MuhammedAli

Jahil logh hen khafqat matana chahtay hen kissi tara say. Apnay andar kee steam nikal jahay bas baat ki tuq banti ho ya nah bas barhaas nikal jahay bughz kee aag ka yeh asool heh in ka. Ek Sahib musalmanoon ko Mushrik likh rahay thay aur woh sher pesh ker rahay thay jin meh musalmanoon ko Mushrik tehraya gaya. Muj say baat huwi deen kay masail par, aur meri fitrat hee ashidda alal kuffar wali heh, Itla e dalahil e shariat kay bad Kafir ka 'fatwah' aam tor per mera tareeka heh. Un sahib ko meh nay kaheen baar us kay uqabir aur ko chand dafa janab ko Kafir tehraya toh janab nay hadith pesh kee kay joh la ilaha ilAllah paray woh musalman heh. Meh nay tawajoh dalahi kay falan jaga toh tum musalmanoon ko joh pura kalmah, roza, zakat, hajj, saum, salat, tilawat e Quran, sab krtay hen un ko Mushrik tehra ahay ho idhar mujjay yeh hadith suna rahay ho, tum ko us waqt hadith pata nahin thee. Alhasil yeh huwa kay janab ko hadith toh maloom thee magar baat dao par thee, idhar keun kay Kafir kehnay wala meh thah is leyeh Hadith pesh ker deeh. In logoon kee wardat ka tareeka aur in kay 'Islam' ka ahem asool yeh heh; dao laga loh, asool o insaaf kuch faida nahin deta. Phir janab nay taweel kee kay mera aqeeda yeh nahin, yeh toh falan ka thah aur us nay falan kay mutaliq esa likha, meh nay jawab likha kay chalo tumara toh yahi heh nah kay joh la ilaha ilAllah paray musalman heh toh tum hee bata doh kay falan nay joh falan ko Mushrik tehraya toh tumara falan maulvi Kafir huwa ya nahin Takfir palatnay kee waja say, magar es'see maut aahi kay jawab nah deeya. kehna yeh chahta thah kay in logoon ko haq o batil, asal o asool, jaiz o na-jaiz, kissi kee parwa nahin jahan par joh dao chalta heh chala loh. Keun kay in ka nazria heh andi mukhalfat behtr heh khamosh rehnay say. Is waja say joh ahay, likh detay hen aur jab likh deeh, dunya meh kohi manwa nahin sakta, yeh nasal bey-asal heh, aur joh bey-asal hota heh woh kissi ka lehaz nahin karta, baray chotay, achay buray, haq aur batal, kissi ka nahin.

Introduction: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s purpose according to the first and the second principle was to establish a common connection between the beliefs of Mushrikeen of Arabian Peninsula and the Muslims of his own era. Then using Khariji methodology interpret verses of Quran which were about polytheists in such a fashion that they seem to represent the creed of Muslims. With this he laid the foundation of justification of Takfir (i.e. declaring Muslims as polytheistic Kafirs) and murder of Muslims. Belief Of Muslims Regarding Intercession & Intermediation: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) intercedes to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) if he notes sin of a Muslim asking Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to forgive the sins, established from this Hadith: “Bakr bin ‘Abdullah also reported that the Holy said: My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and you are responded. And when I will die my demise will be a great good for you. Your deeds will be presented to me, if I see goodness, I will praise Allah, and if I see wrongs, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you."[1] The other Ahadith establish that it is recommended to ask servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in time of need: “Allah has angels on the earth - other than the [two] record-keepers - who keep a record [even] of the leaves that fall on the ground. Therefore, if one of you is crippled in a deserted land where no-one is in sight, let him cry out: Help O servants of Allah” [Ref: Majma az Zawaid, Vol10, H17104] Imam Baihaqi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) writes: “Abdullah bin Ahmed bin Hanbal (rah) said that he heard his father (Imam Ahmed) who said: I performed Hajj 5 times, thrice on foot and twice on ride or he said thrice on ride and twice on foot, once when I was on foot I lost my way hence I started to exclaim this: O Allah’s servants show me the way I kept on repeating this until I came back on track.”[2] [Ref: Shu’ayb ul Iman, Vol6, P128, H7697] Of course asking the servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is not with belief they are gods or partners of God but as servants whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has granted the means to help the Saliheen. Hadith Qudsi records that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) becomes metaphorically speaking hands, feet, eyes ears, of His Awliyah, which implies that He grants them supernatural powers of granting, travelling, seeing, hearing: “And the most beloved things with which My slave comes nearer to Me, is what I have enjoined upon him; and My slave keeps on coming closer to Me through performing Nawafil till I love him, so I become his sense of hearing with which he hears, and his sense of sight with which he sees, and his hand with which he grips, and his leg with which he walks; and if he asks Me, I will give him, and if he asks My protection, …" [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H509] These Awliyah-Allah provide help to those who need it in the time of their need, with permission of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and to those whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is pleased with. Ibnul Wahhab’s Objective In Writing Second Principle: According to Wahhabism seeking intermediation of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and Awliyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is [major] Shirk. Hence to establish as [major] Shirk of Muslims Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab in the first principle of Qawa’id Al Arba it is writes: “That you know the disbelievers (i.e. Kufar) who the Messenger fought used to affirm that Allah (ta’aala) was the Creator and the Disposer of all the affairs but that didn’t enter them into Islam and the proof is the saying of the Most High:…” Also Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab wrote; “That they say: We do not call upon and turn towards them except to seek nearness and intercession. So the proof against seeking this nearness (through others like Awliyah) is the saying of the Most High: …”After which he proceeded to quote verse [39:3] which was revealed for the disbelievers Arabia who lived in the time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). From this we gather the words; “That they say: We do not call upon …”. mean they the disbelieving polytheists say that we do not call upon except to seek nearness and intercession. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab is implying that those Muslims who believe in Tawassul/Waseela (i.e. intermediation) of Awliyah-Allah are like the disbelieving polytheists. Note he also wrote that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) fought the disbelievers to implant the idea in the readers to mind; it is permissible to declare war on those Muslims who are Mushrikeen according toMuhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s methodology. The Genesis Of Edicts Of Kufr Upon Muslims: Khawarij were from earliest sects to leave the fold of Islam. The following Hadith puts their methodology in perspective:“... 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: Qatal Al Khawarij] This Hadith establishes central to Khariji methodology is to interpret verses which were revealed regarding disbelievers in such a fashion that they seemingly represent the creed of Muslims. What the Hadith omits is, after utilizing such a verse and interpreting in this fashion; the Khawarij accused the Muslims of being disbelievers on account outwardly similarity.[3] Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab revived this apostate group’s central misguided teachings of Shirk[4] and utilized the methodology of apostate sect to justify the evictions of Muslims from Islam and their killing. Wahhabi’s Believe Muslims Are Kafir: The Muslims have always believed in Tawassul/Shaf’at of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and the Awliyah-Allah but heretical Khariji elements originated in Najd who based on misinterpretation Quranic verses labeled Muslims as disbelievers and permitted the killing of Muslims. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab was the leaders of these lunatics. He considered Muslims who practiced Tawassul of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and Tawassul of Awliyah-Allah as polytheists – Kafir. He waged relentless armed campaign against the Muslims of Arabian Peninsula on the pretext that Sunni Muslims are Mushrikeen – Kafir. His bandits practiced wholesale killing of Sunni’s men, women, children and pillaged villages, towns and cities and raped thousands of Muslim women. All this slaughter, rape, pillaging was carried out in effort to forcibly convert the Sunni population to Wahhabism. Wahhabi Excuse Muslims Have Fallen Into Shirk: When it is pointed out to Wahhabi’s that you accuse Muslims of being polytheistic Kafirs and your sect teaches it is permissible to kill Muslims. They argue that Muslims had/have fallen into major Shirk hence they had/have become polytheistic disbelievers and therefore it was/is permissible to kill those people. Muslim Ummah Protected From Shirk: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: “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] Similar Hadith is found else where: “Satan has despaired of ever being worshipping in this land of yours, but he will be obeyed in some matters which you regard as insignificant, and he will be content with that.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, Vol.1, B25, H3055] Hadith has to be understood in the light of following verse of the Quran: “(The polytheists) leaving Him call but upon goddesses: They call but upon Satan the persistent rebel!” [Ref: 4:117] In the language of the Quran calling upon other gods/goddesses besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is akin to calling upon Satan. Therefore the hadith means that Satan has lost all hopes of worshippers of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would ever worship idols in Arabian Peninsula.[5] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is reported to have said regarding his Ummah: “By Allah! I am not afraid that you will associate with Allah after my death, but I am afraid that you will compete with one another for the worldly things." [Ref: Bukhari, B23, H428] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “The thing that I fear most for my nation 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] Therefore the charge of Muslims taking Awliyah-Allah as idol-gods and intercessors, besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and worshipping them to gain nearness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is false. Takfir Of Muslims Returns To Those Who Make Takfir: Those who accuse Muslims of worshiping others besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in reality accuse Muslims of being polytheists. Major Shirk is more serious offense then Kufr and worshiping others beside Allah is major Shirk. Therefore denouncing Muslims as polytheists is worse then calling them disbelievers. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has told that one who calls his brother surely one of them is: "If a man says to his brother: ‘O Kafir!’ Then surely one of them is such.” [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H125] Quoted Hadith is further explained by another: “Any person who calls his brother: O Unbeliever! (then the truth of this label) would return to one of them. If it is true, (then it is) as he asserted, (but if it is not true), then it returns to him (and thus the person who made the accusation is an Unbeliever).” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H117] With so much difference of belief as well as practice between Muslims and Mushrikeen could there be a justifiable reason for declaring a Muslim to be polytheistic Kafir! One may want to argue, remember Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has foretold that his Ummah [as whole] will remain free from [major] Shirk. Killing Of Muslims Without Jusitiable Reason: It has been established from the Ahadith that Ummah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will remain free from [major] Shirk and as long as the Muslims remain upon Arabian Peninsula the Shirk will not return to it. Hence Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s charge that Muslims of Arabian Peninsula had fallen into [major] Shirk was unwarranted and his legalizing the spilling of blood of Muslims was illegal in religion of Islam. The Impermissibility Of Killing A Muslim: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is reported to have said: "The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims." [Ref: Bukhari, B83, H17] In another Hadith is is recorded that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is said: "The most hated persons to Allah are three: (1) A person who deviates from the right conduct in the Haram (i.e. sanctuaries of Mecca and Medina); (2) a person who seeks that the traditions of the pre-lslamic period of ignorance, should remain in Islam (3) and a person who seeks to shed somebody's blood without any right." [Ref: Bukhari, B83, H21] Note out of most hated persons by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is one who seeks to kill a Muslim. Then how much hated would a person be one who kills a Muslim intentionally? Another narration records words of Mother of Momineen Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha), she said: “It is not permissible to shed the blood of a Muslim except in three cases: An adulterer who had been married, who should be stoned to death; a man who killed another man intentionally, who should be killed; and a man who left Islam and waged war against Allah, the Might and Sublime, and His Messenger, who should be killed, or crucified, or banished from the land." [Ref: Nisa’i, Vol5, B37, H4023] Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and his followers have declared the Muslims, the Sawad Al Azam (i.e. greath majority), the Jammah (i.e. the Group) as Kafir idol worshipers and on this pretext legalized the killing of Muslims. He with his minions made Halal the blood of Muslims which Messenger (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) declared to be Haram.[6] The Serious Offense Of Killing a Muslim: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) sent a expedition against the tribe of Juhaina. In the morning the expedition attacked the enemy and routed them from battle field. Two companions chased a individual and when they caught up to him he recited; “There is no god except Allah.” This was indication that he had accepted Islam therefore killing him was impermissible but one companion thinking the man has faked his conversion on pain of death stabbed him to death with his spear. The news reached Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and he said to this companion: "O Usama! You killed him after he had said, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah?"' The companion replied: "O Allah's Apostle! He said so in order to save himself." Then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: "You killed him after he had said, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah." The Hadith further records: “The Prophet kept on repeating that statement till I wished I had not been a Muslim before that day.” [Ref: Bukhari, B80, H11] Note one individual who recited one aspect of confession and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) disapproved it so much that his constant repetition made companion feel that he wished he wasn’t Muslim. Meaning Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) made him feel so guilty of his action that he was ashamed of being a Muslim. Killing a Muslim who recites confession of creed, performs prayers, fasts every year, goes for Hajj, Umrah, celebrates the Eid, recites the Quran, partakes in funeral prayers, loves Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), loves His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam), hurts when a Muslim is hurt and does what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and his Messenger (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) instructed in Islam. Imagine how Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) would react to Wahhabi’s killing Muslims. Would he be pleased with them or order them to be put to sword for killing Muslims?[7] Killing A Muslim Is Kufr And Killer Is Apostate: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) stated to kill a Muslim is Kufr and to abuse him with foul words is Fisq: “Narrated 'Abdullah: Allah's Apostle said, "Abusing a Muslim is Fusuq (i.e., an evil-doing), and killing him is Kufr (disbelief)." [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H70] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: “The Prophet said to me during Hajjat-al-Wida': Let the people keep quiet and listen. Then he said (addressing the people), "Do not revert to disbelief after me by striking the necks of one another (with swords)." [Ref: Bukhari, B3, H122] This establishes that killing a Muslim is Kufr which invalidates one’s Islam and person becomes apostate. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: "Anyone who kills a believer deliberately will receive as his reward (a sentence) to live in Hell for ever. God will be angry with him and curse him, and prepare dreadful torment for him." [Ref: 4:93] Kafirs, will be in hell fire for eternity, and anyone who kills a Muslim is Kafir hence he will burn in hell for eternity with the disbelievers. Best Of Speech And Best Of Guidance: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “The best of the speech is embodied in the Book of Allah, and the best of the guidance is the guidance given by Muhammad. And the most evil affairs are their innovations; and every innovation is error." [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] In another hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: “The worst of things are those that are newly invented; every newly-invented thing is an innovation and every innovation is misguidance, and every misguidance leads in the Fire.” [Ref: Nisa’i, B19, H1579] The belief that, Muslim Ummah has fallen into Shirk was introduced by Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and this is a innovation, which leads to the fire. Those who believe in it, defend it, promote it are the people of hell because they have chosen a religion other then the religion of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). They have chosen a path other then the straight path taught by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and those who oppose Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) after guidance has been conveyed to them they are people of hell: "Whoever opposes the Messenger after clear guidance has been conveyed to them and follows a way other than the believers then We shall entrust him to what he has turned to and land him in Hell, what an evil refuge" [Ref: 4:115] Conclusion: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s second principle contradicts the established beliefs of Quran and Sunnah. The principle is geared toward programing the readers to consider the Muslims as Mushrikeen and engage in fighting and killing Muslims. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) had expressed in no uncertain terms that his Ummah will remain free from [major] Shirk. Also Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) forbade the killing of Muslims and declared it to be Kufr and act of apostasy. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, his immediate and his modern followers, all declare that vast majority of Muslims are upon [major] Shirk and as such fighting and killing them is permissible. Their beliefs are contradicting the teaching Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). We the Muslims believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as are God and Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) as the Last, Finale of Prophets. We believe in the guidance of our Rabb and teaching of our Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and one who abandons them has abandoned Islam. We are not from them nor they are from us and we the Muslims thank and praise Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for guarding our Islam and making us Muslims. Their act of declaring Muslims as polytheists and their slaughter of Muslims is enough evidence for their renegation from Islam. All praises belong to Allah the Rabb of Alameen. Footnotes: - [1] Ibn Sa‘d, at-Tabaqat-ul-kubra (2: 194); ‘Ali bin Abu Bakr Haythami related in Majma‘-uz-zawa’id (9:24) 2nd) Narrated by Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalani, through Harith in his al-Matalib-ul-Aliyah, 4: 22-3 #3853. - [2] These three narrations to establish that scholars preceding the modern Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat have narrated texts which establish Tawassul/Waseela of Awliyah-Allah and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). If Waseela/Tawassul was such an issue of [major] Shirk these Ulamah would have out right rejected these narrations stating these narrations contradict Tawheed. In fact no one would have even narrated these traditions, classifying these traditions and criticizing their Isnad (i.e. chain of narrators) as well as interpreting the Matan (i.e. text) would be too much to get involved in. How many fabricated Ahadith are narrated which instruct worship of Al-Lat or Al-Uzza and why not? Not one, because any narration which contradicts teaching of Tawheed the Scholars would have dismissed it based on the text of Hadith, without getting involved into criticism of narrating chain. No scholar has ever stated these Ahadith are teaching polytheism or they contradict Tawheed. This is sufficient to establish Scholars of Islam never considered Tawassul of deceased as Shirk. People like Ibn Taymiyyah and his equally rabid student Ibn Qayyim Al Jawziyyah may have been only individuals whom might have classed these Ahadith as teaching Shirk. In the truest sense Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and his minions of Shaytan started the innovation of stating these Ahadith contradict Tawheed. - [3] Excellent example of how this outwardly similarity being utilized to demonize the Muslims as Kafirs is demonstrated by Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab in the first principle of Qawa’id Al Arba. The Muslims ask the servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in other words Awliyah-Allah to help them in time of need as instructed by the Ahadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). In context of this practice Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab quoted the following verse: “And those who you take Awliyah besides Him (they say): ‘We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allah.” [Ref: 39:3] Firstly, quoting this verse creates a false parallel between the belief of Muslims and Mushrikeen. It insinuates to the readers that Muslims worship the Awliyah-Allah like the Mushrikeen worshiped their Awliyah. Note Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab defined the act of asking of help from Awliyah-Allah as a act of worship. In other words if a Muslim was to ask for help of servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) saying; ‘Ya RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) help me!’ or say; ‘O Servants Of Allah help me.’, then according to Wahhabism, the Muslims has worshipped the one whom he has sought help from. Therefore what is insinuated from principle is the belief of Wahhabis and it is not an assumption. Secondly, the Khawarij interpret the Quranic verses independently of other verses of Quran which are on same topic. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab ignored the following verses: “Then why did those they took besides Allah as gods by which to approach [Him] not aid them? But they had strayed from them. And that was their falsehood and what they were inventing.” [Ref: 46:28] This verse reveals that polytheistic Kafirs took their gods as means to get close to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and on the judgment day these gods would abandon them. Fact established is, the verse was about polytheists who took their idols as gods and believed these idol-gods will get them closer to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) if they worship them. Yet we the Muslims worship none but Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and invoke no other god except Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). We Muslims do not ask help from Awliyah-Allah of our own accord but do what was commanded to us by our Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Following verse was revealed regarding the Awliyah of Muslims: “Your Wali is none but Allah and His Messenger and those who have believed - those who establish prayer and give zakah, and they bow [in worship].” [Ref: 5:55] About these Awliyah-Allah [singular; Wali, plural; Awliyah] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) grants super natural powers: “… My slave keeps on coming closer to Me through performing Nawafil till I love him, so I become his sense of hearing with which he hears, and his sense of sight with which he sees, and his hand with which he grips, and his leg with which he walks; and if he asks Me, I will give him, and if he asks My protection, …" [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H509] Where as the Awliyah of polytheists Allah (subhanhu wa ta’ala) states saying to polytheists: “And do not invoke besides Allah [idol-god intercessors] that which neither benefits you nor harms you, for if you did, then indeed you would be of the wrongdoers.'" [Ref: 10:106] How can the Awliyah-Allah of Muslims and Awliyah of polytheists be counted as one and the same by a just, a true, and a Muslim, when they are worlds apart? This reveals how the Khawarij and Wahhabi’s use ambiguity in verses to implicate Muslims into [major] Shirk of polytheists and how interpreting Quran with Quran can check-mate their heretical beliefs. - [4] The Khariji methodology of Shirk was simple and straight forward. If a action/belief of Muslim had any resemblance to a Kafir’s action/belief even in Zahir (i.e. apparent, outward) form then Muslim was Kafir/Mushrik. Or if a Muslim gave attribute of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to a creation even in outwardly then Muslim is guilty of [major] Shirk hence a Mushrik/Kafir. The example of first is; 1) Hindu prostrates to an Idol, Hindu is Mushrik/Kafir. An ignorant Muslim who has no knowledge of prohibitions of Islam, out of reverence, love, affection prostrates to a grave of Wali, the Khariji would label him to be a Kafir/Mushrik and declare the grave of Wali and maybe even the Wali of Allah to be idol. The Muslims believe prostration of ignorant man would be major sin if he did out of respect and prostration of worship if he believed he was prostrating to his god, hence Kafir/Mushrik. The example of second is best demonstrated when the Khawarij charged Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) of committing [major] Shirk because he appointed a Judge between himself and Hadhrat Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). The Khawarij charged him of Kufr/Shirk quoting verse of the Quran which stated Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Judge. The modern Wahhabi’s quote verses which state Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Aalim Ul Ghayb (i.e. Knower Of Ghayb) and accuse the Ahle Sunnat of committing Shirk just like their Khariji predecessors. - [5] The disbelievers may argue; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) foretold the return of Shirk in Arabian Peninsula. The people of Islam say; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) foretold the Shirk will return in Arabian Peninsula after the blowing of wind which will take the life of all believers and the disbelievers who will survive will revert to religion of their forefathers. This does not contradict the statement of hadith because then the worshipers of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would be dead. Therefore the worshipers of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will not revert to worship of idols on Arabian Peninsula but disbelievers. - [6] Legalizing the blood of Muslims was a evil and reprehensible innovation which should have been rejected but instead his followers have swallowed the Kufr. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “If somebody innovates something which is not in harmony with the principles of our religion, that thing is rejected." [Ref: Bukhari, B49, H861] Similar Hadith states: “He who did any act for which there is no (explicit or implicit) sanction from our behalf, that is to be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] The legalizing of blood of Muslim under the pretext that Muslims are Kafir Mushrikeen was a innovation for which there was no valid proof. One who invents an evil innovation he was warned by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) with the following words: “And he who introduced some evil practice in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] The word of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) indicate any murder of Muslim by a Wahhabi, it’s Kufr and the sin of killing a Muslim will be part of the burden which Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab will have to account for on judgment day. - [7] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) foretold about the emergence of Wahhabism from Najd in the Hadith. Please read the following articles; 1) ‘The Satan's Group Will Descend From Dhil Khawaisira At-Tamimi.’ 2) ‘Satan's Group Will Emerge East Of Madinah From A Place Called Najd.’ Also Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) indeed did instruct the killing of Wahhabi’s and informed that anyone who kills them for them there is reward. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits separate article will be written establishing this aspect with clear evidences of Ahadith and it will explain why it is permissible to kill them.

