MuhammedAli

Salam alayqum, Dr Saeed Sahib aur moteram Khalil Rana Sahib ki wazahat kay mutabiq mein nay is ibarat ka English mein tarjumah yoon keeya heh: “From them is a fanatical supporters of Gangohi called Ashraf Ali Thanvi. He has written small pamphlet; not even of four pages long. In which he explicitly stated knowledge of Ghayb like of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) like it is possessed by every infant, every lunatic, in fact every animal and every quadruped. And followin is (Shaykh Ashraf Ali Thanvi) the cursed’s statement: ‘If it is correct to attribute knolwedge of Ghayb to holy being (of Prophet) then issue needing to be enquired is: Is this baaz from Ghayb or qull Ghayb; if baaz from knowledge of Ghayb is intended then what is so unique about Hadhoor’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knowledge of Ghayb; knowledge like this is even possessed by Zayd and Amr; but every infant, lunatic, all animal and quadrupeds. And if all knowledge of Ghayb is intended, from which none of detail (of Ilm al-Ghayb) is excluded, then falsehood of this (belief) is proven from textual and logical evidences.’ I say look at the effect of Allah’s seal (placed on his heart) how he establishes equality between RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and between creation. And how the boastful ignormous could not understand that Zayd and Umru and names of others he mentioned; if they know a matter of Ghayb even then it would gained through speculation. And definitive (knowledge of) matters of Ghayb is purely for Prophets (alayhis salam). And definitive knowledge of Ghayb if it is known by non-Prophets then it is through Prophets informing them and not through anyone else. And have you not seen how your Lord has stated: ‘Allah reveal to you the unseen. But Allah chooses of His messengers whom He wills, so believe in Allah and His messengers.’ [Ref: 3:179] ‘The knower of the unseen (i.e. Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala) does not disclose His Ghayb to anyone, Except whom He has approved of messengers, and indeed, …’ [Ref: 72:26/27] See how this man left the Quran and lost his faith. And ended up enquiring what is difference between Prophet and animals (in regards to Ghayb). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) sets seal on heart of every deceptively arrogant (person) like this. Notice how he restricted; limited knowledge (i.e. علم مطلق) and unlimited knowledge (i.e. مطلق علم): And he (Shaykh Thanvi) did not differentiate between knowing of one or two matters (of Zanni Ghayb by; Zaid, Amr, lunatics, animals, infants) and of those matters (of Ghayb known by RasoolAlllah sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) which are beyond enumeration.” [Ref: Hussam Al Haramayn Ala Munharil Kufr Wal Mayn, Pages 87/88] Baqi ka tarjuma jari heh ... Mein koshish mein hoon kay Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat ka Thanvi kay mutaliq joh material heh us ka tarjuma karoon. English mein ek tarjuma para joh samaj say bahir aur rooh e mazmoon say khali heh ... parh kar yeh pata nhin chalta kay joh zameer heh woh kis ki taraf heh aur maqabal o mabad mein kia talluq heh... koshish heh kay brackets mein izafaat kay saath tarjumein ko asaan banaya jahay ... aur aam fehm banda thori mehnat say samaj sakkay. In sha Allah kissi ahle ilm say is pooray mazmoon ki Sharh likhwa kar woh bi tarjumah kar doon ga ...

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Amar Iqbal [12 November 2017 07:22]: Salaam. Hope your in good health and Emaan. You have not explained the concept of good bida and where this is derived from. Many quote Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) however this is untrue to attribute the concept being portrayed. Waslaam Muhammed Ali [On 26 Nov 2017, at 12:53]: Salam alayqum. Brother Amar I have revised my earlier articles to improve content and in addition to this if you recall you mentioned Imam Nawavi (rahimullah) said Hadith referrs to prophetic Sunnah and reviving prophetic Sunnahs. As promised I have addressed that claim of yours. Its has taken long because I have been getting caught into discussions which required immediate response hence it has been on ignore nearly four/five years. Please read the following article with regards to Imam Nawawi's statement and how you have misunderstood or atleast have been lied to: Brother Amar Iqbal’s Understanding Of Hadith Of Good Sunnah Refuted And Position Of Imam Nawawi Explained. I will insha Allah briefly comment on your lattest and put it into perspective. If there are any other schoalrs, prior to Najdi Shaykh's emergence, who you hold in esteem and believe they have supported your position on Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam please refference them and I promise to respond promptly. Also you do claim to be following Salaf but I noted you quoted Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta'ala) as proof of your belief. Anyhow your response is eagerly being awaited. Amar Iqbal [Mon 27/11/2017 21:23]: Waslaam. You have titled it: Brother Amar Iqbal’s Understanding Of Hadith Of Good Sunnah Refuted And Position Of Imam Nawawi Explained.You had no permission to publish my emails as it was a private ongoing discussion. Muhammed Ali [Tuesday, 28/11/2017 10:20]: Salam alayqum. (1) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) stated: "Narrated Abdullah bin Amr: That the Prophet said: There are four things that whoever has them, then he is a hypocrite, and whoever has one attribute from among them, then he has an attribute of hypocrisy,until he leaves it: Whoever lies whenever he speaks, he does not fulfill whenever he promises, he is vulgar whenever he argues, and whenever he makes an agreement he proves treacherous." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B38, H2632] Brother as I recall neither you nor I discussed publishing of our discussion. Nor we ever talked about that i/you would secure your/my permission before publishing material. If I had stated or we had agreement; I would secure your permission at any time and then publish; then i am bound by my word as it is sign of a Munafiq to betray a agreement. Also our discussion was private but no secrect. Had it been so I would be guilty of divulging secret and guilty of Shar'ri offense. Bottom line is; I was and I am under no obligation to withdraw the content. Therefore I will not remove the content but I can try and ask the admin/mods to remove referrence which identifies you. Coming to private and on going discussion. If i recall correctly your words were; 'with all due respect you're not interested in what you have to say but what Salaf have stated' which was technically end of discussion. All I had was what Allah's Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) said, and meanings which I translated into my own words to convey understanding of prophetic words. You did not respond to anything I had written. Not that you didn't have anything to say but because what I wrote wasn't from Salaf therefore you refuse to grace it with a response. Hence there was no on going discussion. Thereafter I sent you number of emails, roughly four, none were responded to. So discussion had ended because you wanted me to quote you Salaf [yet you quoted me Imam Nawawi rahimullah, who is from Khalaf and not Salaf]. Even if this was a ongoing discussion this is no reason to withold the information and not publish it. If I had published your unfinished response you would be justified in objecting to me publishing it. The responses you sent me there were complete hence if they are already online it will not effect our ongoing discussion and any further exchanges also will eventually go on forum. My objective is to share knowledge with others and people to learn from my and your mistakes. I am more then happy to be proven wrong in public and my errors to be exposed in public. I see nothing but benefit for myself in doing this. (2) With regards to referrences from Salaf. In reality I had quoted the Salaf, the Prophet, and Ahadith narrated by his companions which you didn't ponder over I assume; one can't get more follower of Salaf then that. Even though I have no claim that I am exclusively following Salaf, which you have, and therefore you’re under burden to provide proof of your belief from Salaf because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said burden of proof is upon the claimant: “’On the authority of Ibn Abbas; the Messenger of Allah said: Were people to be given everything that they claimed, men would (unjustly) claim the wealth and lives of (other) people. But, the onus of proof is upon the claimant, and the taking of an oath is upon him who denies.’A hasan hadeeth narrated by al-Baihaqee and others in this form, and part of it is in the two Saheehs.” [Ref: Forty Ahadith – Nawavi, Hadith 33] My claim is, way of prophetic Sunnah and Jammah of Ummah which is inclusive of three generations that followed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam). And as principle; we follow the first three generations, but when there is ambiguity and no clear guidance to a problem from Quran, prophetic Sunnah, and three generations, we then referr to tasreehat (i.e. clarifications) of Ulamah of Ummah. And then we apply these understandings on practical example of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) and his companions to see if the clarification fits into their practice. In case of Ahadith of good Sunnah in Islam. Even though there is no clear explicit interpretation of it from Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) nor from his companions but we have an interpretation that it sanctions into Islam innovated good Sunnahs. We test this interpretation by applying it incidents that took place during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam). A companion innovated a new Tasbih in Salah: “One day we were praying behind the Prophet. When he raised his head from bowing, he said: "Sami`al-lahu liman hamidah." A man behind him said, "Rabbana wa laka l-hamdu, hamdan kathiran taiyiban mubarakan fihi" When the Prophet completed the prayer, he asked, "Who has said these words?" The man replied, "I." The Prophet said, "I saw over thirty angels competing to write it first." Prophet rose (from bowing) and stood straight till all the vertebrae of his spinal column came to a natural position.” [Ref: Bukhari, B12, H764] Note it was not Sunnah but became Sunnah after it was approved. This teaches companions innovated good Sunnahs into Islam and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) accepted them and so did Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). So even though we have no explanation from Salaf of Hadith of; whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam; but our interpretation is caroborated by this incident. Leading us to conclude that prophetic words; whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam; would be understood by companions as; whoever intrdouces innovated good Sunnah in Islam. So missing information can be implied when the beginning and end are known but information in between is missing. And even though the missing isn’t what Salaf stated but it fits into overall conclusion therefore it has to be correct. Following would explain my point easily and would be easily accessible : 1 + 4 + 5 – 3 + ? x 2 + 5 - 11 = 10. To solve the missing value we have to do bit of detective work. (1+4 =5), (5+5=10), (10-3=7), the last known value is seven and because ? has to be added to seven and then multiplied by two … to get the figure of ten. Suppose ? is assumed to be five, so it would be: 1 + 4 + 5 – 3 + 5 x 2 + 5 - 11 = 18. And this is wrong because it should be ten. Through devaluing five to four, to three, to two, to one, trial by error or a method, one will eventually arrive at the missing value which is one and demonstrated in the following: 1 + 4 + 5 – 3 + 1 x 2 + 5 - 11 = 10. Now even though the missing value wasn’t stated