MuhammedAli

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Dosri baat ek Hadith mein aya heh kay ek banda qayamat kay din kahay ga kay mein nay jannat apnay amaal kay balbootay par hasil keeh. Allah ta'ala us ki aankh ka ana nikaal kar aur us kay amaal e salihah ko tarzooh par rakhay ga aur Allah kay deeyeh huway anay ka wazan ziyada hoga ... yehni agar jannat amaal ki kamahi heh toh banda khuda tooh ek aankh kay barabar bi amal hasil nah kar sakka. Aur Allah ki ek niamat ka badla nah chuka saka apnay amaal say toh phir kistera jannat ka haq dar huwa. Agar kama kar jannat hasil karni heh toh pehlay Allah ki deeyeh huway jism jaan rooh aur niamatoon ka badla chuka doh, aur janat kama kar chalay jana. Aur agar nah chuka sako toh phir samaj loh kay yeh karam say milli. amaal say nahin. Insaaf agar Allah karay toh phir kon sa amal qubul heh aur Allah kesay Kazib huwa aur kesay imkan e kizb sabat huwa.

Salam alayqum Janab Jannat mein dakhal keeya jana Allah ta'ala ka karam hoga. Agar Allah ta'ala adil/insaaf karay ga toh phir amaal e salihah ki janch partal hogi. Ek banda namaz parta heh wuzu mein ghalti karta heh. Sura Fatihah parta heh magar ilfaaz ki adaigi tajweed kay qawaneen kay saath ada nahin karta ... in sooratoon mein agar Allah chahay toh insaaf kay taqazat kay mutabiq amal kay kamil nah honay ki waja say qubul nah karay. Karam yeh heh kay Allah qubul kar leh aur bandoon ki khatahoon ko dar guzr karay. Jannat karam ki badolat millay gi. Insaaf karay toh phir jannat hasil karna muhaal ho jata heh. Is'see wastay Allah kay nabi nay bi farmaya kay Allah mujjay bi Jannat mein dakhal karam ki waja say karay ga. Allah ta'ala nay Quran mein naik amal karnay waloon ko jannat ka wada farmaya heh. Jab amaal mein hi nuqs ho aur haqiqat mein amaal darja amaal e salihah taq paunchen hi nah, toh phir nah qubul keeyeh jahen, aur naqis amaal walay ko Allah juhanum behjay, toh yeh insaaf heh ya jhoot? Insaaf keun kay woh naik amaal hasil nah kar sakka. Jinneh woh naik amaal samajta raha haqiqi tor par un mein nuqs thah aur nuqs ki waja say qubul nah huway toh yeh Allah ka insaaf huwa. Agar Allah nuqa-is ko dar guzr karay aur phir bi jannat behjay toh karam huwa. Is mein jhoot kesa huwa aur imkan kizb kesay dakhal huwa.

Salam alayqum Janab maslay ki tafseel likhtay toh kohi khatami fesla hota. Agar aap nay 3 talaqen likh deenh hen, ya phir aap nay ek likhi magar murad hasil 3 wali thee toh phir talaq ho chuki. Text message mein behjen, khat kay zariya, email, WhatsApp, telegram, postcard, banday kay zariyeh message behjen, video recording ho, sab ki soorat mein agar banday nay teen talaq deeh toh teen talaq lagoo huwi aur Nikkah khatam huwa. Teen talaqoon mein ruju be mumkin nahin. Sirf ussi halat mein Nikkah mumkin heh kay aurat kissi mard say shadi karay aur dosray khawand say jismani rishta qaim karay aur phir kissi waja say talaq ho jahay toh pehlay walay khawand say nikkah kar sakti heh, issay Halalah kehtay hen. Is halalay ki ek haramay wali soorat bi heh jis mein talaq shoda aurat kissi mard say nikkah is shart par karti heh kay woh pehli, dosri, maheenay, haftay ... ek motayyin waqt par ... ussay talaq deh ga. Yeh harama heh. Halala ki asli soorat heh kay aurat talaq kay bad phir kissi say shadi karay baghayr talaq ki shart kay aur mard joh us say nikkah karay woh talaq kay wastay nikkah nah karay balkay donoon asli, haqiqi shadi karen aur phir asli waja say donoon mein rishta qaim nah rahay aur talaq ho.

Jazakallah khayr ...

Urdu: https://www.scribd.com/document/35947982/Al-Sawaiq-al-Ilahia-fi-al-Ra-d-ala-al-Wahabia-by-Suleman-Ibn-Abdul-Wahab-Hanbali Arabic: http://ia700701.us.archive.org/12/items/swa3iq-ilahia/13138341161.pdf

Kuch arsa pehlay mein nay ek kitab kay chand waraq paray thay ... jis mein zikr thah kay Ala Hadhrat nay thanvi kay radd mein do kutub likhi theen,... donoon kay naam: أدخال السنان وقع السنان Agar kissi kay ilm mein kutub hoon toh link share karay mahirbani hogi. Is kitab kay safa 61 par donoon kitaboon kay naam hen, here.

Introduction: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnessing the deeds of entire mankind till the day of judgment and having knowledge of Ghayb of all that is in preserved tablet is disputed by Khawarij. This is despite the fact these teachings are fundamentally taught in clear/emphatic text of Quran. They advance many reasoned arguments to refute these firmly grounded beliefs of Islam. But their efforts are without sense and without in-depth understanding of fundamental dispute; reasoned arguments cannot and will not refute what is fundamentally established from text of Quran, here. Yet they devise strategies and make schemes against Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to negate his merits and honor. Comprehensive And Improved Version Of Khariji Argument: You believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) came to know all the knowledge of Ghayb in Law al-Mafooz after completion of Quran and you believe that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was, is, and will be Hadhir Nazir till the judgment day is established. Indicating you believe he witnessed all the deeds that will happen till judgment day. If it can be proven that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not know one or few matters of Earth on judgment day then logically both beliefs would be refuted. It is recorded in Hadith: “Narrated Ibn Abbas: The Prophet delivered a sermon and said: "You will be gathered before Allah bare-footed, naked and uncircumcised." (The Prophet then recited): 'As We began the first creation We shall repeat it. (It is) a promise We have undertaken and truly We shall do it.' And added: "The first man who will be dressed on the Day of Resurrection, will be Abraham. Lo! Some men from my followers will be brought and taken towards the left side, whereupon I will say: 'O Lord my companions!' It will be said: 'You do not know what new things they introduced (into the religion) after you.' I will then say as the righteous pious slave Jesus said: 'I was a witness over them while I dwelt among them ... and You are the Witness to all things.' (5.117) Then it will be said: 'These people never stopped to apostate since you left them." [Ref: Bukhari, B65, H4740] “It was narrated that Ibn Abbas said: … The first one to be clothed on the Day of Resurrection will be Ibrahim, peace be upon him. Then some men from among my Ummah will be brought and will be taken toward the left. I will say: 'O Lord, my companions.' It will be said: 'You do not know what they innovated after you were gone.' And I shall say what the righteous slave said: 'And I was witness over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Watcher over them, … the All-Wise.' And it will be said: 'These people kept turning away since you left them.'" [Ref: Nisai, B21, H2089] These Ahadith without doubt refute your belief of Hadhir Nazir and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) having all knowledge of Lawh al-Mafooz. If you disagree with my conclusion please answer my following questions with evidence: Did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) know the people being turned away from Hawd al-Kauthar are innovators? And did he know the innovations they created after him? 0.0 - Leaders Of Innovators Taken Toward The Fire: The Ahadith you quoted use the following words states when the people are taken toward hell-fire (i.e. left) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will say they are his companions. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will respond: “… whereupon I will say: 'O Lord my companions!' It will be said: 'You do not know what new things they introduced (into the religion) after you.' I will then say as the righteous pious slave Jesus said: 'I was a witness over them while I dwelt among them ..." [Ref: Bukhari, B65, H4740] “Then some men from among my Ummah will be brought and will be taken toward the left. I will say: 'O Lord, my companions.' It will be said: 'You do not know what they innovated after you were gone.' And I shall say what the righteous slave said: …” [Ref: Nisai, B21, H2089] Note the Qaideen (i.e. leaders) of innovators invented innovation. And Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) saying: “You don’t know what they innovated after you were gone.”, in both Ahadith is evidently establishing the people being taken to left were Qaideen and not ordinary followers of innovation. 0.1 - Prophet Of Allah Knew Everything Relating To Innovators: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed the companions about the Qaideen (i.e. leaders) of innovators to appear in the Ummah till the day of judgment: “Narrated Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman: I swear by Allah, I do not know whether my companions have forgotten or have pretended to forgot. I swear by Allah that the Apostle of Allah (sallallahu alayhi was’sallam) did not omit a leader of a wrong belief (fitnah,) up to the end of the world, whose followers reach the number of three hundred and upwards but he mentioned to us his name, his father's name and the name of his tribe.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B35, H4231] And Hadith establishes these innovating leaders would number more then three hundred and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed them of name of innovating leader, his fathers name, and the tribe to which he will belong. 0.2 - Prophet Will Recognize Leaders And They Will Recognize Him: Following two Ahadith establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will recognize the Qaideen of innovators and they will recognize Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “Narrated Anas: The Prophet said, "Some of my companions will come to me at my Lake Fount, and after I recognize them, they will then be taken away from me, whereupon I will say, 'My companions!' Then it will be said, 'You do not know what they innovated (new things) in the religion after you." [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H584] " The Prophet said, "I am your predecessor (forerunner) at the Lake-Fount, and whoever will pass by there, he will drink from it and whoever will drink from it, he will never be thirsty. There will come to me some people whom I will recognize, and they will recognize me, but a barrier will be placed between me and them." Abu Hazim added: An-Nu'man bin Abi 'Aiyash, on hearing me, said. "Did you hear this from Sahl?" I said, …" [Ref: Bukhari, B76, H585] Those Qaideen of innovators whom Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will recognize they will not be just the ones lived during his time but they will be inclusive of all till the day of judgment. And note he was shown his entire Ummah with their good bad actions during and after his earthly life. So his recognition of Qaideen of innovators would be unique in the sense that he would recognize them personally and individually due to their innovations. With regards to: “There will come to me some people whom I will recognize, and they will recognize me, but a barrier will be placed between me and them.” The Qaideen of innovators are aware Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be seated on station of Hawd al-Kauthar. Therefore some will recognize him by looks because they lived during the life time of Prophet -: leaders of Khawarij (i.e. Dhil Khuwaisirah) and Musaylmah the liar etc. And others will recognize Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) via knowledge because they have been informed Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was will be on Hawd al-Kauthar. They are those who were born after him and therefore they could not have the opportunity to see him. 0.3 - Ummat And Actions Shown In Life And After Departure From Earth: Good and bad deeds of entire Muslim Ummah were presented to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) during his life: “It was narrated from Abu Dhār that the Prophet said: "My nation was shown to me with their good deeds and bad deeds. Among their good deeds I saw a harmful thing being removed from the road. And among their bad deeds I saw sputum in the mosque that had not been removed." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B33, H3683] “Abu Dhār reported: The Apostle of Allah said: My nation was presented to me with their good and bad, and I found the removal of something objectionable from the road among their good deeds, and the sputum mucus left unburied in the mosque among their evil deeds.” [Ref: Muslim, B4, H1126] The Ummat being shown to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and their good/bad deeds being presented was not limited to his life only. In fact the good/bad deeds will continued to be presented to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) after his death: “Narrated Sulayman bin Harb, Hammad bin Zaid, Ghalib al Qattan, Bakr bin Abdullah al-Muzani: RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: My life is good for you [because] Hadith are narrated for you and you narrate them. When I die then in my death there is good for you [because] your actions are presented to me. If I see goodness I will praise Allah and if I see otherwise I will seek forgive for you from Allah.” [Ref: Khasa’is Ul Kubra, Imam Suyuti, pages 391/392.] He will seek forgiveness for Muslims for sinful actions and praise Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for righteous deeds of Muslims even after his death. 0.4 – Prophet Of Allah Sees All Till The Day Of Judgment: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: "O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness, a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as witness to mankind: "Whatever of good reaches you, is from Allah, but whatever of evil befalls you, is from yourself. And We have sent you as a Messenger to mankind, and Allah is Sufficient as a Witness." [Ref: 4:79] “Abu Huraira reported that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: I have been given superiority over the other prophets in six respects: I have been given words which are concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror (in the hearts of enemies): spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship; I have been sent to all mankind and the line of prophets is closed with me.” [Ref: Muslim B4, H1062] And he has been sent as a witness to mankind like Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) was sent to Fir ’awn: "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you, even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] Implications all this is that he has been sent as a hearing seeing witness upon mankind like Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) was sent as a hearing/seeing witness from Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Concerning the witnessing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) enquired from his Lord: "It states that when this verse was recited then Prophet peace be upon him shivered and said "O Allah I am witness upon the people in which i am (living). How can I be witness of those to whom I have not seen?" [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Abi Haatim 3/956, Tabrani is Mojam alKabeer 19/243, Wahidi in his Tafsir 2/55, Abu Nuyeem in Muarifa tul Sahaba no: 63] Ahadith record how Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) demonstrated His power to establish; He is able to do everything. It is recorded in Ahadith: "Narrated Abdur Rahman ibn A'ish: Allah's Messenger (peace be upon him) said: I saw my Lord, the Exalted and Glorious in the most beautiful form. He said: What do the Angels in the presence of Allah contend about? I said: Thou art the most aware of it. He then placed His palm between my shoulders and I felt its coldness in my chest and I came to know what was in the Heavens and the Earth. He recited: 'Thus did we show Ibrahim the kingdom of the Heavens and the Earth and it was so that he might have certainty.' (6:75)" [Ref: Tirmadhi, Vol5, H3245, Tafsir Surah Sad] "Then I saw Him put his palms between my shoulder blades till I felt the coldness of his fingers between the two sides of my chest. Then everything was illuminated for me and I recognized everything. He said: Muhammad! I said: At Thy service, my Lord. He said: What do these high angels contend about? I said: In regard to expiations. He said: What are these? [...]" [Ref: Tirmadhi, Vol5, H3246, Tafsir Surah Sad] How much was known to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and how much capability he was granted is established from following Hadith: "Narrated Hakim Bin Nafi, Saeed Bin Sinan, narrated Abu Zahriyat, Kathir Bin Murra Abu Shajara al-Hadhrami, Ibn Umar said: Abdullah bin Umar (radi Allahu anhuma) that Sayyiduna Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) said: "Indeed this entire world is in front of me so that I can observe everything in it. I can see everything in this world and everything that will take place till the Day of Qiyamah. I see the entire world as I see the palm of my hand". [Ref: Kitab al-Fitan, 1st Chapter, Hadith No. 2, by Hafidh Naeem Bin Hammad al-Marwazi] Other chains of narration are quoted in the following, here. Alhasil -: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnesses the deeds of entire Jinn and mankind. Everything was illuminated for him and he came to see the present and saw everything that was to take place till the day of judgment. 1.0 - A Concise Account Of What Was Established Previously: It was established the Ahadith you quoted refer to leaders of innovators and not ordinary people following the innovations. And it was also established Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knew the names of these Qaideen, names of their father, and the tribes to which these Qaideen of innovators will belong. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knew these details about every Qaid of innovation to appear till the judgment day. Note the apostate leaders of people of innovation are amongst part leaders of innovation whose names Prophet knew etc. Ahadith also establish these Qaideen will recognize Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) at Hawd al-Kauthar and he will recognize them too. It is also established Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is hearing/seeing type of witness upon mankind and thus his witnessing of deeds of apostates and their innovations are witnessed by him. And he was shown everything like Prophet Ibrahim (alayhis salam) was shown everything. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) saw everything in the present and saw everything that was to happen till the day of judgment – even though it is yet to transpire. And this is includes apostasy of some of his companions and their Kufria innovations. Not ignoring those Qaideen of innovation who remained part of Ummah Muslimah despite their innovations: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in his life time was shown his entire Ummah and their good and bad deeds. And after his departure from earthly life he will continuously be shown the good and bad deeds of his Ummatis. When he will see righteousness he will praise Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and when he will see sin he will seek forgiveness from Him on our behalf. And introducing innovations into religion of Islam is blameworthy act, sinful act. 1.1 - Prophet Knew They Are Leaders Of Innovators And Knew Innovations: When RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is sent as a witness to mankind to witness their actions and saw like the palm of his hand events to transpire till the day of judgment which is inclusive of apostasy of some Muslims. And he knows the names of Qaideen of Muslim/Kafir innovators, their fathers names, the tribe to which they will belong. And is aware of the innovations of Muslims because they were shown to him during his life time and will also be shown to him as the events transpire. Then how can a sane person say: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will not know they are innovators nor will he have knowledge of the innovations they invented? It is evident that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be aware what they have done and that they are innovators. 2.0 - He Witnessed All The Events Then Why Hadith Negates His Knowledge: If we believe; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had full knowledge of events that transpired on earth even then this would not solve the issue of why the following words were used: “You do not know what they innovated after you were gone.” On the face of it -; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) negates Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knowing the innovations Qaideen of innovators. Yet we already have established that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does recognize the innovators. And good/bad actions are presented to him therefore he would have known the innovations they created after him. There is obvious discrepancy and you don’t have to be expert to note this discrepancy. To resolve this problem in accordance with findings. It should be realized the translation relevant part is incorrect. And the blame isn’t entirely upon the translators because, ہمزہ (ء) استفہام , is only found in Sahih Muslim version of Hadith. Now even though the incident is same there are many narrations regarding it and almost all are without, ہمزہ (ء) استفہام , except few: “I would say: My Lord, they are my followers and belong to my Ummah. And it would be said to me: أَمَا شَعَرْتَ مَا عَمِلُوا بَعْدَكَ وَاللَّهِ مَا بَرِحُوا بَعْدَكَ يَرْجِعُونَ عَلَى أَعْقَابِهِمْ.” [Ref: Muslim, B30, H5684] 2.1 - Logical Deduction And Natural Meaning Of Hadith: It was and is standard practice for , ہمزہ (ء) استفہام , to be omitted in some cases and considered invisibly present - to be implied - and there are many examples of this. Following few will suffice to prove my point; 2:106, 2:107, and 94:1.When we consider the fact it is standard orthographic practice to omit in places, ہمزہ (ء) استفہام , where it should be, and it exists at least in a single narration of same incident, and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knows the innovators and their innovations then logical conclusion should be that Imam Bukhari (rahimullah) or later generation Hadith transcribers have deliberately omitted it. The Ahadith you quoted are not without, ہمزہ (ء) استفہام , but in these Ahadith it is omitted and Hadith should be translated in accordance with it. Grammatically, ہمزہ (ء) استفہام , serves as a rhetorical device. Usage of which indicates a statement made to make someone realize or remind of something already known. In other words effect of, ہمزہ (ء) استفہام , is that sentence without it is read as: “You do not know what they innovated after you were gone.” But where it is part of the text, instead of negating the knowledge, it is rhetorically implies the person is aware of it: “Don’t you know what they innovated after you were gone!” Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is reminding Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with this rhetorical device which implies; you’re aware that they are innovators and they created innovations. It is similar to saying to someone who was nearly electrocuted: Don’t you know this is electricity! What is being implied is: You know this is electricity and you should be careful with it. In the context of Hadith implication is: You know they are innovators and created innovations after you and yet you call them companions/Ummatis. Once realizing he would say in humility, and submission, what righteous servant, and Prophet, Isa (alayhis salam) would have said: “And I shall say what the righteous slave said: 'And I was Shahid over them while I dwelt amongst them, but when You took me up, You were the Raqeeb (i.e. Watcher) over them, … the All-Wise.' And it will be said: 'These people kept turning away since you left them.'" [Ref: Nisai, B21, H2089] In other words Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will say: O Lord! I was Shahid/Shaheed [as Raqeeb/Hafeez – guardian watcher] over them when I was amongst them [because they were Muslims] but when you took me up You was Raqeeb over them [during Your Guardianship they became apostates] and you did not make me Raqeeb/Hafeez over the apostates. For a detailed study of last part of Hadith please refer to following article, here. 3.0 – Temporary And Permanent Forgetfulness: It is not uncommon for people to forget past events momentarily or permanently. Temporary forgetfulness can be helped if another shares the details of event. Sometimes the stress of an unexpected traumatic event can cause the person to loose awareness of his surroundings or causes individual to forget what is known to them. And in such circumstances it would be irrational to conclude unawareness or impute fault upon the individual. Following are examples from Quran and Ahadith which put this into perspective. 3.1 - Forgetfulness Is Not Proof Of Not Knowing: To begin with your saying, if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had truly knowledge of events via Law al-Mafooz and directly witnessing them then he would know what transpired on earth, is not definitive. Let me illustrate my point with a verse from Quran. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And remember when your Lord brought forth the generations from the backs of the descendants of Adam, and made them their own witness: ‘Am I not your Lord?’ They all said: ‘Yes surely You are! We testify!’ You may say on the Day of Resurrection that: ‘We were unaware of this.’" [Ref: 7:172] Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states; soul every descendent of Adam (alayhis salam) was brought to testify and affirm; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Rabb/Sustainer and this includes me and you. So when you was in Alam al-Arwah (i.e. world of souls) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) via an appointed angel enquired from you: “Am I not your Rabb?” And you affirmed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is your Lord. Can you recall event from your memory? Or do you have visual and audial memory of event? You not remembering it is that proof the event never transpired involving you? And your lack of remembrance should only lead to one conclusion; the event mentioned in the Quran never transpired? See how you retreat in haste to protect yourself from deviation! It has transpired but you have forgotten. Your forgetfulness is proof of your forgetfulness, and not proof of event not taking place, or you not ever being witness to the events that took place in world of souls. 3.2 – Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Grief And Its Effect: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) passed away and Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had this to say about his death: “… Umar stood up and said: "By Allah! Allah’s Messenger is not dead!" 'Umar (later on) said: "By Allah! Nothing occurred to my mind except that." He said: "Verily! Allah will resurrect him and he will cut the hands and legs of some men." [Ref: Bukhari, B57, H19] Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) came back from journey and kissed the forehead of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and said: “Then Abu Bakr came and uncovered the face of Allah's Messenger, kissed him, and said: "Let my mother and father be sacrificed for you. You are good in life and in death. By Allah in Whose Hands my life is, Allah will never make you taste death twice." Then Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and recited verses of Quran in to remind Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and companions about departure of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) from earthly life: “Then he went out and said: "O oath-taker! Don't be hasty." When Abu Bakr spoke: 'Umar sat down. Abu Bakr praised and glorified Allah and said: No doubt! Whoever worshipped Muhammad, then Muhammad is dead, but whoever worshipped Allah, then Allah is Alive and shall never die." Then he recited Allah's Statement: "Verily you (the Prophet) will die, and they also will die." He also recited: "Muhammad is no more than an Apostle; and indeed many Apostles have passed away, before him, If he dies Or is killed, will you then Turn back on your heels? And he who turns back On his heels, not the least Harm will he do to Allah And Allah will give reward to those Who are grateful." [Ref: Bukhari, B57, H19] Another Hadith reveals why Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) sat down when Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) spoke: “Narrated Az-Zuhri: Sa`id bin Al-Musaiyab told me that Umar said: "By Allah, when I heard Abu Bakr reciting it, my legs could not support me and I fell down at the very moment of hearing him reciting it, declaring that the Prophet had died." [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H733] Alhasil –: We can see Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was so over come by grief; he did not believed death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was possible nor recall the verses of Quran relating to his death. It was only after Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) recited the verses that reality sunk in his heart resulting his legs giving way. 3.3 – Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu) Lost In Thoughts: It is recorded in a Hadith that after death of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) the companions were so deeply pained; they were not aware of what was happening around them. Following Hadith quotes the words of Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and a incident involving him: “It was narrated that Zuhri said: A man among the Ansar who was a man of knowledge told me that he heard Uthman bin Affan narrated when the Prophet died some of the companions of Prophet grieved so much that some of them were almost unaware of what was going on around them. Uthman said: I was one of them. Whilst I was sitting in the shade of a small fort Umar passed me and greeted me and I did not realize that he had passed me or had greeted me. Umar when to Abu Bar and said to him: Do you think it is right that I passed by Uthman and greeted him and he did not return my greeting? When Abu Bakr had been appointed Khalifah then he and Abu Bakr came and both greeted me. Then Abu Bakr …” [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Msnd Abu Bakr, H20] The Hadith goes on to detail, Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) visiting Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and seeking clarification. In response to which Uthman (radiallah ta’ala anhu) takes oath that he did not hear his greetings nor saw him pass by. 3.4 - Prophet Knew But Why Would He Say -: Companions And Ummatis: There is no definitive answer to what caused Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to refer to the apostates as Ashabi/Ummati (i.e. my companions/my followers) only speculative answers to this question. i) Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will allow the leaders of innovating apostates to reach Hawd al-Kauthar to torment physiologically before the actual punishment in hell-fire. ii) Realizing people brought the Hawd will enter hell-fire Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was extremely distressed and this resulted him forgetting who they were. iii) The mercy of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will over-whelm Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and he will forget these people became apostates. Note there is only doubt on what caused him to intercede for the apostates but there is no question regarding Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being already aware of their apostasy. 3.5 - Prophet Forgot Due To Over-Whelming Of Mercy: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was/is rahmat ul-lil alameen (mercy upon universe). When Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will see ex-Ummatis and ex-companions, being taken toward hell, after being allowed to visit him at Hawd al-Kauthar, his mercy will over over-whelm him and the emotional stress of events unfolding in his very sight cause him forgot who these people really are. And in this over-whelming of mercy he will attempt to save them from hell-fire. End. This is what I believe would be the cause of momentary forgetfulness. Only folk who cannot imagine the monumental event and do not understand the love Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had for his followers and the way he cared for us will understand it and interpret it to prove his lack of knowledge. Conclusion: Ahadith establish Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was aware of number of leaders of tribulation, their names, their father’s names, the tribe they belong to, and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will recognize them. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a Witness upon mankind therefore it is imperative that he sees their actions. And Ahadith establish Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) made it possible for him to see everything including the present and all that was to happen till the day of judgment. Note he saw then all that was to happen till the day of judgment and this is similar to Hadith in which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) heard the footsteps of Bilal (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in paradise. Therefore he saw the apostasy and the reasons they left Islam and knew who they were. In addition to this Ahadith establish he was informed shown the good and bad actions of his Ummah during his life and he is presented the good and bad actions after his departure from earthly life. He seeks forgiveness for the sins and praises Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for the righteous deeds of his followers. Introducing reprehensible innovations into Islam is amongst the sinful deeds and therefore he would have seen these actions as well. Considering all the evidence in support of Islamic understanding a just and reasonable believer would agree that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knew but was over-whelmed and therefore forgot momentarily. And, ہمزہ (ء) استفہام , is not for any other sake then to indicate that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) knows the reason why they are being sent to hell. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: After being disbeliever in creed of Hadhir Nazir and spewing years of anti-Hadhir/Nazir rhetoric Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) guided me and I became believer in Hadhir Nazir.[1] After much thinking about why subject of Hadhir Nazir turns into a mess I believe I kind of have my finger on the cause. And if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits this article will educate the believers and disbelievers about it. 0.0 - Two Types Of Hadhir Nazir Beliefs: There are two major parts of Hadhir Nazir: a) Hadhir Nazir Roohani/Noorani. b) Hadhir Nazir Bashari (i.e. human). Roohani/Noorani is connected with witnessing of events prior to birth. Bashari is related to after being sent as a Bashar Nabi/Rasool and witnessing of deeds Roohani/Noorani sense. 0.1 - Hadhir Nazir Roohani, Noorani, And Bashari: Hadhir Nazir Noorani is connected with Haqiqat al-Muhammadiyyah (i.e. reality of Prophet Muhammad). It is belief of Ahlus Sunnah; first creation created by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was Noor of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Hadhir Nazir Roohani is belief of Ahlus Sunnah; soul of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) observed the deeds of all mankind prior to being sent as Nabi/Rasool. Muslims believe due to this witnessing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) refers to some of past incidents and says to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “Have you not seen …” (i.e. أَلَمْ تَرَ) in numerous verses of Quran. Hadhir Nadir Bashari is belief that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sent as a witness and his supernatural capacity to witness deeds of mankind were perfected gradually as perfection of Quran came to an end. And after his departure from earthly life Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) spiritually witnesses the deeds of Jinn/mankind. 1.0 - Discussing All Aspects Of Hadhir Nazir Simultaneously: The biggest reason for debate on Hadhir Nazir not reaching conclusion is that both parties discuss all components of Hadhir Nazir subject simultaneously. Therefore the component of Hadhir Nazir being discussed should be pre-fixed. This will stop the discussion from widening too greatly and some kind of structure will be maintained and due to one part being discussed it will be easy to follow. Evidences for each part are different therefore care should be taken to not contaminate the discussion with evidence of other half of Hadhir Nazir. 2.0 - Overlapping Subjects Of Ilm Al Ghayb And Hadhir Nazir: Ilm Al Ghayb topic can be classified into two main categories: Akhbar al-Ghayb (i.e. news of Ghayb) and Mushayda/Sama of Ghayb (i.e. viewing/hearing of the Ghayb).[2] This can be further divided into two types of Mushayda/Sama: i) Seeing/Hearing places (i.e. paradise, hell) with creatures whose actions are not to be judged. ii) Seeing/Hearing of places with good/bad deeds of Jinn and mankind which are to be judged. Topic of Hadhir Nazir is connected with second type, Mushayda/Sama of Ghayb. 2.1 - Broader Subject Of Ilm Al Ghayb Causes Confusion: Suppose topic of Hadhir Nazir Bashari is being discussed. Generally Muslims quote key verses of Quran to support Hadhir Nazir followed by evidence of 1st and 2nd sub-category of Mushayda/Sama in order to establish circumstantially; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnesses the happenings of universe not just the Jinn/mankind. This is where the complications creep into discussion because the Khawarij in response will quote Ahadith which cast doubt onto 1st and 2nd sub-category of Mushayda/Sama. Also evidence of these two categories brings the discussion into subject of Ilm Al-Ghayb. At this point discussion also spills into topic of Ilm al-Ghayb willingly or unwillingly both subjects will be discussed. Simplicity beats complexity every time. 2.2 - Right Course Of Action - Presenting Circumstantial Evidence Of Hadhir Nazir: Your primary proof for Hadhir Nazir are verses quoted in this section and related to it. No other deviation should be engaged and allowed to keep the discussion well tracked toward resolution. Muslim should quote traditional evidence - such as: “Whatever of good reaches you is from Allah, but whatever of evil befalls you is from yourself. And We have sent you as a Messenger to mankind, and Allah is Sufficient as a Witness." [Ref: 4:79] “Indeed, We have sent to you (O mankind) a Messenger as a witness upon you just as We sent to Pharaoh a messenger.” [Ref: 73:15] “O Prophet! Truly We have sent you as a Witness (to mankind as) a Bearer of Glad Tidings, and Warner." [Ref: 33:45] And when it becomes absolutely essential then Muslim should employ proofs related to 2nd sub-category of Mushayda/Sama as circumstantial evidence to establish; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnesses events. It should be spelt out that these are circumstantial proofs establishing witnessing not the foundational evidence. 3.0 - If Arguments And Their Worthless Worth: The disbelievers attempt to refute Hadhir Nazir with ‘if’ arguments. If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was Hadhir Nazir then why would the angels take Salat (i.e. Durud Shareef) to him? This can be rebutted with counter question: If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is knower of Ghayb (i.e. hidden) and knower of Shahid (i.e. visible) then why do angels present our deeds to Him on Thursday and Monday?[3] There are many ‘if’ constructed arguments which the disbelievers put forward and none was more academically challenging then: If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was/is Hadhir Nazir then why is he not mentioned as part of those who witness the secret meetings of hypocrites/disbelievers?[4] Two have been mentioned but there is no end to ‘if’ arguments if there is will to invent them. One can engage in such polemical argumentation all his life and the debate will never conclude for seeker of truth. Point to remember is; no if/implied argument can refute what is fundamentally established from Quran or Hadith, see here. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Alim ul-Ghayb (i.e. knower of hidden) and Shahadah (i.e. apparent). He isn’t dependent upon anyone or a thing for His knowledge. He observes all by Himself. And no amount of implied/if reasoning can refute this and same applies to Shahid/Shaheed status of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And my advice for those who engage in inventing such arguments, those who employ them, and those who respond to them, stop. Deal with the fundamental evidence head on. 4.0 - The Causes Of Difficulty In Resolving This Debate: There are six major causes due to which discussion amongst scholars and academic students on topic of Hadhir Nazir does not bear any fruit: i) Difference in understanding of Tawheed/Shirk and in principle methodology of how to determine Shirk. ii) Not defining what aspect of belief of Hadhir Nazir will be discussed/debated out of two. iii) Then to further compound the mess Ilm Al Ghayb is topic brought into discussion of Hadhir Nazir. iv) Over whelming use of ‘if’ arguments regarding which the believers know, such arguments refute nothing, and disbelievers believe refute they everything. v) Statement of scholars are employed to either establish or refute creed of Hadhir Nazir.[5] This is incorrect methodology because it is stated in Quran; in disputes refer to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). This factor is one cause leading to never ending discussion, other being ‘if’ arguments. vi) Also participants of discussion have already decided what the TRUTH is and this TRUTH is without possibility of fault. As result they do not engage in debate/discussion to learn and with mind-set of changing position if they are proven wrong. Their effort is to WIN the debate/discussion in favour of their own sectarian position. And to achieve this they will gladly bring into question; matters which both parties have no dispute over but superficial level it serves purpose of refuting hence it has to be employed. 5.0 - The Reality Of Hadhir Nazir Dispute: After being on two anti-Hadhir Nazir sides, Wahhabi, Deobandi, and then becoming Sunni, and fully being aware of teaching of all three sides on Tawheed and Shirk. My judgment regarding this topic is; it is an Ijithadi difference resulting from literalistic vs. modernist Tafsir of Quranic verses. Even though Khawarij – Deobandi/Wahhabi – judge Hadhir Nazir to be major Shirk and Kufr. Their verdict is clouded by their own flights of fantasy about our belief. If Khawarij were to judge justly, by passing verdict on, what we say, we believe, and not what they assume, what we believe, they will judge it, no more then deviation and innovation even in their own methodology, but their delusions are strong with them. It definitely is not serious enough, like Khawarij argue and believe: Hadhir Nazir warrants major Shirk. And it is not issue which takes Muslim into Kufr if one disbelieves it. One who disbelieves in Hadhir Nazir from perspective of Muslims is following an evil innovation and is out of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah which is no different from true verdict of antagonists. Conclusion: Hadhir Nazir is a complex subject with many components and each component requiring different evidence. It is linked with topic of Ilm al-Ghayb also. Resulting a very broad topic being discussed without limitation and restriction. In addition to this the parties involved are ignorant of actual belief which results in learning the belief as you go. While attempting to maintain and justify initial uneducated position. And foundation of this dispute is difference in understanding of methodology of determining major Shirk. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] Please refer to the following link, here, and to sections forty-three to forty-five. - [2] Maulvi Ismail Dehalvi - a claimed by Wahhabis of Pakistan and Deobandis – wrote book Taqwiayat al-Imam (i.e. strengthening of faith). In this book he wrote Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not possess knowledge of Ghayb and one who believes so is Mushrik. The Muslim scholarship challenged him for debates. This is where the Ulamah of Islam presented evidence of Hadhir Nazir as proof of Ilm al-Ghayb. And as part and package of everything related to these debates topic of Hadhir Nazir became subject of dispute. Students of Maulvi Ismail Dehalvi took position against Hadhir Nazir in effort to refute Ilm al-Ghayb of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). In accordance with long tradition Islamic scholarship held to belief of Ilm al-Ghayb therefore employed it as proof of Ilm al-Ghayb. Note there is record going far back as Imam Bukhari’s (rahimullah) teacher Imam Qastallani (rahimullah); establishing early Islamic scholarship and succeeding generations, up till Maulvi Ismail Dehalvi’s time, Muslims believed in what we know as Hadhir Nazir. - [3] They may respond: When deeds are presented to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then He forgives the sins except who has rancour against his brother/sister but this answer isn’t sufficient. This only answers half of the question: Why would the angels take Salat (i.e. Durud Shareef) to him? It does not fully consider the implication of question. Question is implying if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is aware of our deeds then there would be no need for the deeds to be presented to Him because He would already know them. Which is the same point the disbelievers attempt to make against Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being presented Salat. Obviously lack of knowledge isn’t established in both cases. Instead it only establishes this is how Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) willed it to be. He could have forgiven sins without having deeds of Jinn and mankind being presented to Him but He chose not to. This argument was comprehensively refuted in the following article, here. - [4] The answer: While reading an account of debate between Allamah Hashmat Ali (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) and Deobandi Aalim this objection was put forward and Allamah Hashmat Ali (rahimullah) explained it. Based on his explanation following article was written, here. - [5] The focus should be what Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) revealed in His Book and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) left in Sunnah. And when there is demand from the opponent to provide scholarly evidence to substantiate/discredit the belief of Hadhir Nazir only then it should be quoted. Even then in limited numbers of scholars.

Introduction: A brother sent me email after reading my following article, here, which was criticising sister Umm Abdullah and Najdi Shuyukh for belief that polytheists of Arabia believed in Tawheed al-Rububiyyah. He contacted and criticised some parts of it and attempted to reason that their position is without blame. In response I took the easiest way out to avoid writing again on this topic. I sent him links of following articles, here, here, here, and here. And setup my self by saying: If there is anything else I can do for you, I would be glad to. After about a month brother came back after going through all the articles and deeply thinking about topic and sent me following short email. 0.0 - Email Received From A Salafi Brother: “Salam. You have justifiably criticised the Najdi Shuyukh regarding their belief that polytheists believed in Tawheed al-Rububiyyah. I have been reading the articles you suggested and after mulling over mountain of evidence against Najdi position I am forced to seriously doubt my initial understanding of subject. I can gladly abandon their position [that polytheists believed in Tawheed al-Rububiyyah]. I see no reason to demonize these Shuyukh or charge them of any wrong doing. Tawheed Al Rububiyyah is defined as xyz and polytheists believed xyz for Allah. In this sense of definition it would be correct to say they believed in Tawheed Al Rububiyyah. If I can be convinced/over-whelmed to believe contrary to my judgement then it would be easy to disregard the teaching of Najdi Shuyukh. Seeing there is no blame in holding to Najdi position is holding me back from leaving it altogether.” [This is edited and improved version of original.] 0.1 - Material Related To Fourth Argument In Mentioned Articles: In the mentioned articles evidences were submitted and explained which establish polytheists were/are not believers in Tawheed al-Rububiyyah. Note that evidence established; polytheists believed their gods also exercised authority in affairs of Rububiyyah which refuted the notion ‘they believed in Tawheed al-Rububiyyah’ according to Salafi definition of Tawheed al-Rububiyyah. In other words it was established; polytheists negated Tawheed al-Rububiyyah even according Salafi definition of Tawheed al-Rububiyyah. 1.0 - Tafsir Of Verses Establishing Shirk On Safety Of Land: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And when harm touches you upon the sea, those that you call upon vanish from you except Him. But when He brings you safe to land, you turn away (from Him). And man is ever ungrateful.” [Ref: 17:67] Their gods vanish from their minds and they solely invoke Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “… and they sail with them with a favourable wind, and they are glad therein, then comes a stormy wind and the waves come to them from all sides, and they think that they are encircled therein. Then they invoke Allah, making their Faith pure for Him Alone,” And addressing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) they say: "If You (Allah) deliver us from this we shall truly be thankful (to you alone).” Yet when they reach the safety of land, due to Mushrikeen/Insaan being ever ungrateful they do not thank Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): But when He delivers them, behold! They on land rebel (against Him) without justification/right.” [Ref: 10:22/23] Contextually the meaning of the last portion is; polytheists even though promise Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to be grateful and thankful to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) alone if their lives are saved. But despite this they rebel against Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) by doing something against their own promise and by doing something for which they have no justification/right. This rebellion is rebellion of Shirk.[2] In other words, when polytheists are on safety of land they commit Shirk, they associated partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), for which they have no right (i.e. no permission from Allah subhanahu wa ta’ala) even though they promised they will not commit Shirk when their lives were in peril at sea. Following verse establishes how they turn away from their promise and rebel against Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “Say: "Who rescues you from the darkness of the land and the sea, (when) you call upon Him in humility and in secret (saying): If He only saves us from this (danger), we shall truly be grateful? Say: "Allah rescues you from this and from all (other) distresses, and yet you (still) associate others (as partners) with Him ." [Ref: 6:63/64] When on the safety of land they associate idols and gods as partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala).[3] End of Tafsir. 1.1 - Implications Of Immediate And General Context On Verse 6:63/64: When it is evident that polytheists of Arabia when their lives were at peril, as it is true with mankind in general, they invoked Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) promising Him to believe in Him alone but on safety of land they broke their promise and associated idols/gods as partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). There are two possible contexts in which the polytheist would associate partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) -: which the verse could be targeting: i) the immediate context of transpired event, ii) and in their general and daily life. In the first category the implication is that polytheists said: Thanks to the Goddess Al-Laat today my life was saved. They broke the promise and instead of giving credit to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), even though they asked Him alone, they gave credit to their idols and gods. In second category the implication is Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is targeting their belief in many idol-gods, their worship of many gods etc. In this context they promised at sea: O Allah if you save us, we will not associate gods/idols (i.e. Al-Laat, Al-Uzza, Al-Manat etc.) with you nor we will worship them (i.e. Al-Laat, Al-Uzza, Al-Manat etc.). And when Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) saved their lives and they reached safety of land they associated with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) gods/idols. Rebelling against their true God by breaking their promise and demonstrating they are ungrateful. My judgment is both were intended and both are valid. First Argument -: Polytheists Committed Shirk In al-Rububiyyah: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is saving the life by calming the sea, or by other means, it is proof He is managing the affairs of His creation and this is demonstration of Rububiyyah. Out of the two possible contexts mentioned if the first context is believed then polytheists of Arabia committing Shirk in Rububiyyah is established because they give credit of an act of Rububiyyah to their idols/gods: “Say: "Allah rescues you from this (i.e. storm of sea) … and yet you (still) associate others (such as Al-Laat, Al-Uzza as partners) with Him (soon as you reach safety of land by thanking and crediting them for safe return).” Implications of second context are two, one is inclusive of Rububiyyah and other is exclusive of Rububiyyah. The one inclusive of Rububiyyah is: “Say: "Allah rescues you … from all distresses, and yet you (still) associate others (such as Al-Laat, Al-Uzza as partners) with Him (as partners by associating your idol-gods with Him in His powers of Rububiyyah and worshiping them).” Exclusive of Rububiyyah is following: “Say: "Allah rescues you from this and from all (other) distresses, and yet you (still) associate others with Him (as partners by associating idol-gods and worshiping them).” Do note all these interpretations are of verses 6:64. All three are result of focus on a particular part of verse in discussion and the focused part is highlighted. Therefore all interpretations are valid and none should not be rejected. Alhasil polytheists associating partners in Rububiyyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is established and that too in accordance with Salafi definition of Tawheed Al-Rububiyyah. Second Argument –: Belief In Ilah Beside Allah Negates Tawheed al-Rububiyyah: Tawheed (i.e. Oneness) is always associated with TWO main parts; Zaat (i.e. Essence) and Sifaat (i.e. Attributes). Note Tawheed al-Afaal (i.e. Actions) – Tawheed al-Rububiyyah - is connected with some if not all attributes of Tawheed al-Sifaat. So when someone says: I believe in Tawheed of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Fundamentally the person is saying: I believe in Oneness of Allah’s Zaat and Sifaat. If Tawheed of Zaat is negated/disbelieved, via believing there are many gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), or there is another god beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), then all parts of Tawheed are by default negated. From logical perspective to believe there are other gods , or there is a god beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) by default negates Tawheed al-Sifaat, which Rububiyyah is part of, because god beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would be believed with attributes. And these attributes are directly or indirectly related to Rububiyyah details of which I will not go into. Third Argument -: Negation Of One Part Of Tawheed Is Negation Of All: Also Muslims divided Tawheed into categories to understand it systematically and in detail. It was never divided into categories to understand in which sense the Mushrikeen were/are Muwahideen. The divisions of Tawheed should not be employed to establish Tawheed of Mushrikeen because Tawheed is composed of all components and it cannot be believed in parts. Negation of one component of Tawheed is negation of all components of Tawheed.[1] In the context of discussion; the polytheists believed their gods possess attributes of Rububiyyah and that too after affirming belief of Ilahiyyah. Which by default negates belief of Tawheed al-Rububiyyah and this is true even when Ism (i.e. name) of Rububiyyah is not affirmed/believed for their gods. Fourth Argument -: Polytheists Are Muslim In Tawaf: It is documented in authentic Ahadith that polytheists of Arabia performed Tawaf around the Kabah. Would it correct to say: Polytheists were Muslims when it came to Tawaf around the Kabah? Muslim-ness isn’t defined by Tawaf around the Kabah there is whole lot of package which cements belief in Islam. Just like previous example Tawheed isn’t defined by believing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) manages the affairs of creation (i.e. Rububiyyah). Its fundamental components are mentioned in Surah Ikhlas and negation of gods, worship of gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is part of believing in Tawheed. Fifth Argument -: Tawheed al-Rububiyyah Of Muslims: Tawheed al-Rububiyyah is construct of Tawheed (i.e. Oneness) and Rububiyyah (i.e. Lordship). When Tawheed is negated by believing in gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) then the foundation of Rububiyyah is by default refuted. In other words from Islamic perspective the foundation of Tawheed al-Rububiyyah is Tawheed al-Zaat (i.e. Essence). When a Zaat beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is attributed with Ilahiyyah and is believed to possess some, or few, or all attributes of Rububiyyah, in equal/unequal sense in comparison to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), then Tawheed al-Rububiyyah cannot be established, and will never be established according to Islamic teaching. 2.0 - The Matter Of Blame/Sin Or No Blame: The blame upon those who believe polytheists believed in Tawheed al-Rububiyyah is of Kufr if I was being extremely judicial in my judgment because to establish a teaching clearly against Quran is Kufr. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) says they are Mushrikeen even after believing in Rububiyyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Shaykh says they are Muwahid in Tawheed al-Rububiyyah even though they associate with Him partners in His Lordship – which is established from textual proofs of Quran. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: "One who innovates something in this matter of ours that is not of it will have it rejected.” [Ref: Bukhari, B49, H861] “He who acted any action not from our affair that is rejected.” [Ref: Muslim, B18, H4267] And there is no proof for Tawheed of polytheists and therefore this teaching of Najdi Shuyukh is rejected. And one who adheres to this rejected type of innovation they should take note of following words of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “And he who introduced some evil Sunnah in Islam which had been followed subsequently, he would be required to bear the burden like that of one who followed this without theirs being diminished in any respect.” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] "And whoever starts an erroneous Biddah with which Allah is not pleased nor His Messenger then he shall receive sins similar to whoever acts upon it without that diminishing anything from the sins of the people.” [Ref: Tirmadhi, B29, H2677] In light of these Ahadith generous judgment in this regard is that one who believes Mushrikeen believed in Tawheed al-Rububiyyah, like Shuyukh of Najd teach, then person has fallen into heretical/sinful innovation and tradition. The innovator and the actors/followers are all equally responsible. 2.1 - Judgment Of Kufr For Whom And Judgment Of Innovation For Whom: A qualified Aalim/Shaykh, if after evidences of Quran and Sunnah have been presented, and arguments of Islam have been clearly explained, and despite this believes in heretical notion then hokum of Kufr is warranted. A jahil, following the Shuyukh of Najd adheres to it, with little understanding of subject, such a person is heretic and sinful, but Takfir is to be held back until all means of Sharia are exhausted. But anyone believes Mushrikeen did not commit Shirk in Ilahiyyah and Asma/Sifaat such a person is Kafir, no quarter given. Email Received After Unpolished Version Of Above Response Was Sent: “Salam. I eagerly anticipated your response and this morning Fajr time I checked and it was inboxed. It was bit nerving to read but I got through without heart attack. Even though I do sympathise with them [Salafi Shuyukh] but the strength of your arguments is compelling enough to reject their teaching. I officially renounce my belief [that polytheists believed in Tawheed al-Rububiyyah]. Mushrikeen as Muslim in Tawaf just brought smile to my face. If someone presented this notion from your side on my side of the border. They will definitely banned him with Takfir. I laughed hysterically how you alluded to same. I still can’t get it out of my head. I am thinking … lets poison the peaceful atmosphere in here by saying polytheists were Muslim in Hajj. lol! Just one more thing and this is more to do with curiosity then anything of substance. Was dispute over Tawheed ar-Rububiyyah part of reasons which resulted in you leaving Salafiyyah?(4) With regards to your desire of publishing this on IslamiMehfil. It is your content so do as you please but I would appreciate if my details aren’t shared. Otherwise I will get mugged by zealous army patrolling borders of Minhaj as-Salafiyyah waiting to evict anyone not holding their understanding. It would be an unwanted stress which I rather not deal with. I had totally given up hope on brothers following Barelwi Minhaj but meeting you has made me realize my ignorance was self imposed. Hand on my heart … with some embarrassment … I acknowledge ... you have greatly increased my respect for scholarship of Barelwi Minhaj. I will try to go through the articles you suggested on Tawheed and Shirk before attempting to read your discussion [on subject of Istighathah]. If I had something to say or ask I will do then. May Allah reward you for time and effort.” Conclusion: The notion that Polytheists believed in Tawheed al-Rububiyyah is completely without warrant. A principled study of dispute with textual evidences from Quran establishes clearly that polytheists did not believe in Tawheed al-Rububiyyah. They merely affirmed Rububiyyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in major affairs like of which are mentioned in the verses commonly employed by Wahhabis to establish their belief. But they believed in minor matters their gods/lords exercise authority also. Please refer to linked articles to get complete picture of subject. There is indeed blame of innovation and Kufr upon one who believes in polytheists being Muwahideen in al-Rububiyyah. May Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) guide and protect us all. Ameen. Wama alayna ilal balalghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] “He it is Who conveys you yusayyirukum a variant reading has yanshurukum across the land and the sea until when you are in ships and they sail with them there is a shift of address from second to third person with a fair gentle breeze and they rejoice therein there comes upon them a stormy wind blowing violently destroying everything and waves come on them from every side and they think that they are overwhelmed that is that they shall perish they call upon God secure in their faith their supplication only to Him ‘If la-in the lām is for oaths You deliver us from these terrors we shall verily be of the thankful’ of those who affirm Your Oneness. Yet when He has delivered them behold they are insolent in the earth wrongfully. By associating others with God. O mankind your insolence wrongdoing is only against yourselves since the sin thereof shall fall against them; it is but the enjoyment of the life of this world which you will enjoy for a short while then to Us is your return after death and We shall inform you of what you used to do and then requite you for it a variant reading for nominative matā‘u has accusative matā‘a ‘an enjoyment’ in other words read as with an omitted verb such as tatamatta‘ūna ‘one which you shall enjoy’.” [Ref: Tafsir Al Jalalayn, 10:22/23] - [2] “(Say) O Muhammad to the disbelievers of Mecca: (Who delivereth you from the darkness) from the hardships and tumults (of the land and the sea? Ye call upon Him humbly and in secret) openly and in secret, ((saying): If we are delivered from this) from these hardships and tumults (we truly will be of the thankful) of the believers. (Say) to them, O Muhammad: (Allah delivereth you from this) from the hardships of the sea and the land (and from all afflictions) from all grief and turmoil. (Yet ye) people of Mecca (attribute partners) idols (unto Him).” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn al-Abbas, 6:63/64] “Say O Muhammad s to the people of Mecca ‘Who delivers you from the darkness of the land and the sea from their terrors during your journeys? When you call upon Him openly and secretly saying “Verily if la-in the lām is for oaths You God deliver us anjaytanā is also read anjānā ‘if He delivers us’ from this darkness and hardship we shall truly be among the thankful”’ the believers. Say to them ‘God delivers you read yunjīkum or yunajjīkum from that and from every distress from every other anxiety. Yet you associate others with Him’.” [Ref: Tafsir Al Jalalayn, 6:63/64] - [3] It would be better to explain this statement. Essence and attributes compose a sentient being. Essence and attributes of Harry make-up Harry. If one believes in attributes of Harry exist but the very foundation on which the attributes are built (i.e. essence) never existed. Has one truly believed in existence of Harry? No! If someone believed there was/is in essence a twin of Harry but not in attributes. Has that individual believed in oneness/uniqueness of Harry? No! Following is an example more closely relevant to discussion: Someone believed Harry was a unique individual in his essence but in some attributes of are shared equally/unequally by Thomas. Has that person believed Harry is truly unique in his existence? No! Tawheed is belief that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is truly and absolutely unique and nothing compares to Him. If someone believed in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as His God and Lord. And believed there are other gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and unequally affirmed for them some attributes essential for Rububiyyah. Does he truly believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is the only Lord [and God] beside whom there is none? No! For simple fact that he affirmed Ilahiyyah and believed other gods beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) unequally/unequally – in comparison to themselves and in comparison to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) - possess attributes of Rububiyyah. - [4] No! During my Salafi and Deobandi days I didn’t think there was problem with notion; polytheists believed in Tawheed al-Rububiyyah. I had heard murmurs that Asharis/Sufis challenge this notion but I had never really paid much attention and ignored it. After joined the ranks of Ahlus Sunnah attempt was made to learn Tawheed and Shirk and methodology of determining Shirk. After these two topics were naturalised I started to study in light of Ahlus Sunnahs definition issues which Salafi/Wahhabi accuse Muslims of committing Shirk in. These topics gave me opportunity to exercise the learnt methodology. Even then I never paid attention to the topic until I bumped into, hornofsatan, website. This happened while I was searching for material critical of Qawaid al-Arba, by Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab. And in the first principle polytheists believing in Rububiyyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is mentioned and Sunni brother refuting it wrote extensively refuting the notion, here. While writing refutation to Qawaid al-Arba’s. I had to grapple with the issue polytheists believing in Rububiyyah of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And as a footnote[11] I commented on Tawheed al-Rububiyyah part. It was the first (in 2013) time I had to actually think deeply about the topic in light of orthodox understanding of Shirk and principles of determining Shirk. This was roughly 9/10 years after leaving Salafism/Wahhabism. And more I delved into the topic clearer its deviation came to.

Introduction: Wahdat al-Wujud is a part of doctrine of Tawheed misconstrued and demonized by foolish folk as Pantheistic. To be precise Hindu Monistic pantheism (i.e. Hama Oost, Persian) not Logostic pantheism. Yet the truth of matter is far from it. If matter of Tawheed and Shirk and principles of determining Shirk are studied in depth and then matter of Wahdat al-Wujud is approached. By referring to scholarly works on this topic. None would judge it to be Shirk or Pantheism. It is beautiful expression of Tawheed. And points to a dimension of Tawheed of Zaat commonly not studied nor realised with superficial understanding of Tawheed. Muwahid will appreciate Tawheed Wahdat al-Wujud. Meaning Of Wahdat Al Wujud: Wahdat al-Wujud. Wahdat means Oneness. In Sufi literature terms Wahdat/Wahdaniyyah are used in same meaning as Tawheed (i.e. Oneness). Al-Wujud means the Existence. And the al-Wujud is not referring to creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) but al-Wujud is referring to Zaat (i.e. Essence) of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Wahdat al-Wujud is technical term to meaning: Tawheed of Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) Zaat’s Existence. Oneness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is unique to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) therefore in true sense the term Wahdat al-Wujud means: Uniqueness of Oneness of Existence of Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Teaching Of Wahdat Al Wujud: Wahdat al-Wujud explains how Existence/Wujud of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) uniquely exists. It answers the question: Whose is existence is Haqiqi/Real - Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or His creations? It teaches; the Haqiqi/True Existence is of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). However impossible may it be for His creation is to realize. And however real/true His creations existence may seem to His creation the reality of it is no greater then the reality of places, people, smells, we experience in dream. In other words existence of creation is illusory. Supporting Wahdat al-Wujud: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) existed from Eternity and there was nothing with Him –: living nor dead, material nor immaterial. He was the First, the Last, the Eternal, the Absolute/Perfect, the Apparent, the Hidden, and is the Uncreated, there was nothing like Him and is nothing like Him. His Existence was the definition of Haqiqi Existence and nothing has changed this definition nor was a creation made part of it. When reality of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is evident then material with which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) created His creation can not be Haqiqi. If it is believed to possess Haqiqi essence then implication is creation was created from Essence of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and this is Shirk al-Akbar which invalidates belief in Islam. Reasoning Behind Wahdat al-Wujud: When there was nothing but Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and nothing other then Him was present, and when He did not create His creation from His Essence then natural implication is; His creation is devoid of Haqiqat other then what we the creation collectively are programed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to see, hear, touch, feel. This may seem far fetched but following example will explain it. According to our created sense of judging what exits and what doesn’t exist a picture on PC monitor has no material existence other then conceptual. So even at created level we have degrees of existence; material and conceptual. Shaykh Ibn Arabi (rahimullah) and the Awliyah-Allah who supported and believed in Wahdat al-Wujud believed. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has Haqiqi Wujud, or the Wujud. The creation Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) created is just an illusion of existence which we collectively experience, like a person experiences places, sounds, smells, evens in dream but in reality he is not witness to anything as such. Alhasil there is illusory existence of creation and in this illusory existence in sentient beings there is sense of existence [of created] Zaat) and in it there is sense of existence [of created] illusory existence. Conclusion: Pantheism is Logostic and Monistic. The first teaches a spark of God combines with material to compose sentient creation. And the second teaches all that exists; sentient and insentient, creation is created from Him. Tawheed is that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is unique in all aspects of His Essence and Attributes. And His Existence is just as unique. Nothing of Him is composing creation and nothing of creation composes Him. Wahdat al-Wujud establishes the Haqiqi existence is of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and all what He created is an illusion. Nothing from His Essence, or Attributes resulted in creation but He created His creation and programmed in His creation the existence of His creation. Wama alayna ilal balalghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi.

Introduction: A brother contacted me mentioned he has read my account of how and why I became orthodox Muslim, here, but he noted account regarding Wahdat al-Wujud has not been mentioned. He enquired if I believe in Wahdat al-Wujud and if I did believe in it what is Wahdat al-Wujud according to my research. I informed him that when it is appropriate I will try to write brief account. And after thinking I have decided both the account and what my current position regarding Wahdat al-Wujud is should be written separately. This article will briefly mention my Wahhabi era understanding regarding Wahdat al-Wujud and then why and how it changed. Background That Lead Me To Question My Initial Position: After years of being on anti-Wahdat al-Wujud band wagon and branding it Shirk and Kufr. Denouncing believers of Wahdat al-Wujud as Kafirs/Mushriks and branding those who believe in Wahdat al-Wujud as followers of Hindu doctrine pantheistic (i.e. everything is God). My conversion to orthodox Islam lead me to learning doctrine of Tawheed/Shirk it became apparent to me; one who understands Tawheed/Shirk in such great detail cannot fall into polytheism. Not unless one completely abandons Islam knowingly and willingly for another religion. It occurred to me then why would prominent scholars of orthodox believe in pantheistic doctrine of Wahdat al-Wujud? If someone like of my intellect and understanding of Tawheed/Shirk cannot accept it how can they? Rather then resorting to: O because they were idiots and I am obviously smart. And they didn’t know Kitabullah and Sunnah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and I am just on another level, the greatest Muffasir, Muhaddith on planet. Instead I laid the blame upon n my own door: It is my fault. The current tradition cherished by folks is: Everything is their fault, I can never be wrong, they had/have no sense, I am smart and I have IQ level 250. Why did I lay the blame because after knowing what I knew. I realized; I am following the principles of Tawheed/Shirk of group of scholars who pioneered them and know one who knows these cannot and will not ever fall into Pantheism of Wahdat al-Wujud. And it seemed highly improbable and infinitely impossible; that they would believe Wahdat al-Wujud if it was Pantheism. Then I started to research the subject in earnest. Studying Pantheism And Panentheism Its Types: The very first step was to study Pantheism. The very first book on topic Pantheism read was written by Paul Harrison, Pantheism: The Spirituality of and the Universe. And this was followed by another book of same author: Pantheism: Understanding the Divinity in Nature and the Universe. Note there is no religious text, or structure of Pantheism, rather is how a philosopher evolved the idea. And this process is continuous hence Pantheism is evolving. As an uninitiate of subject I believed Pantheism was only of one type. Commonly known termed as everything is God. Or more accurately all the material of universe is essence of God - the very material composing - by definition this is Monistic Pantheism. This main branch divides into two, a group believes the universe is God without soul of God, the other believes universe is essence and His soul unites all. The other main branch is Logostic Pantheism acknowledges God being a distinct being within Universe and His spark/soul is absorbed by His creation. There are other types but these two are popular with philosophers. End. Panentheism is belief that God exists within the universe and outside of universe. There are many versions of Panentheism and at the very least one is Pantheistic. Every major religion has some form of Panentheism except Islam. Western intellectuals purpose likes of Shaykh Ibn Arabi (rahimullah) had Panentheistic view of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Yet orthodox Islamic scholarship has completely rejected this notion and its ascription to Shaykh Ibn Arabi (rahimullah). After equipping my self with foundational knowledge required to understand the subject. I ventured to read first Sunni book on this topic. Writings Of Ala Hadhrat, Allamah Kazmi, Pir Mehr Ali Shah Golarvi: My first book on subject of Wahdat al-Wujud was: Tehqeeq ul-Haq Fi Kalamat il-Haq, by Pir Mehr Ali Shah (rahimullah), here. This book is not for weak hearted because the Urdu is Grand Master class. Note this book was written in response to Deobandi Maulvi Abdul Hayy Lakhnavi’s Takfir of a Sunni Aalim. It was very difficult read and even more difficult to grasp what the author is actually saying. At the end of first attempt I was no better educated about the topic then when I started. Second attempt helped but its difficulty put me off from finishing it second time. Searching for a replacement book I stumbled upon: Wahdat al Wujud, by Allamah Syed Ahmad Saeed Kamzi (rahimullah), here. My first major error was that I had like Khawarij assumed word wujud in Wahdat al-Wujud to Urdu equivalent of jism (i.e. body). When I read Allamah Kazmi Sahib’s (rahimullah) explanation of Wujud it became apparent he used it in meaning of Existence. And then explained that Wujud (i.e. Existence) Zaat (i.e. Essence). If there is existence of Zaat then it has to exist in essence at the very minimum. He said to believe there is Wujud of others beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) that would mean Shirk in Zaat. There would be charge; we believe in existence of creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) therefore we cannot escape charge of major Shirk. And he responded to it by saying that Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) Wujud is Haqiqi Existence of His creation’s wujud is Majazi. This was the point when I started connect Wujud of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) with Haqiqi, Qulli, Bi-Ghayr Izni, Mustaqil, Ghayr Muntahi … Then it clicked; if we believe a creation beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) or all creation, exists in this sense we indeed would be Mushrik. Allamah Sahib (rahimullah) went to state and explain; nothing beside Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) exists in Haqiqi sense and all that exists for creation is illusory existence. There after I looked for Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat’s (rahimullah) material but I was unable to find anything substantial. In Malfuzaat of Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (rahimullah) only one reference to Wahdat al-Wujud was found. He was asked: What is definition of Wahdat al-Wujud? To which he responded: One Existence and Existence of the One. And went on to imply that all other are illusory existences. Thinking there was nothing written on this topic by Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) I abandoned the search for it. But Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) provided me opportunity to talk to a senior work colleague who said Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (rahimullah) had written a pamphlet on it. He promised he will make an effort to acquire it. He didn’t quite manage to get the Risala but from some where managed to get photo copies of pamphlet it was titled: Al Qaul il-Masood il-Mahmood Fi Mas’ala Wahdat al-Wujud, here. In this Risala he defines meaning of Wahdat al-Wujud as: Existence of the One and the One’s Existences. All others are images and shadows. And explains with an example that just as reflections in mirror are dependent for their existence upon the body creating reflection in the same fashion creation is dependent upon Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). In other words; image, reflection, shadow is dependent upon the objection which creates it. In the similar fashion creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is dependent upon Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) to create them and to bring their existence into being.(1) And stated Wujud of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is dependent upon nothing. Hence His existence is Haqiqi. End. Some the doubts and questions that remained unanswered were cleared by Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala). After few months same brother brought me a Risala on Wahdat al-Wujud but warned it is written by Shia. This was enough for me to put it down. Returning To Pir Mehr Ali Shah Sahib (rahimullah): Years of brainwashing wasn’t to be eliminated due to weeks of effort. I had few nagging doubts about the concept and issues of trust. My judgment was: If Wahdat al-Wujud is as defined then I don’t have problem but there are things written by Sufis which are questionable. So I wasn’t entirely satisfied if it was Wahdat al-Wujud or not. I eventually decided to re-read Pir Mehr Ali Shah Sahib’s (rahimullah) book again in the hope that it will clear some doubts. Major doubt was Sufis have made statements which give meaning they see Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in His creation or as His creation. Pir Sahib (rahimullah) explained it but I will give an example to illustrate his explanation. A person is stationed in a house. The walls of house are solid, with glass windows. Etc. … Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) granted this person special power to see through the walls just as he sees throw glass windows. Inside the house in front of a wall there is a decorative piece and the man’s son is standing on other side of the wall (i.e. out side of the house). The man looks at the decorative piece and points at it saying that is my son. In similar fashion a Wali of Allah who has reached to a stage due to Taqwa that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) counts his Wali as beloved and then grants him supernatural powers of seeing, hearing, traveling, and ceasing/granting. This is established from Hadith Qudsi recorded in Sahih al-Bukhari. Then the Wali when he wants to sees through the walls and material and creation he does so. And directly he maybe looking at creation and says that is my Lord but reality is he sees through all and sees Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Just as the man saw through the wall and pointed to his son and people may deem him insane and mentally unstable. Even though people may consider it a defect but in reality it points to his merit. Of course not all those who claim this station have earned it but those who have genuinely achieved this status are known in the Ummah and Ulamah have pointed them out including the pretenders. This explanation allowed me to reconcile some statements. Other statements were explained by the fact that some of the Awliyah lost their mental balance and never regained consciousness. They are exempt from Shar’ri judgment because of their insanity but what they uttered are judged in accordance with Shari’ah. If these statements are Kufr/Shirk then they are declared to be so but the Takfir of person is not made due to mental instability nor punishment is given.(2) This put in perspective everything that I had against the Muslims and I found their understanding of Tawheed to be sound and problematic statements either explained or disavowed due to their Kufria nature. This was the lost hurdle after jumping over it and realising a balanced and systematic approach is taken by orthodox Muslims. I became believer in Wahdat al-Wujud. About Leaving Wahhabism And Deobandism: This was one of last subjects I studied and it was not the reason for which I left Wahhabism or Deobandism. And it was for this it was not mentioned in the account of how and why I was misguided and then guided. The decision to leave both was made on other aspects. I was just trying to find a place to fit, and part of this attempt to fit, was to study Ahle Sunnat's teaching. Praise be to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). I naturalised into Ahle Sunnat’s methodology over the period of about three years. And ever since I have strived to undo the damage I did, in my Wahhabi and Deobandi days, by putting my struggle into pen so others can benefit from it. Pantheism, Panentheism And Tawheed Wahdat al-Wujud: Pantheism assumes whole or part of God is in universe and polytheistic Panentheism (i.e. Christian Trinitarianism) assumes part of God as a god is in the universe. Heretical Panentheism – from Islamic teachings perspective – is where a God is not part of Christian but resides with in creation. Wahdat al-Wujud teaches Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is not part of His creation but He is unique and His Existence is absolutely unique and Haqiqi. Where as all which Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) created is Majaz (i.e. Assumed, Illusory). Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnote: - [1] Some idiots do not understand how tashbih (i.e. comparison) works. They assume tashbih in every detail when in reality tashbih is always in a single characteristic, or action, or quality. Ulamah of old used words such as; shadow, image, reflection, to denote dependence upon Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Where as the enemies of Islam have used these words to demonise them. Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat (alayhi rahma) explains the terminology in his mentioned book. In Urdu words, Zill e Illahi (shadow of god), is used to mean king. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is King of Kings, and being His shadow implies king. Just as Isa (alayhis salam) being Ruhullah does not mean Isa (alayhis salam) is part of Ruh of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). - [2] This does not mean that someone utters Kufr and claims to be Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and we say: He is mad. Or accept the claim of madness without verifying it. If someone is insane or has lost mental balance then the people around him will testify if it is so.

Meray father-in-law dunya say 1st ko rukhsat huway thay please un ki maghfirat ki dua karna. Hafidh e Quran aur Aalim thay.

Salam alayqum Allah ta'ala aap ko jaza e khayr deh. ameen.

Salam alayqum, Is Hadith par kissi ek Deobandi ki jirah pari thee ... ghaliban Sarfaraz Khan Safdar ki. Is Hadith ki sanad par kuch material ho toh zeroor share karen.

Ghulam e Raza bhai, mein nay click keeya heh, fori tor par file download honay wala option aa gaya. Shahid aap nay pop-op blocker lagay huwa heh. Computer restart kar kay try karen.

Salam alayqum, Ghulam e Raza bhai Allah ta'ala aap ko jaza e khayr deh. Mein nay is par kaam shoroon kia thah magar work over-load ki waja say socha complete baad mein kar loon ga. Magar phir ek hafta doh mein aur doh chaar mein badlay aur bhool gaya. Aap nay like keeya toh dekhnay par phir yaad ayah kay is ko complete nahin keeya. In sha Allah ainda articles upload mein yeh bi hoga. Jazakallah khayr.

... Sunnati khulafa ar-rashideen wal mahdiyeen ... ka pass bi nahin rakha ...