Introduction: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab presented the definition of permitted and prohibited intercession. In this article these two definitions will be criticized from the perspective of Quran and Sunnah. The Second Principle Of Qawaid Al Arba: That they say: We do not call upon and turn towards them except to seek nearness and intercession. So the proof against seeking this nearness (through others like Awliyah) is the saying of the Most High: “And those who you take Awliyah besides Him (they say): ‘We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allah.” Verily, Allah will judge between them concerning that wherein they differ. Truly, Allah guides not him who is a liar, and a disbeliever.” [Ref: 39:3] And the proof of intercession (through Awliyah) is the saying of the Most High: “And they worship besides Allah things that hurt them not, nor profit them, and they say: These are our intercessors with Allah.” [Ref: 10:18] And intercession is of two types; 1) the prohibited intercession, 2) and the affirmed intercession. The prohibited intercession is that which is sought from other than Allah concerning that which only Allah is able to do. And the proof is the saying of the Most High: “O you who believe! Spend from that which We have provided for you, before a Day comes when there will be no bargaining, nor friendship, nor intercession. And it is the disbelievers who are the wrong-doers.” [Ref: 2:254] And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah, and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for, is one whom Allah is pleased with; his speech and actions, after he gives permission, as He, Ta’aala, said: “Who is he that can intercede with Him except with His permission?” [Ref: 2:255] Prohibited Type Of Intercession/Intercessors And Seeking Nearness: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab defines the prohibited type of intercession as: “The prohibited intercession is that which is sought from other than Allah concerning that which only Allah is able to do.” This is contrary to teaching of Islam and result of foolishness. The disbelievers took idol-gods as their intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Taking these idol-gods as intercessors to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and worshipping them is prohibited to gain nearness. The evidence of prohibition is: “And do not invoke besides Allah [idol-god intercessors] that which neither benefits you nor harms you, for if you did, then indeed you would be of the wrongdoers.'" [Ref: 10:106] Therefore the prohibited type of intercessor/intercession or seeking nearness according to Quran is where an Shafi/Wali is taken as a god besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and then believed to be a intercessor or believed to be means to nearness to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Permitted Type Of Intercession And Intercessor: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s incorrect definition of permitted intercession is; “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah, and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for, is one whom Allah is pleased with; his speech and actions, …” The correct permitted intercession or seeking nearness is where the one who seeks intercession or seeking nearness affirms belief of Tawheed and seeks intercession or nearness from one who is believed to a created servant of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In detail, the one who seeks intercession/nearness, believes; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is One God, besides whom there is no God, and believes; Allah is One Allah besides whom there is no allah. Also believes Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is without likeness to creation in attributes etc. The seeker believes about intercessor; intercessor is a creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), a servant of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and not human-god or idol-god. Permitted Intercession Is Sought From Permitted Intercessors: The Ahadith establish that on the judgment day the people will go to Prophets and ask them to intercede for them to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Eventually they will come to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and will ask him to intercede to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will prostrate in worship of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and he will be granted the right of intercession. Our beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will be the first one to intercede. This establishes that affirmed intercession is which is sought from Prophets and the Prophets intercede on behalf of the sinners to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Also note the verse of Quran employed to establish the innovative definition of affirmed intercession, states; “To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. Who is it that can intercede with Him except by His permission? He knows what is [presently] before them and ...” [Ref: 2:255] The verse of Quran in light of other verses establishes; permitted intercession is where intercessor is granted the right to intercede to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits intercession. In the light of Ahadith and Quranic verses then the affirmed intercession would be; where intercession is sought from a intercessor who has been permitted to intercede and sinners seek intercession from a intercessor who intercedes on their behalf to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Such intercession seekers commit neither Kufr nor Shirk and anyone who charges those who seek intercession of creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) of Kufr/Shirk has himself fallen into it. Fused Definition Of Prohibited Intercession: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab define prohibited intercession as: “The prohibited intercession is that which is sought from other than Allah concerning that which only Allah is able to do.” It seems the Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab deliberately fused the issue of intermediation (i.e. Tawassul) with intercession (i.e. Shaf’at). Here he was thinking of innovative principles of aid which is sought with means (i.e. ma-teht al asbab) from a creation and aid which is sought without means (i.e. ma fawq al asbab) from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Here is what Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab was intending to write; “The prohibited intercession intermediation is that which is sought from other than Allah concerning that which only Allah is able to do.” In reality this entire principle is fusion of Tawassul and Shaf’at, which makes it impossible to correct it. If one was to consider the above correction as valid and replace the word intercession with intermediation in the principle. Then the evidence which Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab employed to argue against intermediation will have no relevance to the subject. Evidence is about polytheists not having intercessor to intercede for them on the judgment day because they took idol-gods as intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In summary, on the basis the definition of prohibited intercession, the evidence employed does not support it therefore evidence used in context of definition is wrong and in the light of evidence the definition of prohibited intercession is clearly wrong. Prohibited & Permitted Principles Analyzed: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab fused the issue of Shaf’at and Tawassul. Keeping the definition of prohibited type of intercession in mind; “The prohibited intercession is that which is sought from other than Allah concerning that which only Allah is able to do.” The definition of permitted type of intercession should have been: “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah concerning that which others are able to do and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for, is one whom Allah is please with his speech and actions, after he gives permission …”[1] If one was to keep the definition of permitted type of intercession in mind; “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah, and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for, is one whom Allah is pleased with; his speech and actions, after he gives permission …” Then the prohibited type of intercession should be something like this: “The prohibited intercession is that which is sought from other than Allah, and the intercessor is not honored with right of intercession and one requiring intercession is one whose speech and actions Allah is displeased ” Note, the following part is omitted from the prohibited type of intercession; “… concerning that which only Allah is able to do.” Two two’s of a fool never add up to five just like lies and distortions of a heretic will never add to equal Islam. If one looks at it logically, each definition should be diametric opposite of the other[2] because Tawheed is opposite of Shirk. Note, according to Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s methodology permitted intercession in line with Tawheed and prohibited intercession is Shirk. These two are opposites of each other therefore permitted intercession and prohibited intercession should be opposite of each other. Prohibited Intercession Principle Under Microscope: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab defined prohibited intercession with following words: “The prohibited Shaf’at is that which is sought from other than Allah concerning that which only Allah is able to do.” The crossed out part of quote has no real or any significance in the context of intercession. Attempts to reconcile the crossed out part with the principle; “… Concerning which only Allah is able to do.” Means “… concerning which Allah is only able to grant.” Allah is only able to permit who can intercede therefore; “the prohibited Shaf’at is that which is sought from other than Allah which only Allah is able to grant.” Hence Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab meant; “the prohibited Shaf’at is that which is sought from other then Allah, who have not been granted the right of intercession.” This exercise establishes; crossed out part of principle has no direct connection with the subject of intercession. If one resorts to Taweel of Taweel of Taweel, only then one can harmonize the principle in the context of the evidence. The correct Wahhabi solution would be to replace the word Shaf’at with Tawassul, example; “The prohibited Tawassul is that which is sought from other than Allah concerning that which only Allah is able to do.” Alhasil, the crossed out words can be reconciled with the evidence by resorting to reinterpretation but lengths one has to go to achieve it are more then a stretch. Therefore the Taweel is improbable and the suggested correction is according to Wahhabi methodology and would be better option. The finale Taweel of the prohibited principle and the version with word Shaf’at replaced by Tawassul, both are with their own faults which have been demonstrated. Wrong Definition Of Permitted Intercession: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab wrote: “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah, and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for, is one whom Allah is pleased with; his speech and actions …” He believes the intercession sought from intercessors is not permitted unless intercession is sought from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala😞 “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah …” Obviously the prohibited intercession in light of this statement would be one which is sought from anyone other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Here is the explicit confirmation of derived: “The prohibited intercession is that which is sought from other than Allah concerning that which only Allah is able to do.” Permitted Intercession Is Prohibited Intercession: If the prohibited type of intercession is analyzed in the light of permitted type of intercession then true Khariji nature of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s methodology is established. The prohibited intercession is defined as “The prohibited intercession is that which is sought from other than Allah concerning that which only Allah is able to do.” and permitted intercession is defined as; “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah, and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for, is one whom Allah is pleased with; his speech and actions, …” Therefore if one seeks intercession according to permitted type of intercession [i.e. Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi was’sallam] then he/she seeks prohibited intercession which is seeking intercession of other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This conclusion is explicitly stated by Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab in his another booklet: “So if he says, “The Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) was given the right of intercession and I am seeking from him that which Allah the Most High gave him,” then the reply is: “Allah gave him the right of intercession but has forbidden you from doing this (which you have just mentioned) – so He, the Most High, stated: “So do not call upon anyone besides Allah.“ So if you were to call upon Allah asking that He allow His prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) to intercede for you, then you would have obeyed Him in His statement: “So do not call upon anyone besides Allah.” [Ref: Kashf Ash-Shubuhat, Page: 16, Trans: Abu Abdir Rahman Nasser Ibn Najam Alvi] According to Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab seeking intercession of anyone other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is prohibited and engaging in seeking prohibited intercession in his methodology is Kufr/Shirk. Hence according to his methodology anyone who seeking intercession of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) or anyone else will be and is Mushrik/Kafir. Permitted Intercession Is Not Kufr Or Shirk: Supporter of disbelief will argue; Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab established the belief of intercession of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) with evidences and he believed in intercession of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Hence you do not represent his belief correctly. It is based on mutilation of principle mentioned by Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and inferred via devious means. The response of believer should be; firstly, Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab explicitly affirmed what is deduced from the principle in; Kashf ash’Shubuhat, hence the accusations of employing devious means to make case against Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab is baseless. Secondly, according to Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s methodology he did not make distinction between the Tawassul of Awliyah-Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) by Muslims and between Shafa’at. And evidence of this is found in the following excerpt: “Amongst these objections is their saying: “We do not associate any partners with Allah, rather we testify that none creates, nor provides, nor benefits, nor harms except Allah alone, who has no partners. And that Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) cannot bring about any benefit for himself and nor bring about any harm, let alone the likes of Abdul-Qadir and those like him. But I am a sinner and the Righteous have position and status with Allah, hence I ask Allah though them.” So you should reply to him with what has preceded in that those whom the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa salam) fought against affirmed everything you have mentioned (concerning Allah) and they affirmed that their idols do not control or regulate anything. But they (the Mushriks) merely desired [the use of] their status and their intercession. And recite to him what Allah has mentioned in His Book and explain it to him.” [Ref: Kashf Ash-Shubuhat, Page: 10, Trans: Abu Abdir Rahman Nasser Ibn Najam Alvi] To refute Tawassul he argues that polytheists sought Shafa’at from their idols. He would only establish this evidence against Tawassul if he believes both of these subjects are one and same. In light of this Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab believed; anyone who seeks aid via Tawassul or seeks Shafa’at from other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) seeks prohibited Tawassul/Shafa’at. A detailed representation would be; anyone who seeks aid via Tawassul from the dead or seeks intercession of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) then he/she seeks prohibited Tawassul/Shafa’at. According to Wahhabism anyone seeking ‘prohibited Tawassul’ or ‘prohibited intercession’ is guilty of major Shirk which is disbelief. Alhasil, Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab wished to refute Tawassul while employing evidence of Shafa’at. With it he establishes two types of shafa’at/tawassul prohibited and permitted. Prohibited shafa’at/tawassul is which is sought from other than Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Regarding seeking of shafa’at/tawassul of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) he stated: “So if he says, “The Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) was given the right of intercession and I am seeking from him that which Allah the Most High gave him,” then the reply is: “Allah gave him the right of intercession but has forbidden you from doing this (which you have just mentioned) – so He, the Most High, stated: “So do not call upon anyone besides Allah.“ So if you were to call upon Allah asking that He allow His prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) to intercede for you, then you would have obeyed Him in His statement: “So do not call upon anyone besides Allah.” [Ref: Kashf Ash-Shubuhat, Page: 16, Trans: Abu Abdir Rahman Nasser Ibn Najam Alvi] Here Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab has criminalized the seeking of intercession from Prophets including Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Note, on the judgment day people will go to Prophets and seek their intercession. This seeking of intercession has been criminalized in the above mentioned quote. So according to the principles of Wahhabi’s as well as clear statement of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, Tawassul/Shafa’at of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) in dunya and aakhira is criminal offence which invalidates belief in Islam. Reason Of Shirk Is Seeking Which Only Allah Is able To Do: Apostate may argue, Shirk will not warrant until one seeks from other then Allah which only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is able to do. The Muslim should respond; the Muslims and Wahhabis are in agreement that creed precedes the action. Therefore according to Wahhabism mere belief that one can seek aid from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) via; Tawassul of the dead/prohibited Tawassul, is be major Shirk. And this verdict is before one starts asking which only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is able to do. Now if one seeks what is termed as which is only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) able to do [or in other words ma fawq al asbab aid] from the dead then according to Wahhabism one engages in worship commits Shirk in attributes. Alhasil, according to Wahhabism the definition of prohibited Tawassul does not depend on the crossed out part for one to be guilty of major Shirk. And just like this, according to Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s methodology Shaf’at of other than Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) does not depend on the crossed out part to be major Shirk. Mere belief that it is permissible to seek intercession from other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is enough to be guilty of major Shirk. This is also supported by Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s following statement: “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah, and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for …” Giving Allah’s right to a creation is major Shirk and seeking intercession according to Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, is right of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because he defines affirmed intercession as which is sought from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Now if the seeks intercession from other than Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then according to Wahhabism one is giving right of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to a creation, hence intercession ghair of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would be major Shirk. Permitted Intercession Under The Microscope: On the judgment day when the heat of sun becomes unbearable the believing people will decide to seek intercession to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). They will go to various Prophets to seek their intercession but every Prophet will refuse to intercede and recommend another until people reach Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). He will prostrate to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and glorify Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then he will be granted the right of intercession. Please bare previously mentioned information in mind to understand the following point. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab defined permitted intercession as; “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah, and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for, is one whom Allah is pleased with; his speech and actions, …” According to Ahadith the people will seek intercession of Prophets [i.e. Prophets; Adam, Ibrahim, Musa, Isa, etc] even when they have not been granted the right of intercession and those whom Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will intercede for will be people who have earned displeasure of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The evidence of this is that those whom Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will intercede will be guilty of major sins and people of hellfire: "My intercession is for the people who committed the major sins in my Ummah." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B11, H2435] "On the Day of Resurrection I will intercede and say, "O my Lord! Admit into Paradise (even) those who have faith equal to a mustard seed in their hearts." Such people will enter Paradise, and then I will say, 'O (Allah) admit into Paradise (even) those who have the least amount of faith in their hearts.” [Ref: Bukhari, B93, H600] Defense Of Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab’s Permitted Intercession: If apostate argues; principle should include what is established from Quran/Ahadith and Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab included which is established from both these two sources. We Muslims should respond; the principle contradicts the established facts of Ahadith. The intercession is sought before the permission is granted and there is no proof that intercession was sought by anyone after Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) was granted the right to intercede. Ahadith indicate that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will intercede on his own accord for which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will permit. Also the intercession is not being sought from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but from Prophets even before they have been permitted to intercede. Therefore nothing of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s ‘permitted intercession’ is according to teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Even if an aspect of belief is established from Quran/Ahadith does not legitimize its inclusion to a principle. The confession is; there is no god but Allah Muhammad is Messenger of Allah. Would it be correct to insert the following in the beginning of confession; all praise is for Allah the Rabb of universe? Or would it be correct to add the following; “Say: O disbelievers.” in the beginning? One who is educated about deen will realize; not all which is established from Quran and Ahadith can be made part of principle.[3] But the principle should be inclusive of all essential elements and exclusive of all which is not fundamental to ones Islam. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab inserted the non-essential beliefs in his principle and excluded the essential. Principle Should Be Inclusive Of Essential And Exclusive Of Superfluous: The error of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab derived principle and his lack of knowledge about extracting principles needs to be demonstrated so readers understand the fault in his principles. Here is example of a defective principle; one who believes in intercessors and believes in Allah is Muslim. If this principle was considered valid then the polytheists of Makkah would be Muslims. They believed in [their idols as gods and believed these gods are] intercessors and believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Alhasil the principle is not exclusive enough to exclude the disbelievers from entering Islam and not inclusive enough to only allow the Muslims into fold of Islam. Now coming to Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s permitted intercession as; “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah, and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for, is one whom Allah is pleased with; his speech and actions, …” The affirmed intercession’s first condition; “… which is sought from Allah”, will not be fulfilled by Muslims because they will seek intercession from ‘other than Allah’ i.e. Prophets. The intercessors at that time will not be honored with right of intercession and the ones who need intercession will be sinners. Alhasil, the principle which I presented to demonstrate my point is too flexible and allows non-Muslims to enter Islam but on other hand Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s principle is incorrect and excludes Muslims from Islam. If seeking intercession prior to the Prophets being granted the right of intercession was major Shirk then our beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) would have informed us of it. Interpreting Which Only Allah Is Able To Do: Apostate may argue in context of the following hadith; “… and (last of all) the Almighty (Allah) will say, 'Now remains My Intercession. He will then hold a handful of the Fire from which He will take out some people whose bodies have been burnt, and they will be thrown into a river at the entrance of Paradise, called the water of life.” [Ref: Bukhari, B93, H532], this part of the first principle; “… concerning which only Allah is able to do.” and this part of second principle; “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah …” Refers to act of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) indicated in the hadith. In other words it refers to act of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) taking people out of hellfire. In this context the following two principles; “The prohibited intercession is that which is sought from other than Allah concerning that which only Allah is able to do.”, would mean; the prohibited intercession is which is sought from other than Allah about taking people out of hellfire which only Allah is able to do. In the context of following principle; “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah, and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for, is one whom Allah is pleased with; his speech and actions, …”, would mean; the affirmed intercession is where entry into paradise is sought from Allah, and the intercessor is honored. The Muslims should respond; the people will seek intercession of Prophets they are ‘other than Allah’ and the intercession would be regarding taking people out of hellfire. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will say; “… and (last of all) the Almighty (Allah) will say, 'Now remains My Intercession.” After which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will take out fire from which people will be taken out and thrown into river of paradise. Putting it simply Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) intercession is taking people out of fire and entering them in paradise. Therefore intercession of Prophets should be and it is of taking people out of fire and entering to paradise. As proof note, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “I shall go towards Hell and knock at its door, so it will be opened for me. I will enter it - and praise Allah with such praise that has never been done by anyone before me, nor shall it ever be done by anyone after me …” As a result of which he will remove everyone who sincerely professed the first part of Shahadah: “… and shall remove from it every such person who has with a sincere heart said ‘None is worthy of worship except Allah’.” [Ref: Al-Mau'jam Al Awsat, H3857, Vol. 4, Page 503] Hence these two interpretations only add the following; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will take people out of hellfire, to the already established inconsistency – on the judgment day people seeking intercession from ‘other than Allah’ and those who were not granted the right of intercession. Alhasil, if the permitted intercession principle is understood as; the affirmed intercession is where entry into paradise is sought from Allah, and the intercessor is honored. Then the entry into paradise isn’t sought by the person in hell-fire but he is interceded for and the intercessor is honored with right of intercession. Therefore the interpretation of principle does not truly represent Islamic teaching. If the prohibited intercession is interpreted as; the prohibited intercession is which is sought from other than Allah about taking people out of hellfire which only Allah is able to do. Then people would be seeking intercession from ‘other than Allah’ to take people out of hellfire which according to the principle only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) can do. Hence people would be engaging in prohibited intercession. Yet according to Islam this type of intercession which Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s principle demonizes is Islam because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will take people out of hellfire. Affirmed Intercession Is Sought From Allah By The Intercessor: A apostate is likely to argue; by the following statement; “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah …”, he meant; affirmed intercession is where intercessor is granted the right of intercession and intercessor seeks intercession from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for one with whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is pleased with. Therefore the argument that people will be seeking intercession from ‘other than Allah’ is invalid. The insertion of words in brackets gives the principle mentioned meaning; “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah [by the intercessor] and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for, is one whom Allah is pleased with; his speech and actions, …” As Muslims we should say to apostate; Firstly, if your interpretation is granted nothing alters in reality because the people will still go to Prophets and seek their intercession. These people will go around seeking intercession until Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is granted the right of intercession. Then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will seek intercession on behalf of Muslims. So in reality the people will be going to ‘other than Allah’ for intercession until one from these ‘other than Allah’s’ will be granted the right of intercession. Then this ‘other than Allah’ will be first one to be granted the right of intercession and as a result he will intercede to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Secondly, the people will seek intercession before the right of intercession is granted to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Hence according to Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s definition of prohibited intercession people will be engaged in polytheism on the judgment day. Lastly, the principle states Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will be pleased with actions/speech of those residents who will be interceded for. Reality is they will be in hell because they would have earned displeasure of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) due to their actions and speech. Alhasil, the ‘permitted intercession’ states those who will be interceded for, will earn it due to their action/speech and this contradicts the reality and the permitted intercession is contradicted by prohibited intercession. Allah Being Pleased With Speech And Actions Is Misunderstood: The apostates may argue; the Quran states Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will be pleased with the speech of those who are in hell and as a result Allah will permit the intercessors to intercede on their behalf. Muslim should inform the apostate; no where Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated He will be pleased with speech or actions of those in hell. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab wrote; “… and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for is one whom Allah is pleased with; his speech and actions, after he gives permission …” The bold part of principle is based on the understanding of the following verses of Quran; “He knows what is [presently] before them and what will be after them, and they do not intercede except on behalf of one whom He’s satisfied.[4] And they, from fear of Him, are apprehensive.” [Ref: 21:28] The underlined is connected with the one being interceded where as in reality the underlined was stated about the intercessor i.e. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam); “Upon that Day (the) intercession of none will profit except of him whom the Merciful has given permission, and with whose speech He is satisfied.” [Ref: 20:109] The verse states only whose speech pleases Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will be given the right to intercede. There is no indication that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will be satisfied with actions or speech of those people in hell. Seeking From Other Then-Allah Which Only Allah Is Able To Do: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab intended to establish that Tawassul of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and Awliyah-Allah is major Shirk. He wrote prohibited Shaf’at/Tawassul is that which is sought from other than Allah which only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) can enact: “The prohibited intercession is that which is sought from other than Allah concerning that which only Allah is able to do.” It is worth pointing out that in Wahhabism anything which is out of human limit is defined as; ‘which only Allah is able to do’. Anything which does not require supernatural powers but only human ability is ‘which human is able to do’. Seeking from human which is ‘which only Allah is able to do’ in Wahhabism is major Shirk. According to Muslim belief seeking anything from anyone, living or dead, human or Jinn, animal or bird, mentally-ill or sane, male or female and seeking any item including which the Wahhabi’s term; ‘which only Allah is able to do’ or ‘which human is able to do’ does not warrant major Shirk, unless it is combined with polytheistic creed. Once polytheistic creed is affirmed seeking anything from anyone is an act of worship because it becomes invocation in Shar’rai terms. To establish the error of Wahhabi ways I would like to demonstrate that there is evidence that monotheists sought from human beings what is in Wahhabi’s ‘which only Allah is able to do’. Hadhrat Abu Huraira (radiallah ta’ala anhu) came to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and complained that he forgets what he hears from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam😞 "O Allah's Apostle! I hear many narrations from you but I forget them." Then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said to Hadhrat Abu Huraira (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and he did so: "Spread your covering sheet." I spread my sheet and …” Then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam😞 “… moved both his hands as if scooping something and emptied them in the sheet and said, "Wrap it!" Hadhrat Abu Huraira (radiallah ta’ala anhu) states: “I wrapped it round my body and since then I have never forgotten a single Hadith.” [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H841] Rebuking The Non-Muslim For Making Excuse Against The Obvious: Non-Muslim is very likely to argue Hadhrat Abu Huraira (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not ‘technically’ seek ‘which only Allah is able to do’ from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) therefore he was not committing major Shirk. Our response would be one who visits a doctor due to an ailment to seek a medicine which will cure his illness. Doctor only enquires about the ailment and the patient only informs the doctor of his ailment. The patient does not state that he is there to seek a medicine for his ailment. The patient understands by informing the doctor of his ailment he will be prescribed a medicine and the doctor understands once he identifies an illness he will have to prescribe a medicine to cure ailment. Similarly Hadhrat Abu Huraira (radiallah ta’ala anhu) visited Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) to seek solution to his problem and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) provided the solution. Therefore ‘technically’ Hadhrat Abu Huraira (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did visit Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) to seek from his ‘which only Allah is able to do’ from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Had his intention not been so he would have remained home and beseeched Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) himself and surely Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would have answered his invocation. Here I will be generous and consider the flimsy argument and forward the response to utterly disgrace the enemy of Islam. Prophet Suleiman (alayhis salaam) asked addressed the members of assembly and said: “[solomon] said, "O assembly which of you will bring me her throne before they come to me in submission?" [Ref: 27:38] In response to him a Jinn replied: “A powerful one from among the jinn said, "I will bring it to you before you rise from your place, and indeed, I am for this [task] strong and trustworthy." [Ref: 27:39] A Wali-Allah, Asif bin Barkhiyah, a human said: “One who had knowledge from the Scripture said: "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 favor 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] Technically speaking this is a Karamat (i.e. saints-miracle) but still help ‘which only Allah is able to do’ was sought from him and technically in Wahhabism Prophet Suleiman (alayhis salaam) has committed major Shirk. Allah Does His Will Via Karamat Therefore No Shirk: Disbeliever may argue, miracle of a Wali is not performed by the Wali, but he is only outward means, in reality; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) does the miracles. Therefore the miracle of Asif bin Barkhiyah is an act of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Prophet Suleiman (alayhis salaam) understood this aspect of Tawheed. Hence he knew what he seeks is not done by the Jinn and Asif bin Barkhiyah but in reality from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Therefore the creed of Tawheed of Prophet Suleiman (alayhis salaam) was not negated. There are two points a Muslim must understand and present as argument in defense of Islam. First, Mojzah/Karamat (i.e. prophet’s-miracle/saint’s-miracle) are not acts of God which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) enacts through them. Rather the power to perform these wondrous acts has been bestowed upon the Prophets and Awliyah by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as we are granted the ability to see, hear, walk, and talk. The difference is that Prophet’s utilize their supernatural ability when they are commanded by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) via Revelation (i.e. Wahi) and Awliyah-Allah are guided by intuitive knowledge (i.e. Ilm e Ladunvi) as it was in the case of Khidr (alayhis salaam). The proof for Prophets performing miracles themselves after permission of God is established from the following verse where Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) claims to perform the miracles, note the usage of I’s by Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam):: “And [make him] a messenger to the Children of Israel, [who will say], 'Indeed I have come to you with a sign from your Lord in that I design for you from clay [that which is] like the form of a bird, then I breathe into it and it becomes a bird by permission of Allah . And I cure the blind and the leper, and I give life to the dead - by permission of Allah. And I inform you of what you eat and what you store in your houses. Indeed in that is a sign for you, if you are believers.” [Ref: 3:49] In another verse of Quran Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) attests the claim of Isa (alayhis salaam) performing the miracles with His permission: “… and [remember] when I taught you writing and wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel; and when you designed from clay [what was] like the form of a bird with My permission, then you breathed into it, and it became a bird with My permission; and you healed the blind and the leper with My permission; and when you brought forth the dead with My permission; and when I restrained the Children of Israel from [killing] you when you came to them with clear proofs and ...." [Ref: 5:110] Therefore to down play or even negate the part of Ambiyah and Awliyah in the performing wondrous feet is heretical. Prophet Suleiman (alayhis salaam) only did he not believe the doer of wonder is the Jinn/human he also believed the ability to do so is from God. Hence Asif bin Barkhiyah performed an act which according to Wahhabism; ‘which only Allah is able to do’, and Prophet Suleiman (alayhis salaam) did violate the Wahhabi principle of; ‘which only Allah is able to do’. Hence he should be termed as Mushrik as the principle leads one to conclude or dismiss this principle completely and believe Islamic teachings; actions do not warrant major Shirk but creed. Secondly, those who seek help what the Wahhabi’s define as; ‘which only Allah is able to do’ from a Wali of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). They seek it with belief that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has granted the Wali with miraculous powers which enable the Wali to do; ‘which only Allah is able to do’. The proof of Awliyah-Allah possessing miraculous powers and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) being the source of their powers is established by following Hadith: “And the most beloved things with which My slave comes nearer to Me, is what I have enjoined upon him; and My slave keeps on coming closer to Me through performing Nawafil till I love him, so I become his sense of hearing with which he hears, and his sense of sight with which he sees, and his hand with which he grips, and his leg with which he walks; and if he asks Me, I will give him, and if he asks My protection, I will protect him; and I do not hesitate to do anything as I hesitate to take the soul of the believer, for he hates death, and I hate to disappoint him." [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H509] So when Muslim seeks from a Wali he seeks keeping Tawheed in mind and seeks with belief that Wali grants via wondrous feet because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has granted the Wali supernatural powers. Hence in creed of a Muslim Prophet Suleiman (alayhis salaam) sought aid which the Wahhabi’s term; ‘which only Allah is able to do’ but with correct creed therefore he was not guilty of Shirk like a Muslim is not guilty of major Shirk. Note, seeking from a creation; ‘which only Allah is able to do’ makes the request of help into supplication and such type of requests are worship in Wahhabism. Hence Prophet Suleiman (alayhis salaam) would be guilty of worshiping Asif bin Barkhiyah which makes him Mushrik. Conclusion: The prohibited intercession and the permitted intercession definitions both contradict each other. For these two to be valid they must be opposite of the other. If prohibited intercession definition is the correct one then the permitted one should be exactly the opposite and if the permitted intercession definition was correct then the prohibited definition should be exactly the opposite.[5] These definitions are inconsistent with each other and evidences of Quran and Sunnah, hence heretical. More importantly these definitions are employed by apostates to undermine the monotheism of Muslims to declare them as non-Muslims. Anyone who engages or employs these principles or its derivatives to attack the sound creed of Tawheed of a Muslim is from these apostates. Wama alayna alal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi. Footnotes: - [1] The crossed out part of the principle even though is part of permitted intercession technically should not be part of it. - [2] To validate a doctrine one can infer the diametric opposite of a belief and use evidence of Quran/Ahadith to validate both beliefs. Diametric opposite of following Tawheedi statement; there is One God, would be Shirki statement; there are many gods. If the diametric opposite of; there is One God, is stated to be; there are idols who cannot walk or talk, then it should be apparent that one from the two is incorrect. Or maybe correct Islamic teaching but not correct diametric opposite. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab failed on the diametric opposite validation test. This establishes that he did not understand the process of developing a principle. Instead of presenting a true/correct principle he was more concerned about his takfir methodology being represented correctly. - [3] A Shia started discussion with me about the validity of their version of Shahadah. He said; do you have proof for Shahadah? I replied; yes indeed. I quoted verses of Quran for the first and the second part of Shahadah. He said; Do you have a verse of Quran which explicitly affirms the entire Shahadah in one verse. I replied; no, not that I am aware of. He said; the way you picked up bits of verses even we can prove our Shahadah. I asked; what is your Shahadah? He replied; there is no god but Allah, Muhammad is Rasool of Allah, Ali is Wali of Allah. I said; your proof? He replied by quoting the verse of Quran about Wali’s. He reasoned; do you believe Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is a Wali? I replied; without doubt he is Wali. He argued; the verses you quoted and the verse I quoted all contribute to prove our Shahadah. I replied; Shahdah is foundation without affirming which one cannot be Muslim and evidence for it is definite as well as explicit. Where as evidence for; Ali is Wali of Allah, is derived from Ahadith. If one who rejects explicit and definite of Quran is a Kafir. Denial of Mutawatir Hadith also amounts to Kufr. In regard of Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) being Wali there is no explicit or definite verse or Mutawatir Hadith but his being Wali is derived from Ahadith hence not Kufr. Therefore how can it be made part of which is definite and explicit when its denial amounts to heresy? But the denial of; there is no god but Allah, and denial of; Muhammad is RasoolAllah, amounts to Kufr. He said; it is proven from hadith therefore it is correct. I replied; then entire corpus of Quran and Sahih Ahadith should be part of your Shahadah as well as all that can be derived from these. The discussion should have ended but like all foolish folks he continued. The main point is; everything established with evidence should not be made part of a foundation/principle. - [4] The ‘Sahih International’ translation has the verse; “… and they cannot intercede except on behalf of one whom He’s pleased/satisfied.” Imam Ahmad Raza’s translation of the verse is; “… and they do not intercede except on behalf of one whom ….” The ‘Sahih International’ conveys meaning that people cannot intercede due to lack of ability. Where as translation of Imam Ahmad Raza conveys meaning that they have the ability to intercede but only will intercede with whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is satisfied with. The following verse establishes that angel will have ability to intercede and they will intercede but their intercession will not benefit until after the right of intercession is granted to them; “And how many angels there are in the heavens whose intercession will not avail at all except [only] after Allah has permitted [it] to whom He wills and approves.” [Ref: 53:26] Establishing that with the intercessors the issue is not of ‘cannot’ but the issue is that they ‘do not’ intercede except for whom Allah is pleased. - [5] Truth of matters of religions can be determined by judging by opposites. If the saying; I am absolutely confident there is no God what so ever, is Kufr, then its opposite; I am absolutely confident there is a God, is Islam. If saying; Allah is one God beside whom there are no other gods, is Tawheed, then saying; Allah is one God beside him there are many gods, is Shirk. In similar which ever out of the two principles is correct then it’s opposite should be true principle.

I Will Continue My Response Once I have Completed Posting Five Article Material Regarding Qawa'id Al Arba's Second Principle. All The Material Is Written But It Needs Finale Touches. Hence I Have Decided Not To Pursue My Debate Response Until The I Have Completed Posting Those Articles. I Believe Topic Of Hadhir Nazir Has Been Completely Exhausted From A Debate Point Of View And Much Of The Material Will Be Just Repetition. But There Are Some Important Points Which Need To Be Adressed And In-Sha-Allah I will Adress Them This Week. I Have Been Extremely Busy With My Work As A Result Abandoned Long Project Of Debate Response Which I Will Start Again. Until Then I Will Be Adding Finale Touches To Already Written Material To Make It Available For Readers. Thank You For Your Paitence.

Introduction: This article is in-depth analysis of claim objective of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab to denounce Tawassul of the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and Awliyah-Allah to be Shirk. The discussion will revolve around determining what the Shirk of polytheists was and how would Muslims be guilty of Shirk as well as what the Muslims believe. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s Objective: In the first principle Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab stated: “That you know the Kuffaar who the Messenger fought used to affirm that Allah Ta’aala, was the Creator and the Disposer of all the affairs but that didn’t enter them into Islam and…” In the second principle he gives reason why they were not Muslim. He states: “That they say: We do not call upon and turn towards them except to seek nearness and intercession.” Then quotes the verse to establish the Kufr/Shirk of polytheists: “And those who you take Awliyah besides Him (they say): ‘We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allah.” Verily, Allah will judge between them concerning that wherein they differ. Truly, Allah guides not him who is a liar and a disbeliever.” [Ref: 39:3] According Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s teaching, the Shirk of Arabs was; polytheists of Arabian Peninsula worshipped (subhanahu wa ta’ala) Friends, Intercessors as means of nearness to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) therefore they are disbelievers. His rationale is; Muslims worship Awliyah-Allah and take them as intercessors to gain nearness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and argue with Wahhabi’s by saying; we [Sunni’s] do not call upon Awliyah-Allah and turn face them except to seek nearness and intercession to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). From this he is arguing; the belief/action of polytheists and ‘Muslims’ is same therefore they commit Shirk/Kufr just as the polytheists committed Kufr/Shirk. What Is Not Kufr/Shirk Of Polytheists: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab isolated the verse of Quran from other verses which truly point out the belief of polytheists to make a case of Kufr/Shirk against Muslims. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s methodology is of employing the apparent to of verse to establish similarity between the beliefs of Muslims and then charge of Shirk. If his methodology is accepted then the very idea of believing in Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and the pious Muslims being Awliyah as well as taking means to gain nearness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will be Shirk. Common sense dictates that believing creations of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as Awliyah and taking means to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) cannot be the reason of Shirk because it is common belief between Muslims and polytheists. Therefore the reasons of polytheists being polytheists are other then the established common facts. Polytheists Were Guilty Of Shirk Due To Creed: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab the leader of minions of Shaytan believed; the Shirk of polytheist Arabs was that they worshipped their Awliyah/Intercessors. We the Muslims say; Shirk of polytheists of Arabia was not only this but they also attributed idol-god partners to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This is the main reason for which the polytheists were/are guilty of major Shirk. One who attributes a god-partner with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) he is a Mushrik and a Kafir even if he/she does not worship that idol-god. If Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab is believed then the polytheists of Arabia were only guilty of major Shirk when they worshiped their idol-gods. Yet according to principles of Muslims, the polytheists were upon major Shirk every second of life. Islamic principle is; primary cause of major Shirk is creed and once an individual is guilty of major Shirk in creed then every second of his life is upon major Shirk, even if one does not worship the idol-god. Please note the argument which establishes the principle of Muslims and refutes the principle of apostates. A man believes in an idol as a god but does not worship it. Instead the man spits on it, drags it in streets in hate and disgust. Question to the apostates is; is the man a Mushrik? If you deny his Kufr then know you’re Kafir like him and now you have no excuse. If you accept his Kufr, you destroy the foundation of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s principle and you establish the principle of Muslims, which states creed determines Tawheed/Shirk of a individual not actions. With this we establish that polytheists of Arabia were guilty of taking gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and this was the primary cause of their Kufr/Shirk. To establish the validity of this statement further take note of following argument. We the Muslims reason; polytheists worshipped and then believed idols were their gods or did they believe idols were their gods and then worshipped them? Muslim knows the creed precedes action therefore the polytheists of Arabia believed their idol as gods and due to it worshipped them. Hence the primary Shirk and cause of them being polytheists was their belief that created being are gods and the secondary cause was the worship of these idol-gods. Difference Between Belief & Practice Of Muslims & Polytheists: The polytheists believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is supreme God with many gods as partners. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has got sons/daughters and god-partners who run the affairs of universe with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In addition to this, the polytheists had taken idols as intercessors to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) they believed them to be gods and worshipped them as such. Also believed worship of these god-partners of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) earns nearness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The Muslim believes all acts of worship are for only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the One without; mother or father, brother or sister, son or daughter, beginning or end. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is God without gods, a Creator without creators, a Sustainer without sustainers etc. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the First without beginning and the Last without an end. He is the Apparent undeniable and the Hidden untraceable. The Muslims hold the belief the intercessors of believers will intercede as servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and not as gods etc. These intercessors are creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and also believe these intercessors will be granted the right of intercession on the judgment day. The first one to intercede will be our beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and others will follow. His intercession will be for those whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will approve of and those whom he intercedes will be major sinners. Due to his intercession they will be allowed to enter paradise and they will be called ‘people of hell’. Polytheistic Creed Primarily Invalidates Tawheed: The polytheists worshiped their Awliyah i.e. idol-gods, to gain nearness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).[1] Even though these idol-gods possess no powers to provide help nor have life in them. The Awliyah-Allah and Shu’afa of Muslims are servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and due to their nearness to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the Muslims love and respect them but do not worship them. As Muslims we believe worship of anyone other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is major Shirk which invalidates belief in Islam. Hence Muslims worship Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) alone and associate none with Him in His worship to gain His nearness. We do not call upon the living or the dead for what is in their power or what is out of their power believing they are gods. Anyone who does so, commits major Shirk and is guilty of worshiping creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) even if one seeks a glass asks for glass of water from living or dead. The polytheists sought rizq from those whom they believed to be their idol-gods. Muslims call upon servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with belief that created servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will help. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states, He along with Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) as well as pious are Wali of believers, Wali means; guardian, protector, supporter, helper: “Your Wali is none but Allah and His Messenger and those who have believed - those who establish prayer and give zakah, and they bow [in worship].” [Ref: 5:55] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has informed of servants of Allah helping in time of distress. These servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) possess miraculous powers of hearing, seeing, traveling, granting as stated in Hadith of Qudsi. Therefore they have the abilities granted to them by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to grant help to a pious Muslims if their help is sought. The Kufr/Shirk Of Polytheists: The Shirk/Kufr of polytheists was that they took their idol-gods as Awliyah with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and this is affirmed in the following verse: “Then why did those they took besides Allah as gods by which to approach [Him] not aid them? But they had strayed from them. And that was their falsehood and what they were inventing.” [Ref: 46:28] The second Shirk/Kufr was that they worshipped these Awliyah idol-gods besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and this is affirmed in the following verses: “And those who you take Awliyah besides Him (they say): ‘We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allah.” [Ref: 39:3] “And they worship other than Allah that which neither harms them nor benefits them, and they say, "These are our intercessors with Allah." [Ref: 10:18] Muslims Are Free From Kufr/Shirk Of Polytheists: In contrast to the polytheists we the Muslims do not believe in any god other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) nor have we taken gods has Awliyah. We affirm what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “… and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords besides Allah. Then, if they turn away, say: "Bear witness that we are Muslims." [Ref: 3:64] “And your Allah is One Allah. There is no god but He, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.” [Ref: 2:163] We Muslims do not worship anyone other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Invoking of a god is worship and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has prohibited worship of gods besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala😞 “Say, "Indeed, I have been forbidden to worship those you invoke besides Allah." Say, "I will not follow your desires, for I would then have gone astray, and I would not be of the [rightly] guided." [Ref: 6:56] In another place we the Muslims are instructed to say about our religion: “Say, "O people, if you are in doubt as to my religion - then I do not worship those which you worship besides Allah; but I worship Allah, who causes your death. And I have been commanded to be of the believers.” [Ref: 10:104] The Awliyah-Allah Of Muslims & Polytheists: We the Muslims believe Awliyah-Allah to be pious people from amongst Muslims. As such they are believed to be created servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has granted the ability to perform wondrous things due to their nearness to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). This is attested by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in a Hadith: “… and My slave keeps on coming closer to Me through performing Nawafil till I love him, so I become his sense of hearing with which he hears, and his sense of sight with which he sees, and his hand with which he grips, and his leg with which he walks; and if he asks Me, I will give him, and if he asks My protection, I will protect him; and I do not hesitate to do anything as I hesitate to take the soul of the believer, for he hates death, and I hate to disappoint him." [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H509] Despite their wondrous powers of Awliyah-Allah they are believed to be creation and not gods, nor parts of God, nor partners of God. In contrast to this the polytheists took idols as their Awliyah and believed them to be gods. They believed these gods were sons and daughters of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). These idol-gods rule over the universe with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) who is the supreme Ruler. With regards to the idol-gods, the Awliyah of polytheists, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated that they, do not hear or see, harm or benefit, unable to reverse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has done, unable to help themselves or anyone else, unable to raise the dead, unable to bring back what is snatched from them, they create nothing but are themselves created by polytheists. Awliyah-Allah And Seeking Means To Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala😞 Believing in Awliyah and taking means to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) cannot Shirk because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “Your Wali is none but Allah and His Messenger and those who have believed - those who establish prayer and give zakah, and they bow [in worship].” [Ref: 5:55] Wali is singular and Awliyah is plural. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) affirmed that the Awliyah of Muslims are Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and the pious believers who act on deen. These Awliyah will be without fear on the judgment day: “Unquestionably, [for] the Awliyah of Allah there will be no fear concerning them, nor will they grieve.” [Ref: 10:62] If believing in Awliyah was Shirk Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would not have established this and because it is established its proven believing in Awliyah is not Shirk. But it can be Shirk if belief is polluted with Shirk. Meaning taking all the mentioned as god partners of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will warrant Shirk. Polytheists did pollute their belief in Awliyah with Shirk by taking idols as gods. So what really determines Shirk/Kufr; the belief in Awliyah or the belief in god-Awliyah? If taking means to gain nearness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was Shirk then the following would not be seeking means of nearness to approach Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala😞 “Those whom they invoke seek means of access to their Lord, [striving as to] which of them would be nearest, and they hope for His mercy and fear His punishment. Indeed, the punishment of your Lord is ever feared.” [Ref: 17:57] Also if seeking means of nearness to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Shirk then Allah would not have instructed seeking of means: “O you who have believed, fear Allah and seek the means [of nearness] to Him and strive in His cause that you may succeed.” [Ref: 5:35] Authentic Ahadith record that on the judgment day the Prophets will seek means of nearness, to approach and gain nearness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And the means of nearness to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will be Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Conclusion: The Awliyah of polytheists were their idol-gods and as a result of believing idols to be gods they worshiped these idol-gods to get near to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). These two were the reasons for which they were guilty of Shirk. Also major Shirk which nullifies one’s Islam takes place when one’s creed changes and a creation [be it idol or human or anything else] is taken as a god partner of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The Muslims to not believe in Awliyah-Allah as god-partners but we believe in them to be Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) servants whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has blessed with supernatural powers, attested in the Quran and numerous Ahadith.[2] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructs the believers to seek means (i.e. literally Waseela) of getting closer to Him: “O you who have believed, fear Allah and seek the means [of nearness] to Him and strive in His cause that you may succeed.” [Ref: 5:35] As Muslims we are permitted to use Waseela/Tawassul and instructed to seek Waseela/Tawassul by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In one verse of the Quran Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructs the sinners to seek Tawassul/Waseela of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) to gain His forgiveness: “And We did not send any messenger except to be obeyed by permission of Allah. And if, when they wronged themselves, they had come to you, [O Muhammad], and asked forgiveness of Allah and the Messenger had asked forgiveness for them, they would have found Allah Accepting of repentance and Merciful.” [Ref: 4:64] Therefore to label Tawassul/Waseela of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) as Shirk is foolishness or worst kind. Wama Alayna Ilal Balaghul Mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnote: - [1] Invoking of a human-god or idol-god is worship therefore invoking of gods is worship. If one argues invoking anyone other then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is worship then reason with him employing the verse; “Do not make [your] calling of the Messenger among yourselves as the call of one of you to another. Already Allah knows those of you who slip away, concealed by others. So let those beware who dissent from the Prophet's order, lest fitnah strike them or a painful punishment.” [Ref: 24:63] By saying; did the companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) worship Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam)? Individual would respond with either affirming or negating the worship of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). If he affirms that companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) worshipped him. Then know that he has committed major disbelief by accusing the best of Ummah of worshiping Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Best course would be to exhort for repentance and if individual remain upon disbelief. Then know he/she has become apostate and it is permissible to slaughter him for pleasure of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). If he negates the worship of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) by companions then explain to him systematically. His negation implies that dua to creation is not always worship. If creation is believed to be servant, a creation and not god-partner of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then dua to creation is not worship. If dua is to a creation, a servant, who is believed to be a human-god or idol-god then dua would be worship. Dua to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) by companions was with belief that he is creation, a servant of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and not god therefore their calling/dua was not worship. Dua of polytheists was directed toward those whom they believed to be human-gods/idol-gods therefore their dua to these is worship. From this we establish that the position of Muslims regarding supplication of polytheists is correct. - [2] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And the most beloved things with which My slave comes nearer to Me, is what I have enjoined upon him; and My slave keeps on coming closer to Me through performing Nawafil till I love him, so I become his sense of hearing with which he hears, and his sense of sight with which he sees, and his hand with which he grips, and his leg with which he walks; and if he asks Me, I will give him, and if he asks My protection, I will protect him; and I do not hesitate to do anything as I hesitate to take the soul of the believer, for he hates death, and I hate to disappoint him." [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H509] Note, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) does not become part of his pious slave –Wali but He grants His Wali supernatural abilities of seeing, hearing, granting, and travelling which no ordinary human is able to do. A excellent example of how Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) grants His servants the miraculous powers is in the following verses of Quran: “… and [remember] when I taught you writing and wisdom and the Torah and the Gospel; and when you designed from clay [what was] like the form of a bird with My permission, then you breathed into it, and it became a bird with My permission; and you healed the blind and the leper with My permission; and when you brought forth the dead with My permission; and when I restrained the Children of Israel from [killing] you when you came to them with clear proofs and ...." [Ref: 5:110]

Salam alayqum meri behan Donoon halatoon meh wuzu nahin toot-ta. Wuzu khoon behnay yehni khoon zakham say nikal kar jism kay dosray hissay par paunchay toh wozoo toot-ta heh. Sirf agar zakham meh jama rahay toh wuzu tootta nahin magar jism kay us hissay ko dohna behtr heh. Rafa e hajat kee donoon halatoon meh yehni chota/bara peshab kay basat toot-ta heh. Ya phir khawand aur biwi ka azwaji talluq qaim kernay say toot-ta heh. Aur aurat kay makhsoos dinoon kay shoroon hona ka joh sign hota heh us say be toot-ta heh. Meri behan behtr hoga agar aap kissi Islami behan say yeh sawal poochen woh tafseel say jawab denh gee.

Introduction: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s Qawa’id Al Arba is the Takfir manual for heretics. This little book introduces all heretics to the art of making everyone Mushrik. The focus of this article would be to explain the evidences which Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab utilized to establish the rules in his second principle. This will serve two main objectives; 1) this will allow the readers to know the subject matter of the issue in detail, 2) and once the correct understanding these verses realized by the readers then it will be easier to see the trick being played. The Second Principle Of Qawaid Al Arba: That they say: We do not call upon and turn towards them except to seek nearness and intercession. So the proof against seeking this nearness (through others like Awliyah) is the saying of the Most High: “And those who you take Awliyah besides Him (they say): ‘We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allah.” Verily, Allah will judge between them concerning that wherein they differ. Truly, Allah guides not him who is a liar, and a disbeliever.” [Ref: 39:3] And the proof of intercession (through Awliyah) is the saying of the Most High: “And they worship besides Allah things that hurt them not, nor profit them, and they say: These are our intercessors with Allah.” [Ref: 10:18] And intercession is of two types; a) the prohibited intercession, and the affirmed intercession. The prohibited intercession is that which is sought from other than Allah concerning that which only Allah is able to do. And the proof is the saying of the Most High: “O you who believe! Spend from that which We have provided for you, before a Day comes when there will be no bargaining, nor friendship, nor intercession. And it is the disbelievers who are the wrong-doers.” [Ref: 2:254] And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah, and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for, is one whom Allah is pleased with; his speech and actions, after he gives permission, as He, Ta’aala, said: “Who is he that can intercede with Him except with His permission?” [Ref: 2:255] Part One – A: The Awliyah Of Polytheists: The polytheists of Makkah attempted to scare Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) by saying: "We say nothing but that (perhaps) some of our gods may have seized thee with imbecility.” [Ref: 11:54] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) responds to their this saying: “Is not Allah enough for his Servant? But they try to frighten thee with other besides Him! For such as Allah leaves to stray, there can be no guide.” [Ref: 39:36] In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) refers to the idol-gods of polytheists as Satan’s Awliyah: “That is only Satan who frightens [you] of his Awliyah. So fear them not but fear Me, if you are [indeed] believers.” [Ref: 3:175] This establishes that Awliyah of polytheists according to Quran are idol-gods of polytheists. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Then do those who disbelieve think that they can take My servants instead of Me as Awliyah?” [Ref: 18:102] “Or have they taken Awliyah besides him? But Allah - He is the Protector ...” [Ref: 42:9] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states on the day of judgment the Awliyah of polytheists will be gathered and questioned: “And [mention] the Day He will gather them and that which they worship besides Allah and will say, "Did you mislead these, My servants, or did they [themselves] stray from the way?" [Ref: 25:7] These Awliyah will reply to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala😞 "Exalted are You! It was not for us to take besides You any Awliyah. But You provided comforts for them and their fathers until they forgot the message and became a people ruined." [Ref: 25:8] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) explicitly narrates the questioning of Awliyah of polytheists: “And [beware the Day] when Allah will say: O Jesus, Son of Mary did you say to the people: Take me and my mother as gods besides Allah? He will say: "Exalted are You! It was not for me to say that to which I have no right. If I had said it; You would have known it. You know what is within myself, and I do not know what is within Yourself. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen.” [Ref: 5:116] Once again this establishes the Awliyah of polytheists were people who had been elevated to status of gods or idols who were believed to be gods. Regarding the Awliyah of polytheists Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Say: Who is Lord of the heavens and earth? Say: Allah! Say: Have you then taken besides Him Awliyah not possessing [even] for themselves any benefit or any harm?” [Ref: 13:16] These harmless and profitless Awliyah were worshiped by polytheists: “But they worship rather than Allah that which does not benefit them or harm them, and the disbeliever is ever, against his Lord, an assistant [to Satan].” [Ref: 25:55] The polytheists worshipped idols besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and this is attested in the following verse: “You only worship, besides Allah idols and you produce a falsehood. Indeed, those you worship besides Allah do not possess for you [the power of] provision." [Ref: 29:17] “They said: "We worship idols, and to them we are ever devoted." [Ref: 26:71] This establishes that the Awliyah of polytheists stated in the following verse are idols: “And those who you take Awliyah besides Him (they say): ‘We worship them only that they may bring us near to Allah.” [Ref: 39:3] And these idols were believed to be gods as declared in the following verse: "These our people have taken for worship gods other than Him.” [Ref: 18:15] Part One – B: Polytheists Worshiped Gods Besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala😞 The Awliyah of polytheists are their gods whom they worshiped besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) declared, the Awliyah of polytheists will deny worship of polytheists: “And they have taken besides Allah [false] gods that they would be for them [a source of] honor. No! Those [gods] will deny their worship of them and will be against them opponents [on the Day of Judgment].” [Ref: 19:81/82] These gods were idols as indicated by the following words of Quran: And said, "You have only taken, other than Allah, idols as [a bond of] affection among you in worldly life. Then on the Day of Resurrection you will deny one another and curse one another, and your refuge will be the Fire, and you will not have any helpers." [Ref: 29:25] These worshipped will include the idols of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and of the pious belonging to nation of Prophet Nuh (alayhis salam). The origin of the idols worshipped by Arab polytheists is stated by Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu😞 “All the idols which were worshipped by the people of Noah were worshipped by the Arabs later on. As for the idol Wadd, it was worshipped by the tribe of Kalb at Daumat-al-Jandal; Suwa' was the idol of (the tribe of) Murad and then by Ban, Ghutaif at Al-Jurf near Saba; Yauq was the idol of Hamdan, and Nasr was the idol of Himyr, the branch of Dhi-al-Kala.'” [Ref: Bukhari, B60, H442] Then Ibn Abbas (radiallah ta’ala anhu) goes on to state about the identity of the idols: “The names (of the idols) formerly belonged to some pious men of the people of Noah, and when they died Satan inspired their people to (prepare and place idols at the places where they used to sit, and to call those idols by their names. The people did so, but the idols were not worshipped till those people (who initiated them) had died and the origin of the idols had become obscure, whereupon people began worshipping them.” [Ref: Bukhari, B60, H442] These pious people as well as Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam), Maryam (alayhis salaam), Uzair (alayhis salam) all will disown those who have elevated them to status of gods and deny the worship. And the idols which were made to represent them will enter fire as stated by the verse. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) tells Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) to enquire from the Messengers before Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permitted taking of gods with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and their worship: “And ask those We sent before you of Our messengers; have We made besides the Most Merciful gods to be worshipped?” [Ref: 43:45] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in another verse answers the question Himself: “Or have they taken gods besides Him? Say, [O Muhammad], "Produce your proof. This [Qur'an] is the message for those with me and the message of those before me." But most of them do not know the truth, so they are turning away. And We sent not before you any messenger except that We revealed to him that: "There is no god except Me so worship Me." [Ref: 21:24/25] This establishes that polytheists worshiped gods besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and in Islam the worship is to be only of God. Part One – 😄 Verse 39:3 In Context Of Beliefs Of Polytheists: The verse quoted by Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab in light of above established evidence means; those who you take idol-god Awliyah besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) say; we worship idol-god Awliyah that they may bring us near to Allah. It would be better if the mentioned interpretation is put in the context of verse, contextual interpretation: “And those who you take as [idol-god] Awliyah besides Him (they say): ‘We worship them [the idol-gods] only that they may bring us near to Allah.” Verily, Allah will judge between them concerning that wherein they differ. Truly, Allah guides not him who is a liar, and a disbeliever.” [Ref: 39:3] Note in response to claim of polytheists Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: Verily, Allah will judge between them concerning that wherein they differ. Truly, Allah guides not him who is a liar and a disbeliever.” [Ref: 39:3] Indicating that those who make this claim are lying about why they take their idol-gods as Awliyah with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In a nutshell, the verse 39:3 was revealed regarding the polytheists and their gods and not about Muslims. Please bare these two important points in mind because these points are essential to fault of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab’s methodology. Part Two – A: Polytheists Worship Which Cannot Profit Or Harm: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And they worship besides Allah things that hurt them not, nor profit them, and they say: These are our intercessors with Allah.” [Ref: 10:18] In the following Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) tells; a Kafir [takes intercessor with Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala and] worships which do not benefit or harm: “But they worship rather than Allah that which does not benefit them or harm them, and the disbeliever is ever against his Lord, an assistant [to Satan].” [Ref: 25:55] While refuting the belief of disbelievers, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) gives hint about the identity of intercessors: “Or have they taken other than Allah as intercessors? Say, "Even though they do not possess [power over] anything, nor do they reason?" [Ref: 39:43]Arguing against the disbelievers that you take them as intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) even though they possess no ability [of life hearing, seeing, walking, talking] nor they can reason [because they cannot speak]. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) prohibits the disbelievers from taking intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala😞 “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] From all this we established; disbelievers took intercessors, their intercessors have no ability to harm or benefit, and disbelievers are prohibited from taking intercessors to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). To know why the intercessors of polytheists are unable to harm/benefit and why the disbelievers were prohibited from taking intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) we have to identify the type of intercessor they took. Part Two – B: Worshiping Intercessor Idol-Gods: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) quotes: "These our people have taken for worship gods other than Him.” [Ref: 18:15] “And they have taken besides Allah [false] gods that they would be for them [a source of] honor. No! Those [gods] will deny their worship of them and will be against them opponents [on the Day of Judgment].” [Ref: 19:81/82] These gods were worshipped in form of idols which the polytheists themselves created: “You only worship, besides Allah idols and you produce a falsehood. Indeed, those you worship besides Allah do not possess for you [the power of] provision." [Ref: 29:17] These verses of established that those whom the polytheists worshiped besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) were idol-gods. The following verse further establishes that these idol-gods whom the polytheists had taken as intercessors do not have power to benefit or harm: “And they worship besides Allah things that hurt them not nor profit them and they say: These are our intercessors with Allah.” [Ref: 10:18] In another verse Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is made to say about the idol-gods of polytheists: “Should I take other than Him gods! If the Most Merciful intends for me some adversity, their intercession will not avail me at all, nor can they save me.” [Ref: 36:23] This establishes that the polytheists believed their idol-gods are their intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Part Two – 😄 Harmless, Profitless Idol-Gods: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) narrates the intention of Prophet Ibrahim (alayhis salaam😞 “And by Allah I will surely plan against your idols after you have turned and gone away." So he made them into fragments, except a large one among them so they might return to it [and question].” [Ref: 21:57/58] When the polytheists of his nation came back they questioned to each other: "Who has done this to our gods? Indeed, he is of the wrongdoers." They said, "We heard a young man mention them who is called Abraham." They said, "Then bring him before the eyes of the people that they may testify." [Ref: 21:59/61] They questioned Prophet Ibrahim (alayhis salaam) and received a very thought poking response: “They said, "Have you done this to our gods, O Abraham?" He said, "Rather, this - the largest of them - did it, so ask them, if they should [be able to] speak." [Ref: 21:62/63] Upon this they realize the error of their belief but remained upon their disbelief and replied to Prophet Ibrahim (alayhis salaam😞 “So they returned to [blaming] themselves and said [to each other], "Indeed, you are the wrongdoers." Then they reversed themselves, [saying], "You have already known that these do not speak!" [Ref: 21:64/65] To which Prophet Ibrahim (alayhis salaam) replied: "Then do you worship instead of Allah that which does not benefit you at all or harm you? Uff to you and to what you worship instead of Allah. Then will you not use reason?" [Ref: 21:66/67] To which the polytheists had no response other then easiest way out; they intended to kill him. Implication Note that Prophet Ibrahim (alayhi salaam) regarding the idol-gods of polytheists said: "You have already known that these do not speak!" He said, "Then do you worship instead of Allah that which does not benefit you at all or harm you?” [Ref: 21:66] And regarding the polytheists of Arabia Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said: “And they worship besides Allah things that hurt them not nor profit them and they say: These are our intercessors with Allah.” [Ref: 10:18] This establishes verse about polytheists of Arabia was about their idol-gods and in the verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is stating; polytheists worship idol-gods besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) which do not hurt nor profit them and yet the polytheists take these idol-gods as intercessors: Part Two – 😧 Verse 10:18 In Context Of Beliefs Of Polytheists: The true interpretation of the verse quoted by Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab is as follows. They the polytheist worship besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) idol-gods that hurt them not nor profit them and the polytheists say regarding their idol-gods; these idol-gods are our intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Putting this understanding in the context of the verse; “And they [the polytheists] worship besides Allah [idol-gods] things that hurt them not nor profit them and they [the polytheists] say: These [idol-gods] are our intercessors with Allah.” [Ref: 10:18] The verse continues with to mention association of polytheists with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala😞 “Say, "Do you inform Allah of something He does not know in the heavens or on the earth?" Exalted is He and high above what they associate with Him.” [Ref: 10:18] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states in another verse: “Follow what has been revealed to you from your Lord - there is no god except Him - and turn away from those who associate others with Allah.” [Ref: 6:106] This establishes Polytheists of Arabian Peninsula took their idol-gods as intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and worshipped them as such. Part Three – A: No Friendship Nor Intercession For Disbelievers: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab introduced into Islam a heretical type of intercession which he defined as; “The prohibited intercession is that which is sought from other than Allah concerning that which only Allah is able to do.” And to establish this principle he quoted the following verse of Quran: “O you who believe! Spend from that which We have provided for you, before a Day comes when there will be no bargaining, nor friendship, nor intercession. And it is the disbelievers who are the wrong-doers.” [Ref: 2:254] The day mentioned in the verse is judgment day and for the disbelievers there will be no bargaining nor friendship nor intercession. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will say to the polytheists: “[it will be said to them], "And you have certainly come to Us alone as We created you the first time, and you have left whatever We bestowed upon you behind you. And We do not see with you your 'intercessors' which you claimed that they were among you associates [of Allah]. It has [all] been severed between you, and lost from you is what you used to claim." [Ref: 6:94] Realizing that they have no one to intercede for them the polytheists will say: “Do they wait except its result? The Day its result comes those who had ignored it before will say, "The messengers of our Lord had come with the truth, so are there [now] any intercessors to intercede for us or could we be sent back to do other than we used to do?" They will have lost themselves, and lost from them is what they used to invent.” [Ref: 7:53] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated regarding the polytheists: “And the Day the Hour appears the criminals will be in despair. And there will not be for them among their [alleged] partners any intercessors, and they will [then] be disbelievers in their partners.” [Ref: 30:12/13] Quran records the words how polytheists will disassociate themselves from the partners they ascribed to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala😞 “To him [alone] is attributed knowledge of the Hour. And fruits emerge not from their coverings nor does a female conceive or give birth except with His knowledge. And the Day He will call to them: "Where are My 'partners'?" they will say, "We announce to You that there is [no longer] among us any witness [to that]." [Ref: 41:47] The polytheists will say this because those whom they worshipped will deny being worshipped: “And [mention, O Muhammad], the Day We will gather them all together - then We will say to those who associated others with Allah, "[Remain in] your place you and your 'partners.' "Then We will separate them, and their "partners" will say: "You did not used to worship us.” [Re: 10:28] Part Three – B: The Permitted Intercessors Will Intercede For Muslims: Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab stated: “And the affirmed intercession is that which is sought from Allah, and the intercessor is honored with the intercession and the one interceded for, is one whom Allah is pleased with; his speech and actions…” And to establish this innovative principle he quoted the following verse: “To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. Who is it that can intercede with Him except by His permission? He knows what is [presently] before them and ...” [Ref: 2:255] There are many verses of Quran which establish the intercession of those whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will permit, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Indeed, your Lord is Allah, who created the heavens and the earth in six days and then established Himself above the Throne, arranging the matter [of His creation]. There is no intercessor except after His permission. That is Allah, your Lord, so worship Him. Then will you not remember?” [Ref: 10:3] The people of hell will request the angels: ”And those in the fire will say to the keepers of hell, "Supplicate your Lord to lighten for us a day from the punishment." [Ref: 40:49] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states that their intercession will not avail them: “And how many angels there are in the heavens whose intercession will not avail at all except [only] after Allah has permitted [it] to whom He wills and approves.” [Ref: 53:26] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states about idol-gods of polytheists not having the right to intercede and some being granted the right of intercession: “And those they invoke besides Him do not possess [power of] intercession; but only those who testify to the truth [can benefit], and they know.” [Ref: 43:86] “None will have [power of] intercession except he who had taken from the Most Merciful a covenant.” [Ref: 19:87] “That Day, no intercession will benefit except [that of] one to whom the Most Merciful has given permission and has accepted his word.” [Ref: 20:109] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states those intercessors who will be permitted to intercede will only intercede for whom Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will permit: “And intercession does not benefit with Him except for one whom He permits. [And those wait] until, when terror is removed from their hearts ...” [Ref: 34:23] “He knows what is [presently] before them and what will be after them, and they cannot intercede except on behalf of one whom He approves. And they, from fear of Him, are apprehensive.” [Ref: 21:28] Many Ahadith record the details regarding the intercessors and about whom they would intercede. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: “The people will come to me, and I will prostrate myself underneath Allah's Throne. Then I will be addressed: 'O Muhammad! Raise your head; intercede, for your intercession will be accepted, and ask (for anything) for you will be given." [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H556] In another hadith it is recorded that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: "On the Day of Resurrection I will intercede and say, "O my Lord! Admit into Paradise (even) those who have faith equal to a mustard seed in their hearts." Such people will enter Paradise, and then I will say, 'O (Allah) admit into Paradise (even) those who have the least amount of faith in their hearts.” [Ref: Bukhari, B93, H600] The intercession of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will be for those who committed major sins: "My intercession is for the people who committed the major sins in my Ummah." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B11, H2435] Ahadith also record Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has told of others from amongst the Ummah interceding behalf of sinful Muslims: "Indeed in my Ummah are those who intercede for large groups of people, and among them (there are) who intercede for a tribe, and among them (there are) who intercede for a group, and among them (there are) who intercede for a man, until they are admitted to Paradise." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B11, H2440] Another hadith states Messengers and angles will be instructed to intercede: ”Then the angels will come and intercede and the Messengers will intercede.' And he mentioned the Sirat, and said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'I will be the first one to cross it, and when Allah has finished passing judgment among His creation, and has brought forth from the Fire those whom He wants to bring forth, Allah will command the angels and the Messengers to intercede and they will be recognized by their signs, for the Fire will consume all of the son of Adam apart from the place of prostration. Then the water of life will be poured on them, and they will grow like seeds on the banks of a rainwater stream." [Ref: Nisa’I, B12, H1141] Another version of the hadith also includes believers in the list of permitted intercessors: "Then the prophets and angels and the believers will intercede, and (last of all) the Almighty (Allah) will say …” [Ref: Bukhari, B93, H532] Part Three – 😄 Why No Intercessor And Intercession For Disbelievers: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “O you who believe! Spend from that which We have provided for you, before a Day comes when there will be no bargaining, nor friendship, nor intercession. And it is the disbelievers who are the wrong-doers.” [Ref: 2:254] It has already been established that believers will have intercessors and Muslims having Wali’s is established by the following verse; “Your Wali is none but Allah and His Messenger and those who have believed - those who establish prayer and give zakah, and they bow [in worship].” [Ref: 5:55] And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and believers being Wali’s of each other will not change even on the judgment day: “Close friends, that Day, will be enemies to each other, except for the righteous.” [Ref: 43:67] Hence the verse does not mean believers will not have anyone to intercede for them. On the judgment day when the mankind realizes the reality they will then seek friendship and seek to bargain. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) informs them that on that day there will be no such a thing. Hence implying that time for bargaining your wealth, time, for securing and making friendship and assuring intercession your life time on earth. If you fail to secure it in your earthly life then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states regarding such wrong-doers (i.e. polytheists), clearly: “And warn them, [O Muhammad], of the Approaching Day, when hearts are at the throats, filled [with distress]. For the wrongdoers there will be no devoted friend and no intercessor [who is] obeyed.” [Ref: 40:18] In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “So today no ransom will be taken from you or from those who disbelieved. Your refuge is the Fire. It is most worthy of you, and wretched is the destination.” [Ref: 57:15] There are two reasons why polytheists will not have intercessors on judgment day, a) polytheists took idol-gods as their intercessors they did not become Muslims. Taking idol-gods as intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and worshipping them is prohibited. Polytheists took prohibited intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Regarding prohibited intercessor idol-gods Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “And they [the polytheists] worship besides Allah [idol-gods] things that hurt them not nor profit them and they [the polytheists] say: These [idol-gods] are our intercessors with Allah.” [Ref: 10:18] “And do not invoke besides Allah [idol-god intercessors] that which neither benefits you nor harms you, for if you did, then indeed you would be of the wrongdoers.'" [Ref: 10:106] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) tells the polytheists they will disbelieve in whom they associate with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as His god-partners: “And there will not be for them among their partners any intercessors, and they will [then] be disbelievers in their partners.” [Ref: 30:13] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is made to say to the polytheists regarding their idol-god intercessors: “Should I take other than Him gods! If the Most Merciful intends for me some adversity, their intercession will not avail me at all, nor can they save me.” [Ref: 36:23] Coming to the second reason, if the polytheists had accepted Islam then they would have had Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and believers as their intercessors because they would have believed in these intercessors while affirming Oneness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Part Three – 😧 Verse 2:254 In The Context Of Quran: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated: “O you who believe! Spend from that which We have provided for you, before a Day comes when there will be no bargaining, nor friendship, nor intercession. And it is the disbelievers who are the wrong-doers.” [Ref: 2:254] Even though in the beginning of the verse the believers are addressed but later in the verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states about the disbelievers that they will not be able to bargain for paradise, nor their friendships will Muslims will avail them nor they will have intercession of their intercessors -no intercession of their idol gods. Hence according to all the established evidence the correct understanding of the verse is; “O you who believe! Spend from that which We have provided for you, before a Day comes when there will be no bargaining, nor friendship, nor intercession [for the disbelievers]. And it is the disbelievers who are the wrong-doers.” [Ref: 2:254] Or it could mean; “O you who believe! Spend from that which We have provided for you, before a Day comes when there will be no bargaining, nor friendship, nor intercession [without the permission of Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala]. And it is the disbelievers who are the wrong-doers.” [Ref: 2:254] In the context of the verse and general Quranic theology the implication would be; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) tell the believers to do good deeds (i.e. give Charity) because on judgment day there will not be anyone permitted to intercede for them without His permission hence the good deeds will save you from punishment of fire. Note the those sinners whose bad deeds out weigh the good deeds will have to taste the punishment and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will only be able to intercede for them after he receives permission. Hence they should not solely rely on the intercession of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) but perform good deeds to remain out of fire even before the permission is granted. Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab Methodology Is Methodology Of Khawarij: We have established that the verse 39:3 is referring to the Awliyah of polytheists and Quran establishes the Awliyah of polytheists were idol-gods. The verse 10:18 was revealed about the polytheists who contended with Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) about Tawheed and instead of believing in One-ness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the polytheists believed in many gods and worshipped these many gods and believed these gods will be their intercessors to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In a nutshell, it can be said this verse too was revealed regarding the polytheists and their gods. The verse 2:254 can be interpreted differently and both interpretations are valid. One interpretation is, that the verse refers to polytheists and disbelievers in general not having any intercessor in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The second interpretation is; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will not be able to intercede for the disbelievers if they are sent to hellfire due to their bad deeds out weighing the good ones, until Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is granted the permission to intercede. Now, Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab quoted verses which were revealed regarding the disbelievers and their idol-gods and applied these verses to Muslims of his time. With exception to 2:254 which can be interpreted differently all other verses definitely and certainly referred to non-Muslims. The only verse which can be interpreted in context of Muslims was employed by Shaykh al-Najd Muslims have no intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in reality establishes Muslims have intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) with His permission. Hazrat Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) stated about the people who employ the methodology like of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab: “... 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: …” Why he considered them as the worst in the creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is also explained: "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: Qatal Al Khawarij] This is the nature of Khawarij to describe the believers as disbelievers and interpret the verses which revealed regarding disbelievers in such a fashion that they describe believers. This methodology is a heretical innovation and anyone who employs it and applies understanding of such verses upon Muslims saying; these verses describe your belief, is from the heretics/innovators and from the people who will enter the fire. Conclusion: From the Tafsir of the verses it is established that polytheists do not have and will not have any intercessors with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The primary reason for this is; they have taken idols as gods and attributed them to be partners of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and it was these attributed god-partners which the Mushrikeen believed will be their intercessors. In contrast to polytheists we the Muslims believe Prophets and pious Muslims are our intercessors as servants of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and not because of being god-partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). We also believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has granted them the permission to intercede on behalf of believers. Hence in light of this, the prohibited intercession is one which is sought from a idol-god instead of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and the permitted intercession is, which is sought from a creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) while affirming creed of Tawheed. Also the methodology which Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab employed is innovation of Khawarij. As a result of his methodology he is from these people, the worst people in creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and those who follow him in creed and in methodology are also from his sect of Khawarij. Wama Alayna Ilal Balaghul Mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Salam alayqum, English discussion has been discontinued in this thread. Instead I have created the following thread for the discussion: Hadhir Nazir (Shahid/witness) Discussion With Haq3909. I Have Started Pasting My Response In The Above Thread.

You quoted the Hadith and wrote [in red]: “Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger having said this: Two are the types of the denizens of Hell whom I did not see: people having flogs like the tails of the ox with them and they would be beating people, and the women who would be dressed but appear to be naked, who would be inclined (to evil) and make their husbands incline towards it. Their heads would be like the humps of the bukht camel inclined to one side. They will not enter Paradise and they would not smell its odour whereas its odour would be smelt from such and such distance.” [Arabic: Sahih Muslim 2128] “The Prophet Sallallho Alayhi Wa Sallam clearly states that He has NOT seen them.” Regarding your statement that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) you wrote; “The Prophet Sallallho Alayhi Wa Sallam clearly states that He has NOT seen them.” Not seeing does not mean he will not see in future it means he has not seen up to the time he made the statement. If I say; ‘I have not seen a idiot like you Haq3909 in my life.’ Will that mean that up to current stage of my life I have not seen idiot like you or I will never see idiot like you? Not seeing at the moment of statement does not mean that I won’t meet anyone more idiotic then you. We do not believe that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) saw/heard everything ever moment of his life or straight after the revelation of Shahid verses. Rather we believe maqam of Shahid was perfected gradually until he reached the stage where he saw deeds of all mankind. There are four Ahadith on this topic all of which are found in Sahih of Imam Muslim. Here is English translation reference for the above hadith: “Two are the types of the denizens of Hell whom I did not see: people having flogs like the tails of the ox with them and they would be beating people, and the women who would be dressed but appear to be naked, who would be inclined (to evil) ...” [Ref: Muslim, B24, H5310] Characteristic of Ox tail is that it is thicker in one side and thinnest the other. Other type could resemble the end of ox tail. Ox tail at the end becomes like a dusting brush. A similar version of that whip also exists where a small wooden handle is attached strands of rope or leather or chain hanging. http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/08/18/article-1046370-0226A53F0000044D-269_468x354.jpg This version is commonly used by the Shia to beat themselves to ‘mourn’ the martyrdom of Hazrat Imam Hussain (radiallah ta’ala anhu) on annual 10th Muharram festival of - beating the crap out of your own self. The first one existed in our times, and Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab and his followers engaged in whipping Muslims with something which resembled ox’s tail. The TTP which is a Deobandi Khariji terrorist group in Pakistan was engaged in it. A minor was whipped in public her kameez was lifted from her back side and whipped her with a whip resembling tail of ox. The Somalian Wahhabi group Al-Shabab whips with something which resembles entire Ox tail. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: “There are two types of residents of hell whom I did not see; people having flogs like tails of ox …” The purpose was to inform the audience that they are not alive right now but they will be born later. Had these people existed then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) would have seen them with his own eyes. The following Ahadith affirm that the people who Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) described did not exist, here : “If you live for a time, you would certainly see people get up (in the morning) in the wrath of Allah and getting into the evening under the curse of Allah, and there would be in their hands (whips) like the tail of an ox.” [Ref: Muslim, B40, H6842] “If you survive for a time you would certainly see people who would have whips in their hands like the tail of an ox. They would get up in the morning under the wrath of Allah and they would get into the evening with the anger of Allah.” [Ref: Muslim, B40, H6841] In these two Ahadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) stated that if the companions lived for long enough they would see with their own eyes. Hence he was merely stating that he has not seen them with his own eyes. The Hadith which you quoted is part of the Hadith quoted by me. Hence the full text of the Hadith would be: Two are the types of the denizens of Hell whom I did not see: people having flogs like the tails of the ox with them and they would be beating people. … “If you survive for a time you would certainly see people who would have whips in their hands like the tail of an ox. They would get up in the morning under the wrath of Allah and they would get into the evening with the anger of Allah.” The basic line is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has not yet seen them with his own eyes because they do not live. But if the companions lived long enough they would see them with their own eyes. Not seeing the actions of people at that moment does not mean he will not get to see their actions. We all agree that deeds of people are presented to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam), evidence here: Bakr bin ‘Abdullah also reported that the Holy said: My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and you are responded. And when I will die my demise will be a great good for you. Your deeds will be presented to me, if I see goodness, I will praise Allah, and if I see wrongs, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you." [Ref: Ibn Sa‘d, at-Tabaqat-ul-kubra (2: 194); ‘Ali bin Abu Bakr Haythami related in Majma‘-uz-zawa’id (9:24)] Hence, seeing of the deeds of these people is established. Regarding the women dressed yet naked, it refers to two things, thin clothes through which the bodies can be seen, which are a modern phenomena and wearing of tight clothes. Tight clothes also come into this because purpose of clothes is to cover your body parts but tight clothes reveal the shape of these parts hence such clothes defeat their Shara’i purpose. The camel hump refers to two types of women the Kufar and Muslim. The Kuffar are models who design their hair frequently as camel humps and walk on stages wearing designer clothes, prostituting their bodies for money. The Muslims are those who are heavily influenced by Western culture and have no Haya in their hearts, eyes, ears but out need of looking ‘cute’ or fashionable or fake impersonation of modesty wear Hijab and make camels humps on their heads. All you have to do is in google image search ‘Camels hump Hijab’ and you will see it. The bottom line is Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) did not get to see these women because they were not born but he will definitely get to see their actions which they are presented to him. Not seeing them at the moment is no proof that he will never get to see them. The following Hadith states the deeds of people will be presented to him: “My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and we talk to you, and my demise is also a great good for you (because) your deeds will be presented to me. If they are good, I will praise Allah, and if they are bad, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you.” [Ref:Narrated by Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalani, through Harith in his al-Matalib-ul-‘aliyah, 4: 22-3 # 3853] This establishes that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will get to see the deeds of these Muslim women and he will seek forgiveness for them. The maqam of Shahid was perfected for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) he has reported to have said: "It is reported by Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Mawahib-e-Ladunnia] This Hadith is also supported by the following verses in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is stated to have been sent as a witness over mankind: "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] “And strive for Allah with the striving due to Him. He has chosen you and has not placed upon you in the religion any difficulty. [it is] the religion of your father, Abraham. Allah named you "Muslims" before [in former scriptures] and in this [revelation] that the Messenger may be a witness over you and you may be witnesses over the people. So establish prayer and give Zakah and hold fast to Allah. He is your protector; and excellent is the protector, and excellent is the helper.” [Ref: 22:78] Being witness over mankind means that should be seeing/hearing the deeds of mankind otherwise he is not witness over mankind. Therefore the deeds of mankind and the type of women in discussion all are witnessed by him. [Continued ...]

You wrote in response to my quote: Furthermore you said: "There are two possible things which you may have alluded to one, angels saying Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam): "Don't you know what they did after you!" and this issue has thoroughly answered and explained in this dicussion: http://www.islamimehfil.com/topic/19739-hadhir-nadhir-objection/ .[...] [bukhari Volume 8, Book 76, Number 584] […] [sahih Muslim Book 040, Number 6847] […] So the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) did recognize them, so they could not be disbelievers, rather were people he knew, and he did not know what they did after him.” The issue is answered of: "Don't you know what they did after you!" and everything related to the topic has been explained in the mentioned discussion. Link; http://www.islamimehfil.com/topic/19739-hadhir-nadhir-objection/ The entire discussion is essential but certain posts which I think are very important. I will list some posts which you should focus on reading; #8, #9, #10, #17, #23, #27, #29 and etc. You have stated the people who visited Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) on hawd al kauthar could not be Kafirs. I did not say they are disbelievers I wrote they would be apostate-disbelievers. You can check the linked discussion again. I suppose you are saying they will not be apostates. Lets analyze who the people were apostates or not. You quoted with screen print the following hadith in your post #3, here: “It was narrated that Ibn Abbas said: "The Messenger of Allah stood up to give an admonition and he said: 'O people, you will be gathered to Allah naked."' (One of the narrators) Abu Dawud said: "Barefoot and uncircumcised." (The narrators) Waki and Wahb said: "Naked and uncircumcised: As We began the first creation, We shall repeat it. The first one to be clothed on the Day of Resurrection will be Ibrahim, peace be upon him. Then some men from among my Ummah will be brought and will be taken toward the left. I will say: 'O Lord, my companions.' It will be said: 'You do not know what they innovated after you were gone,' and I shall say what the righteous slave said: 'And I was witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them; and You are a Witness to all things. If You punish them, they are Your slaves, and if You forgive them, verily, You, only You, are the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.' And it will be said: 'These people kept turning away since you left them.'" [Ref: Nisa’i, B21, H2089] Then in your post #16 you quoted another version of same Hadith: “Narrated by Ibn Abbas: The Prophet stood up among us and addressed (saying) "You will be gathered, barefooted, naked, and uncircumcised (as Allah says): 'As We began the first creation, We shall repeat it..' (21.104) And the first human being to be dressed on the Day of Resurrection will be (the Prophet) Abraham Al-Khalil. Then will be brought some men of my followers who will be taken towards the left (i.e., to the Fire), and I will say: 'O Lord! My companions whereupon Allah will say: you do not know what they did after you left them. I will then say as the pious slave, Jesus said, And I was witness over them while I dwelt amongst them...(up to) ...the All-Wise.' (5.117-118). The narrator added: Then it will be said that those people (relegated from Islam, that is) kept on turning on their heels (deserted Islam).” [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H533] Hence even from your own evidence it is clear that the Ahadith you presented were about apostates. You quote the Ahadith about apostates I also quoted other two Ahadith which are connected with the same topic out which one clearly established these people were apostates: "Narrted Ibn Abbas: Allah's Apostle said, "You will be resurrected (and assembled) bare-footed, naked and uncircumcised." The Prophet then recited the Divine Verse:-- "As We began the first creation, We shall repeat it: A promise We have undertaken. Truly we shall do it." (21.104) He added, "The first to be dressed will be Abraham. Then some of my companions will take to the right and to the left. I will say: 'My companions! 'It will be said, 'They had been renegades since you left them.' I will then say what the Pious Slave Jesus, the son of Mary said: 'And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them; when You did take me up, You were the Watcher over them, and You are a witness to all things. If You punish them, they are Your slaves, and if you forgive them, You, only You are the All-Mighty the All-Wise.' " (5.117-118) Narrated Quaggas, "Those were the apostates who renegade from Islam during the Caliphate of Abu Bakr who fought them." [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H656] The Ahadith you quoted prior to your #26 were both about apostates. So obviously those people who Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will recognise would have been Muslims in his life time like Musailimah, Ansi, Saajjah, and Khawarij. But after his death these people became apostates and deserted Islam and became disbelievers again. You have admitted that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will recognise the leaders of heretics by their faces and they will recognise him. You are contesting that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) knowing what they did after him, so lets judge this on basis of Hadith. It is important that base of explanation is laid before I proceed to explain the issue, the base. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is reported to have informed: “I swear by Allah, I do not know whether my companions have forgotten or have pretended to forgot. I swear by Allah that the Apostle of Allah (sallalahu alayhi was'salam) did not omit a leader of a wrong belief (fitnah)--up to the end of the world--whose followers reach the number of three hundred and upwards but he mentioned to us his name, his father's name and the name of his tribe.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B35, H4231] When these leaders will go to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) he will say my companions, my companions the angels will point out that they invented innovations after you [those who invent innovations are leaders of the sects]: “'Abdullah reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying; I shall be there at the Reservoir {Al Kauthar} before you, and I shall have to contend for some people, but I shall have to yield. I would be saying: My Lord, they are my friends, they are my friends, and it would be said: You don't know what innovations they made after you?” [Ref: Muslim, Book 30, Hadith 5690] "... therefore, be cautious lest one of you should come (to me) and may be driven away like a stray camel. I would ask the reasons, and it would be said to me: You don't know what innovations they made after you? And I would then also say: Be away.” [Ref: Muslim, B30, H5686] Now lets use Ahadith to find out if Prophet (sallallahu alayhiwas’sallam) knew what the leaders of innovators invented and who the innovators were. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) clearly about the kufr of Khawarij that they will kill muslims [killing muslims is kufr] and that they will appear in Iraq, they will read Quran but will go out of Islam as an arrow goes through a target, meaning a little sign of Islam will be upon them etc. Their leader Abdullah bin Dhil Khuwaisira, the Tamimi, the Najdi, the Khariji, the Kafir came to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) accused him of being unjust and not fearing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in distributing the spoils of war. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) foretold about him that he has companions and also foretold that from his progeny a group of people would rise who would read Quran … till end: “He again looked at him and he was going back. Upon this he (the Holy Prophet) said: There would arise a people from the progeny of this (man) who would recite the Qur'an glibly, but it would not go beyond their throats; they would (hurriedly) pass through (the teachings of their) religion just as the arrow passes through the prey. I conceive that he (the Holy Prophet) also said this: If I find them I would certainly kill them as were killed the (people of) Thamud.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2319] He foretold about Musailmah and the Hadith clear states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said to him: “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: That the Messenger of Allah said: "In Thaqif there is a liar and a destroyer." [Ref: Tirmadhi, Vol1, B46, H3944] Bani Thaqif was located in Yamama and Musailimah the Liar claimed Prophethood from this tribe: “It was narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Messenger of Allah said: “I saw wristbands of gold on my arms, so I blew into them, and I interpreted them as being these two liars, Musailimah and ‘Ansi.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, Vol 1, B35, H3922] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) pin pointed who will claim Prophethood: “Allah's Messenger said, "While I was sleeping, I was given the treasures of the earth and two gold bangles were put in my hands, and I did not like that, but I received the inspiration that I should blow on them, and I did so, and both of them vanished. I interpreted it as referring to the two liars between whom I am present; the ruler of Sana and the Ruler of Yamama." [Ref: Bukhari, Book 59, Hadith 660] These Ahadith establish that people Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will know exactly what these leaders [and their followers] were engaged in. Therefore Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will not be unaware of their deviations but he will know what they did. Importantly Ahadith establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is presented the deeds of believers and he praises Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) if he sees good and seeks forgiveness for the believer if he sees sins, see: “My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and we talk to you, and my demise is also a great good for you (because) your deeds will be presented to me. If they are good, I will praise Allah, and if they are bad, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you.” [Ref:Narrated by Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalani, through Harith in his al-Matalib-ul-‘aliyah, 4: 22-3 # 3853] So how could he be unaware of the deeds of Muslims? Also the following Hadith narrated by Imam Qastallani (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala): "It is reported by Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Mawahib-e-Ladunnia, Volume 7, Page 204] To conclude the discussion on this topic Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) recognised the leaders of Khawarij and foretold what the Khawarij will do. He foretold what Musailimah the Liar will do (i.e. claim Prophethood), told about Sajjah the Liar (i.e. false Prophetess) and told about Ansi of Yemen from capital Sana. He told about the Khawarij and the reasons for there apostasy everything he told in his life time. He told about the Rawafiz, that they will curse my companions. He warned about getting invovled on issue of Taqdeer because he knew this will be cause of tribulation. He foretold there will be thirty liars, false claimants of prophethood. All these people Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) recognised and he knew about all of them who would emerge till the judgment day. Then the Ahadith are evidence that all the deeds of Muslims are presented to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and in another hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) says that he will see the deeds of people that take place till judgment day. Yet, you say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will not know what the apostates and heretics and me and you and everyone else did after him. Shameless ignorance of Quran and Ahadith and black hearted people with Kufr filled hearts will ignore the truth of creed of Ahle Sunnat and falsehood of your creed. As supplementary reading for you I recommend two of my articles which also deal with issues related to the issue of apostates and heretics: - Further Clarifying Hadith Of; O My Lord They Are My Companions. - Studying Phrase Of Hadith; O Lord My Companions! It Will Be Said: They Introduced New Things Into Religion After You. You wrote: “None of the scholars above said that the Prophet sallallho alayhi wa sallam knew their true conditions, some said they are apostate and the Prophet sallallho alayhi wa sallam will recognize them according to what he knew of them being Muslim when he was alive, or they are hypocrites and the Prophet sallallho alayhi wa sallam will call them according to their apparent state, and he did not know their inner state, or these people are innovators and sinners the Prophet sallallho alayhi wa sallam will recognize them by their marks of Wudhu, or some few even said they are apostates and hypocrites, yet they will still have marks by which they will be recognized. So all of these scholars agree that the Prophet sallallho alayhi wa sallam was NOT aware of these people's apostatsy or innovations.” Firstly, you quoted Imam Nawavi (rahimullah), Mullah Ali Qari (rahimullah), Hafiz Ibn Hajar (rahimullah) and Imam Qurtubi (rahimullah). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [way] and best in result.” [Ref: 4:59] Therefore it is against my methodology to refer to the Ulamah on which we dispute. When the Ahadith and Quran is clear then there is no need to dicuss what the Ulamah have written. My methodology is to establish with evidence from Quran and Ahadith and then if there is need to back a aqeedah up with quotes from Ulamah. Part of methodology is that while commenting on a single Ayat/Hadith a commentator may state something which maybe related to that verse individually and not in wider context or in context of specific verse. When a verse/tradtion is interpreted in wider context or in context of specific verse/tradtion then the meaning may change. Hence what the commentators have stated is in context of specific Hadith and not considered wider context. To establish my statement I would like to present the following verse: “Muhammad is not but a messenger. [Other] messengers have passed on before him. So if he was to die or be killed, would you turn back on your heels [to unbelief]? And he who turns back on his heels will never harm Allah at all; but Allah will reward the grateful.” [Ref: 3:144] Tafsir Al Jalalayn, Tafsir Ibn Kathir, Tafsir Ibn Abbas, and others did not interpret the word ‘killed’. Those who are killed in the way of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) they are matyrs hence from wider theological point of view the verse is saying: ‘So if he was to die or be matyred, would you turn back on your heels?’ Point is commentators commented explained without employing the wider context of the Quranic Ayaat. Nor they considered theological implications rather they only explained the immediate text of a Ayaat. Similarly the commentators of Hadith might comment either directly at the content of Hadith while ignoring the wider context and ignore the theological implications. Hence we cannot limit restrict the interpretation of verses of Quran or Ahadith according to what they have stated. We are permitted to interpret the Quran and Ahadith and give new interpretations which our predecessors have not given and as long as our interpretations are in accordance with Quran and Sunnah they are valid. Coming to the issue of witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) the evidence which proves Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) knows sees/hears the actions of his Ummah and mankind. What the Mullah Ali Qari, Imam Nawavi have written does not contradict or refute any aspect of Hazir Nazir because they have commented on a individual Hadith and not related the text of Hadith to wider context of Ahadith and Quran. Hafiz Ibn Hajr’s and Al Qurtubi’s commentaries state nothing contradictory to hearing/seeing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). With regards to what the commentators wrote did they conclude that based on this it is established that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will not know the innovations and apostasy of people? Or are you implying this from what they have written? As I understood is that they have commented on individual Hadith without relating to theological implications of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) knowing the deeds. If you assume that these scholars have written and their commentaries refute Hazir Nazir please clearly and emphatically argue your case explaining to me how you assumed or understood what you did. My intellect cannot comprehend how these quotes in anyway refute Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) being Hazir and Nazir. The scholars have written many things and this was also written by a scholar: "It is reported by Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Mawahib-e-Ladunnia, Volume 7, Page 204] Commentator Sahih Al Bukhari, Imam Ibn Hajr Al Asqalani (rahimullah) writes, I quote Urdu translation from, ‘Buzurgoon Kay Aqeedeh’, quote: “Hamaray Ulama e kiram nay farmaya ke Hazoor sallallahu alayhi was’sallam ki zindgi aur wafat meh kohi farq nahin voh apni Ummat ko dekhtay hen aur un ki halatoon, niyyatoon aur raazoon aur dil kee batoon ko jantay hen aur yeh aap per bilqul zahir hen, is meh kohi poshidgi nahin.” [Ref: Muwahid Ladunya, Volume 2, Page 387] Also please check on the following pages 77 onwards to 83. Link: http://www.scribd.com/doc/9674825/Haq-Par-Kaun-Urdu Some are strong and directly related to the Hazir Nazir others are supplementary evidence. You presented the following: “Moreover have a look at the following Ahadith: “Anas reported that a person was charged with fornication with the slavegirl of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him). Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said to 'Ali: Go and strike his neck. 'Ali came to him and he found him in a well making his body cool. 'Ali said to him: Come out, and as he took hold of his hand and brought him out, he found that his sexual organ had been cut. Hadrat 'Ali refrained from striking his neck. He came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Allah's Messenger, he has not even the sexual organ with him.” [Sahih Muslim Chapter 11, Book 37, Number 6676] Imam Nawawi made the chapter with the name of; "THE EXONERATION OF THE SLAVEGIRL OF ALLAH'S APOSTLE (MAY PEACE BE UPON HIM) FROM A FALSE CHARGE” So here we come to know that Prophet peace be upon him was not witnessing or Present that is why Prophet peace be upon him did not know about the case of slave girl. Next hadith clears this issue. When Ali R.A. told Prophet peace be upon him that he has not sexual organ, Prophet peace be upon him said to Ali : “The absent can not see what the witness see.” [Musnad Ahmad 1/83, Ziaa in al-Mukhtarah 1/248, Silsilah as-Saheehah no: 1904] First of all, you shamelessly plagiarized the material from another website and only your contribution in the above quote is the first underlined part, also removing of ‘5thly’. Have moral spine and at least give the credit to those whom you copy/paste from because this is not good system of life. The intelligent people don’t plagiarize and if they do they state its not from them and also plagiarize from those who know. Secondly, this Hadith is against what is stated in the Quran. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And those who accuse chaste women, and produce not four witnesses, flog them with eighty stripes, and reject their testimony forever. They indeed are the Fasiqun (liars, rebellious, disobedient to Allah).” [Ref: 24:4] In another verse: “And for those who accuse their wives, but have no witnesses except themselves, let the testimony of one of them be four testimonies (i.e. testifies four times) by Allah that he is one of those who speak the truth.” [Ref: 24:6] Another verse: “Why did they not produce four witnesses? Since they (the slanderers) have not produced witnesses! Then with Allah they are the liars.” [Ref: 24:13] Four witnesses are required for Zina yet according to the Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is reported to have instructed killing of man without four witnesses being presented. Therefore this Hadith is clearly against what Quran teaches and one cannot expect Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) to disregard teaching of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Therefore to take this Hadith as evidence for anything in religion is transgression and it’s evidence is invalid. There are Ahadith which clearly indicate the Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) that he took four witnesses in cases of Zina: “A man came to Allah's Apostle while he was in the mosque, and called him, saying, "O Allah's Apostle! I have committed illegal sexual intercourse." The Prophet turned his face to the other side, but when the man gave four witnesses against himself, the Prophet said to him, "Are you mad?" The man said, "No." So the Prophet said (to his companions), "Take him away and stone him to death. " [Ref: Bukhari, B89, H280] Another much longer Hadith records that a companion saw his wife engaged in illicit sexual intercourse but the companion could not provide four witnesses hence Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) did not carry out the punishment on the basis of accusation. Hadith states: “Hilal bin Umaiya accused his wife of committing illegal sexual intercourse with Sharik bin Sahma' and filed the case before the Prophet.” Prophet said to the Sahabi: "Either you bring forth a proof (four witnesses) or you will receive the legal punishment (lashes) on your back." To which the Sahabi replied: "O Allah's Apostle! If anyone of us saw a man over his wife, would he go to seek after witnesses?" But Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) continously repeated: "Either you bring forth the witnesses or you will receive the legal punishment (lashes) on your back." Then the companion took an oath: "By Him Who sent you with the Truth, I am telling the truth and Allah will reveal to you what will save my back from legal punishment." Then the verse of Quran was revealed regarding Sahabi and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) recited it: “As for those who accuse their wives...' '... (her accuser) is telling the truth.' Hadith records: “Then the Prophet left and sent for the woman, and Hilal went (and brought) her and then took the oaths (confirming the claim). The Prophet was saying, "Allah knows that one of you is a liar, so will any of you repent?" Then the woman got up and took the oaths and when she was going to take the fifth one, the people stopped her and said, "It (the fifth oath) will definitely bring Allah's curse on you (if you are guilty)." So she hesitated and recoiled (from taking the oath) so much that we thought that she would withdraw her denial. But then she said, "I will not dishonor my family all through these days," and carried on (the process of taking oaths).” After which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: "Watch her; if she delivers a black-eyed child with big hips and fat shins then it is Sharik bin Sahma's child." Later she delivered a child of that description. So the Prophet said, "If the case was not settled by Allah's Law, I would punish her severely." [Ref: Bukhari, B60, H271] Number of things are established from this Hadith, a) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) demanded four witnesses, b.) he did not accept the oath taken by companion, c) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) knew if she took the fifth oath Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will punish her. d) He gave description of child which if met would establish the accusation against her, e) the child born was as Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) which established the charge against the woman was truth. f) Despite this incriminating evidence Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) did not impliment the punishment upon her because of lack of witnesses. Hence conclusion the Hadith of slavegirl is unreliable because it contradicts a established verse of Quran as well as Sunnah of beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). You also quoted the following: “The absent can not see what the witness sees.” Once, again this Hadith is connected with the Hadith of Muslim and same inconsistency exists between the Quran and the Hadith. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “What the witness sees the absent cannot see.” I believe from this you’re insinuating that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) was not Hazir/Nazir upon the actions of people. Your logic is, if he was, then he would have known the incident has not taken place and he would have known that the accused is missing sexual organ. As a note, this is the last time I would inferred your position from the material you write or plagiarize. So in future if your argument is not presented and coherently, logically argued I will not derive it on your behalf. It’s your responsibility to present your case not mine to infer. Otherwise I would quote about fifty Ahadith and Verses and let you derive my arguments from them. Coming back to the topic, to answer your argument there are number of things you need to know. Firstly, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) did not see the actions of mankind immediately after the verses of Shahid were revealed rather this station was improved gradually and this station was perfected when the last and finale verse was revealed. Therefore before the perfection was achieved there is no guarantee that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) knew/saw everything. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has referred to the Quran as a Book without doubt and that he will protect it from alterations but note this was before the Quran was completely revealed. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) declared about the entire book that He will preserve it even before it was revealed. Similarly Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) declared: “O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) declared:“And strive for Allah with the striving due to Him. He has chosen you and has not placed upon you in the religion any difficulty. [it is] the religion of your father, Abraham. Allah named you "Muslims" before [in former scriptures] and in this [revelation] that the Messenger may be a witness over you and you may be witnesses over the people. So establish prayer and give Zakah and hold fast to Allah. He is your protector; and excellent is the protector, and excellent is the helper.” [Ref: 22:78] But being declared as a witness and as a witness over us, does not mean he became witness instantly. Instead the station of Shahid was improved until it was perfected in him, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) declared this: “And verily the latter portion will be better for thee than the former. And verily thy Lord will give unto thee so that thou wilt be content.” [Ref: 93:4/5] In his life best station of Ilm/Shahid of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) was upon which he died on. But the seeing of deeds and actions continued after his death: “And say: "Do deeds! Allah will see your deeds, and (so will) his Messenger and the believers. And you will be brought back to the All-Knower of the unseen and the seen. Then He will inform you of what you used to do." [Ref: 9:105] ”They will present their excuses to you when ye return to them. Say thou: "Present no excuses: we shall not believe you: Allah hath already informed us of the true state of matters concerning you: It is your actions that Allah and His Messenger will observe: in the end will ye be brought back to Him Who knoweth what is hidden and what is open: then will He show you the truth of all that ye did.” [Ref: 9:94] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) seeing the actions of mankind is established from these Ahadith as well: “My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and we talk to you, and my demise is also a great good for you (because) your deeds will be presented to me. If they are good, I will praise Allah, and if they are bad, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you. [Ref:Narrated by Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalani, through Harith in his al-Matalib-ul-‘aliyah, 4: 22-3 # 3853] “Bakr bin ‘Abdullah also reported that the Holy said: My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and you are responded. And when I will die my demise will be a great good for you. Your deeds will be presented to me, if I see goodness, I will praise Allah, and if I see wrongs, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you." [Ref: Ibn Sa‘d, at-Tabaqat-ul-kubra (2: 194); ‘Ali bin Abu Bakr Haythami related in Majma‘-uz-zawa’id (9:24)] Long story short, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) improved in his knowledge and in his mojzaati ability of seeing/hearing throughout his life and he reached perfection of seeing/hearing i.e. – being witness, near the end of his life. Hence he could not have seen/heard everything. Therefore this hadith does not refute our Aqeedah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) witnessing deeds of believers. My assumption is these two even though they are contradictory to Quran and Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) it could be that the incident narrated in them is prior to revelation of verses which require four witnesses. If this was/is the case this would automatically vindicate the Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat’s Aqeedah of Hazir/Nazir because this would establish the incident took long before the finale part of life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) hence its evidence against our Aqeedah is pointless. [Note: Material Seperated - Three arguments Against Hadhir Nazir] Anotherly (lol!), the following Hadith is in favour of Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat; “What the witness sees the absent cannot see.” Before I present the explanation how this Hadith supports the Aqeedah of Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat the base of explanation has to be laid. Allah said that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has been sent as a Apostle to be witness over mankind: "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] This is further attested in the following verse, which states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is witness over mankind: “And strive for Allah with the striving due to Him. He has chosen you and has not placed upon you in the religion any difficulty. [it is] the religion of your father, Abraham. Allah named you "Muslims" before [in former scriptures] and in this [revelation] that the Messenger may be a witness over you and you may be witnesses over the people. So establish prayer and give Zakah and hold fast to Allah. He is your protector; and excellent is the protector, and excellent is the helper.” [Ref: 22:78] This Hadith establishes that a witness is one who is able to see and if cannot see he is absent (i.e. literally Ghayb). Hence if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is witness over mankind and he was sent as a witness to mankind then he must be able to see the actions. Otherwise he was/is not hearing seeing type of witness and if he is not hearing/seeing type of witness then he is not witness but absent and if he is absent then why did Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) say: "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said he is witness then how can you attribute to him qualities which are not of a Shahid but qualities of Ghayb – i.e. not being present, hearing, seeing? If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) sent him as a Shahid Rasool over mankind and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) did know meaning of Shahid then why do you disbelieve in what He stated and instead you have believed in Kufr and follow the footsteps of apostates i.e. your elders, and not believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His most excellent Messenger Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam)? Believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) who has sent his beloved Messenger Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) as a Shahid over us as He sent Messenger to Firawn. Believe that he is Shahid over us with the qualities of Shahid and not with qualities of Ghayb if you are from Muslims. You quoted the following Hadith: “It is mentioned in a hadith: Narrated An-Nu'man bin Bashir: My mother asked my father to present me a gift from his property; and he gave it to me after some hesitation. My mother said that she would not be satisfied unless the Prophet was made a witness to it. I being a young boy, my father held me by the hand and took me to the Prophet. He said to the Prophet, "His mother, bint Rawaha, requested me to give this boy a gift." The Prophet said, "Do you have other sons besides him?" He said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "Do not make me a witness for injustice." Narrated Ash-Shabi that the Prophet said: "I will not become a witness for injustice." [Ref: Bukhari, Book 48, Hadith 818] According to this hadith mentioned in Bukhari it is clear that Prophet peace be upon him will NOT become witness for injustice.” The Hadith is pretty self explanatory but I will write a brief account. A companion wanted to gift his son. His mother recommended that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) should be witness to the event. Hence the father bought the son in presence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and wished to give his son a gift making Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) a witness. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) enquired the companion had any other children and the companion affirmed upon which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: "Do not make me a witness for injustice.” Implying that giving a gift to one child and ignoring the others is injustice hence he does not wish to be witness of the injustice. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: “Thereupon he (the Holy Prophet) said: Fear Allah, and observe equity in case of your children. My father returned and got back the gift.” [Ref: Muslim, B12, H3965] “I narrated this hadith to Muhammad (the other narrator) who said: Verily we narrated that (the Holy Prophet) had said: Observe equity amongst your children.” [Ref: Muslim, B12, H3970] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: “I heard the Messenger of Allah as saying: He who amongst you sees something abominable should modify it with the help of his hand; and if he has not strength enough to do it, then he should do it with his tongue, and if he has not strength enough to do it, (even) then he should (abhor it) from his heart, and that is the least of faith.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H79] Here Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) saw one child being preferred over the others and he declared this is injustice and he spoke out against it because it was appropriate for him to do so. You have taken the following portion out of its natural context: "Do not make me a witness for injustice.", to argue Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will not see injustice i.e. major and minor sins. This implies that he is not seeing/hearing actions. I understand the speech of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) as part of Jawami Al Kalim in other words, short expression widest in meaning, hence it is not an issue with me even if you isolate the words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). The issue is Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has stated: "Do not make me a witness for injustice. … “I will not become a witness for injustice." If you take the statement the following statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) to mean: “I will not become a witness for injustice.", that he will never be witness to injustice taking place then this is incorrect and it contradicts Ahadith. Here something which we both do agree on: “My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and we talk to you, and my demise is also a great good for you (because) your deeds will be presented to me. If they are good, I will praise Allah, and if they are bad, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you.” [Ref:Narrated by Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalani, through Harith in his al-Matalib-ul-‘aliyah, 4: 22-3 # 3853] “Bakr bin ‘Abdullah also reported that the Holy said: My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and you are responded. And when I will die my demise will be a great good for you. Your deeds will be presented to me, if I see goodness, I will praise Allah, and if I see wrongs, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you." [Ref: Ibn Sa‘d, at-Tabaqat-ul-kubra (2: 194); ‘Ali bin Abu Bakr Haythami related in Majma‘-uz-zawa’id (9:24)] This establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will see in his life time major and minor sins of his Ummah and he will then supplicate Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for forgiveness. The following verses are also evidence that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will see the actions of believers: “And say: "Do deeds! Allah will see your deeds, and (so will) his Messenger and the believers. And you will be brought back to the All-Knower of the unseen and the seen. Then He will inform you of what you used to do." [Ref: 9:105] ”They will present their excuses to you when ye return to them. Say thou: "Present no excuses: we shall not believe you: Allah hath already informed us of the true state of matters concerning you:It is your actions that Allah and His Messenger will observe: in the end will ye be brought back to Him Who knoweth what is hidden and what is open: then will He show you the truth of all that ye did.” [Ref: 9:94] Therefore the interpretation that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will not and did not see injustices taking place is refuted. Why did the companion wanted to make him Witness for the event in the first place? The answer is they believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is witness upon their deeds as a result they wanted to make him eye witness to act of father being good to his son. Then on the judgment day he will testify to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that they did good deeds. Father wanting to gift his son is good deed but to ignore the others is sinful and injustice. As a result when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) would be bearing witness against these people in the court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It was for this reason Messenger (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: "Do not make me a witness for injustice.” If they make him witness to sins then he will bear witness against them. Secondly considering that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is Shahid upon us, according to Quran, the phrase could mean; “Do not commit injustices.” As a father says to son who has been caught smoking/drinking; “Do not ever make me ever witness this sinful act again.” This does not mean that father wishes for the son to engage sinful acts in secret rather means: “Do not ever engage in such sinful acts.” Implication is if you make me witness upon your deeds [which I inevitably will because deeds are presented to me] then I will bear witness against you. Hence the statement of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) in reality is teaching not to engage in acts which are sinful. Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) saying: "I will not become a witness for injustice." Now if we take the literal meaning of quote then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) indeed did not become witness for injustice because he spoke against it and prevented the companion from only gifting his one son and ignoring the other. So in the specific context Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) did not be a witness to injustice. If you take the phrase literally and generally then this is contradicted by those Ahadith which establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is witnesses the actions of people and seeks forgiveness for Muslims for their sins and praises Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for the good deeds. Apart from these Ahadith if I will with mercy of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) I can quote twenty-five Ahadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) witnessed injustice taking place. The phrase of Hadith; "I will not become a witness for injustice." means; "I will not become a witness for injustice [and remain silent over it]." or could mean; "I will not become a witness for injustice [and not censor and correct it].” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) censored the injustice and suggested correction i.e. – treating all children equally. You have employed this Hadith in refutation to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) being hearin/seeing type of witness. Nothing could be more unjust then your belief that Ummah will bear testimony in defence of Prophets based on being told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) who hasn’t seen/heard the events which has told his Ummah about. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is the most just from creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and the most truthful in creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). As such he will bear witness in defence of Ambiyah (alayhis salaam) because he has seen/heard the events of all Ummats. It would be injustice and lie if he bears witness in defence of Ambiyah (alayhis salaam) without seeing/hearing the events. Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) does not lie and is not unjust to anyone because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has sent him as truthful Prophet [who is from amongst truthful Prophets]: “That He may ask the truthful about their truth. And He has prepared for the disbelievers a painful torment.“ [Ref: 33:8] Yet you are adamant that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is going to bear witness even though he has not seen or heard anything. Did the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) not say that not to make him witness for injustice and that he will not be witness for injustice, here: "Do not make me a witness for injustice." … "I will not become a witness for injustice." Instead of him being witness to injustice he will be committing injustice according to your belief if he has not seen/heard the events himself. You force this injustice upon the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) despite the fact that our beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has negated injustice for himself and Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has declared him to be truthful. Are you without shame and do you not have fear of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? Will you not then believe in Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) like we the Muslims believe? Will you not believe in him as a truthful and just Prophet, and reject/disbelieve in the Kufr you hold to, and walk on the straight path and leave innovations which have lead you away from the path of Islam? Finally, your argument against Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) being hearing/seeing type of witness is that because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said that he will not be witness to injust therefore he is not hearing/seeing type of witness. This argument is based on Qiyas and Qiyas is not evidence on issues of creed. The Qadiyani’s employ your methodology to support their argument that Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) has died. They quote all the verses in which the word ‘rafa’ has been used to mean raise in honor and status. Therefore in the verse “… bal rafa’ullahu alayhi …” [Ref: 4:158] the raising of Isa (alayhis salaam) isn’t in meaning of physical raising but rising in status. You are following footsteps of heretics who have always sought to distort the meaning of Quran by inferring from other verses while completely ignoring tons of Ahadith. We Muslims follow the methodology of Ahle Sunnat and we interpret the verses according to what the Ahadith indicate and apply a meaning to a verse which is in harmony with the Ahadith. In order to clarify the methodology of Ahle Sunnat I will provide a example. ‘Rafa’ according to Quran can meaning and does mean rising of status but Ahadith indicate and the verse indicates Isa (alayhis salaam) did not die. The verse states neither they killed him on cross nor they killed him by other means: “And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; …” [Ref: 4:157] The Hadith state Isa (alayhis salaam) will return and die. Quran states, death is twice, birth is twice [Ref: 40:11]. Period before birth is one death, birth, then death and then life again, that’s two deaths two lives [Ref: 2:28]. Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) if he was born, died, will come to life again to during time of Imam Mahdi, die again and will come to life again for judgment day. This is; death, life, death, life, death, life, that’s three, deaths three lives, this contradicts Quran, therefore it cannot be correct. Therefore if we take Ahle Sunnat’s Aqeedah, period before his birth equales death, then birth – grew up – raised alive, will return – die, and then will be raised for judgment day, this is total two deaths two life, as it should be. Hence based on all this data the only feasible meaning of ‘Rafa’ is Isa (alayhis salaam) being raised alive. We the Muslims consider and account for all the details and according to these details assign a meaning to a verse/word. The heretics disregard the all the evidence and infer the meanings of words from other verses where the word has been used in different meaning. On basis of this difference they attack a clear explicit understanding of verse like you have been doing. Our position on Hadhir Nazir is based on complete analysis of all the available evidences and we do not disregard any evidence. Nor we distort the meaning of verses of Quran by employing the methodology of enemies of Islam. If the methodology of enemies of Islam was the correct methodology then the fundamental aspects of creed will be in danger. If the methodology of refuting the fundamental by indirect means was correct then how would we the Muslims establish that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has knowledge for everything, all the time, when Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) questioned Musa (alayhis salaam) about his staff? To refute the fundamental with indirect means and then to determine a new fundamental position which contradicts the verse is not Tafsir but distortion of Quran and one who distorts the Quran with Tafsir bir’ra’i is Kafir according to one Hadith and according to other one destined to hellfire. Save your self from the Kufr and fire of hell and do not distort the book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). [Continued ...]

Firstly the hadith states two upon receiving the bowl Tamim ad-Dari (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Adi bin Badda which was sold for the price of ONE thousand Dirhams. This one thousand Dirhams were divided by them which if divided between the two would be five hundred Dirhams each. Tamim ad-Dari (radiallah ta’ala anhu) returned his share to the family who the money belonged. The amount which he should have returned should be what he received by selling the bowl i.e. five-hundred Dirhams but the figure which he returned is stated to be fifty-thousand Dirhams and also note from Adi bin Badda it is stated that fifty-thousand Dirhams were taken. How can they return the family what they did not gain by selling? The bowl was sold for ONE THOUSAND Dirhams and each got five-hundred. Hence the right of family was not one-hundred-thousand but only a one-thousand Dirhams. This does not bid well for the authenticity of the Hadith and Hadith is unreliable account of historical event. I just checked the Hadith on Sunnah.com and discovered that Hadith is stated to be fabricated (i.e. Maudu). Urdu translation published by Shabirbrothers and translated by Muhammad Muhayyud-din Jhangeer, page 323, hadith 2985, there the hadith is classified as Ghareeb (i.e. strange/Scarce). Therefore the Hadith is no evidence and cannot be utilized as evidence on matters of Fiqh or Aqeedah. Secondly, lets ignore for the sake of argument the faults established above. When Tamim ad-Dari (radiallah ta’ala anhu) returned the returned the money he told the family that Adi bin Badda also received half of the money. The hadith says the family took Adi bin Badda to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) to retrieve the money from him when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) asked them for proof that Adi bin Badda received the money: “They took him to the Messenger of Allah but he asked them for their proof, which they did not have, …” So Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) instructed them to take oath Adi bin Badda to take the oath which he did. Then two witnesses got up and took oath as witnesses and the fifty-thousand/five-hundred Dirhams were taken from Adi bin Badda. The draw down, Tamim ad-Dari (radiallah ta’ala anhu) bore witness to that Adi bin Badda received the half of the money as well. He therefore bore witness to a event which he himself was WITNESS to. He was the partner in crime and he bore witness against his partner that his partner had received five-hundred/fifty-thousand Dirhams. Thirdly, there are Sahih Ahadith on this issue: “A man from Banu Sahm went out with Tamim ad-Dari and Adi ibn Badda'. The man of Banu Sahm died in the land where no Muslim was present. When they returned with his inheritance, they (the heirs) did not find a silver cup with lines of gold (in his property). The Messenger of Allah administered on oath to them. The cup was then found (with someone) at Mecca. They said: We have bought it from Tamim and Adi. Then two men from the heirs of the man of Banu Sahm got up and swore saying: Our witness is more reliable than their witness. They said that the cup belonged to their man. He (Ibn Abbas) said: The following verse was revealed about them: "O ye who believe! When death approaches any of you....." [Ref: Abu Dawood, B24, H3599] "A man from Banu Sahm went out with Tamim Ad-Dari and 'Adi bin Badda. The Sahmi man died in a land in which there were no Muslims. When they arrived with what he left behind, they searched for a bowl made of silver which was inlaid with gold. The Messenger of Allah had the two of them take an oath. Then they found the bowl in Makkah, and the person said: 'We purchased it from Tamim and 'Adi.' So two men among the relatives of the Sahmi man stood to take an oath by Allah that they (his family) had more right to it than them." He said: "So it was about them that the following was revealed: “O you who believe! (When death approaches any of you then) take the testimony (5:106)." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B44, H3060] The actual issue was that one party claimed to have purchased the bowl and other party said the bowl is ours. Both parties were telling the truth hence no judgment was passed on the issue because both parties produced witnesses. One party said bowl belonged to x hence we are its heirs and on this they presented witnesses to prove the bowl belonged to their x hence they should be its heirs. The other party said we purchased it from Adi bin Badda and Tamim ad-Dari (radiallah ta’ala anhu) therefore it is our. They presented witnesses to support their claim as well. It was then that: “… relatives of the Sahmi man stood to take an oath by Allah that they (his family) had more right to it than them.” They started taking oaths instead of producing witnesses which proves other party did not purchase the bowl but usurped, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) reminds them that take testimony of a witness. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) did not give the bowl to them on the account of oath. This proves nothing for you in refutation to Hazir Nazir. Fourthly, aqeedah of Hazir Nazir is fundamental aspect of Quran evidences of which have been discussed previously and in sha’allah at the end of this response I will add a comprehensive explanation of Hazir Nazir. You are trying to refute aqeedah of Hazir Nazir with Qiyas and Qiyas is not proof against Nass e Qatti and worst part is the Hadith on which you based your Qiyas on is maudu/ghareeb. Quran has explicit evidence which proves Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knows all at all times. We cannot employ Qiyas – LIKE on the issue of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) asking Musa (alayhis salaam) and over turn the meaning of Nass e Qatti. Your aqeedah is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is not hearing/seeing type of witness and he will bear witness on judgment day without seeing actions of Jinn, mankind and previous Ummats. You are trying to imply from the Hadith that people bore witness ‘without’ seeing in this Hadith therefore Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will also bear witness without hearing/seeing. Even more disgraceful aspect is that the Hadith is fabricated. Yet you are using it for Qiyas to support your Aqeedah that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has not seen the events to events which he will be bearing witness about. Finally, now I am going to argue my case that these two Ahadith which you quoted help to establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) sees and saw the events about which he will bear witness on judgment day. Tamim ad-Dari saw the event and told the family that Adi bin Badda received half of the bowls price. [Ref: Tirmidhi, B47, H3336] Witnessing of Khuzaymah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) who had heard from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) that he had bought the horse. [Ref: Dawood, B24, H3600] In both these cases at least one person has actually seen the events and others are bearing witness or claiming based on what that one eye-witness told them. Now, the time for magic has come the time to pull the truth out of hat. From the above two mentioned Ahadith of Tirmadhi, Abu Dawood we deduce that there be at least one person who is EYE-WITNESS and if he is truthful and if he has told others then others can bear witness to a event and there witnessing will be accepted. You see the Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness because they were told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Which is established in this Hadith: “...He will say: ‘Muhammad and his ummah.’ So Muhammad and his ummah will be called, and it will be said to them: ‘Did this one convey the message to his people?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet came to us and told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message.’ That is the words of Allaah, ‘Thus We have made you a just (and the best) nation.’ He said: Just, so that you will be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger will be a witness over you.” [Ref: Musnad Imam Ahmad, Hadith 1164] Then based on the principle we derived from the two Ahadith of Tirmadhi and Abu Dawood it must be that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is EYE-WITNESS. The principle derived indicates at least one should be EYE-WITNESS and we the Muslims believe that one witness from all the chain is Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Our belief is supported by the following Ahadith: "Narrated AbdurRahman ibn A'ish: Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said: I saw my Lord, the Exalted and Glorious in the most beautiful form. He said: What do the Angels in the presence of Allah contend about? I said: Thou art the most aware of it. He then placed HIS PALM between my shoulders and I felt its coldness in my chest and I came to know what was in the Heavens and the Earth. He recited: 'Thus did we show Ibrahim the kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth and it was so that he might have certainty.' (6:75)" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3245, Tafsir Surah S'ad] "[...] Then I saw Him put his palms between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of his fingers between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me and I recognized everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? [...]" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3246, Tafsir Surah S'ad] "It is reported by Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Mawahib-e-Ladunnia] You wrote [in read] and quoted my material [in green]: “Now ofcourse Prophet (Sallalho Alayhi Wa Sallam) WILL be present and seeing on the Day of Judgement and will also bear witness that the earlier prophets convyed the messages and NEVER did I deny this fact, however this bearing witness will not be based on Him actually being present, hearing and seeing all the previous nations and events in the world but will rather be based on the knowledge he has received from revelation (i.e. Quran) and even you have admitted this fact in one of your article where you said: RasoolAllah will bare witness against previous nations, and his nation, hence Allah gave him book which explains to him everything about past present, and future nations, so by knowing the material of the book he would know exactly what had happened in past, and will happen in future, this is how his witnessing is truthful and will be accepted by Allah. This is EXACTLY the belief of the deobandis. However in this thread you said: "Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness based on the news which he has recieved from Quran. There is no proof what so ever in this regard. You have used qiyaas to infer this non-sense. There is only proof that Ummah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'salam) will bare witness based on what they were told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam): “... ‘Did this one convey the message to you?’ and they will say, ‘No.’ It will be said to him: ‘Did you convey the message to your people?’ and he will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said to him: ‘Who will bear witness for you?’ He will say: ‘Muhammad and his ummah.’ So Muhammad and his ummah will be called, and it will be said to them: ‘Did this one convey the message to his people?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet came to us and told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message.’ That is the words of Allaah, ‘Thus We have made you a just (and the best) nation.’ He said: Just, so that you will be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger will be a witness over you.” [Ref: Musnad Imam Ahmad, Hadith 1164, Sunan Ibn Maajah, Hadith 4284] The underlined proves that Ummah will bare witness on account of being told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam). Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness on account of reading it in the Quran? You have deduced based on Qiyas that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness based on the knowledge he has recieved from Quran. There is not a single hadith or verse of Quran which states this.” You have severely and clearly contradicted yourself in your aqeeda. You yourself are not clear in your aqeeda. Now I advice you to learn the real issue of IKTHILAF and then come to argue instead of blaming me. Alhamdullillah I am sure about my aqeedah. Moreover, how does this hadith prove that Prophet sallallho alayhi wa sallam will NOT bare witness based on the knowledge he has recieved from Quran? Can you show me a single hadith or ayat of the Quran which shows that the witness will be based on actually having seen the previous nations and not based on previous knowledge recieved via revelation? Moreover i will post some hadith later on which SUPPORT my stance i.e. the witness has to be based on previous knowledge.” Let’s go through the first statement of mine which you quoted in the context of the article. The first quote was from this article: http://www.islamimehfil.com/topic/22039-qull-ghayb-knowledge-of-lawh-mahfooz-al-qalam-known-to-rasoolallah/ Readers can find the references on this link I won’t quote them here. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: "... every dry or green object their mention as been made in kitab al mubeen (i.e clear book)." In another verse: "...what ever big or small object their mention has been make in kitab al mubeen (i.e clear book)." Another verse states: "There is no moving creature on earth but its sustenance dependeth on Allah. He knoweth the time and place of its definite abode and its temporary deposit: All is in kitab al mubeen (i.e clear book)." Another verse records: "…by Alim Ul Ghayb { i.e. Allah} from Whom is not hidden the least little atom in the heavens or on earth: Nor is there anything less than that, or greater, but is in the kitab al mubeen (i.e clear book)." And finally another verse: "And what ever Ghayb there is in HEAVENS and EARTH it mention has been made in kitab al mubeen (i.e clear book)." And in this article I established name of Quran is Kitab Al Mubeen, which is established from this verse: "... there as come to you from Allah a Noor and Kitab al mubeen (i.e. clear book).” [Ref: 5:16] In other words the knowledge in the Preserved Tablet and the Pen to which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said write, and it asked what shall I write, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said write everything that is to take place till judgment day, hadith: “… of faith until you know that what has come to you could not miss you, and that what has missed you could not come to you. I heard the Messenger of Allah (May peace be upon him) say: The first thing Allah created was pen. He said to it: Write. It asked: What should I write, my lord? He said: Write what was decreed about everything till the Last hour comes. O Bunai! I heard the...” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B41, H4683] All this knowledge is written by the Pen in the Preserved Tablet is in the Quran. In this context this was written: “RasoolAllah will bare witness against previous nations, and his nation, hence Allah gave him book which explains to him everything about past present, and future nations, so by knowing the material of the book he would know exactly what had happened in past, and will happen in future, this is how his witnessing is truthful and will be accepted by Allah.” Now let me explain to you what the statement actually means, I wrote that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) gave him a book (i.e. Quran) which explains everything about that has happened in past, everything will happen in future and everything which is happening at present. This everything is not everything that you and me can read in translations of Quran. Instead this everything includes all the events which happened from the beginning of creation and will happen till the judgment day. Hadith explains what type of everything was meant; everything Zahir from Quran or everything from the beginning to judgment day. Here this was the Hadith: “Narrated 'Umar: One day the Prophet stood up amongst us for a long period and informed us about the beginning of creation (and talked about everything in detail) till he mentioned how the people of Paradise will enter their places and the people of Hell will enter their places. Some remembered what he had said, and some forgot it.” [Ref: Bukhari, B44, H414] To conclude, all that exists in creation which we consider dry or green, dry or wet, big or small, and all that we consider Ghayb all this is mentioned stated in the Quran. Your computer keyboard do you consider it big or small, dry or green, wet or green, and all that happens behind your back and out of your site and hearing, far or near, in your body or out of your body, do you consider it Ghayb or not? All that you and I, and we all human beings classify big is mentioned in Quran be it computer or anything else. Coming to Hadith, it establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) told of everything that was to take place from beginning of creation till the judgment day and till they go to hell and paradise. The word everything in my quote was inclusive of this and in other words inclusive of knowledge of the Pen and the Preserved Tablet. You telling me Deobandi’s believe that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) knows EVERYTHING that has happened from beginning of creation and that will happen till the end of creation? I am EX-DEOBANDI, I know all what you believe and all that you don’t. You are incapable of understand what is written you lack the ability to read properly. If you actually believe what I explained you are the only Deobandi who believes in this. In fact I know you don’t believe in this because you are the same guy who is arguing against Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) knowing all the knowledge of the Preserved Tablet, remember! In the second quote you have highlighted following: “Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness based on the news which he has recieved from Quran. There is no proof what so ever in this regard.” and this: “Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness on account of reading it in the Quran?” To explain this I need to quote what was written by you. You wrote in post #18: “You need to produce strong proof to show that, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) stating that people will bear witness in defense of Prophets and he will bare witness upon the people is ACTUALLY the hearing seeing type of witness and NOT the witness based on Previous Knowledge and the news that He (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) had received from the Holy Quran (i.e. the News that Allah ta'ala has already foretold that the Prophets alayhi Salam had indeed convyed the messages.)” And it was in this response to this that I enquired where is the proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness after reading the text of Quran which states Prophets delivered the messages given to them. There are Ahadith which indicate that Ummah will say our Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) told us that Prophets delivered the message given to them. I said give me proof in where Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said: ‘I WILL BEAR WITNESS BECAUSE I READ IN QURAN THAT PROPHETS DELIVERED THE MESSAGE.’ Or give me evidence in which Allah said: ‘O PROPHET MUHAMMAD (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) YOU BEAR WITNESS BECAUSE YOU HAVE READ IN THE VERSES THAT PROPHETS DELIEVERED THE MESSAGE.’ Point was that there is NO PROOF on which you believe that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness because he read in the Quran that Prophets delivered the messages given to them. Rather this is what you have deduced with QIYAS. You and I both know that Aqeedah cannot be based on QIYAS instead clear/explicit text is required. We have clear/explicit text saying Ummah will bear witness because of being told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and we the Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat believe this because the explicit/clear hadith states this. Can you quote me one hadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) or Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said in Hadith or Verse that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness due to being told? Coming back to what I wrote, the news being discussed in these quotes is that Prophets delivered the message. In Quran there is no verse in the Quran or atleast not in my knowledge which states explicitly that Prophets delivered there message. I know of only one verse of the Quran which instructs Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) to say: “O Messenger, announce that which has been revealed to you from your Lord, and if you do not, then you have not conveyed His message. And Allah will protect you from the people. Indeed, Allah does not guide the disbelieving people.” [Ref: 5:67] So to assume that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will has read the Quran due to it he will know Prophets delievered the messages given to them is stretch. Suppose, I say Zahid read the book; ‘Ali Baba And The Forty Thieves’ and because of that he knew: “Say: Allah is One …” to the end. [Ref: Surah Ikhlas]. To establish this first we need to establish first he has got the book, two he can read and understand book and three the quote which I alleged Zahid read is in the book i.e. - “Say: Allah is One …” [Ref: Surah Ikhlas] If it’s in the book then we have reasonable assumption to conclude that he did read it. If it’s not even in the book then what I alleged is baseless. Now if the quote is in the book, then we have probale base now we only have to establish that he read it from the book and not heard it from someone else. Now first we need to establish that there are verses which state Prophets delivered the message to their respective nations. Then we have probale cause and if they are in the Quran then I will concede and agree that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) read them in the Quran. Then you will have to establish that he will bear witness due to reading these verses. Remember NO QIYAS and NO LOGIC in matters of Aqeedah. Once we have this then we will see if it contradicts and refutes all our evidence or does it supplement our understanding. You wrote: “You have severely and clearly contradicted yourself in your aqeeda. You yourself are not clear in your aqeeda. Now I advice you to learn the real issue of IKTHILAF and then come to argue instead of blaming me. Alhamdullillah I am sure about my aqeedah.” Both of my quotes have absolutely nothing to do with each other they are totally unrelated. One talks about Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) knowing the all that is in the Preserved Tablet and bearing witness over the actions of entire mankind from Adam (alayhis salaam) to the last man because he knows all what they did and will do, he will all their deeds good and the bad. Ibn Kathir establishes this in his Tafsir: “as witness” means, a witness to Allah's Oneness, for there is no God except He, and a witness against mankind for their deeds on the Day of Resurrection. “and We bring you as a witness against these people” (4:41). This is like the ayah: “that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you” (2:143)“and a bearer of glad tidings, and a warner.” means, a bearer of glad tidings to the believers of a great reward, and a warner to the disbelievers of a great punishment.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 33:45] The other quote is about evidence which I have explained in ‘Ali Baba Forty And The Thieves’ discussion. So here go the quotes again: “Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness based on the news which he has recieved from Quran. There is no proof what so ever in this regard.” … “Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness on account of reading it in the Quran?” Now I have explained to you like a little ten year old I think the question is warranted; where is there a contradiction between these two statements of mine? Only senseless brain of your could percieve this to be contradiction because it has not learnt how to read and understand a book. Aqeedah of Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat is that knowledge of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) consists of mainly of two categories; 1) knowledge via Quran, 2) and knowledge via seeing/hearing the actions of mankind and Jinkind as they happened. Knowledge via Quran is two types, the Zahir, and the Batin. The knowledge of Zahir of Quran can be gained by anyone and depends upon effort and capacity. The knowledge of Batin of Quran is reserved for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and Awliyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). The Batin knowledge of Quran is of the Preserved Tablet and the Pen, which only the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and elect from Awliyah-Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) have access to. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) was given all the knowledge of the Preserved Tablet and the Pen via Quran. The second aspect of Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) knowledge is Mushayda Alal Ghayb (i.e. Seeing Of Ghayb). This is of three types ; one, where Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) showed him EVERYTHING, (Ahadith Tirmadhi). Second, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) seeing the actions of Mankind and Jinn-kind as the events takes place. Thirdly, the presenting of deeds to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) by the angels and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) seeking forgiveness for sins and praises Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in happiness if he sees good. I believe in all these sources are for Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) knowledge and I do not deny or disbelieve in any of them. Once again let’s bring you back to my statement, I wrote: “RasoolAllah will bare witness against previous nations, and his nation, hence Allah gave him book which explains to him everything about past present, and future nations, so by knowing the material of the book he would know exactly what had happened in past, and will happen in future, this is how his witnessing is truthful and will be accepted by Allah.” Before you go on the read ahead I want you to utilize the spongy sack between your ears and try to draw conclusion based on what I have stated in the above paragraph. Try to answer these questions; did Muhammad Ali, al Qadri, al Razavi, al Akhtari contradict his own Aqeedah according to what he wrote in this paragraph? Or did Muhammed Ali al Qadri, al Razavi, al Akhtari state his Aqeedah and the Aqeedah of his predecessors and the Muslims? Don’t use your brain let me answer it for you save it for something else. My above quote is related to Batini aspect of Quran – the Preserved Tablet & Pen, and my other statement is related to Zahiri aspect of Quran which you and I can access. And in that quote I was merely asking you to quote me a single Hadith/Ayaat in which it is written that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness upon being told like Ummah was told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Coming to the following statement: “Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness based on the news which he has recieved from Quran. There is no proof what so ever in this regard.” … “Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness on account of reading it in the Quran?” [Note; Please refer to full quote if you wish, I am not going to quote it full, just what you underlined.] You believe that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness due to the news which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) received clearly and explicitly and apparently. Hence I asked where is the proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness based upon the Anba Al Ghayb (i.e. news of unseen) given to him in [Zahir of] Quran. You are a Deobandi and you do not believe in Batini meanings of Quran yet you believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness based upon the news of Ghayb he has received in Quran. Hence my question was asking you to quote me a single clear/explicit verse of Quran or Hadith which establishes your Aqeedah. These two statements are completely unrelated and opposite of each other. In a nutshell for these two statements to establish contradiction in my Aqeedah, both these statements need to be related to either Zahiri aspect of Quran or Batini aspect of Quran. If the both statements were about Zahiri aspect then there will be contradiction in my Aqeedah or if both statements were about Batini aspect then there will be contradiction in my Aqeedah and more importantly the statements have to be on the same topic/individual/thing. It is clear that both of these statements are unrelated and have nothing in common with each other. Coming to the quote; “RasoolAllah will bare witness against previous nations, and his nation, hence Allah gave him book which explains to him everything about past present, and future nations, so by knowing the material of the book he would know exactly what had happened in past, and will happen in future, this is how his witnessing is truthful and will be accepted by Allah.” I concluded this because I quoted the following verse in the article, just before the quote: “One day We shall raise from all Peoples a witness against them, from amongst themselves: and We shall bring you as a witness against these (thy people): and We have sent down to thee the Book explaining all things, a Guide, a Mercy, and Glad Tidings to Muslims.” [Ref: 16:89] Hence it would only make sense if I conclude the subject mentioning the witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Note this verse 16:89 is reply to the following: "It states that when this verse was recited then Prophet peace be upon him shivered and said "O Allah I am witness upon the people in which i am (living). How can I be witness of those to whom I have not seen?" [Ref: Tafseer Ibn Abi Haatim 3/956, Tabrani is Mojam alKabeer 19/243, Wahidi in his Tafseer 2/55, Abu Nuyeem in Muarifa tul Sahaba no: 63] The verse 16:89, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness about the events [that have taken place in past, will take in future] because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has sent a book which explains all things (i.e. tibyanilli qulli shay’i) and as a result of this Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will be able to bear witness. Basicly the article was written to establish the following Aqeedah of Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has been granted knowledge of the Preserved Tablet and the Pen. This verse 16:89 was part of evidence and the verse also connected with Hadhir Nazir topic. Hence I concluded the all the evidence up to that point in the context of the verse as well as the other evidence. I merely stated one aspect of my Aqeedah because it is was directly connected with the subject of article and did not mention aspect of Mushayda Alal Ghayb because it was not connected with the topic I was writing about. This ikhtisar in stating my Aqeedah you interpreted as a contradiction in my Aqeedah. I wonder how would you judge Ahadith in which some details are omitted but mentioned in another Hadith! Contradictions, I believe! Or would you be intelligent enough to realize ikhtisar in one place is not proof of contradiction if more details is found in another place. If one person says; I believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Ahad and week later you also hear him says; I believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Samad. Will you go charge of having contradiction in his Aqeedah? Or will you be intelligent enough to realize he believes Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Ahad as well as Samad. Will you realize that he affirmed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) being Ahad because this was part of that conversation and in the second conversation he affirmed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) being Samad because it was requirement of what he was discussing at that time? Have you grasped the point I am making or do I need to spell it out? I am not going to trust your judgment I rather explain it myself. Point being made is that something maybe affirmed in one place and something else being affirmed in another place about same topic/individual/thing is not contradiction. Let me tell you how to establish a contradiction in a statement. The contradiction is if one says; ‘Allah is One!’ and then on another occasion says; ‘Allah is not One!’ or says; ‘Allah is Two not One!’ Now if you employ what you learnt from this lesson I would like to ask you how I have contradicted my own Aqeedah in the following two quotes: “RasoolAllah will bare witness against previous nations, and his nation, hence Allah gave him book which explains to him everything about past present, and future nations, so by knowing the material of the book he would know exactly what had happened in past, and will happen in future, this is how his witnessing is truthful and will be accepted by Allah.”, and in this quote; “Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness based on the news which he has recieved from Quran. There is no proof what so ever in this regard.” … “Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness on account of reading it in the Quran?” [Note; Please refer to full quote if you wish, I am not going to quote it full, just what you underlined.] Where did I state Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) does NOT know Ghayb of past, present, future hence he will NOT be witness? Based on my explanation of second statement [which did not require explanation it is clear and emphatic enough for a two year old] how did you conclude that it contradicts the first one? What I advise you is to read and think and ask questions about what you read to make sure that you have understood correctly. I was not jibing you when I said you need to learn the real issue and I am not jibing you right now when I wrote read and think. Reading books or material will not make you understand it. Spending time on your own and thinking about what you read and listening to your mind will make you understand. I have absolutely no doubt or confusion or contradiction in my Aqeedah. I advised you before and I advised you now because it hurts me to see people ruin their own selves. I know no one heeds advice given ulta logh bewaqoof kehtay hen for advising them but it is Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) to give good advice. It is entirely upon you to act on it or throw it right on my face and spit on my face and say; that’s your advice and that’s the payment of it. I am a Muslim and compassion is part of my nature and as long as I have this compassion in my heart I will advise. At certain times I would say harsh and even use insulting tone and you will have to forgive me for that and bear with me as I bear with you. You wrote: “Moreover, how does this hadith prove that Prophet sallallho alayhi wa sallam will NOT bare witness based on the knowledge he has recieved from Quran?” While refering to this hadith: “... ‘Did this one convey the message to you?’ and they will say, ‘No.’ It will be said to him: ‘Did you convey the message to your people?’ and he will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said to him: ‘Who will bear witness for you?’ He will say: ‘Muhammad and his ummah.’ So Muhammad and his ummah will be called, and it will be said to them: ‘Did this one convey the message to his people?’ They will say: ‘Yes!’ It will be said: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet came to us and told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message.’ That is the words of Allaah, ‘Thus We have made you a just (and the best) nation.’ He said: Just, so that you will be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger will be a witness over you.” [Ref: Sunan Ibn Maajah, Hadith 4284] This hadith proves that Ummah will bear witness on account of being told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). It does not prove that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness on account of reading in the Quran because of three reasons. 1) The Hadith does not state that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness because of reading it in the Quran. 2) On this Hadith you have assumed that; since Ummah will bear witness upon being told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam), hence Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) must also bear witness due to being told by someone else – i.e. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Even though the Quran doesn’t explicitly state that Prophets delivered the message. Even if we suppose there is a verse which states; Prophets delivered the message, which I don’t know about, even then it will be Qiyas. 3) Qiyas is not the criteria to base Aqeedah on and your Aqeedah that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness by reading the Quran is pure speculation for which you have no clear/explicit proof. These three reasons establish soundly why the Hadith in discussion is not proof for your Aqeedah. You wrote: “Can you show me a single hadith or ayat of the Quran which shows that the witness will be based on actually having seen the previous nations and not based on previous knowledge recieved via revelation?” I have quoted enough evidence to prove my case that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness because he is seeing/hearing type of witness. It will be too much repition as a result I won’t but near the end in sha’allah I will write a comprehensive account of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) being hearing/seeing type of witness. One thing which I have not already mentioned is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is said to have been sent as a Shahid and naturally one who is Shahid must also be present, hearing and seeing otherwise he cannot be Shahid. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said: “Say, "O People of the Scripture, why do you disbelieve in the verses of Allah while Allah is witness over what you do?" [Ref: 3:98] Quran addresses the Jews and Christians and calls them people of scripture, ahlul kitab. How about if I argue; they are ahlul kitab because they have not received a book, no book was given to them! Can it be possible that they be Ahlul Kitab without ever receiving a single word of guidance inform of book? I am sure you will agree that it is impossible. Or what if I say: ‘O educated people, I want to give you some advice.’ Then I say educated doesn’t mean educated it means one who never went to school and can’t read or write. Will you call accept that this is definition of ‘educated people’? What I am trying to point out is that using a word which means one thing but I declare it means this. Would you call this interpretation or mutilation? When Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated O Prophet we have sent you as a Shahid, you are saying no Shahid at all. If he has been sent as a Shahid and neither heard or saw about what he was going to bear witness about then what kind of Shahid is he. Did Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) not know what the word Shahid means and what the phrase; We have sent you as a witness, means? Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the knower of all knew well that the phrase means hearing/seeing type of witness and not deaf, blind type of non-witness. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has said: “O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has been sent as a witness upon us: “And strive for Allah with the striving due to Him. He has chosen you and has not placed upon you in the religion any difficulty. [it is] the religion of your father, Abraham. Allah named you "Muslims" before [in former scriptures] and in this [revelation] that the Messenger may be a witness upon you and you may be witnesses over the people. So establish prayer and give Zakah and hold fast to Allah. He is your protector; and excellent is the protector, and excellent is the helper.” [Ref: 22:78] This establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) was sent as a witness seeing/hearing type witness and he also currently witnessing our deeds because the verse says: “… and in this [revelation] that the Messenger may be a witness upon you …” Who is Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) witness upon? He is witness upon two groups of people the Muslims and non-Muslims because he has been sent to entire mankind as Prophet/Messenger: “Abu Huraira reported that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon hlmg) said: I have been given superiority over the other prophets in six respects: I have been given words which are concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror (in the hearts of enemies): spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship;I have been sent to all mankind and the line of prophets is closed with me.” [Ref: Muslim B4, H1062] As a result of his being sent to entire mankind the following part of verse 22:78 means: “… and in this [revelation] that the Messenger may be a witness upon you [i.e. O Mankind] …” This is why Ibn Kathir stated in verse 33:45 that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness against mankind for their deeds: “as witness” means, a witness to Allah's Oneness, for there is no God except He, and a witness against mankind for their deeds on the Day of Resurrection. “and We bring you as a witness against these people” (4:41). This is like the ayah: “that you be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger be a witness over you” (2:143)“and a bearer of glad tidings, and a warner.” means, a bearer of glad tidings to the believers of a great reward, and a warner to the disbelievers of a great punishment.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 33:45] This proves that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is witness upon all that takes place at present and will be tile the judgment day, which is also clearly established in the following Hadith: "It is reported by Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Mawahib-e-Ladunnia] [Continued ...]

<< Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) gave interpretation of the verse but did he negate the hearing and seeing type of witnessing? Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) stated people will bear witness in defence of Prophets and he will bare witness upon the people. How does that mean Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is not hearing seeing type of witness? How does the understanding that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was sent as a hearing seeing type of witness go against the Tafsir which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) gave? Comming to the point in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) asked the companions who recited the phrase while he was leading the prayers. Does every question indicate that one needs to gain knowledge? When Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) asked Musa (alayhis salaam) what do you have in your hand and he replied a staff. Does that mean Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) didn't know what Musa (alayhis salaam) had in his hand and by asking Musa (alayhis salaam) Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) learnt that it was a staff. Or should we assume that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) knows everything else but Allah didn't knew Musa (alayhis salaam) was carrying a staff? The hadith of Jibraeel (alayhis salaam), when he came in the form of human and enquired about, Emaan, Ihsan, etc. When Jibraeel (alayhis salaam) left then Prophet told the companions that this was Jibraeel and he came to teach you deen. Point is some time question is not asked to gain knowledge but question is asked for other purposes. In case of Musa (alayhis salaam) it was to make Musa (alayhis salaam) realize what he was carrying. Then he was asked to throw it upon the floor and the staff turned to a snake and left the area. In case of Jibraeel (alayhis salaam) he questioned Prophet (sallallahu aalyhi was'sallam) so the companions can learn about important aspects of deen. In case of Prophet's (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) the question was asked so he steps up and companions recognize him and to tell him the good news how angels responded to his praiseworthy innovation. Imagine this, you live in a village and you perform prayers five times a day. In small village areas people know each other and recognize each other. It would be impossible for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) not to know and recognize the person and his voice because they live in same city and the companions performed prayers behind Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam). Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) I see at the back has i see in the front and your outward sincerity and your inner-sincerity are not conealed from me. This is state of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) all the time and we interpret evidence contrary to it in light of other examples. In this case we interpreted the questioning of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) in light of questioning of Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) and Jibraeel (alayhis salaam). Let me explain the methodology involved in interpreting, we believe that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) knows all ghayb and all that is apparent and this is fundamental belief. Therefore any evidence which indicates that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) did not know something we interpret it to conform to fundamental teaching of aqeedah so it accords the fundamental aqeedah and not refutes it. Similarly the fundamental aqeedah regarding Prophet knowledge is that he sees at the back as he sees at the front and he knows sinerity in the hearts of believers. Now any hadith which contradicts this fundamental aqeedah we interpret it to conform to teaching of Islam. Your methodology is shaytaani methodology because you are attemtping to undermine a fundamental aspect of aqeedah with indirect evidence. Why don't you undermine Allah knowing everything by point of Musa (alayhis salaam) carrying staff in his hand? You will not undermine basic aqeedah of Allah knowing evryhting with Musa (alayhis salaam) example but you are willing to and wanting to undermine the basic/fundamental aqeedah regarding Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) by using his question as example? Foolish people like you who do not know the asool of religion engage in such foolishness. We the Muslims understand that if a verse/hadith goes against fundamental aqeedah we interpret the verse/hadith to conform to fundamental aqeedah. We the Muslims do not refute the fundamental aqeedah as a result of verse/hadith. >> You wrote that being present at a event and being witness to any event is not same: “I will In Sha' Allah address this issue in the next part of my argument in much more detail since you basics are not clear regarding the difference of being a Witness to an event and being actually PRESENT at that event. These two things are NOT the same.” You what? Whaaat! You delinquent how can a person be present and not be a witness to events or things that are in his sight or he hears? Deobandi; O! O! He’s blind and deaf that’s why he isn’t witness to events/things, sounds around him. Lol! I answered my self cause is possible you may say this. So let me rephrase the question Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) being present (i.e. sitting) on Masjid Nabvi’s Mimbar. Is he not going to witness the sounds with his ears, and witness the events with his eyes, and see things with his eyes? Will he not be present and be a Witness? What does a Deobandi say? Deobandi: Being witness upon a event and being present at a event are two different things. You are breaking the boundaries of all rational and common sense. You wrote: “Now please read the Bold and Underlined portion of your argument atleast thrice because you have displayed complete ignorance. I wasn't expecting this from someone of your caliber however it's not your fault since you were TAUGHT this. The reason why you people have mixed up this Hazir O Nazir concept is that you think a person MUST be present and see the events he is witness on i.e. you think a person MUST be present and seeing at a crime scene in order to testify in the court however this is NOT true in this case.Now i am going to provide you with two Ahadith which will In Sha' Allah clear your concept.” Before I address anything you have written it is important that I quote my two full quotes which you did not respond to and you could not answer. << You wrote: "I mean how can you deduce the meaning of Hazir o Nazir for the word "Shahid" from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam')'s own Tafsir when he did not give such a meaning himself?" Here pay attention let me establish something for you. Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) states in Quran: “One day We shall raise from all Peoples a witness against them, from amongst themselves: and We shall bring you as a witness against these (people): and We have sent down to thee the Book explaining all things, a Guide, a Mercy, and Glad Tidings to Muslims.” [Ref: 16:89] Because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will be bearing witness on the day of judgment, Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) has sent him to earth to be a witness with eyes, and ears, hearing and seeing: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] Or are you going to argue Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was sent as a witness without eyes, ears and without the ability to hear and see? O now you can interrogate me how these two verses mean seeing hearing type of witness. Now because he was sent as a WITNESS Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) questions Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) about what the angles are arguing about. And Allah the all knower didnt ask because Allah didnt know, Allah asked for a purpose. Prophet said he doesnt know what they are arguing about. The rest read the hadith: Narrated AbdurRahman ibn A'ish: Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said: I saw my Lord, the Exalted and Glorious in the most beautiful form. He said: What do the Angels in the presence of Allah contend about? I said: Thou art the most aware of it. He then placed HIS PALM between my shoulders and I felt its coldness in my chest and I came to know what was in the Heavens and the Earth. He recited: 'Thus did we show Ibrahim the kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth and it was so that he might have certainty.' (6:75)" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3245, Tafsir Surah S'ad] "[...] Then I saw Him put his palms between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of his fingers between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me and I recognized everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? [...]" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3246, Tafsir Surah S'ad] Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) granted all the knowledge in earth and universe to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) in an instant and then asked again but this time he knew all: He (i.e. Allah) said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? I said: Going on foot to join congregational prayers, sitting in the mosques after the prayers, performing ablution well despite difficulties. He again said: Then what do they contend? I said: In regard to the ranks. He said: What are these? I said: Providing of food, speaking gently, observing the prayer when the people are asleep. He again said to me: Beg (Your Lord) and say: O Allah, I beg of Thee (power) to do good deeds, ..." [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3246, Tafsir Surah S'ad] Mukhtasar, Prophet has been sent as a witness to earth and he has been made witness to all the events in an instant. >> Because there were two angles from which your above questioned needed to be addressed I addressed the second angle below: << You wrote: "I mean how can you deduce the meaning of Hazir o Nazir for the word "Shahid" from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam')'s own Tafsir when he did not give such a meaning himself?" To answer you question. Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) has stated: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] First of all lets be logical and not closed and narrow minded. Lets take Shahid in meaning of Witness. A witness must possess atleast two qualities and a kamil will have three essential qualities. A witness must be hazir/present and must be able to see/nazir the events he is witness on. You are witness to the discussion we are having on IslamiMehfil because you are Hazir and because you are Nazir. If you was not Hazir as a creation as a human/Jinn/animal/insect/bird/ etc... that will mean you don't exist. Therefore two most essential qualities for a WITNESS are being HAZIR and NAZIR. In dua of Janaza the word Shahid has been used to mean opposite of ghayb - present. Dua begins, Allahum maghfirli hayyitina wa mayyitina wa shahidina wa ghaybina wa sagheerina wa kabeerina ... which means Allah forigve our alive and dead and present and absent and young and old, those who are males and females. Note here the opposite are mentioned, opposite of dead is alive, opposite of young is old, opposite of male is female, opposite of ghayb (i.e. absent) is present (i.e. Shahid). And note the word Shahid was used for the living who are present in the funeral and ghayb for those who are not. Now tell me when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) bare witness in defence of the Ambiyah will he not be present and will he not be seeing/hearing? From the Tafsir which he gave isn't it obvious that he has to be present and hearing /seeing/ speaking/ understanding/ knowing on the day of judgment and as result of these he will testify on the day of judgment. You claimed to have study concept of Hazir Nazir and fact is you don't know head or tail of the issue. You don't know with what part of Hazir Nazir you should agree or what you should disagree with. Pay attention to this, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) said he will bare witness on the day of judgment. This means he will be Hazir on the day of judgment and seeing, hearing, talking, speaking, answering, understanding, and defending the Prophets. Every creation which is Shahid must also be HAZIR in the creation in some form. >> In the first part I explained the technical side of Hazir Nazir with evidences and in the second part I explained how the word Shahid means Hazir Nazir. Readers please note of my second quote especially the purple part of the quote because you will have to find this in what Haq3909 quoted from me. Here is what Mr Haq3909: << "To answer you question. Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) has stated: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] First of all lets be logical and not closed and narrow minded. Lets take Shahid in meaning of Witness. A witness must possess atleast two qualities and a kamil will have three essential qualities. A witness must be hazir/present and must be able to see/nazir the events he is witness on. You are witness to the discussion we are having on IslamiMehfil because you are Hazir and because you are Nazir. If you was not Hazir as a creation as a human/ Jinn/animal/ insect/bird/ etc... that will mean you don't exist.Therefore two most essential qualities for a WITNESS are being HAZIR and NAZIR. Now tell me when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) bare witness in defence of the Ambiyah will he not be present and will he not be seeing/hearing? From the Tafsir which he gave isn't it obvious that he has to be present and hearing/seeing/speaking/understanding/knowing on the day of judgment and as result of these he will testify on the day of judgment. You claimed to have study concept of Hazir Nazir and fact is you don't know head or tail of the issue. You don't know with what part of Hazir Nazir you should agree or what you should disagree with. Pay attention to this, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) said he will bare witness on the day of judgment. This means he will be Hazir on the day of judgment and seeing, hearing, talking, speaking, answering, understanding, and defending the Prophets. Every creation which is Shahid must also be HAZIR in the creation in some form. Metaphorically speaking you are barking up the wrong tree. The issue of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) in aakhirah being Hazir is not even contented by the foolish I think you are pretty reasonablly educated so why would you contend this beats me. I am ex-Deobandi my advice to you is first learn the real issue of IKHTILAF and then come to argue over it." >> Mr Haq420 deliberately and deceptively omitted the crucial part because it explains how the word Shahid has been used in dua of Janaza to mean Hazir. In future if you going to quote and leave something out do so by indicating it via three dots […] in brackets. You wrote: “Now please read the Bold and Underlined portion of your argument atleast thrice because you have displayed complete ignorance.” I read it three times Mr Deobandi writes I have displayed ignorance and because he can never be wrong therefore I have displayed ignorance. Since you never lie and you can never be wrong in what you say and you always understand everything it must be that I have displayed ignorance. I displayed ignorance when I beautifully established the creed of Muslims from Quran and Ahadith. I displayed ignorance when YOU deliberately omitted what I wrote to conceal from readers that Shahid means Present/Hazir and I displayed ignorance because YOU have intelligence and sense of a infant. If you had any sense or ability to evaluate the evidences of Quran and Hadith you would have understood that truth has come and your batal can not refute it. This is why you have ignored everything that I have wrote and not answered a single point instead you have been making stupid and irrational statements. You are a typical Deobandi who cannot and will not reply to evidence of Ahle Sunnat therefore chooses to ignore presented evidence and instead argues on and on. You ignored the evidence which is from Tirmadhi Shareef, these two Ahadith establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) was shown all there was and will be. I quoted Hadith from Imam Qastallani’s Muwahid Al Ladunia in which Hadith states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will witness all the events till the judgment day. These evidences can solve the entire issue of Hazir Nazir but instead of being a seeker of truth you are one of those people who do not want to believe in Islam instead they have chose for themselves Kufr and no matter how clear the evidence is you will not believe because you have already decided what TRUTH is. You are shameless and senseless. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has blackened your heart with Kufr and destined for you death upon Kufr and you will not believe in Islam regardless of how hard we the Muslims attempt to convince you truth of Islam. You wrote: I wasn't expecting this from someone of your caliber however it's not your fault since you were TAUGHT this. The reason why you people have mixed up this Hazir O Nazir concept is that you think a person MUST be present and see the events he is witness on i.e. you think a person MUST be present and seeing at a crime scene in order to testify in the court however this is NOT true in this case.Now i am going to provide you with two Ahadith which will In Sha' Allah clear your concept.” We the Muslims believe to be a truthful and actual witness in court of law the witness must see/hear the events he is bearing witness about otherwise he is not truthful witness. In other words one does not have to be in the vicinity where the event is taking place he could be any where but as long as he sees the actions he can bear witness. We believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) has been granted the supernatural powers of hearing/seeing by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with which he hears/sees all the actions that take place, this is supported by the following narrations: "It is reported by Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Mawahib-e-Ladunnia] This hadith itself is supported by Hadith in Bukhari which establishes that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) becomes eyes, ears, hands, feet of a believer when he becomes a Muqarrib: "Allah said, 'I will declare war against him who shows hostility to a pious worshipper of Mine. And the most beloved things with which My slave comes nearer to Me, is what I have enjoined upon him; and My slave keeps on coming closer to Me through performing Nawafil till I love him, so I become his sense of hearing with which he hears, and his sense of sight with which he sees, and his hand with which he grips, and his leg with which he walks; and if he asks Me, I will give him, and if he asks My protection, I will protect him; and I do not hesitate to do anything as I hesitate to take the soul of the believer, for he hates death, and I hate to disappoint him." [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H509] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) does not literally become eyes, ears, hands, feet of any creation rather Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) grants his beloved servants the supernatural abilities of hearing, seeing, giving, and traveling. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) granted these supernatural abilities to his beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) hence he saw and heard what can not be known by common person with their eyes/ears. Coming back to what you wrote, we do believe that one bearing witness about the criminal/sinful activities must see/hear the events to be truthful witness. Other type of witnessing of Eman, conviction like of which we bear in Call-To-Prayer; I bear witness there is no god by Allah, I bear witness that Muhammad is Messenger of Allah, this type of witnessing is witnessing of ones on belief Eman and conviction. He declares what is in his heart and in reality he is only human who can be witness to his own belief, eman therefore the Muazzin bears witness to his own belief. You see you believe that one can bear witness without hearing/seeing the events. I say to you; I bear witness that your mother was engaged in illicit sexual activity for money. Now on account of my witnessing will you stone your mother to death? I am bearing witness to your mothers prostitution on account of being told by someone who is reliable and truthful in my judgment. Now what will you go and stone her? Will you allow us to stone your mother to death for a crime which only reliable people have narrated but not seen by the witnesses? Do you think the court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will be a joke on the judgment day? You or anyone else in this earth will not allow someone to be stoned to death on account of reliable truthful witnesses but you think Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will permit the testimony of people who have not seen or heard the events and then send people to hell. Who is more just in judging, you or Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? How can you be more strict and demand that a witness should see/hear to what he bears witness about when to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) you attribute a court system which is neither reasonable nor just. La hawla wala quwwata … You quoted the following Hadith to prove that one can bear witness to events which he has not seen: “The Prophet (peace be upon him) bought a horse from a Bedouin. The Prophet (peace be upon him) took him with him to pay him the price of his horse. The Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) walked quickly and the Bedouin walked slowly. The people stopped the Bedouin and began to bargain with him for the horse as and they did not know that the Prophet (peace be upon him) had bought it. The Bedouin called the Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him) saying: If you want this horse, (then buy it), otherwise I shall sell it. The Prophet (peace be upon him) stopped when he heard the call of the Bedouin, and said: Have I not bought it from you? The Bedouin said: I swear by Allah, I have not sold it to you. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: Yes, I have bought it from you. The Bedouin began to say: Bring a witness. Khuzaymah ibn Thabit then said: I bear witness that you have bought it. The Prophet (peace be upon him) turned to Khuzaymah and said: On what (grounds) do you bear witness? He said: By considering you trustworthy, Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him)! The Prophet (peace be upon him) made the witness of Khuzaymah equivalent to the witness of two people.” [Ref: Dawood, B24, H3600] Before actually answering the point it would be best to narrate Quranic material related to this incident. The following verse of Quran states that transactions carried out on the spot require no writing or witness: “O you who believe! When you contract a debt for a fixed period, write it down. Let a scribe write it down in justice between you. Let not the scribe refuse to write as Allah has taught him, so let him write. Let him (the debtor) who incurs the liability dictate, and he must fear Allah, his Lord, and diminish not anything of what he owes. But if the debtor is of poor understanding, or weak, or is unable to dictate for himself, then let his guardian dictate in justice. And get two witnesses out of your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women, such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called (for evidence). You should not become weary to write it (your contract), whether it be small or big, for its fixed term, that is more just with Allah; more solid as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among yourselves, except when it is a present trade which you carry out on the spot among yourselves, then there is no sin on you if you do not write it down. But take witnesses whenever you make a commercial contract. Let neither scribe nor witness suffer any harm, but if you do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So be afraid of Allah; and Allah teaches you. And Allah is the All-Knower of each and everything.” [Ref: 2:282] It seems that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and the Bedouin verbally agreed the sale and the payment was yet to be made but the Bedouin tracked back on his verbal agreement. Understand that no one carry’s the amount of money to buy a car in his pocket. Maximum the money one carry’s is about hundred to two-hundred pounds in pocket. Same in Prophet’s time he must not have carried the large sum of money on him and when he liked the horse he agreed to purchase it but must have agreed that he will pay the money when he gets home and while on the way home the Bedouin back tracked on the agreement. First Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) had a verbal agreement and no written record and secondly the sale was not carried out on the spot. The money and the horse was not exchanged on the spot. The rule for revelation is that a incident must take place before the verse regarding it is revealed. After this incident the verse was revealed and writing of long and short term agreements became the rule. Witnessing of Hazrat Khuzaymah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was affirmation of his own trust and faith in Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) just as a Muazzin states: I bear witness there is no god but Allah. I bear witness Muhammad is Messenger of Allah. Muazzin only affirms his own faith in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and in Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) Messenger-ship. Due to his truth and faith Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) granted him the status of two witnesses because he knew a time will come when he will be the only witness to verse of Quran which everyone else will forget. So while gathering the text of Quran one verse was found on him but no one other but him knew it. This verse was added into Quran because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) had granted Hazrat Khuzaymah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) status of two witnesses. Coming to the main point, the Bedouin demanded a witness for the agreement and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) did not have a witness. Hazrat Khuzaymah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) bore witness that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) bought the horse: “I bear witness that you have bought it.” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) asked: “On what (grounds) do you bear witness?” To which he replied: “He said: By considering you trustworthy, Apostle of Allah (peace be upon him)!” This indicates the companion was not a FIRST HAND witness to the deal but he was merely bearing witness because he believed that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is truthful hence his claim to purchasing the horse will not be a lie. If someone who is first-hand witness to a event and then faithfully tells another of the event which he witnessed with his eyes. Then the second person can only bear witness saying: I was told by him [i.e. the first hand witness]. But he cannot claim to be FIRST-HAND witness to the event and bear witness as it. Such witnessing will not be considered eye-witness account rather it will be taken as supplementary evidence which corroborates eye-witnesses story. There is no evidence in a single HADITH in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) accepted the WITNESSING of Hazrat Khuzaymah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and said: On the account of Khuzaymah’s witnessing it has been proven that I had purchased the horse. Please quote me a single hadith which establishes Hazrat Khuzaymah’s witnessing was accepted by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Just mere witnessing of Hazrat Khuzaymah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is not proof that one can bear witness without seeing the event and his witnessing is accepted. Where is the evidence which proves that after bearing witness, without seeing the deal, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) said your witnessing is accepted. More importantly, LETS SUPPOSE PROPHET (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) DID ACCEPT HIS WITNESSING TO BE WITNESSING OF EYE-WITNESS. My question is how can this hadith be interpreted to mean that on the judgment day Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness without seeing the events! The answer is via Qiyas, you employ qiyas and argue Hazrat Khuzaymah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) bore witness without seeing so Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will also bear witness without seeing the event. About Qiyas you told me: “… Acharvi Sahab in his Miqiyas E Hanafiyat a long time ago and you seem to follow in their footsteps. However, what you and they don't realise is that anaology cannot be used in matters of aqeedah. Maklook ko Khaliq bay bilkul bhi Qiyas nahi kiya jasakta.It is here where Shirk starts to pour in. Remember that matters related to aqeedah cannot be treated using anaology, similitudes or parables. Textual Proof and Clear evidence is a must. Now coming back to the point which you raised : …” [Ref: Post #16] But my furry friend is now ignoring what you was preaching. In matter of aqeedah indeed no Qiyas is accepted and Alhamdulillah I have presented evidence for every aspect of aqeedah of Ahle Sunnat and you have so far used Qiyas to refute it. You cannot refute Nass e Qatti with Qiyas my friend you should know this. Provide clear explicit text of Quran or Hadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) or Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness on the judgment day even though he hasn’t seen or heard anything. Suppose you and someone are arguing. Someone says he saw your mother engaged in illicit sexual intercourse. You ask him where are the witnesses? Few people walk pass and upon finding out the argument they say we bear witness your mother committed illegal sexual intercourse. You ask them: Was you witness to the event. They say we say it cause we trust this person he is reliable and has never lied to us. Will this witnessing be accepted by you and will then proceed to stone your mother to death? If not, then I rest my case, because we know such witnessing is not acceptable in deen of Islam nor such witnessing can be used to punish anyone. Quran states that a witness must be first-hand witness: “Turn ye back to your father, and say, 'O our father! behold! thy son committed theft! we bear witness only to what we know [from first hand experience] and we could not well guard against the unseen!" [Ref: 12:81] And seeing is essential to witnessing, as it is indicated in the following verse: “He said: "It was she that sought to seduce me - from my (true) self. "And one of her household saw (this) and bore witness, (thus):- "If it be that his shirt is rent from the front, then is her tale true, and he is a liar!"[Ref: 12:26] Witness must be present and first hand witness to the events to be truthful witness: “Never said I to them aught except what Thou didst command me to say, to wit, 'worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord'; and I was a witness over them whilst I dwelt amongst them; when Thou didst take me up Thou wast the Watcher over them, and Thou art a witness to all things." [Ref: 5:117] Hazrat Khuzaymah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was not first hand witness, he did not see the deal taking place and he was not present as a witness while the agreement was being made. Instead he was merely affirming it after hearing it from the mouth of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) as EVERY MUSLIM WILL TRUST AND AFFIRM WHAT PROPHET (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) STATES without doubting it. Witnessing of Hazrat Khuzayman (radiallah ta’ala anhu) contradicts the three quoted verses hence it is not valid Shara’i witnessing which can be taken as proof of event. You quoted the following Hadith: Narrated Ibn Abbas R.A. from Tamim Ad-Dari, regarding this Ayah: O you who believe! When death approaches any of you then take the testimony (5:106). He said: "The people are innocent of it, other than myself and 'Adi bin Badda.' We were Christians who used to frequent Ash-Sham before Islam." They went to Ash-Sham for their business, and they were approached by a freed slave of Banu Sahm, who was called Budail bin Abi Maryam, with some trade. He had a bowl they wanted made of silver, but he wanted a great deal for it. Then he became ill, and willed it to them, and he commissioned them to deliver what was left to his family. Tamim said: "When he died, we took that bowl and we sold it for one-thousand Dirham. Then 'Adi bin Badda and I divided it. When we went to his family to give them what was with us, they searched for the bowl and asked about it. We said: 'He did not leave behind other than this, nor did he give us other than this.'" Tamim said: "When I accepted Islam, after the Messenger of Allah had arrived in Al-Madinah, I felt guilty about that, so I went to his family, and informed them about what had happened. I gave them fifty-thousand Dirham and told them my companion had the same. They took him to the Messenger of Allah but he asked them for their proof, which they did not have, so he ordered them, to have him take an oath in accordance with whatever the people of his religion revered, so he took the oath. Then Allah revealed: 'O you who believe! When death approaches any of you then take the testimony...' up to His saying: 'Or else they would fear that oaths will be admitted after their oaths (5:106).'" So 'Amr bin Al-'As and another man stood to take an oath, and the fifty-thousand Dirham was taken from 'Adi bin Badda.'" [Ref: Tirmidhi, B47, H3336] [Continued ...]

My Latest Response To Haq3909. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It seems that your feeble mind is unable to keep track of the discussion in its context. This same thing happened in the other discussion: http://www.islamimehfil.com/topic/20344-discussion-hadhir-nadhir/ In post 11 note I am lamenting that brother keep my comments in the context of discussion. Fact is that any discussion will divide into sub discussions which are related to main discussions. As this happens it is important to keep track of the mini-discussions as they progress because they might start from a specific point but has they lengthen they become general. As they become general two things begin to happen one the discussion no longer remains strickly about the main topic and two the mini dicussions become general and as result start to confuse people involved in discussion. When discussion becomes general then always revert to point where the mini discussion started and interpret the general statements in it’s context. This time I am going to make a effort to rectify and try to restore contextual relevance. In future responses you will have to draw specificness of general comments from the genesis of discussion. Otherwise the discussion will descend into chaos and confusion which is no benefit to me or to you or to anyone else. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You wrote: “I will mostly ignore the first portion of your discussion since you weren't able to get the gist of my argument however I will address a few points which you have put forth. You said : … Now let me remind you who said it goes in favour. Its actually your Mullahs and whole of the deviant barelwi sect that use the "Shaheed" verses and its tafseer to prove that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bear witness on the Day of Resurrection because He was present and seeing all the previous Ambiya (Alayhi Salam) and their nations.[please refer to JaAlhaq and Taskeen al Kawathir] Then how does the tafseer presented by Prophet (Sallallahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) NOT refute your aqeedah? I will In Sha' Allah address this issue in the next part of my argument in much more detail since you basics are not clear regarding the difference of being a Witness to an event and being actually PRESENT at that event. These two things are NOT the same.” The section you quoted belongs to this part of writing and here it has been inserted in brown into its original context: << You questioned: "Did the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) approve of the hearing and seeing type of witnessing if not negate it?" No Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) did not explicitly state that he will be hearing seeing type of witness in that Tafsir. And why are you even asking me this question any way? Did I claim that this Tafsir of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) refutes those who say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is not Hazir Nazir? Who said it goes in favour and who presented it as evidence to prove Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is a hearing seeing type of witness? No one, then why are you questioning me. I questioned you to establish your fault because you was using this Tafsir to refute seeing hearing type of witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) saying that any tafsir other then the one in hadith is against Prophet's (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) tafsir. My objective was to establish the Tafsir does not refute our aqeedah hence why would you consider anything unacceptable when it does not contradict Prophetic Tafsir. I established that Quran has many meanings a verse can be interpreted to mean many things. If our tafsir contradicts what Prophet said then you have a point but if it doesnt and which it doesnt contradict then how can you say aqeeday of hazir nazir is unacceptable. You employed the Tafsir issue: "Moreover our Holy Prophet Sallallaho Alayhi Wasallam has himself explained the verse 143 of Surah Baqara hence presenting another Tafseer , that goes totally against it is unacceptable." to argue that a Tafsir of verse which states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is Hadhir Nadhir/hearing seeing type of witness is unacceptable. It can only be unacceptable to a Muslim when the Tafsir we the Muslims present contradicts what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) interpreted. When i questioned: "Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) gave interpretation of the verse but did he negate the hearing and seeing type of witnessing?" Purpose was that you will realize that … >> I have noticed that the response which was written regarding the Tafsir was misplaced under the following question for some reason: "How does the understanding that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was sent as a hearing seeing type of witness go in favour of the Tafsir which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) gave?" The portion under this section was about the Tafsir of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) being employed by you to refute hearing seeing type of witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). In its right context it becomes clear question was related to Tafsir and not the verse in other words: << Who said the Tafsir goes in favor and who presented the Tafsir as evidence to prove Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is a hearing seeing type of witness? No one, then why are you questioning me about Tafsir. I questioned you about the Tafsir to establish fault because you are using this Tafsir to refute seeing hearing type of witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) saying that any Tafsir other then the one in hadith is against Prophet's (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) Tafsir. >> Note how the ma-qabl and ma-baad fits the theme. I cannot make sense how the portion got misplaced or where the answer to the actual question went. As a result I will have to write the response to the part again. This refutes nothing at all nor I presented it as evidence to refute or weaken any aspect of your argument. I was only placing the quote in it's original context. Now coming to your criticism, in post #3 you said alleged that we THE MUSLIMS use verses 2:143,4:41 to prove Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is Hazir Nazir and then you quoted Prophetic Tafsir. I in post #13 criticiszed your usage of Prophetic Tafsir to refute hearing seeing type of witnessing and I established that this Tafsir does not refute our aqeedah because other interpretations are possible. Then in post #18 I continued established the Tafsir/verses 2:143, 4:41 on its own do not establish hearing seeing type of witness. Point was that the Prophetic Tafsir and verse 2:143, 4:41 on their own do not REFUTE OR PROVE the CREED OF AHLE SUNNAT. Also in the part which you choose to ignore the argument was that since the scholars of Ahle Sunnat nor did I employ these verses and Prophetic Tafsir to prove Hazir Nazir then why are you critizing us. We didn’t present them as evidence rather YOU SAID dishonestly that these verses and Prophetic Tafsir we use to prove Hazir Nazir. Where as the truth of matter is these verses are part of package and not the main evidence on their own. They help to fill the gaps but they are not fundamental evidence for our creed of Hazir Nazir. Here have a read of it again hopefully this will make better sense: << You questioned: "Did the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) approve of the hearing and seeing type of witnessing if not negate it?" No Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) did not explicitly state that he will be hearing seeing type of witness in that Tafsir. And why are you even asking me this question any way? Did I claim that this Tafsir of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) refutes those who say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is not Hazir Nazir? Who said it goes in favour and who presented it as evidence to prove Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is a hearing seeing type of witness? No one, then why are you questioning me. I questioned you to establish your fault because you was using this Tafsir to refute seeing hearing type of witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) saying that any tafsir other then the one in hadith is against Prophet's (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) tafsir. My objective was to establish the Tafsir does not refute our aqeedah hence why would you consider anything unacceptable when it does not contradict Prophetic Tafsir. I established that Quran has many meanings a verse can be interpreted to mean many things. If our tafsir contradicts what Prophet said then you have a point but if it doesnt and which it doesnt contradict then how can you say aqeeday of hazir nazir is unacceptable. You employed the Tafsir issue: "Moreover our Holy Prophet Sallallaho Alayhi Wasallam has himself explained the verse 143 of Surah Baqara hence presenting another Tafseer , that goes totally against it is unacceptable." to argue that a Tafsir of verse which states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is Hadhir Nadhir/hearing seeing type of witness is unacceptable. It can only be unacceptable to a Muslim when the Tafsir we the Muslims present contradicts what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) interpreted. When i questioned: "Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) gave interpretation of the verse but did he negate the hearing and seeing type of witnessing?" Purpose was that you will realize that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) has not negated the hearing seeing type of witnessing. Which you know that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) has not negated this. So how can you reject the Tafsir of Muslims when it does not contradict what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) has stated. How can a Tafsir of Quran which is supported by Quran be unacceptable to you when it is not in contradicting what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) stated? You don't need to question me if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) proved hearing seeing type of witness from this tafsir because I didnt present it has evidence to prove that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is seeing hearing type of witness. I questioned you to establish the reality of the meaning of verse, to prove to you that you have rejected Prophet being Hadhir Nadhir based on evidence which does not contradict or refute Hadhir Nadhir. Tafsir of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) would only refute Hadhir Nadhir if he stated he is not hearing seeing type of witness. Nature of Quran is Jawami Al Kalim meaning it is written short but has widest meanings: "I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "I have been sent with Jawami al-Kalim, and I was made victorious with awe (caste into the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the earth were brought to me and were put in my hand." Muhammad said, Jawami'-al-Kalim means that Allah expresses in one or two statements or thereabouts the numerous matters that used to be written in the books revealed before (the coming of) the Prophet." [Ref: Bukhari, B87, H141] Interpreting verses of Quran in light of other verses is not going against the interpretation of Quran. But interpreting verses of Quran in light of Quran is according to Jawami al Kalim nature of Quran. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) only gave one interpretation from Quran from the wide meanings he explained one. We cannot limit restrict to one meaning which Prophet gave. The Rawafiz - Shia they take the ahadith of cloak in whch Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) covered Hadhrat Ali, Fatimah, Hassan, Hussain (Allah be pleased with all of them) and recited the verse of tatheer. They say on basis of this that these people were the intended members of Ahli bayt and not wives of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam). To prove to them that wives of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) are also Ahli Bayt what do you and what do we the Muslims do? We go back to Quran and not restrict our selves to hadith only. We quote the entire verse 33:33 and say wives are also Ahli Bayt. Just to refute the creed of Muslims you have adopted the methodology of Rawafiz that you want to stick to hadith only and ignore the book of Allah. >> You need to quote me a single Aalim of Ahle Sunnat who did only employ this Tafsir to establish aqeedah of Hazir/Nazir. The Ulamah employed the Prophetic Tafsir and supplemented this Tafsir with additional evidence and reasoning to substantiate the position of Hazir and Nazir. Would you care to quote me a single reference where a scholar of Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat quoted just the Prophetic Tafsir or the verse and argued this establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is Hazir/Nazir? In the first chapter of Hazir/Nazir, Pehli Fasl, Ayaat Qurania Say Saboot, Jaa Al Haq, page 146/147 Mufti Sahib quotes 33:45, 73:15 and 2:143 and another verse and then he draws conclusions from this hadith without quoting it: “… or more than that. Then his people will be called and it will be said to them: ‘Did this one convey the message to you?’ and they will say, ‘No.’ It will be said to him: ‘Did you convey the message to your people?’ and he will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said to him: ‘Who will bear witness for you?’ He will say: ‘Muhammad and his ummah.’ So Muhammad and his ummah will be called, and it will be said to them: ‘Did this one convey the message to his people?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet came to us and told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message.’ That is the words of Allaah, ‘Thus We have made you a just (and the best) nation.’ He said: Just, so that you will be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger will be a witness over you.” [Ref: Musnad Imam Ahmad, Hadith 1164, Sunan Ibn Maajah, Hadith 4284] Once the Ummah bears witness they will be questioned how come they know that Prophets delivered the message and they will say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) told us. Then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness and there will be no objection. Against their objection Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will bring Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) to bear witness: “One day We shall raise from all Peoples a witness against them, from amongst themselves: and We shall bring you as a witness against these (people): and We have sent down to thee the Book explaining all things, a Guide, a Mercy, and Glad Tidings to Muslims.” [Ref: 16:89] The previous Ummats will not object to his witnessing because I have established previously he was sent as a witness and he had seen all. Quran explicitly states: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15]. [I am not going to deal with Taskin Al Khawatir because you have distorted about too. I will wait for you to prove to me where these scholars only used verses 2:143,4:41, prophetic Tafsir.] Note he was sent to earth as a Witness to witness the events. If these two verses refered to hereafter then Allah would have said, O Prophet truly we have sent you as a Prophet who will be witness on the judgment day. These two verses are about being witness in earthly life and 2:143, 4:41 is about judgment day Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) being called to bear witness to what he witnessed in earthly life. The Tafsir on it’s own is not used as evidence for Hazir Nazir nor the verse on its own was used as evidence for Hazir Nazir but the Tasir was supplemented with other evidence which establish the creed of seeing hearing type of witnessing. The Prophetic Tafsir / verses 2:143, 4:41 on their own are not evidence of hearing seeing type of witnessing but when they are supplemented with other evidences these then establish Hazir Nazir. The part which you did not respond to and ignored was written to establish that I did not and nor did the scholars of Ahle Sunnat employed the Prophetic Tafsir or the Verse 2:143, 4:41 on its own to prove hearing seeing type of witness and neither I employed the verses nor the scholars employed the verses and the Prophetic Tafsir to prove hearing seeing type of witness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). This was what was being questioned by me when I wrote: “Who said it goes in favour and who presented it as evidence to prove Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is a hearng seeing type of witness? No one, then why are you questioning me.” I was insinuating that the Prophetic Tafsir on its own was not used neither by me nor by Scholars of Ahle Sunnat as evidence. Then why are you carrying out Jirah as if I or scholars of Ahle Sunnat presented these two verses 2:143, 4:41 to prove Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is Hazir Nazir. And the question was which did not require answer. You failed to realize it was a rehotrical device to establish already predetermined conclusion. As part of rhetorical device I answered the questioned my self. Since we did not employ these verses and Prophetic Tafsir on their own to prove Hazir Nazir then why are you questioning me? Because it was you who attributed to us that we use these two verses 2:143, 4:41 to prove Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is Hazir Nazir. Yet the truth of matter is that these verses are part of the package which establishes Hazir Nazir creed but not fundamental evidences of Hazir Nazir as you have claimed and attributed them to us. You wrote: "How does the understanding that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was sent as a hearing seeing type of witness go in favour of the Tafsir which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) gave?" Since the answer to this question was lost only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knows how it happened I am going to write the response. The understanding that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is hearing seeing type of witness perfectly accords with the Tafsir of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam). Ummah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) will bear witness in defence of Ambiyah (alayhis salam) the they will be questioned: “’Did you convey the Message?' Noah will say, 'Yes.' His nation will then be asked, 'Did he convey the Message to you?' They will say, 'No Warner came to us.' Then Allah will say (to Noah), 'Who will bear witness in your favor?' He will say, 'Muhammad and his followers. So they (i.e. Muslims) will testify that he conveyed the Message. And the Apostle (Muhammad) will be a witness over yourselves, and that is what is meant by the Statement of Allah "Thus We have made of you a just and the best nation that you may be witnesses over mankind and the Apostle (Muhammad) will be a witness over yourselves." (2.143) [Ref: Bukhari, B60, H14] In another hadith it is recorded the Ummah will be asked how do they know Prophets delivered the message and they will say our Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) told us: “… or more than that. Then his people will be called and it will be said to them: ‘Did this one convey the message to you?’ and they will say, ‘No.’ It will be said to him: ‘Did you convey the message to your people?’ and he will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said to him: ‘Who will bear witness for you?’ He will say: ‘Muhammad and his ummah.’ So Muhammad and his ummah will be called, and it will be said to them: ‘Did this one convey the message to his people?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet came to us and told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message.’ That is the words of Allaah, ‘Thus We have made you a just (and the best) nation.’ He said: Just, so that you will be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger will be a witness over you.” [Ref: Musnad Imam Ahmad, Hadith 1164, Sunan Ibn Maajah, Hadith 4284] This establishes the witnessing of people will be because they have been told and they have not personally witnessed the events. And because the Ummah has not seen the events Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will require Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) to bear witness that Prophets delivered the message because he was made witness to the events by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and following Ahadith are evidence to this: "[...] Then I saw Him put his palms between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of his fingers between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me and I recognized everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? [...]" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3246, Tafsir Surah S'ad] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) recognized everything including all that had happened and will happen. And according to another hadith he came to know everything: Narrated AbdurRahman ibn A'ish: Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said: I saw my Lord, the Exalted and Glorious in the most beautiful form. He said: What do the Angels in the presence of Allah contend about? I said: Thou art the most aware of it. He then placed HIS PALM between my shoulders and I felt its coldness in my chest and I came to know what was in the Heavens and the Earth. He recited: 'Thus did we show Ibrahim the kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth and it was so that he might have certainty.' (6:75)" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3245, Tafsir Surah S'ad] Note the verse quoted says Allah showed Ibrahim (alayhis salaam) the entire universe and in similar fashion Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) came to know everything i.e. seeing. Imam Qastallani recorded: "It is reported by Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Mawahib-e-Ladunnia] You wrote this: “Now let me remind you who said it goes in favour. Its actually your Mullahs and whole of the deviant barelwi sect that use the "Shaheed" verses and its tafseer to prove that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bear witness on the Day of Resurrection because He was present and seeing all the previous Ambiya (Alayhi Salam) and their nations.[please refer to JaAlhaq and Taskeen al Kawathir]” After writing this and to be frank you lied that our scholars uses these verses and prophetic Tafsir to prove Hazir Nazir. In reality these verses and Prophetic Tafsir are part of the package which come with other evidences such as 33:45, 73:15, the Ahadith of Tirmadhi, and one recorded by Imam Qastallani and others … Coming back to what you wrote, after this deceitful deed some how you wrote: “Then how does the tafseer presented by Prophet (Sallallahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) NOT refute your aqeedah?” This indicates that you wrote what you wrote before the question as a justified refutation and based on this refutation you are asking me a question. If you had written, for this and this reason Prophetic commentary means Prophet is not seeing hearing type of witness and then questioned; “Then how does the tafseer presented by Prophet (Sallallahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) NOT refute your aqeedah?” Then the question will have some basis. You are asking me this question as if you have given me the greatest argument against Hazir Nazir on earth prior to this question. And in reality prior to the question there was no argument. I think I get your drift you have based this question based on my answer that the Prophetic Tafsir does not establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) is hearing seeing type of witness. But I also did establish that the Tafsir which we do does not go against the Tafsir of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) because he explained that Ummah will bear witness then he will bear witness. This is proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) and his Ummah will bear witness and does not prove or disprove that Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) witnessing as one who has been seeing/hearing the events. Once again I want to affirm that the Tafsir and the verses which you quoted are part of package and on their own are not proof of Hazir Nazir. I recommend that you read the following response again and think about actually dealing with the issues raised in it: [Continued ...]

Salam alayqum, Jazakallah Khair moteram Saeedi Sahib Allah ta'ala aap ko jaza e khair aur aap kay Allah darajat aur buland karay, ameen.

Post: #26 بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم Dear MohammadAli, I will mostly ignore the first portion of your discussion since you weren't able to get the gist of my argument however I will address a few points which you have put forth.You said :"Who said it goes in favour and who presented it as evidence to prove Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is a hearng seeing type of witness? No one, then why are you questioning me. I questioned you to establish your fault because you was using this Tafsir to refute seeing hearing type of witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) saying that any tafsir other then the one in hadith is against Prophet's (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) tafsir. My objective was to establish the Tafsir does not refute our aqeedah hence..." Now let me remind you who said it goes in favour. Its actually your Mullahs and whole of the deviant barelwi sect that use the "Shaheed" verses and its tafseer to prove that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bear witness on the Day of Resurrection because He was present and seeing all the previous Ambiya (Alayhi Salam) and their nations.[please refer to JaAlhaq and Taskeen al Kawathir]Then how does the tafseer presented by Prophet (Sallallahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) NOT refute your aqeedah?I will In Sha' Allah address this issue in the next part of my argument in much more detail since you basics are not clear regarding the difference of being a Witness to an event and being actually PRESENT at that event.These two things are NOT the same. You wrote: "Here pay attention let me establish something for you. Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) states in Quran: “One day We shall raise from all Peoples a witness against them, from amongst themselves: and We shall bring you as a witness against these (people): and We have sent down to thee the Book explaining all things, a Guide, a Mercy, and Glad Tidings to Muslims.” [Ref: 16:89] Because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will be bearing witness on the day of judgment, Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) has sent him to earth to be a witness with eyes, and ears, hearing and seeing: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] Or are you going to argue Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was sent as a witness without eyes, ears and without the ability to hear and see? O now you can interrogate me how these two verses mean seeing hearing type of witness. Now because he was sent as a WITNESS Allah..." Then again a little further , you said : "To answer you question. Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) has stated: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] First of all lets be logical and not closed and narrow minded. Lets take Shahid in meaning of Witness. A witness must possess atleast two qualities and a kamil will have three essential qualities. A witness must be hazir/present and must be able to see/nazir the events he is witness on. You are witness to the discussion we are having on IslamiMehfil because you are Hazir and because you are Nazir. If you was not Hazir as a creation as a human/Jinn/animal/insect/bird/ etc... that will mean you don't exist. Therefore two most essential qualities for a WITNESS are being HAZIR and NAZIR. Now tell me when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) bare witness in defence of the Ambiyah will he not be present and will he not be seeing/hearing? From the Tafsir which he gave isn't it obvious that he has to be present and hearing/seeing/speaking/understanding/knowing on the day of judgment and as result of these he will testify on the day of judgment. You claimed to have study concept of Hazir Nazir and fact is you don't know head or tail of the issue. You don't know with what part of Hazir Nazir you should agree or what you should disagree with. Pay attention to this, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) said he will bare witness on the day of judgment. This means he will be Hazir on the day of judgment and seeing, hearing, talking, speaking, answering, understanding, and defending the Prophets. Every creation which is Shahid must also be HAZIR in the creation in some form. Metaphorically speaking you are barking up the wrong tree. The issue of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) in aakhirah being Hazir is not even contented by the foolish I think you are pretty reasonablly educated so why would you contend this beats me. I am ex-Deobandi my advice to you is first learn the real issue of IKHTILAF and then come to argue over it." Now please read the Bold and Underlined portion of your argument atleast thrice because you have displayed complete ignorance.I wasn't expecting this from someone of your caliber however it's not your fault since you were TAUGHT this.The reason why you people have mixed up this Hazir O Nazir concept is that you think a person MUST be present and see the events he is witness on i.e. you think a person MUST be present and seeing at a crime scene in order to testify in the court however this is NOT true in this case.Now i am going to provide you with two Ahadith which will In Sha' Allah clear your concept. Narrated Uncle of Umarah ibn Khuzaymah: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) bought a horse from a Bedouin. The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) took him with him to pay him the price of his horse. The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) walked quickly and the Bedouin walked slowly. The people stopped the Bedouin and began to bargain with him for the horse as and they did not know that the Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) had bought it. The Bedouin called the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) saying: If you want this horse, (then buy it), otherwise I shall sell it. The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) stopped when he heard the call of the Bedouin, and said: Have I not bought it from you? The Bedouin said: I swear by Allah, I have not sold it to you. The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Yes, I have bought it from you. The Bedouin began to say: Bring a witness. Khuzaymah ibn Thabit then said: I bear witness that you have bought it. The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) turned to Khuzaymah and said: On what (grounds) do you bear witness? He said: By considering you trustworthy, Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him)! The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) made the witness of Khuzaymah equivalent to the witness of two people. (Abu Dawood Book #24, Hadith #3600) ✔It is clear that Khuzaymah bin Thabit was NOT present at that time but still he bore witness by considering Prophet peace be upon him as a trustworthy person. Now coming to the Next hadith: Narrated Ibn Abbas R.A. from Tamim Ad-Dari, regarding this Ayah: O you who believe! When death approaches any of you then take the testimony (5:106). He said: "The people are innocent of it, other than myself and 'Adi bin Badda.' We were Christians who used to frequent Ash-Sham before Islam." They went to Ash-Sham for their business, and they were approached by a freed slave of Banu Sahm, who was called Budail bin Abi Maryam, with some trade. He had a bowl they wanted made of silver, but he wanted a great deal for it. Then he became ill, and willed it to them, and he commissioned them to deliver what was left to his family. Tamim said: "When he died, we took that bowl and we sold it for one-thousand Dirham. Then 'Adi bin Badda and I divided it. When we went to his family to give them what was with us, they searched for the bowl and asked about it. We said: 'He did not leave behind other than this, nor did he give us other than this.'" Tamim said: "When I accepted Islam, after the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had arrived in Al-Madinah, I felt guilty about that, so I went to his family, and informed them about what had happened. I gave them fifty-thousand Dirham and told them my companion had the same. They took him to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) but he asked them for their proof, which they did not have, so he ordered them, to have him to take an oath in accordance with whatever the people of his religion revered, so he took the oath. Then Allah revealed: 'O you who believe! When death approaches any of you then take the testimony...' up to His saying: 'Or else they would fear that oaths will be admitted after their oaths (5:106).'" So 'Amr bin Al-'As and another man stood to take an oath, and the fifty-thousand Dirham was taken from 'Adi bin Badda.'"(Tirmidhi, Book 47 , Hadith 3336) ✔It is clear that Amr bin Al-'As and another man were NOT present nor had they seen the incident but yet they bore witness and testified by considering Prophet peace be upon him as a trustworthy person. Now ofcourse Prophet (Sallalho Alayhi Wa Sallam) WILL be present and seeing on the Day of Judgement and will also bear witness that the earlier prophets convyed the messages and NEVER did I deny this fact , however this bearing witness will not be based on Him actually being present , hearing and seeing all the previous nations and events in the world but will rather be based on the knowledge he has received from revelation (i.e. Quran) and even you have admitted this fact in one of your article where you said : RasoolAllah will bare witness against previous nations, and his nation, hence Allah gave him book which explains to him everything about past present, and future nations, so by knowing the material of the book he would know exactly what had happened in past, and will happen in future, this is how his witnessing is truthful and will be accepted by Allah. This is EXACTLY the belief of the deobandis. However in this thread , you said : "Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness based on the news which he has recieved from Quran. There is no proof what so ever in this regard. You have used qiyaas to infer this non-sense. There is only proof that Ummah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'salam) will bare witness based on what they were told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam): “... ‘Did this one convey the message to you?’ and they will say, ‘No.’ It will be said to him: ‘Did you convey the message to your people?’ and he will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said to him: ‘Who will bear witness for you?’ He will say: ‘Muhammad and his ummah.’ So Muhammad and his ummah will be called, and it will be said to them: ‘Did this one convey the message to his people?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet came to us and told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message.’ That is the words of Allaah, ‘Thus We have made you a just (and the best) nation.’ He said: Just, so that you will be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger will be a witness over you.” [Ref: Musnad Imam Ahmad, Hadith 1164, Sunan Ibn Maajah, Hadith 4284] The underlined proves that Ummah will bare witness on account of being told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam). Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness on account of reading it in the Quran? You have deduced based on Qiyas that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness based on the knowledge he has recieved from Quran. There is not a single hadith or verse of Quran which states this. You have severely and clearly contradicted yourself in your aqeeda. You yourself are not clear in your aqeeda. Now I advice you to learn the real issue of IKTHILAF and then come to argue instead of blaming me. Alhamdullillah I am sure about my aqeedah. Moreover , how does this hadith prove that Prophet Sallallho Alayhi Wa Sallam will NOT bare witness based on the knowledge he has recieved from Quran?Cn you show me a single hadith or ayat of the Quran which shows that the witness will be based on actually having seen the previous nations and not based on previous knowledge recieved via revelation?Moreover i will post some hadith later on which SUPPORT my stance i.e. the witness has to be based on previous knowledge. Furthermore you said :"There are two possible things which you may have alluded to one, angels saying Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam): "Don't you know what they did after you!" and this issue has thoroughly answered and explained in this dicussion: http://www.islamimehfil.com/topic/19739-hadhir-nadhir-objection/ ". I was following this discussion from the beginning and no where does it answer my questions up to the very end. Rather it would be better if we undertood this hadith in the light of the great Islamic scholars.First lets look at the different versions of the hadith: Narrated Anas: The Prophet said, "Some of my companions will come to me at my Lake Fount (al-Hawd), and after I recognize them, they will then be taken away from me, whereupon I will say, 'My companions!' Then it will be said, 'You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you."[bukhari Volume 8, Book 76, Number 584] Another hadith says:"And, behold! some persons of my Ummah would be brought and taken to the left and I would say: My Lord, they are my companions, and it would be said: You do not know what they did after you, and I would say just as the pious servant (Hadrat 'Isa) said: "I was a witness regarding them as I remained among them and Thou art a witness over everything, so if Thou chastisest them, they are Thy servants and if Thou forgivest them, Thou art Mighty, Wise" (v. 117-118). And it would be said to him: They constantly turned to their heels since you left them. This Hadith has been transmitted on the authority of Waki' and Mu'adh (and the words are): "What new things they fabricated."[ Sahih Muslim Book 040, Number 6847] Imam Nawawi says: والثاني : أن المراد من كان في زمن النبي - صلى الله عليه وسلم - ثم ارتد بعده ، فيناديهم النبي - صلى الله عليه وسلم - وإن لم يكن عليهم سيما الوضوء لما كان يعرفه - صلى الله عليه وسلم - في حياته من إسلامهم فيقال : ارتدوا بعدك ، The second (saying): The people meant are those who (were Muslim) at the time of the Prophet then became apostate after him, and the Prophet will call them even if they did not have the marks of Wudhu as he knew them to be upon Islam in his life, and he will be told: they turned apostate after you.[Commentary of Sahih Muslim under the hadith 247] Scan: http://www.islamweb....d=53&startno=36 Mulla Ali Al-Qari wrote in his “Mirqat” v 10 p 227 about this Hadith: “The Prophet further said: "I will say those people are from me” meaning from my community or my companions. “It will be said, 'You do not know what changes and new things they did after you'” from apostasy, as sins do not prevent from coming to the Hawd and drinking from its water. “Then I will say, 'Far removed (from mercy), far removed (from mercy), those who changed (the religion) after me!" meaning after my death or after accepting my religion and entering my community” Hafiz Ibn Hajar said in “Fath ul Bari” Kitab Riqaq Bab Kayfa Al-Hashr: “Firabri said that it is mentioned from Abi Abdillah Al-Bukhari from Qabisah that these (people) are those who became apostate at time of Abu Bakr and Abu Bakr fought them, meaning until they were killed and died on disbelief. Al-Isma’ili brought a full Isnad of that trough another way from Qabisah. Al-Khattabi said that none of the Sahabah did became apostate, only some hard Bedouins bringing no help to religion did became apostate, and this does not bring any blame on the famous Sahabah… And others said : the disbelief is on its apparent meaning, and the meaning of “my Ummah” is the Ummah of Da’wah (the community addressed by the Prophet , meaning all mankind including disbelievers) and not the Ummah of Ijabah (the community who believed in the Prophet saw, meaning our community), and this is given precedence because of his saying in the Hadith of Abu Hurayrah : “Then I would say to them go away (Suhqan)” and this is also strengthened by the fact that their situation remained hidden to him, and if they were from Ummah of Ijabah, then he would know their situation as their actions are presented to him. And this (view) is refuted by his saying in the Hadith of Anas: “until I recognized them” (‘araftuhum) and the same in the Hadith of Abu Hurayrah. So the Prophet did recognize them, so they could not be disbelievers, rather were people he knew, and he did not know what they did after him. Imam Abu 'Abdillah Al-Qurtubi (author of the famous Tafsir) said in his “Tazkirah fi Ahwalil Mowta wal Akhirah” after quoting the Ahadith of Al-Hawd: “Chapter: Our scholar, may Allah’s mercy be on them all, have stated: Whoever apostasies from the religion of Allah or innovates in it what displeases Allah and what Allah did not legislate, they will be pushed away and distanced from it, and the most pushed away are those who oppose the Jama’ah of Muslims and separate from their way, as the Khawarij with their difference in sects, the Rawafid with their difference in misguidance, and the Mu’tazilah with their categories of passion, all of them are people who have brought change (to the religion). And this is also the case for the darkness of people involved in tyranny and oppression and discredit of the truth and killing those who support the truth and their humiliation. The same for those who commit major sins openly and exceed the bounds in sins and the group of people of deviation and desire and innovation. Then the distance can be in a state then they can approach it after forgiveness if it is a change in actions and not in beliefs. And on this supposition, they will be recognized (by the Prophet) by the marks of their Wudhu, and then they will be told: May you perish. And if they are among hypocrites that were present at time of the Prophet Sallallho Alayhi Wa Sallam and they were showing faith and hiding disbelief, then he will consider them on Zahir (evident actions) and then their covers (real states) will be uncovered (to him) and he will say to them : May you perish. None of the scholars above said that the Prophet Sallallho Alayhi Wa Sallam knew their true conditions, some said they are apostate and the Prophet Sallallho Alayhi Wa Sallam will recognize them according to what he knew of them being Muslim when he was alive, or they are hypocrites and the Prophet Sallallho Alayhi Wa Sallam will call them according to their apparent state, and he did not know their inner state, or these people are innovators and sinners the Prophet Sallallho Alayhi Wa Sallam will recognize them by their marks of Wudhu, or some few even said they are apostates and hypocrites, yet they will still have marks by which they will be recognized. So all of these scholars agree that the Prophet Sallallho Alayhi Wa Sallam was NOT aware of these people's apostatsy or innovations. Moreover have a look at the following Ahadith: Anas reported that a person was charged with fornication with the slavegirl of Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him). Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said to 'Ali: Go and strike his neck. 'Ali came to him and he found him in a well making his body cool. 'Ali said to him: Come out, and as he took hold of his hand and brought him out, he found that his sexual organ had been cut. Hadrat 'Ali refrained from striking his neck. He came to Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Allah's Messenger, he has not even the sexual organ with him.[ Sahih Muslim Chapter 11, Book 37, Number 6676] Imam Nawawi made the chapter with the name of "THE EXONERATION OF THE SLAVEGIRL OF ALLAH'S APOSTLE (MAY PEACE BE UPON HIM) FROM A FALSE CHARGE" So here we come to know that Prophet peace be upon him was not witnessing or Present that is why Prophet peace be upon him did not know about the case of slave girl. Next hadith clears this issue. When Ali R.A. told Prophet peace be upon him that he has not sexual organ, Prophet peace be upon him said to Ali R.A: الشاهد يرى ما لا يرى الغائب The absent can not see what the witness see. [Musnad Ahmad 1/83, Ziaa in al-Mukhtarah 1/248, Silsilah as-Saheeha no: 1904] It is mentioned in a hadith that Narrated An-Nu'man bin Bashir: My mother asked my father to present me a gift from his property; and he gave it to me after some hesitation. My mother said that she would not be satisfied unless the Prophet was made a witness to it. I being a young boy, my father held me by the hand and took me to the Prophet . He said to the Prophet, "His mother, bint Rawaha, requested me to give this boy a gift." The Prophet said, "Do you have other sons besides him?" He said, "Yes." The Prophet said, "Do not make me a witness for injustice." Narrated Ash-Shabi that the Prophet said, "I will not become a witness for injustice." (Bukhari Book #48, Hadith #818) According to this hadith mentioned in Bukhari it is clear that Prophet peace be upon him will NOT become witness for injustice. Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) having said this: Two are the types of the denizens of Hell whom I did not see: people having flogs like the tails of the ox with them and they would be beating people, and the women who would be dressed but appear to be naked, who would be inclined (to evil) and make their husbands incline towards it. Their heads would be like the humps of the bukht camel inclined to one side. They will not enter Paradise and they would not smell its odour whereas its odour would be smelt from such and such distance.[sahih Muslim 2128] The Prophet Sallallho Alayhi Wa Sallam clearly states that He has NOT seen them. Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, went to the burial grounds and said, "peace be upon you, home of a people who believe! We shall be among you, Allah willing. I wish that I had seen our brothers!" The people with him said, "Messenger of Allah! Are we not your brothers?" "No," he said, "you are my companions. Our brothers are those who have not yet come. And I will precede them to the Hawd. (The Hawd: the watering place of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, from which he will give to the people of his community on the day of rising.)" They asked him, "Messenger of Allah! How will you recognise those of your community who come after you?" He said, "Doesn't a man who has horses with white legs and white blazes on their foreheads among totally black horses recognise which ones are his own?" They said, "Of course, Messenger of Allah." He went on, "Even so will they come on the day of rising with white marks on their foreheads, hands and feet from wudu, and I will precede them to the Hawd. Some men will be driven away from the Hawd as if they were straying camels and I shall call out to them, 'Will you not come? Will you not come? Will you not come?' and someone will say, 'They changed things after you,' so I shall say, 'Then away with them, away with them, away with them!' " (Mawatta Maalik, Book #2, Hadith #2629) The Prophet Sallallho Alayhi Wa Sallam clearly states that He has NOT seen them. Quran also rejects the idea of Prophet peace be upon him being present and watching, Allah says in Surah al-Qasas addressing the Prophet peace be upon him (44. And you were not on the western side (of the Mount), when We made clear to Musa the commandment, and you were not among the witnesses.) (45. But We created generations, and long were the ages that passed over them. And you were not a dweller among the people of Madyan, reciting Our Ayat to them. But it is We Who kept sending (Messengers).) (46. And you were not at the side of At-Tur when We called. But (you are sent) as a mercy from your Lord, to give warning to a people to whom no warner had come before you, in order that they may remember or receive admonition.) Ibn Katheer commented: Similarly, Allah told him about Maryam and her story, as Allah said: (You were not with them, when they cast lots with their pens as to which of them should be charged with the care of Maryam; nor were you with them when they disputed) (3:44), meaning, `you were not present then, but Allah has revealed this to you.' Similarly, Allah told him about Nuh and his people, and how He saved Nuh and drowned his people, then He said: (This is of the news of the Unseen which We reveal unto you ; neither you nor your people knew it before this. So, be patient. Surely, the (good) end is for those who have Taqwa) (11:49). And at the end of the same Surah (Hud) Allah says: (That is some of the news of the towns which We relate unto you) (11: 100). And here, after telling the story of Musa from beginning to end and how Allah began His revelation to him and spoke with him, Allah says: (And you were not on the western side (of the Mount), when We made clear to Musa the commandment,) meaning, `you -- O Muhammad -- were not on the western side of the mountain where Allah spoke to Musa from the tree which was to the east of it, in the valley.' (and you were not among the witnesses.) `to that event, but Allah has revealed this to you,' so that it may be evidence and proof of events which happened centuries ago, for people have forgotten the evidence that Allah established against them and what was revealed to the earlier Prophets.(And you were not a dweller among the people of Madyan, reciting Our Ayat to them.) meaning, `you were not living among the people of Madyan reciting Our Ayat to them, when you started to tell about Our Prophet Shu`ayb and what he said to his people and how they responded.' Then you said : Question is why did Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) will say what is recorded in Hadith. When Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) will ask the Prophets about what response they recieved from their Ummats the Prophets will say they have no knowledge: "[be warned of] the Day when Allah will assemble the messengers and say, "What was the response you received?" They will say, "We have no knowledge. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen" [Ref: 5:109] Question is why would the Prophets will when that they have no knowledge when they know what happened. All the Prophets will know exactly how their nations replied to them but on the day of judgment they will say THEY HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE. Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) when he comes back the second time he will know exactly what his Ummah did after him. He will read the Quran and he will learn that people have made him into a god and a son of god. Yet on the day of judgment all the Prophets will say we have no knowledg. Will they be lieing to Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala)? They will deny their own knowledge due to humility. They know exactly what happened but the one asking is Allah the Rabb of Alameen, the Knower of Ghayb and the Shahada, therefore they in humility and in submission and in respect and honor of Allah will say o Allah we have no knowledge you o Allah know everything you are the knower of Ghayb. It is established that Prophets were not lieing but they were being humble and respectful to Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) by denying their own knowledge. I had already explained this ayat earlier that according to some interpretations the prophets (all of them) were unaware of the full details of the conditions of their peoples’ response to them, which is why they said “We have no knowledge.”[see Tafsir Ibn Kathir] In fact, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari said in the exact place in his commentary of Mishkat: “This [witnessing] does not negate His statement: “the day when Allah will assemble the messengers and will say to them, “How were you responded to?” They will say, “We have no knowledge. Surely You alone have the full knowledge of all that is unseen” because response is different to conveying, and it (i.e. the response of their peoples) requires details , the essence of which is comprehended only by Allah, as opposed to conveying itself which is from obvious necessary knowledge).” Now listen!When someone Knows something but yet says out of humility that ' He DOESN'T know' then what does it mean?Now there are two options:Either the prophets were lieing(MazAllah) or they were actually unaware of all the responses.The first option is impossible and the second one is probable as supported by Mulla Ali Qari Rh.Now you need to produce incisive proof that it was due to humility or else my case stands.More on this verse later. Now comings towards the hadith you posted: Narrated AbdurRahman ibn A'ish: Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said: I saw my Lord, the Exalted and Glorious in the most beautiful form. He said: What do the Angels in the presence of Allah contend about? I said: Thou art the most aware of it. He then placed HIS PALM between my shoulders and I felt its coldness in my chest and I came to know what was in the Heavens and the Earth. He recited: 'Thus did we show Ibrahim the kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth and it was so that he might have certainty.' (6:75)" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3245, Tafsir Surah S'ad] "[...] Then I saw Him put his palms between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of his fingers between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me and I recognized everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? [...]" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3246, Tafsir Surah S'ad] Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) granted all the knowledge in earth and universe to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) in an instant and then asked again but this time he knew all: He (i.e. Allah) said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? I said: Going on foot to join congregational prayers, sitting in the mosques after the prayers, performing ablution well despite difficulties. He again said: Then what do they contend? I said: In regard to the ranks. He said: What are these? I said: Providing of food, speaking gently, observing the prayer when the people are asleep. He again said to me: Beg (Your Lord) and say: O Allah, I beg of Thee (power) to do good deeds, ..." [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3246, Tafsir Surah S'ad] I have come across this hadeeth many times and it has been dealt with comprehensively. Shaykh Shu'ayb al-Arna'ut provided a detailed analysis of the various routes of this narration under the relevant hadiths in his edition of Musnad Ahmad - in particular numbers 3484 and 22109. He shows the chains are extremely erratic (mudtarib) - though they generally centre around one individual called 'Abd al-Rahman ibn 'A'ish - and due to this idtirab the hadith is weak even though a particular chain was graded strong by al-Tirmidhi. Al-Arna'ut quotes al-Daraqutni who said in his al-'Ilal after a detailed analysis of the different chains of this hadith: "Nothing in it is sahih and they are all mudtarib." And Muhammad ibn Nasr said in Ta'zim Qadr al-Salah as quoted by al-'Asqalani: "The narrators of this hadith have been contradictory in relating its chain [of transmission], and it is not established from the people of knowledge." And al-Bayhaqi said about this hadith in al-Asma' wa al-Sifat: "It was related through other routes, and all of them are weak." And Ibn al-Jawzi said in al-'Ilal al-Mutanahiyah: "The foundation of this hadith and its routes are mudtarib." Al-Dhahabi said in the biography of 'Abd al-Rahman ibn 'A'ish in al-Mizan regarding this hadith: "This hadith of his is strange and rare. Secondly, after conceding the authenticity, they are from solitary reports which cannot override the Book. Thirdly, the intent of “all things” are things apposite to that context, not all creation such that nothing is excluded from it, as is corroborated by the hadith about the vision, since the discussion was concerning what the Highest Company were arguing about and regarding this, he (upon him peace) said: “I don’t know.” Then after the placing of His (Exalted is He) palm, everything became manifest to him of this, until he knew that their dispute was over atonement. Fourthly, after conceding [the literality of] “all,” the manifestation of all things to someone does not entail its encompassment in complete detail, and his knowledge of what is in the insides of things or their outsides, since the meaning of “manifestation” is “appearance,” so it may be that a large city in its entirety appears to someone when he ascends a lighthouse or a mountain and the entire city is in his field of view and it is acceptable for him to say, “I saw the entire city,” but this does not entail his encompassing knowledge of what is within it, especially of what is in the insides of houses and the different heights of the earth. Fifthly, even if his encompassment of everything is accepted at the moment of the manifestation, this does not entail that it always remains. How can it remain, when the texts and hadith-transmissions of things he (Allah bless him and grant him peace) was unaware of [at the time of] his death, rather even at the resurrection also, are mass-transmitted? Consider His (Blessed and Exalted is He) statement: “The day when Allah will assemble the messengers and will say to them, ‘How were you responded to?’ They will say, ‘We have no knowledge.’” (5:109) How can this be upheld when all the messengers (Allah’s blessings be on them all) will come out to the plain of resurrection without knowing the details of the deeds of their nations? Again the same hadith :Al-Bukhari has narrated from Sahl ibn Sa‘d (Allah be pleased with him), Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri and Abu Hurayrah (Allah be pleased with them) through various chains, and the wording of Abu Hurayrah is that he would narrate that Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: “A group of my companions will come to me on the Day of Resurrection, and they will be driven away from the Pond, so I will say: ‘O my Lord! My companions!’ So He will say: ‘Verily you have no knowledge of what they invented after you.’” (Sahih al-Bukhari, Kitab al-Hawd, 2:974) As for you second hadith:Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is reported to have said that deeds of believers are presented to him: My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and we talk to you, and my demise is also a great good for you (because) your deeds will be presented to me. If they are good, I will praise Allah, and if they are bad, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you. [Ref:Narrated by Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalani, through Harith in his al-Matalib-ul-‘aliyah, 4: 22-3 # 3853] Bakr bin ‘Abdullah (رضي الله عنه) also reported that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and you are responded. And when I will die my demise will be a great good for you. Your deeds will be presented to me, if I see goodness, I will praise Allah, and if I see wrongs, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you." [Ref: Ibn Sa‘d, at-Tabaqat-ul-kubra (2: 194); ‘Ali bin Abu Bakr Haythami related in Majma‘-uz-zawa’id (9:24)]This hadith does not mean the Prophet (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam) is aware of all the actions of his entire ummah. Firstly, Mawlana Manzur Nu’mani points out in his Bawariq al-Ghayb that this hadith is clearly talking about the ummat al-ijabah only. There are two usages of “ummah”: one, all the people to whom the Prophet (sallAllahu ‘alayhi wasallam) was sent, believer or otherwise – this is “ummat al-da’wah”; and second, those who responded to the message and accepted it – this is “ummat al-ijabah.” The reason it is clear the hadith is only talking about the latter is that the Prophet says: “if I see evil I will ask forgiveness of Allah for you.” Seeking forgiveness is not permitted for non-Muslims, so this only refers to Muslims. Therefore, all murtaddin, kuffar, munafiqin and zanadiqah are excluded from this hadith, which is a large proportion of people. Therefore, it certainly does not prove the Barelwi doctrine of Hazir Nazir. Furthermore, in order to harmonise this narration with the earlier stronger and more authentic narrations, it must be understood as a “general presentation” (‘ard ijmali) and not a “detailed presentation” (‘ard tafsili). Meaning, the actions are presented in a general way, without there necessarily being specification of the time, place, nature, doer etc. of the action. In this way the hadith is consistent with the other more authentic and stronger Prophetic sayings: “I was a witness over them for as long as I was amongst them…” (which he says both in this world and the next) and that he will be told: “You have no knowledge of what they invented after you” and “Perhaps, I will not see you after this year of mine.” You then said: It is clearly establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is witness upon the actions and deeds of people but the two ahadith prove contrary to the established fact. So is Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) lieing about being shown everything and deeds being presented to him and did Allah die about sendin Prophet has a witness? Answer is emphatic no, all of these facts are true and fundamental part of aqeedah of Muslims and we the Muslims make no Taweel of fundamental aqeedah based on circumstantial or implicit evidence. Just as we the Muslims will not accept Allah being Trinity on basis of plurals such as We, Us, Our which are found in Quran and used by Allah for himself. Point is here Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will be using the words of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) while adopting humility and submissiveness of Hadhrat Isa (alayhis salaam). Here he will be immitating the humility and humility and the words will not indicate his reality.First of all , it is not established that Prophet Sallallaho Alayhi Wa Sallam is witnessing all our actions in detail as proved above.Secondly again you're using humility to hide your beliefs.You can't just say humility,humility,humility everywhere.This is your own interpretation.You need to support your stance with scholars of Hadith to prove point or any other incisive textual proof.If His(Sallallaho Alayhi WaSallam) words are not indicating reality, then what are they indicating?I'm quiet sure you know where you're heading. Then you said: I am absolutely astonished at this statement of yours. Did you even understand what you wrote? Where did I make analogy on matter of aqeedah? What was the analogy in matter of aqeedah? If I had written: "Allah sees and like Allah Prophet sees" then if you wrote i am making analogy with Prophet's (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) seeing and between Allah's (subhanahu wa ta'ala) seeing and then if you said from this shirk pours in then I would understand. Give you benefit of the doubt that you have misunderstood because my lack of writting. But I made no Qiyas and no analogy between Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam). I didnt say, Allah knows all therefore Prophet knows all, i didnt say, Prophet is Hazir Nazir because Allah is Hazir and Nazir, i didn't say the way Allah is Hazir Nazir in the same way Prophet is Hazir Nazir. If I said something like this then at least your comment about me drawing analogy and your comment about Shirk pouring would be understood. I stated no such a thing and you have grossly and senslessly wrote which has no connection with what I written. Briefly, i wrote there is fundamental aqeedah which is essential to be Muslim and evidence that goes against it or something which insinuates something againsts that aqeedah we harmonize it so it accords the fundamental aqeedah..... What you didn't realise is that i was talking about analogy in this case where you said: Does every question indicate that one needs to gain knowledge? When Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) asked Musa (alayhis salaam) what do you have in your hand and he replied a staff. Does that mean Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) didn't know what Musa (alayhis salaam) had in his hand and by asking Musa (alayhis salaam) Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) learnt that it was a staff. Or should we assume that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) knows everything else but Allah didn't knew Musa (alayhis salaam) was carrying a staff? In this case we interpreted the questioning of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) in light of questioning of Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) and Jibraeel (alayhis salaam).Your last line shows that you clearly used analogy.Why are using similitudes using Allah Ta'ala.Allah Ta'ala is free from all kinds of similitudes,interpretations and analogies.Never ever do this again.If Allah Ta'ala does something , it is according to his Majesty and Wisdom.The same cannot be applied on his creation.I hope you understand. Next you said: Concerning bold part, the creed of Deobandi's regarding Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) is that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) does not not until humans act. Maulvi Hussain Ali the student of Maulvi Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi writes in his Tafsir Balaghatul Hiraan: "And human is independant to perform good deeds or not and Allah does not know before hand what [humans] will do. Instead Allah knows after they act and verse of Quran like ..." The Urdu quotes with scans be seen here: http://www.falaah.co...ulghatul-hairan Firstly, you are writting something which is not established from your elders. This issue has already been discussed in detail.It is more important that we concentrate on our own aqeeda. Even if that person is wrong, he does not represent the whole Jammat. Moreover I can quote 100s of such statements from the barelwi creed but i won't because i have read the following hadith: "Abu Zarr reported that the Holy Prophet said: "No man accuses another man of being a sinner, or of being a kafir, but it reflects back on him if the other is not as he called him".Narrated by al-Bukhari.I hope you understand next time. Then you said: It would be unjust to declare that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) didn't know something based on a question because the possibility of knowing and not knowing there. Also absence of clear explicit proof for knowing something is not criteria of not knowing........ Based on this fact should we assume these are meaningless? Let's be sensible and not make absence of clear, explicit evidence as a evidence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) not knowing something. The possibility of knowing it but not declaring it on command of Allah is established from the verse of Quran: "Your companion [Muhammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred, Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination. It is not but a revelation revealed, Taught to him by one intense in strength." [Ref: 53:2/5] You have taken the wrong meaning of the bolded portion:Imam Hafiz Ibn Kathir, says in the commentary of this verse (Nor does he speak of desire), asserting that nothing the Prophet utters is of his own desire or wish, (It is only a revelation revealed.), means, he only conveys to the people what he was commanded to convey, in its entirety without additions or deletions. Hence there is no mention of knowing it and not declaring.On the contrary we fin the following hadith in Sahih Bukhari: وَمَنْ حَدَّثَكَ أَنَّهُ كَتَمَ فَقَدْ كَذَبَ، ثُمَّ قَرَأَتْ: {يَا أَيُّهَا الرَّسُولُ بَلِّغْ مَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِنْ رَبِّكَ} [المائدة: 67] [صحيح البخاري 6/ 141] Who so ever narrates to you that he (Sallallho Alayhi Wa Sallam) concealed, then he has indeed lied. Then she recited "O Rasul! preach to them that which has been revealed to you from your Lord". Yet again we find the following hadith: Kharijah bin Zaid bin Thabit narrated that Yazid bin Thabit, who was older than Zaid, said: “We went out with the Prophet (ﷺ) and when we reached Al-Baqi’, we saw a new grave. He asked about it and they said: ‘(It is) so-and-so (a woman).’ He recognized the name and said: ‘Why did you not tell me about her?’ They said: ‘You were taking a nap and you were fasting, and we did not like to disturb you.’ He said: ‘Do not do that; I do not want to see it happen again that one of you dies, while I am still among you, and you do not tell me, for my prayer for him is a mercy.’ Then he went to the grave and we lined up in rows behind him, and he said four Takbir (i.e. for the funeral prayer).” This hadith clearly shows that after the telling of the Sahaba Radiallahu Anhum , the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) recognized her and the proof is " Whom Messenger of Allah knew (فَعَرَفَهَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم) in another version of the hadith. Hence this hadith clearly proves that Prophet Sallallho Alayhi Wa Sallam is NOT Hazir o Nazir everywhere and neither has Ilm Ghayb. In the end you said : What you have asked here is not really important because we the Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat do not believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) knew everything before the Akmaliat of his knowledge. We believe his knowledge was perfected when the last verse of Quran was revealed to him. Then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) knew everything which is in Lawh Al Mahfooz. To refute our aqeedah you need to quote those Ahadith which are about incidents which happened after the Quran was completed First of all , According to Mufti Ahmad Yaar Khan, Hakim al-Ummah of Barelwis, our beloved Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) knew the Qur'an even before he was born. Just look at this absurdness.Now to answer your demand: Hadrat Abdullah bin Abbas (r.a.) states that Surah Nasr is the last Surah of the Quran to be revealed, i.e. no complete Surah was sent down to the Holy Prophet after it.Related by Muslim Nasai, Tabarani, Ibn Abi Shaibah, Ibn Marduyah. According to Hadrat Abdullah bin Umar (r.a.), Surah Nasr was sent down on the occasion of the Farewell Pilgrimage in the middle of the Tashriq Days at Mina, and after it the Holy Prophet rode his she camel and gave his well known Last Sermon. Related by Tirmidhi, Bazzar, Baihaqi, Ibn Abi Shaibah, Abd bin Humaid, Abn Yala, Ibn Marduyah. Baihaqi in Kilab al-Hajj has related from the tradition of Hadrat Sarra bint-Nabhan (r.a.) the Sermon which the Holy Prophet gave on this occasion. She says: "At the Farewell Pilgrimage I heard the Holy Prophet (saws) say: 'O people, do you know what day it is?' They said: 'Allah and His Messenger (saws) have the best knowledge.' He (saws) said: 'This is the middle day of the Tashriq Days.' Then he (saws) said: 'Do you know what place it is?' They said: 'Allah and His Messenger (saws) have the best knowledge.' He (saws) said: 'This is Masharil-Haram.' Then he (saws) said: 'I do not know, I might not meet you here again. Beware, your blood and your honor are forbidden, until you appear before your Lord, and He questions you about your deeds. Listen: let the one who is near convey it to him who is far away. Listen: have I conveyed the message to you?' Then, when we returned to Madinah, the Holy Prophet passed away not many days after that." If these traditions are read together, it appears that there was an interval of three months and some days between the revelation of Surah An-Nasr and the Holy Prophet's (saws) death, for historically the same was the interval between the Farewell Pilgrimage and the passing away of the Holy Prophet. Now look at the following Hadith: Hence your aqeedah has been refuted.The End. Wa akhiru dawana anil hamdulillahi rabbil allamin Wasallam.

Post: #21 Your wrote: "I remember the same type of anaology was first put up by Mufti Ahmed Yar Khan Naeemi in His Ja Alhaq and similarly by Molvi Mohammad Umar Acharvi Sahab in his Miqiyas E Hanafiyat a long time ago and you seem to follow in their footsteps." Stating that I have followed the footsteps of Ulamah of Ahle Sunnat is no sufficent ground to reject what I have presented. I presume you intended to refute the creed of Muslims by writing the above because Wahhabi's and Deobandi's both are conditioned to refute the Ahle Sunnat by arguing you are only following ancestors. Commonly these verses are employed to argue against following the religion of ancestors: "Then have they not reflected over the Qur'an, or has there come to them that which had not come to their forefathers?" [Ref: 23:68] "And when it is said to them, "follow what Allah has revealed," they say, "Rather, we will follow that which we found our fathers doing." Even though their fathers understood nothing, nor were they guided?" [Ref: 2:170] These verses were revealed regarding the polytheists of Makkah the disbelievers of Makkah and Arabian Peninsula in general. Applying the text of these verses upon Muslims and refuting their belief by association with ancestors is irreligious. Hazrat Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta'ala anhu) has reported stated: “... and the Mulhidun (heretical) after the establishment of firm proof against them:"And the statement of Allah: 'Allah will not mislead a people after He has guided them, until He makes clear to them what to avoid.' [9:115] And Ibn Umar used to consider them (the Khawarij and the Mulhidun) the worst of Allah's creatures and said: "These people took some verses that had been revealed concerning the disbelievers and interpreted them as describing the believers." [Ref: Bukhari, Vol 9, Page 49, Chap 6: Killing The Khawari] Now Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is reported to have said: "Abu Hurayrah said, “The Prophet said, ‘There will be “dajjals” and liars among my Ummah. They will tell you something new, which neither you nor your forefathers have heard. Be on your guard against them, and do not let them lead you astray.’” [Ref: Musnad Imam Ahmad] This establishes that people will come and invent lies which the Muslims in previous generations have not heard before. And by default this establishes chain of a particular aqeedah, if what i narrate is narrated by previous generation and they narrate by what was narrated by previous generation and each generation narrates what it heard from previous then eventually the sanad of creed will go back to a Sahabi and even back to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam). Hence following the ancestors i.e. scholars of past is nothing negative in fact it is a tool with which authenticity of a creed or concept is established. If what I have written is mentioned by the Ulamah of past then praise be to Allah who guided me to Islam and guided me to correct understanding which is testified by those who succeeded me. You wrote: "However, what you and they don't realise is that anaology cannot be used in matters of aqeedah.Maklook ko Khaliq bay bilkul bhi Qiyas nahi kiya jasakta.It is here where Shirk starts to pour in.Remember that matters related to aqeedah cannot be treated using anaology, similitudes or parables.Textual Proof and Clear evidence is a must." I am absolutely astonished at this statement of yours. Did you even understand what you wrote? Where did I make analogy on matter of aqeedah? What was the analogy in matter of aqeedah? If I had written: "Allah sees and like Allah Prophet sees" then if you wrote i am making analogy with Prophet's (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) seeing and between Allah's (subhanahu wa ta'ala) seeing and then if you said from this shirk pours in then I would understand. Give you benefit of the doubt that you have misunderstood because my lack of writting. But I made no Qiyas and no analogy between Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam). I didnt say, Allah knows all therefore Prophet knows all, I didnt say, Prophet is Hazir Nazir because Allah is Hazir and Nazir, i didn't say the way Allah is Hazir Nazir in the same way Prophet is Hazir Nazir. If I said something like this then at least your comment about me drawing analogy and your comment about Shirk pouring would be understood. I stated no such a thing and you have grossly and senslessly wrote which has no connection with what I written. Briefly, i wrote there is fundamental aqeedah which is essential to be Muslim and evidence that goes against it or something which insinuates something againsts that aqeedah we harmonize it so it accords the fundamental aqeedah. Then I wrote fundamental aqeedah in reqards to Prophet is that he saw front back and new sincerity of hearts. Then the evidence which you presented to refute it I harmonized it as per the mentioned rule. There is no analogy between Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) or Prophet (sallallahu alyhi was'sallam) in this. The commonality is of principle, we have a fundamental aqeedah and we explain all evidence against this fundamental evidence in ways which removes the contradiction. Let me illustrate the point with another example, we the Muslims believe Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) is not dead but he was raised and Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) died. These two are our fundamental creeds, do you agree! In this Hadith which you also presented in post three from Sunnah.com. It is written that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) wil say like Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam): "... will take to the right and to the left. I will say: 'My companions! 'It will be said, 'They had been renegades since you left them.' I will then say what the Pious Slave Jesus, the son of Mary said: 'And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them; when You did take me up, You were the Watcher over them, and You are a witness to all things. If You punish them, they are Your slaves, and if you ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H656] Please take note of underlined Qadiyani's argue on the basis of this Hadith that if Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) is alive and taken up to heaven then here too tawaf-faytani means taking up which means Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was-sallam) did not also die but was raised to heaven. Or they argue if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is dead and he used this same word and it will mean that he died then why is Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) thought to be alive. We the Muslims defend the death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) and raising of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) alive and interpret the hadith in a fashion that it supports both fundamental creeds i.e. death of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) and raising alive of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam). Point was that we defend the fundamental creeds from evidence which does not conform to the fundamental creeds even if the evidence seems to contradict it. I cannot comprehend how you managed to lay the foundation of qiyas between Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) and Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) and then write this. There was no qiyas being made I merely established and stated the principle of; explaining the evidence in a way that it conforms to fundamental creed, and no sane person would even contest this leave alone lecture me about qiyas and pouring of Shirk. Creed of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) being hearing, seeing type of Witness and his being sent as hearing, seeing type of Witness has been firmly established with clear and explicit Quranic evidences. You wrote: "Now coming back to the point which you raised: Does every question indicate that one needs to gain knowledge? When Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) asked Musa (alayhis salaam) what do you have in your hand and he replied a staff. First of all every Intellectual and Just Muslim has no doubt regarding Allah Ta'ala that He is always looking at everything and He is the All-Knower of Everything .[ He knows what is in the heavens and on earth, and He knows what you conceal and what you reveal. And Allah Ta'ala is the All-Knower of what is in the breasts (of men).(Surah Al-Taghabun, 64: 4) ]. Hence, when Allah Ta'ala Asks/Inquires about something, then it is definitely based on Hikmah (Wisdom) as opposed to the Prophets Alayhim Sallato Wasallam and Auliya Karam (Rehma Ulla), regarding whom our aqeeda is that they are NOT ALIM UL GHAYB and hence they do not know in advance. However, when it is established through incisive proof that the answer to a Question that they inquired/asked about was already known to them in advance, then ONLY that particular question will be based on Hikmah and not generally all questions." Concerning bold part, the creed of Deobandi's regarding Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) is that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) does not not until humans act. Maulvi Hussain Ali the student of Maulvi Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi writes in his Tafsir Balaghatul Hiraan: "And human is independant to perform good deeds or not and Allah does not know before hand what [humans] will do. Instead Allah knows after they act and verse of Quran like ..." The Urdu quotes with scans be seen here: http://www.falaah.co...ulghatul-hairan Firstly, you are writting something which is not established from your elders. Considering one Deobandi intellectual has emphatically attributed ignorance to Allah until after the event has taken place, how definate are you that when Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) asks its based on Wisdom and not based on ignorance. Now incase you choose to say; 'I don't believe that!' you will then have to atleast issue of edict of Takfir or declare the statement of Maulvi Hussain Ali is Kufr. You have stated that only after clear proof establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) then you will state that questioning of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was based on Hikmah. I would purpose that a righteous believer will only assume that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) doesnt know something when there is clear explicit proof in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) clearly and emphatically declared that he did not know this when he said this or that. It would be unjust to declare that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) didn't know something based on a question because the possibility of knowing and not knowing there. Also absence of clear explicit proof for knowing something is not criteria of not knowing. Imam Bukhari wrote he knew over 600'000 but he chose 100'000 for his Bukhari. Could it not be that narrations were not passed on to us and left like Imam Bukhari left near 500'000 Ahadith. Just take the knowledge of haroof al muqat'at there is no single narrations regarding their meaning in books of Ahadith which we possess. Based on this fact should we assume these are meaningless? Let's be sensible and not make absence of clear, explicit evidence as a evidence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) not knowing something. The possibility of knowing it but not declaring it on command of Allah is established from the verse of Quran: "Your companion [Muhammad] has not strayed, nor has he erred, Nor does he speak from [his own] inclination. It is not but a revelation revealed, Taught to him by one intense in strength." [Ref: 53:2/5] Belief of Muslims is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) gained perfect knowledge of Al Lawh Al Mahfooz when the entire Quran was revealed. Then all which was in Al Lawh Al Mahfooz was known by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) and there is no gaurantee of knowing everything or somethings before this. Ahle Sunnat generally interpret all questions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) in light of Akmaliat e Ilm of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam). This Akmaliat of knowledge is also affirmed by Imam Busairi (rahimullah alayhi ta'ala) who wrote: fa inna min joodi qad dunya wa dar rataha wa min uloomika huwal lawh wal kalami. The burden of proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) rests upon who wishes to refute that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) didn't know and thats why he questioned. We the Muslims have established that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) sees behind as he saw the front and from him the sincerity of hearts was not hidden. It was you who brought the Hadith to contradict the fundamental belief of Muslims therefore its upon you to establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) did not knew who it was who recited the hamd and it was for this reason he asked.Your responsibility is to quote a hadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) has stated I am not always seeing at the back as I see at the front and I do not always know the sincerity in the hearts of believers. What you presented was a question and on that you made QIYAS that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) did not know. I only merely criticised your evidence and pointed flaws in your evidence and established Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) has stated that he sees at the back as he sees the front and sincerity of hearts is not concealed from him and if his state had changed he would have declared it as he declared his seeing back/front and sincerity. You wrote: "Know I request to you to show me a Saheeh and Explicit Hadeeth in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) asked a question related to a Non-Shariah matter and he already knew the answer to it as opposed to Allah Ta'ala who already knows everything in advance. However need not to but I will still pose a hadith from which it is clearly proven that Allah Ta'ala alreadys knows in advance about something which He asks about." ... Know can you show me any Saheeh and Explicit hadeeth in which the words , " وَهُوَ أَعْلَمُ(he knows best)" were used for the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) when he asked a question? On the contrary you will find many hadeeth in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) asked questions about matters that were unknown to him previously." What you have asked here is not really important because we the Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat do not believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) knew everything before the Akmaliat of his knowledge. We believe his knowledge was perfected when the last verse of Quran was revealed to him. Then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) knew everything which is in Lawh Al Mahfooz. To refute our aqeedah you need to quote those Ahadith which are about incidents which happened after the Quran was completed. Please read the following two articles they explain my methodology: - http://www.islamimehfil.com/topic/22039-qull-ghayb-knowledge-of-lawh-mahfooz-al-qalam-known-to-rasoolallah/ - http://www.islamimeh...of-rasoolallah/ I have entrusted brother Saad Qadri with my articles I had to upload them due to emergency requirement. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen.

Post: #19 I don't think anyone with an ounce of brain will contest that Shahid means is one who is Hazir as well as Nazir. This is so basic and it was so undisputed that I doubt anyone ever even concieved challenging this prior to emergence of Wahhabism in India and Deobandism. In Taskeen al Khawatir Fi Masla Hadhir wa Nazir, the refferences are presented: http://www.mediafire.com/download/it10o181lsylm8k/taskeenul+khwater.pdf Is there any stronger proof then these two verses which prove Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was sent as a hearing seeing type of witness: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] These two verses talk about Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) being sent as a witness upon the earth as a human. Allah (subhanhu wa ta'ala) states: "Whatever of good reaches you, is from Allah, but whatever of evil befalls you, is from yourself. And We have sent you as a Messenger to mankind, and Allah is Sufficient as a Witness." [Ref: 4:79] This is also attested in the Hadith of Muslim: “Abu Huraira reported that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon hlmg) said: I have been given superiority over the other prophets in six respects: I have been given words which are concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror (in the hearts of enemies): spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship;I have been sent to all mankind and the line of prophets is closed with me.” [Ref: Muslim B4, H1062] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) being sent as a witness to entire mankind is established and his seeing their deeds and actions is established because he was sent as a witness with eyes, ears, which posesses super natural abilities. He saw at the back as he saw at the front and from him not even the sincerity in the hearts was concealed. Allah showed him everything and he came to know everything instantly, he became witness upon entire mankind because he was sent as a witness. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) being sent as a witness is like I or anyone else goes to a religious convention as a WITNESS. Or I am or anyone else is sent as a WITNESS. If i am sent as a witness to a convention will I not see the events taking place? Will I not hear the events taking place? Me going there as a witness and being a WITNESS means that I see and i ge to hear the events at the convention. You agree? So when Allah the all mighty sent his Prophet as a WITNESS to entire mankind do you think he sent the Rehmatal Lil Alameen AS A BLIND DEAF DUMB? Where is your brain? We Muslims call you to Islam, will you then not accept Islam, when it is so clear and irrefutable? Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness based on the news which he has recieved from Quran. There is no proof what so ever in this regard. You have used qiyaas to infer this non-sense. There is only proof that Ummah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'salam) will bare witness based on what they were told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam): “... ‘Did this one convey the message to you?’ and they will say, ‘No.’ It will be said to him: ‘Did you convey the message to your people?’ and he will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said to him: ‘Who will bear witness for you?’ He will say: ‘Muhammad and his ummah.’ So Muhammad and his ummah will be called, and it will be said to them: ‘Did this one convey the message to his people?’ They will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet came to us and told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message.’ That is the words of Allaah, ‘Thus We have made you a just (and the best) nation.’ He said: Just, so that you will be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger will be a witness over you.” [Ref: Musnad Imam Ahmad, Hadith 1164, Sunan Ibn Maajah, Hadith 4284] The underlined proves that Ummah will bare witness on account of being told by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam). Where is your proof that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness on account of reading it in the Quran? You have deduced based on Qiyas that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will bare witness based on the knowledge he has recieved from Quran. There is not a single hadith or verse of Quran which states this. You may present the following Hadith to argue that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) ko ilm nahin hoga keun kay un ka farmaan heh: "It states that when this verse was recited then Prophet peace be upon him shivered and said "O Allah I am witness upon the people in which i am (living). How can I be witness of those to whom I have not seen?" [Ref: Tafseer Ibn Abi Haatim 3/956, Tabrani is Mojam alKabeer 19/243, Wahidi in his Tafseer 2/55, Abu Nuyeem in Muarifa tul Sahaba no: 63] Note Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is asking question this does not mean he won't be able to see its just a question to Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala). In answer to this question Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) showed him everything like Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) showed everything to Prophet Ibrahim (alayhis salaam): "Narrated AbdurRahman ibn A'ish: Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said: I saw my Lord, the Exalted and Glorious in the most beautiful form. He said: What do the Angels in the presence of Allah contend about? I said: Thou art the most aware of it. He then placed HIS PALM between my shoulders and I felt its coldness in my chest and I came to know what was in the Heavens and the Earth. He recited: 'Thus did we show Ibrahim the kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth and it was so that he might have certainty.' (6:75)" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3245, Tafsir Surah S'ad] "[...] Then I saw Him put his palms between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of his fingers between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me and I recognized everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? [...]" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3246, Tafsir Surah S'ad] So Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) informed him how he will be able to bare witness on those he does not see. Imam Qastallani (rahimullah alayhi ta'ala) records: "It is reported by Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Mawahib-e-Ladunnia] I rest my case on these that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) asking Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) about he will bare witness on those he has not yet seen does not mean he was not given the knowledge and shown everything. [ To Be Continued ...]

Post: #18 You questioned: "Did the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) approve of the hearing and seeing type of witnessing if not negate it?" No Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) did not explicitly state that he will be hearing seeing type of witness in that Tafsir. And why are you even asking me this question any way? Did I claim that this Tafsir of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) refutes those who say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is not Hazir Nazir? You employed the Tafsir issue: "Moreover our Holy Prophet Sallallaho Alayhi Wasallam has himself explained the verse 143 of Surah Baqara hence presenting another Tafseer , that goes totally against it is unacceptable." to argue that a Tafsir of verse which states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is Hadhir Nadhir/hearing seeing type of witness is unacceptable. It can only be unacceptable to a Muslim when the Tafsir we the Muslims present contradicts what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) interpreted. When i questioned: "Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) gave interpretation of the verse but did he negate the hearing and seeing type of witnessing?" Purpose was that you will realize that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) has not negated the hearing seeing type of witnessing. Which you know that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) has not negated this. So how can you reject the Tafsir of Muslims when it does not contradict what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) has stated. How can a Tafsir of Quran which is supported by Quran be unacceptable to you when it is not in contradicting what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) stated? You don't need to question me if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) proved hearing seeing type of witness from this tafsir because I didnt present it has evidence to prove that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is seeing hearing type of witness. I questioned you to establish the reality of the meaning of verse, to prove to you that you have rejected Prophet being Hadhir Nadhir based on evidence which does not contradict or refute Hadhir Nadhir. Tafsir of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) would only refute Hadhir Nadhir if he stated he is not hearing seeing type of witness. Nature of Quran is Jawami Al Kalim meaning it is written short but has widest meanings: "I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "I have been sent with Jawami al-Kalim, and I was made victorious with awe (caste into the hearts of the enemy), and while I was sleeping, the keys of the treasures of the earth were brought to me and were put in my hand." Muhammad said, Jawami'-al-Kalim means that Allah expresses in one or two statements or thereabouts the numerous matters that used to be written in the books revealed before (the coming of) the Prophet." [Ref: Bukhari, B87, H141] Interpreting verses of Quran in light of other verses is not going against the interpretation of Quran. But interpreting verses of Quran in light of Quran is according to Jawami al Kalim nature of Quran. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) only gave one interpretation from Quran from the wide meanings he explained one. We cannot limit restrict to one meaning which Prophet gave. The Rawafiz - Shia they take the ahadith of cloak in whch Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) covered Hadhrat Ali, Fatimah, Hassan, Hussain (Allah be pleased with all of them) and recited the verse of tatheer. They say on basis of this that these people were the intended members of Ahli bayt and not wives of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam). To prove to them that wives of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) are also Ahli Bayt what do you and what do we the Muslims do? We go back to Quran and not restrict our selves to hadith only. We quote the entire verse 33:33 and say wives are also Ahli Bayt. Just to refute the creed of Muslims you have adopted the methodology of Rawafiz. That you want to stick to hadith only and ignore the book of Allah. Your question: "How does the understanding that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was sent as a hearing seeing type of witness go in favour of the Tafsir which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) gave?" Who said it goes in favour and who presented it as evidence to prove Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is a hearng seeing type of witness? No one, then why are you questioning me. I questioned you to establish your fault because you was using this Tafsir to refute seeing hearing type of witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) saying that any tafsir other then the one in hadith is against Prophet's (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) tafsir. My objective was to establish the Tafsir does not refute our aqeedah hence why would you consider anything unacceptable when it does not contradict Prophetic Tafsir. I established that Quran has many meanings a verse can be interpreted to mean many things. If our tafsir contradicts what Prophet said then you have a point but if it doesnt and which it doesnt contradict then how can you say aqeeday of hazir nazir is unacceptable. You wrote: "I mean how can you deduce the meaning of Hazir o Nazir for the word "Shahid" from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam')'s own Tafsir when he did not give such a meaning himself?" Here pay attention let me establish something for you. Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) states in Quran: “One day We shall raise from all Peoples a witness against them, from amongst themselves: and We shall bring you as a witness against these (people): and We have sent down to thee the Book explaining all things, a Guide, a Mercy, and Glad Tidings to Muslims.” [Ref: 16:89] Because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will be bearing witness on the day of judgment, Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) has sent him to earth to be a witness with eyes, and ears, hearing and seeing: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] Or are you going to argue Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was sent as a witness without eyes, ears and without the ability to hear and see? O now you can interrogate me how these two verses mean seeing hearing type of witness. Now because he was sent as a WITNESS Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) questions Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) about what the angles are arguing about. And Allah the all knower didnt ask because Allah didnt know, Allah asked for a purpose. Prophet said he doesnt know what they are arguing about. The rest read the hadith: Narrated AbdurRahman ibn A'ish: Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said: I saw my Lord, the Exalted and Glorious in the most beautiful form. He said: What do the Angels in the presence of Allah contend about? I said: Thou art the most aware of it. He then placed HIS PALM between my shoulders and I felt its coldness in my chest and I came to know what was in the Heavens and the Earth. He recited: 'Thus did we show Ibrahim the kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth and it was so that he might have certainty.' (6:75)" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3245, Tafsir Surah S'ad] "[...] Then I saw Him put his palms between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of his fingers between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me and I recognized everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? [...]" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3246, Tafsir Surah S'ad] Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) granted all the knowledge in earth and universe to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) in an instant and then asked again but this time he knew all: He (i.e. Allah) said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? I said: Going on foot to join congregational prayers, sitting in the mosques after the prayers, performing ablution well despite difficulties. He again said: Then what do they contend? I said: In regard to the ranks. He said: What are these? I said: Providing of food, speaking gently, observing the prayer when the people are asleep. He again said to me: Beg (Your Lord) and say: O Allah, I beg of Thee (power) to do good deeds, ..." [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3246, Tafsir Surah S'ad] Mukhtasar, Prophet has been sent as a witness to earth and he has been made witness to all the events in an instant. You wrote: "I mean how can you deduce the meaning of Hazir o Nazir for the word "Shahid" from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam')'s own Tafsir when he did not give such a meaning himself?" To answer you question. Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) has stated: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] First of all lets be logical and not closed and narrow minded. Lets take Shahid in meaning of Witness. A witness must possess atleast two qualities and a kamil will have three essential qualities. A witness must be hazir/present and must be able to see/nazir the events he is witness on. You are witness to the discussion we are having on IslamiMehfil because you are Hazir and because you are Nazir. If you was not Hazir as a creation as a human/Jinn/animal/insect/bird/ etc... that will mean you don't exist. Therefore two most essential qualities for a WITNESS are being HAZIR and NAZIR. In dua of Janaza the word Shahid has been used to mean opposite of ghayb - present. Dua begins, Allahum maghfirli hayyitina wa mayyitina wa shahidina wa ghaybina wa sagheerina wa kabeerina ... which means Allah forigve our alive and dead and present and absent and young and old, those who are males and females. Note here the opposite are mentioned, opposite of dead is alive, opposite of young is old, opposite of male is female, opposite of ghayb (i.e. absent) is present (i.e. Shahid). And note the word Shahid was used for the living who are present in the funeral and ghayb for those who are not. Now tell me when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) bare witness in defence of the Ambiyah will he not be present and will he not be seeing/hearing? From the Tafsir which he gave isn't it obvious that he has to be present and hearing/seeing/speaking/understanding/knowing on the day of judgment and as result of these he will testify on the day of judgment. You claimed to have study concept of Hazir Nazir and fact is you don't know head or tail of the issue. You don't know with what part of Hazir Nazir you should agree or what you should disagree with. Pay attention to this, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) said he will bare witness on the day of judgment. This means he will be Hazir on the day of judgment and seeing, hearing, talking, speaking, answering, understanding, and defending the Prophets. Every creation which is Shahid must also be HAZIR in the creation in some form. Metaphorically speaking you are barking up the wrong tree. The issue of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) in aakhirah being Hazir is not even contented by the foolish I think you are pretty reasonablly educated so why would you contend this beats me. I am ex-Deobandi my advice to you is first learn the real issue of IKHTILAF and then come to argue over it. You wrote: "Moreover the other hadith which i have quoted substantiates my proof of using the word, "Shahid" to mean Witness based on the previous knowledge that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) had received through revelation and not "Actual" witnessing in the sense that you refer to. Please read the following hadith once again." It doesnt really matter if you take the word to mean Shahid or Hazir or Hazir/Nazir. The point is it can be easily established and no reasonable or rational or educated can contend with it. Shahid = Witness and witness has to be HAZIR/NAZIR. You don't even know this basic aspect and you earlier claimed that you have studied the subject. Witnessing is dependant upon two factors either you hear or you see then you can bear witness. Here the verse attests to witnessing after seeing: "He said: "It was she that sought to seduce me - from my (true) self. "And one of her household saw (this) and bore witness, (thus):- "If it be that his shirt is rent from the front, then is her tale true, and he is a liar!" [Ref: 12:26] And seeing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is stated: And say: "Do deeds! Allah will see your deeds, and (so will) his Messenger and the believers. And you will be brought back to the All-Knower of the unseen and the seen. Then He will inform you of what you used to do." [Ref: 9:105] There are two possible things which you may have alluded to one, angels saying Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam): "Don't you know what they did after you!" and this issue has thoroughly answered and explained in this dicussion: http://www.islamimehfil.com/topic/19739-hadhir-nadhir-objection/ The other is the issue of Prophet Isa alayhis salaam. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) saying that he will say like Prophet Isa (alayhis slaam) will say. And I will explain this issue in detail because this has not been dicussed. Question is why did Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) will say what is recorded in Hadith. When Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) will ask the Prophets about what response they recieved from their Ummats the Prophets will say they have no knowledge: "[be warned of] the Day when Allah will assemble the messengers and say, "What was the response you received?" They will say, "We have no knowledge. Indeed, it is You who is Knower of the unseen" [Ref: 5:109] Question is why would the Prophets will when that they have no knowledge when they know what happened. All the Prophets will know exactly how their nations replied to them but on the day of judgment they will say THEY HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE. Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) when he comes back the second time he will know exactly what his Ummah did after him. He will read the Quran and he will learn that people have made him into a god and a son of god. Yet on the day of judgment all the Prophets will say we have no knowledg. Will they be lieing to Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala)? They will deny their own knowledge due to humility. They know exactly what happened but the one asking is Allah the Rabb of Alameen, the Knower of Ghayb and the Shahada, therefore they in humility and in submission and in respect and honor of Allah will say o Allah we have no knowledge you o Allah know everything you are the knower of Ghayb. It is established that Prophets were not lieing but they were being humble and respectful to Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) by denying their own knowledge. We will come back to this topic of saying of Isa (alayhis salaam) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam). Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is reported to have said that deeds of believers are presented to him: My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and we talk to you, and my demise is also a great good for you (because) your deeds will be presented to me. If they are good, I will praise Allah, and if they are bad, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you. [Ref:Narrated by Ibn Hajar ‘Asqalani, through Harith in his al-Matalib-ul-‘aliyah, 4: 22-3 # 3853] Bakr bin ‘Abdullah (رضي الله عنه) also reported that the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: My life is a great good for you in whom you talk (to me) and you are responded. And when I will die my demise will be a great good for you. Your deeds will be presented to me, if I see goodness, I will praise Allah, and if I see wrongs, I will ask Allah’s forgiveness for you." [Ref: Ibn Sa‘d, at-Tabaqat-ul-kubra (2: 194); ‘Ali bin Abu Bakr Haythami related in Majma‘-uz-zawa’id (9:24)] In addition to this the already quoted ahadith establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was shown everything: "Narrated AbdurRahman ibn A'ish: Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said: I saw my Lord, the Exalted and Glorious in the most beautiful form. He said: What do the Angels in the presence of Allah contend about? I said: Thou art the most aware of it. He then placed HIS PALM between my shoulders and I felt its coldness in my chest and I came to know what was in the Heavens and the Earth. He recited: 'Thus did we show Ibrahim the kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth and it was so that he might have certainty.' (6:75)" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3245, Tafsir Surah S'ad] "[...] Then I saw Him put his palms between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of his fingers between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me and I recognized everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? [...]" [Ref: Tirimdhi, Vol 5, Hadith No. 3246, Tafsir Surah S'ad] Now when it is established that deeds are presented to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) therefore he would indeed know what has happened after him. And he also was given the power to see everything as the ahadit of Tirmadhi indicate. Also Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) seeing the deeds of people is proven from these two verses "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] These two verses prove that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was sent as a witness to see/hear about the deeds which he will bear witness about. With all this evidence now we go back to hadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will say like Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam): "Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet said, "You will be gathered (on the Day of Judgment), bare-footed, naked and not circumcised." He then recited:--'As We began the first creation, We, shall repeat it: A Promise We have undertaken: Truly we shall do it.' (21:104) He added, "The first to be dressed on the Day of Resurrection, will be Abraham, and some of my companions will be taken towards the left side (i.e. to the (Hell) Fire), and I will say: 'My companions! My companions!' It will be said: 'They renegade from Islam after you left them.' Then I will say as the Pious slave of Allah (i.e. Jesus) said. 'And I was a witness Over them while I dwelt amongst them. When You took me up You were the Watcher over them, And You are a witness to all things. If You punish them. They are Your slaves And if You forgive them, Verily you, only You are the All-Mighty, the All-Wise." (5.120-121) [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H568] "Narrted Ibn Abbas: Allah's Apostle said, "You will be resurrected (and assembled) bare-footed, naked and uncircumcised." The Prophet then recited the Divine Verse:-- "As We began the first creation, We shall repeat it: A promise We have undertaken. Truly we shall do it." (21.104) He added, "The first to be dressed will be Abraham. Then some of my companions will take to the right and to the left. I will say: 'My companions! 'It will be said, 'They had been renegades since you left them.' I will then say what the Pious Slave Jesus, the son of Mary said: 'And I was a witness over them while I dwelt amongst them; when You did take me up, You were the Watcher over them, and You are a witness to all things. If You punish them, they are Your slaves, and if you forgive them, You, only You are the All-Mighty the All-Wise.' " (5.117-118) Narrated Quaggas, "Those were the apostates who renegade from Islam during the Caliphate of Abu Bakr who fought them." [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H656] It is clearly establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is witness upon the actions and deeds of people but the two ahadith prove contrary to the established fact. So is Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) lieing about being shown everything and deeds being presented to him and did Allah die about sendin Prophet has a witness? Answer is emphatic no, all of these facts are true and fundamental part of aqeedah of Muslims and we the Muslims make no Taweel of fundamental aqeedah based on circumstantial or implicit evidence. Just as we the Muslims will not accept Allah being Trinity on basis of plurals such as We, Us, Our which are found in Quran and used by Allah for himself. Point is here Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will be using the words of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam) while adopting humility and submissiveness of Hadhrat Isa (alayhis salaam). Here he will be immitating the humility and humility and the words will not indicate his reality. If one argues the word will indicate the reality of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) then my argument is was Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) raised like Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam)? Isa (alayhis salaam) was taken up this is why he will say: "... when you did take me up you were the witness ..." but what about Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam)? Was he taken up and will he return like Isa (alayhis salaam)? Point here is that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will be emulating a Sunnah of Nabi Isa (alayhis salaam) like we the Muslims emulate the Sunnah of Ibrahim (alayhis salaam). Like we emulate the Sunnah of Hajirah (alayhis salaam) the mother of Ishmaeel (alayhis salaam) by running on the two mountains doing Sai on the Hajj. Like we emulate her Sunnah and stone the Jamras during Hajj. These actions in reality are of other people and they have no real connection with us nor there is actual need to stone or do these things apart from symbolical and worship perspective in our Sharia. We just emulate the actions because we are instructed to. Similarly Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) will emulate the SUNNAH OF PROPHET ISA (ALAYHIS SALAAM) FOR THE PURPOSE OF SHOWING HUMILITY TO ALLAH (SUBHANAHU WA TA'ALA) while in reality the words will have no connection with his own actual state. You may say, ARE YOU SAYING PROPHET WILL TELL A LIE? I say didn't the Quran say when Allah asked the Prophets how the Ummats recieved them and they will all say we have no knowledge. Will they then be lieing? Nope, humility and I say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) show humility and respect by adopting the Sunnah of Prophet Isa (alayhis salaam). [To Be Continued ...]

Mr Haq3909 Did Not Format His Response Properly Hence To Make It Easier For The Readers To Distinguish Between What I Wrote And He Wrote I Formatted It On His Behalf. Post: #16 Did the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) approve of the hearing and seeing type of witnessing if not negate it? How does the understanding that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was sent as a hearing seeing type of witness go in favour of the Tafsir which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) gave? I mean how can you deduce the meaning of Hazir o Nazir for the word "Shahid" from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam')'s own Tafsir when he did not give such a meaning himself?Moreover the other hadith which i have quoted substantiates my proof of using the word, "Shahid" to mean Witness based on the previous knowledge that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) had received through revelation and not "Actual" witnessing in the sense that you refer to. Please read the following hadith once again. Bukhari, Volume 8, Book 76, Number 533 : Narrated by Ibn 'Abbas: The Prophet stood up among us and addressed (saying) "You will be gathered, barefooted, naked, and uncircumcised (as Allah says): 'As We began the first creation, We shall repeat it..' (21.104) And the first human being to be dressed on the Day of Resurrection will be (the Prophet) Abraham Al-Khalil. Then will be brought some men of my followers who will be taken towards the left (i.e., to the Fire), and I will say: 'O Lord! My companions whereupon Allah will say: you do not know what they did after you left them. I will then say as the pious slave, Jesus said, And I was witness over them while I dwelt amongst them...(up to) ...the All-Wise.' (5.117-118). The narrator added: Then it will be said that those people (relegated from Islam, that is) kept on turning on their heels (deserted Islam). Moreover can you Quote me any major Tafseers which take the meaning of "Shahid" used in the above verses in the Hazir o Nazir sense.From most of the Tafseers which i have come across , all take the meaning of Shahid in the sense which i have stated.You need to produce strong proof to show that, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) stating that people will bear witness in defence of Prophets and he will bare witness upon the people is ACTUALLY the hearing seeing type of witness and NOT the witness based on Previous Knowledge and the news that He (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) had received from the Holy Quran(i.e. the News that Allah Ta'ala has already foretold that the Prophets Alayhi Salam had indeed convyed the messages.) I remember the same type of anaology was first put up by Mufti Ahmed Yar Khan Naeemi in His Ja Alhaq and similarly by Molvi Mohammad Umar Acharvi Sahab in his Miqiyas E Hanafiyat a long time ago and you seem to follow in their footsteps.However, what you and they don't realise is that anaology cannot be used in matters of aqeedah.Maklook ko Khaliq bay bilkul bhi Qiyas nahi kiya jasakta.It is here where Shirk starts to pour in.Remember that matters related to aqeedah cannot be treated using anaology , similitudes or parables.Textual Proof and Clear evidence is a must.Now coming back to the point which you raised : Does every question indicate that one needs to gain knowledge? When Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) asked Musa (alayhis salaam) what do you have in your hand and he replied a staff. First of all every Intellectual and Just Muslim has no doubt regarding Allah Ta'ala that He is always looking at everything and He is the All-Knower of Everything .[He knows what is in the heavens and on earth, and He knows what you conceal and what you reveal. And Allah Ta'ala is the All-Knower of what is in the breasts (of men).(Surah Al-Taghabun, 64: 4)]. Hence, when Allah Ta'ala Asks/Inquires about something , then it is definitely based on Hikmah(Wisdom) as opposed to the Prophets Alayhim Sallato Wasallam and Auliya Karam(Rehma Ulla) , regarding whome our aqeeda is that they are NOT ALIM UL GHAYB and hence they do not know in advance. However, when it is established through incisive proof that the answer to a Question that they inquired/asked about was already known to them in advance , then ONLY that particular question will be based on Hikmah and not generally all questions.Know I request to you to show me a Saheeh and Explicit Hadeeth in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) asked a question related to a Non-Shariah matter and he already knew the answer to it as opposed to Allah Ta'ala who already knows everything in advance.However need not to but I will still pose a hadith from which it is clearly proven that Allah Ta'ala alreadys knows in advance about something which He asks about. angels.PNG Know can you show me any Saheeh and Explicit hadeeth in which the words , " وَهُوَ أَعْلَمُ(he knows best)" were used for the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) when he asked a question? On the contrary you will find many hadeeth in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) asked questions about matters that were unknown to him previously. Now lets look at the following Hadeeth: proof2.PNG This hadith clearly shows that after the telling of the Sahaba Radiallahu Anhum , the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) recognized her and the proof is " Whom Messenger of Allah knew (فَعَرَفَهَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم).Now can you show me any proof where Allah Ta'ala asked a question regarding something and upon receiving an answer , Allah Ta'ala knew( فَعَرَفَهَا اللَّهِ تَعَالَى) or recognized(MazAllah)?Any Quranic verse or explicit hadeeth? Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) I see at the back has i see in the front and your outward sincerity and your inner-sincerity are not conealed from me. This is state of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) all the time and we interpret evidence contrary to it in light of other examples. In this case we interpreted the questioning of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) in light of questioning of Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) and Jibraeel (alayhis salaam). Can you provide proof for your claim that this State is all the time?On the contrary we find the following hadith. Narrated Um Salama: The Prophet heard the voices of some people quarreling near his gate, so he went to them and said, "I am only a human being and litigants with cases of disputes come to me, and maybe one of them presents his case eloquently in a more convincing and impressive way than the other, and I give my verdict in his favor thinking he is truthful. So if I give a Muslim's right to another (by mistake), then that (property) is a piece of Fire, which is up to him to take it or leave it." [Sahih Bukhari Book #89, Hadith#295] Can you please tell me about this fundamental aqeeda which i have highlighted in red?Can you please show me this aqeedah in the books of Aqaid? On the contrary I have quoted the above hadith.

Post: #13 Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) gave interpretation of the verse but did he negate the hearing and seeing type of witnessing? Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) stated people will bear witness in defence of Prophets and he will bare witness upon the people. How does that mean Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is not hearing seeing type of witness? How does the understanding that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was sent as a hearing seeing type of witness go against the Tafsir which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) gave? Comming to the point in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) asked the companions who recited the phrase while he was leading the prayers. Does every question indicate that one needs to gain knowledge? When Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) asked Musa (alayhis salaam) what do you have in your hand and he replied a staff. Does that mean Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) didn't know what Musa (alayhis salaam) had in his hand and by asking Musa (alayhis salaam) Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) learnt that it was a staff. Or should we assume that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) knows everything else but Allah didn't knew Musa (alayhis salaam) was carrying a staff? The hadith of Jibraeel (alayhis salaam), when he came in the form of human and enquired about, Emaan, Ihsan, etc. When Jibraeel (alayhis salaam) left then Prophet told the companions that this was Jibraeel and he came to teach you deen. Point is some time question is not asked to gain knowledge but question is asked for other purposes. In case of Musa (alayhis salaam) it was to make Musa (alayhis salaam) realize what he was carrying. Then he was asked to throw it upon the floor and the staff turned to a snake and left the area. In case of Jibraeel (alayhis salaam) he questioned Prophet (sallallahu aalyhi was'sallam) so the companions can learn about important aspects of deen. In case of Prophet's (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) the question was asked so he steps up and companions recognize him and to tell him the good news how angels responded to his praiseworthy innovation. Imagine this, you live in a village and you perform prayers five times a day. In small village areas people know each other and recognize each other. It would be impossible for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) not to know and recognize the person and his voice because they live in same city and the companions performed prayers behind Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam). Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) I see at the back has i see in the front and your outward sincerity and your inner-sincerity are not conealed from me. This is state of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) all the time and we interpret evidence contrary to it in light of other examples. In this case we interpreted the questioning of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) in light of questioning of Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) and Jibraeel (alayhis salaam). Let me explain the methodology involved in interpreting, we believe that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) knows all ghayb and all that is apparent and this is fundamental belief. Therefore any evidence which indicates that Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) did not know something we interpret it to conform to fundamental teaching of aqeedah so it accords the fundamental aqeedah and not refutes it. Similarly the fundamental aqeedah regarding Prophet knowledge is that he sees at the back as he sees at the front and he knows sinerity in the hearts of believers. Now any hadith which contradicts this fundamental aqeedah we interpret it to conform to teaching of Islam. Your methodology is shaytaani methodology because you are attemtping to undermine a fundamental aspect of aqeedah with indirect evidence. Why don't you undermine Allah knowing everything by point of Musa (alayhis salaam) carrying staff in his hand? You will not undermine basic aqeedah of Allah knowing evryhting with Musa (alayhis salaam) example but you are willing to and wanting to undermine the basic/fundamental aqeedah regarding Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) by using his question as example? Foolish people like you who do not know the asool of religion engage in such foolishness. We the Muslims understand that if a verse/hadith goes against fundamental aqeedah we interpret the verse/hadith to conform to fundamental aqeedah. We the Muslims do not refute the fundamental aqeedah as a result of verse/hadith.

Post: #11

Post: #10 Most of the material which you have brought up has been discussed in the following dicussion with a brother. Just visit the thread, and if you have any specific text, hadith, verse which you think is strong proof against Hadhir Nadhir please refer it to me via private message. Note I will not be dealing with copy paste jobs. I know exactly where you copied the English material from and trust me its not very impressive. For sake of your hereafter stop copy pasting material and give the brain a chance to understand the matters your self: http://www.islamimeh...-hadhir-nadhir/ Most of the material which you have copy pasted has been already been discussed in the link.

Please Open Another Tab With Same Thread And On It Click On The Links To View Them While You Read The Discussion. Alternatively Please Click On This Link And It will Take You Direct To The Post Where Images Are Visible; #3, Thank You.

The following discussion took place here: #1 (please click to view the thread). The discussion on Hadhir Nazir (i.e. Shahid/Witnessing) of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) branched into two discussions. The main Urdu discussion was between learned and honourable brother Khalil Rana and our equally learned and honourable brother Saeedi and our Deobandi antagonist, Haq3909. May Allah reward both of them for their effort and elevate their ranks, Ameen, and guide brother Haq3909 to the understanding of Islam, Ameen. The English discussion was between my self and Mr Haq3909. It is essential that some back ground information is provided so readers have a beginning point and clear image from which they can begin with. The objective is not to gloss over my personal faults and highlight Mr Haq3909's faults but merely to represent both understands as neutrally as possible. Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) states that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) has been sent as a Shahid (i.e. Witness or Hadhir & Nazir) and in another verse it states he has been sent as a Shahid upon you (i.e. Muslims/Mankind). The Deobandi's and Wahhabi's believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) is not a seeing/hearing type of Shahid. Instead he will bearing witness on the day of judgment on events which he has not seen/heard but has been informed in the Quran by Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) that following things have taken place. On the opposite the Ahle Sunnat Wal Jammat all over the world believe that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi was'sallam) was sent as a Shahid upon us therefore he is hearing/seeing type of witness and he will bear witness to events which he has seen/heard. From this main disagreement other understands branch of but it is not important to point them out because the readers will get to read them as the discussion develops. Here I will be quoting all the material quoted by brother Haq3909 and material which is written by me in response to him. Note at the end of it each post will have a blue number if you click on that it will take you to the original post and you can verify yourself if the material is quoted honestly and truthfully. I would advise the readers to note which out of us two has actually answered the points and who has avoided answering the crucial aspects of the discussion. At the end of dicussion there will be oppurtunity for the readers to question myself and Mr Haq3909. Note I will explicitly state when the dicussion comes to an end so until then avoid commenting. As addition of others commenting will only make the dicussion more complex and difficult for the readers to follow the dicussion. In time of this fitna and lack of knowledge it is important that readers have easy access to knowledge and something easy figure out. Please the end abstain from commenting, thank you. Please Note Where Ever Mr Haq3909 Lacked Decency To Format His Response Appropriately I Would Be Formatting The Response On His Behalf. If I Reference A Post Number Please Note This Number Is Refering The Posts In The Original Thread And Not This Thread. Muhammad Ali Razavi.

Is ko apnay haal par chor denh. Ek banda discuss karta heh toh mukhalifeen kay points ka jawab deta heh. Jab yeh pans jata heh toh chup ho jata heh aur intizar karta heh kay baat thori agay baray ya phir kissi point ko leh kar shoroon ho jata heh. Misaal kay tor par, Musalman hindu say kehta heh yeh idols tumaray khuda kesay hen yeh kuch be nahin kar saktay. Hindu khamosh rahay ... jab kohi likhay idols toh bot hen sab lartay keun nahin apis meh. toh phir wapis aa kar ... sab meh ittifaq heh, agar kohi kahay woh toh lartay thay tumaray mazhab meh yeh daleel heh ... phir chup ... musalman, ganesha insaan kee shakal meh hindu idol heh, hindu wapis aa kar challenge deta hoon sabat kar doh kay insaan thah woh toh elephant sar wala thah body insan ke thee. Apna time waste nah keren in jesay bandoon kay wastay Allah ta'ala nay farmaya thah: "Nor are (alike) the living (i.e. the believers) and the dead (i.e. the disbelievers). Verily, Allah makes whom He wills to hear, but you cannot make hear those who are in graves." Yehni Kufr par in kee maut heh. Is ka aur is kay uqabir ka ek hee asool thah aur abh bee heh ke jab Islam aur Kufr meh choose karna paray aur masla izzat ka ho toh Islam say Kufr behtr heh. Izzat bachay apnay Islam ko bacha kar kia milna heh. yeh heh in ka aur in kay uqabir ka asool. Sab nay izzat bachahi apnay Islam ko kissi ko bachanay kee tofeeq nah huwi saray Kafir maray aur yeh be uneeh kay tareek par heh.