when it is figured and fits into the equation then we know for certaintity it is correct. In similar fashion the missing information can be implied and when it fits into practical life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his companions then it is correct and it would considered methodology and teaching of Salaf even though there is no explicit statement but it is implied. Alhasil I did provide you evidence from Salaf and I have explained how a position can be understanding of Salaf even though their explicit statements in support of it are missing. On subject of innovation and Ahadith of good Sunnah in Islam. We have: whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam + Tasbih of Salah = innovated in Islam good Sunnah, or innovated in Islam good Sunnah of Tasbih. In this way we can verify and figure out the missing information and prove that Salaf also had same understanding on subject of innovation as we the Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah have and they must have believed the Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam is referring to innovated good Sunnahs in Islam. Muhammed Ali [Tuesday, 28/11/2017 10:56]: Salam Alayqum. Brother Amar on 12th Nov you sent an email. Can you further elucidate on the following: "You have not explained the concept of good bida and where this is derived from." Did you mean it in the following sense: “You have not proven concept of good innovation from Quran and prophetic Sunnah.” Or did you mean to say: “You have not explained what is good innovation made-up of and from where the practices which compose a good innovation are derived from.” There is ambiguity and I would like to have clarification of what you meant so I can address it. Would you like me to address both or just the one you intended. Please point out what you intended. You also stated: "Many quite Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) however this is untrue to attribute the concept being portrayed." But you have not explained why what Umar (radiallah ta'ala anhu) said is not proof for good innovation. If Amr says Surah Ikhlas is not proof of Tawheed. This is his denial and not proof. And it is in need of justification and proof of some type. Rejection of something being not so is never proof that it is not so. Muhammed Ali [Thursday, 30/11/2017 16:58]: Salam Alayqum, Brother Amar I would wait for another three days and in between if I do not recieve a response to my querry and if i do not get notified about your response. Many more capable then yourself have adressed the difficulty in Ahadith of good Sunnah in Islam and they have been responded to. To mention some names, Shaykh Waheed Al-Zaman, here, Shaykh Salim al-Qarni and Shaykh Abd al-Rahman al-Ajlan, here, and Shaykh Aymen Bin Khaled, here. There isn't much that I have not heard before on this topic but rarely someone does come up with something ingenious. You may feel your position has been badly represented. Rest assured evidences relating to it and in support of your position have been addressed before and three articles just are example. I would appreciate an academic response or at least an acknowledgment that you will respond in next three days. After you inform me then you can be at your leasure and respond to, anything I have written, in time which best suites you. If I do not get some sort of response in three days I will proceed to upload my lattest explanation; which explains how my response was evidence from Salaf. As well as write up a response to two possibilities which you might have enquired about and regarding which I sought clarification. Ammar Iqbal [Thu 30/11, 19:26]: Waslaam. I invite you to sit down with me to discuss the topic and you can bring your Arabic books with you etc. Muhammed Ali [01/12/2017 19:47]: Salam alayqum. Brother I will have to turn down your offer. I no longer discuss/debate in person. After thousands of hour being spent on it nothing productive was achieved. I preferr to write because even if immediate person doesn't benefit others will. I am too busy with my academic pursuits and family life and cannot spare time for anything else. If we happen to meet by chance as we did in past then in sha Allah we will discuss it. I will proceed with my response and once completed it will be emailed to you and then posted online. Allah Hafiz. Muhammed Ali: (1) In your email dated 12th Nov 2017 you stated: “Many quote Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) however this is untrue to attribute the concept being portrayed. Waslaam.” What you wrote is unintelligble and confusing. Best way to understand it is to reconstruct it within frame work of what a Salafi might say. Following is my best effort: (a) “Many quote: “…excellent innovation …”. statement uttered by Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) however it is incorrect to attribute to Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) the concept of good innovation which is being portrayed by them. Waslaam.” (b) “Many quote words of Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to support concept of good innovation however it is wrong to deduce from his words the support for the concept of good innovation which is apparently being portrayed by his words. Waslaam.” (c) “Many quote Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) however this statement of his is not untrue to attribute the concept of good innovation being portrayed by them. Waslaam.” There was no real need to for textual criticism as far as I was concerned but readers would have struggled therefore I did my best to put your statement in perspective of traditional Salafi/Wahhabi belief. All three boil down to two justifications; (a) Taraweeh was prophetic Sunnah, (b) and therefore Omar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said it is excellent innovation in linguistic sense. (2) We need to establish what linguistic innovation is and how to figure out if someone said good innovation in linguistic innovation. (a) There is obvious way; Bakr believes Islam allows good Shar’ri innovations. His belief is known and documented. When he says; Mawlid is an excellent innovation then we interpret his statement in context of his belief. In case of Bakr; he said Mawlid is an excellent innovation in Shar’ri sense. There are other ways to establish if something is innovation in legal sense or linguistic sense. And it is by taking note of in what context the statement was made about. (b) Suppose Amr says; Hajj is an excellent innovation taught by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and by His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Note it is clear that Amr believes Hajj isn’t innovation of Ummatis by innovation taught by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And technically in legal sense of Islamic law innovation is something which isn’t taught by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). By computing basic information and with compassion the more likely probability is that Amr made his statement in linguistic sense. Of course those who have malice and are blinded by sectarianism will distort it to mean something else but if one has best opinion of a Muslim’s belief, knowledge, and intentions then he will reach to best and natural mentioned conclusion. (c) Bakr isn’t aware performing Salat ad-Duha is prophetic Sunnah. Bakr enters Masjid and observes Amr performing Salat ad-Duhan and says; what an excellent innovation. Even though Bakr is incorrect in his judgment but his verdict tells that Bakr believes innovations can be excellent and can be practiced even if they are not prophetic Sunnahs. The reason is simple; if Bakr didn’t believe in good innovation concept he would not judge something to be excellent innovation. He would have said it is an innovation and every innovation is misguidance. (d) Suppose Bakr is aware that when prayer leader (i.e. Imam) says; sami Allahu liman hamidah the Muqtadi (i.e. follower) is supposed to say; rabbana wa lak al-hamd. Yet he decides to say: "Rabbana wa laka l-hamdu, hamdan kathiran taiyiban mubarakan fihi."[1] Zaid hears him utter these words and says; this is a good innovation. Note these words are not prophetic Sunnah. Bakr’s statement is an innovation. The alteration is made in Deen and in Salah (i.e. Tasbih of Salah). Therefore this statement of Zaid is Shar’ri judgment and the saying of good innovation is about Shar’ri good innovation. Note this last example of determining innovation is related to Umar Ibn al-Khattab’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) statement. (3) Taraweeh as we both know is Prophetic Sunnah and to be precise three day Taraweeh under leadership of a Qari/Imam is prophetic Sunnah. On fourth day Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not attend the Masjid -: Following Hadith sheds light on the incident: "Allah's Messenger went out in the middle of the night and prayed in the mosque and some men prayed behind him. In the morning, the people spoke about it and then a large number of them gathered and prayed behind him (on the second night). In the next morning the people again talked about it and on the third night the mosque was full with a large number of people. Allah's Messenger came out and the people prayed behind him. On the fourth night the Mosque was overwhelmed with people and could not accommodate them, but the Prophet came out (only) for the morning-prayer. When the morning-prayer was finished he recited Tashah-hud and said, "Amma ba'du, your presence was not hidden from me but I was afraid lest the night prayer should be enjoined on you and you might not be able to carry it on."So, Allah's Apostle died and the situation remained like that." [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H229] The three days of Taraweeh mentioned in the Hadith of Bukhari was lead by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And the three days performed were in the last ten days of Ramadan and to be precise on 23rd, 25th, and 27th of Ramadan -: As following Hadith establishes: "It was narrated that Abu Dharr said: "We fasted Ramadan with the Messenger of Allah, and the Prophet did not lead us in Qiyam until there were seven days left of the month (i.e. 23rd of Ramadan) then he led us in Qiyam until one-third of the night had passed. Then when there were six days left (i.e. 24th of Ramadan) he did not lead us in Qiyam. When there were five days left (i.e. 25th of Ramadan) he led us in praying Qiyam until half the night had passed. We said: 'O Messenger of Allah (SA), why don't you lead us in praying Qiyam for the rest of the night?' He said: 'If a man prays with the Imam until he leaves, that will be continued for him as if he spent the whole night in prayer.' Then, when there were four days left (i.e.26th of Ramadan) he did not lead us in praying Qiyam. When there were three days left (i.e. 27th of Ramadan) he sent for his daughters and women, and gathered the people, and he led us in praying Qiyam until we feared that we would miss Al-Falah. Then he did not lead us in praying Qiyam for the rest of the month." Dawud (one of the narrators) said: "I said: ' What is falah?' He said: 'Sahur.'"