MuhammedAli

Introduction: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sent as a hearing/seeign type of Shahid/Shaheed (i.e. witness). We also believe he was sent to entire Jinn and mankind as a Nabi and Shahid/Shaheed over them. In connection with these beliefs we also have belief that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness to actions of Jinn/mankind on judgment day. And to be a true Shahid/Witness one must have seen/heard the events regarding which he/she will be called to bear witness. Therefore Prophet (sallallahua alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnesses all actions of Jinn and mankind. Anti-Islam Element Disbelieve In Islamic Teaching: Anti-Islam elements rejects this Islamic teaching and argues stating: It is not fundamental requirement to be an actual hearing/seeing type witness to be true Shahid and Shaheed. Instead a truthful person - who has witnessed the event - can inform another and the informed can bear witness on account of that truthful person. The basis for their this argument is; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness after his Ummah in defence of Prophets therefore he will be [indirectly] informed by truthful Muslims and he will bear witness on account of their testimony. Please note this evidence of anti-Islam element was discussed in detail, here, in sections 3.1 to 3.4, where the invalidity of principle was established along with correct understanding of Hadith. And to their invented principle they present many evidences from Quran/Ahadith and witnessing of Khuzaimah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) of part of their supporting evidences. The Ahadith In Which Khuzaimah Bore Witness: “It was narrated from 'Umarah bin Khuzaimah that his paternal uncle, who was one of the companions of the Prophet told him that:the Prophet bought a horse from a Bedouin and asked him to follow him, so that he could pay him for the horse. The Prophet hastened but the Bedouin was slow. Men started to talk to the Bedouin and make offers for the horse, and they did not realize that the Prophet had bought it, until some of them offered more than the Prophet had bought it for. Then the Bedouin called out to the Prophet and said; "Are you going to buy this horse or shall I sell it?" The Prophet stood up when he heard him calling and said: "Have I not bought it from you?" He said: 'No, by Allah, I have not sold it to you and the Prophet said "I bought it from you." The people started to gather around the Prophet and the Bedouion as they were talking, and the Bedouin started to say: "Bring a witness who will testify that you bought it." Khuzaimah bin Thabit said: "I bear witness that you bought it." The Prophet turned to Khunzimah and said: "Why are you bearing witness?" He said: "Because I know that you are truthful O Messenger of Allah." Prophet made the testimony of Khuzaimah equivalent to the testimony of two men.” [Ref: Nisai, Book 44, Hadith 4651] “Narrated Uncle of Umarah ibn Khuzaymah: The Prophet bought a horse from a Bedouin. The Prophet took him with him to pay him the price of his horse. The Messenger of Allah walked quickly and the Bedouin walked slowly. The people stopped the Bedouin and began to bargain with him for the horse as and they did not know that the Prophet had bought it. The Bedouin called the Messenger of Allah saying: If you want this horse, (then buy it), otherwise I shall sell it. The Prophet stopped when he heard the call of the Bedouin, and said: Have I not bought it from you? The Bedouin said: I swear by Allah, I have not sold it to you. The Prophet said: Yes, I have bought it from you. The Bedouin began to say: Bring a witness. Khuzaymah ibn Thabit then said: I bear witness that you have bought it. The Prophet turned to Khuzaymah and said: On what (grounds) do you bear witness? He said: By considering you trustworthy, Messenger of Allah! The Prophet made the witness of Khuzaymah equivalent to the witness of two people.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B24, H3600] Understanding Ibn Khuzayma’s Witnessing: When Bedouin said who will bear witness for you that you purchased this horse then Ibn Khuzaymah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said: “I bear witness that you have bought it.” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was aware Ibn Khuzayma (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not witness the transaction and therefore he enquired from companion: “Why are you bearing witness?”, “On what (grounds) do you bear witness?” In response companion said: (-قَالَ بِتَصْدِيقِكَ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ‏) Note the quoted online translations do not provide literal translation but give a interpretative translation – which are correct on their own merit. Translation closer to wording would be: “He said: By affirming/attesting to what you said.” Or alternatively: “He said: By believing what you said.” Which ever translation (i.e. mine or quoted in earlier section) you ascribe to Ibn Khuzayma (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is merely attesting to what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said. In other words Ibn Khuzayma (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was bearing witness because he heard Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) say that he purchased the horse from Bedouin: “Then the Bedouin called out to the Prophet and said; "Are you going to buy this horse or shall I sell it?" The Prophet stood up when he heard him calling and said: "Have I not bought it from you?" He said: 'No, by Allah, I have not sold it to you. And the Prophet said "I bought it from you.” This establishes Ibn Khuzayma (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was not bearing witness as a hearing/seeing type of witness but due to his belief in truthfulness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Hadith goes on to state Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated from that moment onwards Ibn Khuzayma’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) witnessing is equal to witnessing of two men: “The Prophet made the witness of Khuzaymah equivalent to the witness of two people.” This unique station was granted to Ibn Khuzayma (radiallah ta’ala anhu) because he demonstrated fear Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and demonstrated belief in truthfulness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): “O you who believe! Have fear of Allah, and believe in His Messenger, He will give you a double portion of His mercy, and He will give you a light by which you shall walk.” [Ref: 57:28] Such witnessing is of belief and cannot be used and was not used by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to support his own position, here. The Incident Mentioned In Hadith Is Not Evidence For Principle: You believe: ‘Truthful person - who has witnessed the event - can inform another and the informed can bear witness on account of that truthful person.’ You have stopped short of stating if such witnessing would be sufficient to judge the case in favour of party or not. The real issue is; if this type of testimony in a dispute would be valid grounds to judge the case in favour of a disputing party. Due to anti-Islam elements belief, against Hadhir Nazir, it seems one who presents this Hadith in principle believes such witnessing does resolve the dispute in favour of a party. Question begs to be asked on the ground: When it is evident a person is bearing witness to an event which he/she has not witnessed with eyes/ears. And is only doing so due to being informed by a truthful person then will his witnessing in support of a party settle the dispute in favour that party? Absolutely not! This has never happened in history of Islam. If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) accepted the witnessing of Ibn Khuzayma (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and judged the issue in his own favour then this incident could only have been valid evidence against the notion that in disputes witnessing required is hearing/seeing type. And there absolutely no evidence to suggest that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) used witnessing of Ibn Khuzayma (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to decide the dispute in his own favour. Conclusion: Ibn Khuzaima (radiallah ta’ala anh) bore witness in defence of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) because of his firm belief and conviction in truthfulness of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had accepted the witnessing of Ibn Khuzayma (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and judged the dispute in his own favour. Then it could have been a valid argument against Islamic notion; witnesses in all a criminal acts has to be hearing/seeing type. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness to actions of his own Ummah and in defence of Prophets, against their nations, saying the Prophets delivered the message of Islam to their nations. This type of testimony requires hearing/seeing type of witnessing and one who bear witness without witnessing the events is a false witness and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) does not give false testimony. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Salam alayqum, Jahan taq mera naqis ilm heh Talaq ho chuki heh aur daranay ka uzr qabl e lehaz nahin. Magar behtreen yeh heh kay aap Muftiyan e Kiram say rabta keren aur kissi qassai type Mufti say nahin. Kissi tajurba-kar Mufti say, Bareilly Shareef mein, ruju karen. Istifta mein apni beti ka zeroor likhna. Shahid kuch kunjaish ho.

Salam alayqum, Mein nay kaha thah keh, Deobandi Maulvi [peysoon aur apnay jhootay mazhab ko firogh denay kay wastay] kuch bi kar saktay hen, yeh dekhen in kay kartoot: Deobandi Upload - Munazra Abh ek saal bad kissi Sunni ko hosh aya toh us nay Munazra poora upload keeya: Sunni Upload - Munazra

Introduction: Muslims believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) sent Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to Jinn and mankind as a hearing/seeing type of Witness. The opponents who disbelieve use various indirect evidences of Quran/Hadith and present a reasoned argument in attempt to discredit this Islamic teaching. They reason on account of verses of Quran, or this Hadith; if he was Hadhir Nazir then x, y and z took place and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did nothing to reveal he knows what will happen or prevent it from happening. Therefore he was not Hadhir Nazir, or in other words, he was not sent to Jinn/mankind as a hearing/seeing type of witness. A Demonstration Of One Such Argument: The heretic element states, Hafsa (radiallah ta’ala anha) and Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) schemed to prevent Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) spending more time with his wife Zaynab (radiallah ta’ala anha) by saying the can smell strong odour of Honey/Mimosa from him. If Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was Hadhir Nazir then he would have witnessed that his wives had made this plan. There are many such arguments invented to refute witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Potential Arguments Against Hadhir Nazir Number In Thousands: There are potentially thousands of such arguments which can be generated against Islamic creed of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent to Jinn and mankind as a hearing/seeing type of witness. A Muslim can devote life time arguing and counter-arguing on this point alone if correct methodology isn’t taught. And none should be involved so deeply into the topic where every objection, every argument, every point has to be refuted of opponents of Islam, so they may believe. Instead correct Islamic teaching should be taught followed by principle to follow in the next section. Building Case For Principle -: Plurals, We, Us, Our: We Muslims believe in Tawheed of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), here, and believe He is Wahid (i.e. the One) as indicated by the following verse: “Say: He is Allah, the One.” [Ref: 112:1] Despite this there are many verses of Quran where plurals, We, Our, and Us are used by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for Himself: “Who believe in the unseen, establish prayer, and spend out of what We have provided for them.” [Ref: 2:3] “And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Servant then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah, if you should be truthful. “ [Ref: 2:23] “And they wronged Us not - but they were wronging themselves.” [Ref: 2:57] On basis of these evidences someone argues: If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was the Only One God then plurals would not have been used. Instead Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is One supreme God and all other gods indicated by We, Our, Us are His subordinates. Is this valid argument against monotheism of Islam? And will you reject the established teaching of Islam and believe his distortion? No! Building Case For Principle -: Knower Of Unseen And Apparent: We Muslims believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is knower of Ghayb and Shahadah and this is established by many verses. Here just one is being quoted: “Say, "O Allah, Creator of the heavens and the earth, knower of the unseen and the witnessed, You will judge between your servants concerning that over which they used to differ." [Ref: 32:6] A ‘true Muwahid’ of Salafism argues, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is not aware of Ghayb (i.e. hidden/unseen) and Shahadah (i.e. apparent/witnessed). He basis his logic on the following verse:“’And what is that in your right hand, O Moses?’ He said, ‘It is my staff; I lean upon it, and I bring down leaves for my sheep and I have therein other uses.’" [Ref: 20:17/18] And reasons He enquired what was in hand of Musa (alayhis salam). And Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) too believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) didn’t know what was in his hand and what function it played in his life so he educated Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) had known He would not have enquired. And if Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) believed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knew he would not have informed Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and educated Him about its functions. And then he goes on to reinterpret the verse, knower of unseen and the apparent, in context of revelation and in context of historical event which resulted in revleation of verse, and says this verse does not mean that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is knows all past present future. Will your belief based on the literal, apparent, clear emphatic meaning of verse be refuted: “Say, "O Allah, Creator of the heavens and the earth, knower of the unseen and the witnessed, You will judge between your servants concerning that over which they used to differ." And will you believe in his Taweel? No! Because the explicit cannot be negated by reasoned argument derived from implicit evidence. Building Case For Principle -: Angel Informs About Stages Of Embrio: Muslim believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is fully aware of all that is happenings which is established from following evidence. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “And with Him are the keys of the Ghayb (i.e. hidden, unseen); none knows them except Him. And He knows what is on the land and in the sea. Not a leaf falls but that He knows it. And ...” [Ref: 6:59] They keys of Ghayb are five mentioned in the following verse and one is knowledge of what is in the womb: “Indeed, (i) Allah has knowledge of the Hour (ii) and sends down the rain (iii) and knows what is in the wombs. (iv) And no soul perceives what it will earn tomorrow, (v) and no soul perceives in what land it will die. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted.” [Ref: 31:34] All that in the whomb is Ghayb therefore according to following verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knows Ghayb of womb: “Say, "O Allah, Creator of the heavens and the earth, knower of the unseen and the witnessed, You will judge between your servants concerning that over which they used to differ." [Ref: 32:6] A person believes Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knows what is in the womb because the angel appointed by Him on it informs Him. He quotes the following Hadith as proof of his belief: “Narrated Anas bin Malik: The Prophet said, "At every womb Allah appoints an angel who says, 'O Lord! A drop of semen, O Lord! A clot, O Lord! A little lump of flesh.’ Then if Allah wishes (to complete) its creation, the angel asks, (O Lord!) Will it be a male or female, a wretched or a blessed, and how much will his provision be? And what will his age be?' So all that is written while the child is still in the mother's womb." [Ref: Bukhari, B6, H315] And then he reasons, if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) was able to hear/see what is in the womb the angel would not inform Him of each stage. Therefore Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) only knows what is in the womb because the apointed angel informs of it. Based on his belief, Hadith, and the reasoning question needs to be asked: Is his belief authentically supported by evidence of Quran and Hadith? And will you believe in his Taweel? No! Building Case For Principle -: Witnessing Of Deeds By Allah: Suppose true Salafi Muwahid believes, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) only knows Ghayb when he is informed by events of Ghayb by angels. He quotes the following Ahadith: “… Why do you fast on Monday and Thursday, while you are an old man? He said: The Prophet of Allah used to fast on Monday and Thursday. When he was asked about it, he said: The works of the servants (of Allah) are presented (to Allah) on Monday and Thursday.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B13, H2430] “Those are two days in which deeds are shown to the Lord of the worlds, and I like my deeds to be shown (to Him) when I am fasting." [Ref: Nisa’i, B22, H2360] He interprets all verses of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knowing Ghayb and being Alim Ul Ghayb (i.e. Knower of Ghayb) in light of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) being informed by angels. He argues if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) knows Ghayb by Himself then why would the angels present to Him the record of deeds! Only reasonable and justified understanding is that Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) Himself and directly does not know what Jinn and mankind are engaged in therefore angels present to Him the record of deeds. And will you believe in his Taweel when it is evident from following verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) sees our actions: “Say, "Make no excuse - never will we believe you. Allah has already informed us of your news. And Allah will observe your deeds and His Messenger; then you will be taken back to the Knower of the unseen and the witnessed, and He will inform you of what you used to do." [Ref: 9:94] One word answer: No! Principle Cause Of Rejection Of Reasoned Arguments: Amongst the Islamic Scholars universally accepted principle is: Any belief or practice emphatically indicated by Quran or Hadith cannot be invalidated/refuted by a reasoned argument derived from indirect evidence. Always the clear text of Quran or Hadith will supercede any belief/practice supported by implied argument. Prophet Of Allah Sent As A Shahid/Shaeed: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: "We have truly sent thee as a witness, as a bringer of glad tidings, and as warner." [Ref: 48:8] "O Prophet! Truly We have sent thee as a witness, a bearer of glad tidings, and as a warner." [Ref: 33:45] In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a hearing/seeing type of witness – like of which was sent to Pharaoh: “We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is sent to mankind: “… 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] Therefore he was sent as a witness upon mankind – of his time and to come. In another verse Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be brought as a witness against nations that preceded him: “How then (will the sinners fare on judgment day) when We shall bring forward witnesses from within every community, and bring thee as witness (i.e. Shaheed) against them?” [Ref: 4:41] Indicating he was witnessed the deeds of nations before him. Based On Indirect Evidence Presenting Reasoned Arguments: Unfortunately the anti-Islam element employs reasoned arguments to challenge and refute the Islamic belief of; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent to mankind as a hearing/seeing type of Shahid (i.e. Hadhir Nazir). It should be impressed upon them: Explicitly stated belief/practice cannot be invalidated/refuted by reasoned argument based on implicit evidence. Only way the explicitly stated belief/practice can be invalidated/refuted is if same belief/practice is abrogated with verse of Quran or a Hadith. And if you claim belief; Prophet (sallallahua layhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent to Jinn/mankind as a hearing/seeing type of Shahid was abrogated then burden of proof is upon the claimant to establish his claim with backing of Quran/Hadith and scholarly evidences. Conclusion: Reasoned arguments can be presented to undermine the very foundation of Islamic belief. Such arguments should not be utilised and cannot be taken seriously when they contradict explicitly stated teachings of Islam. At times a convincing explanation can be given to refute the implied argument but when such explanation cannot be forwarded due to lack of textual evidences even then there are no proper grounds to reject a Islamic belief established from explicit text of Quran/Hadith. Some arguments presented against witnessing of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) may fall into this category but belief of Hadhir Nazir should be held with confidence because a reasoned argument derived from implicit evidence cannot refute emphatic text of Quran/Hadith. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Two principles were derived in an attempt to explain what would be linguistic and what would be legal innovation in an article responding to argument; Ibn Umars (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made statements, Salat ad-Duha is excellent/fine innovation, in linguistic sense, here. And it was argued that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not believe Salat ad-Duha was Prophetic Sunnah hence he made the statements in legal (i.e. Shar’ri sense). Later after careful consideration it was realised these statement, Salat ad-Duha is fine/excellent innovation, was made in context of Salat ad-Duha of congregation. And this prompted me to rectify my understanding, here. My opponent in the light of lattest readjustment has responded to me in the hope of refuting Islamic position – Islam has made provisions via which good innovations can be made part of Islam. An Email Arguing Against Islamic Position: In your lattest post you have acknowledged statements of Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) regarding Salat ad-Duha are in context of congregation, in Masjid other than Haram/Quba, and a day on another than Saturday. This means you take the Ahadith in which Salat ad-Duha has been stated to be good/fine innovation and dear innovation to be referring to performing of Salat ad-Duha in congregation, in Masjid other than Haram/Quba, and a day on another than Saturday. And this implies you believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed Salat ad-Duha in congregation and Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was unaware of this. Your admission changes the dimensions of the discussion because it is stated in Hadith that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed Salat ad-Duha in congregation: “Bilal replied in the affirmative. I said, 'Where)?' He replied: 'Between these two pillars and then he came out and offered a two rak`at prayer in front of the Ka`ba.' "Abu `Abdullah said: Abu Huraira said, "The Prophet advised me to offer two rak`at of Duha prayer. " Itban (bin Malik) said, "Allah's Messenger and Abu Bakr, came to me after sunrise and we aligned behind the Prophet and offered two rak`at."[1] [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H268] And your own principle states: “Knowing y is Quranic/Prophetic teaching but despite this saying y is excellent/fine innovation. In this context, the y practice which is being called innovation is in Lughvi (i.e. linguistic) sense.” This establishes that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) deemed Salat ad-Duha in congregation to be linguistic innovation. All I demand is, you to establish that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was unaware of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performing Salat ad-Duha in Masjid, in congregation, and in public. If this is established by you my argument [against Islam allowing good innovations] stands refuted and if you fail your argument [of Islam permitting good/fine innovations] stands refuted. Assumption – He Was Aware Of ad-Duha In Congregation Is Prophetic Sunnah: It is heart warming to see you employ my own principle to refute Islamic arguments and this points you have granted the principle a degree of credibility. The problematic aspect is that you have assumed Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was aware of Salat ad-Duha performed in congregation is Prophetic Sunnah and despite having this knowledge he went on to Salat ad-Duha in congregation is excellent/fine innovation.You have claimed my principle substantiates your position; Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made the statement Salat ad-Duha in congregation being linguistic innovation. For your argument to be valid you must establish Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was aware of Salat ad-Duha in congregation being prophetic Sunnah. Merely establishing it is Prophetic Sunnah cannot proof of, and is not proof, Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) being aware of Salat ad-Duha in congregation being Prophetic Sunnah. Ibn Umar Wasn’t Aware Of It Being Prophetic Sunnah: The notion that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was aware of Salat ad-Duha in congregation being Prophetic Sunnah is senseless. The evidence establishes; Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not perform Salat ad-Duha which he termed innovation: “Narrated Muwarriq: I asked Ibn `Umar: "Do you offer the Duha prayer ?" He replied in the negative. I further asked …" [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H27] And he believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and his first two Khulafah did not perform it: “. I further asked, "Did `Umar use to pray it?" He (Ibn `Umar) replied in the negative. I again asked, "Did Abu Bakr use to pray it?" He replied in the negative." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H27] Naturally Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) would and will have no reason to object to or to not to perform Salat ad-Duha in congregation if he believed it was Prophetic Sunnah. And if he believed it was Prophetic Sunnah why would he say it was not performed by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam)! And why would he himself not perform it if he believed it was Prophetic Sunnah? Considering The Impossible – He Was Aware Of It Being Sunnah: Here we suppose he was aware that Salat ad-Duha in congregation was Prophetic Sunnah. Will this establish his statements about Salat ad-Duha being excellent/fine innovation were made in linguistic sense? One word answer: No! Hadith of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) not performing and his first two Khulafah not performing Salat ad-Duha would go on to force conclusion that the scholarly opinion about Ibn Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) statements (i.e. Salat ad-Duha is excellent/fine innovation are with regards to Salat ad-Duha of congregation) is incorrect. The reason being for this is; otherwise if the Ahadith are understood in context of Salat ad-Duha of congregation than Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is made to say a Prophetic Sunnah was not performed by two Khulafa and himself, and by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), which would be complete non-sense. And this contradictory non-sense naturally would force the scholarship to reconcile the difficulty by forming another opinion which would lead to conclusion that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was reffering to another aspect of Salat ad-Duha as excellent/fine innovation – not Salat ad-Duha of congregation. Alhasil there is no way out of Islamic position. Only slight modification - such as Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala ahu) deemed xyz aspect of Salat ad-Duha to be fine/excellent innovation [and believed Salat ad ad-Duha of congregation to be Sunnah] would result in refutation of your position. Hence it would be in your interest to conform to following the majority aspect of Prophetic teaching because there is no alternative way out of Islamic position – i.e. Islam allows good innovations to be made part of it. Islamic Scholarship Said Ahadith Are About Ad-Duha Of Congregation: You have stated for me to refute your position all needs to be established is that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was unaware of Salat ad-Duha in congregation being Prophetic Sunnah. Note Islamic scholarship has stated that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) made the following statements about Salat ad-Duha performed in congregation [with two other reasons]: “Narrated Muwarriq: I asked Ibn `Umar: "Do you offer the Duha prayer [in congregation]?" He replied in the negative. I further asked, "Did `Umar use to pray it [in congregation]?" He (Ibn `Umar) replied in the negative. I again asked, "Did Abu Bakr use to pray it [in congregation]?" He replied in the negative. I again asked, "Did the Prophet use to pray it [in congregation]?" Ibn `Umar replied, "I don't think he did." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H27]“Narrated Mujahid: Urwa bin Az-Zubair and I entered the Mosque (of the Prophet) and saw Abdullah bin Umar sitting near the dwelling place of Aisha and some people were offering the Duha prayer [in congregation]. We asked him about their prayer and he replied that it [in congregation] was an innovation.” [Ref: Bukhari, B27, H4] "It is an innovation [in congregation] and what a fine innovation it is [in congregation]!" [Ref: Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Kitab Of Prayer – Salat ad-Duha, 3] "At the time Uthman was killed no-one considered it desirable and the people did not innovate anything that is dearer to me than that prayer [in congregation]." [Ref: Musannaf Abd Razzaq, Vol3, Pages 78/79] If understanding of Islamic scholarship is correct and your position; Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was aware of Salat ad-Duha in congregation being Prophetic Sunnah than there is contradiction between what you assert and what is established from these Ahadith. And based on the Prophetic teaching of following Jamhoor (i.e. majority), and Sawad al Azam (i.e. group of great majority) these Ahadith are proofs as requested and they refute your position. If He Was Unaware Of It Being Prophetic Sunnah: He is reported to have stated; he does not perform Salat ad-Duha, nor did Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), nor did Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and not his father – Umar Ibn al-Khattab (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performed Salat ad-Duha. And if he made this statement about Salat ad-Duha in congregation than why would he consider it Prophetic Sunnah? Do you believe Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) will state a Prophetic Sunnah was not acted on by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) when he is all too well informed that it is indeed a Prophetic Sunnah? He is a Sahabi and not a Wahhabi that he will lie or distort his religion. He is from the best of Ummah and by Ijmah of Jammah of Muslims a righteous Muslim and he is above such deception. Therefore only logical conclusion can be that he genuinely did not believe Salat ad-Duha of congregation as Prophetic Sunnah. He Learnt It Was Sunnah Latter In Life: You may attempt to argue; he deemed it Salat ad-Duha of congregation as fine/excellent innovation at one stage but later learnt it was Prophetic Sunnah. Even though the assertion that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) during later period of life found out Salat ad-Duha of congregation is Prophetic Sunnah, is unestablished but I feel compelled to address it. Even if this was true you cannot interpret his earlier period position with latter awareness. Suppose a child at the age of three believed Santa Claus was real but later in his teenage years realised it wasn’t the case. Would it be correct to reinterpret his three years of age’s understanding in light of when he was fifteen? Point being made is that if Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed in his latter life, it was Prophetic Sunnah, even then his early lifes statements cannot be reinterpreted to conform to his latter lifes understanding. Rather those statements should be and would be understood in context of his knowledge/belief when he made the statements. In other words Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) statement, Salat ad-Duha is excellent/fine innovation, will be interpreted in his early lifes understanding when he made them. And if he was unaware of them being Prophetic Sunnah than as per the principle his statement was made in Shar’ri sense. Instructs Earlier Statements To Be Interpreted In Light Of Latter: Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was unaware and then learnt Salat ad-Duha of congregation was Prophetic Sunnah latter in his life. And he changed his position and he then instructs everyone: Interpret my earlier statements in such a way that they conform to my latter position. This is hypothetical scenario. Will this mean Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) does not believe in Islam permitting good innovations, or Islam allowing innovation to be introduced into it? Ofcourse not because he has retracted from his erroneous position regarding Salat ad-Duha and has not rejected, disowned the basis (i.e. Islam has created room to allow good innovations to be made part of) on which he made the judgment regarding Salat ad-Duha in congregation being good innovation. Interpreting The Statements In light Of Earlier And Latter Position: Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said regarding Salat ad-Duha of congregation that it is fine/excellent innovation: “Ibn Ulayyah narrated to us, Jarir narrated, al-Hakim bin A'raj narrated; I asked Muhammad about Salat ad-Duha, while he was sitting near the house of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). He said: It is an innovation and what a fine innovation it is!" [Ref: Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Kitab Of Prayer – Salat ad-Duha, 3] And out of all the innovations which originated Salat ad-Duha was most beloved to him: "At the time Uthman was killed no-one considered it desirable and the people did not innovate anything that is dearer to me than that prayer [of Salat ad-Duha in congregation]." [Ref: Musannaf Abd Razzaq, Vol3, Pages 78/79] If his statements are interpreted in light of latter life and his instruction, which I hypothised, then his statements would be in linguistic sense in light of my principle: “Knowing y is Quranic/Prophetic teaching but despite this saying y is excellent/fine innovation. In this context, the y practice which is being called innovation is in Lughvi (i.e. linguistic) sense.” And if his statements are interpreted in light of ealier life during which he believed Salat ad-Duha was not Prophetic Sunnah then it was Shar’ri judgment and this would be in accordance with my other principle: “Believing y is not Prophetic Sunnah and then termining it a good innovation is legal ruling [or in other words, Shar’ri judgment] about an innovation.” And fact is that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) changing his position would not refute the Islamic understanding because it merely establishes he rectified his erroneous which he had about Salat ad-Duha. In other words he still held to the notion Islam allows good innovations to be incorporated into it. And even if he had disavowed the notion that Islam allows good innovation he cannot overrule the Prophetic teaching in this regard:“He who introduces a good Sunnah in Islam, there is a reward for him for this and reward of that also who acted according to it subsequently, without any deduction from their rewards …” [Ref: Muslim, B34, H6466] Conclusion: It is not logical to assume, Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was aware Salat ad-Duha is Prophetic Sunnah, when there is no evidence to establish it and the only ‘evidence’ on which is is assumed establishes nothing other than; it is Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). If Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) had changed his opinion later in his life regarding Salat ad-Duha of congregation not being innovation even then his earlier judgment would be based on Islamic understanding; Islam allows and has introduced provisions to incorporate good innovations into it. And there was/is no evidence that he disavowed this teaching of Islam. And if the, impossible, strikes than the Prophetic principle telling of reward for introducing good Sunnah in Islam is suffient proof against him. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnote: - [1] “Narrated Mujahid: Somebody came to the house of Ibn Umar and told him that Allah's Messenger had entered the Ka`ba. Ibn Umar said, "I went in front of the Ka`ba and found that Allah's Messenger had come out of the Ka`ba and I saw Bilal standing by the side of the gate of the Ka`ba. I said: 'O Bilal! Has Allah's Apostle prayed inside the Ka`ba?' Bilal replied in the affirmative. I said: 'Where?' He replied: 'Between these two pillars and then he came out and offered a two rak`at prayer in front of the Ka`ba.' "Abu Abdullah said: Abu Huraira said: "The Prophet advised me to offer two rak`at of Duha prayer." Itban (bin Malik) said: "Allah's Messenger and Abu Bakr came to me after sunrise and we aligned behind the Prophet and offered two rak`at." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H268]

Introduction: Muslims believe, a witness is he/she who has seen/heard the events unfold in their presence. And it is due to this we believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness on day of judgment because he would have heard/seen the events regarding which he will be called to witness. Contrary to belief of Muslims some believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness without ever having seen/heard the events. And they believe to be a truthfull witness it is not fundamentally important that a person hears/sees events. Instead one can bear witness on account of being informed by truthfull person/people. They present various evidences to justify their un-Islamic notion in order to refute Islamic belief of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent as a Shahid, or hearing/seeing type of witness. Please refer to the following article, it exposes the methodological error for using such evidence, here. 0.0 - Evidence Employed Anti-Islam Eliment: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: "The Messenger of Allah said: 'Whoever performs Wudu' and does it well, then says: " أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا عَبْدُهُ وَرَسُولُهُ" eight gates of Paradise will be opened for him, and he may enter through whichever one he wishes.'" [Ref: Nisai, B1, H148] This Hadith indicates merit of saying after Wudhu:أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا عَبْدُهُ وَرَسُولُهُ . In light of this Hadith there are Muslims who say, I bear witness none is worthy of worship except Allah and I bear witness Muhammad is His servant and Messenger. In our call to prayer (i.e. Azhan) the words narrated are – repetition ommitted -: “Allah is the Greatest! (…) I bear witness that there is none worthy of worship except Allah. (…) I bear witness that Muhammad is the Messenger Allah. (…) Come to the Prayer. (…) Come to the prosperity. (…) Allah is the Most Great. (…) None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B3, H709] The Mu’azzin (i.e. caller), and Muslims generally say: I bear witness none is worthy of worship except Allah (i.e. أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لَا إِلٰهَ إِلَّا ٱلله). And also testify saying: I bear witness Muhammad is Messenger of Allah (i.e. أَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدٌ رَسُولُ ٱلله). 0.1 - Anti-Islamic Reasoning Against Station Of Shahid/Shaheed: The above evidence establishes: To be a truthful witness it is not fundamental requirement to be a first hand witness. A truthful person, bearing witness to a truth, can bear witness to the truth without having seen/heard the events to which he bears witness, despite this his witnessing will considered truthful and is to be accepted. Therefore your belief of Hadhir Nazir is refuted because it is based on principle; to be a truthful witness one must hear/see the events regarding which he will testify. 1.0 – Believing In What Allah And What Prophet Taught: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) instructs the Muslims to believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) in following verse: "Believe in Allah and His Messenger, the unlettered Prophet." [Ref:7:158] "We sent you as a witness and a bringer of good news and a warner so that they might believe in Allah and His Messenger." [Ref: 48:8/9] Other verses of Quran state Muslims are instructed to believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi wa’sallam) and what sent down with him in form of Book: “So believe in Allah and His Messenger and the Qur'an which We have sent down. And Allah is Acquainted with what you do.” [Ref: 64:8] “O you who have believed, believe in Allah and His Messenger and the Book that He sent down upon His Messenger and the Scripture which He sent down before.” [Ref: 4:136] Part of believing in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and in Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and the Quran is to testify; there is no Ilah except Allah, and Prophet Muhammad is Messenger of Allah. 1.1 - The Witnessing Of Muslims To Ilahiyyah: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states: “Say: "What thing is the most great in witness?" Say: "Allah is witness between me and you. This Qur'an has been revealed to me that I may there with warn you and whomsoever it may reach. Can you verily bear witness that besides Allah there are other Alihah (i.e. gods)?" Say "I bear no (such) witness!" Say: "But in truth He is the only one Ilah. And truly I am innocent of what you join in worship with Him." [Ref: 6:19] In another verse Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) gives the instruction for correct answer: “There is no god but He: That is the witness of Allah, His angels, and those endued with knowledge, standing firm on justice. There is no god but He, the Exalted in Power, the Wise." [Ref: 3:18] In this verse there are two types of witnessing indicated: i) witnessing of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) about His Ilahiyyah, ii) witnessing of angels and those who have been enriched with knowledge of Prophet Muhammad revelation (i.e. Quran). Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has bore witness/testified about non-existance of another god beside Him. His witnessing is of hearing/seeing type of witness because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is all-hearing and all-seeing. The angels and men enriched with knowledge they testify/witness to it because they have been instructed to believe in Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), and by the revealed book (i.e. Quran). And in this context the relevent words of call to prayer serves the objective of affirming one’s belief in uniqueness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). 1.2 - The Witnessing Of Muslims To Risalah: Coming to affirmation of Messenger-ship of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Non-Muslims recited, and in following example Thumama Bin Uthal (i.e. Sumamah bin Usal) recited the following phrase to convert to Islam: "I testify that None has the right to be worshipped except Allah, and also testify that Muhammad is His Apostle!” [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H658] And this is indication that testification of such type are mere affirmation of one’s belief in uniqueness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and affirmation of one’s belief; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) chose Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as His Mesenger. In the following verse it is recorded that Munafiqeen bore witness that Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Messenger of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), first Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) bears witness to truth of Prophet Muhammad’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) claim of Messenger-ship, and then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states they, the Munafiqeen, are lieing:“When the hypocrites come to you: They say: "We testify that you are the Messenger of Allah." And Allah knows that you are His Messenger, and Allah testifies that the hypocrites are liars.” [Ref: 63:1] 2.0 – Witnessing Is Connected With Belief: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) connected their witnessing/testifying with their belief, and to be precise lack of belief. The reason given why their testification is termed as lie is given in the following verse: “That is because they believed, and then they disbelieved; so their hearts were sealed over, and they do not understand.” [Ref: 63:3] So Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) rejects their statement, "We testify that you are the Messenger of Allah .", because they believed in Messenger-ship of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and then disbelieved in Islam but continued to pretend that they are Muslims. Expressing the same differently -: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) took their witnessing in meaning of belief as in: "We believe that you are the Messenger of Allah." Yet they had no belief to support their statement so Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) said: “And Allah knows that you are His Messenger, and Allah testifies that the hypocrites are liars.” “That is because they believed, and then they disbelieved; so their hearts were sealed over, and they do not understand.” [Ref: 63:3] This establishes that bearing witness regarding Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), Messengers, or anything else, or to which he/she is not, or cannot be actual eye witness, is witnessing of faith/belief of one’s belief, which we are instructed to affirm by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as Muslims. This would be similar to how the Hawariyoon of Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) testified of their belief: “And when I revealed to Al-Hawariyyun to believe in Me and My Messenger, they said: "We believe. And bear witness that we are muslims." [Ref: 5:111] 3.0 - Truthful Witness And False Witness: If a Muslim states the following believing he is first-hand witness (i.e. hearing/seeing type of witness) then he has bore a false witness: “I bear witness [as a first hand witness] that there is none worthy of worship except Allah. I bear witness [as a first hand witness] that Muhammad is the Messenger Allah.” Note the above statement is completely inaccurate because ‘truthful person’ is bearing witness as a first-hand witness to something which ‘truthful person’ isn’t first-hand witness because it entails hearing/seeing, all, creation, including Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), and His actions.[1] If a person states the following with full knowledge of personal belief and with intention of affirming personal belief then his witnessing is truthful: “I bear witness [with full knowledge and with intention of affirming my belief] that there is none worthy of worship except Allah. I bear witness [with full knowledge and with intention of affirming my belief] that Muhammad is the Messenger Allah.” This statement is absolutely correct because truthful witness is bearing witness about his belief inteachings of Islam. And you will agree anyone who bears witness to the Shahadatayn (i.e. two witnessing) believing he/she is first-hand witness told a odious lie and such witnessing is to be rejected. Truthful witnessing is if a Muslim bears witness to own belief. Substantiating fact is that person uttering these words does not have personal knowledge to qualify him to be a hearing/seeing type of witness hence by default it should be seen as; statement of personal belief, or in other words; witnessing of personal belief. 3.1 – Refuting The Innovated Principle Of Witnessing: The evidence which you employed only establishes there are two possibilities for being a witness when affirming Shahadatayn: i) first-hand witness, ii) bearing witness of one’s own belief. And the one who bears witness to it as a first-hand witness lies and a Muslim who does so affriming his belief in Shahadatayn can only bear witness truth. I quote: “To be a truthful witness it is not fundamental requirement to be a first hand witness.” Your statement is clearly against established and reasoned position because even witnessing of Shahadatayn is first-hand witnessing. Undeniably, to be a truthful witness, one must be first-hand witness regarding events which he/she testifies of. I quote: “A truthful person, bearing witness to a truth, can bear witness to the truth, without having seen/heard the events to which he bears witness, despite this his witnessing will considered truthful and is to be accepted.” First of all this principle is batil (i.e. false) because there is no corraborating evidence to establish this. And the evidence you used does not support it and this was sufficiently demonstrated. Any person, truthful/liar, can bear witness to a truth, such as Shahadatayn, without being first-hand witness and their testimony would be truthful becausee it is of person’s belief. 3.2 – Failure Of Principle – Truthful Witnesses Bearing Witness To Truth: Your principle was interpreted in light of the evidences you employed but your objective was to use this, unestablished/unsubstantiated, principle to negate the validity of Islamic belief of Hadhir Nazir. And this can only be done if your, unestablished/unsubstantiated, principle is for general use, so lets address this principle of yours:“A truthful person, bearing witness to a truth, can bear witness to the truth, without having seen/heard the events to which he bears witness, despite this his witnessing will considered truthful and is to be accepted.”A Hadith records, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told: “A Prophet will come on the Day of Resurrection accompanied by one man, and a Prophet will come accompanied by two men, or more than that. Then his people will be called and it will be said to them: ‘Did this one convey the message to you?’ And they will say: ‘No!’ It will be said to him: ‘Did you convey the message to your people?’ and he will say: ‘Yes.’ It will be said to him: ‘Who will bear witness for you?’” [Ref: Ibn Maajah, B37, H4284] This is completely against your principle which states, witnessing of a truthful person, bearing witness to a truth, without being first-hand witness is truthful, and is to be accepted. Yet this Hadith establishes that a truthful witness, a Prophet of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), who had heard/seen the events as first-hand witness does, testifies in court of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), that he delivered the Message entrusted to him. But Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) the all-knower and all-seer enquires: “Who will bear witness for you?” And in response he would say: “Muhammad and his ummah!” Note when Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) didn’t accept the testimony of a Prophet who had witnessed events he testified about how can you even contemplate He would accept testimony of people who were not first-hand witnesses to the events? According to your principle if testimony is to be accepted then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) should readily accept the testimony of Prophet against his own Ummah. Not only the mentioned Prophet meets all the criterias metnioned in your principle but exceedes the requirement of your principle because he is actual witness. This proves your principle is invalid. 3.3 - A Valid Counter Argument And A Response: You could expand your principle to add the underlined: “… despite this his witnessing will considered truthful and is to be accepted if he is not a party in dispute.” And then argue; he was a party therefore his witnessing was rejected but if he wasn’t a party then even if the mentioned Prophet wasn’t actual witness his testimony will be accepted, and this argument is respectable but your selective application of correct principles isn’t. Firstly, In another article, linked, it was established witnessing required to establish a criminal act is of hearing/seeing type. You cannot apply some of court precedure and reject others after all judgment day is the grandest court to be established to judg disputes. Disputant being unable to bear witness in his/her own defence is to be taken with criteria that truthful witness is one who bears witness of events which has been seen/heard by witness. Secondly, Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is mentioned in Quran as, just/balanced Ummah, as such Ummah will be asked to bear witness in defence of the mentioned Prophet: “’Did this one convey the message to his people?’ They will say: ‘Yes!’ It will be said: ‘How did you know that?’ They will say: ‘Our Prophet came to us and told us that the Messengers had conveyed the message.’” [Ref: Ibn Maajah, B37, H4284] The just nation, the balanced nation of last and final Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness in defence of the mentioned Prophet. And I quote: “A truthful person, bearing witness to a truth, can bear witness to the truth, without having seen/heard the events to which he bears witness, despite this his witnessing will considered truthful and is to be accepted [if he is not a party in dispute].” Now if your principle conformed to teaching of Islam then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) would have accepted their testimony. 3.4 – Prophet Muhammad Bears Witness: But instead Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will ask them, how do you know this Prophet delivered the message and they will say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had informed them. Then Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be called to bear witness in defence of the mentioned Prophet and he will bear witness – as mentioned in following Hadith: “So, I and my followers will stand as witnesses for him.” [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H555] Note the Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness first and then RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness over his own Ummah: “That is the words of Allah, ‘Thus We have made you a just (and the best) nation.’ He said: Just, so that you will be witnesses over mankind and the Messenger will be a witness over you.” (Ref: 2:143) [Ref: Ibn Maajah, B37, H4284] This establishes that if your principle was valid then witnessing would have stopped at the Ummah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) because Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states Ummah as whole is upon justice and balance. Conclusion: We Muslims bear witness to Ilahiyyah and Risalah of RasoolAllah (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) because this is teaching of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) taught by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and it also is Prophetic Sunnah. A truthful witness in Shar’ri terms is one who has seen/heard the events to which he bears witness about. To be an eye witness over the Shahadatayn the requirement is; an individual is able to see/hear all and testify, I bear witness none is worthy of worship except Allah, and be witness of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) appointing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as His Messenger and this is impossible. The only possibility, believable, and true understanding of Shahadatayn is that a person is bearing witness to his/her own belief by saying, أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ وَأَشْهَدُ أَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا عَبْدُهُ. And this witnessing is of first-hand witness. And witnessing is connected with belief as the verses 63:1/3 demonstrate and therefore saying, I testify, is akin to saying, I believe. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnote: - [1] The reason behind this is that to be witness to Wahdaniyyah (i.e. Oneness) of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) as mentioned in, أَشْهَدُ أَنْ لاَ إِلَهَ إِلاَّ اللَّهُ , one must be aware of, all, creation to testify as a first-hand witness. Witness on actions of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) because if one claims that he is first-hand witness then he must have been witness upon the event of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being confered with the role of Messenger of Allah.

Introduction: Just a week ago an article was published responding to one of the best and well thought counter arguments in defense of Shaykh of Najd, here. And a member of the IslamiMehfil forum sent me a private message and requested connection between Dhil Khuwaisirah’s group of Satan and Khawarij should be established and link should be explained to prove they are one and the same. This was something really important because indeed group of Satan being sect of Khawarij has been taken for granted. Also there is indeed mutual agreement between all factions; Khawarij and group of Satan are one and the same sect. And this alone should be suffient because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed to adhere to majority and on this issue there is agreement between entirity of Ummah. So natural the mutual agreement cannot be upon misguidance but as it has been pointed out in the message mutual agreements can be dissmissed has it has happened countless times. Hence it is imperative to establish connection between, what Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) labelled as ‘group of Satan’, and what we later came to know as Khawarij. It is recommended that readers also familiarise with the content of following article as it will be accessory to better understanding this article, here. A Private Message Requesting Explanation: “Salam, brother Muhammed Ali, I am Sunni and Razvi. Just letting you know this in advance so you don’t take what I have to say the wrong way. I have just finished reading your lattest article, here. It was a brilliant response to Salafi’s accusation but there are certain aspects I wish you clarify them. You said Dhul Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi with the group of Satan which you convincingly proved with evidence. From there you stated Dhul Khuwaisirah was from Khawarij. Further on you went to link Wahhabi movement with Dhul Khuwaisirah - in progeny and geneology - part of response. In a bid to prove that Wahhabi movement is also part of Khariji sect. It seems understanding that group of Satan were Khawarij is being taken for granted. So far the Wahhabis nor any other group has denied group of Satan being the sect of Khawarij - maybe due to mutual agreement - but sooner or later someone will question this unestablished connection. And I would like that someone. Could you please provide evidence which establishes group of Satan are Khawarij. Note I am not saying there isn’t connection but I don’t want to take it for granted because mutual agreement would/could be challenged and a position supported by concrete evidence even if challenged can be held with confidence.” [Note: Edited by, MuhammedAli] 0.0 - Dhul Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi From The Region Of Najd: Dhul Khuwaisirah also known as Abdullah and Hurqus Ibn Zuhayr thought Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was unjust in his distribution. Hadith records: “While we were with Allah's Messenger who was distributing there came Dhul Khuwaisira. A man from the tribe of Bani Tamim and said: "O Allah's Messenger! Do Justice." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H807] Note Hadith records Dhul Khuwaisirah belonged to the tribe of Bani Tamim and Hadith indicates Bani Tamim was located on other side of desert of ad-Dahna. Implying between Hijaz and Banu Tamim is desert of ad-Dahna: “Apostle of Allah, he did not ask you for a true border when he asked you. This land of Dahna is a place where the camels have their home, and it is a pasture for the sheep. The women of Banu Tamim and their children are beyond it.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B19, H3064] Please visit following link to see the location of ad-Dahna is in Najd of Arabian Peninsula, here. And then note the location of Banu Tamim in the following map, here. This establishes Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi lived in the region of Najd. 0.1 - Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamim And His Companions: Hadith records: “While we were with Allah's Messenger who was distributing there came Dhul Khuwaisira. A man from the tribe of Bani Tamim and said: "O Allah's Messenger! Do Justice." The Prophet said, "Woe to you! Who could do justice if I did not? I would be a desperate loser if I did not do justice." After Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamim accused of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) of injustice Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) sought permission to kill him. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) refused and informed the audience: “Umar said, "O Allah's Messenger! Allow me to chop his head off." The Prophet said, "Leave him, for he has companions who pray and fast in such a way that you will consider your fasting negligible in comparison to theirs. They recite Qur'an but it does not go beyond their throats and they will desert Islam as an arrow goes through a victim's body.” In other words Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) informed his companions that Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi has companions who are outwardly very pious. He described how they will be identified: “The sign by which they will be recognized is that among them there will be a black man, one of whose arms will resemble a woman's breast or a lump of meat moving loosely. Those people will appear when there will be differences amongst the people." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H807] 0.3 - Group Of Satan In Direction Of East In Region Of Najd: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was invoking Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) on behalf of Sham (i.e. greater Syria), Yemen and a man from Najd persistently requested Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to invoke blessings for Najd and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) responded by saying: "They said again, "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated the same but while facing/pointing toward direction of East: “The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where ‘group of Satan will come out’, or said, ‘the side of the sun’." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: I heard Allah's Apostle while he was facing the East, saying, "Verily! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H213] Note region of Najd is due/precisely in direction of East from Madinah. Regarding this group of Satan to emerge from direction of East and from region of Najd Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “The Prophet said, "There will emerge from the East some people who will recite the Qur'an but it will not exceed their throats and who will go out of (renounce) the religion as an arrow passes through the game, and they will never come back to it unless the arrow, comes back to the middle of the bow (by itself). The people asked, "What will their signs be?" He said, "Their sign will be the habit of shaving.” [Ref: Bukhari, B93, H651] 0.4 - Dhil Khuwaisirah, His Companions, In East And Najd, Are Group Of Satan: Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi and his companions were situated in East of Madinah, and were residents of Najd, and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) described Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamim as well as his companions as group of Satan. This group of Satan will recite Quran but what they read will not reach their heart and they will be recognised by presence of a man with fleshy-hand resembling breast of female and the group as whole will trade mark shaving of their heads. 1.0 - Khawarij And Group Of Satan - Would Recite Quran: Hadith states regarding the group of Satan in direction of East and in region of Najd: The Prophet said, "There will emerge from the East some people who will recite the Qur'an but it will not exceed their throats and who will go out of (renounce) the religion as an arrow passes through the game, and they will never come back to it unless the arrow …” [Ref: Bukhari, B93, H651] “Umar said, "O Allah's Messenger! Allow me to chop his head off." The Prophet said, "Leave him (i.e. Dhil Khuwaisirah)! For he has companions (whom Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam described as group of Satan) who pray and fast in such a way that you will consider your fasting negligible in comparison to theirs. They recite Qur'an but it does not go beyond their throats and they will desert Islam as an arrow goes through a victim's body.” [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H807] And regarding Khawarij a companion was asked and he answered: “Did you hear the Messenger of Allah making a mention of the Khawarij? He said: I heard him say; there would be a people who would recite the Qur'an with their tongues and it would not go beyond their collar bones. They would pass clean through their religion just as the arrow passes through the prey.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2336] Similar Hadith narrates the: “Zaid bin Wahb Juhani reported and he was among the squadron which was under the command of Ali and which set out (to curb the activities) of the Khawarij. Ali said: O people, I heard the Messenger of Allah say: There would arise from my Ummah a people who would recite the Qur'an, and your recital would seem insignificant as compared with their recital, your prayer as compared with their prayer, and your fast, as compared with their fast. They would recite the Qur'an thinking that it supports them, whereas it is an evidence against them. Their prayer does not get beyond their collar bone; they would swerve through Islam just as the arrow passes through the prey.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2333] 1.1 - Khawarij And Group Of Satan – Apparently Righteous: In another Hadith description of group of Satan is given as: “Umar said, "O Allah's Messenger! Allow me to chop his head off." The Prophet said, "Leave him (i.e. Dhil Khuwaisirah)! For he has companions (whom Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam described as group of Satan) who pray and fast in such a way that you will consider your fasting negligible in comparison to theirs.” [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H807] A companion enquired from Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri (radiallah ta’ala anhu); if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold something about Haruriyyah (i.e.Khawarij): "Did you hear the Messenger of Allah mention anything about the Haruriyyah?” In response Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said: “He said: 'I heard him mention a people who would appear to be devoted worshippers: "Such that anyone of you would regard his own prayer and fasting as insignificant when compared to theirs.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H169] 1.2 - Khawarij And Group Of Satan – They Will Become Kafirs: Dhil Khuwaisirah’s group of Satan is described as group of Kufr who will cleanly leave religion of Islam in the following Hadith: “Umar said, "O Allah's Messenger! Allow me to chop his head off." The Prophet said, "Leave him (i.e. Dhil Khuwaisirah)! For he has companions (whom Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam described as group of Satan) who pray and fast in such a way that you will consider your fasting negligible in comparison to theirs. (…) and they will desert Islam as an arrow goes through a victim's. So that the hunter, on looking at the arrow's blade, would see nothing on it; he would look at its Risaf and see nothing: he would look at its Na,di and see nothing, and he would look at its Qudhadh and see nothing (neither meat nor blood), for the arrow has been too fast even for the blood and excretions to smear.” [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H807] Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (radiallah ta’ala anhu) ascribes the same quality to the Khawarij in the following Hadith: “It was narrated that Abu Salamah said: "I said to Abu Sa'eed Khudri: 'Did you hear the Messenger of Allah mention anything about the Haruriyyah (i.e. a sect of Khawarij)?' He said: ... But they will pass through Islam like an arrow passing through its target, then he (the archer) picks up his arrow and looks at its iron head but does not see anything, then he looks at the shaft and does not see anything, then he looks at the band: that which is wrapped around the iron head where it is connected to the shaft, then he looks at the feather and is not sure whether he sees anything or not." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H169] 1.3 – Companions Applied Characteristics of Satan’s Group Upon Khawarij: Companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) applied the Ahadith regarding the group of Satan upon Khawarij. They applied the Ahadith descrbing characteristics of group of Satan such as recitation of Quran without going below collar bones, outward extreme piety that even the companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) would feel embrassed, and going completely out of Islam upon Khawarij. This establishes that companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) understood group of Satan to be sect of Khawarij and they were witnessing the Khawarij and their understanding and application of these descriptions upon Khawarij cannot be wrong. 2.0 - Rightly Guided Caliph Ali Wages War Against Khawarij: Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) reasoned with his followers/army: “You would be marching towards Muawiya and the people of Syria and you would leave them behind among your children and your property (to do harm). By Allah! I believe that these are the people (against whom you have been commanded to fight and get reward) for they have shed forbidden blood, and raided the animals of the people. So go forth in the name of Allah (to fight against them).” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2333] Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) described sign of Khawarij said among the Khawarij will be man with defective hand: “Ubaidah narrated from Ali bin Abu Talib: That he mentioned the Khawarij, and said: "Among them there will be a man with a defective hand, or a short hand, or small hand. If you were to exercise restraint I would tell you of what Allah has promised upon the lips of Muhammed for those who kill them." I said: "Did you hear that from Muhammed?" He said: "Yes, by the Lord of the Ka'bah!' - three times." [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H167] The Khawarij fought army of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) at Naharwan. Their leader Abdullah bin Wahb al-Rasibi instructed them to use swords in the battle and all of them were killed with two casualities on Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) side: “Salama bin Kuhail mentioned that Zaid bin Wahb made me alight at every stage, till we crossed a bridge. Abdullah bin Wahb al-Rasibi was at the head of the Khawarij when we encountered them. He (Abdullah) said to his army: Throw the spears and draw out your swords from their sheaths, for I fear that they would attack you as they attacked you on the day of Harura. They went back and threw their spears and drew out their swords, and people fought against them with spears and they were killed one after another. Only two persons were killed among the people (among the army led by 'Ali) on that day.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2333] The battle resulted in utter anahilation of Khariji army under the command of Abdullah bin Wahb al-Rasibi and afterwards Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) instructed soilders to search for the man with short defective hand – whose hand resembelled female breast and he was a dark-skinned/black skinned man: “'Ubaidullah b. Abu Rafi', the freed slave of the Messenger of Allah said:When Haruria (i.e. the Khawarij) set out and as he was with Ali bin Abu Talib … The most hateful among the creation of Allah is one black man among them. One of his hand is like the teat of a goat or the nipple of the breast. When 'Ali b. Abu Talib killed them, he said: Search (for his dead body). They searched for him, but they did not find it (his dead body). Upon this he said: Go (and search for him). By Allah, neither I have spoken a lie nor has the lie been spoken to me. Ali said this twice and thrice. They then found him (the dead body) in a ditch. They brought body till they placed it infront of him. Ubaidullah said: And, I was present at (that place) when this happened and when Ali said about them. A person narrated to me from Ibn Hanain that he said: I saw that black man.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2334] Following verse was revealed regarding the man with breast like hand: “And among them are men who accuse you in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.” [Ref: 9:58] And this is evident from the following Hadith: “The sign by which these people will be recognized will be a man whose one hand will be like the breast of a woman. These people will appear when there will be differences among the people.” Abu Sa'id added: I testify that I heard this from the Prophet and also testify that Ali killed those people while I was with him. The man with the description given by the Prophet was brought to Ali. The following Verses were revealed in connection with that very person: 'And among them are men who accuse you in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.'” [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] 2.1 - Identifying The Man Regarding Whom Verse 9:58 Was Revealed: It is recorded in Hadith that: “The man with the description given by the Prophet was brought to Ali. The following Verses were revealed in connection with that very person: 'And among them are men who accuse you in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.'” [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] And this man regarding whom the verse was revealed was none other than Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi because he accused Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being unjust in distribution of gold alloy sent by Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) from Yemen: “Narrated Abu Sa'id:While the Prophet was distributing (something) Abdullah bin Dhil Khawaisira At-Tamimi came and said, "Be just, O Allah's Apostle!" The Prophet said,… The sign by which these people will be recognized will be a man whose one hand (or breast) will be like the breast of a woman. These people will appear when there will be differences among the people." Abu Sa'id added: I testify that I heard this from the Prophet and also testify that 'Ali killed those people while I was with him. The man with the description given by the Prophet was brought to 'Ali. The following Verses were revealed in connection with that very person: 'And among them are men who accuse you in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.’” [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] Alhasil the man whom the verse was revealed was Dhil Khuwaisirat at-Tamimi and the description given of a man with breast like hand was of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi’s and he was one of the Khawarij. 2.2 - Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi Connected With The Khawarij: It is recorded in Hadith: “Narrated Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri: While we were with Allah's Messenger who was distributing (something), there came Dhu-l- Khuwaisira, a man from the tribe of Bani Tamim and said, "O Allah's Messenger! Do Justice." The Prophet said, "Woe to you! Who could do justice if I did not? I would be a desperate loser if I did not do justice." `Umar said, "O Allah's Messenger! Allow me to chop his head off." The Prophet said, "Leave him, for he has companions who pray and fast in such a way that you will consider your fasting negligible in comparison to theirs. They recite Qur'an but it does not go beyond their throats (i.e. they do not act on it) and they will desert Islam as an arrow goes through a victim's body, so that the hunter, on looking at the arrow's blade, would see nothing on it; he would look at its Risaf and see nothing: he would look at its Na,di and see nothing, and he would look at its Qudhadh ( 1 ) and see nothing (neither meat nor blood), for the arrow has been too fast even for the blood and excretions to smear. The sign by which they will be recognized is that among them there will be a black man, one of whose arms will resemble a woman's breast or a lump of meat moving loosely. Those people will appear when there will be differences amongst the people." I testify that I heard this narration from Allah's Messenger and I testify that `Ali bin Abi Talib fought with such people, and I was in his company. He ordered that the man should be looked for. The man was brought and I looked at him and noticed that he looked exactly as the Prophet had described him.” [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H807] When Abu Barzah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was asked about Khawarij in order to pin point the identity of Khawarij he narrated the event of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi in which he accused Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) of being unjust in distributing gold alloy: “It was narrated that Sharik bin Shihab said: "I used to wish that I could meet a man among the Companions of the Prophet and ask him about the Khawarij. Then I met Abu Barzah on the day of 'Id, with a number of his companions. I said to him: 'Did you hear the Messenger of Allah mention the Khawarij?' He said: 'Yes. I heard the Messenger of Allah with my own ears, and saw him with my own eyes. Some wealth was brought to the Messenger of Allah and he distributed it to those on his right and on his left, but he did not give anything to those who were behind him. Then a man stood behind him and said: "O Muhammad! You have not been just in your division!" He was a man with black patchy (shaved) hair, wearing two white garments. So Allah's Messenger became very angry and said: "By Allah! You will not find a man after me who is more just than me." Then he said: "A people will come at the end of time; as if he is one of them, reciting the Qur'an without it passing beyond their throats. They will go through Islam just as the arrow goes through the target. Their distinction will be shaving. They will not cease to appear until the last of them comes with Al-Masih Ad-Dajjal. So when you meet them, then kill them, they are the worst of created beings." [Ref: Nisai, B37, H4108] This indicates the Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi was a Khariji and his companions were in fact the group of Khawarij. 2.3 – Putting The Evidence Into Perspective: It was established that Wahb al-Rasibi was the leader of Khawarij who fought Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) at Nahrawan. After the Khawarij were completely anahilated Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) instructed the body of man with hand like a female breast be searched for. He was found amongst the dead of the Khawarij and verse, they accuse you with regards to charity, was revealed concerning this man. Ahadith establish the man accused Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) of injustice with regards to distribution of charity was Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi. Establishing Dhil Khuwaisirah was the man whom Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) described as dark skinned man, shaven head, female breast like hand. Conclusion: Dhil Khuwaisirat at-Tamimi accused Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being unjust in his distribution of gold alloy. This angered Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and he informed the companions that there are others like Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi. Dhil Khuwaisirah belonged to tribe of Banu Tamim and it was situated in East of Madinah and in region of Najd. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) went on to inform his companions that from the direction of East, in region of Najd, group of Satan would emerge. Evidence establishes this group of Satan was none other then Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi. Hadith establishes that Dhil Khuwaisirah was amongst those Khawarij who fought against Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and also points out verse of charity was revealed with regards to him. After the battle Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) instructed his companions to search the dead of Khawarij and body of Dhil Khuwaisirah was found at the bottom of a ditch. In addition to this the companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) applied the Ahadith of group of Satan upon Khawarij indicating they believed group of Satan to emerge from Najd was sect of Khawarij. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Deobandiat kay maulvi kuch bi kar saktay hen, jis firqa kay suttoon farzi kitaben jin ka wujud kabi nah thah Ulamah e Ahle Sunnat say mansoob kar saktay hen un ki agay wali naslen kuch bi kar sakteen hen. Istera ki kitaben, fatway, khutoot, Deobandiat ki char nasalen garti aahi heh aur Musalmanoon say mansoob karti aahi heh. Yeh logh kuch bi kar saktay hen. In kay Maulvi kuch bi kar saktay hen. In kay uqabir toh zaleel huway aur mar gahay aaj kay mojooda dawr mein, Ilyas Ghuman, Ayub Padri and company, Ramzan Nomani, Chan Muhammad, Sadiq Kohati, Hammad Naqshbandi, waghera logh kuch bi kar saktay hen. In bandoon kay dil itnay murda hen aur itnay murda zameer logh hen yeh logh apnay mazhab ko pehlanay ki khatir jhoot ko be jaiz samajtay hen. Mujjay itna kamil yaqeen heh kay agar in ko kohi 25'00'000 rupaya deh aur kahay kay apni behan beti biwi raat kay wastay deh doh yeh special offer kay tor par ek raat free bi saath deh denh. In logoon mein bhot esay kam maulvi hen jinoon nay alimana waqaar ko majrooh nah keeya ho esi harkatoon say. Joh in kay sakhtreen mukhalifeen mein say thay inoon nay un kay naam say khutoot gar kay ya logoon ki jahalat say faida uthatay huway apna maslak bataya aur joh naslen peechay aaheen unoon nay apnoon ka itbar keeya aur mukhalifeen ko bi apna hi bataya. Allah ta'ala esay bandoon ko kabi hidayat nahin deh ga. Ek banda la-ilmi ki waja say kissi kay mutaliq kohi ghalt nazria rakhay aur baat heh magar in kay munazireen hazrat jaan booj kar ibaraat aadi quote kartay hen ... jis say in kay dil ki handeri ka andaza lagaya ja sakta heh.

Molana Abdul Jabbar Shakir (Ahle Hadith), Allamah Saeed Ahmad Assad kay haath Sunni huway hen, link.

https://www.scribd.com/document/323030644/Muhasiba-e-Deobandiyat-Bajawab-Mutala-e-Brailviyat-Part-1 https://www.scribd.com/document/323014811/Muhasiba-e-Deobandiyat-Bajawab-Mutala-e-Brailviyat-Part-2

Salam alayqum, Pehli baat Shaykh Ul Hadith, Allamah Ashraf Sialvi (rahimullah), kay naam kay saath un ki shaan kay layk alqabaat likhen. Dosri baat Ulamah e Ahle Sunnat kay darmiyan joh ikhtilafat hen un ko awaam mein beth kar mat discuss keren. Tesri baat, Allamah Ashraf Sialvi (rahimullah) ka mowaqif us ikhtilaf mein darust nahin thah aur joh un kay khilaf Ulamah thay woh khadim ki samaj kay mutabiq haq par thay. Ikhtilafaat ko khatam honeh denh. In ko discuss kar kar kay phelahen mat. Koshish keren joh Sunni Ulamah mein ikhtilafat hen un ko ikhtilaf peda karnay walay aur ikhtilaaf ko muqabileh mein kharay honay waloon kay saath qabroon mein dafna denh. Ahle Sunnat mein ittihad qaim karnay ki koshish mein lagen aur jin kay khilaaf Jihad ki zeroorat heh udhar tawajoh keren apnay hi ikhtilafat mein esay mat gussen kay dushman Deobandi aur Wahhabi aap ki shalwaren hawa mein lehtrata pheray aur aap ko pata bi nah chalay.

Salam alayqum, Allamah Sufi Muhammad Allah Ditta Sahib rehmatullah nay, Tabreed an-Nawazir kay jawab mein Tanweer Al Khawatir likhi. Aur Tafreeh Al Khawatir kay jawab mein Tanween Al Khawatir likhi heh. Agar kissi kay pass in do kitaboon kay nuskha mojood hen toh in ko upload kar deh. Allah ta'ala aap ko jaza e khayr deh. - Tanween Al Khawatir, bajawab Tafrih Al Khawatir, - Iqrar e Ilm Ghayb Bajawab Izharul Aaib, by Muhammad Jahangir Naqshbandi

Introduction: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a Shahid/Shaheed in meaning of hearing/seeing type of witness. The opponents of Islam reject and argue against this belief on account that witnessing does not require him to be first hand witness. Rather Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) can bear witness without being an actual witness. They believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness on judgment day upon being informed by members of his Ummah. To substantiate their position they quote various evidences which indicate person/people bearing witness without having to see/hear anything of the event. This short article, if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills, will expose the error of their methodology and in-appropriateness of their evidence. Two Types Of Witnessing: There are two types of events to which a Muslim can bear witness, the external and the internal. External witnessing involves sight/sound and it involves an event being heard/seen by an individual. And then this individual bears witness in court recollecting from memory what was seen and heard. The second type, the internal, witnessing is based on knowledge. Knowledge derived from senses, other then eye/ear, without external event, which involves ability of self assessment and then declaration of what was found internally. Situational Appropriate Witnessing: First type of witnessing - or external – involves yourself/another, and always involves an event unfolding, visually/audibly, which you/another can see/hear. This type of witnessing requires being first hand witness to bear truthful witness in court of law and in this context the greatest court of law, aka judgment day. And it is connected with crime/sin and punishment aspect of law of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And the one who does not meet this criterion is not truthful witness. The second type - internal - witnessing involves no audible/visual event, nor it involves another person, it is strictly about one’s oneself. And the type of witnessing involves personal belief to which none can be witness with their eyes/ears. The one who can bear witness about his own belief/faith is the person’s self. Abdul Wahid cannot bear witness about the true state of belief of Abdullah. He can bear witness to what Abdullah declares. The true knowledge of belief/faith of Abdullah, only Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and Abdullah know. The internal type of witnessing is for declaring personal belief, and it cannot be used, and is not used in criminal trials. Hadhir Nazir And The Two Types Of Witnessing’s: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness regarding the actions of his Ummah and the actions of previous nations on judgment day as established in the Quran and Ahadith. And as per rule the type of witness required is - external witness - one who is has heard/seen the events as a first hand witness. Any witnessing of - internal witness – is not acceptable because individual/people are bearing witness about their personal beliefs/convictions which they have. Conclusion: In Islam there are two types of witnessing’s, a type which is related to court, crime, and punishment. And this witnessing requires one bearing witness about actions/events does so after audibly or visually witnessing the details of events. In context of court - bearing witness when person has not seen/heard the events, but has bore witness after being informed by another, such a person is not truthful witness. One who bears witness of his inner belief/faith, does so based on the first hand knowledge, which none can have other than the person, making the statement. And such witnessing is not and was never binding in court. The required type of witnessing for ciminal activity and for punishment is first hand witnessing. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Recently five articles on subject of Salat ad-Duha were presented on the IslamiMehfil forum, here, here, here, here, and here. In these articles position presented was; Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed Salat ad-Duha holistically was an innovation and not a prophetic Sunnah. A Sunni brother directed my attention toward what classical era scholars of Ahlus Sunnah have stated in this regard; Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) has made these statements about performing of Salat ad-Duha in congregation, here, which contradicted my position. After investigating what the scholars of Islam have stated on this topic it was realised position maintained in the articles is of minority. And matter of principle for Muslims is to hold to understanding of majority. This article is an attempt to re-address and establish what Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed in light of teaching of Islamic scholarship. And if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits this article will attone for the error. What Transpired And Where The Mistake Was Made: My understanding of Abdullah Ibn Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) belief was based on literal reading of Ahadith presented in, Ibn Umar Believed Salat ad-Duha To Be An Innovation, of linked, article. Objective was to employ the apparent text of Ahadith and ignore the detail because it would not effect the foundation of Islamic argument.[1] And when it was established Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said to have performed Salat ad-Duha on two ocasions even then I held to my initial judgment because the justification established against this Hadith seemed sound and reasonably justifiable. And it was argued that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not perform Salat ad-Duha [as Prophetic Sunnah and] with intention of performing Salat ad-Duha but merely acted on other Sunnahs of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and evidence of those Sunnahs was presented in the, article. After investigation it was realised the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah have stated Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed Salat ad-Duha is Prophetic Sunnah and the Ahadith in which Salat ad-Duha is being said to be good innovation is regarding a particular aspect and not entirity of Salat ad-Duha. And to compound the means of guidance Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) made it clear that position adopted by me is of insignificant minority. And in adopting my position I also comprimised my long held principle to practice reconciliation between difficult Ahadith – which I did with contradictory Ahadith of Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) - instead of preferrence of a Hadith over the other. What Persuaded Me To Rethink And Change My Initial Position: After re-evaluating the evidence and subject matter as whole I have come to regret the initial judgment due to three reasons: i) due to realisation that to believe a Sahabi like of Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu), did not know Salat ad-Duha is fundamentally a Prophetic Sunnah, is to over stretch, lack of knowledge hypothesis, especially for someone who lived in Madinah. ii) And distrusting narrator of Hadith who attributed performing of Salat ad-Duha to Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anh) on two occasions for no justifiable reason. iii) And importantly the vast majority of Islamic scholarship - the Jamhoor (i.e. majority), the Sawad Al Azam (i.e. greath majority, largest group) whom we are instructed to follow in disputes – believes Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not believe Salat ad-Duha is an absolute innovation but believed aspects of it were innovation in his understanding. Ibn Umar Performed Salat ad-Duha On Two Ocasions: It is narrated that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not perform Salat ad-Duha on any other occasion except on two occasions: “… whenever he reached Mecca; and he always used to reach Mecca in the forenoon (i.e. al-Duha). He would perform Tawaf round the Ka`ba and then offer two rak`at at the rear of Maqam Ibrahim.” And the second occasion is Masjid Al Quba: “Whenever he visited Quba, for he used to visit it every Saturday. When he entered the Mosque, he disliked to leave it without offering a prayer.“ And note he only performed Salat ad-Duha individually at these two locations because he deemed performing Salat ad-Duaha as such a Prophetic Sunnah and practice of his companions: "I do only what my companions used to do and I don't forbid anybody to pray at any time during the day or night except that one should not intend to pray at sunrise or sunset." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H283] And from this Hadith we take that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) must have believed performing Salat ad-Duha in Masjid Haram, and Masjid Quba, individually is Prophetic Sunnah, and performing Salat ad-Duha was only for these two Masajid, and for this reason he only performed it in these two Masajid. Ahadith Of Salat ad-Duha Being Innovation And Their Explanation: It was reported that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said: “Mujahid reported: I and 'Urwah b. Zubair entered the mosque and found 'Abdullah b. 'Umar sitting near the apartment of A'ishah and the people were observing the forenoon prayer. We asked him about their prayer, and he said: It is an innovation.” [Ref: Muslim, B7, H2883] Islamic scholars have stated Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said; it is innovation because it was performed in congregation. And I am also of opinion that Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) said Salat ad-Duha was [good] innovation because Salat ad-Duha was performed in Masjid an-Nabvi on a day which was not Saturday. Implication of all this would be; fundamentally, Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) deemed Salat ad-Duha to be a Prophetic Sunnah, if it was performed individually, in one of the two Masajid, and on Saturday as established from following Hadith: “Ibn `Umar never offered the Duha prayer except on two occasions: (1) whenever he reached Mecca; and he always used to reach Mecca in the forenoon (i.e. al-Duha). He would perform Tawaf round the Ka`ba and then offer two rak`at at the rear of Maqam Ibrahim. (2) Whenever he visited Quba, for he used to visit it every Saturday. When he entered the Mosque, he disliked to leave it without offering a prayer.“ [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H283] And if it was performed in any other Masjid, on any other day, in congregation, then Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) would deem it to be an innovation. Ahadith In Which Salat Ad-Duha Is Said To Be Excellent Innovation: He said the Salat ad-Duha being performed in Masjid an-Nabvi is fine/excellent innovation: “Ibn Ulayyah narrated to us, Jarir narrated, al-Hakim bin A'raj narrated; I asked Muhammad about Salat ad-Duha, while he was sitting near the house of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). He said: It is an innovation and what a fine innovation it is!" [Ref: Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Kitab Of Prayer – Salat ad-Duha, H3] And in another Hadith it is stated that Salat ad-Duha is dear to Abdullah Ibn Umar: "At the time Uthman was killed no-one considered it desirable and the people did not innovate anything that is dearer to me than that prayer." [Ref: Abd ar-Razzaq, Book Salat (No.2), Chap al-Duha, H4868] Note he reffered to Salat ad-Duha performed in Masjid Nabvi as an excellent innovation and his judgment could be due to multiple reasons – for being performed in congregation, in Masjid Nabvi, and day other than Saturday. The bottom line is in light of Hadith he deemed it fine/excellent innovation for one, two, or for all three reasons. Innovated ad-Duha Prohibited/Evil Or Permitted/Good Innovation: Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) would not consider impermissible to perform Salat ad-Duha if it was performed; at home, or in Masjid, or individually, or privately, or daily, or irregularly, or regularly, or in congregation becasuse he believed all worship is permissible including Salat ad-Duha except worship performed at prohibited times: "I do only what my companions used to do and I don't forbid anybody to pray at any time during the day or night except that one should not intend to pray at sunrise or sunset." [Ref: Bukhari, B21, H283] Alhasil in light of Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performing Salat ad-Duha on two occasions, and acting on what his companions acted, it can be said he would deem all form of practice of Salat ad-Duha as fine/excellent innovations except which he practiced. And as a general rule he would deem all forms of Salat ad-Duha as innovations if they did not meet his criteria of Prophetic Sunnah form of Salat ad-Duha – which is that it should be performed on Saturday, in Masajid of Haram/Quba, and individually. Extra Detail Has No Effect On Fundamental Position: Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performing Salat ad-Duha on two occasions and following Ahadith of Salat ad-Duha being declared fine innovation, dearer innovation were/are being employed to establish; he believed Islam teaches and allows good innovations to be made part of it: “Mujahid reported: I and 'Urwah b. Zubair entered the mosque and found 'Abdullah b. 'Umar sitting near the apartment of A'ishah and the people were observing the forenoon prayer. We asked him about their prayer, and he said: It is an innovation.” [Ref: Muslim, B7, H2883] “Ibn Ulayyah narrated to us, Jarir narrated, al-Hakim bin A'raj narrated; I asked Muhammad about Salat ad-Duha, while he was sitting near the house of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). He said: It is an innovation and what a fine innovation it is!" [Ref: Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Kitab Of Prayer – Salat ad-Duha, H3] "At the time Uthman was killed no-one considered it desirable and the people did not innovate anything that is dearer to me than that prayer." [Ref: Abd ar-Razzaq, Book Salat (No.2), Chap al-Duha, H4868] The scholars have stated Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) declared performing of Salat ad-Duha, in congregation, or in Masjid, to be fine innovation. Note this additional detail does not effect main argument which was that Islam allows innovations and it is not effected because Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) still believes an aspect of Salat ad-Duha is good innovation in context of Hadith. Re-Interpreting My Material In The Light Of Current Position: In the mentioned articles where ever belief of Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is stated please insert the following words in square brackets – one, two, or all three: [in congregtion], or [in Masjid other than Masajid of Haram/Quba], or [on any other day than Saturday]. Footnote two demonstrates how it can be and should be inserted into the text of four articles. Please do note there is no guarantee these additions will perfectly fit into all the articles. After all these insertions are being suggested to reconcile articles with my current belief. In other words, these words in brackets are suggested to cover up my error and redirect them toward straight path. But I am confident my writing style allows such Taweels to be made. And where ever it is not possible to reconcile the words of brackets with the context then please stick to the original material and appreciate the fundamental point – Islam allows good innovations – while acknowledging error was made by me regards to presenting Ibn Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) correct position on Salat ad-Duha. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills all these articles will be reworked in due time but not until the Khariji student is informed of change of heart and not until he has his say on the issue. Conclusion: Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not believe Salat ad-Duha is fundamentally an innovation invented by companions of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but he believed it is Prophetic Sunnah which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) observed when he travelled to Masjid Quba and Masjid Haram. He believed to perform Salat ad-Duha apart from these two Masajid and as it was practiced by his companions something which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu), his father Umar Ibn al-Khattab (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not do and therefore he did not perform Salat ad-Duha in: congregation, daily, publically, at home, in Masjid Nabvi or in any other Masjid, regularly, daily, irregularly. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] Suppose a companion believes raising the hands (i.e. rafa ul yadayn) while going into Ruku, coming out of Ruku, going into Sajdah, coming out of Sajdah is innovation but in the beginning of Salah Rafa ul Yadayn is Sunnah. Regarding Rafa Ul Yadayn companion also is on record for saying, its good innovation, and dearest innovation. A Muslim employs his statements to argue he believed Islam allows/recognises good innovations and permits introduction of them into Islam. Let me illustrate this with examples – the basic statements: 1) Rafa Ul Yadayn is innovation. 2) Rafa Ul Yadayn is good innovation. And the statements with details built into them: 1) Rafa Ul Yadayn [while going into Ruku, coming out of Ruku, going into Sajdah, coming out of Sajdah] is innovation. 2) Rafa Ul Yadayn [while going into Ruku, coming out of Ruku, going into Sajdah, coming out of Sajdah] is good innovation. Please note despite the addition of detail the fundamental point hasn’t changed nor the argument has been affected. To establish Islam permits good innovations the Muslim does not need to get into technical details of what he deemed innovation and what he deemed Prophetic Sunnah. Just the statement, Rafa Ul Yadayn is an innovation, or Rafa Ul Yadayn is good innovation, is enough to argue and to establish the point. - [2] Introduction: There is evidence to suggest Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) did not deem Salat ad-Duha [in congregation] as a Prophetic Sunnah. Instead Ahadith record he believed it was a innovation and a practice which did not exist during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) nor in the life of first two rightly guided successors of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). He is reported to have said Salat ad-Duha [in congregation] is a fine innovation. Ibn Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) this statement allows Muslims to deduce that Islam has room for good/fine innovations which the opponents of Muslims reject and choose to disbelieve. Please do note; we Muslims believe Salat ad-Duha is a Prophetic Sunnah and Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was not witness to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performing Salat ad-Duha [in congregation]. Salat ad-Duha Prophetic Sunnah: In a Hadith it is stated Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) so dutifully performed Salat ad-Duha which lead the companions to believe he would not leave it. And then left it for long periods of times leading them to think he will not perform it again: … In another Hadith Abu Huraira (radiallah ta’ala anhu) narrated Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) instructed him engage in three actions – one of which was two Rak’at of Salat ad-Duha: … Following Ahadith record the number of Rak’at performed and how many he would perform at a time: … Ahadith also narrate benefits of performing Salat ad-Duha but these Ahadith are of questionable grading. And Muhaditheen employ principle; weak Ahadith are strengthened if there are multiple chains for it, which is true for these Ahadith. And Ulamah also employ principle, weak Ahadith which mention merits of an action are usable. In this context regular practice of Salat ad-Duha will amount to forgiveness of innumerable sins, and according to another Hadith, in Paradise Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will build palace of gold for practioner of Salat ad-Duha. Salat ad-Duha An Innovation According To Aysha: In a Hadith Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) is reported to have said; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed Salat ad-Duha after returning from a journey: … Note she stated, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not perform Salat ad-Duha and then affirmed it for him saying he performed it after he returned from a journey. This indicates questioner inquired if Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performed Salat ad-Duha regularly and she negated this. And then felt the need to specify when Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) perform it. She is also reported to have said: … Again her negation is in context of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performing Salat ad-Duha regularly and her saying she performs Salat ad-Duha is in context of regularly performing Salat ad-Duha. From this it becomes apparent she deemed regular practice of Salat ad-Duha as something which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has not done. Ibn Umar Believed Salat ad-Duha To Be An Innovation: Ahadith record Abdullah Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was asked if he himself, and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), Abu Bakr (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) performed Salat ad-Duha, and he replied in negative: … Ibn Umar’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) answer naturally implies Salat ad-Duha [in congregtion] is an innovation. Sahih Bukhari and Muslim each record Hadith in which he is explicitly as been reported to have said, Salat ad-Duha is an innovation: … Following Hadith establishes Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) deemed it to be a good innovation: … Yet in another Hadith it is stated; Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) deemed Salat ad-Duha [in congregtion] to be an innovation and it was very dear/loved by him: … Note this Hadith indicates Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) might have started to practice Salat ad-Duha. And after realising its goodness it became dear/beloved to him. Words Of Prophet Regarding Good Innovative Sunnahs: Statements of Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) establishes that he believed in evil innovations and good innovations. And he deemed Salat ad-Duha [in congregtion] to be good innovation which was dear to him. This also establishes that companions did not believe absolutely every innovation is misguidance but believed innovations which conformed to Prophetic teaching can be good. Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was aware performing Salat ad-Duha [in congregtion] conformed to Prophetic teaching according to which Nawafil can be performed in all times except the prohibited times of sunrise/sunset and this is evident from his words: … Regarding good innovations Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: … Note in the Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not say, he who introduces my good Sunnah of Islam. This would have indicated; reward is for a Sunnah which is already part of Islam as Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “He who introduces …” implication of which is; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is referring to every Muslim who introduces his own Sunnah. And then says: “… introduces a good Sunnah in Islam …” Meaning introduces a Sunnah in Islam which is not already part of Islam. Alhasil, Hadith indicates Sunnah for which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told of reward is not already part of Islam and is not Sunnah of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) but Sunnah of Muslim who issues it. And this is precisely the meaning of word innovation and following Hadith also corroborates that the reward is for innovated good Sunnah: … And Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) judged the issue of Salat ad-Duha [in congregtion] being good innovation on basis of these Ahadith.anhu) judged the issue of Salat ad-Duha being good innovation on basis of these Ahadith. Conclusion: Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) has narrated Ahadith according to which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did and did not perform Salat ad-Duha. Principle of Muhaditheen is that which attests takes precedence over that which negates. And therefore those Ahadith which establish Salat ad-Duha being Prophetic Sunnah are to be preferred over those Ahadith of her which negate it. In addition contradicting Ahadith can be reconciled; ones which negate are negating regular practice and those Ahadith which attest to Salat ad-Duha being Prophetic Sunnah are regarding Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performing Salat ad-Duha after returning from journey or reaching a destination. This leads to conclusion in context of her that she practiced Salat ad-Duha regularly which she believed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not do. Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) believed Salat ad-Duha [in congregtion] [in Masjid other than Masajid of Haram/Quba] [on any other day than Saturday] was not performed by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) nor by the first two Khulafah and therefore he did not perform it. And based on this he deemed Salat ad-Duha [in congregtion] to be an innovation and a good innovation which was dear to him. He was unaware of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) performing Salat ad-Duha [in congregtion] and this led him to deem it innovation. His statements cannot be valid evidence to negate the established status of Salat ad-Duha but his statements do establish he believed in Islam there is room for and there is permission to introduce good innovations.” [Ref: Ibn Umar's Statement Regarding Salat ad-Duha Establishes He Believed Shar'ri Good Innovations Are Legitimate In Islam, here]

Introduction: The vast majority Muslim scholarship are of understanding that Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab, the founder of Wahhabi sect, and all adherents of this sect in any form or label are an off-shoot of Khariji apostasy. And this understanding is fully in accordance with teaching of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Number of articles were written in which Islamic position was established with backing of Ahadith. But a Salafi/Wahhabi brother wrote an angry email in which he protested the innocence of Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab and argued that Ahadith of Khawarij were wrongfully applied to him. 0.0 - The Ahadith Of Najd Subject Of This Disscussion: “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: (The Prophet) said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen." People said, "Our Najd as well." The Prophet again said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said again, "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: I heard Allah's Apostle while he was facing the East, saying, "Verily! Afflictions are there, from the side where group of Satan will come out." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H213] 0.1 - His Position In Shortest Expression: I) The Ahadith which predict emergence of horn (or group) of Satan from Najd are regarding Iraq and Khawarij which emerged from Iraq. II) Even if these Ahadith are imposed on central Arabia, or Saudi province of Najd, area surrounding Saudi capital Riyadh, even then these Ahadith are to be applied upon Khawarij of Iraq who were supported by members of Banu Tamim. And this establishes that Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab is free of blame of being Khariji. 0.2 - The Role Of Banu Tamim In First Khariji Uprising: Muslim scholars are of the opinion that Khawarij from Banu Tamim marched from Saudi Arabian region of Najd [area surrounding Riyadh] to Syria and after falling out with Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) returned with his army to Iraq but camped at Harura and later Nahrawan.Where they fought against rightly guided Khalifah Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Amongst these Kharijis of Banu Tamim was Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi, the Najdi. Keeping this Islamic position in mind the Salafi brother stated: “Even if these Ahadith are imposed on central Arabia, on Saudi province of Najd, area surrounding Saudi capital Riyadh, even then these Ahadith are to be applied upon Khawarij of Iraq who were supported by members of Banu Tamim.” Indicating he is assuming this position for sake of argument but does not actually believe this. And for his benefit and others like him, if Allah permits, the Islamic position will be established with sound reasoning and evidence in the following sections but as a starter refer to, here. 0.3 - What Is Being Said In The Argument: Brother connected tribe of Banu Tamim to Riyadh, and Tamimi’s to Khawarij of Iraq, because this would establish, Khawarij emerged from Najd, and marched to Syria and than to Iraq from Najd, long before Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab. And due to this; the condition of Ahadith were fulfilled before birth of Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab and to be specific in life time of Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). And therefore by default Shaykh of Najd is innocent of being part of Khariji sect. And to be honest this argument (II) is a very potent argument. It demonstrates brother had evaluated arguments presented against his belife and argued his case with sound deductive tools. This is by far the most academic argument presented in defence of Shaykh of Najd. But it is in vain and does nothing to vindicate the Shaykh nor those who follow his footsteps. 0.4 - Systematic Steps Leading To Refutation Of Second Argument: In order to successfully and comprehensively refute second argument. And to establish Islamic position that Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab was indeed from group of Satan aka Khawarij: Firstly - It needs to be established that Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi and his companions existed in Arabian province of Najd in during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa alahi was’sallam) referred to them as group of Satan, aka Khawarij. Secondly - They went to Syria with army of Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) to fight against Amir ul-Momineen Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). And they disagreed with Hadhrat Ali’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) decision of arbitration and were disenchanted with him. Thirdly - They returned to Iraq and camped at Harura then Nahrawan and fought against Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and the Iraqi’s killed the Khawarij. Fourthly - Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi and his companions were killed in Iraq [and not Khawarij to emerge from his progeny]. Fifthly - Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold of two groups of Satan would emerge from land of Banu Rabia and Banu Mudhar [situated in East of Madinah, in region of Najd]. Sixthly - Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told from posterity/descendents of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi a group will arise [again]. Seventhly - Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab is considered Khawarij to emerge from progeny/posterity of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi and not from his companions. Eightly – If Hadith of group of Satan emerging for Najd means man power of Najd would appear from Najd or a sect would appear from Najd. Finally – How these steps establish charge levelled against Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab will be concluded in accordance established facts. 1.0 – First Argument - Khawarij Toward Sunrise/East, And In Najd: Prophet (sallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was by the side of pulpitof Masjid Nabvi and pointed out direction from which the group of Satan will emerge: “The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where ‘group of Satan will come out’, or said, ‘the side of the sun’." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] "Verily, afflictions (will start) from here" pointing towards the east; "whence the side of the group of Satan comes out." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H714] Another Hadith establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was pointing toward the house of Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha) to indicate the precise direction of East: “Narrated 'Abdullah: The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointing to 'Aisha's house, he said thrice, "Affliction (will appear from) here," and, "from the side, where Satan's group will come out." [Ref: Bukhari, B53, H336] Alhasil from pulpit to East and East in direction of Hadhrat Aysha’s (radiallah anha) house is precisely toward Saudi capital Riyadh and toward the birth town Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab [Uyaynah], and toward missionary centre activity centre [Dir’riyyah]. This fact has been depicted on the maps in following article, here. And this area is precisely the Najd regarding which Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold group of Satan will emerge from it: “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: (The Prophet) said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen." People said, "Our Najd as well." The Prophet again said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said again, "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] Following two articles depict where Najd is; here and here. 1.1 – Grounds Of Refution And Rejection Of First Argument: In an attempt to point the region from which group of Satan was to emerge Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had pointed toward house of Hadhrat Aysha (radiallah ta’ala anha). That is to say, he pointed toward East, and pointed toward the region of Najd. Hence Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab cannot excluded from being leader of group of Satan on grounds; intended Najd is Iraq and therefore Ahadith of Najd apply upon Khawarij of Iraq. Because Ahadith have indicated a precise direction and a region. And both, the name of Najd and direction of East cannot be applied to Iraq.Therefore the argument by Najd Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) intended Iraq is invalid. And nautrally Ahadith of Najd can be applied to the group of Khawarij which were to appear from Iraq. This leaves me with argument number two and to refute this argument evidence on which it is based needs to be explained properly. 2.0 – The Origin Of Khawarij: Evidence establishes Dhil Khuwaisirah and his companions even existed during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’salam) because when permission was sought to kill Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had stated he has companions: “… While the Prophet was distributing (war booty – raw gold) one day, Dhul Khawaisira, a man from the tribe of Bani Tamim, said, "O Allah's Apostle! Act justly." The Prophets said, "Woe to you! Who else would act justly if I did not act justly?" 'Umar said (to the Prophet ), "Allow me to chop his neck off." The Prophet said, "No, for he has companions (who are apparently so pious that) if anyone of (you compares his prayer with) their prayer, he will consider his prayer inferior to theirs, and similarly his fasting inferior to theirs, ... Abu Sa`id added, "I testify that I heard that from the Prophet, and also testify that I was with Ali when Ali fought against those people.” [Ref: Bukhari, B73, H184] And in another Hadith following is narrated: “Leave him, for he has companions, and if you compare your prayers with their prayers and your fasting with theirs, you will look down upon your prayers and fasting, in comparison to theirs. Yet they will go out of the religion as an arrow darts through the game's body in which case, …” [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] So the Khawarij already existed in Arabia. 2.1 - Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamim In Najd: Where were the companions of Dhil Khuwaisrah at-Tamimi? They were in province of Najd during the life of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam). Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “The Prophet stood up beside the pulpit and said, "Afflictions are there! Afflictions are there, from the side where ‘group of Satan will come out’, or said, ‘the side of the sun’." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H212] "Verily, afflictions (will start) from here" pointing towards the east; "whence the side of the group of Satan comes out." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H714] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) refused to supplicate for people of Najd and he explains why: “Narrated Ibn 'Umar: (The Prophet) said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and our Yemen." People said, "Our Najd as well." The Prophet again said, "O Allah! Bless our Sham and Yemen." They said again, "Our Najd as well." On that the Prophet said, "There will appear earthquakes and afflictions, and from there will come out the side of the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B17, H147] “The people said, "O Allah's Apostle! And also on our Najd." I think the third time the Prophet said, "There (in East) is the place of earthquakes and afflictions and from there comes out the group of Satan." [Ref: Bukhari, B88, H214] Important note, during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) Islam did not reach Iraq nor Iraq was conquered: “Iraq will be conquered and some people will migrate (from Medina) and will urge their families and those who will obey them to migrate although Medina will be better for them; if they but knew." [Ref: Bukhari, B30, H99] