where there was a temple in which the people of the tribe of Daus used to worship the idol." [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6944] I say, Shirk being adopted by people mentionted in these Ahadith, and Shirk stated in these Ahadith, no Muslim will ever fall into. The Muslim Ummah is protected from Shirk mentioned in these Ahadith. Restart - When Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated my Ummah will fall into idol-worship and mentioned idols by name etc. Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) questioned Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) regarding the verse : "He it is Who has sent His Messenger with right guidance, and true religion so that He may cause it to prevail upon all religions, though the polytheists are averse (to it)" [Ref: 9:33] Asking that Islam is to dominate and prevail over all religions then how come Muslims will fall into polytheism? Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said it will happen as Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills but: "A'isha reported: I heard Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: "The (system) of night and day would not end until the people have taken to the worship of Lat and 'Uzza (in Arabian peninsula). I said: Allah's Messenger, I think when Allah has revealed this verse: "He it is Who has sent His Messenger with right guidance, and true religion, so that He may cause it to prevail upon all religions, though the polytheists are averse (to it)", it implies that is going to be fulfilled. Thereupon he (Allah's Apostle) said: It would happen as Allah would like. Then Allah would send the sweet fragrant air by which everyone who has even a mustard grain of faith in Him would die and those only would survive who would have no goodness in them. And they would revert to the religion of their forefathers." [Ref: Muslim, B41, H6945] In other words, after Islam prevails over all religions then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will send a wind which will take life of all Muslims and [non-Muslims] who remain behind will revert to the religion of their fore-fathers i.e – polytheism, worship of idols, Lat, Uzza, Dhil Al Khalasa, etc. Following three articles will put everything in perspective in greater detail then I have done in here, please read in order, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Alhasil the Ahadith which opponents of Islam employ against us are in reality are about a time when there will be no Muslim on earth and the infidels in Saudi Arabia will revert to idolatry after death of Muslims. These Ahadith refer to disbelievers who will out-survive the Muslims and day of judgment will be established upon them. Basis Of Muslim Argument Against Khawarij: In the language of Quran, idol-worship is stated to be Satan worship. In the following verse, invoking idol-gods - which is an act of worship - is stated to be invoking Satan in the following verse: “(The Mushrikeen) leaving Him (i.e. Allah) call but upon (i.e. yad'una) godesses: They call but upon Satan the persistent rebel!” [Ref: 4:117] In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Did I not command you, O Children of Adam, that you should not worship Shaitan (Satan). Verily, he is a plain enemy to you.” [Ref: 36:60] Alhasil Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) forbade the worship of idols and in language of Quran Satan worship is idol worship. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said that Satan has despaired regarding Ummah worshiping him: “Verily, the Satan has lost all hopes that the worshippers would ever worship (him) in the peninsula of Arabia, but he (is hopeful) that he would sow the seed of dissension amongst them." [Ref: Muslim, B39, H6752] By this Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) meant, Satan has realised the impossibility of Muslims of Arabia ever worshiping idol-gods as whole hence he has dispaired. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: “That is grave disobedience. This day those who disbelieve have despaired of (eradicating) your religion; so fear them not, but fear Me. This day I have perfected for you your religion and completed My favor upon you and have approved for you Islam as religion. But whoever is forced by severe hunger with no inclination to sin - then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” [Ref: 5:3] In this verse despair of disbelievers mentioned and they despaired because the chief of polytheists had realised Islam is to stay and this became apparent to followers of Iblees when Islam dominated the Arabian Peninsula. Alhasil Muslim Ummah as whole will be Shirk free in Arabian Peninsula. In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said regarding Ummah as whole – including three generations which succeeded him: “By Allah! I am not afraid that you will associate with Allah (i.e. idol-gods as partners to worship them) after my death, but I am afraid that you will compete with one another for the worldly things." [Ref: Bukhari, B23, H428] And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is also reported to have said about Ummah as whole:“The thing that I fear most for my Ummah is associating others with Allah. I do not say that they will worship the sun or the moon or idols, but deeds done for the sake of anyone other than Allah, and hidden desires.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, Vol.1 B37, H4205] All this comes togather to establish Muslims of Arabia as whole and Muslim Ummah as whole will not fall into major Shirk. And this is suffient to refute beliefs and teachings of Khawarij. The Issue Of Majority And Minority: In addition to this, readers should not, even though it will be acknowledge a minority from Muslims can become polytheist. It should be noted that 51% is majority and 49% is minority but I by no way believe such subtantial minority from Muslims can leave Islam and adopt polytheistism. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “Anas bin Malik said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah say: ‘My nation will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not say majority. That numerically would be at minimum 51% but he said great majority. Minority which can possibly become polytheist in my understanding will not exceed 0.5% (i.e. half a percent) of total Muslim population and more closer to 0.01%, and this percentage is based on demonstratable, and at minimum, arguable evidence. A Thought Provoking Fact: O people of Iblees, note that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) left us guidance for minor things. If grave-worship, tree-worship, was to be practisced by Muslims, would he not left us some guidance regarding this? Would he not have told us after me graves and occupants of graves will be worshiped? And would he not warn Muslims to not to worship tree after he passes away? He left us clear guidance regarding minor sings but provided us no guidance regarding major Shirk which according to the Khawarij has engulfed the vast majority of Muslims? Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: “And he is not with-holder of Ghayb.” [Ref: 81:24] Had it been in knowledge of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then He would not have with-held such crucial information from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would not have with-held it from his Ummah. Absence of such information is proof that there was no such thing to take place. Or he could have foretold – a Shaykh will be born from this Najd, from that town, in a era entire Arabian peninsula will be upon grave-worship, tree worship, saint-worship, Jinn-worship, angel-worship, and none from them will know meaning of, there is no Deity except Allah, it will be a time when over whelming majority will be in Shirk, then this Shaykh from Najd would rise and fight for religion of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), he will find out what true Islam is, he will find out what the meaning of, there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah, is. He will then strive hard and will suffer, and this Shaykh will be forced from his home town, but Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) aid him through leader, and they both will come togather, one will be millitary man upon Tawheed, other the scholar of guidance and Tawheed, and they will go on to repopulate Arabian Peninsula with Tawheed and world in general. Do we find such guidance in Ahadith regarding the emergence of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s sect? Not a shred! Do you think Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would have deprived Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) regardign knowledge of such happenings. And would Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) have deprived his Ummah of such beneficial knowledge? Never! On other hand, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold that from Najd there would be appearance of group of Satan (i.e. qarn ash-shaytan), in my words cult of Iblees. The prophecies regarding this cult apply to Shaykh an-Najd and fit upon him and his cult like a glove. Will you not take heed from this and accept Islam and die Muslims? Is this coincidence that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said nothing which validates claims of Shaykh of Najd but only said which undermines entire foundation and refutes the claims of Shaykh of Najd, ye of little faith and reason? Conclusion: Muslim scholars have never stated major Shirk is impossible for a minority from Muslims. Our conflict with Kharijism was and is based one fact. The chief of Khawarij Ibnul Wahhab declared many practices and beliefs of Muslims as major Shirk and these beliefs happened to be beliefs and practices of majority of Muslims. Those who followed his teachings then expressed this fact more explicitly. Hence dispute was always about a rabid minority accusing the great majority of committing major Shirk. In this context scholars have always refuted the charge levelled against great majority of Muslims. Therefore it is unlikely that any Muslim scholar will ever argue, entire Ummah has remained free from major Shirk. Also it is not impossible for a absolute minority from Muslims, for example 0.001%, to fall into major Shirk by adopting another religion, like Christianity, atheism, Hinduism, and Buddhism. And this percentage is based on demonstratable evidence. Also it was demonstrated Ahadith employed by Khawarij refer to period in which there will be no Muslims remaining on earth and tribes of Prophet’s nation (i.e. Arab descent) will revert to religion of their forefathers. Alhasil there is no evidence in Ahadith or Quran which establishes that Muslims will fall into major Shirk but despite this will claim and remain attached to Quran and Sunnah. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] “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, there is no Deity worthy of worship except 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 (i.e. the lands of Najd and surrounding areas) claims that he knew the meaning of, there is no Deity worthy of worship except 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: Ar-Rasa`il ash-Shakhsiyyah] - [2] Anyone who joined his party, they were subjected to act of becoming Muslim, and declaring they were polytheists prior to joining Wahhabi sect, and all those who have not joined their sect are polytheists. And ISIS, the true followers of Shaykh Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab, also convert the Muslims to their religion of Wahhabism, here.

Introduction: A dear brother, after reading the following, article, like always gave valuable feedback. He noted three principles are without any supportive evidence to legitimise them. Hence he suggested the evidence and rationale behind them is explained in a separate article. This is a humble effort to justify the understanding on basis of which these three principles are based. Three Essential Principles: i) What Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not fear, is for two reasons, a) it will not take place, b) or it may take place, and if it does, it will not negatively impact on Eman (i.e. faith) and Amaal (i.e. actions) of a significant majority. ii) What Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fears because it will be a major Fitnah in his Ummah and it will negatively impact on Eman (i.e. faith) and Amaal (i.e. actions) of his followers. iii) If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fears a tribulation more then another, he fears it more because it will cause greater harm to Eman and Amaal, of his Ummah. The Evidence Behind First Principle: ia) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated: “Thawban narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: "I only fear for my Ummah from the misguiding Aimmah." He said that the Messenger of Allah said: "There will never cease to be a group from my Ummah manifest upon the truth, they will not be harmed by those who forsake them until Allah's Decree comes.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2229] The Jama’ah/Group is main body of Muslims: “… on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Messenger of Allah said: Whoever defects from obedience (to the Amir) and separates from the main body of the Muslim - and dies in that state - dies the death of one belonging to the days of jahiliyya. And he who is killed under the banner of a man who is blind (to the cause for which he is fighting),…” [Ref: Muslim, B20, H4557] Main body, in context of number of people refers to, the majority of people. And following Hadith establishes it also: “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, H20776] Two plus one is three and two is majority. Three plus two is five and three is majority of five. And note Prophet said majority is the Jama’ah, and in the context, main body. This is explicitly stated in another Hadith: “Anas bin Malik said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah say: ‘My nation will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] He instructed to follow the majority because the majority will be free from misguidance. And this Hadith also indicates minority from them can be upon misguidance. This comes togather to establish the principle: What Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not fear is becaus it may take plac and if it does, it will not negatively impact on Eman (i.e. faith) and Amaal (i.e. actions) of a significant majority. Principle Two And Three: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) feared appearance of Al-Masih Al Dajjal and Ahadith indicate how much evil/corruption he will sow on earth and destruction he will bring to people of earth. Those who believe in his claim of Lordship will be rewarded and those who disbelieve in him will suffer femines and other tribulations. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said every nations is inflicted with a trial and trial for his Ummah is wealth and he feared it. Note related material is explained in the article linked in introduction. These two examples establish what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) feared were major trials. And this establishes principle two, Fitnah which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) feared was because of its large impact upon his Ummah. Lastly, it is logical that if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) feared something greater then the other then damage of that is also greater. And this establishes third principle. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Islamicly, historical Najd is roughly composed of modern Saudi province of Najd and it is due East of Madinah. Riyadh the Saudi capital is situated in province of Najd. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have stated group of Satan will emerge from Najd. Other Ahadith record he pointed toward East and stated group of Satan is to emerge from this direction. In order to avoid criticism and negativity associated with historical region of Najd Khawarij attempt to disfigure reality by arguing Najd is Iraq because Iraq is East of Madinah. It is especially true when a member of Khariji sect is attempting to deflect criticism levelled against Khariji sect and its founder Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab. One such die hard supporter of this Satanic cult, went against the norm presented ingenious arguments to substantiate Iraq is Najd, Iraq is East. And one such igenious argument was already refuted in this article, here. It is strongly recommended that readers familirise with material of linked article before proceeding. It is important to point out opponents has based his understanding on logical and rational basis. It is completely divorced from reality and geography. The rationale and the methodology employed by opponent was directly refuted in the following two articles, here and here, therefore will no be addressed in here. In sha Allah, new information will be added and contextualised explanation of Ahadith employed will be given in – march of Dajjal toward his death. 0.1 - Presenting Khariji Rationale Why Iraq/Syria Are East: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) facing East said, group of Satan will emerge from this direction: “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] With regards to Dajjal he also said he will merge from East: “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. I said: I preserved it in my mind this narration from Allah's Messenger.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H7028] In other Ahadith it is established the land of East is Iraq/Syria: “He (Dajjal) would appear on the way between Syria and Iraq and would spread mischief right and left.” [Ref: Sahih Muslim B41, H7015] “He said: 'He will appear from what is between Ash-Sham and Al-'Iraq, causing devastation toward the right and toward the left. “ [Ref: Jami at-Tirmidh, B7, H2240] It is established that Dajjal will emerge from Eastern lands (i.e. Iraq/Syria) and also Najd of Khawarij is land of Iraq and Syria. 0.2 - Explaining Evidence Of Opponent – He is In The East: Opponent of Islam quoted the following Hadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is talking about emergence of Dajjal: “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. I said: I preserved it in my mind this narration from Allah's Messenger.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H7028] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) explained, this land in East is called Khurasan, in following Ahadith: "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 faces are shields coated with leather.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2237] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) further explained that Dajjal will be followed by seventy-thousand Jews from Irani city of Isfahan: “Anas b. Malik reported that Allah's Messenger said: The Dajjal would be followed by seventy thousand Jews of Isfahan wearing Persian (aka Irani) shawls.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H7034] Alhasil, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said while pointing toward East, from Khurasan Dajjal will emerge, and he will be followed by seventy-thousand Jews of (belonging to Iran’s city of) Isfahan. 0.3 - Pulling The Plug And Turning The Tables: The argument of Khariji was based on distortion of the fact that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated Dajjal will emerge from East. And in his mind Dajjal was to only appear from Iraq and Syria therefore he concluded East is toward Iraq/Syria. Al hamdu lillah this gross distortion of reality was redressed. With the correct understanding of Hadith the very foundation of argument was removed. In fact by looking at map and direction of East being toward Khurasan/Iran the point has backfired on him because it established East is toward direction of Riyadh – Uyainah and Dir’riyyah. This is precisely toward the house of Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) toward which he pointed to indicate the direction from which the group of Satan will emerge. And both of these places are in historical Najd. Alhasil after distortion of Ahadith is redressed, opponent has no basis on which he can distort the Ahadith and argue Syria, and Iraq are East. Following section will establish Khuruj (i.e. march) of Dajjal and his followers. 1.1 - Dajjal Will Enter All Lands Except Madinah And Makkah: “There will be no part of the earth left that he does not enter and prevail over, except for Makkah and Al-Madinah, for he will not approach them on any of their mountain paths but he will be met by angels with unsheathed swords, until he will stop at the red hill at the end of the marsh.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4077] “Anas b. Malik reported that Allah's Messenger said: There will be no land which would not be covered by the Dajjal but Mecca and Medina, and there would no passage out of the passages leading to them which would not be guarded by angels arranged in rows. Then he (the Dajjal) would appear in a barren place adjacent to Medina and it would rock three times that every unbeliever and hypocrite would get out of it towards him.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H7032] 1.2 - Khurasan - The Land In East: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: '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 faces are shields coated with leather.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2237] Followin is map of ancient Khurasan, here. Please take note of Khurasan being due East from Madinah, here. 1.3 – Seventy-Thousand Jews From Isfahan: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is also stated Dajjal will be followed by seventy-thousand Jews from Isfahan – a city in Iran:“Anas b. Malik reported that Allah's Messenger said: The Dajjal would be followed by seventy thousand Jews of Isfahan wearing Persian shawls.” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H7034] The following map contains location of Isfahan in Iran and points to Iran’s location in relationship to Arabia, here. Please note that Iran in relationship to Arabia is East. 1.4 - Dajjal Will Come To Iraq: Imam Bukhari’s Adab Al Mufrad contains following Hadith: “Al-'Iryan ibn al-Haytham said, "My father came to Mu'awiya when I was a body. When he reached him, he said, 'Welcome, welcome.' A man was sitting with him on the elevated seat. He said, 'Amir al-Mu'minin, who is this you are welcoming?' He said, 'This is the master of the people of the east. This is al-Haytham ibn al-Aswad.' I asked, 'Who is this?' They replied, 'This is 'Abdullah ibn 'Amr ibn al-'As.' I said to him, 'Abu so-and-so. From where will the Dajjal emerge?' He said, 'I have not seen the people of a town who asked about what is far nor left what is near. You are from the people of a town.' Then he said, 'He will emerge from the land of Iraq with the trees and palm trees.'" [Ref: Al Adab Al Mufrad, B47, H1160] Country of Iraq can bee seen in the following map, here. 1.5 - Dajjal Will Come From Syria And Iraq: “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 (Dajjal) 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] Please note, Ash-Shaam (i.e. greater Syria) comprimised of countries including, Lebanon, Jordon, Israel, and present day Syria. Parts of Iraq Arabia may have been part of greater Syria – I have been unable to find maps to help me in regards to this. 1.6 - Dajjal From Behind Uhud: “Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger as saying: Dajjal will come from the Eastern side with the intention of attacking Medina until he will get down behind Uhud. Then the angels will turn his face towards Syria and there he will perish.” [Ref: Muslim, B7, H3187] Mount Uhud is few kilo metres outside the city of Madina, here. Please note the Hadith states Dajjal will camp behind the mount Uhud which is Earterly direction of Masjid Nabvi. There is another Hadith which states, Dajjal will camp on salt-marshes of Madinah, and this is toward the Western seide of Masjid Nabvi. This is indication he will be forced to move. Later the angels will force him to return to Syria (i.e. Israel) and he will be killed at major Israeli airport. 1.7 - Death Of Dajjal At Gate/Airport Of Ludd: Biblical Lydda, Ludd in Arabic, and modern Lod will be place where Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) will kill the impostor Christ and put an end to his Fitnah: “Mujammi' bin Jariyah Al-Ansari said: "I heard the Messenger of Allah(s.a.w) saying: 'Eisa bin Maryam will kill the Dajjal at the gate of Ludd.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2244] Gate/Door is to enter or to leave a house. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) described largest Israeli airport as a gate. Airport functions as means of entry into Israel and is means of exist. So Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) used a word which the Arabs of fourteen hundered year old can make sense of and so can the Muslims of modern world. 1.8 - The March Of Dajjal Toward His Place Of Death: The first Hadith quoted establishes Dajjal will enter every country of earth. The quoted Ahadith point to last leg of journey of Dajjal. He will appear from Khurasan and march into Iran. There he will be joined seventy-thousand devoute Jews. He will march with his followers into Iraq and from there into between Syria and Iraq. Where ever he will go turmoil and tribulation will follow. He will reach behind the mount Uhud. And from there move his camp to salt marshes of Madinah. In other words he will move camp from East of Masjid Nabvi to West of Masjid Nabvi and from there he will travel toward Israel (i.e. Syria) and will be killed at Israeli’s largest airport at city of Lod. Alhasil these Ahadith establishe second and third Ahadith employed by opponent of Islam were part of package of Ahadith which indicate the route Dajjal and his seventy-thousand Jewish followers will take to reach their destination of Israel. The beginning of last leg of Dajjals of travels over the earth will be from Khurasan, then Isfahan, Iraq, Syria, Arabia, and finally he will return to Syria (.e. Israel) with his army of seventy thousand Jews. 2.1 – Group Of Satan Hadith Explained In Light Of Other Ahadith: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was supplicating Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for Sham (i.e. greater Syria) and for Yemen. People from Najd wished; he invoke Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for their Najd as well but he ingored them twice and third time said from Najd group of Satan will emerge: “The Prophet said, "O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Sham! O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Yemen." The People said, "And also on our Najd." He said, "O Allah! Bestow Your blessings on our Sham! 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 direction of East) is (Najd) the place of earthquakes and afflictions and from there comes out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H211] This establishes group of Satan was to emerge from Najd and it was for this reason he refused to invoke Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for blessing in Najd. The following two Ahadith add more detail, first says, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was facing toward East and second states pointing toward East, and he said group of Satan will emerge from this direction: “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 group of Satan comes out." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H213] “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] These two Ahadith come to togather to establish, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was facing toward the direction of East and he pointed toward East and stated group of Satan will emerge from this direction. We also know he indicated Najd is the place from where group of Satan will emerge. As it happens to be, Najd is precisely East from Madinah, therefore he faced and pointed toward Najd. Maps Indicate Najd To Be In Arabia In East: Following two maps are taken from books published around 1846. The first version of it was published 1836, refferenced, here: Following map also indicates Najd. Note, map suggests alternative spelling, Nejd. Underneath Nejd, words, or Negd can be seen. Online refference is also available for this map, here: Conclusion: The Ahadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said Dajjal will emerge from East. Refer to land of Khorasan and indeed this land is in the East. Further more there are many Ahadith which establish that Dajjal will start last leg of his Khuruj (i.e. march) from Khurasan. He will travel to Isfahan then to Iraq and then will arrive in Syria. He will make his way down to East of Madinah and travel back up North toward Israel’s airport at Lodd. The Ahadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward East and stated group of Satan will emerge from it refer to Najd. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

37 - Hadith Of Three Fundamental Roots Of Faith: Sunni: I want to continue our discussion in light of Hadith about what is belief. I have a very important Hadith which you will find helpful but before that I have a question. Wahhabi: Your questions are always a setup for something. Anyway ask away. Sunni: On an issue for which there is no authentic Hadith available but only a Weak Hadith is available. Would it be better to adopt a position derived via Qiyas or adhere to weak Hadith? Wahhabi: IF the Hadith is not against creed of Tawheed then I have no objection following the injunctions derived from the Hadith even IF it is based on Weak Hadith. Sunni: I agree! Is that rule of all Ahadith not relating to issue of Tawheed or just some? Wahhabi: All. Sunni: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated there are three things foundation of Iman, to refrain from killing anyone who profess first part of Shahadatayn, not to declare a Muslim as Kafir for his sins, and not to invalidate Islam of a Muslim for his actions. Wahhabi: There is no such a Hadith about actions and sins. You’re inventing this Hadith and you will reference it to some unknown book so your deception is not found out. Sunni: Deception is strong word brother. You were liable of it but I gave you pass [in section 26] even though I had right to and certainly could say you lied because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “… on authority of Abī Hurayrah, he said, the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah upon him, said: ‘It is enough of a lie for a man to narrate everything he hears.’” [Ref: Muslim, Introduction, H6, here.] This prophetic statement applied to you but I didn’t. We have had a very good discussion this far and beneficial so don’t start slinging mud at me when you have no reason to. We are moving on. Wahhabi: Jazakallah Khayr for Nasihah. Sunni: The Hadith I was talking about is from one book out of six authentic books of Ahadith. It is was narrated by: “Anas bin Malik narrates from the Prophet who said: Three things are the roots of faith: To refrain from (killing) a person who says: (i) “There is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah” (ii) Not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, (iii) and also not to declare him out of Islam due to any of his actions.” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B14, H2170, here.] I leave you to decide. Wahhabi: I need to check the referrence and see what the scholars have said about it. Wahhabi: Allahu Akbar! Sunni: Take note of the third root of Iman which you violate. You declare a Muslim out of Islam for his [sinful and sometimes totally blameless] actions and but Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not permit this. Second root of Iman, which you violate relates to your practice as well. You [Wahhabis] make Takfir of Muslims on actions which are either major sin such as prostration to Ghayrullah (i.e. other than Allah). Or you make Takfir for actions totally innocent such as seeking help from deceased servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Yet you were prohibited by Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) from engaging in this. Due to your two mentioned traits [declaring Kafir due to sins and actions] you invalidate the belief of Tawheed of a Muslim in Islam than permit his murder. Members of your sect murdered hundreds of thousands of Muslims in Arabia even though they pronounced; there is no Ilah except Allah. And this is even when you have no right to do so, because they had professed, there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah. In this way you invalidated and removed from your heart all three roots of Iman. Sunni: The roots on which your sect and you invalidate Tawheed and Islam were prohibited: “Not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits and also not to declare him out of Islam due to any of his action/deed.” Hence in light of this Hadith there is no valid excuse for you to invalidate Tawheed and Islam of a Muslim. Anyone who professes, there is no Deity worthy of worship except Allah, Muhammad is Messenger of Allah, he is Muslim, and his actions and sins do not invalidate his Islam but only if he professes a creed with his tongue which is contrary to Islam. Wahhabi: To invoke anyone other than Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is act of worship and that does nullify the creed of Tawheed. Sunni: You’re judging the creed from his action. You have assumed, XMan seeks help therefore XMan has believed in an Ilah beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). You’re inferring belief from action and based on this you are invalidating the Islam of Muslims. Wahhabi: I am not invalidating Tawheed based on his action I am invalidating it on his belief. Sunni: You’re using the action to deduce a belief. Khawarij did the same. They used an action and from it deduced a belief which was Kufr and they declared the Muslims as Kafirs, Mushriks based on invented belief. Foundation on which you build your case is action like the Khawarij. It is due to methodology of Khawarij that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said do not declare a Muslim as Kafir due to his action. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said regarding them and those who follow their Minhaj (i.e. way😞 “Not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits and also not to declare him out of Islam due to any of his action/deed.” Wahhabi: The Hadith is weak therefore I cannot accept it what is derived from it. Sunni: You have the right to not to accept it or reject but you have contradicted what you stated in the beginning, about preferring weak Hadith over Qiyas. Anyhow do you accept this Hadith would be a valid argument against Khawarij because it depicts their methodology? Wahhabi: Yes of course. Sunni: An argument based on weak Hadith against Khawarij is acceptable to you but because it argument is against your sect and your methodology the same isn’t acceptable to? Wahhabi: ... 38 - Revisiting The Lost Shoe In Madinah Discussion: Sunni: Remember I told you a scenario about a man seeking help from Shaykh Abdul Qadir Al Jilani (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) in city of Madinah regarding a lost shoe. Wahhabi: Yes. Sunni: Do you remember you said it was innovation for seeking help in Madinah? Wahhabi: Yes! I said: OK, good. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) mentioned desert because he lived on a part of earth where most dangerous part of country was desert. So he instructed seeking of help from servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) if one is in need of help in desert. What IF a person is lost in a forest, suppose amazon rain forest? Is he permitted to seek help from servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? Wahhabi: It will be innovation if one was to engage in seeking help from servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in rain forest. Sunni: So brother, you will practice and you believe in strict literalism of Hadith. Where did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) perform his prayers? Did he perform Salah in the Masajid in Arabian Peninsula, or throughout the world? Wahhabi: He performed most of his prayers in Masjid Nabvi. Sunni: So Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed most of his prayers in Masjid Nabvi then why do you perform your prayers in the Masajid of UK? Should you not also be performing most of your prayers in Masjid Nabvi? Wahhabi: Brother we are commanded to worship Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and specification of in which Masjid it is to be performed has not been made in Qur’an or Hadith. Had Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) specified a particular Masjid for Muslims of entire earth then it would have been impractical. No one would be travelling to perform prayers such vast distances. Sunni: That exactly is my point. 38 - Knocking On The Door Of Ijtihad: Sunni: You see brother Hukm (i.e. injunction) to seek help from the servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in desert is impractical for one living in Brazil. There is chance of Brazilian Muslims getting lost in rain forest now if they seek help of servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) they are guilty of innovation. Can it not be that they make Ijtihad via Qiyas, replace desert with forest and seek help in forest? Sunni: Yes, holding to literal permission of Hadith is most correct but Ijtihad is also teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Do you remember when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) sent few companions to Banu Qurayza and instructed them to perform Asir prayers when they reach there? In way between time of Asr prayer came one group performed the prayers on the grounds Prophets (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has instructed to perform the Asr prayer at residence of Banu Qurayza but did not prohibit performing Asr prayer at any other place. The other group reasoned Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has instructed to perform Asir prayer at Banu Qurayza’s place he said nothing about performing Asir prayer in between. Therefore we will not perform it and we will only perform Asir prayer at residence of Banu Qurayza. Both groups referred the difference of opinion back to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and he said both were correct. The literal adherence and the Ijtihadi understanding both were accepted by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). On the basis of this I reason that explicit instruction is for desert but one not living in desert country and one not in difficulty in desert can ask the servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) where ever they maybe – in context of Brazil, rain forest. Wahhabi: I need bit of time to think about the subject. Wahhabi: I could respect such Ijtihadi understanding of Hadith of servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) providing the person does not abrogate the Sunnah relating to it with action of Ijtihad and believes the servants of Allah are the angels. Wahhabi: What Hadith did you base your understanding this on? Sunni: There are two Ahadith I read while browsing but I can’t recall where. I will search for them. Wahhabi: OK. Sunni: “Narrated Ibn Umar: On the day of Al-Ahzab the Prophet said, "None of you Muslims should offer the `Asr prayer but at Banu Quraiza's place." The Asr prayer became due for some of them on the way. Some of those said, "We will not offer it till we reach it, the place of Banu Quraiza," while some others said, "No, we will pray at this spot, for the Prophet did not mean that for us." Later on it was mentioned to the Prophet and he did not berate any of the two groups.” [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H445, here.] “It has been narrated on the authority of Abdullah who said: On the day he returned from the Battle of Ahzab, the Messenger of Allah made for us an announcement that nobody would say his Zuhr prayer but in the quarters of Banu Quraiza (Some) people, being afraid that the time for prayer would expire, said their prayers before reaching the street of Banu Quraiza. The others said: We will not say our prayer except where the Messenger of Allah has ordered us to say it even if the time expires. When he learned of the difference in the view of the two groups of the people, the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) did not blame anyone from the two groups.” [Ref: Muslim, B19, H4374, here.] 39 - Shirk Cannot Become Tawheed Due To Presence Of Evidence: Sunni: According to you [in section 05] even IF Tawheed is upheld and IF one seeks help from Shaykh Abdul Qadir Al Jilani (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) such person is guilty of Shirk. Your reasons for this verdict were: (i) seeking shoe from dead person, (2) seeking help of dead person: “Polytheist due to seeking help from a dead person and polytheist due to seeking a shoe from dead person.” Regarding the first you said in detail: “… he seeks shoe from someone who has no power to grant him or aid him to find it.” Second one you expanded [in section 08] by saying: “It is Shirk. XMan is guilty of worshipping the dead Shaykh by asking him for his help for which there is no proof, nor there is proof the dead can hear the call of help.” In that discussion [ending at section 07] you were unable to substantiate these principles with evidence of Qur’an/Hadith. Is there anything else which nullifies Tawheed of Muslims when they call the dead to help? Wahhabi: I cannot think of anything else. Sunni: I know you believe Istighathah is Shirk because lack of evidence from Qur’an/Hadith. What IF there is proof for Istighathah – will it then be Shirk? Wahhabi: There is no proof for Istighathah. Sunni: Brother, this is a hypothetical question just enquiring to gain knowledge about your principles. Wahhabi: You are insinuating we judge Istighathah to be Shirk because it has no evidence. Quite contrary we judge it to be Shirk because it contradicts teaching of Tawheed. Don’t misrepresent our position. Sunni: I am not. Answer the question please. Wahhabi: IF there was proof, which there isn’t, then it would not be Shirk. Sunni: Brother, this establishes you judge Shirk not on making someone is partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in Rububiyyah, Uluhiyyah, and Asma Wal Sifat. Instead you judge Tawheed based on presence of evidence and Shirk on absence of evidence. Sunni: What is Shirk was never Tawheed, will never become Tawheed, and cannot become Tawheed. IF Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) had a son then the son would be Shareek/partner of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And hypothetically speaking, IF Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was to command us to believe that He possessed a son then we would be believing in a Shirk on command of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The command of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) which sanctions this Shirki belief will never be proof that believing in son of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is a Tawheedi belief. It will forever remain Shirk which is sanctioned by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The point is brother what is Shirk Haqiqi will remain Shirk no amount of scriptural evidence and prophetic words will make it Tawheed. Sunni: Hypothetically speaking we could have had permitted Shirk and prohibited Shirk but we cannot have Shirk becoming Tawheed due to scriptural/textual evidence. 40 - Back To Basics Of Tawheed And Shirk: Sunni: Brother, we both know very well, that Shirk is associating a partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and an action is not Shirk due to absence of evidence. There are many practices which do not have evidence from Qur’an or Sunnah of beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Yet we do not say these practices are Shirk and the ones engaging in them as Mushrikeen. Sunnah way fighting Jihad is; sword, spear, horse, camel, shield, bow and arrows etc. There is no evidence from Qur’an/Hadith for modern weapons. Do you declare the usage of these weapons as Shirk and those who use them as Mushrikeen? Wahhabi: Jihad was commanded nowhere it was stated these weapons should be used for Jihad. Jihad conceptually is part of religion of Islam not the weapons with which we can fight them. Sunni: Does not the Qur’an say way of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is best of examples then will you abandon his example – sword, spear, horse, camel, shield, bow and arrow, for what the Kuffar invented? And isn’t one of principles, innovation in Deen which eliminates Sunnah is Shirk? Wahhabi: … Sunni: Do you agree it is Shirk? Wahhabi: The issue is not related to Shirk so how can I agree to it. Sunni: You’re saying using modern weapons is not Shirk? Wahhabi: What else am I saying bro! That is what you’re asking me about. Sunni: This issue is connected with Wahhabi version of Tawheed al-Hakimiyyah and Shirk al-Hakimiyyah. Legislating religion against what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) legislated is Shirk in Wahhabism. How is not usage of modern weapons Shirk when you have Halaled them leaving what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) Halaled? Wahhabi: We have not declared them Halal and we do not consider them part of Deen. Sunni: Think about this, I don’t believe Yoga is part of Deen; neither is it part of Ibadah. It is just an exercise. What would you say to someone who has abandoned Salah and performs Yoga five times a day, every day, right after Adhan reciting all the Tasbihs of Salah, and has adopted approximate forms from Yoga for each position of Salah? What would you say? You would say something like this: IF you haven’t made it part of Deen and as a replacement of Salah than why are all details match approximately? Your abandoned prophetic Sunnah for modern weapons how else will you make it part of Deen. Do you see Wahhabis use them in their barbaric acts called Jihad? By using them in your so called Jihad you have made them part of Deen. Wahhabi: It would be Shirk in Hakimiyyah IF someone uses them believing they are prophetic Sunnahs, or these modern weapons have abrogated prophetic Sunnah because than they would make them part of Deen. IF you say it is Shirk than you are guilty of Shirk too because Sufis use them too. Sunni: So even though the issue is related to Tawheed/Shirk Hakimiyyah and it has no evidence you won’t declare it Shirk but you do judge Istighathah to be Shirk on account it ‘lacks’ evidence? Wahhabi: … Sunni: Brother, there is indirect evidence for the use of these weapons. We can via Ijtihad legalize the use of these weapons. We can approximate modern weapons with Prophetic Sunnah weapons with Qiyas and legalize their use; rifle with bayonet with spear, rifle with bullets to bow and arrow, artillery to bow and arrow. Wahhabi: Well, than these weapons are not truly without evidence hence no reason to declare their use as Shirk. Sunni: This is not explicit proof this is indirect evidence which I call Ijtihadi evidence. IF you refrain from declaring something Shirk due to implicit evidence then I can at least present implicit evidence in regards to Istighathah, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said, seek help from servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Awliyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), the dead and the living are servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) hence Istighathah is established. IF existence of implicit evidence is valid reason to with-hold edict of Shirk then there is Hadith which implicitly establishes Istighathah. Sunni: It is impossible for Shirk to become Tawheed on basis of existence of evidence. Shirk will remain Shirk even if there is evidence, the only difference would be permitted Shirk and prohibited Shirk. I believe this was sufficient to refute your position. 41 - Pettifogging An Unrelated Issue To Divert Attention From Topic: Wahhabi: You’re saying worship cannot be Tawheedi and Shirki? Sunni: I didn’t say that. Read again. Wahhabi: You’re saying a Shirki action cannot become Tawheedi and I assume other way around would also be true in your methodology. Sunni: I didn’t say that. I said a definite Shirk, a real Shirk; an actual Shirk i.e. will not become Tawheedi even IF Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructed us to believe in. Wahhabi: That’s what I have refuted. Sunni: You haven’t refuted anything. You would have refuted my argument IF you had proved worship of others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) becomes Tawheedi worship because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has instructed us. Wahhabi: Can worship be Tawheedi? Sunni: Yes. Wahhabi: Can we commit Shirk in worship? Sunni: Yes. Wahhabi: You have been refuted. Sunni: How does that refute me has beaten my intellect. I believe an action, or a belief can become Tawheed/Shirk IF Tawheedi and Shirk beliefs are associated with it and there is evidence. Sunni: A belief/action which has already Shirk/Tawheed associated with it cannot become Tawheedi/Shirki without Shirki/Tawheedi aspect being removed from it. IF Quran/Sunnah taught Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has a partner Ilah/Rabb even this evidence will not make this Shirk into Tawheed. Sunni: Istighathah according to you is Shirk but it can be in accordance with Tawheed IF Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed us. I am arguing IF it was indeed Shirk like you claim it will never become Tawheed. Wahhabi: Worship can be Shirki and Tawheedi so why can’t Istighathah be in accordance with evidence of Quran and Sunnah? Sunni: Brother I am getting angry. IF you’re doing this to wind me up than it is good time to stop. Wahhabi: I am not. Sunni: We are not talking about Ibadah so leave it out for now. We are talking about Istighathah and those things which are definitively Shirk. 42 - Attacking Wahhabi Position, Evidence For Istighathah Will Make It Tawheed: Sunni: Is Istighathah by its very essence Shirk? Wahhabi: ... Sunni: Is Istighathah entirely made up of major Shirk? Answer the question brother. Wahhabi: Yes. Sunni: You would agree with the following statement: Istighathah is definitively Shirk just as believing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has an Ilah/Rabb partner is definitively Shirk. Would you? Wahhabi: Yes. Sunni: IF Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) had revealed an Ayah instructing Istighathah would that mean he instructed us to engage in Shirk? Wahhabi: No. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) does not instruct Shirk. Sunni: So Istighathah would be in accordance with Tawheed IF there was evidence in support of it? Wahhabi: Yes. Sunni: How can something Shirk by its very essence/nature become Tawheed on basis of evidence? Please spare me your wisdom. Wahhabi: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will not legalize a Shirk so IF there was evidence in support of it than Istighathah would not be Shirk. Sunni: Point I intended to make was that IF Istighathah was Shirk by its very essence, nature, build than no amount of evidence in Quran/Sunnah will make it Tawheed. Just as IF Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructed us in 200 Ayaat to believe in a Ilah/Rabb partner would not make our creed Tawheed. It will be Shirk but permitted Shirk. We both believe there is no such thing as permitted Shirk. Sunni: You acknowledge Istighathah can become a valid Tawheedi practice IF there was evidence in Quran/Sunnah. This means you believe Istigathah is not Shirk by its very nature/essence even though you have said contrary to it. IF Istighathah can become Tawheedi practice on basis of evidence than it means there is room for it to be compatible with Tawheed even without evidence. Yet according to your methodology Istighathah is a definitive and Shirk by its very nature/essence. This is contradictory position and demonstrates erroneous methodology you’re upon. Wahhabi: Your entire philosophy is erroneous because actions become Tawheed/Shirk. Worship can be in accordance with Tawheed and Shirk. Sunni: My patience is running very thin with your games bro. Wahhabi: Why are you getting angry? Can’t take my legit refutations? Sunni: Amr believes Bakr is an Ilah, worships Bakr, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) reveals Ayah, Bakr is an Ilah, worship of Bakr is commanded, everyone believes Bakr to be an Ilah, worships Bakr. Question to you is that to believe Bakr is an Ilah and worship of Bakr in accordance with Tawheed? Wahhabi: … Sunni: Respond to what I have asked you. Is worship of Bakr in accordance with Tawheed if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructed it? Wahhabi: … Sunni: Your silence speaks volumes. You were talking about entire worship which can be Shirk and non-Shirk. Whereas I was talking about something which is definitive Shirk such as worship of creation. Shirk cannot become Tawheed and Tawheed cannot become Shirk, in presence of, or in absence of evidence. You believe something which is Shirk can be accordance with Tawheed IF there was evidence for it. This can only be IF it was not Shirk to begin with and you were misguided to believe it is Shirk. Believing in son of Allah is Shirk an IF there was evidence in Quran it will not become Tawheed. It was Shirk and remains Shirk. IF Istighathah was Shirk will remain Shirk even with evidence but in your Wahhabism it will become Tawheedi practice IF there was evidence. There are huge consequences of this because without evidence Istighathah is Shirk because it is Shar’ri Dua i.e. Dua of worship. This is what you say and not I. IF there was evidence than what would happen to that Dua of worship in Istighathah; would it would remain Dua of worship but not affect Tawheed? Or worshiping others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) become part of Tawheed? Answer. Wahhabi: … Sunni: You will have to agree that a definitive Shirk will not and cannot become Tawheed on basis of evidence in Quran/Sunnah. Wahhabi: Istighathah is Shirk but not definitive/concrete like others so the Hukm on it can change IF there was evidence. Sunni: Without evidence call of help in Istighathah according to you is Dua of worship how will presence of evidence remove worship from the Dua/call? Wahhabi: … Sunni: Answer to this question is very obvious. You will be forced to abandon your principles. I mean you will have to let go of these; (i) calling upon dead is Dua, Dua worship, hence Shirk, (ii) seeking out of means is Shirk, (iii) seeking one far is Shirk. Which means they would not be part of Tawheed/Shirk determining principles and IF they would be not so than they are not at the moment. Sunni: Only reason you are declaring it Shirk is because you believe there is no evidence for it. We both know absence of evidence for a practice does not make it Shirk but in case of Istighathah you have taken this stance that it is Shirk. Rather than taking natural course of action which is to consider beliefs of people engaged in practice than judge the practice instead you have decided it is Shirk than invented principles mentioned above to prove it is Shirk. These invented principles will instantly disappear and suddenly will absolutely have nothing to do with methodology of determining Tawheed/Shirk. This establishes that your principles have actually nothing to do with determining Tawheed/Shirk and instead they were invented out of thin air to support extremism and Kharijism of Shaykh al-Najd Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab. Wahhabi: You’re milking a hypothetical scenario the reality is Istighathah is Shirk by its very nature and there is nothing in Quran/Sunnah supporting it. Sunni: I have said what I needed to. 43 - An Action And A Practice Can Be According To Shirk And Tawheed: Sunni: Do you believe Shirk can be removed from Istighathah? Wahhabi: The very practice of Istighathah is Shirk. Sunni: You mean to say that Istighathah cannot be separated from Shirk? Wahhabi: Yes! To remove Shirk from Istighathah you have to remove Istighathah. Sunni: Can Shirk enter into a practice and make it polytheistic practice? Wahhabi: Yes, there are many practices in which Shirk can enter. Sunni: Give me example, brother. Wahhabi: Prostration (i.e. Sajdah). Sunni: What are you basing this on? Wahhabi: Angels prostrated to Prophet Adam (alayhis salam) on command of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and it was not Shirk. Sunni: Why was this free from Shirk? Wahhabi: It is not Shirk because Allah does not command Shirk and angels don’t commit Shirk. Sunni: My brother, I am aware of this. Suppose, IF angels had belief that Prophet Adam (alayhis salam) was Ma’bud/Ilah. Then could their action be worship and Shirk? Wahhabi: Why suppose the impossible! I don’t want to get involved in such hypothetical scenarios. Sunni: You had no objections earlier [in the discussion] to answer questions which are hypothetically grounded. Why now? Wahhabi: … Sunni: Imagine I am an Atheist. Wahhabi: You’re worse than an Atheist because you’re Mushrik due to Istighathah. Sunni: As an Atheist, I prostrate to Allah, but do not believe Allah is Ilah/Ma’bud. Have I worshipped Him? Wahhabi: No! Wahhabi: Why would an Atheist do this if he does not believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? Sunni: I am Atheist but new age type Atheist just trying Salah to see IF I get struck with lightening and get instant enlightenment so I do weird stuff. Sunni: So here [in this scenario] there was no belief of Ilahiyyah, neither intention of worship, hence the prostration was not worship. IF same action was accompanied with belief of Ilahiyyah for Krishna and intention to worship [Krishna] was part of it than I will be Mushrik due to belief and guilty of Shirk in Ibadah. Sunni: What I was trying to get from you earlier was the factor which changes the nature of an action but you were not cooperating. You see Shirk can enter and Shirk can leave a practice. When it enters it, practice becomes Shirk, and when it leaves practice than it becomes Tawheed. You’ve stated Istighathah by very nature is Shirk and therefore it cannot be according to Tawheed. Sunni: No action by its nature is of worship, or Shirki, or Tawheedi. Actions become something due to belief and intention with which they are enacted hence your statement that Istighathah by very nature is Shirk is erroneous. 44 - Demonstrating Brother Changed Position To Shirk Cannot Become Tawheed: Sunni: You have also contradicted what you said week ago. You said Istighathah can be in accordance with Tawheed IF there was evidence for it from Quran/Sunnah but week later you said it is Shirk by its very nature and to remove Shirk from Istighathah you have to remove Istighathah. Which means even evidence of Quran/Sunnah, IF there was, would not be enough to make it compatible with Tawheed. Wahhabi: You’re misrepresenting what actually was said by me. I said it was Shirk by its very nature even then but I also said it can be valid practice IF there was evidence. Sunni: I pointed out than that these two were contradictory positions which cannot be reconciled with each other without you letting go of your methodology of determining Shirk. Wahhabi: Did I not say it is Shirk by its very nature? Yes or no. Sunni: Yes you did. Wahhabi: Why are you making it out as IF I have changed my position now when it was there to begin with? Sunni: My bad I will correct the detail. Sunni: You have also contradicted what you said week ago. You said Istighathah is Shirk by its very nature but can be in accordance with Tawheed IF there was evidence for it from Quran/Sunnah but week later you said it is Shirk by its very nature and to remove Shirk from Istighathah you have to remove Istighathah. Which means even evidence of Quran/Sunnah, IF there was, would not be enough to make it compatible with Tawheed. Sunni: I added the missing detail which got you so worked up. This detail doesn’t change the fact that your position on Istighathah has changed from last session. Sunni: Your position has changed. Previous session [in section 42] you said Istighathah is Shirk by its very essence but IF Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructed it than Istighathah would be in accordance with teaching of Tawheed and won’t be Shirk. In this session you have taken position which basically contradicts this and I quote: “Sunni: Do you believe Shirk can be removed from Istighathah? Wahhabi: The very practice of Istighathah is Shirk. Sunni: You mean to say that Istighathah cannot be separated from Shirk? Wahhabi: Yes! To remove Shirk from Istighathah you have to remove Istighathah.” You said to remove Shirk [from Istighathah] you have to remove Istighathah which means to believe nothing can reconcile Istighathah with Tawheed not even the evidence of Quran/Sunnah. Wahhabi: I only entertained a hypothetical scenario but I have been advised not engage in, what IF’s, hence I have reverted back to position which is based on solid foundations. Sunni: Damage was done than and has been done today. Wahhabi: Plus a Talib ul-Ilm confirmed that a definitive Kufr cannot become Tawheed. Sunni: I suppose you believe Istighathah is a definitive Kufr? Wahhabi: It is. Sunni: I have demonstrated [in section 43 that] no practice is definitively Shirk until Shirki beliefs enter it. Istighathah as we practice is not Shirk but if beliefs of Ilahiyyah/Rububiyyah are affirmed for whom the help is being sought and intention of worship is part of call of help then Istighathah is Shirk. Wahhabi: Shirki beliefs (i.e. dead can hear, see, have ability to grant the need) and Shirki actions (i.e. worship) are part of Istighathah. Sunni: Your last comment will change direction of our discussion. 45 - Pointing Out The Evil Side Of Khariji Coin: Wahhabi: You said: “I have demonstrated [in this section 43 that] no practice … is part of call of help than Istighathah is Shirk.” This is not the only criteria determining Shirk but seeking from deceased something which is not in his power and with belief that he can hear/see is Shirk. Sunni: What have you based your principle on? Wahhabi: Based on the fact that dead cannot help you and cannot hear you when you call upon them. Sunni: I gathered that much the first time you said it. What relevance does this [principle of yours] has with Shirk? Wahhabi: It doesn’t have any? Sunni: You and I both know Shirk is associating an Ilah-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). How can seeking help from deceased result in deceased being made Ilah-partner of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)! There is no equality between the deceased Awliyah and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Not unless you believe your Ilah has died, and you seek help from deceased Ilah, and only then seeking aid of deceased Awliyah can have some relevance with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Otherwise I do not see any relevance of your principle with Tawheed or Shirk. Wahhabi: I seek refuge in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) from such blasphemous accusation. Sunni: I didn’t accuse you of anything. I merely indicated how there can be equality between Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Awliyah, leading to ‘Shirk’. IF one was to consider your belief, Istighathah being Shirk, then naturally if we peel each layer, we come to foundation that the Ilah you believe is dead, and you seek help of this dead Ilah, and seeking help of deceased Awliyah therefore will mean sharing His right with creation. 46 - Wahhabi Is Scrambling And His Counter Attack: Wahhabi: Seeking help from the deceased itself is not Shirk but when one does so he worships the deceased and this is Shirk. Sunni: I am fully aware what your methodology and principles are. You are just damage controlling and just distorting the reality. Sunni: What makes the act of calling the deceased an act of worship? Wahhabi: The Mushriks invoked the dead which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said is an act of worship. Sunni: Can you quote me evidence for this in context? Wahhabi: “Those whom they invoke besides Allah have not created anything, but are themselves created. (They are) dead, not alive; and they know not when they will be raised up. Your Ilah is One Ilah. But for those who believe not in the Hereafter, their hearts deny, and they are proud.” [Ref: 16:20/22] Sunni: The verse does not in any way indicate that invoking the deceased is worship or invoking the deceased is Shirk. Wahhabi: The verse establishes that they invoked dead and invocation to the dead is worship. And this is our principle on which we judge Shirk in Istighathah. Sunni: You’ve argued your case well so well that I need to actually think about how I will respond to it. We will meet again tomorrow. Wahhabi: Tomorrow is Monday so I will have to see IF I can. 47 - Wahhabi Brother Is Justifying The End With End: Sunni: I need to set some record straight. Yesterday I had to leave and think about what you said because I thought you have beaten me so I needed to reflect and take stock of matter. This is why I decided to leave. Wahhabi: I didn’t think it was the case but why have you rejected my principle? Sunni: You see you wanted to prove this principle: invoking the deceased is worship, do you agree? Wahhabi: OK! Sunni: This is what you wrote: “The verse establishes that they invoked dead and invocation to the dead is worship.” In other words, the principle which you wanted to establish was part of reasoning through which you established it the principle. It is like trying to establish crow is black with reasoning, crow is black. Wahhabi: Give me bit of time to get my head around what you’re saying. Sunni: OK! Wahhabi: I see your point but it is not big deal to be honest it can be modified. My evidence isn’t wrong how I reasoned my argument was wrong. Sunni: Your understanding is indeed wrong. Wahhabi: How? Sunni: I will prove it but you will have to tolerate excessive writing. Wahhabi: No objections. 48 - Explaining The Evidence Of Q16:21 Employed For Principle: Sunni: You quoted the Ayah: “Those whom they invoke besides Allah have not created anything, but are themselves created. (They are) dead, not alive; and they know not when they will be raised up. Your Ilah is One Ilah. But for those who believe not in the Hereafter, their hearts deny, and they are proud.” [Ref: 16:20/22] Firstly the people who invoked the dead were polytheists. Secondly the words the dead in verse were regarding those who did not create anything but were created themselves and this is a referrence to gods of polytheists. Evidence is as follows: “Yet have they taken besides Allah 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] Their Shirk was they took idols as Ilah beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and invoked their idol-Ilahs as an act of worship to get to closer to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and they said: "We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allah." [Ref: 39:3] They affirmed creed of Ilahiyyah for their idols, had intention of, than performed action of worship. All three requirements for action to be worship are present and this is why their act of invoking ‘the dead’ (i.e. idol-Ilahs) mentioned in the verse is worship. And this goes on to demonstrate the correctness of principles of Ahle Sunnat not yours. Wahhabi: I have proven my principle with sound reasoning and you have rejected it Sunni: I disagree. Wahhabi: We will have to agree to disagree on this then. Sunni: You haven’t proven your principle because referrence to dead was not to dead people but to idols [which are made from dead/inorganic materials] and idols were/are Ilahs of polytheists. The invocation was not to the dead people but to idols [which are made from dead/inorganic materials]. 49 - Wahhabi Interpretation Chapter 16 Verse 21 Is Without Foundation: Wahhabi: Brother you have interpreted the verse in light of another verse. Obviously the understanding will change depending upon verses you couple it with. Sunni: True but this doesn’t refute what I have demonstrated with evidence. Wahhabi: Did I say it refutes anything? Sunni: … Wahhabi: I have taken the verse into account as it is and based my argument on it. Sunni: I have only removed ambiguity and identified who the dead are in this verse. Wahhabi: I am not saying you haven’t but I am saying other interpretations are possible. Sunni: Are those interpretations canonical? Wahhabi: Canonical? Sunni: Authoritative, scriptural and valid. Wahhabi: What is more authoritative than Quran? Sunni: … Wahhabi: When it says they invoke beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) which create nothing but are themselves created and they are dead and not alive than why do you have problem with accepting they invoked the dead people? Sunni: The Ayah does not say they are invoking dead people which created nothing but were themselves created. You’re inserting your understanding into the verse. Wahhabi: Allah says: “Those whom they invoke besides Allah have not created anything, but are themselves created. (They are) dead, not alive; and they know not when they will be raised up. Your Ilah is One Ilah. But for those who believe not in the Hereafter, their hearts deny, and they are proud.” [Ref: 16:20/22] Why would the dead-ness of invoked be emphasized so clearly IF it was only about idols? Sunni: Quote me a single verse from Quran which EXPLICITLY states Mushrikeen of Arabia invoked dead people. Or says like the following verse, they have taken besides Allah dead people as partners which create nothing but were themselves created, something like this but for dead people: “Yet have they taken besides Allah 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] I make you a deal. IF manage this I will become Wahhabi once again. Wahhabi: Bro you’re making such challenges because you have grounded your demand in impossibility. Sunni: It is not impossibility. It is well known and universally accepted that ambiguity found in one verse is removed by another verse so IF your interpretation is correct than evidence is in Quran. Or we can make decision on what is stated Tafasir. Wahhabi: I will try search for evidence Quran. It will take time so we will have to continue week ends as routine. Sunni: Wait. Wait. Sunni: Shaykh Ibn Kathir interpreted the verse in context of idols: “Then Allah tells us that the idols which people call on instead of Him cannot create anything, they are themselves created. As Al-Khalil (Ibrahim) said: "Do you worship that which you (yourselves) carve While Allah has created you and what you make!'' (37:96) Verse: “They are dead, not alive …” Means they are inanimate and lifeless, they do not hear, see, or think. Verse: “… and they know not when they will be resurrected.” Meaning they do not know when the Hour will come, so how can anyone hope for any benefit or reward from these idols. They should hope for it from the One Who knows all things and is the Creator of all things.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Q16:20/21, here.] Have a look at this Tafsir and others. Weekend we can discuss any evidence you submit but condition is that the interpretation has to have explicit evidence from Quran because Quran explains Quran the best. Sunni: Another matter I want to address now before it slips out of my mind. You said your following principle can be corrected: “… they invoked dead and invocation to the dead is worship.” What would be correct? Wahhabi: They invoked the dead, and invocation is worship, hence invoking the dead is an act of worship. Wahhabi: I really have to go. Sunni: We can carry on weekend. 50 - Verses Establish Worship Is On Ilahiyyah, Intention, And Action: Sunni: It was already established the phrase ‘the dead’ refers to idol-gods of polytheists. And this same point is being in the following verse: “Have they feet wherewith they walk? Or have they hands wherewith they hold? Or have they eyes wherewith they see? Or have they ears wherewith they hear? Say: "Call your (so-called) partners (of Allah) and then plot against me, and give me no respite! “ [Ref: 7:195] This verse is implying even though the idols of polytheists possess hands, feet, eyes, ears yet they are dead and do not have life which would enable them to use these body parts. It was also established that polytheists had the intention of worshiping the idol-gods and worshiped them to get closer to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). There is belief of Ilahiyyah, there is intention of worship, and there is action of worship. And IF we accept your understanding of verse and agree that the verse is about dead-people as well even than your principle is incorrect because it omits these fundamentals hence it cannot be correct. Wahhabi: IF the verse was not referring to human beings then why would Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) use the word dead its usage makes no sense. Sunni: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states, earth is dead – here: “He brings the living out of the dead, and brings the dead out of the living, and brings to life the earth after its lifelessness. And thus will you be brought out.” [Ref: 30:19] “And a sign for them is the dead earth. We have brought it to life and brought forth from it grain, and from it they eat. “ [Ref: 36:33] IF earth being dead makes sense to you then why would not idols being referred as dead make sense to you – especially when the idols were made from dead earths material? Wahhabi: I have taken your point on board. Sunni: IF your principle was compromised the following details: They invoked the dead [idol-gods], invocation is worship [when directed toward a Deity with intention of worship], and hence invoking the dead [idol-gods] is an act of worship. This way all the details of verse are included in your principle. He said: You’ve just tactfully presented your own principle in garb of mine. I said: Indeed all the details of the verses do establish my principle. He said: We will have to agree to disagree on this than. I said: I agree. 51 - Invalidating Three Principles Of Wahhabism: Sunni: Right in the beginning of our discussion [section 04] we had the following exchange: “Sunni: Suppose a Wahhabi loses his way in desert. (i) Seeks help from the angel. Is he monotheist or polytheist? Wahhabi: A monotheist! Sunni: (ii) What if he seeks help from the angel believing the angel is god-partner of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Is he polytheist or monotheist? Wahhabi: Polytheist because he takes angel as partner in God-hood! Sunni: Is he polytheist due to belief or action? Wahhabi: Action and belief. Sunni: Which action made him polytheist? Wahhabi: He invoked the angel for help and this is worshipping therefore Shirk. Sunni: OK but why is he Mushrik? Wahhabi: He is polytheist for action of worship and guilty of Shirk for attesting to belief of god-hood for an angel. Do you agree? Sunni: I agree that he is polytheist due to belief and his action. I want to contextualize what we discussed. Sunni: In the scenario (i) the angel wasn’t taken as a god hence his request for help from angel wasn’t worship but in scenario (ii) the angel was taken as a god therefore the request of help was interpreted to mean worship.” Read it and take special note of underlined. I want to discuss something that is connected with underlined. Sunni: I apologize in advance because I will start with something very basic. My objective is to confirm we are on the same page about building blocks and IF we do have any issues they need to be sorted before discussion progresses Wahhabi: I agree. Sunni: What is Dua? Wahhabi: I don’t know what you’re asking but I take a shot at your question. Sunni: What is status of Dua in religion of Islam? Wahhabi: Dua is act of calling-out i.e. supplication, invocation. Wahhabi: Dua is worship. Sunni: In Islam is every act of Dua worship? Wahhabi: No! Sunni: Why isn’t every act of Dua worship? Wahhabi: Word Dua is used in linguistic and legal sense. Sunni: Explain. Wahhabi: In linguistic sense [it just means call therefore] it is not worship and in Shar’ri sense it is [call of, invocation of, supplication of] worship. Sunni: How do I differentiate between Duas … Wahhabi: What has this got to do with the contents of quote? Doesn’t seem it is even remotely connected to it. Sunni: It is connected. You said he is Mushrik due to belief and action. According to you action of Shirk associated with Istighathah is Dua/Ibadah and this is discussion about action associated with it i.e. Dua/Ibadah. Sunni: How do I differentiate between Duas of Tawheed and Shirk according to scholarly Minhaj? Wahhabi: (1) Dua directed toward, dead Wali is worship and Shirk. (2) Dua in which Ma Fawq al-Asbab (i.e. out of natural means i.e. supernatural) type of help is sought is worship and Shirk. (3) Dua directed to someone who cannot naturally hear you is worship and Shirk. Sunni: Are these fundamental and only principles on which you judge Istighathah to be worship and Shirk? Wahhab: These are the core principles on which we judge Dua in Istighathah to be worship. Sunni: And only? Wahhabi: And only. Sunni: So would you agree with the following principles: (1) Asking the living is not worship neither Shirk, (2) asking for which is in Taht al-Asbab (i.e. according to natural means) isn't worship neither Shirk, (3) and seeking help from someone who can hear you is not worship neither shirk? Wahhabi: Yes! Sunni: I offer you a Scenario. Sunni: Aalim genuinely believes his friend Zalim is an Ilah. Aalim says: O Zalim give me glass of water please. Zalim: Walks to him and goes here you go have one cold glass of water. According to your belief system: (1) Asking the living is not worship therefore not Shirk, (2) asking for which is in Taht al-Asbab is not worship therefore not Shirk, (3) and seeking help from someone who can hear you is not worship therefore not shirk. Sunni: Question to you is: Is Aalim a Mushrik? IF yes than why Aalim is Mushrik? IF no why Aalim is not Mushrik? Wahhabi: Aalim is Mushrik because he has believed Zalim is an Ilah. Sunni: Is Aalim guilty of worship of Zalim? Wahhabi: Yes he is. Sunni: Here you have gone against your principles. You stated in your three principles that Dua directed toward dead, Dua in which Ma Fawq al-Asbab type help is sought, and Dua in which someone is expected to hear but has not means of hearing is worship. And you agreed with my presentation and opposite of your principles as well. In your principles this is not an act of worship [and three principles I derived from your three also establish the same] but in my principles it is worship [because belief of Ilahiyyah was affirmed and Dua was directed]. 52 - Three Sunni Principles Via Which Dua Of Worship Is Determined: Wahhabi: What are your principles? Sunni: (i) Dua directed toward a Deity/Ilah is worship. (ii) Dua in which help of a Deity is sought is worship. (iii) Dua in which intention is of worship such Dua is worship. Sunni: According to my principles Aalim believed Zalim is an Ilah therefore he is Mushrik. Aalim also directed Dua of help to Zalim [who is believed as an Ilah] hence he worshiped Zalim and this is second reason why Aalim committed Shirk. Wahhabi: I agree with your first principle and third principle but not second. Sunni: Why? Wahhabi: You’re tying worship with seeking of help from a Deity and this is not an essential requirement. Sunni: You’re objecting because Istighathah wouldn’t be Shirk because there is no outward, explicit affirmation of belief in Ilahiyyah/Rububiyyah. Sunni: What about seeking help from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) while not believing He is my Ilah/Rabb? Will that be worship in absence of Ilahiyyah? Wahhabi: No! No! No! It is essential requirement otherwise it can be worship. Sunni: It seems for Istighathah you Wahhabis have made special exception due which Ibadah/Shirk is warranted even without Ilahiyyah. Sunni: Why should Ilahiyyah be essential for all invocations of worship except invocation of Istighathah? Wahhabi: … Sunni: On what evidence of Quran/Sunnah have you made this Tahkhsees/distinction that in context of Istighathah affirmation of Ilahiyyah isn’t required? Wahhabi: This is methodology of Salaf as-Saliheen. Sunni: I would like to see evidence which proves Salaf adhered to your methodology. Wahhabi: I will search in our books of Aqeedah than I will share it with you. Sunni: And what IF you cannot support your claim? Wahhabi: I will. Sunni: What IF you cannot? Wahhabi: There is no, what IF, I will support my position. Sunni: I just want to get something clear. You will be supporting these principles of yours: “(1) Dua directed toward, dead Wali is worship and Shirk. (2) Dua in which Ma Fawq al-Asbab (i.e. out of natural means i.e. supernatural) type of help is …” There is no Ilahiyyah in these and on basis of this you judge Istighathah to be Shirk. Wahhabi: I will prove invocation of help is worship when it is directed to a dead person hence Shirk. Sunni: OK. 53 - Wahhabi Attests Sunni Principles Are Correct: Islamic Principles: Sunni: The three principles you mentioned earlier: What purpose do they serve? Wahhabi: Well they point out where Shirk is. Sunni: You didn’t understand what was being asked. Wahhabi: You’re not very precise with your questions. Sunni: Your three principles determine Istighathah to be Shirk. Sunni: According to your methodology these three principles establish an action/Istighathah is worship. And it is universally accepted that worship is always of an Ilah/Ma’bud. Hence when a Muslim calls a deceased Wali for help than according to your methodology he has not only worshipped the Wali but also taken him to be an Ilah/Ma’bud and that’s why you charge them of committing Shirk [because they have taken an Ilah as partner beside Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala]. In your methodology seeking help from deceased Wali is worship because Ilahiyyah is implied from the action. Where as in my principle, Dua in which help of a Deity is sought is worship, belief of Ilahiyyah is already believed and then help is sought as act of worship. The difference between two methodologies is that Salafi three principles lead to Ilahiyyah via actions and my methodology Ilahiyyah leads to action of worship/Dua. Sunni: Fundamentally Ilahiyyah is part of my and your methodology. In mine Shirk is due to Ilahiyyah and actions of worship and in your methodology Shirk is due to worship and Ilahiyyah. Rationale of your methodology is that the three principles establish worship, worship is for Ilah, hence worship of creation, implies affirmation of Ilahiyyah for creation. You judge Shirk based on Ilahiyyah but which is implied through action. This is clearly wrong because creed precedes all actions. Wahhabi: No. In this regard I judge Shirk based on worship and not due to affirmation IF Ilahiyyah. Sunni: By worship you specifically mean, invoking the deceased, or are you using it generally? Wahhabi: According to context of our discussion (i.e. Istighathah) and generally. Sunni: You have already said [in sections 18, 19, and 20] that you do not judge belief from actions but you judge belief from what person affirms with his tongue. And I already have refuted your judging creed from actions. You cannot judge/derive creed of Ilahiyyah from actions you know this is wrong because creed leads to actions. Sunni: You said that you judge Shirk from worship? Wahhabi: Yes! How can I not judge creed from actions? Someone is performing Salah and I can make judgment that he believes only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) deserves to be worshipped. Sunni: How can you say those who perform Istighathah are Mushrik IF Salah proves your version of Tawheed al-Uluhiyyah? Wahhabi: Mushrikeen of Arabia which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) encountered purified worship in calamity. You Sufis contaminate your creed with Shirk in calamity. Sunni: In that case Salah is not proof of my creed is it which you said: “… Salah and I can make judgment that he believes only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) deserves to be worshipped.” Is it or not? Wahhabi: … Sunni: Does the belief of Ilahiyyah lead to worship or does worship lead to Ilahiyyah? Wahhab: … Sunni: Did you believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is your Ma’bud/Ilah first and then worshipped Him or did you worship Him and then believed He is your Ilah/Ma’bud? Wahhabi: The creed leads to worship and I worshiped Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) after believing He is worthy of worship. Sunni: The building block of your actions is creed and precisely this is on what principle two which I purposed is based on: “… a Deity/Ilah is worship. (ii) Dua in which help of a Deity is sought is worship. (iii) Dua in which intention …” Think about it. You’re on the methodology of Ahlus Sunnah [because you believe creed of Ilahiyyah leads to worship] but against Ahlus Sunnah you employ the invented principles and methodology [which judge worship in absences of Ilahiyyah]. This proves all my three principles are valid because your own actions are based on them. Wahhabi: I need time to think about the discussion we had so far and refer to Ahlul Ilm in this regard. Sunni: I think we will leave it at this and continue when you return with a verdict. Wahhabi: Salam Alaykum. Sunni: Wa Alaykum Salam. Wahhabi: I have had time to think about contents of our most recent discussion and I am inclined to believe you were correct. Sunni: Why the change of heart? Wahhabi: I thought about why I objected to it and how it is actually valid and that opened the door to my realization your understanding is correct. Sunni: What bought you this realization? What are your reasons? Wahhabi: Like you said that my own Ibadaat and invocations are based on Ilahiyyah/Niyyah hence it cannot be denied validity but on other hand I cannot accept it as a universal principle. I originally objected to your second principle because it was created to exonerate practitioners of Istighathah from Shirk and this is the only context in which I am opposed to it. Otherwise it is valid. 54 - Agreement Principle Is Correct And Ijmah Is Upon Guidance: Sunni: Brother when both of us agree on correct-ness of my principles. Should you not take heed from the following words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam😞 “Anas bin Malik said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah say: ‘My nation will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H3950] Implying that his Ummah will only unite/agree upon what is guidance. Wahhabi: In this Hadith Mu’an Bin Rifa’ah Aslami is weak in Hadith. Abu Khalf al-Aa’ma has been accused of lying. The Hadith is weak hence cannot be used for evidence. Sunni: We have clear instruction in Sahih authentic Ahadith to follow the Jammah and Jammah is majority of Islamic scholarship and Muslims who follow them so the Sanad of Hadith maybe weak but the content is supported with authentic Ahadith. Sunni: I did not intend to imply adherence to majority is obligation so there is no reason to weaken the Hadith. I merely cited the Hadith to establish that Ijmah is upon guidance and not misguidance. You and I both agree that upon Ijmah being source of guidance? Wahhabi: Ijmah of Ummah is upon guidance no doubt but there is no Ijmah on your principle just agreement between us both. You’re calling this Ijmah and this is not right. Sunni: Ijmah is of two types: (i) Ijmah via explicit statements an example of this would be clear categoric statements indicating on this there is Ijmah. (ii) Ijmah via non-contradiction is type in which a position/action was known to scholars but they did not refute it or object to it. Sunni: I and you have agreement following principle is valid: “… a Deity/Ilah is worship. (ii) Dua in which help of a Deity is sought is worship. (iii) Dua in which intention …” Do you think the scholars of Ummah would reject this principle? We have Ijmah Sukooti because none has refuted or contradicted this principle. Not just only this but all three principles mentioned by me are agreed upon by both of us and there is no doubt Islamic scholarship would agree with them hence these cannot be error. As per agreed rules which I quote: “… any principle not agree upon both sides needs to be supported with evidence if demand is made, agreed upon principles will not be brought into dispute, questioned …” We agree upon Ijmah and I expect that it will not be brought into dispute in future. Any how you have already agreed with me upon the correctness of Sunni three principles [mentioned in the beginning of section 52] and I seek assurance you will not bring it into dispute in future. Sunni: As for your three Salafi principles which you presented they are disputed and unsubstantiated. We already had a discussion regarding them on PalTalk, and even in this discussion, and once more I am willing to hand you the charge so you can establish them. At this moment our discussion stands at you holding to Sunni principle which has support from Quran/Sunnah and you agree they are all valid. And on top of these principles you’re holding to your own three principles which don’t have any textual support from Quran/Sunnah. I leave you to decide. Wahhabi: … 55 - Servants Of Allah Inclusive Of Deceased Awliyah-Allah And Karamat: Sunni: IF you recall in the beginning of our discussion [in section 04] you stated the words, servants of Allah, refer to angels and instruction of seeking help is from them. We also discussed [in section 38] about seeking help from servants of Allah in Brazil’s Amazon jungle and you stated you would respect the decision of someone seeking help from angel even though it is not prophetic Sunnah. Wahhabi: I do. Sunni: What IF his Ijtihad is that servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) are not just the angels according to Hadith but inclusive of deceased Awliyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? Wahhabi: The following Hadith has angels: “Ibn Abbas said: Indeed Allah possesses angels besides the Hafazah (the angels of protection) who write (of even) the leaf which falls from a tree so when one of you suffers a limp in a deserted land he should call "Assist (me) O slaves of Allah"' [Ref: Shu’ayb ul-Iman, Volume 1, Hadith 167.] Many commentators including Imam Shawkani (rahimullah), Shaykh Albani (rahimullah) have stated it refers to angels and Muslim Jinn. Sunni: The Hadith explicitly did not state seek help from angel or Muslim Jinn. The Hadith which you quoted only states, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has appointed guardian angels including angels to write everything that takes places on earth even falling of a leaf. It does not in any way insinuate seek help of those or any angel or Muslim Jinn and generality of words, O slaves/servants of Allah, is proof of this. IF Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) intended to say angels/Jinns then he would have said, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has angels appointed to help so say o angels help me. Commentators have stated about the angels and Muslim Jinns and I have no problem with that either. I am all for including angels/Jinn in it but I do not agree to limit phrase slaves of Allah to them only. Wahhabi: Point noted and I will get back to you on this. Sunni: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “When My servants ask you about Me, (tell them that) I am indeed the near-most. I answer the supplicant’s call when he calls Me. So let them respond to Me, and let them have faith in Me, so that they may fare rightly.” [Ref: 2:186] “Indeed you will taste the painful punishment, and you will be requited only for what you used to do (all) except exclusive Allah’s servants.” [Ref: 37:38/40] A general/Mutliq statement is all encompassing and excludes none as is the case in these Ayaat. When RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said slave/servants then all which come into category of slaves/servants are included just as righteous Jinn and Bashr/human are included by these verses. Wahhabi: Brother this would be fruitful and beneficial Ahadith relating to this topic were graded Sahih/authentic or Hassan/good. Issue with these Ahadith is they are not hence servants of Allah being inclusive of Awliyah will not establish permissibility for seeking help from the deceased Awliyah. Sunni: Ibadullah includes Awliyah or not? Wahhabi: … Sunni: Even IF Ahadith are weak we can still act on them as long as the Hadith is not extremely weak. Wahhabi: That is IF Hadith are mentioning a merit of certain action and this Hadith doesn’t mention any. Sunni: Brother these Ahadith have been acted on by Muhaditheen, Mujtahideen, Mujadideen, and by Mufassireen. Why would they act on this weak Hadith IF they saw no reason to do so? There is obviously some benefit and this is why we can too. We recite Surah Fatihah no less than twenty times in a day and ask: “Show us the straight path. The path of those whom you have blessed …” [Ref: 1:6/7] The blessed are Muhaditheen, Mujtahideen, Mujadideen and Mufassireen and straight path is to act on this Hadith as they have. Wahhabi: Others have opposed them. You won’t like it but Shaykh Albani is Muhaddith and he did not act on this Hadith. Sunni: Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (rahimullah) on one side and Shaykh Albani on the other. IF you put them both on a scale who do you think outweigh the other in knowledge of Hadith and Taqwa? Wahhabi: ... 56 - Help From A Wali As An Act Of Karamah: Sunni: Would you agree that servants of Allah are inclusive of Awliyah-Allah? Wahhabi: They can be but chance of a person in desert and his call reaching a living-Wali is zero hence the likelihood of help being granted by a Wali is zero. Sunni: Not even as an act of Karamah (i.e. saintly miracle)? Wahhabi: It is possible but has not taken place. Sunni: What IF I prove it has taken place. Wahhabi: It has taken place amongst early three generations but not later. Sunni: That makes your first statement clear. Sunni: When you said it has taken place amongst the early three generations were you thinking of Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) statement, O Sariya behind the mountain, Hadith? Sunni: “When Umar Ibn Khattab sent out an army, he appointed a man named Sariyah as their leader. Then while Umar was delivering the sermon he started shouting, “O Sariyah, the mountain! O Sariyah, the mountain, the mountain!’ Then a messenger from the army came and he [Hazrat Umar radiallah ta’ala anhu] questioned him [concerning the army]. He said, ’O Leader of the Believers! We met with the enemy and they had [almost] defeated us, then a voice proclaimed, ‘O Sariyah, the mountain!’ So we put our backs against the mountain and Allah vanquished them.’” [Ref: Fadhail is-Sahabah, Hadith 355, Page 121, by Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, Arabic/Urdu, here.] The chain is Hassan/good and it has been narrated in many books. 57- Karamat Of Awliyah And Their Relationship To Istighathah: Wahhabi: Yes! Also about the Ayah in which Prophet Sulayman (alayhis salam) enquired who can bring the throne of Balqis and Ayah says one who had knowledge of book said I will bring it in blink of an eye. Sunni: OK. Wahhabi: “Said one who had knowledge from the Scripture, "I will bring it to you before your glance returns to you." And when (Solomon) saw it placed before him. He said this is from the favour of my Lord to test me whether I will be grateful or ungrateful. And whoever is grateful - his gratitude is only for (the benefit of) himself. And whoever is ungrateful - then indeed, my Lord is free of need and generous." [Ref: 27:40] Sunni: According to Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) he was Katib (i.e. scribe) appointed to write the Wahi dictated to him by Prophet Sulayman (alayhis salam). According to Qatadah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Asif Bin Barkhiya was a human and not some supernatural Jinn/angel type creation. Wahhabi: Shaykh Ibn Kathir (rahimullah) recorded these details in Tafsir Ibn Kathir. Sunni: “’One with whom was knowledge of the Scripture said …’ Ibn Abbas said: "This was Asif the scribe of Sulayman.'' It was also narrated by Muhammad bin Ishaq from Yazid bin Ruman that he was Asif bin Barkhiya and he was a truthful believer who knew the Greatest Name of Allah. Qatadah said: "He was a believer among the humans, and his name was Asif.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 27:40, here.] Sunni: We are on the same page than. Sunni: Point I intended to make was that IF voice of Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) can reach Sariyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) can see the event while it is unfolding. Then why wouldn’t a Wali hear a call of help IF Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills for him to hear it? Wahhabi: As an act of Karamah a living Wali can hear and as an act of Karamah can help someone in need and distress. Sunni: IF I seek help of a Shaykh, believing that he will hear my call of help in Africa, with permission of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and as an act of Karamah. And also believe Wali can help me as an act of Karamah than can that be termed Shirk? Wahhabi: Karamah is possible hence it cannot be termed Shirk but Karamah does not permit nor it is proof of seeking his help. Sunni: I didn’t say Karamah is proof of seeking help from Awliyah. The proof is Ahadith I quoted and we have discussed in detail. These are Ahadith on which the great scholar’s likes of Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal (rahimullah) acted on. I am merely arguing Awliyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) have supernatural powers granted to them and they can see/hear and provide help supernaturally as is in the case of Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu). And IF help was provided by Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) without being asked than Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) can enable His Awliyah to provide help to His servants when they act on the Hadith and say, O servants of Allah help me. Ahlus Sunnah believes Awliyah-Allah hearing/seeing the call of help and providing help are acts of Karamah and within dominion of powers granted to them. Wahhabi: You believe in Karamat even for the deceased? Sunni: According to Ahlus Sunnah Karamat of Awliyah do not cease even after their death. We have established the living Awliyah-Allah can help, see and even hear with permission of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Wahhabi: What are your evidences? Sunni: I want to complete my argument before we change direction. Sunni: One of your principles is that requesting help from someone who cannot hear you through natural means results in Shirk and this principle has been refuted because you have affirmed out of natural means type of hearing is possible for creation. Wahhabi: The call will be heard through the means; super natural means but still has means. Sunni: Is there anything which is believed to take place without natural or super natural means? Everything happens within realm of natural or super natural means. We have never removed means from seeking help. According to Ahlus Sunnah everything happens through means natural/supernatural [and you believe seeking/providing supernatural help i.e. Ma Fawq al-Asbab type is in according to means on account of Karamati abilities of Awliyah hence you had reason to charge us of committing Shirk]. Sunni: I am done. Wahhabi: What are your evidences [Quran/Sunnah] supporting belief that Awliyah perform Karamat even after death? The Quran says the dead cannot hear/see and they don’t know who is calling them etc. How can they perform Karamat? This is against common sense. Sunni: I will answer all briefly: (i) I do not know any evidences other than what the scholars have stated in this regard. (ii) Nowhere does the Quran state the dead people cannot hear. You’re taking advantage of ambiguity in verses of Quran which are about dead idols made from dead material, stones, dead wood etc. Ahadith have made it clear the dead hear. (iii) The body dies the soul is alive. It hears, sees, and knows. IF Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits the souls can provide help. Wahhabi: Than you have nothing to support your belief in reality. Sunni: I prefer follow evidence-less path of, and prefer to be misguided by giant of, Islamic scholarship than guided by you and your Najdi scholarship. Wahhabi: Due to lack of evidence calling the deceased Awliyah to help with belief they will hear, see, know, and help as an act of Karamah would be Shirk. Also IF the Wali called for help does not hear, see, know, and does not provide asked help than Shirk was occurred. Sunni: What evidence of Quran/Sunnah do you have to support this is how Shirk is to be determined? Wahhabi: … Sunni: I have noted in beginning of our discussion your position was that Istighathah was by default Shirk in all conditions but now it is not Shirk IF there is evidence and the Wali called for help hears, sees, knows and provides the needed aid. And this means one thing: You believe call of Istighathah IF meets your above mentioned conditions than it will not be worship. Wahhabi: Brother you are prolonging the discussion. Actual dispute is over deceased Awliyah-Allah being able to help, or having the ability to hear the calls of help. Sunni: IF evidence of Karamat continuing after death can change Istighathah from Shirki to Tawheedi than your standard position [indicated in the beginning of section 42] that Istighathah by default and by its very essence is Shirk is invalid. Wahhabi: You believe it is permissible and I believe it is impermissible because it is Shirk. This is what needs to be discussed but you are bringing into discussion aspects which are not disputed. Sunni: I have made my point IF you have nothing to add than we can discuss permissibility/impermissibility issue. Wahhabi: We need to discuss the permissibility/impermissibility of Istighathah. 58 - Discussion On Impermissibility Of Istighathah Due To Shirk: Sunni: You believe Istighathah is impermissible because it is Shirk. Hypothetically speaking IF it was established that it isn’t Shirk then would it be permissible? Wahhabi: It is impermissible even IF it was not Shirk. Sunni: Would it be impermissible due to being Haram or innovation [which makes it Haram]? Wahhabi: Come again? Sunni: Is Istighathah Haram because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or his Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) declared it Haram explicitly – like we find injunction alcohol, pig, donkey, interest etc? Or is it Haram because it would be an innovation for which there would be no clear prohibition but it would be implied from it being innovation? Wahhabi: I need to think about the answer. Give me a little time. Wahhabi: It is Haram because it is Shirk like prostration to other than Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Haram and Shirk in our Shari’ah. Sunni: We already discussed Istighathah being Shirk and you provided no proofs for this neither for your principles on which you judged it as Shirk. Wahhabi: I am not going through that rabbit hole once again what was discussed and evidence I provided was enough. Sunni: I am not saying we discuss it again I was merely making a statement of what happened already. Wahhabi: And it is a representation which I do not agree with. I have reasoned and provided enough evidence to prove it Shirk. 59 - A Technicality Istighathah Is Not Haram Like Prostration Is Haram: Sunni: OK. What I want to ask is that you said Istighathah is Haram like prostration is Haram. To me this means you said that there is clear explicit texts in Quran/Sunnah which prove Istighathah is Haram. Is this what you meant? Wahhabi: Istighathah is Haram due to clear texts. Sunni: There are many Ahadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) indicated prostration is impermissible for every creation. In this context take note that to say Istighathah is Haram like prostration in my understanding means you’re saying, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has explicitly/clearly declared Istighathah is Haram. You’re talking about corroborative prohibition where as I am asking about explicit/Sari prohibition. Wahhabi: I didn’t mean it like that. I meant Haram due to clear texts which prohibit worship of others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Shirk. Sunni: In my understanding your statement is contradictory. You said, it is Haram because it is Shirk, which means according to you prohibition of Istighathah is based on corroborative evidence. Your next statement was, like prostration to other than Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) Istighathah is Haram, which denotes meaning it is explicit/Sari Haram. Yet the whole sentence is arguing it is corroborative Haram because it is Shirk. In other words your stance of Haram-ness of Istighathah is contradictory and massively confusing. IF it is corroborative Haram due to Shirk than it is not Haram like prostration. IF practice Istighathah is an explicit Haram like prostration than it is not a corroborative Haram due to Shirk. Wahhabi: Why are you wasting so much energy in an attempt to deconstruct what I have said? All you need to do is to ask me. IF I understand you correctly than yes my statement is confusing. Sunni: There is a reason I have to be this technical because ambiguities would cause problems and lengthen our discussion. Also we wouldn’t know exactly where I/you stand on an issue connected with Istighathah. Wahhabi: I will be more direct. Istighathah is Haram because it is Shirk. Sunni: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “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] “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 favour. So accept from Allah His favour, for Allah is not forgetful of anything. He then recited, "And thy Lord is not forgetful." [Ref: Musnad Al Bazzar] We have clear evidence from many Ahadith that prostration to anyone beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is prohibited but there is no proof that Istighathah is prohibited. Wahhabi: Istighathah is prohibited because it is Shirk. Sunni: Where is the evidence of on basis of which you establish its prohibition? 60 - Haram Is Clear Stated And Istighathah Is Not Clearly Stated Haram: Wahhabi: It is Shirk hence prohibited. Sunni: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said all that which is Haram has been clearly stated to be Haram. We have clear evidence of Quran/Sunnah that prostration is Haram. To prove Istighathah Haram you cannot argue its Haram-ness on basis of it is Shirk therefore Haram. Haram is clearly stated to be Haram. IF you quote me a single Hadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said, Istighathah is Haram, or Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) prohibited someone from seeking the help of deceased Awliyah then I will concede the point. Otherwise you will have to accept Haram-ness is based on what is clearly declared has Haram. Wahhabi: Brother Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated that we should not invoke those beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has instructed to ask from Him only. This evidence automatically implies we are forbidden to invoke others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Sunni: Anything to back-up your claim? Wahhabi: "And do not invoke besides Allah that which neither benefits you nor harms you, for if you did, then indeed you would be of the wrongdoers." [Ref: 10:106] “The places of worship are ˹only˺ for Allah, so do not invoke anyone besides Him.” [Ref: 72:18] “And who is in greater error than he who calls besides Allah upon those that will not answer him till the day of resurrection and they are heedless of their call?” [Ref: 45:5] “If you call on them they shall not hear your call, and even if they could hear they shall not answer you; and on the resurrection day they will deny your associating them (with Allah) …” [Ref: 35:14] Sunni: For now let us return to what we were discussing. I will return to content of these verses I need to research regarding them. Wahhabi: Address the content of these verses now. Sunni: I need to research and prepare how I will respond and explain them. Wahhabi: So you admit that you’re not aware of meaning of theses verses? Sunni: I have clear understanding what they mean but I need to substantiate my claim. This is why I need time so I can gather all relevant verses. Wahhabi: OK. No harm in that. Sunni: “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] Read the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and think about them. There is no denying IF something is Kufr/Shirk than it is Haram and we cannot engage in it but establishing Haram-ness due to Shirk is lessening severity of Shirk. Sunni: Would you agree that major Shirk is major sin. Yes or no? Wahhabi: Yes it is major sin but major Shirk also. Sunni: Do you/we establish XMan committed major sin instead of major Shirk? Wahhabi: We don’t deny it being major sin. Sunni: What did I ask? Wahhabi: We don’t. Sunni: The most damaging aspect takes precedence and we correct that and in this case IF Istighathah is Shirk than we have no reason to discuss IF it is Haram or Halal rather we should discuss Shirk-ness. Haram and Halal is determined on what is stated clearly as Haram/Halal and IF something is composed of Haram/Halal. There is no denying engaging in every minor/major Shirk is Haram and we can reason that but it is not proper methodology. You need to establish it is major Shirk and that by default will establish it is Haram therefore wouldn’t need to discuss IF it is permissible/impermissible. Plus Haram-ness of Istighathah is should be last of your and my concern IF it is Shirk discussion on it being Shirk should take precedence over Haram-ness. Wahhabi: There you go, just as I thought, you want me to prove it is Shirk once again. Sunni: We don’t have to but I needed to point out the technicality involved. 61 - What The Verses Of Quran Say And What Wahhabi Made Them Say: Sunni: You quoted these Ayaat as evidence that Istighathah is Shirk: "And do not invoke besides Allah that which neither benefits you nor harms you, for if you did, then indeed you would be of the wrongdoers." [Ref: 10:106] “The places of worship are ˹only˺ for Allah, so do not invoke anyone besides Him.” [Ref: 72:18] “And who is in greater error than he who calls besides Allah upon those that will not answer him till the day of resurrection and they are heedless of their call?” [Ref: 45:5] “If you call on them they shall not hear your call, and even if they could hear they shall not answer you; and on the resurrection day they will deny your associating them (with Allah) …” [Ref: 35:14] In context you wanted to prove Istighathah is Haram because it is Shirk. I want to respond to these verses. Wahhabi: I already know what you will say regarding these evidences. Sunni: You don’t brother. You don’t even believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knows Ilm ul-Ghayb but here you’re claiming it for yourself. Wahhabi: I didn’t claim Ghayb. I said I know because of pattern in your responses is consistent. Sunni: How do you know I will keep to that pattern? Wahhabi: Continue with your response. You’re twisting my words. Sunni: IF you weren’t twisting our belief and actions than we wouldn’t be having this discussion and I wouldn’t be twisting your words. Would I Sherlock Holmes? Wahhabi: … Sunni: You stated Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has instructed that we seek His help and invoke none but Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). You quoted verses of beside-Allah. You’re taking words beside-Allah literally and not in the technical meaning in which they are employed and IF this is correct than surely the living, dead, angels, Jinn, and human are not Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but are beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). IF your quoted evidence is considered without context of Ilahiyyah then we are prohibited to seek help from all mentioned. Yet we seek help from living in all situations and you do not deem it Shirk. Sunni: Invoking none but Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the instruction to invoke beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is in context of not invoking idol-gods of polytheists. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: “Whoever invokes, besides Allah, another god—for which they can have no proof they will surely find their penalty with their Lord. Indeed, the disbelievers will never succeed.” [Ref: 23:117] “And those who invoke not any other Ilah (god) along with Allah, nor kill such person as Allah has forbidden, except for just cause, nor commit illegal sexual intercourse - and whoever does this shall receive the punishment.” [Ref: 25:68] “So invoke not with Allah another Ilah (god) lest you should be among those who receive punishment.” [Ref: 26:213] The ambiguity over the identity of besides-Allah is removed by these verses because these verses make it clear the Mushrikeen invoked their Ilahs/gods. Sunni: The punishment and prohibition is for those who invoke an Ilah beside-Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). We are discussing act of seeking help from souls of deceased Awliyah without affirmation of Ilahiyyah. Also you’re deducing prohibition of Istighathah on basis of these verses yet Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said prohibited matters are clearly stated. IF it was prohibited it would be clearly stated as prostration is prohibited and clearly stated to be Haram in many Ahadith. Also you are using a point which is not established to argue for prohibition i.e. Istighathah is Shirk therefore Istighathah is prohibited. You first need to establish this contention of yours and then you can argue prohibition from it. 62 - Wahhabi Repeats He Said Earlier Without Responding To I Said: Wahhabi: "And do not invoke besides Allah that which neither benefits you nor harms you, for if you did, then indeed you would be of the wrongdoers." [Ref: 10:106] “The places of worship are ˹only˺ for Allah, so do not invoke anyone besides Him.” [Ref: 72:18] “And who is in greater error than he who calls besides Allah upon those that will not answer him till the day of resurrection and they are heedless of their call?” [Ref: 46:5] “If you call on them they shall not hear your call, and even if they could hear they shall not answer you; and on the resurrection day they will deny your associating them (with Allah) …” [Ref: 35:14] All these verses are prohibiting all types of worship of Shirk including of Istighathah. Shirk is Haram and worship of creation Shirk therefore it is Haram. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “Narrated An-Nu'man Ibn Bashir: The Prophet said: Supplication (Dua) is itself the worship. (He then recited) "And your Lord said: Call on Me, I will answer you." (40:60).” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B8, H1474, here.] Istighathah is an invocation and therefore it obligates worship and worship which is directed at creation is Shirk. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has explicitly prohibited to invoke besides-Allah hence Istighathah is Haram. Sunni: You’re not addressing anything I have said instead you have rehashed the same old and I am not responding it to your argument against Istighathah. Wahhabi: To refute what you say I do not need to directly respond to what you have said rather refute what you have deduced from the verses. Sunni: How else will you refute my position than? Wahhabi: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructed angels to prostrate to Adam (alayhis salam). A verse says Iblees did not prostrate. Giving rise to misunderstanding that Iblees was an angel, angels have choice and ability to obey/disobey. We employ verse in which it is clearly stated that Iblees was a Jinn and like humans Jinn have choice to obey/disobey. Sunni: You, by removing ambiguity of one verse through another? Wahhabi: Yes. Sunni: The verses I quoted were actually removing ambiguity found in verses which you quoted above. Where was the ambiguity in what I said or the evidences I quoted? Wahhabi: I don’t have them in front of me to point the ambiguities out. Sunni: I quote them again: “Whoever invokes, besides Allah, another god—for which they can have no proof they will surely find their penalty with their Lord. Indeed, the disbelievers will never succeed.” [Ref: 23:117] “And those who invoke not any other Ilah (god) along with Allah, nor kill such person as Allah has forbidden, except for just cause, nor commit illegal sexual intercourse - and whoever does this shall receive the punishment.” [Ref: 25:68] “So invoke not with Allah another Ilah (god) lest you should be among those who receive punishment.” [Ref: 26:213] Where is ambiguity in these verses which had to be removed? Wahhabi: The verses do not indicate who these Ilahs are but verses I quoted state those who possess these qualities should not be invoked. Sunni: How does that prove your position against Istighathah? Wahhabi: How it doesn’t? Sunni: You basically have said what I needed to say to refute you. Your verses omit mention of Ilahiyyah and my verses omit the qualities you indicated toward. There are two routes we can take, insert missing details of your verses into my set of verses, or insert missing detail established by my set of evidences into yours evidences. Either one will give us the correct way of understanding both sets of verses. Wahhabi: I am not able to comprehend what exactly you mean. Sunni: I removed ambiguity in your verses with my evidence and established Ilahiyyah is part of your verse. Wahhabi: Can you give example of what you mean? Sunni: Brother you’re pointlessly pretending ignorance. You understand very well what I mean and how it affects understanding of verses in discussion. Wahhabi: I understand but I want clarity. Sunni: I need time to write and demonstrate what I meant. Wahhabi: I will wait. Sunni: You quoted: "And do not invoke besides Allah that which neither benefits you nor harms you, for if you did, then indeed you would be of the wrongdoers." [Ref: 10:106] Verse prohibits calling upon beside Allah that … Who are these beside Allah whom we are prohibited to call? This question is answered by following: “So invoke not with Allah another Ilah (god) lest you should be among those who receive punishment.” [Ref: 26:213] Why are they offer no benefit, or harm? They are idols: “Yet have they taken besides Allah 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] Idol-Ilahs of Mushrikeen are harmless and benefit-less. In light of other verses you quoted these idol-Ilahs cannot hear and will not hear even unto the judgment day. Therefore Mushrikeen were instructed: “And do not invoke beside Allah that which neither …” [Ref: 10:106] Wahhabi: JazakAllah Khayr. Sunni: I have had some ideas while writing the above that I need to pen down. Wahhabi: IF it is not related to discussion than it should wait. You can’t just leave write down your dreams. Sunni: It is related to our discussion and explanation of mine/your evidences. And it will take time to complete so I wish to continue tomorrow IF it is not objected. Wahhabi: Brother Ali I have to leave my chores to make time for this discussion but you unilaterally decide to pack your bags and leave when you like. Don’t you think this is a tad bit rude. Sunni: I will clarify these verses in light of evidences I presented earlier but you will have to give me permission to improve content when I publish it. Wahhabi: You can improve it. 63 - Wahhabi Qur’anic Evidence And How I Removed Ambiguity From It: Sunni: (i) This is how you quoted the verse: "And do not invoke besides Allah that which neither benefits you nor harms you, for if you did, then indeed you would be of the wrongdoers." [Ref: 10:106] And this is how I removed ambiguity and explained it with my set of evidences: "And do not invoke besides Allah [an Ilah] that which neither benefits you nor harms you, for if you did [invoke an Ilah beside-Allah], then indeed you would be of the wrongdoers." [Ref: 10:106] (ii) This is how you quoted the verse: “The places of worship are (only) for Allah, so do not invoke anyone besides Him.” [Ref: 72:18] And this is how I removed ambiguity with my set of verses and explain it in the context of verse itself: “The places of worship are for Allah [and not for any Ilah beside Him] so do not invoke any [Ilah] besides Him [in these places of worship].” [Ref: 72:18] (iii) This is how you quoted the verse: “And who is in greater error than he who calls besides Allah upon those that will not answer him till the day of resurrection and they are heedless of their call?” [Ref: 46:5] This is how I have removed ambiguity through verses I employed as evidence: “And who is in greater error than he who calls upon besides Allah [Ilahs] those that will not answer him till the day of resurrection and they are heedless of their call?” [Ref: 46:5] (iv) This is how you quoted the verses: “If you call on them they shall not hear your call, and even if they could hear they shall not answer you; and on the resurrection day they will deny your associating them (with Allah) …” [Ref: 35:14] This is how I remove ambiguity from it with my set of evidences and based on context: “If you call on them they [the Ilahs you call upon O Mushrikeen they] shall not hear your call, and even if they [the Ilahs you call] could hear they shall not answer you; and on the resurrection day they [the Ilahs you called upon] will deny your associating them (with Allah) …” [Ref: 35:14] Sunni: This exercise establishes verses you employed are about Mushrikeen who believed idols are their Ilahs and as an act of worship called/invoked them. Shirk and worship is determined on basis of creed of Ilahiyyah and intention with which action is performed. Creed and intention of polytheists was in agreement with Shirk and worship hence they were Mushrikeen. Istighathah doesn’t warrant Shirk because creed which necessitates worship and the intention of worship are missing. Invocation of Shirk in which Ilahiyyah is believed for a creation and Niyyah is to worship is prohibited in these verses and not Istighathah. 64 - Intertextual Explanation Of Verses By Combining Relevant Parts: Sunni: “Whoever invokes besides Allah another god for which they can have no proof they will surely find their penalty with their Lord. [Ref: 23:117] And do not invoke besides Allah that which neither benefits you nor harms you. [Ref: 10:106] That will not answer him till the day of resurrection and they are heedless of their call. [Ref: 45:5] And even if they could hear they shall not answer you; and on the resurrection day they will deny your associating them (with Allah). [Ref: 35:14] So invoke not with Allah another Ilah (god) lest you should be among those who receive punishment. [Ref: 26:213] Yet have they taken besides Allah 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] And those who invoke not any other Ilah (god) along with Allah, nor kill such person as Allah has forbidden, except for just cause, nor commit illegal sexual intercourse - and whoever does this shall receive the punishment. [Ref: 25:68] This Tafsir is based on verses which you have employed and verses I have employed Sunni: Reading it will become obvious that prohibition to invoke was regarding Ilahs/gods. These Ilahs/gods are said to be benefit-less, harmless, unable to hear/answer, cannot create anything, but were themselves created by the ones worshipping them, and these Ilahs have no control over life, death, or resurrection. Theme of this Tafsir is Mushrikeen invoking idol-Ilahs when there is no justifiable reason to invoke them hence they are forbidden to invoke idol-Ilahs on threat of punishment. It is evident that prohibited and Shirki invocation is one directed to an Ilah beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And this evidence is not against Istighathah because Istighathah is calling without affirming Ilahiyyah and Niyyah to worship one called. Invocation which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has forbidden is one directed to an Ilah beside-Allah with intention of worship. [This section was written two days after the session ended and it was shared with Wahhabi brother. Section 65 is continuation of section 63. I have inserted section 64 in between both because section 63 and 64 are related in theme and objectives.] 65 – Again Ignores Tawheed/Shirk Is On Creed, And Worship On Creed/Intention: Sunni: I am done at the moment but I will provide comprehensive and explanation of verses once I have finished writing it. Do you have any objections disagreements in regards to what I wrote? Wahhabi: … Sunni: I need an answer brother. Wahhabi: I will answer in my own way. Sunni: … Wahhabi: Who do you believe created the universe and earth? Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or those whom you call for help in Istighathah? Sunni: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Wahhabi: IF Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wished a harm or a benefit can they remove any harm from your, or deprive you of a benefit intended for you by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? Sunni: No. Wahhabi: Why not than invoke Him who can benefit/harm as He pleases and the One who cannot be stopped? Sunni: … Wahhabi: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: "If indeed, you ask them who is it that created the heavens and the earth, they would be sure to say: Allah! Say: See you then the things that you invoke besides Allah? Can they if Allah wills some penalty for me, remove His penalty? Or if He will some grace for me, can they keep back His grace?" [Ref: 39:38] How are you any different from Mushrikeen than because they held to same belief? You’re justifying exactly the same Shirki invocation and you have same beliefs as Mushrikeen yet you claim you’re a Muslim. Sunni: I will respond to you and answer your questions in our next session [which started from section 72 onward]. For now I need to complete Tafsir of verses you quoted as evidence [in sections 60 and 62]. 66 - Tafsir Do Not Invoke Besides-Allah Which Neither Benefits Nor Harms: Sunni: You quoted: "And do not invoke besides Allah that which neither benefits you nor harms you, for if you did, then indeed you would be of the wrongdoers." [Ref: 10:106] Following verse has explicitness about identity of besides-Allah: “But they have taken besides Him gods which create nothing, while they are created, and possess not for themselves any harm or benefit and possess not (power to cause) death or life or resurrection.” [Ref: 25:3] Hence in verse Q10:106 the prohibition to invoke idol-Ilahs besides-Allah because has made it clear in verse Q25:3 that besides-Allah are idol-gods of Mushrikeen. 67 - Tafsir Masajid Are For Allah So Do Not Invoke Besides Him: Sunni: You quoted the Ayah: “The places of worship are (only) for Allah, so do not invoke anyone besides Him.” [Ref: 72:18] To properly and comprehensively understand it with evidences I need to build the foundations. (i) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructs to say: “Say: "Shall we invoke instead of Allah that which neither benefits us nor harms us and be turned back on our heels after Allah has guided us? (We would then be) like ...” [Ref: 6:71] In following verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has replaced/interpreted word invoke with worship to insinuate invocation is worship: “Say: "Do you worship besides Allah that which holds for you no (power of) harm or benefit while it is Allah who is the Hearing, the Knowing?" [Ref: 5:76] This is in agreement with following words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) narrated in Hadith: “Narrated An-Nu'man Ibn Bashir: The Prophet said: Supplication (Dua) is itself the worship. (He then recited) "And your Lord said: Call on Me, I will answer you." (40:60).” [Ref: Abu Dawud, B8, H1474, here.] (ii) You quoted verse: “The places of worship are (only) for Allah, so do not invoke anyone besides Him.” [Ref: 72:18] Do not invoke anyone besides-Him means do not worship anyone beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in Masjid: “The places of worship are (only) for Allah so do not invoke/call [as an act of worship] anyone besides Him.” [Ref: 72:18] (iii) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: “The places of worship are (only) for Allah, so do not invoke anyone besides Him.” [Ref: 72:18] Masajid are only for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in the sense that He alone should be worshipped and invoked in: “In houses (mosques) which Allah has ordered to be raised in them His Name is remembered. Therein glorify Him (Allah) in the mornings and in the afternoons or the evenings.” [Ref: 24:36] (iv) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: The places of worship are (only) for Allah, so do not invoke anyone besides Him.” [Ref: 72:18] We are prohibited to invoke besides-Allah and these are idol-Ilahs of Mushrikeen invoked/worshipped: “So invoke not with Allah another Ilah (god) lest you should be among those who receive punishment.” [Ref: 26:213] “Whoever invokes, besides Allah, another god for which they can have no proof they will surely find their penalty with their Lord. Indeed, the disbelievers will never succeed.” [Ref: 23:117] (v) By combining the understanding all the Tafasir in this section we have meaning that Masajid are only for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in the sense that He is ONLY to be worshipped them and Masajid are not for idol-Ilahs of Mushrikeen to be invoked in worship. 68 - Tafsir Who Upon Is Greater Misguidance Than One Invokes Beside-Allah: Sunni: (i) You quoted the verse: “And who is in greater error than he who calls besides Allah upon those that will not answer him till the day of resurrection and they are heedless of their call?” [Ref: 46:5] One verse before what you quoted Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: "Say, Have you considered that which you invoke beside-Allah? Show me what they have created of the earth; or did they have partnership in the heavens? Bring me a scripture (revealed) before this or a (remaining) trace of knowledge, if you should be truthful." [Ref: 46:4] The insinuation is that Min Du’nillah have not created anything on earth nor they were partners in creation of anything in space and similar is affirmed in following verse: “Yet have they taken beside-Allah 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] In this light it has become evident that verse quoted by you as evidence is about Mushrikeen and idol-Ilahs they invoked: “And who is in greater error than he who calls besides Allah [idol-Ilahs] upon those that will not answer him till the day of resurrection and they are heedless of their call?” [Ref: 46:5] (ii) Allah says besides-Allah will not respond/answer till the judgment day: “And who is in greater error than he who calls besides-Allah upon those that will not answer him till the day of resurrection and they are heedless of their call?” [Ref: 46:5] Besides-Allah are unable to respond to call of Mushrikeen on this earth till the judgment day. On the judgment day the Mushrikeen will again call their partners but they will still not respond: “And (warn of) the Day when He will say, Call My partners whom you claimed, and they will invoke them, but they will not respond to them. And We will put between them (a valley of) destruction.” [Ref: 18:52] “And there will not be for them among their (alleged) partners any intercessors, and they will (then) be disbelievers in their partners.” [Ref: 30:13] Yet despite in earthly life the Mushrikeen believe those who do not benefit/harm them are their intercessors: “And they worship other-than-Allah that which neither harms them nor benefits them, and they say, "These are our intercessors with Allah. " Say, "Do you inform …” [Ref: 10:18] These partners and intercessors who cannot hear their call till the judgment day and will not respond to Mushrikeen nor are any benefit/harm to Mushrikeen are gods of Mushrikeen: “Yet have they taken beside-Allah 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] Each succeeding verse is connected with and revealing a new detail about preceding verse as such all of them are about beside-Allah whose identity has been revealed in Q25:3 with words, taken beside-Allah gods that create nothing but are themselves created. (iii) Both these Tafasir make it clear that one who invokes an Ilah partner beside-Allah is upon the greatest error. 69 - Tafsir They Do Not Hear Call And IF They Hear Than Shall Not Answer Till Judgment: Sunni: (i) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says the ones invoked by Mushrikeen will not hear the call and if they could hear they will not respond to them even to the judgment day: “If you call on them they shall not hear your call, and even if they could hear they shall not answer you; and on the resurrection day they will deny your associating them (with Allah) …” [Ref: 35:14] This verse indicates that one’s invoked by Mushrikeen do not have ability of hearing neither ability to answer. Following part of verse is in two meanings: “… and even if they could hear they shall not answer you …” (a) Invoked have no ability of speech hence they cannot answer through speech. They cannot respond with speech like, we heard your invocation nor they can say, help has been sent: “… and even if they could hear they shall not answer you [to inform you of their activities] …” (b) Invoked have no capacity neither access to resources to provide what Mushrikeen invoked them: “… and even if they could hear they shall not answer you [and provide you what you have asked them to provide] …” (c) Ability to provide is ability to benefit and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says invoked are unable to answer/benefit: “… and even if they could hear they shall not answer you [to benefit you] …” (d) Overall understanding derived from Ayah is that invoked cannot hear, speak, neither have any ability to provide material help, nor access to resources which they can grant. (ii) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: “If you call on them they shall not hear your call, and even if they could hear they shall not answer you; and on the resurrection day they will deny your associating them (with Allah) …” [Ref: 35:14] Who are the invoked in this Ayah, why are they unable to hear and respond? The ambiguity about identity of invoked is removed and was demonstrated by Prophet Ibrahim (alayhis salam) in his debate with Mushrikeen: “And recite to them the story of Ibrahim (Abraham). When he said to his father and his people: "What do you worship?" They said: "We worship idols, and to them we are ever devoted." He said: "Do they hear you, when you call on (them)? Or do they benefit you or do they harm (you)?" They said: "(No) but we found our fathers doing so." [Ref: 26: 69/74] In the following Ayah idol-Ilahs of Mushrikeen are described having hands, feet, eyes, ears but which do not function: “Verily, those whom you call upon besides Allah (are created by you and owned by you and therefore) are slaves like you. So call upon them and let them answer you if you are truthful. Have they feet wherewith they walk? Or have they hands wherewith they hold? Or have they eyes wherewith they see? Or have they ears wherewith they hear? Say: "Call your (so-called) partners (of Allah) and then plot against me and give me no respite! “ [Ref: 7:195] 70 - Prohibited Invocation Is One Directed To An Ilah With Intention Of Worship: Sunni: All these verses prove that in all of them Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) prohibited invocation directed to an Ilah beside-Allah and told of harm and punishment for one who invokes an Ilah besides-Allah. None of these verses are evidence against Istighathah nor prove Istighathah is major Shirk/Kufr neither these verses in anyway established Istighathah is Haram. Alongside the following Hadith these verses have established invocation directed to an Ilah with intention of worship: “Narrated Umar bin Al-Khattab: I heard Allah's Messenger saying: "The action depends upon the intentions and every person will get the reward according to what he has intended. So ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B1, H1, here.]“It was narrated from Jabir that the Messenger of Allah said: “People will be gathered (on the Day of Resurrection) according to their intentions.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4230, here.] It is important to point out that in technical sense worship of anyone other than Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Kufr and the creed which leads to it, i.e. XMan is an Ilah/god, is cause of major Shirk. Hence to think that Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah would permit a major Kufr and Shirk is preposterous. [All content from sections 66 to 70 was pre-written and shared via e-mail with Wahhabi brother.] 71 - Wahhabi Wants Me To Address His Last Evidence And Argument: Wahhabi: I have nothing against your Tafasir. My objection and reasons for it were voiced at the end of our last session [now part of section 65] and that is something you need to address. Sunni: This means you want me to move onto your presented argument and evidence? Wahhabi: You had six days to prepare. Sunni: I have prepared my response and explanation of verse you quoted. You are will be fine IF I share it here or do you want me to e-mail it to you? Wahhabi: In here would be convenient. Sunni: I will share it here but I will e-mail it also because in this chat formatting and emphasised parts won’t show. Is that good with you? Wahhabi: … 72 - Tafsir See Things You Invoke Beside Allah, Can They Remove Penalty: Sunni: (i) You also quoted [in section 65] and it is important I explain it before responding to what you said: "If indeed, you ask them who is it that created the heavens and the earth, they would be sure to say: Allah! Say: See you then the things that you invoke besides Allah? Can they if Allah wills some penalty for me, remove His penalty? Or if He will some grace for me, can they keep back His grace?" [Ref: 39:38] Two examples of penalty/punishment are mentioned in the following verses. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructs to enquire Mushrikeen about IF Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) made day/night permanent as punishment than is there a Ilah/god they worship who could change it to night/day: “Say "Tell me! If Allah made the night continuous for you till the Day of Resurrection, which Ilah (god) besides Allah could bring you light? Will you not then hear?" Say: "Tell me! If Allah made the day continuous for you till the Day of Resurrection, which Ilah (god) besides Allah could bring you night wherein you rest? Will you not then see?" [Ref: 28:71/72] (ii) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says: "If indeed, you ask them who is it that created the heavens and the earth, they would be sure to say: Allah! Say: See you then the things that you invoke besides Allah? Can they if Allah wills some penalty for me, remove His penalty? Or if He will some grace for me, can they keep back His grace?" [Ref: 39:38] The answer to both questions is no. IF Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) intended some penalty or some grace the invoked cannot prevent Him. It is worth noting and remembering that penalty imposed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is harm and grace granted by Him is benefit and the invoked cannot prevent Him from inflicting/granting either. In another Ayah Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) clearly states that invoked Ilahs of Mushrikeen do not possess the ability to benefit or harm: “Yet they have taken besides Him other gods who created nothing but are themselves created, and possess neither harm nor benefit for themselves, and possess no power (of causing) death, nor (of giving) life, nor of raising the dead.” [Ref: 25:3] This verse is explained by following verse: “Verily those on whom you call besides Allah, cannot create (even) a fly, even though they combine together for the purpose. And if the fly snatches away a thing from them, they will have no power to release it from the fly. So weak are (both) the seeker and the sought.” [Ref: 22:73] Ability to prevent someone taking what belongs to one is ability to benefit one’s own-self and the Ayah says the idols are unable to benefit themselves by preventing item being taken from them. They cannot harm because if they could they would have prevented the fly from stealing what was offered to them. Sunni: In conclusion the idol-Ilahs of Mushrikeen not only are unable to prevent Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) from inflicting harm neither they are able to prevent Him from granting benefit. The idol-Ilahs of Mushrikeen are also unable to inflict any harm or do anything beneficial for anyone else including can benefit themselves, or harm anyone for their own benefit and defence.

Yeh sab doka baazi heh. Yeh dil mein shahid Mian Sahib rehmatullah ko gali deh raha hoga. Asal maqsad jahil logoon ko dekhana heh kay ham mantay hen aur woh in kay saath ho jatay hen. Yeh danda banda pansanay ka zariya heh. Aur kuch nahin.

Syed Fasih Ud-Din Soharwadi, ki Aawaz main Hadaiq e Bakhshish by Ala Hazrat say Aik Khoobsoorat Naat Shareef ka nazrana

Salam alayqum, Allah ta'ala Muftiyan e islam ko haq qubul karnay, pehlanay, pehchanay, samajnay, aur khatahoon say toba ki aur tofeeq deh. Ameen.

Introduction: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been quoted as saying in Ahadith, every innovation is misguidance. Muslims believe literally every innovation is not misguidance. Only every reprehensible innovation is misguidance and every reprehensible innovation is composed of components which are violating the prophetic teaching and contradict spirit of Islam. Contrary to Islamic belief, the anti-Islamic elements believe every innovation in literal sense is innovation even if it is composed of Islamicly sanctioned acts of worship, charity, etc. This is due to their literal interpretation of Hadith and their emphasis on qullu (i.e. every). Hence it is important to establish use of ‘every’ is not in respect of every innovation but ‘every’ has been limited and restricted to reprehensible type of innovations. Also the Ibn Fawzaan quoted renowned scholar to aid his position. He stated collection of Quran into a book and writing and collecting Ahadith into books is not a praiseworthy innovation. Shaykh Saalih Al Fawzaan And His Standing Amongst Khawarij: And Issue Of Translation: Shaykh Ibn Fawzaan is a prominent scholar in Saudi Khariji State and member of Board Of Senior Scholars And Member Of Permanent Committee For Fatwah And Research. His works carry weight amongst the Khawarij hence it is crucial his writing is addressed from Islamic perspective and lays bare heretical understandings which he has purposed. Issues With Translation Of Jami Al Hikam Wal Ulum: The translation of Shaykh Ibn Fawzaan’s work by Maaz Qureshi at times was incoherent and bereft of contextual relevance. The points were poorly conveyed and lacked clarity hence original was altered for sake of clarity by adding words and rephrasing sentences.[1] This is a reconstruction of the message being conveyed in original Arabic. Alterations were not result of reading Arabic text of original essay. Hence there is possibility errors might have been made in re-constructing of his point of view. I seek refuge in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) from misguidance of Satan the cursed. In case of errors in representing his view, please do notify me and mistakes will be rectified. Point to note for readers – quotes lacking immediate refference have been refferenced in footnotes. Please refer to relevent number to check various translation. Part One: Shaykh Saalih Al Fawzaan’s Short Essay: “Whoever divides innovation in the religion into good innovation (i.e. bid'ah hasanah), and sinful innovation (i.e. bid'ah Say’yah), then he has committed wrong, and has opposed Prophet’s (sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) statement, "Every innovation is a misguidance", because the Messenger (sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) ruled that innovation - all of it - is misguidance, and this says that not all innovation is misguidance, rather there is good innovation. Al-Haafidh Ibn Rajab said in his commentary in al Arba'een: “So his (sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) statement, “The best discourse is the Book of Allah, and the best guidance is the guidance of Muhammad, and the worst of affairs are those which are newly introduced, for every innovation is an error” is a comprehensive statement, nothing is excluded from it. And this is the greatest principle from the principles of the Religion and it is connected with his (sallaahu 'alayhi wa sallam) following statement, "Whoever invents in this affair of ours, what is not from it, then it is rejected" So whoever invents things and attributes them to the religion, and it does not have an origin in the religion to return to then it is misguidance, and the Religion is free from those things. And equally applies to matters of beliefs, or actions, or statements whether hidden, or manifest.” [Ref: Jaami'ul 'Uloom Wal Hikam, p233] And there is not a proof for them that there is good innovation, except for the statement of Umar (radiallaahu 'anhu) regarding the Taraweeh prayer, "What a good innovation this is!" (i.e. ni'imatul bida'atu hadhihi).”[2] Ibn Rajab’s Definition Of Innovation: Prior to Shaykh Ibn Fawzaan’s quoted material Shaykh Ibn Rajab stated: “Regarding the Holy Prophet’s saying: “Beware of newly introduced matters, for every innovation is a straying.” It is a warning to the community against following innovated new matters. He emphasized that with his words, “every innovation is a straying.” [Such type of] innovations are those things which are newly introduced, having no source in the Shari’ah to prove them.”[3] Shaykh Ibn Rajab believes any practice/belief which is termed as innovation is by default a Shar’ri innovation, and such innovation has no evidence from Quran or Hadith. Yet from his statement one can glimpse that according to Shaykh Ibn Rajab, an innovation without evidence of Shari’ah is reprehensible innovation because he connected Hadith of; every innovation is misguidance, to his following statement: “[Such type of] innovations are those things which are newly introduced, having no source in the Shari’ah to prove them.” He also stated; an innovated practice/belief with evidence of Shari’ah is not an innovation from Shar’ri perspective, here: “As for whatever has a source in the Shari’ah, thereby establishing it, then it is not an innovation in the [sense of] Shari’ah, even though it might linguistically be an innovation.”[4] And same was repeated bit later: “As for those things in the sayings of the right-acting first generations where they regard some innovations as good, that is only with respect to what are innovations in the linguistic sense, but not in the Shari’ah.”[5] Shaykh Ibn Rajab is gravely mistaken in the following part: “… that is only with respect to what are innovations in the linguistic sense, but not in the Shari’ah.” The scholars of Islam have always considered good innovations to be from perspective of Shari’ah. Shari’ah defines the goodness and evilness of innovations hence what it judges to be good and bad is part of Shari’ah. Before continuing to next point it is important to state that linguistic meaning of innovation is; which is without precedent. Shar’ri meaning of innovation is; which is without precedent in Islam. The important point in is that those scholars who have divided innovation to be good have done so on basis of following Hadith: “Whoever sets a good precedent in Islam, he will have the reward for that, and the reward of those who acted in accordance with it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest.” [Ref: Nisa’i, B23, H2555] When something is not part of Islam but it is being part of Islam than innovation is being made part of Islam. This is assertion is supported by linguistic and Shar’ri meaning of innovation. Considering this, meaning of the Hadith is when a good innovation which is not part of Islam is made part of Islam then the one who sets a good innovation in Islam [for others to follow] will receive reward and those who follow his good innovated precedent, and this refutes Shaykh Ibn Rajab’s understanding that innovations are good in linguistic sense not in Shar’ri sense. Four Important Points Made By Shaykh Saalih Al Fawzaan: There are four main points in the short essay produced by chief of Khawarij and they are as follow: i) One who divides innovation into categories of praiseworthy and blameworthy innovations has wronged teaching of Islam and opposed the statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). ii) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] Use of وَكُلُّ (i.e. and every) in the relevant Hadith is to include everything and nothing is excluded from it hence all innovations are misguidance. iii) There is no proof for good innovation except the statement of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) regarding Taraweeh prayer. iv) Quote from Jami Ul Uloom Wal Hakim of Shaykh Ibn Rajab Al Hanbali as quoted by Shaykh Saalih Ibn Fawzaan. Scholars Always Divided Innovation In Two Main Branches: Early Muslim scholars have always and scholars continue to divide innovation to two main categories. Type one, which is composed of Islamicly sanctioned practices/beliefs. Type two, which is composed of Islamicly prohibited practices/beliefs. Type one, has been termed as, praiseworthy, permissible, righteous, guidance, and even termed it linguistic innovation.[6] Type two, has been stated to be, prohibited, evil, misguiding, sinful, and legal innovation.[7] Then these categories are subdivided into many categories.[8] The chief of Khawarij stated one who divides innovation into good and bad has wronged and opposed the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) because he believes every newly invented matter, from perspective of Sharia if it is declared as an innovation than it is misguidance. Therefore it is important to point out who according to Shaykh Ibn Fawzaan’s statement has wronged the religion of Islam and who in Ummah is guilty of opposing the teaching of Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The Eminent Scholars Who Wronged And Opposed: Imam Shafi (rahimullah) stated innovations are of two types. The type which contradicts the teaching of Quran, the Sunnah, Hadith and Ijma, such one he classed as misguiding innovation. Concerning the type which does not contradict the teaching of Quran, Sunnah, Ahadith, and Ijma, he classed good and quoted Hadith where Hadhrat Umar (radiallah) had said Taraweeh is good innovation. Following is evidence of Imam Shafi (rahimullah) understanding on subject of innovation: “It was narrated to us by Muhammad ibn Musa ibn al-Fadl who had it narrated to him from Abul-Abbas Al-Asam who said Rabi ibn Sulayman narrated to us from Imam ash-Shafi’s that he said, “Innovated matters in religion are of two kinds: 1) Whatever is innovated and is contradicts the Book, or the Sunnah, or a narration, or Ijma – then this is an innovation of misguidance. 2) Whatever is innovated of good and that does not contradict any of these – then this is a novelty which is not blameworthy. And Umar (radiya Allahu ‘anhu) said concerning the night-prayer in the month of Ramadhan: نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. what a good innovation this is!) meaning something new not previously present, and if done does not rebut anything which existed before.” [Ref: Reported by al-Bayhaqi in Manaqib ash-Shafi'i, 1/469] Imam Al-Ghazali (rahimullah), Imam Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalani (rahimullah), Imam Nawavi (rahimullah), Imam Qurtubi (rahimullah), Muhammad al-Shawkani (Khariji), Imam Suyuti (rahimullah), and countless others defined innovation into praiseworthy and blameworthy. Even Shaykh Ismail Dehalvi (the apostate) divided innovation into good and bad in his Tazkira Al Ikhwan.[9] Position Of Muslims About Prominent Scholars: In light of Shaykh Ibn Fawzaan’s statement it can be concluded that he believes the mentioned scholars and all those who divided innovation into good and bad categories are the ones who have wronged and opposed prophetic teaching. Considering this insolence of Shaykh Ibn Fawzaan, effort is being made to defend the honor of prominent scholars of Islam from the indirect attack by supporting the definition of Muslims. As Muslims we believe, Imam Shafi (rahimullah), Imam Al Ghazali (rahimullah), Imam Ibn Hajar (rahimullah), and Imam Nawavi (rahimullah) scholars are not the ones who have wronged and opposed the teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). It is Shaykh Ibn Fawzaan who is opposing the prophetic Sunnah and if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills the charge will be established. Valid Difference Of Opinion Over The Definition: It would be too much to say he was unaware of evidence which establishes the understanding of these scholarly giants but it is just and befitting his caliber to say; he is ignorant of their interpretations. Shaykh Ibn Fawzaan failed to understand; the difference on definition of innovation is a valid difference of opinion and none from these two definitions is blameworthy because the evidence exists for both versions. As Muslims we believe those scholars whose understanding of innovation agrees with Ijtihad of these luminaries, they are upon the truth, like those who pioneered this understanding of innovation. Those who have pioneered the simple definition of innovation and those who employ it they are closer to the truth but missed the mark of perfection. The pioneers of this definition have erred in their Ijtihad and there is no blame upon them for this but only reward from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because mistakes of Mujtahid are rewarded. Hadith Of Every Innovation Is Misguidance: Ibn Fawzaan quoted the following Hadith: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] And argued the words وَكُلُّ (i.e. and every) are used in the Hadith therefore nothing is excluded from this statement. There will be five approaches to answer this point: i) logical criticism to solve problem, ii) on usage of وَكُلُّ (i.e. and every), iii) concluding remarks regarding usage of ‘every’, iv) explaining the Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with Ahadith which support the positions argued for first and second approach, v) and establishing category of good innovation. Note, out of the four important points of Ibn Fawzaan pointed in the beginning or article, three will be addressed in forth coming material and the last one will be addressed as a separate part. First Approach – The Counter Attack: If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had stated; all of innovations are misguidance literally, without restricting/limiting the meaning of ‘every’ to a specific genre of innovations then questions is: Are books of Ahadith (i.e. Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmadhi etc.) included in this ‘every’ or excluded from ‘every’? If you say they are excluded therefore not innovations, then you have eliminated the foundation of your argument because your argument was ‘every’ used in this Hadith is without Takhsees (i.e. specifics) yet you have made Takhsees in ‘every’ to accommodate the books of Ahadith. We Muslims affirm that ‘every’ is connected with a specific type of innovation and it is not to be understood on its generality. The point is; ‘every innovation’ is not in meaning of ‘absolutely every innovation’ but ‘every innovation’ is used to mean ‘every innovation in a specific context’. What that specific context is, if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits will be explained in third approach. Second Approach – The Usage Of Every: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: "As for the boat, it belonged to certain men in dire want: they plied on the water: I but wished to render it unserviceable, وَرَاءَهُم مَّلِكٌ يَأْخُذُ كُلَّ سَفِينَةٍ غَصْبًا (i.e. for there was after them a certain king who seized on every boat by force).” [Ref: 18:79] It is stated in the verse that a king has ordered every boat is to be ceased but order was to cease all usable boats. Hence Khidar (alayhis salaam) damaged the boat to prevent the livelihood of boat owner being ceased by inflicting damage which can be repaired with little effort. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And [recall] when Moses prayed for water for his people, so We said, "Strike with your staff the stone." And there gushed forth from it twelve springs, قَدْ عَلِمَ كُلُّ أُنَاسٍ مَّشْرَبَهُمْ (i.e. and every people knew its watering place). "Eat and drink from the provision of Allah, and do not commit abuse on the earth, spreading corruption." [Ref: 2:60] The verse states every people knew where to drink water from when Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) struck the rock with his staff. Yet it was not every people in literal sense of the word but every tribe from the twelve tribes of tribe of Israeel. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “They said, Postpone [the matter of] him and his brother and send among the cities gatherers. Who will bring you every learned magician? يَأْتُوكَ بِكُلِّ سَاحِرٍ عَلِيمٍ (i.e. And the magicians came to Pharaoh). They said, Indeed for us is a reward if we are the dominant." [Ref: 7:111/113] Logistics of undertaking such task at that time would make it impossible to reach every city of earth. Yet the verse says they were sent to every city which is too farfetched. The polytheists in time of Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam) sent for emissaries to every major city or to every city of Egypt to gather the best magicians to compete with Prophet Musa (alayhis salaam). Therefore literal reading of every city is not intended. Please bear with an example which would resonate with readers. Ali is carrying valet full of money, credit card, a brand new mobile phone, wearing on his 50 carat gold ring. Thief strikes and says: Hand over everything you have or you going to die. Does the thief want Ali to hand over all that he doesn’t carry with him as well or just what he is carrying with him? All that Ali is carrying at that moment. Third Approach – Summing Up The Findings: The word ‘every’ even though by itself is not limited/restricted and is inclusive of all but when it is used in a restrictive/limiting context then it is no longer on its natural meaning. Rather it is limited and restricted according to the context. Note the word ‘every’ was used but it was limited restricted by circumstances. Similarly in the verses ‘every’ was limited and restricted according to contextual relevance.[10] Hence it could be said, use of word ‘every’ in the following Hadith is not ‘absolutely every’ but in meaning of ‘every in specific context’, here: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] Just as the context of verses limit and restrict the meaning of ‘every’ to ‘every in specific context’ the words ‘every innovation’ are limited and restricted by other Ahadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Fourth Approach – Explaining Hadith With Ahadith: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “And he who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً سَيِّئَةً (i.e. evil precedent in Islam), there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Linguistically innovation is what does not have precedent in Quran of Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). What is not part of Islam and is made part of Islam is innovation hence the mentioned Hadith is talking about one who introduces into Islam evil innovation. And tells for him who introduces evil innovation and those who follow his evil innovation will receive equal burden of sin. This understanding of above Hadith is supported by another Hadith found in Tirmadhi, here: "And whoever introduces a بِدْعَةَ ضَلاَلَةٍ (i.e. erroneous innovation) with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] In light of this, the following statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not literal: “And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is misguidance." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] Rather it should be understood in context of Hadith of ‘evil precedent in Islam’ and ‘erroneous innovation’. Therefore the interpretation of Hadith is as follows: the most evil affairs are the evil precedents and erroneous innovations introduced into Islam and every evil/erroneous innovation is misguidance. Hence the word ‘every’ is restricted and limited in the phrase, “… every innovation is misguidance …” in specific context of evil and erroneous innovations. Now question must arise, how are evil innovations judged to be evil? Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) answered this question by saying: “Aishah reported the Messenger of Allah as saying: if any one introduces into this affair of ours anything which does not belong to it, it is rejected. Ibn Isa said: the prophet said: if anyone practices any action in a way other than our practice, it is rejected.” [Ref: Dawood, B41, H4589] And in another Hadith it is stated: “He who enacted any act for which there is no sanction from our behalf that is to be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] In other words if an innovation is composed of anything which is not from prophetic Sunnah it is evil innovation and it is to be rejected. Fifth Approach – Establishing The Good Innovation: It was previously said, innovation is which does not have precedent in Quran and Sunnah, and following words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) point to permissibility of, and reward for, introducing good innovation into Islam: “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 …”[11] [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Note, the Hadith states one who introduces into Islam a good Sunnah, if a good Sunnah is being introduced into Islam then it means it is not part of Islam. What is not part of Islam and it is being made part of Islam is, innovation. Hence Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told of reward for introducing good innovation into Islam. It was based upon understanding of the Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam that Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) declared his gathering of worshipers under leadership of an Imam as an excellent innovation, here: “Then on another night I went again in his company and the people were praying behind their reciter. On that, 'Umar remarked نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. what an excellent innovation this is) but the prayer which they do not perform, but sleep at its time is better than the one they are offering.' He meant the prayer in the last part of the night. (In those days) people used to pray in the early part of the night." [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] These Ahadith establish the position of Muslims that to introduce praiseworthy innovations into Islam is permissible and reward worthy. Conclusion: We have established the prominent scholars of past have divided the innovation into two categories. It has been established those who have divided innovation into good and bad have not erred nor opposed the teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but rather have employed all evidence available on the topic of innovation to perfect their understanding. And it was minion of Iblis incarnate who actually opposed the teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). The usage of ‘every’ has been explained in detail. The usage of ‘every’ is affected by context, which limits its absolute meaning and restricts it to a specific. The foolish assumption that Muslims do not have any evidence but the evidence related to Taraweeh was shattered with proper explanation of Hadith of introducing good Sunnah into Islam. As for the quote taken from Shaykh Ibn Rajab it has been explained by the content of first, second and third approach. Shaykh Ibn Fawzaan position is based on Shaykh Ibn Rajab's quote and due to which no direct response is required. Instead, Shaykh Ibn Rajab's understanding of innovation was explored and his error was pointed out in light of evidence of Hadith. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] To find out where the alterations have been made please use MSWord to compare original and revised versions. To see the original quote click, here. - [2] Clarification Of Doubts Concerning Innovation. Originally taken from; Kitab at-Tawheed, author; Shaykh Saalih al Fawzaan, page 106/110 Translation; Maaz Qureshi, Amendments; Muhammed Ali Razavi. - [3]"His saying; 'and beware of the newly invented matters, and every bid'ah is a misguidance', contains a warning to the ummah from following the newly invented innovations, and he stressed this by saying, 'and every innovation is a misguidance'. And the meaning of bid'ah is everything that is newly invented that has no basis in the sharee'ah that would prove it.” [Ref: Clarification Of Doubts Concerning Innovation, Ver1.0, page3, footnte2, Pblshd by TROID Publications, Trans by Maaz Qureshi] “His saying, “Beware of innovations and inventions in religion, because evry innovation leads to the wrong path.”, is a warning to the Muslim nation against following any inventions in religion. Innovation in religion is an act that is not grounded in Shari’ah.” [Ref: Jami Ul Uloom Wal Hikam, Trans: Muhammad Fadel, Pblshd; Um Al-Qura, p363] - [4]“The meaning of Ash-Shafi’s saying is that dispraised innovation are not grounded in Shari’ah. As for the commendable innovation, it is grounded in Shari’ah but is called an innovation according to its linguisitic connotation.” [Ref: Jami Ul Uloom Wal Hikam, Trans: Muhammad Fadel, Pblshd; Um Al-Qura, p365] “… and the meaning of ash-Shaafi'ee (rahimahullaah) is as we have mentioned previously: that the foundation for the blameworthy bid'ah is that which does not have a basis in the sharee'ah that can be referred to - and this is a bid'ah in the convention of the sharee'ah. As for the praiseworthy bid'ah then that is what agrees with the sunnah - meaning that is has a basis in the sunnah that can be referred to, and this is a bid'ah in it's linguistic meaning not in it's sharee'ah meaning due to it's conforming with the sunnah.” [Ref: Clarification Of Doubts Concerning Innovation, Ver1.0, page3, footnte2, Pblshd by TROID Publications, Trans by Maaz Qureshi] - [5]“As for commending something innovation as reported by some pious predecessors, they used the word ‘innovation’ with its linguistic connotation [but not in Shar’ri meaning].” [Ref: Jami Ul Uloom Wal Hikam, Trans: Muhammad Fadel, Pblshd; Um Al-Qura, p364] “And as for what has occurred from some of the Salaf in their declaring some Biddahs to be good then this is regards to bid'ah in it's linguistic meaning not it's sharee'ah meaning, and from these is the saying of 'Umar (radiyallaahu 'anhu) when he gathered the people for the standing of Ramadhan behind one Imaam ...” [Ref: Clarification Of Doubts Concerning Innovation, Ver1.0, page3, footnte2, Pblshd by TROID Publications, Trans by Maaz Qureshi] - [6] Those scholars who have labelled type one innovations as linguistic innovation they follow a different definition of innovation. Their definition accords the following principles: Any action/belief of which there is no Asal (i.e. foundation - explicit or implicit evidence) such is innovation. And the opposite was: Any action/belief which can be established from Quran/Sunnah from implicit or from generality of words is not an innovation. They maintain innovation is of two types, linguistic and legal. According to this classification when an innovation is classed as an innovation from legal perspective than it is in meaning of ‘type two’ innovation (i.e. reprehensible - which composed of that which contradicts teaching of Islam). So according to their understanding compiling Quran into a book after death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Hadhrat Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) gathering the people of Masjid to perform Taraweeh under one Qari for entire Ramadhan are not innovations [in legal sense]. And this is because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in his life time over saw the writing of revelation (i.e. Quran). Also there is precedent of performing Taraweeh under leadership of Imam because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in person led Taraweeh for three days. These scholars agree that these are innovations in linguistic sense. The vast majority of scholars have classified these two practices to be good innovations because of their division of innovation being divided as good and bad. Words of Hadhrat Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) are evidence of Taraweeh being innovation and being good innovation according to this definition: قَالَ عُمَرُ نِعْمَ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِه.ِ [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227] Therefore the real difference between the two parties is due to label and not of result. One group labels it linguistic innovation and other considers as good innovation. They label it good innovation because, even though Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) intrusted the writing of Quranic verses yet he did not instruct its compilation in a book format. The scholars called Taraweeh good innovation because only three days practice of Taraweeh is Sunnah the remainder (i.e. 26/27 days) is a innovation. - [7] From Islamic perspective anti-Muslim element’s legal/Shar’ri innovation’s equivalent is reprehensible innovation. In Islamic terminology, all innovations are legal/Shar’ri innovations, be it praiseworthy or reprehensible. - [8] The details of sub-divisions and explanation of them can be found in the following book, What Is Innovation In Islam, by Mufti Ahmad Yar Khan Naeemi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). - [9] If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits an article will be written on subject of innovation containing writings of these scholars. - [10] The word ‘every’ in its natural meaning cannot be used for creation without warranting major Shirk. The natural meaning of ‘every’ which is unlimited, unrestricted can only truly be used for Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). When the word ‘every’ is used for creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) it is always used with certain constraints implied from context or implied from inability of creation for whom it was used for. - [11] “Narrated Ibn Jarir bin 'Abdullah: from his father that the Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever starts a good tradition 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] “It was narrated that Abu Juhaifah said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever introduces a good practice that is followed after him, will have a reward for that and the equivalent of their reward, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H207]

Salam alqyum, Aap ko ghalti huwi, yeh maulvi Ghulamullah ka khaleefah lagta heh aur Ataullah shah Bukhari ka shagird, donoon ki tera khoob gali deta heh. Aur yeh bi ho sakta heh kay Hussain Ahmad Madaani kay gali namay aur bazaari gali namay paray hoon, gali mein ussee ki tara maharat rakhta heh.

Mian Muhammad Baksh Arif e Khari shareef rahimullah alayhi ta'ala, aap jesoon kay mutaliq likh chookay hen aur yahi mera jawab heh: Amma be ikhalsan andar, khasan di gal karni mit'thi kheer paka Muhammad kuttay-yan agay dharni. Tarjuma: Aam bey-ikhlas (logoon) kay darmiyan khasoon ki baat karna (Esa heh jesay) Sheeri Kheer ko paka kar kuttoon kay agay rakhna. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ek aur jaga farmatay hen: Aslan nal jay naiki karyeh naslan tanh ni pulday Bey-asalan nal jay naiki karyeh puthiyan chalan chalday. Tarjumah: Khandani ( ya Halali/Mukhlis) logoon kay saath jab naiki kee jahay toh un ki anay wali naslen bi ussay nahin bhoolti Haramiyoon kay saath naiki ki jahay toh woh ulti chalen chaltay hen. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Khasoon kay leyeh joh baat thee, woh khaas samaj chukay hen, abh bey-ikhlasoon say maghz mari kuttoon ko kheer khilanay nay barabar heh, aur aap nay toh wesay bi ulti chalen chalni hen is waja say mit'thi kheer paka kar aap kay agay nahin rakhi ja sakti. Joh matti kissi kaam ki hoti heh us ko pani doh toh woh choos kar sabza ugati heh, aap banjar zameen hen, pani ka koi faida nahin. Jin logoon ko Allah ka Quran aur Nabi ka farman rah par nahin la saka meri baten bi nahin lanay wali.

Introduction: There are numerous Ahadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said to have feared things for his Ummah and others which he did not fear. This is explanation of some of those Ahadith. Ahadith Of What Prophet Does And Doesn’t Fear: “Mahmud bin Labid narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: “The thing I fear most for you is the lesser shirk, showing-off (of good deeds).” ‘Related by [Imam] Ahmad [Bin Hanbal in his Musnad] with a good chain of narrators.’ [Ref: Bulugh Al Maram, B16, H1527] “ So the the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) performed the Salat and when he finished, they assembled before him. The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) smiled when he saw them, then he said: 'I think that you heard that Abu 'Ubaidah has arrived with something?' They said: 'Yes O Messenger of Allah! 'He said: 'Then receive good news, and hope for what will please you. By Allah! It is not poverty that I fear for you, but what I fear for you is that the world will be presented for you just as it was presented for those before you, then you will compete for it, just as they competed for it, and it will destroy you, just as it destroyed them.'” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B11, H2462] “Once the Prophet went out and offered the funeral prayers for the martyrs of Uhud, and then went to the pulpit and said, "I am a predecessor for you and I am a witness for you: and by Allah, I am looking at my Fount just now, and the keys of the treasures of the earth (or the keys of the earth) have been given to me: and by Allah, I am not afraid that you will commit Shirk after me, but I am afraid that you will strive and struggle against each other over these treasures of the world.” [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H590] Three Essential Principles: i) What Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not fear, is for two reasons, a) it will not take place, b ) or it may take place, and if it does, it will not negatively impact on Eman (i.e. faith) and Amaal (i.e. actions) of a significant majority. ii) What Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fears because it will be a major Fitnah in his Ummah and it will negatively impact on Eman (i.e. faith) and Amaal (i.e. actions) of his followers. iii) If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) fears a tribulation more then another, he fears it more because it will cause greater harm to Eman and Amaal, of his Ummah. Two – Explaining: I Fear Most For You Is The Lesser Shirk: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated in: "So woe to the worshippers, who are neglectful of their prayers. Those who want to be seen (by men)." [Ref: 107:4/6] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has termed desire to be seen by others as, hidden Shirk – Performing of prayers to show-off sincerity, submission, in worship: “We said: ‘Yes.’He said: ‘Hidden polytheism, when a man stands to pray and makes it look good because he sees a man looking at him.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4204] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said – that he feared hidden/lesser for his Muslim Ummah: “Mahmud bin Labid narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: “The thing I fear most for you is the lesser shirk, showing-off.” ‘Related by [Imam] Ahmad [Bin Hanbal in his Musnad] with a good chain of narrators.’ [Ref: Bulugh Al Maram, B16, H1527] He feared minor/lesser Shirk more then tribulation of Dajjal: “It was narrated that Abu Sa’eed said: “The Messenger of Allah came out to us when we were discussing Dajjal and said: ‘Shall I not tell you of that which I fear more for you than Dajjal?’ We said: ‘Yes.’He said: ‘Hidden polytheism, when a man stands to pray and makes it look good because he sees a man looking at him.’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4204] He feared it more then tribulation of Al Massih Al-Dajjal because of it good deeds are invalidated. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated: "To whomsever desires the life of this world and its glitter, We shall pay [the price of] their deeds therein - without decrease. They are those for whom there is nothing in the Hereafter except the Fire: Vain are their deeds therein" [Ref: 11:15/16] The life of this world includes; wealth, its enjoyments, and praise and approval of people in doing good – hence the deeds in which ar-Riya was part of will be nullified. In an Hadith Qudsi it is recorded that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “I am the One, One Who does not stand in need of a partner. If anyone does anything in which he associates anyone else with Me, I shall abandon him with one whom he associates with Allah.” [Ref: Muslim, B42, H7114] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said regarding those who committed Shirk of ar-Riya: “Verily, what I fear most for you is the lesser idolatry.” And he elaborated, “It is showing off. Allah the Exalted will say to them (who show off), on the Day of Resurrection when the people are being rewarded for their deeds: Go to those whom you wished to show off in the world and look for your reward with them.” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, H23119] In other words, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will abandon him telling the committer of Shirk ar-Riya to go and seek the reward of good deed/deeds from whom he intended to please. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the Only, the One, rewards for good deeds and punishes, hence even if he goes to the person, he will not be able to reward him. Three – Explaining: I Do Not Fear Poverty For You: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated, he does not fear poverty for his Ummah but he feared wealth which would destroy his Ummah: “ So the the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) performed the Salat and when he finished, they assembled before him. The Messenger of Allah (s.a.w) smiled when he saw them, then he said: 'I think that you heard that Abu 'Ubaidah has arrived with something?' They said: 'Yes O Messenger of Allah! 'He said: 'Then receive good news, and hope for what will please you. By Allah! It is not poverty that I fear for you, but what I fear for you is that the world will be presented for you just as it was presented for those before you, then you will compete for it, just as they competed for it, and it will destroy you, just as it destroyed them.'” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B11, H2462] Poverty: When Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) says, he does not fear something, it implies it is not going to damage the Eman and Amaal of Ummah as whole – in this case poverty. Poverty by itself is a negative but it does not harm the religion infact it brings the poverty stricken to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because it is means of alleviating it: “Abu Hurairah narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: "Indeed Allah, Most High said: 'O son of Adam! Devote yourself to My worship, I will fill your chest with riches and alleviate your poverty. And if you do not do so, then I will fill your hands with problems and not alleviate your poverty.'” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B11, H2466] Riches: It is established the wealthy ones abandon religion and God. We can see the effect of wealth on our lives. How it has distanced Muslims from the religion and brought us into sin. Wealth will introduce gradual secularisation of Muslim world until action on practical aspects, Prayers, Fasting, Pilgrimage, Charity will altogathered abandoned by Ummah as whole. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has foretold: “Ka'b bin 'Iyad narrated that the Prophet said: "Indeed there is a fitnah for every Ummah, and the Fitnah for my Ummah is wealth." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B10, H2336] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “The Messenger of Allah said: ‘The likeness of this nation is that of four people: A man to whom Allah gives wealth and knowledge, so he acts according to his knowledge with regard to his wealth, spending it as it should be spent; a man to whom Allah gives knowledge, but he does not give him wealth, so he says: “If I had been given (wealth) like this one, I would have done what (the first man) did.” The Messenger of Allah said: ‘They will be equal in reward. And a man to whom Allah gives wealth but does not give knowledge, so he squanders his wealth and spends it in inappropriate ways; and a man to whom Allah gives neither knowledge nor wealth, and he says: “If I had (wealth) like this one, I would do what (the third man) did.” The Messenger of Allah said: ‘They are equal in their burden (of sin).’” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B37, H4228] Note, considering this Hadith wealth is not Fitnah (i.e. tribulation) if wealth is used appropriately according to teaching of Islam. It is only Fitnah if it is used for Haram, or Kufr, or Shirk, or sinful activities. Hence when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said it will be Fitnah. He meant wealth will be used inappropriately – alcahol, drugs, prostitutions, TV, immodest dress, wasting wealth, etc. Note the Hadith of Tirmadhi states: “… but what I fear for you is that the world will be presented for you just as it was presented for those before you, then you will compete for it, just as they competed for it, and it will destroy you, just as it destroyed them” Wealth will destroy the Ummah Muslimah like it destroyed the previous nations. The Hadith states, Ummahs before us were Jews and Christians: “Narrated Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri: The Prophet said, "You will follow the ways of those nations who were before you, span by span and cubit by cubit (i.e., inch by inch) so much so that even if they entered a hole of a mastigure, you would follow them." We said, "O Allah's Messenger! (Do you mean) the Jews and the Christians?" He said, "Whom else?" [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H 422] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’salalm) said we will follow collective ways of Jews and Christians – in my own words – inch by inch, centimetre by centimetre. In light of Hadith of Bukhari, reference to previous nations was, to Jewish and Christian nations. Now in this context, wealth completely destroyed the religious practices of Jews and Christians. This was result of wealth which gradualy secularised followers of these two religions and nearly eliminated effect of their religions upon Jews and Christians. Majority of followers of these religions are only nominal Christians/Jews. Therefore as wealth gradually creeps into Muslim world and poverty lifts secularisation will begin to take hold as it is already happening. Eventually Muslims will be nominal Muslims like the Jews and Christians are at present. With little to no knowledge of their religion. Until the state of Ummah reaches a level where one reciting Shahadah will not know what it means, he will say I heard my parents say this and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said, in that times it will be enough for his forgiveness. Four - Explaining: I Am Not Afraid You Will Commit Shirk After Me: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “… and by Allah, I am looking at my Fount just now, and the keys of the treasures of the earth (or the keys of the earth) have been given to me: and by Allah, I am not afraid that you will commit Shirk after me, but I am afraid that you will strive and struggle against each other over these treasures of the world.” [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H590] He does not fear that, we as whole Ummah, will commit [major] Shirk after him, meaning, after his departure from earthly life. He did not fear it because the harm of it will equale to taking of a drop from an ocean. And precisely this is established. Throughout fourteen centuries number of apostates from Islam have been so miniscule that it is as if there were no apostates from Islam. He feared, Muslims competing against each other for wealth of world. In centuries past effect of wealth was miniscule on practicing of religion because Ummah as whole was not wealthy enough to have leasure time. But at present, dessert rabble, the bandits of Najd, the naked, bare-footed, destitute, and sheperds are competing for tallest building titles. At present, the competition has just started. Ummah is beginning to horde the wealth. Effects of which are evident, to keep a job Salah has to be abandoned, especially in Europe/America. With wealth other evils have crept into lives of Muslims. TV and related Media, one of the greatest Fitnah of modern times, and most destructive weapon of Iblees against Muslims. In modern world, possession of wealth leads to secularisation and immitation of collective Jewish and Christian achievements in dress, language, moral philosophy, behaviour, and eating habbits. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have foretold that Muslims will immitate the Jews and Christians so deligently until they resemble them: “Narrated Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri: The Prophet said, "You will follow the ways of those nations who were before you, span by span and cubit by cubit (i.e., inch by inch) so much so that even if they entered a hole of a mastigure, you would follow them." We said, "O Allah's Messenger! (Do you mean) the Jews and the Christians?" He said, "Whom else?" [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H 422] T-Shirt and Trouser has already replaced the traditional dress of Muslims. Traditionally the Muslim women wore more modest clothes then men but at present trend of, tightest jeans, thinest material, and see through t-shirt is becoming popular amongst them. And those men/women who had oppurtunity to attend a university, or even a college speak the language of trend, sophistication, education, civilisation, and seem too eager to do away with native language of lands, and parents, and religion, thinking them to be languages, moral, dress sense, religion of foolish illiterate medieval barbaric barbarians. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “It was narrated that ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Umar said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever imitates a people is one of them.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B, H3512] In light of modern context, the harm of wealth to Ummah as whole is evident and as it increases to the level where a righeous man will struggle to find a person to whom he gives his charity, the practice of religion will disappear along side it. Until the book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) remains but those who know how to understand it and know the practical aspects are so little in number that it would be as if they don’t exist. Religion will retreat back to Madinah. Conclusion: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) feared minor Shirk more then tribulation of Al Massih Al-Dajjal because it nullifies the good deed committed in which it is part of. Ar-Riya is a major tribulation in which only few in the Ummah are free off. The vast majority of people have fallen into this minor Shirk and it nullifies their good deeds. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told that as time progresses the good deeds of people will decrease and a major contributor to this is ar-Riya. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) not fearing major Shirk is proof that Ummah as whole was and is in no danger of falling into major Shirk. He feared tribulation of wealth because it is this tribulation which has in past, currently is, and will continue to strip off the religion of Islam of Muslims. And it was for this reason he warned the Muslims regarding the tribulation of wealth. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Recently on IslamiMehfil forum I received a very abusive private message which I am not going to focus on. It seemed that sender was secular, pro-Wahhabi, filled with zeal for unification of Ummah. Al hamdu lillah he is neither now and is aspiring to learn proper creed and practices of Islam. He stated he holds Masters degree in evolutionary biology. He rebuked my consistant targetting of Wahhabism. Educated me that Islam is all one religion and we should be united, and it is medieval mind set of Mullahs which has divided the Ummah – like me. Went on to tell me that world is rapidly progressing in science, and technology yet Mullahs have chained the Muslims to ancient ways preventing them from progress. To point out my flaws he cited my articles on Najd and remarked that non-Muslims are progressing toward colonising Moon and Mars. Yet you’re sitting here petty bickering over a geographical detail which is of no consiquence to anyone, nor Islam depends on it. Saying knowledge regarding exact location of Najd is worthless and attempting to acquire is time waste. He rehtorically stated, what good it would do to anyone if they sifted through tons of material to know precise location of Najd on earth. Attempting to insinuate that it is no good, worthless knowledge. His first message did not receive my response because it was rather foul abusive and contained too much enlightenment in for of abuse. Sarcasm ahead - It was master piece of civil-ness and perfect example of a graduate of secular insitution. His second message demanded a response because it seemed having a degree and ‘professional’ career had him thinking he’s the best thing that has ever happened to education. First I congradulated him for being a human and berated evolution for producing a bad specimen of humanity in his form. And demanded that evolution produce a more civil and less abusive specimen for validation of its ability to naturally select perfect trait for a certain envoriment.[1] Through discussion with him I made abundantly clear to him that I am better read even with my minimal GCSE formal qualitications then his prestigious university Masters. Following material is on subject of Najd and Wahhabism and is presented with some additions which were made later. All material related to evolution is being ommitted. Insults Of Enlightened Civilised Muslims: We should protect ourselves from innovations introduced by worst of people, the worst of creatures in creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). If we do not speak out against innovations introduced into our religion – especially in this regard then how will the warnings which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) gave regarding Najd valuable guidance for Muslims? Suppose if someone states Al-Juhfah is in France. What difference would it make if any? Why argue over such petty issue? There are other more important issues then bickering over loction of Al-Juhfah? Mullahism is crazy they are arguing over where Al-Juhfah in a age where people are planning to go to Mars? What does a Mullah know of world – he is too preoccupied worshipping Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? These backward foolish beardy folks are still entrenched in medieval mind set even in this age of enlightenment. Right? All the insults, all the enlightenment that has reached you but have you ever thought or enquired what significance does it have in Islam because of which you are arguing over this Al-Juhfah/Najd? Englightening The Englightened: Location of Al-Juhfah is important because it is designated as Miqat (i.e. place of assuming state of Ihram for Umrah/Hajj) by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Those people traveling from direction of Syria are suppose to assume Ihram from Al-Juhfah. Now if an idiot states, Al-Juhfah is in France and spreads his innovation and people start believing him – similar has already happened with Najd being made into Iraq. Then those Syrians who have performed Hajj/Umrah by assuming state of Ihram from this new Al-Juhfah have assumed state of Ihram from wrong place and it would invalidate the Hajj/Umrah. So if we do not speak out against this innovation, Muslims would be wasting wealth, time and effort. So it needs to be argued and truth to be established. Often its not the place but the way it is associated with Islamic teaching for which the precise location requires debate. Miqat For Najd And Iraq – Confusion: Iraq has Dhat al-Irq as place of Miqat. Najd has Qarn Al Manazil. If we allow the innovation of Khawarij to be permitted and unchallenged and let their heresy become norm and accepted then where would you assume Ihram – from Qarn Al Manazil or Dhat al-Irq? Medieval barbaric Mullahs like me have to argue and spread knowledge of truth on this matter so enlightened, educated, sophisticated, broad-minded, and civilised people like you can perform Hajj/Umrah with best start. Only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knows what kind of stupidity you would engage in during your Tawaf? Few Shirk ar-Riya selfies during Tawaf and few Shirk ar-Riya pictures of your self while you decide to perform Salah only for photo-op session, so everyone on Facebook can see you. You can do anything to invalidate you own worship how you please but you will have a sound start because medieval frame of mind Mullahs have done something for you. In return which you have heaped on them mountain of insults. We Muslims are instructed to speak out against when a wrong is taking place. And making of Najd into Iraq is a gross distortion of teachings based on religion. This Fitnah is beginning to take hold and if it is not countered then a a sun of guidance will be blurred. And a light of guidance which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in context of Najd will be extinguished. Signs Boards Of Guidance: Vast majority of Muslims of modern world, the englightened folk are the type; ready to go to Mars but not ready to enter mosque for prayers, with time for everything else but not for prayers, money for all vanities of world but not Zakat, will read entire news paper without missing out a chunk or without missing single eye candy – women/men – but no time for reading Quran or learning about Islam. The issue of Najd is important for this type of Muslims. You see, in old days people had to know the route they are traveling – there were no sign boards guiding them so they got lost if they made mistake. Then came road signs it made it easier for people to travel and required less knowledge. It told them that this path leads to this destination if you want to go there get on it, if not find the right one. Point is, there was a time when people required detailed knowledge to travel then sign boards made it easy to know the toward the direction and destination you are traveling. Sign board allowed them to rectify their mistakes and find the straight path. Paradise Earned By Good Works And Mercy: Even though modern, sophisticated, englightened, civilised Muslims, do study all sciences of the world, including the one which will allow them to build a space craft for Mars, and spend years in universities and thousands of dollars for secular education, and get big jobs, wear suite, boot, tie, tight jeans, see through blouse, and earn a healthy salary, have a huge house, spotless and shiny, but entry to paradise isn’t granted on these, and worship and charity isn’t the name of these. Its earned with good works and mercy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The good works will only be accepted, and mercy will only be granted, if you have remained innovation free. Only if you had not accepted a innovation introduced into Islam by another. Or you yourself have not introduced an innovation into religion of Islam. Also there will be seventy-three sects in Ummah of Muslims. Out of them seventy two will be in hell no questions asked – straight to hell on judgment day. Seventytwo sects will be in hell fire because they introduced innovations into religion of Islam and people followed the innovators and their innovations. One sect of hell is termed as group of Satan – aka Khawarrij. Significance Of Najd For Muslims Of Modern Times: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has clearly indicated the straight path of Islam, the straight path leading to hell. Those who have time and care about their hereafter make every effort to learn and investigate it to find and travel upon it for their real success. There are others who are/were need of more guidance for many reasons. And for them Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) put sign boards, from Najd group of Satan will emerge, this is their description, these are their traits, they are people of disbelief, etc. He pointed out that Najd is place of group of Satan. They will be standing on gates of hell and will invite people toward it. Anyone who responds to them will enter hell-fire, he said they will be with shaven heads – trait of Wahhabis, they will kill Muslims – Muslims being killed by ‘Muslims’ (i.e. Wahhabis). When this much information and more is available for group of Satan then Najd has a major significance. If we allow Najd to become Iraq and do nothing then will guidance of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be utalised correctly? Would it be source of guidance for anyone? When we know group of Satan is to emerge from Najd, sect of Khawarij is to emerge from Najd, and no sect to emerge from Najd other then the sect of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab, popularly known as Wahhabism. Now if Najd of Hadith is made Iraq and we allow it and accept it. Then sect of Wahhabism is not group of Satan, sect of Khawarij and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) left us no guidance on tribulation of modern times. Connection Of Wahhabism And Terrorism: Starting from my home country, TTP is semi-Wahhabi (i.e. Deobandi) terrorist organisation responsible for thousands of deaths. Figures given by news agencies and government officials indicate twenty-five thousand plus Muslims have been killed due to terrorism of this Wahhabi organisation. Taliban in Afghanistan are semi-Wahhabi, or whole Deobandi organistation. They are responsible for totally destroying Afghanitan. Taliban traditionally not were a terrorist organisation nore engaged in terrorist activities but reports now indicate they have taken a new direction of suicide bombings, targetting civilians in their conflict. Somalia, Al Shabab – Al Shabab is composed of all Wahhabis rebel force, driven by and guided by Wahhabism theology: Muslims are polytheists, its permissible to kill them, those Muslims who do not conform to our religious ideas are apostates. Result, you can investigate the destruction of life and property of Muslims in Somalia. Saudi Arabia, when this sect first originated it deemed all Muslims of Arabian Peninsula as Polytheists and deemed permissible to kill Muslims, wage war, take property, and enslave Muslim women on basis that these are women are polytheists. This killing and war only stopped when the Saudis established the modern Saudi state under the patronage of UK and later America. The modern examples of Wahhabism, its theology, and its destruction – Syria and Iraq. Both these countries have been in state of civil war against ISIS – this terrorist organisation is truest form of Wahhabism. And are responsible for destruction of Syria and Iraq. And responsible for deaths of half a million Muslims. They have followed the actual teaching of Shaykh of Najd. Anyone who deserts their army is deemed apostate and put to death. Any citizen not sticking to their brand of ‘Islam’ is put to death. In Iraq they slaughtered three-hundred-fifteen scholars of Ahle Sunnat and slaughter of general populace of Ahle Sunnat, Rawafiz, is beyond count. They have subjected the minorities to most barbaric treatment who had lived in these lands peacefully for centuries. Libyan Islamists can all be summed as Wahhabi and the on going civil war is proof of its true nature. Wahhabism The Sect Of Satan: Wahhabism’s core teaching is, that majority of Muslims in the world are polytheists hence they should be called back into Islam. It is permissible to wage war, kill, take property, enslave their women if they do not repent from their ‘Shirk’. Due to teaching of this sect, actions of members following teaching of this sect, you cannot hold your head high with pride and say: I am Muslim. Rather you’re forced defend your self, and plead your innocence, and justify your innocence. You will never be able to disassociate yourself from them because Media ensures and provides testimony of people; “[This sucicide bomber] was an ordinary person, very loving, caring, there was no sign of any extremism on him.” The going narrative is, terrorists in your countries do not display abnormal behaviour but are very social and normal upright members of community, until they blow themselves up with innocent people. This is the perception being created in mind of your hosts by Media and you will never be deemed a humane human being, and a Muslim, until this strategy continues. You have Wahhabism and Wahhabis to thank for this. Najd, Wahhabism And Terrorism: Origin of Wahhabism from Najd is important because it establishes Wahhabism is the sect of Satan about which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold. And correct location of Najd is important because if it was Najd from which Wahhabism originated then the prophesy fits them – and no doubt it fits them and they are the sect of Satan. The teachings of Wahhabism and actions of its members is enough proof that it indeed is sect of Satan. Najd is important, because there is a huge sign of danger on it, it states, group of Satan, it says they will invite you to hell. For a seeker of straight path, and for the one on the straight path, they will see the sign boards and stay away from Najdi sect of Wahhabism, the sect of hell-fire. Just knowing the precise location of Najd, emergence of Wahhabism from Najd, and few Ahadith regarding sect of Satan to emerge from Najd, will be enough for a believer to stay away from Wahhabism. With little knowledge you can guide your self on straight path and stay on straight path of Islam. The other alternative is going old school, traveling without maps and having in-depth knowledge of routes. Simply you won’t have to go into detail why Wahhabism is heretical/disbelief sect. You just look at the sign boards and will know; sign board says, road closed ahead, or road ahead leading to hell fire. And you can ensure your survival. So if precise location, direction of Najd is maintained, you can guide your self and if Najd becomes Jamaica then you will have to learn the old school way to know why it is wrong sect to join. This doesn’t mean you don’t learn the old school way. You should learn it but if you don’t have time – Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has left for people signs by seeing which and understanding which with minimal effort you can keep to, or guide your self to straight path of Islam. And prophecy fore-telling emergence of sect of Satan from Najd is one such sign post. What Is Authentic And What Is Heretical: All which the modern descendants of Khawarij from Najd have common in practice and in belief with Muslims is authentic and all which is unique to them is heretical/disbelief. All groups which have elements of heretical Khariji methodology, or practice, or belief are heretical/disbelief. Just like the principle, alchohol is Haram in pure form and it is Haram in diluted form. In similar fashion any group which employs their methodology, or has incoporated heretical beliefs and practices of Khawarij is heretical and is a sub-sect of modern day Khawarij of Najd, and are equally misguiding. Modern Kharjism has been repacked and rebranded from Wahhabism to, Salafism, Ahlul Hadith (i.e. aka Ahle Hadith) and Atharism. Members of this sect operate in many forms, Jamat ad-Dawah in Pakistan, and Islamic Research Foundation (IRF) – lead by Dr Zakir Naik. Regardless of what form and name they have taken they all consider Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah the anthropomorphist, Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab the Khariji, Shaykh Muhammad Nasir ud-Din Al Baani the Distorter, as their major scholars. And all have core beliefs of Wahhabism common amongst them. All believe majority of Muslims are polytheists, meaning disbelievers of worst type. Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab believed Muslims of his time were the worse polytheists then polytheists of prophetic times – meaning worse then worse disbelievers of prophetic times. Conclusion: Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab emerged from Najd and emergence of his sub-khariji sect was prophecised by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Najd is crucial in helping to identify the sect of Khawarij and any attempt to distort geographical location of Najd is attempt to distort prophetic teaching which help the Muslims to recognise their enemy. The teachings and actions of this sect establish beyond shadow of doubt these people are Khawarij and ahlul Kufr. Their teachings are mockery of Islam and their actions are utter anahilation and destruction of Muslims and the lands of Muslims. Just as Shaytan is enemy of Muslims so are his minions – and the display of enemity is for all to see. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnote: - [1] Note evolutionists, when talking about evolution and natural selection talk about the process as if natural selection possesses capacity to think and decide the right course of action in adopting traits for certain envoriment or need. Polar bear and the colour of its fur. Evolutionists will tell you due to disadvantages of having any other colour then white in polar ice and difficulties in hunting eventually through natural selection polar bears became white. By this they imply that natural selection possesses capacity of knowing and determining correct course of action. Once a perfect trait for a envoriment has been adopted by natural selection then it is reproduced generation after generation without change. In perspective, polar bears evolved from brown bears according to evolutionists and ever since natural selection has thought white colour of furr is fine for the envoriment they are in. Point I am hinting at is, that natural selection does not possesses any intellectual capacity nor it is a being it’s a concept, idea, a name for bilogical process. And without a guiding force it should produce all sorts of polar bears, pink, green, black, white, and yellow. But absence of this trial by error and maintaining a trait generation after generation indicates act of design by a intelligent being, God. Coming to the main point, I took the stab at him to insult him and the profession he adopted. Even though he disassociated himself from evolution of man from evolution. I was not having any of his natural selection, rubbish. I purposed to him, intelligent design, by natural selection. And al hamdu lillah, without boasting about my credentials, I maintained my position and presented various arguments in light of Islamic teachings. Arguing natural selection, teaches trial by error, once right trait is selected for a envoriment it gives cerntain benefits to that animal, bird, or insect over its competitors thus ensuring is survival and prosperity. Where as belief in Tawheed does not allow for a Muslim to believe trial by error part of natural selection in micro and macroevolution. End result of long discussion was he tracted from some aspects of evolution due to Islamic teachings while maintaining other non-conflicting aspects of evolution.

Jis kitab ki taraf Maulana Khalil Rana moteram nay ishara keeya, us ka yeh link heh: https://archive.org/stream/AjaibEInkishafAjaibEDeoband#page/n7/mode/1up

Yeh kissi be- asal Deobandi nay kitab chapi heh aur naam Sunni Aalim ka laga deeya heh. Deobandiat mein is kism ka harami pan firqa Deobandiat ka warsa heh. Esa hee in kay baray baray maulvi kartay ahay hen. Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri, murtaza hassan chandpuri, sarfaraz kahn safdar... yeh sab logh kitaboon kay naam gar kay aur matan gar kay refference detay ahay hen.

Ghaliban yeh kissi Hadith say akhaz heh ... kaheen para thah ... milnay par paste kar doon ga.

1 - Ibarat mein lafz khuda likha heh magar aap kay scan mein nazr nahin. uppar check kar lenh. 2 - bil zaat ka lafz wazia likha heh ... yehni Zaati tor par hazir nazir ki do sifaat Allah kay wastay khas hen. Ham toh bil arz mantay hen, bil zaat toh ham bi ghayr khuda kay leyeh Shirk mantay hen. 3 - Neechay dekhnay sunnay ko bi Allah ki sifat bil zaat likha heh, aur agar esi sift makhlooq mein maani jahay aur bil zaat toh ham bi Shirk mantay hen. 4 - kissi kay baray mein yeh nazriya rakhna kay woh dekhta sunta heh Shirk heh? Shirk wesay toh nahin magar bil zaat maneh toh zeroor Shirk heh. Is'see tera hazir nazir manna Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) ko Shirk nahin jab taq un ko bil zaat hazir nazir nah mana jahay. Joh bewaqoof yeh kahay kay hazir nazir ko shirk likha keun kay yeh khaas Allah ki sift heh toh phir poochen Mufti sahib nay toh dekhnay sunnay ko be khasi sift Allah ka bataya abh insaan ko dekhnay sunnay wala mana jahay toh bi Shirk heh? Wazia tor par bil zaat ka likha heh kay khaasoosiat bil zaat hazir nazir, sami o baseer honay mein heh, bil ata honay mein nahin.

Salam alayqum, Jab taq scanned refference nah ho kuch jawab nahin deeya ja sakta.

Introduction: Khawarij employing bogus scholarship attempt to argue Ahadith of Najd – which indicate group of Satan is to emerge from it - were in fact regarding Iraq because Iraq is East of Madinah. Their attempt to use logic/rationalism to interpret Ahadith without the considering contradicting geographical data are gross distortions. It is best example of heretical Qiyas (i.e. Analogy). Employing correct information and deducing incorrect conclusion – like Iblees did, created from fire, created from clay, qiyas = I am better then him. Mixing falsehood with some truth. Poison presented as healthy food. Hence objective would be to expose the fraud perpetuated by the young and foolish Khawarij. So the seekers of truth can correctly employ the information to know that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) warned Muslims regarding emergence of group of Satan from Najd, warned people about emergence of Wahhabism/Salafism from Najd. Told the Ummah that their methodology would be to quote the best people in the Ummah Muslimah as proof of their ideas.[1] Another Hadith tells that they will employ best of speech[2] to argue their case against Muslims.[3] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said this and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said that but they will be without guidance and out of Islam. Coming back, one the dust of heresy/disbelief will be removed it will become clear and those who are concerned for their hereafter will be able to use the information in Ahadith to guide themselves to straight path. 0.0 - The Rationale Behind Iraq Being East And Najd Being Iraq: A Hadith records Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said regarding Najd: “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: (The Prophet) said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen." People said, "Our Najd as well." The Prophet again said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said again, "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] They say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward Iraq when he refused to supplicate Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “Abdullah Ibn-Umar related that once, he saw the Prophet showing Iraq with his hand, and saying: "The fitna is here, the fitna is here, the fitna is here, three times, it is from here that will appear the devil's group.” [Ref: Musnd Ahmad V10, Hadith.6302, or 6129, P391] “Narrated Yusair bin 'Amr: I asked Sahl bin Hunaif, "Did you hear the Prophet saying anything about Al-Khawarij?" He said, "I heard him saying while pointing his hand towards Iraq.” There will appear in it (i.e, Iraq) some people who will recite the Quran but it will not go beyond their throats, and they will go out from (leave) Islam as an arrow darts through the game's body.' " [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H68] To seal the deal they present the following evidence in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was pointing toward the direction of East: “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] On this they conclude, Iraq is in the East of Madinah, and by Najd Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) intended meant Iraq. 1.0 - Appearance Of Dajjal And Issue Of Najd: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said regarding Dajjal: “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 (and safeguard him against his evil). He (Dajjal) 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 …” [Ref: Muslim, B41, H7015] Another Hadith provides additional detail: “Allah has not sent any Prophet but he warned his nation about Dajjal. I am the last of the Prophets, and you are the last of the nations. He will undoubtedly appear among you. If he appears while I am among you, I will contend with him on behalf of every Muslim, and if he appears while I am not among you, then each man must fend for himself and Allah will take care of every Muslim on my behalf. He will emerge from Al-Khallah, between Sham and Iraq, and will wreak havoc right and left. O slaves of Allah, remain steadfast. I will describe him to you in a manner in which none of the Prophets has described him before me. He will start by saying "I am a Prophet," and there is no Prophet after me. Then a second time he will say: "I am your Lord." But you will not see your Lord until you die.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B36, H4077] According to these Ahadith, Dajjal would appear between Syria and Iraq [of that time]. The second Hadith provides Al Khallah as the place from where Dajjal would appear. It also states: “He (i.e. Dajjal) undoubtedly appear among you.” Indicating he would appear from Arabia as well. Another Hadith states, that Dajjal will appear from East, in land of Khurasan: 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] Following link leads to map depicting ancient Khurasan on modern geographical data, here. In another Hadith it is stated: “We said: 'Yes.' He said: 'Inform me about the Prophet, has he been sent?' We said: 'Yes.' He said: 'Inform me how the people came to him.' We said: 'Quickly.' He leaped up to try and escape.' We said: 'What are you?' He said: 'I am the Dajjal.'" (The Prophet(s.a.w) said) "He will enter all of the lands except At-Taibah, and At-Taibah is Al-Madinah." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2253] In other words, Dajjal will go to every country, or maybe every city of every country, but the city of Madinah – in other words he would appear in every country/city of earth. Please bare with me, the preceding was not related to Najd but it will be put into perspective and will establish inconsistent and defective, and deceptive methodology of opponents of Islam. 1.1 - Refuting The Logic And Rationale On Which Najd Became Iraq: From the Ahadith it is established, Dajjal will appear from East, will appear between Syria and Iraq, he will appear from Khurasan, and he will enter every city except city of Madinah. Using all this information, would it be correct to argue, land between Iraq and Syria is in East and called Khurasan? Or land of Khurasan is in East, and Iraq and Syria are in Khurasan? In the first case, Khurasan which is in East is moved to North of Madinah. In the second case, Khurasan which is in East, but Syria and Iraq have been made in direction of East and made part of Khurasan. Considering the saying of Prophet, Dajjal will enter every land and Dajjal is to appear in Khurasan, can we assume all countries/cities are in East of Madinah and are called Khurasan? England, East of Madinah, its also called Khurasan. France in East and part of Khurasan. What kind of methodology is this? And what kind of scholarship is this? Is this the scholarship of Salaf Saliheen and methodology inherited from them? Its not scholarship its blendership, you put everything in one blender of stupidity, and get everything out which suites your purpose. O enemy of Islam – do you reason like this when you wish to demonstrate from where the Dajjal will appear? Do you interpret one place by the name of another? Have you ever argued Khurasan is between Syria and Iraq? Or Syria and Iraq are region, or places in Khurasan? Or argued Khurasan is another name of Al-Khallah? No! Then why display of such depravity with regards to appearance of Khawarij from Najd and Iraq? 1.2 - Restoring Sanity Amongst The Insane Distorters Of Islam: Appearance of Dajjal is mentioned from many places, in East, from Khurasan, from North of Madinah – between Iraq and Syria. And Muslims do not combine all this data and distort the location of Khurasan, or direction of East, or location of Syria and Iraq. Instead we believe he will visit all lands, and Hadith stating about appearance of Dajjal in these lands only means he will visit these lands – as well as all lands of earth. The actual residence of Dajjal, the actual place of origin of Dajjal is mentioned in Hadith of Tamim Dari and definitely the lands are not of Iraq, Syria, Khurasan. These lands are where he would make his appearance but these are not lands of his origin. Neither do we interpret a name of place by another. And this is correct methodology. Yet on issue of Najd, instead of maintaining and affirming all regions our opponents interpret Najd to mean Iraq on the grounds that detail – i.e. group of Satan is said to appear from Iraq, and Najd. If matching of details means two different places can be one and the same then appearance of Dajjal between Syria and Iraq, Khurasan, from East, can/should all be combined, to make a new intepretation – Khurasan is Al Khalla, and it is between Syria and Iraq. Or we can wait for fruit-cake[4] scholarship to produce another logical/rational master pieace – in which all the mentioned details are crammed without any due respect to accuracy. Such bogus and shameless scholarship was and is foundation of all Khawarij, and it is also true for followers, defenders and promoters of Khariji teaching of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab.[5] And we must leave such incredulous disgraceful scholarship lacking morally upright character to Shaykh of Najd and his band of foolish dessert rabble good for nothing except enemity to religion of Islam and Muslims whose only major contribution is destruction of Ummah Muslimah whole-sale. And we as Muslims follow the upright methodology and apply it consistently every time. 2.0 - Rebellion Of Khawarij In Syria - Al-Siffin: According to Ahadith it is also clear that Khawarij will appear when there will be tribulation amongst the Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) – such as war between companions. The following Hadith is evidence of it: “Abu Sa'id al-Khudri said that the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a mention of a sect that would be among his Ummah which would emerge out of the dissension of the people. Their distinctive mark would be shaven heads. They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures. The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them. The Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) gave an example (to give their description) or he said: … 1Abu Sai'd then said: People of Iraq. it is you who have killed them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, M2324] The dissension mentioned was battle of Al-Siffin between the armies of rightly guided Caliph Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and leader of pious Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). 2.1 - Emergence Of Khawarij – Najd, Syria, Iraq: Vast majority of Khawarij and their leader Dhil Quwaisirah at-Tamimi belonged to Bani Tamim. He resided toward East of Madinah in region of Najd. From there he along his followers marched to Syria to take part in battle between Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). After incident of arbitration – which they disapproved - they seperated from Army of Ali (radiallaht a’ala anhu) and later marched to Harura [Haruri is another name for Khariji] in Iraq. There like minded people joined them and then they moved camp to Nehrawan. At Nehrawan Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) faced them in battle which resulted in utter and complete defeat of Khawarij. In short, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold that Khawarij will emerge from Banu Tamim, from East of Madinah, from Najd, will march to Syria, become Khariji, march to Iraq, and fight battle, and foretold their complete anahilation – when he stated every single group of Khawarij will be cut-off, meaning anahilated. Considering this, why should you argue Iraq is Najd, why not Syria? Have you any principle by which you stand? Shouldn’t Najd, Syria, Iraq be one and the same according to your own methodology because Khawarij left the party of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in Syria? Doesn’t your sense of shame cause you to feel embrassed and feel ashamed of your distortions? 3.0 - Hypothetically Speaking – Najd Is Iraq, Najd Is Syria, So What: Suppose even if Iraq is Najd, Syria is also Najd, it still would not lighten the burden of Kharijism carried by Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab because the Najd which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward was in East of Madinah, here, the direction of sunrise, here, from the prophetic pulpit of Masjid Nabvi – toward the direction Ummul Momineen Aysha’s (radiallah ta’ala anha) house, here – which establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward Saudi capital Riyadh. And these details which indicates direction of Najd you cannot fit on Iraq or Syria. These detail only substantiate traditional and Islamic understanding of Najd; Najd is in Arabian Peninsula, central Arabia, region surrounding Riyadh. It is established that the first Kharijis were followers of Dhil Quwaisirah at-Tamim, from tribe of Banu Tamim. Following article provides links to maps published by Khawarij and neutral sources which indicate where Bani Tamim was located in Arabian Peninsula during the prophetic times. It also contains links to maps which indicate direction, location and region of Najd in Arabian Peninsula, here. Finally the following article refutes the rationale and logic on which the opponents of Islam have argued, Iraq is East, Najd is Iraq, here. Coming to back Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and Riyadh - Uyainah the birth place of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab and Dirriyah the missionary centre of his Khariji movement are stones throw away from Riyadh. Alhasil, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) precisely pointed the region of Najd from which group of Satan – Khawarij were to emerge. Conclusion: Najd, Iraq, Syria, Khurasan, are all different vast regions of Earth. Najd and Khurasan are East of Madinah. Syria is pretty precisely North, Iraq is more North from in context of Arabia then East and in context of Madinah North East. Baghdad/Kufa where Khawarij were in Iraq is toward North then North East.All these places were and are known as separate places from Ahadith and geographical data. On basis of a trait, a detail of information, it is foolish to interpret, Iraq to mean Najd or Najd to mean Iraq, or Al-Khalla to mean Khurasan, or any other distorted possibility. We cannot interpret Ahadith like this, accurately; distort Ahadith like this and if one does so such one is guilty of distorting and is attempting to distort Islam. Ahadith establish Khawarij are to appear from Najd, Iraq and even Syria. Najd is place of origin of Khariji Fitnah and Banu Tamim is the mother tribe in which it festered until it infected battle of Al-Siffin and then Iraq. And Iraqis were the people who killed the Khawarij. Also pre-supposing, Iraq is also Najd even then it cannot be Najd toward which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed – he pointed toward direction of Riyadh which is established from Hadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward the house of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha). This supposition disregards all available information which negates/refutes the Khariji position that Najd is Iraq or in Iraq. And despite this a single detail refutes it and establishes Islamic position that Najd is in central Arabia, region surrounding Saudi capital Riyadh. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] Hadith records: “Abdullah [bin Mas'ud] narrated that the Messenger of Allah said: "In the end of time there will come a people young in years, foolish in minds, reciting the Qur'an which will not go beyond their throats, uttering sayings from the best of creatures, going through the religion as an arrow goes through the target." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B7, H2188] Even though scholars of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah also do this but it is not trade-mark. Yet their maybe hardly any practicing Salafi/Wahhabi who doesn’t do this. And this is their trade mark call: – understand religion as the Salaf as-Saliheen understood it. Who are the best of generations, the Sahabah, the Tabiyoon, and the Taba Tabi’een. And who puts the mosts emphasis on following these three best of generations? Be fair if you know, is it not the Wahhabiyyah? This excessive emphasis on Salaf Saliheen is proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had foretold the emergence of Wahhabism and described their trait – calling them young foolish people who have gone out of religion. Note this was not the trait of earliest Khawarij. They put emphasis on Quran more then the Sunnah. The Shaykh of Najd and his followers put great emphasis on Salaf Saliheen so much so that they are called Salafi i.e. one who follows predecessor. - [2] “Narrated Abdullah: The best talk (speech) is Allah's Book, and the best way is the way of Muhammad, and the worst matters are the heresies (those new things which are introduced into the religion); and whatever you have been promised will surely come to pass, and you cannot escape (it).” [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H382] - [3] “Narrated Ali: I relate the traditions of Allah's Messenger to you for I would rather fall from the sky than attribute something to him falsely. But when I tell you a thing which is between you and me, then no doubt, war is guile. I heard Allah's Messenger saying, "In the last days of this world there will appear some young foolish people, who will use (in their claim) the best speech of all people (i.e. the Qur'an), and they will abandon Islam as an arrow going through the game. Their belief will not go beyond their throats (i.e. they will have practically no belief), so wherever you meet them, kill them, for he who kills them shall get a reward on the Day of Resurrection." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H808] Anyone interested on seeing the actual demonstration of this can buy any random book published by Wahhabiyyah. It will be crammed with Quranic and refferences from Ahadith and references of Salaf Saliheen. Yet the reality is what they quote has nothing to do with what the scholars of Islam wrote, nor the Quran or Ahadith teach. These books contain wgross distortions which go against emphatic teaching of Ahadith. For ilustration purposes, Kitab at-Tawheed of Shaykh of Najd, is replete with quotes from Quran and Ahadith. Yet all verses are about polytheists but he has applied them upon Muslims. And according to Abdullah Ibn Umar, it was trait of early Khawarij, the worst of creatures in existance and not of 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, Volume 9, Page 49, Chapter 6: Killing The Khawarij] So even though their books are replete with refferences they contain no guidance and their authors are standing at gates of hell inviting people to hell and one who responds to them will be in fire with them. - [4] Fruit-Cake scholarship, is my way of very politely saying bogus and fraudulent scholarship. Offensive way would be, whore-scholarship. With a whore, moral depravity and money justifies the action, in whore-scholarship of Wahhabism, moral depravity and end justifies the means – i.e. methodology is justified by what the Khariji wants to achieve. To earn money whore sells body. On other hand a Khariji, Wahhabi, Salafi scholar to protect the sectarian interest and to ensure smooth flow of Saudi petro-dollars, is willing to sell everything; sound methodology is first one to go, consistent honest objective application of methodology is the second victim of petro-dollars, and lastly sells his soul to Iblees, and earns hell-fire for distorting the religion, and for introducing innovations. - [5] Note readers, it is not that they don’t know the correct way of interpretation. They do know how to correctly interpret the given data in Ahadith. They demonstrate their correct knowledge when they explain the Ahadith of Dajjal in which appearnce of him is mentioned from different plcaes. The problem is that their blackened hearts love the teaching they have been exposed to. Hence when the truth of Islam is established and it becomes apparent to them; by accepting the truth of Islamic argument they would destroy their own religion of Kharijism, and religion of Islam would be triumphant against them, as it is destined to be triumphant. Then they resort behaving like a fish out of water – unpredictably flaps, looses all grace. In similar fashion, the brain fuse goes pop and the resulting spasm attack results in such arguments and such scholarship. I am waiting for some true follower of Salaf as-Saaliheen to come and say, sun will rise from West near the judgment day, hence West is East, and group of Satan is European Uninon. Hint! Hint! Qarn = European Union = European Group = East Is West = Eurpean Union/Group of Satan. What do you care about distorting the Ahadith. As long as, group of Satan is not from direction of Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab’s place, all interpretations are valid, right? Psst!!! Over here! Shhh! Not so loud, Alps in France establishes Najd is Europe because Najd means raise/elevated land, keep it between me and you. Hehe! Okay? Hehe! Okay!

Kalay safaat dekh kar mukhalif ka lajawab hona, yeh ilmiat heh, aur Allah nay yeh mujjay mubarak kee. Chand points ka zikr karna bhool gaya, yaad anay par izafa kar raha hoon. Khadam nay apnay puranay material mein ek aur point - point five, six, seven ka izafa keeya heh. Point one, Mufti Sahib nay likha heh kay: "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Janab tashbih is jumlay mein Noori bashr honay mein deeh jaa rahi heh. Abh sawal peda hota heh kis jesay Noori bashr hen, saamp jesay noori bashr (mazallah astaghfirullah) ya Jinn jesay noori bashr? Ya Jibraeel alayhis salaam jesay Noori bashr hen? Siyaaq o sabaq say toh sabat heh kay Allamah Sahib rahimullah nay, Jibraeel (alayhis salaam) kay Noor honay aur Bashr ban kar anay ka zikr farmaya heh, phir tashbih us'see waqt hoti heh jab kissi zaat mein kissi aur ki zaat o sift ko shamal keeya jahay. Aur yahan par wazia heh kay Mufti Sahib nay Jibraeel alayhis salaam ka Noor e hissi ho kar bashr ban kar anay say tashbih deeh. Aur tashbih jaiz is waja say huwi keun kay, Nabi e kareem rauf ar raheem Noor minallah (Allah ki taraf say Noor hen) aur Bashr ki soorat mein ahay. Yahi Ahle Sunnat ka aqeeda heh. Aur issee mein tashbih deeh jaa rahi heh. Point two, Abh agar is jumla ko siyaq o sabaq say juda keeya jahay toh phir bi aap ihtiraz nahin kar saktay, keun kay likha heh, Esay hee hamaray Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen? Kesay Noori bashr hen,us'see bashriat kay teht jis mein nikkah, khana, peena heh. Mufti Sahib nay Jumlay kay shoroon mein tashbih kay lafz istimal keeya aur aakhar mein mumasilat kay point bi biyan kar deeyeh. Ta-qay aap jesay anparh aur gawar logh ihtiraz bi na kar saken. Point three, Meray yeh aakhiri point pehlay donoon points ka majmua heh donoon points ki ilada sabat keeya aur phir idhar jama keeya. Aap ko is ibarat par keun ihtiraz huwa us ki taraf aata hoon aur aap ki kam fehmi aur kam aqli sabat karta hoon. Aap nay samja ya janbooj kar aap nay ghalat mafoom nikala taqay aap apnay uqabir ki tara Islam dushmani aur Musalman dushmani par qaim rahen. Mufti Sahib likhtay hen: "Aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah. Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Mufti Sahib likhtay hen, "aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah." Magar Mufti Sahib nay agay likha us par tawajoh nahin ki. Mufti Sahib nay saamp ki tara nigalnay, ya saamp ki tara khanay mein tashbih nahin deeh. Balkay Mufti Sahib nay likha: "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Mufti Sahib nay, samp kay khanay say tashbih nahin deeh, balkay tashbih Noori Bashr honay mein deeh aur bashr honay ki tafseel mein tashbih deeh, aur likha kay khana peena nikkah bashariat kay ihkam mein thah. Point four, Raha kay samp ka zikr keun darmiyan mein ayah jab is ka talluq nahin thah aur tashbih mein is ki kohi munasbat nahin banti thee aur nah is ki tashbih deeh. Musa alayhis salaam ki laathi ka zikr ki munasbat, joh mein pehlay likh aya hoon, Zaat badli, toh phir us ki sifaat badli, banda jab taq sahih ul aqeedah sahih ul amal Sunni ho toh RasoolAllah say muhabbat aur un ki shaan biyan karta heh, magar jab Thanvi, Ismail Dehalvi, Sarfaraz Khan Safdar, Murtaza Hassan Chandpuri, Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri ka chahnay wala ho toh phir gustakhiyan karta heh, hasil kalam yeh huwa kay zaat badalnay say sifaat o khoobiyan badalti hen aur needs badalti hen. Idhar banda toh wohi heh sirf label Deobandi aur taleem Deobandi mazhab ki - ba-adab say bey-adab ho gaya. Sayaq o sabaq mein dekha jahay toh Mufti Sahib yeh keh rahay hen kay Jibraeel alayhis salaam Jab farishtay thay toh kalay baal nahin thay, insaani ankh nahin thee, insaani shakal o soorat nahin thee, lebaas bi insaani nahin thah, magar jab zaat badli toh sab kuch insaani ho gaya, keun kay noori zaat say insaani zaat banay. Musa alayhis salaam ka aasa thah toh bey-jaan thah, khata peenay ki khoobiyan nahin theen, aankh nahin thee, magar jab samp bana toh phir khoobiyan badleen. Hamaray Nabi e kareem, Jab Noor thay toh phir khana peena sona jagna insaani jism nahin rakhtay thay, magar jab bani Adam say afzalul khalq bashr huway toh phir insaani khoobiyan aur insaani zerooriyat bi saath huween aur insaani limitations bi saath huween, yehni peda huway, shahadat bi huwi, waghera ... Point Five: Sayaq o sabaq say sabat huwa kay Mufti Sahib ka mowaqif - zaat badli toh sifaat badli - issee ko sabat karnay kay leyeh Mufti Sahib (rahimullah) nay tafseel likhi. Mufti Sahib nay jumla tashbiya mein. Tashbih zaat badalnay aur sifaat badalnay, mein deeh. Mufti Sahib ki ibarat: "Aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah. Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Tafseel yoon heh, jistera, Jibraeel alayhis salaam ki zaat badli toh zaat kay saath sifaat badli, Jin joh atashi hen insaan bantay hen jab un ki zaat badli toh agar insaani zaat ka roop apnaya toh insaani sifat lazam aahi, is'see tera Musa alayhis salaam ka Aasa mubarak ki zaat badli aur bi iznilah saamp bana toh zaat badalnay say joh zaat ikhtiyat ki us kay mutabik sifaat badli, hamaray nabi Noor thay aur noorani sifaat kay jamay thay. Jab Noor ki Zaat badli aur bashri zaat apnahi toh sifaat badleen. Is context mein Mufti Sahib ka farmana: "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Yeh mafoom deta heh kay, esay hee jab hamaray Nabi e kareem Noori Bashr hen jin ki badli, pehli zaat Nooraniat thee. aur badalnay kay baad phir bashr banay, toh khana peena nikkah is'see bashariat kay ihkam mein heh. Hasil kalam, tashbih zaat kay badalnay aur sifaat kay badalnay mein huwi. Mazeed wazhat, jumla maqabl mein a'asa ka samp bannay ka zikr heh: "Aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah. Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Is jumla mein khaas point - zaat badli aur new zaat kay mutabiq sifat badli heh. Aur tashbih zaat badal kar aur soorat ikhtiyar kharnay mein deeh gahi heh samp honay ya saamp kee tara nigalnay mein nahin. Point Six: Note, mein ibarat hafzay say likh raha hoon, shahid chota mota hifz ho ya izafa, overall mafoom mein farq nahin hoga. Thanvi Sahib ki ibarat: "... phir yeh kay aap ki zaat e muddisa par ilm e ghayb ka hokam keeya jana agar baqawl Zahid sahih ho toh daryaft talab amr yeh heh kay is ghayb say qull ghayb murad heh ya baaz, agar baaz uloom e ghaybiya murad hen to is mein hazoor hi ki kia takhsees heh esa ilm ghayb..." Pehla point yeh heh kay Thanvi Sahib ka yeh ek sentence heh aur kohi break nahin. Is puri ibarat mein Thanvi Sahib nay aap ki zaat e muqadisa kay ilfaz istimal keeyeh, aur ilm e ghayb kay ilfaaz. Phir Thanvi sahib nay, ghayb ki zameer ilm e ghayb kee taraf lutahi, aur jama kay seeghoon kay saath ilm e ghayb ka zikr keeya, phir hazoor ki zameer ko Allah kay Nabi ki zaat e muqadisa ke taraf lotaya, phir ilfaaz ilm e ghayb ka istimal keeya - istera apnay mozoo aur jis zaat ka zikr heh sayaq o sabaq kay mutabiq qaim rakha. Yehni, Thanvi sahib nay sayaq o sabaq ko qaim rakha, mozoo aur jis zaat ka zikr heh us ko mustaqil zikr heh, aur tashbih ka lafz 'esa' bi istimal keeya, aur jis sift mein tashbih deeh us ka zikr be keeya, yehni "esa ilm e ghayb ...". Aur Thanvi Sahib nay, jin zaatoon say tashbih deeh us ka zikr bi keeya ... RasoolAllah ki zaat e muqadisa aur janwar, pagal, bachay, zaid, bakr. Agar yaqeen nah ahay toh aap khud dekh lenh: Abh aatay hen Mufti Sahib ki ibarat ki taraf.Mufti Sahib ki ibarat: "Aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah. Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Jumla maqabl aur jumla ma-bad mein bazahir kohi connection nahin - sirf zaat badal janay say sifat badal janay ka connection heh. Mufti Sahib nay jis sift mein tashbih deeh us ka jumla maqabl say kohi talluq nahin, tashbih Noori bashr honay mein heh jis ka jumla maqabl say kohi talluq nahin, Nabi ki zaat ko insaan say tashbih deeh is ka zikr bi wazia heh: "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Aur is ka talluq jumla maqabl say toh nahin magar Jibraeel alayhis salaam kay bashr bannay say heh. Alhasil, nah samp ki zaat aur Allah kay Nabi ki zaat mein tashbih - yehni, yeh nahin farmaya kay hamaray Nabi e kareem samp jesay hen - agar yoon hota toh sar'ri kufr thah aur taweel lazam nah hoti aur nah mein aur nah kohi Sunni taweel karta. Nah samp kay khanay aur peenay aur RasoolAllah kay khanay peenay mein tashbih. Yehni yeh nahin farmaya, jesay saamp khata thah wesay hamaray Nabi khatay hen. Alhasil, ibarat Mufti Sahib mein tashbih har giz nahin yeh aap ki ziyadti heh jis kay aap jawab deh hoon gay. Ibarat aap jantay hen magar ek dafa phir, parh saktay hen: Jab donoon ibarat mein itna farq, thanvi sahib ki ibarat mein jin zatoon mein tashbih, jis sift mein tashbih, sab ka wazia zikr heh. ilm mein tashbih, Allah kay Nabi aur pagaloon, janwaroon, bachoon, kay darmiyan tashbih, sar'ri ilfaz say sabat heh. Mufti Sahib ki ibarat mein jis tashbih par kufr lazam ata heh woh mojood nahin aur jis say aap ko mowaqif sabat hota heh woh mojood nahin. Balkay joh mera mowaqif heh wohi sabat heh. Sar'ri tor par mufti sahib ki ibarat say kufria tashbih sabat nahin agar hoti toh aap chup nah kartay. Bas zan ki bunyad par aap Kufr ka hokam jaari kar rahay hen. Zan par daleel ghalab hoti heh. Aur aap ki tashbih bil farz e muhal, agar heh bi toh zanni, aur zan par hokam Kufr kabi nahin hota. Thanvi sahib ki ibarat mein Kufr sar'ri heh zanni nahin - wazia tashbih heh. Aap agar tashbih ko zan sabat kar denh mujjay auroon ka pata nahin magar mein wada karta hoon takfir nahin karoon ga. Agar aap ko Mufti Sahib rehmatullah alayhi ki takfir kerni heh toh dil ki hasrat bi puri kar lenh ham nay apna imaan o Islam kharab nahin karna - Mufti Sahib ki takfir kar kay. Aap kay pass donoon nahin, takfir kar kay aur kia bigar lenh gay apna! Wesay, takfir kay asool hen, pehlay, takfir kay leyeh Kufr ka sadir hona, dosra Kufr baknay walay ka ihtimam e hujjat kay bad bi Kufr say toba ka munkir hona, aur phir hokam e takfir hota heh. Mufti Sahib say Kufr ka sadoor nahin huwa, toh phir ihtimam e hujjat kesay hoti, aur nah kissi Mufti e Islam aur nah kissi Mufti e Deoband nay hokam kufr ka lagaya is bunyad par, nah ihtimam e hujjat ki bunyad bani. Misaal kay tor par chalen ibarat kufria hee hoti, toh kia aap Takfir karen gay? Aap kay mazhab mein Musalmanoon ki majority, aksiriat wesay be Mushrik heh, Taqwiyatul Iman ka pehla bab parh lenh, is leyeh Mufti Sahib par Kufr ka hokam laganay mein aap ka kia nuqsan hoga. Jis jammat nay Ummat kay jamhoor ki takfir ka bhoj uthaya huwa heh us par ek banday ka aur laad dena kia bura hoga. Mein likh raha thah kay chalen Mufti Sahib ki ibarat Kufria hee hoti, ham musalman tab bi takfir nah kartay, keun kay anjani mein Kufr ka baqa jana - khata par mabni hota, dosra ham ibarat kay kufr kay qail hotay magar mufti sahib ki takfir nah kartay keun kay ihtimam e hujjat nahin huwi agar hoti toh shahid toba kartay. Ham Musalman toh Ismail Dehalvi kay 70 say zaid Kufriat kay qail hen aur Ala Hazrat, Hakeem Ul Ummat, Mujadid e Deen O Millat, Mujtahid e Mutliq, Qutb Ul Ulamah o Awliyah, Al Imam, Ahmad Raza Khan rehmatur rahman, Asr e Hazir mein haq ki pechan nay bi Ismail Dehalvi ki Takfir nah kee, doh bunyadoon par, toba mashoor honay ki bunyad par, aur ihtimam e hujjat nah honay par. Esay khabees banday ki Takfir nah kee, Mufti Sahib rahimullah toh aap kay ilzam say bari hen, kufr huwa bi nahin, phir ihtimam e hujjat bi nahin huwi aur nah jawab banta heh, toh ham Musalman Takfir kesay karen? Aap karen, gadday par jamhoor e Ummat ko Mushrik tehrana aur Kafir tehranay ka bhooj lada heh, aap joh jamhoor/majority kay ilawa minority bachi heh us ki bi kar lenh. Point Seven: Kufr sar'ri mein taweel nahin hoti. Agar kohi Allah kay Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) kay ilm ko bachoon, pagaloon, janwaroon, keeroon makaroon jesa kahay. Cha-hay miqdar/quantity mein kahay - yehni baaz honay mein, ya ilm jannay mein, toh aap say batahen aap kay dil mein yeh baat bey-adabi nah lagay gee? Ya agar kohi kahay, Allah kay Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) kay Quran hifz kernay mein kia khasoosiat/takhsees heh esay 10 saala bachay bi hifz kar letay hen. Aap apnay iman say bata-hen kay Allah kay Nabi kay Quran hifz karnay ko 10 sala bachay say muqabala karwana mein Allah kay Nabi ki towheen nahin? Baat sach heh kay bachay kartay hen - magar tashbih aur muqabala baazi mein Allah kay Nabi kay hafzay ko 10 sala bachay kay jesa tehrana - aap apnay imaan say batahen towheen o tanqees nahin? Thanvi Sahib ki ibarat aur Mufti Sahib ki ibarat, Thanvi sahib nay ibarat mein Allah kay Nabi kay ilm ka muqabala bachoon, pagaloon janwaroon say karwaya aur RasoolAllah ki khasoosiat ka inqaar keeya. Thanvi sahib toh khasoosiat kay munkir hen aur yahi sabat kar rahay hen. Aur is'see munkr ko sabat karnay kay leyeh Thanvi sahib nay tashbih deeh takay khasoosiat qaim nah ho.Alhasil, Thanvi Sahib nay RasoolAllah kay wohi ilm e ghayb mana joh us nay pagaloon janwaroon kay leyeh mana. Abh es'see sift ki kia shaan joh pagaloon kay pass bi ho? Aur esay ki kia izzat/shaan jis ki khoob mein pagal shareek hoon? Apnay dil par haath rakh batahen, kay agar aap kay pass Christian Hindu ya ek Deobandi hee, ata heh aur kehta heh, tumara Nabi wohi heh jis kay ilm e ghayb mein pagal, bachay, janwar shareek hen, jis ki ilm e ghayb jannay mein khasoosiat nahin? Toh, aap ka kia rad e amal hoga, aap hifz ul iman utha kar us kay samnay rakhen gay, dekho jee, yahi toh ham keh rahay hen kay khasoosiat nahin, ya aap midan e jang laga lenh gay us kay khilaf? Tawaqoh nahin. Aap shahid us ko batahen kay hamara Islam toh kehta heh kay Namaz mein Nabi e kareem kee taraf khiyal mein tawajoh karna bi biwi say jismani talluqat kay suhanay khiyalat say bi badtr heh. Aap bad-sha hen apni aakhirat kay, kuch be kar saktay hen, aur karen gay, ham par farz samjna thah samja deeya. Abh aah kar apni, jheet kay dhol bajahen. ----------------------------

Taweel kesi? Aap kakay toh nahin nah kay Urdu parna nahin aati, mein panween jammat Urdu para hoon, agar mein samaj gaya ibarat ko to kia aap muj say kam paray hen joh aap ko samaj nahin aahi?

Janab is ka faisla toh parnay walay karen gay kay chavlen kis kee hen. Yeh aap ki pesh karda, scan aur ihtiraz: Aur yeh huwi meri wazahat - jissay logh parh kar faisla kar lenh gay: Agar mein nay taweel kee heh toh aap phir batahen kay kesay joh mein nay wazahat kee heh ghalat heh. Sirf gilay shikway hujjaten qaim nah karen. Apna mowaqif wazahat o daleel say pesh karen. Mein joh ihtiraz karoon ga Thanvi Sahib par aur joh hokam qaim karoon ga woh daleel par hoga. Mein gila nahin karoon ga, shikwa nahin karoon ga, aur rona dona nahin hoga - aap esay hen wesay hen is waja say meri baat nahin mantay. Mein nay toh daleel qaim karni heh apnay mowaqif par aur karoon ga aur agar zeroori samja ya fitrat say majboor huwa toh saath hi shahid kuch jali bhuni suna doon. Magar khalis rona dona nahin hoga meri taraf say, aur nah khalis jali bhuni sunahoon ga. Joh aap kar rahay hen yeh sirf jali bhuni aur rona dona kar rahay hen aur yeh mujjay manzoor nahin. Apna aur aap ka waqt doon/loon toh hasil kuch toh ho awaam ko. Aap nay meri nahin man-ni aur mein nay toh aap ki nahin man-ni keun kay mein toh al-hamdulillah samajta janta behtr hoon. Is leyeh yeh meray aur aap kay darmiyan nahin. Keun kay aap nay bi faisla keeya huwa heh kay aap ka firqa hee sacha heh, aur aap ka mazhab hee sacha heh aur aap kay feham mein is ka ghalat hona esa muhaal hona heh jesay Allah ka makhlooq hona. Aur mera nazria heh kay Allah ka Quran, Nabi ka farman, aur Islam hee sacha heh aur aap ki Deobandiat mardood heh. Aur Islam hee woh mazhab heh joh Allah ko qabool hoga aur aap ka mazhab Allah radd kar deh ga. Is waja say ham donoon nay faisla kar leeya kay kia sacha heh kia jhoota heh. Magar awaam kay leyeh kuch likh denh. Parnay walay logh kia kahen gay kay Deobandiyoon ko kuch nahin aata. Is waja say awam kay faida kay wastay chand ilmi nuqat hee biyan karen taqay logoon ko pata chalay kay waqia hee aap kay point mein wazan heh kuch jaan heh.

Kon say Kufr, kahan heh sar'ri Kufr? Sirf chavlen hen tumari. Jistera tum maar rahay ho yahi tumaray uqabir ka warsa heh. Kis kay saath tashbih ka iqrar keeya? Abh kohi jawab nahin toh hawahi firing par utar aahay - esay bi kabi radd hota heh? Yeh wazahat tamacha heh ahle jahl kay moon par.

Al-Muhannad also known as Al Farad Wal Dajjal [by me]. Wazahat karo nah kesay iftara o buhtan heh. Mujjay bi toh pata challay kay kis mantaq kay mutabiq yeh aap ka dawah haq heh. Chalo tum yeh karo, Al Muhannad wali ibarat Hifz Ul Iman say nikaal kar doh. Agar tum Hifz ul imaan wali ibarat tum Al Muhannad say nikal doh tum jheet gahay, theek? Shart yeh kay ibarat lafz ba lafz wohi ho. Jis ka tum nay refference deeya heh usee version kay page 51 par dekho, tashbih ka lafz hee nikal deeya gaya heh yehni "esa ilm'. 'Esa ilm' kee jaga "baz ghayb ka ilm" dala. Yeh darust heh kay zameer baaz ilm e ghayb ki taraf uthai ghai thee, is waja say baaz ka izafa problem nahin balkay 'esa' ko nikalnay say ibarat ka mafoom badla. Agar al Muhannad mein yeh hota toh; 'esa baaz ilm e ghayb ...' tehreef ka ilzaam lazam nah ata.

Salam alayqum, Point one, Mufti Sahib nay likha heh kay: "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Janab tashbih is jumlay mein Noori bashr honay mein deeh jaa rahi heh. Abh sawal peda hota heh kis jesay Noori bashr hen, saamp jesay noori bashr (mazallah astaghfirullah) ya Jinn jesay noori bashr? Ya Jibraeel alayhis salaam jesay Noori bashr hen? Siyaaq o sabaq say toh sabat heh kay Allamah Sahib rahimullah nay, Jibraeel (alayhis salaam) kay Noor honay aur Bashr ban kar anay ka zikr farmaya heh, phir tashbih us'see waqt hoti heh jab kissi zaat mein kissi aur ki zaat o sift ko shamal keeya jahay. Aur yahan par wazia heh kay Mufti Sahib nay Jibraeel alayhis salaam ka Noor e hissi ho kar bashr ban kar anay say tashbih deeh. Aur tashbih jaiz is waja say huwi keun kay, Nabi e kareem rauf ar raheem Noor minallah (Allah ki taraf say Noor hen) aur Bashr ki soorat mein ahay. Yahi Ahle Sunnat ka aqeeda heh. Aur issee mein tashbih deeh jaa rahi heh. Point two, Abh agar is jumla ko siyaq o sabaq say juda keeya jahay toh phir bi aap ihtiraz nahin kar saktay, keun kay likha heh, Esay hee hamaray Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen? Kesay Noori bashr hen,us'see bashriat kay teht jis mein nikkah, khana, peena heh. Mufti Sahib nay Jumlay kay shoroon mein tashbih kay lafz istimal keeya aur aakhar mein mumasilat kay point bi biyan kar deeyeh. Ta-qay aap jesay anparh aur gawar logh ihtiraz bi na kar saken. Point three, Meray yeh aakhiri point pehlay donoon points ka majmua heh donoon points ki ilada sabat keeya aur phir idhar jama keeya. Aap ko is ibarat par keun ihtiraz huwa us ki taraf aata hoon aur aap ki kam fehmi aur kam aqli sabat karta hoon. Aap nay samja ya janbooj kar aap nay ghalat mafoom nikala taqay aap apnay uqabir ki tara Islam dushmani aur Musalman dushmani par qaim rahen. Mufti Sahib likhtay hen: "Aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah. Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Mufti Sahib likhtay hen, "aasa e Musavi saamp ki shakal mein ho kar sab kuch nigal gaya thah." Magar Mufti Sahib nay agay likha us par tawajoh nahin ki. Mufti Sahib nay saamp ki tara nigalnay, ya saamp ki tara khanay mein tashbih nahin deeh. Balkay Mufti Sahib nay likha: "Esay hee hamaray Nabi e kareem (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) Noori Bashr hen, khana peena nikkah is'see bashriat kay ihkam mein thah." Mufti Sahib nay, samp kay khanay say tashbih nahin deeh, balkay tashbih Noori Bashr honay mein deeh aur bashr honay ki tafseel mein tashbih deeh, aur likha kay khana peena nikkah bashariat kay ihkam mein thah. Point four, Raha kay samp ka zikr keun darmiyan mein ayah jab is ka talluq nahin thah aur tashbih mein is ki kohi munasbat nahin banti thee aur nah is ki tashbih deeh. Musa alayhis salaam ki laathi ka zikr ki munasbat, joh mein pehlay likh aya hoon, Zaat badli, toh phir us ki sifaat badli, banda jab taq sahih ul aqeedah sahih ul amal Sunni ho toh RasoolAllah say muhabbat aur un ki shaan biyan karta heh, magar jab Thanvi, Ismail Dehalvi, Sarfaraz Khan Safdar, Murtaza Hassan Chandpuri, Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri ka chahnay wala ho toh phir gustakhiyan karta heh, hasil kalam yeh huwa kay zaat badalnay say sifaat o khoobiyan badalti hen aur needs badalti hen. Idhar banda toh wohi heh sirf label Deobandi aur taleem Deobandi mazhab ki - ba-adab say bey-adab ho gaya. Sayaq o sabaq mein dekha jahay toh Mufti Sahib yeh keh rahay hen kay Jibraeel alayhis salaam Jab farishtay thay toh kalay baal nahin thay, insaani ankh nahin thee, insaani shakal o soorat nahin thee, lebaas bi insaani nahin thah, magar jab zaat badli toh sab kuch insaani ho gaya, keun kay noori zaat say insaani zaat banay. Musa alayhis salaam ka aasa thah toh bey-jaan thah, khata peenay ki khoobiyan nahin theen, aankh nahin thee, magar jab samp bana toh phir khoobiyan badleen. Hamaray Nabi e kareem, Jab Noor thay toh phir khana peena sona jagna insaani jism nahin rakhtay thay, magar jab bani Adam say afzalul khalq bashr huway toh phir insaani khoobiyan aur insaani zerooriyat bi saath huween aur insaani limitations bi saath huween, yehni peda huway, shahadat bi huwi, waghera ... Khadam nay aap ko tafseelan jawab deeya heh ... aur tawaqoh heh kay aap meray sawal ka jawab joh pichli post meh guzray hen, zeroor denh gay. Wesay yeh musalmanoon kay mufti hen Deobandiyoon kay kutb ul aftaab o hakeem ul ummat qasim ul uloom nahin joh gustakhi par gustakhi karen gay.