[2] [Ref: Nisai, B13, H1365] This establishes prophetic Sunnah of Taraweeh is for three days; 23rd, 25th, and 27th and congregational practice of Taraweeh was abandoned by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). There is no record which indicates prophetic Sunnah of Taraweeh changed during Abu Bakr’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) time but in Umar Ibn al-Khattab’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Khilafat he revived portion of prophetic Sunnah (i.e. 23rd, 25th, and 27th night Taraweeh). And through it innovated following good Sunnahs in Islam; (a) instructed that Taraweeh should be performed for entire month of Ramadan, (b) consecutively from beginning to end of Ramadan, (c) entire or more Quran is completed in Ramadan by Qari/Imam, (d) and under leadership of an Imam. And following Hadith is evidence of it: “Malik related to me from Ibn Shihab from Urwa ibn az-Zubayr that Abd ar-Rahman ibn Abd al-Qari said, "I went out with Umar ibn alKhattab in Ramadhan to the mosque and the people there were spread out in groups. Some men were praying by themselves, whilst others were praying in small groups. Umar said, 'By Allah! It would be better in my opinion if these people gathered behind one reciter.' So he gathered them behind Ubayy ibn Kab. Then I went out with him another night and the people were praying behind their Qur'an reciter. Umar said, نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. How excellent this innovation is!) But what you miss while you are asleep is better than what you watch in prayer.' He meant the end of the night, and people used to watch the beginning of the night in prayer."[3] [Ref: Muwatta Malik, B6, H3] Note he said it is an excellent innovation. Of course he did not say this regarding the prophetic Sunnah aspect of Taraweeh (i.e. 23rd, 25th, and 27th). Rather he said it about whole month of Taraweeh and it being performed in congregation for entire month. And these aspects are indeed innovations and therefore his saying; Taraweeh of entire month under leadership of an Imam is excellent innovation were not linguistical innovation rather his words were regarding Shar’ri good innovation which is a good Sunnah in Islam. Please referr to 2d to understand the rationale supporting the judgment. Alhasil his statement is proof; Islam there is room for good innovations and Islam recognises classification of innovation into good/excellent innovation and that Umar (radillah ta’laa anhu) believed innovations can be excellent. Regarding Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) the rightly guided Caliph Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “After I am gone, you will see great conflict. I urge you to adhere to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, and cling stubbornly to it.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H44] Hence you’re under Shar’ri burden to accept Sunnah of rightly guided Caliph and believe as he believed about innovations. Muhammed Ali: In E-mail dated 12th Nov 2017 you stated: "You have not explained the concept of good bida and where this is derived from." Regarding which I sought clarification, Email 28th/11/20177 – 10:56, about what you meant but I have received no response and therefore I will proceed to respond to both possibilities. It was quite possible you intended the following: “You have not proven concept of good innovation from Quran and prophetic Sunnah.” Before starting please note in my previous E-mail rule mentioned in 2C applies to this context so please familiarize yourself with it. Note the rule applies to following part of response the scenario details mentioned may not fully fit into here because in 2C I was merely trying to establish the rule not to use the incident as proof. (1a) In the previous E-mail it was established how statement of Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was/is proof of classification of innovation into good/excellent in the following words of his son Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) will be explained. And then words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed Salat ad-Duha is not prophetic Sunnah: “Narrated Muwarriq: I asked Ibn `Umar: "Do you offer the Duha prayer ?" He replied in the negative. I further asked, "Did `Umar use to pray it ?" He (Ibn `Umar) replied in the negative. I again asked, "Did Abu Bakr use to pray it?" He replied in the negative. I again asked, "Did the Prophet use to pray it?" Ibn `Umar replied, "I don't think he did." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H27] What he is indicating is; Salat ad-Duha is innovation which the following Hadith also confirms: “Narrated Mujahid: Urwa bin Az-Zubair and I entered the Mosque (of the Prophet) and saw Abdullah bin Umar sitting near the dwelling place of Aisha and some people were offering the Duha prayer. We asked him about their prayer and he replied that it was an innovation.” [Ref: Bukhari, B27, H4] The Ulamah have said he believed it is innovation to perform it in congregation, others said he deemed it innovation to perform it regularly, others said he said it is innovation because it was being performed in Masjid, and others said he deemed it innovation as whole because he believed it was never performed by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). I say it is not important in which detail he considered it innovation but the fact is that he did consider one aspect of it as innovation or whole of it as innovation. Irrespective of his true belief at very least he considered something of Salat ad-Duha as innovation and regarding it he said it is fine/excellent innovation: “Ibn Ulayyah narrated to us, Jarir narrated, al-Hakim bin A'raj narrated; I asked Muhammad about Salat ad-Duha, while he was sitting near the house of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). He said: It is an innovation and what a fine innovation it is!" [Ref: Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Kitab Of Prayer – Salat ad-Duha, 3] "At the time Uthman was killed no-one considered it desirable and the people did not innovate anything that is dearer to me than that prayer." [Ref: Musannaf Abd Razzaq, Vol3, Pages 78/79] (1b) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “He who introduces a فِي الإِسْلاَمِ سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً (i.e. good Sunnah in Islam), there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Innovation is not already part of Islam and prophetic Sunnah is already part of Islam. And the reward being told is for a good Sunnah which is not already part of Islam but will be introduced into Islam. Therefore the Prophetic words referr to innovating a good Sunnah and making it part of Islam via Ijtihad. Alhasil reward for innovator and actor is for a innovation of good Sunnah. (2) It is quite possible you meant the following: “You have not explained what is good innovation made-up of and from where the practices which compose a good innovation are derived from.” If this is what you stated then answer is very simple: Innovated good Sunnah [or else; good innovation] is composed of various prophetic Sunnahs such as acts of worship, charity, righteous deeds, and everything about them is agrees with Islamic teaching which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has taught. If someone deems Yoga to be an act of worship and decides to worship Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) considering it good innovation then it is rejected because it isn’t sanctioned act of worship. But if someone recites Surah Ikhlas x100 and performs two Rakat Nawafil, gives Sadaqah to a poor person, and then supplicates Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for his need. And he does all this to gain pleasure of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) so when he invokes Him he is granted what he needs from Him. Even though this entire process of pleasing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and seeking need from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is innovation but the tools employed are prophetic teachings. Such as actions of charity and worship therefore it would be good innovation. It really makes no difference if he calls his practice Khatam Ikhlas because the permissibility isn’t judged on name/label but by content. And also a practice can be permissibile even it is not prophetic Sunnat because permissibility is judged by what it is composed of and not if it is prophetic Sunnat. If permissibility was judged by a practice being prophetic Sunnah then use of tooth brush/paste, modern weapons in Jihad would be Haram and sinful innovation because they are not prophetic Sunnahs. Note: Brother Amar sent another E-Mail where he in some detail pointed out the the sufferings Ummah is afflicted with but nothing related to the topic of innovation hence it is being omitted. Footnotes: - [1] “One day we were praying behind the Prophet. When he raised his head from bowing, he said, "Sami`al-lahu liman hamidah." A man behind him said, "Rabbana wa laka l-hamdu, hamdan kathiran taiyiban mubarakan fihi" When the Prophet completed the prayer, he asked, "Who has said these words?" The man replied, "I." The Prophet said, "I saw over thirty angels competing to write it first." Prophet rose (from bowing) and stood straight till all the vertebrae of his spinal column came to a natural position.” [Ref: Bukhari, B12, H764] - [2] “It was narrated that Abu Dharr said: “We fasted Ramadan with the Messenger of Allah and he did not lead us in praying Qiyam (prayers at night) during any part of it, until there were seven nights left. He led us in praying Qiyam on the seventh night until approximately one third of the night had passed. Then on the sixth night which followed it he did not lead us in prayer. Then he led us in praying Qiyam on the fifth night which followed it until almost half the night had passed. I said: ‘O Messenger of Allah, would that we had offered voluntary prayers throughout the whole night.’ He said: ‘Whoever stands with the Imam until he finishes, it is equivalent to spending the whole night in prayer.’ Then on the fourth night which followed it, he did not lead us in prayer, until the third night that followed it, when he gathered his wives and family, and the people gathered, and he led us in prayer until we feared that we would miss the Falah.” It was asked: “What is the Falah?” He said: “Suhur.” He said: “Then he did not lead us in prayer at night for the rest of the month.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B5, H1327] “It was narrated that Abu Dharr said: "We fasted with the Messenger of Allah in Ramadan and he did not lead us in praying Qiyam until there were seven days left in the month, when he led us in praying Qiyam until one-third of the night had passed. Then he did not lead us in praying Qiyam then there were six days left. Then he led us praying Qiyam when there were five days left until one-half of the night had passed. I said: "O Messenger of Allah! What if we spend the rest of this night praying Nafl?" He said: "Whoever prays Qiyam with the Imam until he finishes, Allah (SWT) will record for him the Qiyam of a (whole) night." Then he did not lead us in prayer or pray Qiyam until there were three days of the month left. Then he led us in praying Qiyam when there were three days left. He gathered his family and wives (and led us in prayer) until we feared that we would miss Al-Falah. I (one of the narrators) said: "What is Al-Falah?" He said: "The suhur".” [Ref: Nisai, B20, H1606] - [3] “Abdur Rahman bin 'Abdul Qari said, "I went out in the company of 'Umar bin Al-Khattab one night in Ramadhan to the mosque and found the people praying in different groups. A man praying alone or a man praying with a little group behind him. So, 'Umar said, 'In my opinion I would better collect these (people) under the leadership of one Qari (Reciter)’. So, he made up his mind to congregate them behind Ubai bin Ka'b. Then on another night I went again in his company and the people were praying behind their reciter. On that, 'Umar remarked نِعْمَتِ الْبِدْعَةُ هَذِهِ (i.e. what an excellent innovation this is) but the prayer which they do not perform, but sleep at its time is better than the one they are offering.' He meant the prayer in the last part of the night. (In those days) people used to pray in the early part of the night." [Ref: Bukhari, B32, H227]

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

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

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

Salam alayqum. Dhul Qurnayn ghaliban ek Yahoodi qom say thay aur Musalman thay yehni Musa alayhis salam kay mannay walay thay. Alexander Mushrik/Kafir thah. Baqi sari kissay kahaniyan hen. Kissi kay pass kuch wazia subut nahin.

Introduction: Brother Amar Iqbal bumped into me in a eatery. We discussed about religious issue of Mawlid, Khatams, Geeyarween and naturally subject turned to topic of innovation. His position, like typical of all Wahhabiyyah was; innovations in Islam are completely prohibited and innovations into Deen are evil/sinful. He quoted Hadith, every innovation is misguidance, to support his position. My response was; if every/qullu is in its Haqiqi meaning then nothing is excluded from it, not Bukhari, and not Muslim. They too would be inclusive, therefore would be innovations and misguidance. His position was no they are not included in every/kullu and these two collections of Hadith are not innovations. I argued that every/kullu includes them too. Eventually he stopped interfering and agreed to just hear me out. I said to him: If you limit every/kullu to some innovations and not others then you actualy don’t believe in every/kullu every innovation being evil. You’re creating room for some innovations to be accepted. Here reasoning would be; Bukhari/Muslim are books composed of Prophetic teaching hence they are not innovation because what they are composed of words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and companions have reported his actions. My response then would be; the innovated practices of Muslims are also composed of Prophetic teaching and acts of worships which he taught hence they are not innovations. And if they are composed of sinful practices then they are innovations. At the end of mini speech I quoted the following Hadith; whosoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam for him and those who follow him will earn equal reward. He requested the referrence and we exchanged email addresses to continue our discussion until the Hadith’s referrence is checked and verified. He emailed me as promised and I sent him the Hadith. Reworked Old Articles And Reformatted Them With New Titles: I had started work to compile this discussion/debate for publishing soon as it finished. Intention was I would not publish it until Imam Nawawi’s (rahimullah) referrence has been verified but after being unable to find his Sharh I decided to abandon the project. But recently when I started to go through my old unfinished articles I bumped into it, and decided to make another effort. While compiling the account I decided to check the old articles produced in response to brother Amar Iqbal and realized recent update of the forum software has completely destroyed the formatting. Then it was decided that as well as reproducing Email discussion faithfully and reformat; I will overhaul referenced articles written especially to refute his misunderstandings and publish them again with titles which reflect the content accurately. This only deliberate alteration but nothing of Email exchanges was altered except spelling errors. Realization About Brother Amar's Methodology And Counter Strategy Explained: After carefully reading and trying to understand what made him write the position he mentioned in 2nd EMAIL I figured brother Amar Iqbal’s position fundamentally is; guiding principle is restricted to context [especially in regards to the Hadith of good Sunnah] and does not referr to anything else and should not be interpreted by itself therefore the Hadith is not about good innovations. So it was decided to rectify his this error first instead of directly responding to each and every point he made. Strategy was to target the basis of his understanding and then the interpretation. So the first four articles focused on the principle on which he based his understanding. The last two were directly responding to what he wrote. The overall objective of first four articles was to establish that a general principle will remain general even if it is issued in context of an historical event. And the principle may have contexual relevance but is not bound to context. And various Ahadith were quoted to establish this position. Please note, actual responses to brother Amar Iqbal were in form of the six articles. The E-mail exchange was to give an informal response until the six articles were completed. Email Exchange With Brother Amar Iqbal: Amar Iqbal - [Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 22:12:48 +0000]: “Salaam, Please send me the hadith about innovating of good in Muslim which you quoted when we briefly met. Jzk.” MuhammedAli - [Sent: 05/12/2011 02:30] -: "Jarir b. Abdullah reported that some desert Arabs clad in woollen clothes came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him). He saw them in sad plight as they had been hard pressed by need. He (the Holy Prophet) exhorted people to give charity, but they showed some reluctance until (signs) of anger could be seen on his face. Then a person from the Ansar came with a purse containing silver. Then came another person and then other persons followed them in succession until signs of happiness could be seen on his (sacred) face. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their's being diminished in any respect." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] "Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who called (people) to righteousness, there would be reward (assured) for him like the rewards of those who adhered to it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And he who called (people) to error, he shall have to carry (the burden) of its sin, like those who committed it, without their sins being diminished in any respect." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6470] The first Hadith is clear, doesn’t require interpretation. The second one is to be interpreted in light of first Hadith. Amar Iqbal - [Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 20:17:18 +0000] -: “This hadith does not mention new biddah? Also its about reviving a Sunnah which people forgotton and neglected. In addition giving charity is very clear in the deen. Where have U taken ur understanding from? What's the understanding of the first three generations on this? Wassalam.” MuhammedAli: Ahadith use many words for innovation like Sunnah: "... sunnati khulafa ar-rashideen, ..." Also words muhdasa as well as Biddah: "... qullu muhdasatin bidda ..." Therefore your point that word Biddah is not used is ignorance of Sunnah of beloved Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Its not about reviving a Sunnah my dear brother. Shaytan is getting best of you. You should read the Hadith again and ponder over it. My understanding is from Quran, and Sunnah of beloved RasoolAllah (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and Sunnah of companions. Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) knows better about the understanding of first three generations of these Ahadith. But their Ijtihadi praiseworthy innovations and action upon them are abundantly recorded in Ahadith. From this it can be deduced they understood innovation to be of two types: praiseworthy and blameworthy. See following: Understanding Ahadith Of; Every Innovation Is Misguidance In Context Of Ahadith Of GoodEvil Sunnah. I have written substantially about innovation find the material which interests you, and which support my position, it would be easy because the names of articles are clear enough. MuhammedAli [Sent: 06/12/2011 20:14] Salam alayqum wr wb. MuhammedAli [06/12/2011 23:05]: Insha Allah ta'ala ul Aziz, I will write a comprehensive response on that forum. Amar Iqbal [Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 19:05:04 +0000]: “All due respect im not interested in what you have written rather what's the understanding of the Hadith from the Salaf? Please define what is Biddah and Sunnah as they both canot be over looked. I will get you a full understanding on this Hadith from my books when I return home. Please answer my questions? Waslaam.” Amar Iqbal [Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 08:57:11 +0000]: “Waslaam Akhi (i.e. brother).” Muhammed: Here short explaination on the Hadith: Interpreting Hadith Of Good And Evil Sunnah In Light Of Historical Context And Natural Meaning Of Prophetic Words. One more article on its explanation maybe two more then third one and fourth will be a direct response to what you wrote. MuhammedAli: Salam Alaykum. See following: Understanding The Prophetic Principles In Ahadith And Principle Of Good Sunnah In Islam. I will write a comprehensive response to your points soon but as far as I could figure out see your pattern of thought and rationale behind your response I have started to address write on it. But something I haven't been able to figure out the reasons you wrote this: “Also its about reviving a sunnah which people forgotton and neglected.” My assumption was/is that due to the use of word Sunnah you asumed it was about Sunnah neglected/forgotten Sunnah so it would help if you could quote evidence on basis of which you deduced that. Amar Iqbal [Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2011 00:35:18 +0000]: “This is the understanding of Imam Nawawi and others but to say said and to attribute to the Messenger that he said:‘whoever does a good Biddah …’ This opens a very dangerous door for which there are no limits. Please quote with refrences where U have taken this from because it contradics the Hadith and principles of the Sunnah.” MuhammedAli : (1) First of all your methodology is wrong. Its forbidden to fallow ulil amr on issues which become disputed rather they need to be judged according to what Allah and what RasoolAllah said:“O ye who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Messenger, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last Day: ...” [ref: Surah 4:59] This means issues Muslims differ on (these we should refer) to Quran and Sunnah. Note there is no saying; obey ulil amr on disputed issues. So obedience of Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) on a disputed issue is innovation. It is akin to taking him Lord beside Allah, and Messenger after Prophet Muhammed (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam). Yet there is there is no Lord besides Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and no Prophet after RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). (2) Your saying: “… its about reviving a Sunnah which people forgotton and neglected … This is the understanding of Imam Nawawi and others …” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) exhortated the companions to give Sadaqa and this was about Sunnah indeed but there is no indication it was forgotten or neglected. How can the interpretation that, whosoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam, can mean; whosoever revives a forgotten Sunnah of Islam, when there is huge word difference and there is no proof that companions had forgotten this prophetic Sunnah. If what you attribute to Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) is true and he also negated possibility of another interpretation then Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) erred. If you believe Imam Nawavi's (rahimullah) said what you attribute to him and you believe his position is correct then substantiate his claim with proof that companions of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) had forgotten the Sunnah of Sadaqa or were neglecting it. This interpretation; companions forgot the Sunnah of giving Sadaqa, would only make sense if companions had forgotten the Sunnah of Sadaqa, and then companion who came with bag if silver, would be reviving it. Yet the fact is Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) exhorted them to give Sadaqa few mins before the man came with bag of silver belies what you attribute to Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala😞 “He saw them in sad plight as they had been hard pressed by need. He (the Holy Prophet) exhorted people to give charity, but they showed some reluctance until (signs) of anger could be seen on his face.” Surely companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had longer memory span then a sparrow. It seems other Ahadith of reviving Sunnah are forcefully are being imposed upon this Hadith of introducing good Sunnah in Islam instead of truly interpreting the Hadith in context of event. (3) Hadith indicates that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) gave Khutba to companions to give Sadaqa and this interpretation of which you referr to [and attribute to Imam Nawawi rahimullah] could only in context of this quoted part of the Hadith: “He saw them in sad plight as they had been hard pressed by need. He (the Holy Prophet) exhorted people to give charity, but they showed some reluctance until (signs) of anger could be seen on his face. Then a person from the Ansar came with a purse containing silver.” Quote me what Imam Nawavi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) and others wrote only on the part of the Hadith whose meaning we dispute. It seems you took his interpretation, made in specific context of an evidence, and generalised that to; it only means this. If it is true what you attribute to Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) has interpreted the historical events in context of the principle and not principle in context of historical events. (4) A very common error made by self-taught and DIY scholars is that they do not understand basic rule of Tafsir. A verse of Quran or prophetic statement when interpreted in context of another verse/Hadith it will only give meaning of type of verse/Hadith it has been coupled with. Suppose verse A has been coupled with verse B. The resulting interpretation would be of A+B. Now if A is interpreted by itself, without B, then natural meaning A would be Tafsir. If verse A has been coupled with E then interpretation would reflect A + E. Point is whenever a verse/Hadith is coupled with another the literal meaning of verse/Hadith being interpreted would be changed by the evidence being employed to interpret it. (5) Forexample, suppose I am interpreting following part: “Guide us to the straight path.” [Ref: 1:6] The commentators have said straight path is Islam and others said it is prophetic Sunnah. I say it also means: Guide us to simple path. And they all are correct in light of their own evidences but I say the verse means: ‘Guide us to straight path of worship of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)’, in light of following: "Verily, God is my Sustainer as well as your Sustainer; so worship Him (alone): this is a straight way." [Ref:3:51] Building on this interpretation the verse also means: ‘Guide us to straight path of worshiping Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with Ihsan.’ Because best form worship is worshiping Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as if you see Him and if not that then He sees you. And this is Ihsan and this is evidenced by Hadith of Jibraeel (alayhis salam😞 “The man again asked, "O Allah's Messenger What is Ihsan?" The Prophet said, "Ihsan is to worship Allah as if you see Him, and if you do not achieve this state of devotion, then (take it for granted that) Allah sees you." [Ref: Bukhari, B60, H300] Alhasil the interpretation of verses/Hadith when it is coupled with another verse/Hadith will always be inclusive of both and literal meaning of each would not be effected. Nor limited or restricted due to coupled verse/Hadith. Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) used the principle; whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam, to interpret the historical event. This does not mean he believed the principle is to be subjected to contextual restrictions and looses its generality because of context or evidence with which it is interpreted. He interpreted the good Sunnah part of Hadith in context of his own evidence and his interpretation is valid in context of evidence he coupled the principle with. Just like the interpretations I have given to verse are valid along side of interpretations of others. (6) Coming to following part of Hadith: ‘Whoever introduces evil Sunnah in Islam …’ Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) did not interpret in the context of historical event. If he had done so then it was likely he would have said; reluctance of companions was said to be evil Sunnah by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Instead Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) only interpreted the principle by itself and reached to understanding that it referrs to innovation. And then Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) stated evil Sunnah part of same Hadith referrs to limit/restrict hadith of: “… every innovation is misguidance …” If one examines the gramatical structure of both parts of Hadith they are exactly the same. Only difference of two words, good and evil. Yet the Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) gave two interpretations; i) one in context of event ii) other out of context of event. Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) was Imam and not DIY scholar. Suppose the impossible; Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) didn’t know/believe, whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam, referrs to good innovations [which would be impossible because it is evidence for his own belief that innovations are good and evil] even then his interpretation of second part give credence to understanding that Sunnah in this context can mean innovation. To be honest, I refuse to believe that Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) and the early scholars were hollow heads as my contempories and I urge you to referr to his Imam Nawawi’s (rahimullah) commentary on the part which you dispute about. (7) It is absolutely against my principles to referr to scholars on disputed issues. The rabble out here seems to practice it therefore I will write an article on this Hadith according to what early scholars said about the specific part of Hadith. The limits of Halal, Haram, Islam and Kuffr have been set. Good has limits evil is limitless, praiseworthy innovations would be in good limits. [“Please quote with refrences where U have taken this from because it contradics the Hadith and principles of the Sunnah.”] My sources are clearly stated in my articles and I don’t need to state them here. I can write so that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) guides you but I can not make you read what I write and explain it. So its entirely upto you to read and understand it. Third article has been completed in light of Quran and Hadith: Hadith Of Good/Evil Innovated Sunnah In Context Of Hadith Of Few Sentences With Vast In Meaning. MuhammedAli [12/12/2011 01:37]: (1) Biddah linguistically means invention/innovation. Technically it is used to referr to those combination of deeds, actions, beliefs which are not Prophetic Sunnahs. Sunnah linguistically means way, practice, and custom. The disagreement is, if Sunnah can be used in meaning of innovation and can a phrase/sentence in which Sunnah is used can mean innovation. We Muslims believe yes it is quite possible and it is evidenced from Ahadith. a) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has said: Follow my Sunnah and Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs as it is established by following Ahadith: “You must then follow my Sunnah and Sunnah of the rightly-guided caliphs. Hold to it and stick fast to it.” [Ref: Dawood, B40, H4590] Sunnah of rightly guided caliphs is distinguised from Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). If Sunnah of rightly guided Caliphs is separate then how can these Sunnahs not be innovations? b) It is narrated in another Hadith: "Narrated Abdullah: The Prophet said, "None is killed unjustly, but the first son of Adam will have a part of its burden." Sufyan said: "..a part of its blood because he was the first to establish the Sunnah of murdering" [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H423] Son of Adam (alayhis salam) started the Sunnah of murder and Hadith says he was the first one to start it. Originating, inventing, what didn’t exist before, isn’t that innovation? Then how can the Sunnah here not mean innovation if he was first one to start it. c) Also Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) used the word Sunnah in meaning of innovation in following Hadith regarding which you contend it referrs to Sunnah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam😞 “He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Yet what is not part of Islam is innovation. And reward being told is for which is not already part of Islam (i.e. innovation). (2) You know what innovation is and even if you did not then, I have stated it. Innovation is not part of Islam and Prophetic Sunnah is already part of Islam. The Hadith tells of reward for introducing good Sunnah into Islam. In this there is indication; reward being told is for something not already part of Islam. You and I both know this is innovation. Yet you choose to disbelieve that this Hadith is referring to good innovations or good innovated Sunnahs. (3) Further if Sunnah in the first part of Hadith is referring to Sunnah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then whose Sunnah is next part of Hadith referring to? Here Hadith: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their's being diminished in any respect." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Does this referr to evil Sunnahs (i.e. beliefs and actions) of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? If the first part means one who revives my good Sunnahs for him and those who follows them will get equale reward. Then second part of Hadith means; one who revives my evil Sunnahs will equally be responsible as one who followed them. And we know what the reviver and actor will get but what about the one who started the evil Sunnah (i.e. Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)? And if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed Deen as he was instructed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then who started the evil Sunnah? Yet you do not believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instituted an evil Sunnah and nor did Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instruct it. My point is it is not fundamental for the Prophetic statement to be connected with the event. If it was fundamental then you are burdened to explain what evil Sunnah is and to whose evil Sunnah it referrs? Our understanding is the principles of good Sunnah and evil Sunnah are not connected with the context of event but the event can vaguely be interpreted in their light. MuhammedAli [Tue 17/01/2012 19:48]: Salam brother, I have just completed the response to your point that Imam Nawavi (rahimullah alayhi ta'ala) interpreted the hadith to mean reviving the forgotten Sunnahs: Hadith Of Good/Evil Innovated Sunnahs A Critical Analysis Of An Interpretation. Please do give me some feedback on it. Jazakallah Khair. MuhammedAli [Thu 19/01/2012 20:43]: Salam Alayqum, Brother I have completed my comprehensive explaination of the Hadith of praiseworthy and blameworthy innovation from Quran and Sunnah. These are the articles on just that one Hadith lattest: Refuting Amar Iqbal’s Claim; Whoever Introduces Good Sunnah In Islam, Does Not Mention New Innovation. I still have to investigate the issue of what the Imams of Ahlus Sunnah have stated about this Hadith. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) I will start and complete the article soon. I would be more then happy to recieve a written response. JazakAllah Khair. MuhammedAli [25th Oct 2017 20:05]: (1) My brother you claimed Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) in his commentary of Sahih Muslim stated phrase, whosoever introduces a good Sunnah in Islam, referrs to reviving prophetic Sunnahs. I have finally had an oppurtunity to look into what you attributed to Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). To begin with: This Hadith is found in to places, in Kitab al-Ilm and in Kitab al-Zakat. In Kitab al-Ilm Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) did not comment on the Hadith. In Kitab al-Zakat he explained it and I will get to that in a bit. (2) Earlier with some reservations I assumed what you attributed to Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) is correct and responded to it based on assumption and without verifying your claim. So whatever I stated earlier regarding Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) and what he wrote only stands if what you attributed was correct otherwise I disown any I criticism levelled against him. Please do note my earlier response is aid in understanding of principles of Tafsir/Sharh and therefore whatever is related to it still stands. (3) I recently had the opportunity to check the refference you gave. And I advise you to check it as well, here. Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) in his commentary stated: “His saying: "Whoever enacted starts a good Sunnah in Islam will have its reward ..." to the end of (the hadeeth). This contains encouragement to initiate Hasanaat (i.e. plural of Hasanah; good) and to enact the good Sunnahs and a warning from inventing falsehoods and repugnant things (mustaqbahaat). And the reason behind this statement in this hadeeth is that he (the narrator) said at the beginning of it, "Then a person came there with a money bag which his hands could scarcely lift; in fact, they could not (lift). Then the people followed continuously (in giving)..." So the great virtue was for the one who began this goodness and the one who opened the door to this benevolence. And within this hadeeth is the [evidence of] Takhsees (i.e. restriction/specification) of his [Mutliq/Unrestricted] saying: "Every newly-introduced matter is an innovation, and every innovation is misguidance" And that the intent behind it is the newly introduced matters and blameworthy innovations. And the explanation of this has already preceded in Kitab al-Salat al-Jumu'ah and we mentioned there that innovations are of five types: obligatory, recommended, unlawful, disliked and permitted.” [Ref: Sharh Of Sahih Muslim, by Imam Nawawi rahimullah, Kitab al-Zakah, 7/104] Please check the translation is from a Salafi website, here. Also note portions from his translation have been accentuated for better understanding. After carefully reading the Arabic and English translation of it. I have come to conclusion that Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) no where stated the part of Hadith; whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam, is about reviving a forgotten Sunnah. (4) In fact Imam (rahimullah) only stated that the principle originated because the man came with silver bag and those who followed him. It seems you have made assumption that Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) said; this Hadith is about reviving forgotten Sunnahs. Or at the very least sources and persons involved in producing them have misguided you. And fact that Sunnah of Sadaqa was not forgotten by companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as you claim further discredits your position. (5) Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) has stated: “This contains encouragement to initiate Hasanaat and to enact the good Sunnahs, and a warning from inventing falsehoods and repugnant things (mustaqbahaat).” This entire statement is referring to innovated good Sunnahs. Following part of Imam Nawawi’s (rahimullah) explanation: “This contains encouragement to initiate Hasanaat and to enact the good Sunnahs …” -; is in agreement with following prophetic words: “He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] And following part of Imam Nawawi’s (rahimullah) statement: “… and to enact the good Sunnahs …” -; is relating to following prophetic words: “…which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Alhasil Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) did not say anything about prophetic Sunnah rather his explanation is brief commentary on the content of Hadith. On this feeble ground you base your belief/claim that Imam Nawavi (rahimullah) said prophetic Sunnah. (6) If Imam Nawavi (rahimullah) intended Sunnah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in his explanation then he would have said: “… encouragment to intiate prophetic Sunnahs …”, “… and to enact the prophetic Sunnahs …” And he would not have said: “This contains encouragement to initiate Hasanaat (i.e. goods) and to enact the good Sunnahs, and a warning from inventing falsehoods and repugnant things (mustaqbahaat).” Also no where did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “… follow my good Sunnah and …” And neither do the Muslims say; whosoever acts on good Sunnahs of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) there will be reward for him like the one initiated, revived and followed the good Sunnah. To say this would imply from logical perspective that we believe there are evil prophetic Sunnahs. Suppose you say: I agree with the good brother Ali says. The diametric opposite and natural implication is; you don’t agree with evil that brother Ali says but with only good. Am I not logically deducing this conclusion? If statement of Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) was directed to Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), in following fashion: “This contains encouragement to initiate Hasanaat [Sunnahs of Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam] and to practice the [prophetic] good Sunnahs …” The implication is that he believes prophetic Sunnahs are of two type, good Sunnahs and evil Sunnahs which even a leaflet distributing idiot woun’t believe. Now if Imam Nawavi (rahimullah) statement is interpreted as pointed out then implication [that Imam Nawawi rahimullah believed some prophetic Sunnahs are evil and this] would naturally fit into next part of Hadith: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the ..." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] I leave it upon you to burden Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) with stupidity of Khawarij of Najd. (7) There can be argument that Imam Nawavi (rahimullah) did not use words; “… in Islam …” in his explanation therefore he meant prophetic Sunnahs. Please note Imam Nawavi (rahimullah) did not insert “… in Islam …” into text of his commentary because there are many versions of this Hadith which all mean the same: “It was narrated that Abu Juhaifah said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever introduces a good practice (سُنَّةً حَسَنَةً) that is followed after him, will have a reward for that and ... Whoever introduces an evil practice that is ...'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H207/H203] Narrated Ibn Jarir bin Abdullah: From his father that the Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever starts a good tradition (سُنَّةَ خَيْرٍ) which is followed, then for him is a reward … And whoever starts a bad tradition which is followed, then for him is the sin, and the likes of the sins of whoever …” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2675] "Jarir b. 'Abdullah reported Allah's Messenger as saying: The servant does not introduce سُنَّةً صَالِحَةً (i.e. good/righteous Sunnah) which is followed after him. The rest of the hadith is the same." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6468] And this has lead me to believe Imam Nawavi (rahimullah) ignored the word accuracy for sake of conveying intended meaning. Also the explanation has to be understood in context of Hadith and Hadith in context of his explanation. Missing parts from both have to be implied from each other.As I believe and that’s how it stands to reason because Hadith talks about reward for introducing good Sunnah in Islam. Innovation is not part of Islam. Prophetic Sunnah is already part of Islam. Therefore reward is being told is for innovated Sunnah which is made part of Islam and is Hasanah. Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) explained the Hadith in light of these two facts. When these facts are used to understand the Hadith then what Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) believed and what his statement means becomes apparent as it does in the following:“This contains encouragement to initiate Hasanaat [innovated into Islam] and to enact the good Sunnahs [innovated after him] and [the part of Hadith following good Sunnah in Islam contains] a warning from inventing falsehoods and repugnant things (mustaqbahaat).” (8) If you recall in our original in the discussion in presence of my friend (i.e. Naveed), myself (i.e. Ali), you (i.e. Amar) and your friend (i.e. Bilal) you quoted Hadith of every/qullu innovation is misguidance. And argued nothing is excluded from it. I quoted this Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam to establish that every/qullu is not without Takhsees. You restricted the Hadith into context, and said it refers to reviving Sunnah of Sadaqah, and cited Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) for your Taweel. This proved to be incorrect because Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) said nothing as such. Your objective was to hold to generality of Hadith; every innovation is misguidance; and mine was to refute it [in context of Mawlid discussion]. Note I am also appealing to authority of Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) for Takhsees of Hadith; every innovation is misguidance. Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) believes portion of Hadith evil Sunnah in Islam serves as Takhsees for every/qullu innovation is misguidance: “And within this hadeeth is the [evidence of] Takhsees (i.e. restriction/specification) of his [Mutliq/Unrestricted] saying: "Every newly-introduced matter is an innovation, and every innovation is misguidance" And that the intent behind it is the newly introduced matters and blameworthy innovations. And the explanation of this has already preceded in Kitab al-Salat al-Jumu'ah and we mentioned there that innovations are of five types: obligatory, recommended, unlawful, disliked and permitted.” [Ref: Sharh Of Sahih Muslim, by Imam Nawawi rahimullah, Kitab al-Zakah, 7/104] In other words every innovation isn’t literally every but the Takhsees means; every innovated evil Sunnah is innovation, and every evil innovation is misguidance. Alhasil you have lost your argument on basis of evidence and on basis of authority. If you reject my Daleel (i.e. evidence, Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam) for Takhsees even then you cannot reject authority [which you wanted me to accept] -; Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). Please bare in mind if you reject authorative position of Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) then you will only establishe your insincerity and you’re better then this. Finally when every innovation isn’t misguidance and only every evil innovation [which are composed of Haram, Kufr, Shirk] is misguidance then you have no argument against validity of innovated practices which are composed of all that is Halal and righteous in Islam. Conclusion: The fundamental dispute was on four points, if principles are restricted to context, Sunnah can be used in meaning of innovation, if Hadith of Sahih Muslim is proof for good innovations, and what Imam Nawawi (rahimullah) said on this Hadith. Praise be to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). It was established principles are not restricted to context. Word Sunnah can mean innovation and good Sunnah part of Hadith of Imam Muslim does indeed referr to good Sunnahs which have been innovated by people. Finally Imam Nawawi (rahimulllah) did not say the words of; whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam, reffer to reviving prophetic Sunnahs. And it was established that Imam Nawawi (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) distinguised between Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and innovated good Sunnahs. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Definition of innovation legitimacy of praiseworthy innovations and engagin in praiseworthy innovations is has become subject of dispute. As a result of this dispute there is great deal of tribulation in Ummah of beloved Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam). A the extremist faction regularly churns out edicts; brandishing Muslims as innovators and telling them they’re from people of hell. This affliction can not be eliminated until the fundamental cause of tribulation isn't solved and that is the definition of innovation. If two academics attempt to explain their position of definition innovation from Qur’an/Sunnah then the evidences used by both parties become subject of dispute due to both sides having their own interpretations. In such circumstances it has become very difficult to reconcile two definitions of innovations with one another but it is not impossible.[1] Even though a reconciliation is possible between the two definitions of innovations it is not required to reconcile them rather the definition which accords the teaching of Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) should be taught. This is because; the fahdeelat (i.e. merit) is in definition of innovation which is in accordance with teaching of Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) and it is backed by the actions of companion of Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam). The Wahhabi definition is based on those Ahadith which point to evilness of innovations.[2] In contrast Islamic understanding is based on all the Ahadith on subject of innovation; including Ahadith of evil innovation and Ahadith which inform of reward for introducing and for those who engage in praiseworthy practices.Therefore we have two categories of innovation. Out of which praiseworthy category is objected by Wahhabis. This article is response to brother Amar Iqbal.[3] Discussion With Brother Amar Iqbal My Former Wahhabi Associate: Amar Iqbal - [Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2011 22:12:48 +0000]: “Salaam, Please send me the hadith about innovating of good in Muslim which you quoted when we briefly met. Jzk.” MuhammedAli - [Sent: 05/12/2011 02:30] -: "Jarir b. Abdullah reported that some desert Arabs clad in woollen clothes came to Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him). He saw them in sad plight as they had been hard pressed by need. He (the Holy Prophet) exhorted people to give charity, but they showed some reluctance until (signs) of anger could be seen on his face. Then a person from the Ansar came with a purse containing silver. Then came another person and then other persons followed them in succession until signs of happiness could be seen on his (sacred) face. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And he who introduced some evil practice in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their's being diminished in any respect." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] "Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who called (people) to righteousness, there would be reward (assured) for him like the rewards of those who adhered to it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And he who called (people) to error, he shall have to carry (the burden) of its sin, like those who committed it, without their sins being diminished in any respect." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6470] The first Hadith is clear, doesn’t require interpretation. The second one is to be interpreted in light of first Hadith. Amar Iqbal - [Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2011 20:17:18 +0000] -: “This hadith does not mention new biddah? Also its about reviving a sunnah which people forgotton and neglected. In addition giving charity is very clear in the Deen. Where have U taken ur understanding from? What's the understanding of the first three generations on this? Wassalam.” Hadith Of Praiseworthy And Blameworthy Innovation: Hadith was presented as evidence to Wahhabi in order to prove; in Islam the notion of praiseworthy innovations is not repugnant and there is permission and reward for introducing in Islam praiseworthy praise worthy practices. The Hadith clearly states “He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam ...” and “And he who introduced some evil practice Sunnah in Islam ...” He responded with: “This hadith does not mention new innovation (i.e. bidda). Also its about reviving a Sunnah which people forgotten and neglected.” His second point; the hadith is referring to forgotten/neglected Sunnahs has been already addressed in separate article, here. And his first point, this hadith is not about new innovations, will be discussed in this article. Evil Of Distortion Of Hadith And Its Evil Result: Brother Amar Iqbal said: “Also its about reviving a Sunnah which people forgotten and neglected.” His comment is referring to this part of Hadith: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] If he is believed that in the Hadith new innovations are not being discussed but the words are regarding reviving of prophetic Sunnahs then contextually the second part of Hadith is also referring to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And this would imply that anyone who revives evil Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) for him as well as for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) there would be punishment: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their's being diminished in any respect." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] We all know anyone who considers any Sunnah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) evil or believes that there is punishment for Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) for evil Sunnahs such a person is disbeliever. The only acceptable understanding of the Hadith is that it generally referrs to innovations in both parts of the Hadith. Novel Attempt To Discard Bitter Pill: If one was to say; second Sunnah refers to reprehensible innovation and not Sunnah of Rasoolallah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah ...” Therefore he is free of possible charge of apostasy. And for some weird reason states; the word Sunnah refers to Sunnah of beloved Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in following part of Hadith: “He who introduced some good Sunnah ...” Then argues that therefore Hadith is about reviving of Sunnahs. Firstly if the meaning of reviving the Sunnah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is derived from Hadith of Sahih Muslim without mutilating natural meaning of Hadith then the implications are; the very concept of reviving Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is praiseworthy innovation in Islam. Note this interpretation is weak because concept of reviving prophetic Sunnahs itself is a Sunnah. Even then this interpretation does not harm the position of Muslims rather supports it and is based on it. If the interpretation is derived after mutilating the Hadith then there is no need to respond to such heretical rejection and mutilation of prophetic words. Secondly if in second part of Hadith word Sunnah is understood to mean evil innovation then the person has to accept that in the first part of the Hadith of Sahih Muslim the the word Sunnah can mean praiseworthy innovation and over all statement does give meaning of praiseworthy innovative Sunnah. Regardless of how a Wahhabi interprets this Hadith the position of Ahle Sunnat is not refuted rather supported with their own interpretations. Innovation & Sunnah Of RasoolAllah (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam): Ahadith use many words to imply innovations. For example in the following Ahadith word Sunnah of Caliphs is used to denote innovated practices of righteous Caliphs: “Beware of the newly invented matters, for indeed they are astray (i.e. misguidance). Whoever among you sees that, then he must stick to my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly guided Khulafa, cling to it with the molars.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2676] “He then said: I enjoin you to fear Allah, and to hear and obey even if it be an Abyssinian slave, for those of you who live after me will see great disagreement. You must then follow my Sunnah and Sunnah (i.e.innovative practices) of the rightly-guided caliphs. Hold to it and stick fast to it.” [Ref: Dawood, B40, H4590] In the same Hadith words Muhdasa and Bidda are used to mean innovation: “Avoid novelties, for every novelty is an innovation, and every innovation is an error.” [Ref: Dawood, B40, H4590] Therefore the word innovation does not have to be used to imply innovation. Rather any of the words muhdasa, bidda, Sunnah, or even if none of these words are used but the sentence indicates innovation it will be understood as innovation as is in the case of: “... and monasticism, which they innovated (i.e. ibtada); We did not prescribe it for them …” [Ref: 57:27] Hadith Of Muslim And Its Meaning: Brother Amar Iqbal said: “Also its about reviving a sunnah which people forgotton and neglected. In addition giving charity is very clear in the deen.” Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is already part of Islam. Hence by reving what is already part of Islam one does not introduce prophetic Sunnah into Islam. Introducing into Islam a Sunnah which is not part of it is innovation and Hadith obviously is talking about introducing into Islam which is not part of it: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And he who introduced some evil practice in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their's being diminished in any respect." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Therefore the natural meaning of Hadit is; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told of equal reward for introducing into Islam and practicing praiseworthy/rewardworthy innovation. And told of equal responsibility for introducing evil innovation into Islam and for those who follow evil innovation. Evidence That Word Sunnah Is Perfect Subsitute For Bidda: Coming to Hadith which was quoted as evidence of good innovation. Part of same Hadith is following prophetic words: “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without their's being diminished in any respect." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Another version of Hadith states: “He said: "That indeed whoever revives a Sunnah from my Sunnah which has died after me, then for him is a reward similar to whoever acts upon it without diminishing anything from their rewards. And whoever introduces an erroneous innovation which Allah is not pleased with, nor His Messenger, then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it, without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2677] “… that the Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever revives a Sunnah of mine, which people then act upon, will have a reward equivalent to that of those who act upon it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. And whoever introduces an innovation (Bid'ah) that is acted upon, will have a burden of sins equivalent to that of those who act upon it, withot that detracting from the burden of those who act upon it in the slightest.'"[4] [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H209] In these Ahadith of word Sunnah has been replaced with Bidda indicating that the in Arabic language word Bidda can be a substitute for Sunnah in context of this. Alhasil the Hadith from Sahih of Imam Muslim (rahimullah) does reffer to innovations which are not part of Islam. Conclusion: The words, Sunnah, Muhdasa, Bidda, Ibtida, are used to denote innovations in context of Ahadith and verses of Quran. Wahhabi may disbelieve in good Sunnah portion of statement referring to good innovations but will be forced to turn the second part of Hadith toward evil innovation. And this interpretation itself would support Islamic position; word Sunnah is in meaning of innovated Sunnah. The difference would be that we the Muslims would believe it to be referring to both prophetic statements and Wahhabi would be damage controlling by turning the evil Sunnah part toward innovation. Truth of matter is decided on the fact; Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) are already part of Islam and by reviving them one would not be introducing them into Islam. This Hadith and like it are telling of reward for introducing good Sunnahs into Islam. Innovation is not part of Islam and not part of Sunnah. Hence natural meaning of which is; reward being told is for introducing good innovations into Islam. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: [1] Islamic definition consists of two categories praiseworthy and reprehensible innovations. The Wahhabi definition consists of legal innovation and non-legal, or linguistic innovation. What ever Wahhabi term as, innovation, or legal innovation in sense of Deen, is, reprehensible innovation, in jargon Muslims. Whatever the Wahhabi terms linguistic/non-legal innovation in termonology of Islamic scholarship it is praiseworthy innovation. The real difference is principles used to interpret these definitions. Wahhabis disbelieve in introducing good innovation/practices into Islam which are not Sunnah hence they employ their rules to prohibit their introduction. - [2] Readers should note that the definition which the Wahhabi's adhere to predates their sect [emerged in the 17th century from Najd]. Seikh Ahmad Sarhindi al-Farooqi (alayhi rehma) popularly known has Mujadid Alif Thaani, Imam al-Rabbani used the definition of innovation which Wahhabis used some 100 year after. Before him Hanbali Shaykh, Ibn Rajab (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) used this definition. The blame upon Wahhabis is; they did not apply this definition of innovation has it was applied by the scholars of Ahle Sunnat likes of Seikh Ahmad Sarhindi (alayhi rehma). Instead they distorted it, invented their own methodological principles and interpreted the definition of innovation according to them. - [3] Brother Amar Iqbal and his friend Bilal were my associates during my college years. They introduced me and guided me on numerous ocasions regarding matters of Deen. They had recommended me [Wahhabi] books and introduced me to Omar Bakri’s Al-Muhajiroon and if I recall correctly it was these brothers who recommended that I read Omar Bakri’s booklet, The Creed Of Ahlus Sunnah. These two brothers knowingly and unknowingly became part of my journey to Wahhabism. Brother Amar is brother of good heart, good conduct and sincere intentions for his Deen but misguided due to choosing others as guide to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) when he should have remained upon path of the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). - [4] Another narration of same Hadith: "I heard the Messenger of Allah say: 'Whoever revives a Sunnah of mine that dies out after I am gone, he will have a reward equivalent to that of those among the people who act upon it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. Whoever introduces an innovation (Bid'ah) with which Allah and his Messenger are not pleased, he will have a (burden of) sin equivalent to that of those among the people who act upon it, without that detracting from their sins in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H210]

Introduction. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam and those who follow it all will have equal reward. Due to thisHadith of innovated good/evil Sunnahs Muslims believe these Ahadith teach reward for innovated good Sunnahs, for its creator and actors. The anti-Islam element argues contextually Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) uttered the words about Sunnah of Sadaqah therefore they are about reviving forgotten/neglected prophetic Sunnahs. This Hadith can be explained in many different ways without contradicting the established teachings of Quran and Ahadith. And when a interpretation contradicts fundamental meaning of Hadith then it is to be rejected. Unless it can be reconciled with natural meaning of Hadith. This article will attempt to point the fault in anti-Islam element’s understanding and if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills it will be reconciled with fundamental meaning of Hadith. 0.0 - Ahadith Of Reprehensible And Praiseworthy Innovated Sunnah. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated: “It was narrated that Abu Juhaifah said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever introduces a good practice (i.e. Sunnah Hasanah) that is followed after him, will have a reward for that and the equivalent of their reward, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. Whoever introduces an evil practice that is followed after him, will bear the burden of sin for that and the equivalent of their burden of sin, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H207/H203] Same meaning Hadith is narrated with Khayrin (i.e. good) in Tirmadhi instead of Hasanah (i.e. good): “Narrated Ibn Jarir bin Abdullah: From his father that the Messenger of Allah said: "Whoever starts a good tradition (سُنَّةَ خَيْرٍ) which is followed, then for him is a reward, and the likes of their rewards of whoever follows him, there being nothing diminished from their rewards. And whoever starts a bad tradition which is followed, then for him is the sin, and the likes of the sins of whoever follows him, there being nothing diminished from their sins." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2675] In Sahih of Imam Muslim (rahimullah) this Hadith has also been narrated with variation of Sunnah Salihah: "Jarir b. 'Abdullah reported Allah's Messenger as saying: The servant does not introduce سُنَّةً صَالِحَةً (i.e. good/righteous Sunnah) which is followed after him. The rest of the hadith is the same." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6468] This Hadith is also narrated with the words ‘in Islam’ twice in Sahih of Imam Muslim (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) and once in Nisai: "… them in succession until signs of happiness could be seen on his (sacred) face. Thereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: He who introduced some good practice (i.e. Sunnah Hasanah) in Islam (فِي الإِسْلاَمِ) which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect. And he who introduced some evil practice (i.e. Sunnah) in Islam which had been followed subsequently (by others), he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this (evil practice) without theirs being diminished in any respect." [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466]“The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever sets a good precedent (i.e. Sunnah Hasanah) in Islam (فِي الإِسْلاَمِ) he will have the reward for that, and the reward of those who acted in accordance with it, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. And whoever sets an evil precedent in Islam, he will have a burden of sin for that, and the burden of those who acted in accordance with it, without that detracting from their burden in the slightest."' [Ref: Nisai, B23, H2555] None of these details matter because over-all meaning of all Ahadith is same – i.e. of reward/punishment for innovated good/evil Sunnah in Islam for innovator and actor. 0.1 - Genre Of Ahadith Of Reward For Initiator And Follower: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told of reward/punishment regarding one who innovated good/evil Sunnahs in Islam and those who follow them: “The Messenger of Allah said: He who sets a good precedent in Islam, there is a reward for him for this (act of goodness) and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards; and he who sets in Islam an evil precedent, there is upon him the burden of that, and the burden of him also who acted upon it subsequently, without any deduction from their burden.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2219] And initiator and follower getting reward/punishment is also true for one inviting toward guidance and toward misguidance: “Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that the Messenger of Allah said: “No one calls to guidance without having the same reward as those who follow him, without diminishing their rewards at all. And no one calls to error without having the same burdens as they do, without diminishing their burdens at all.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B15, Chap9, H41] And so is true for one reviving prophetic Sunnahs which have been forgotten after death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “… the Prophet said to Bilal bin Al-Harith: "Know." He said: "I am ready to know O Messenger of Allah!" He said: "That indeed whoever revives a Sunnah from my Sunnah which has died after me, then for him is a reward similar to whoever acts upon it without diminishing anything from their rewards." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2677] “Narrated Anas bin Malik: "The Messenger of Allah said to me: 'O my son! If you are capable of (waking up in) the morning and (ending) the evening, while there is nothing of deception in your heart for anything, then do so.' Then he said to me: 'O my son! That is from my Sunnah. Whoever revives my Sunnah then he has loved me. And whoever loved me, he shall be with me in Paradise.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2678] Another Hadith talks about benefit of spreading Islamic knowledge: “Sabl bin Mu’ddh bin Anas narrated from his father that the Prophet i said: “Whoever teaches some knowledge will have the reward of the one who acts upon it, without that detracting from his reward in the slightest.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, Book of Sunnah, Hadith 247] 0.2 - Points Of Principle And Issue Of Correct Belief: Hadith of innovated good/evil belongs to a genre of Ahadith which inform the believers of reward/punishment from Allah (subhanahu wa ta'ala) for various righteous/sinful deeds and for those who follow them. One set of Ahadith makes mention of innovated good/evil Sunnahs. The second mentions equal reward for calling toward guidance and equal sin toward for inviting toward misguidance. Third set of Ahadith mentions reviving of forgotten Sunnah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'salam). The fourth type of Ahadith discusses teaching of knowledge. It is ludicrous to use of one set of Ahadith to distort the apparent meaning of another set of Ahadith. Any Hadith from particular genre can be used to interpret another Hadith of different genre but the interpretation will not alter the natural meaning of each Hadith. Three plus four produces sum of seven. The sum of seven does not alter the value of three and four. In similar fashion principle of interpretion is; z interpretation derived via x and y will not cancel natural meaning of x and y, and will not turn x and y into z. Therefore any interpretation of Ahadith of; good/evil Sunnah in Islam with another set of Ahadith will not negatively impact on the position of Muslims. Please note there is requirement for interpretation of any of these sets of Ahadith and if they were to be interpreted with each other no valid interpretation can exclude another valid interpretation because prophetic words are Jawami al-Kalim in nature. Meaning the nature of RasoolAllah's (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam) speech is such that it can be interpreted to mean many thing. As a believer we should accept all valid interpretations without practicing selectivism because this is demonstration of firm belief in teaching of Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was'sallam). 1.0 - Anti-Islam Elements Interpretation Harmonized And Refuted: Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) has stated: “He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” In order to deny/reject the other possible interpretations the anti-Islam element interprets this Hadith exclusively to mean: “Also its about reviving a Sunnah which people forgotton and neglected.” This interpretation is acceptable in light of following Hadith because there is no mention of words; in Islam: “It was narrated that Abu Juhaifah said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever introduces a good Sunnah that is followed after him, will have a reward for that and the equivalent of their reward, without that detracting from their reward in the slightest. Whoever introduces an evil practice …” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H207/H203] In other words Hadith means: “Whoever introduces a good Sunnah [to people which was forgotten/neglected and if] that is followed after him, will have a reward for that and the equivalent of their reward …” This meaning is tolerable as long as it is not applied to historical context and upon prophetic statement of; good Sunnah in Islam because Takhseesi meaning can be given to a Hadith/Ayat on the basis of an evidence but that interpretation can not supersede the literal reading of text. Please note in reality there is no need to interpret these Ahadith by Ahadith of reviving prophetic Sunnah because those Ahadith themselves convey the same meaning: “… the Prophet said to Bilal bin Al-Harith: "Know." He said: "I am ready to know O Messenger of Allah!" He said: "That indeed whoever revives a Sunnah from my Sunnah which has died after me, then for him is a reward similar to whoever acts upon it without diminishing anything from their rewards." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2677] “Narrated Anas bin Malik: "The Messenger of Allah said to me: 'O my son! If you are capable of (waking up in) the morning and (ending) the evening, while there is nothing of deception in your heart for anything, then do so.' Then he said to me: 'O my son! That is from my Sunnah. Whoever revives my Sunnah then he has loved me. And whoever loved me, he shall be with me in Paradise.'" [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2678] But in the context of Hadith of; good Sunnah in Islam; their interpretation is heretical. It is so because it can only derived after completely mutilating the Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam. And secondly because the reviving of prophetic Sunnah is after depature of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) from earthly life: “He said: "I am ready to know O Messenger of Allah!" He said: "That indeed whoever revives a Sunnah from my Sunnah which has died after me, then for him is a reward similar to whoever acts upon it without diminishing anything from their rewards.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2677] Therefore to say prophetic words were about reviving ‘neglected/forgotten’ Sunnah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and to be precise regarding Sadaqah is bit stupid. And there was/is no proof it was forgotten, and it definitely was not forgotten because; the context reveals Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) exhorted them to give charity (i.e. Sadaqah) minutes before the companion broke the ice by giving bag of silver and minutes after Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) uttered the following words: “He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” Lastly there is no actual need to interpret the Hadith of; good Sunnah in Islam with Hadith of reviving prophetic Sunnahs because Hadith of reviving prophetic Sunnahs conveys exactly the desired/interpreted meaning by itself – without need of interpretation: “… the Prophet said to Bilal bin Al-Harith: "Know." He said: "I am ready to know O Messenger of Allah!" He said: "That indeed whoever revives a Sunnah from my Sunnah which has died after me, then for him is a reward similar to whoever acts upon it without diminishing anything from their rewards." [Ref: Tirmadhi, B39, H2677] There is no actual need for interpretation apart from effort to distort Hadith of; good Sunnah in Islam. If anti-Islam position is believed then it boils down to; Wahhabi won’t forget for days and years to come but Sahabis forgot Sunnah of giving Sadaqah twenty seconds after being encouraged to give Sadaqah. In other words if this distortion of Hadith is believed then natural conclusion would be; Sahabi is a useless idiot with memory capacity of thirty secs at maximum but Wahhabi isn’t. 1.1 - Concept Of Reviving Prophetic Sunnah Is An Innovated Good Sunnah: An interpretation which does not omit the fundamental meaning of Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam but which incorporates is safer then the mutilation of Hadith. One such interpretation is if the concept of reviving Sunnah/Practice of RasoolAllah (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) itself is considered a good Sunnah introduced in Islam then the meaning of hadith of Muslim would be: “He who introduced some good Sunnah in Islam [i.e. reviving of neglected, forgotten Sunnahs] which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” With this interpretation the fundamental meaning of Hadith of good Sunnah in Islam remains intact while Hadith of Tirmadhi is incorporated into it's text to give a interpretation. Please bare in mind this does not refute the fundamental meaning of Hadith. And Islamic understanding is based on fundamental meaning of Hadith and in fact it refutes the exclusivists. Note exclusivists believe this Hadith referrs to reviving the forgotten/neglected Sunnahs only i.e. Sadaqah. With this interpretation the concept of reviving of Sunnahs of RasoolAllah (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) itself is innovated good Sunnah. This interpretation does not contradict the position of Muslims but rather this interpretation is in agreement with fundamental meaning of Hadith and it is valid interpretation. 2.0 - Explanation Of Every Innovation Is Misguidance: Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) has reported to have said: “... further say: "The best of the speech is embodied in the Book of Allah, and the beet of the guidance is the guidance given by Muhammad. And the most evil affairs are the innovations; and every innovation is error." He would further say: I am more dear to a Muslim even than his self …" [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1885] On the basis of this Hadith anti-Islam element argues; 'every' innovation is evil misguidance. Unbeknown to them in Arabic qullu (i.e. every) isn’t always used to mean absolutely ever/all but it is used to mean all or every in a specific category. The specific category of innovation from which every innovation is misguidance is of type which are not composed of Islamicly sanctioned acts as the following Ahadith indicate [please note following is not literal translation rather they convey intended meanings]: “Narrated Aisha: Allah's Apostle said, "If somebody innovates something which is not in harmony with the principles of our religion, that thing is rejected." [Ref: Bukhari, B49, H861] “Sa'd b. Ibrahim reported: I asked Qasim b. Muhammad about a person who had three dwelling houses and he willed away the third part of every one of these houses; he (Qasim b. Muhammad) said: All of them could be combined in one house; and then said: A'isha informed me that Allah's Messenger said: He who did any act for which there is no sanction from our behalf, that is to be rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] Those innovation which are composed by sinful, Kufr, Shirk, and other non-Islamic forms of worship (i.e. Aarti) are without valid justification from Shari’ah and thus they should be rejected and will be rejected on judgment day. Every such innovation is misguidance and every misguidance of such type makes fire of hell-fire Halal upon believer. Those innovations which are in harmony with principles of our Deen are compromised of various prophetic Sunnahs that were sanctioned by Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) such as; worship, charity, and education of Islam etc are accepted, and are good innovated Sunnahs in Islam. These are good innovated Sunnahs regarding which Prophet (sallalahu alayhi was'sallam) stated: “He who introduced some good practice in Islam which was followed after him (by people) he would be assured of reward like one who followed it, without their rewards being diminished in any respect.” 3.0 - Valid And Invalid Interpretation Of Reviving Good Sunnah In Islam: The dispute between Muslims and anti-Islam elements is regards to what Hadith of; whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam means in context of event. Anti-Islam element believes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) made the statement about reviving good prophetic Sunnah in Islam and one who revives a Sunnah and those who act on the revive Sunnah will all get equal reward. The Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught innovated good Sunnahs which are not yet part of Islam can be made part of Islam and there is reward for innovator and actors. Please note for an interpretation may not be valid in context of historical event but this does not mean it is not valid at all. In light of historical context position of anti-Islam element is invalid and heretical because it amounts to distorting what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) taught. Yet if this understanding is held as an additional interpretation originating after death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) along the fundamental meaning then it would be valid position because of Jawami al-Kalim nature of prophetic words. Conclusion: The position of Muslims is; in Deen innovated good Sunnahs can be made part of Islam via Ijtihad. And Hadith of; good Sunnah in Islam establishes this Islamic understanding. Those who believe Hadith of; good Sunnah in Islam is about reviving prophetic Sunnahs ignore the fact; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had encouraged the companions to give Sadaqah at maximum minutes before the companion broke the ice by giving bag of silver. And to think it was forgotten minutes after is bit stupid of person who thought of this distortion of Hadith. This false Taweel is nothing less then at attmpt to insult and attack the lofty status of righteous companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Also the Ahadith of reviving the prophetic Sunnah tell of reward to those who revive prophetic Sunnah after death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) yet Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was alive and well. And to apply these Ahadith on portion of Hadith of; good Sunnah in Islam; to make them mean; whoever reviving forgotten Sunnah in Islam and then relate it to context. And say it referrs to Sunnah of Sadaqah is senseless. The reviving forgotten Sunnahs was for after his death and he could not have meant those; whoever revive my Sunnah of Islam, by saying; whoever introduces good Sunnah in Islam because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was alive. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi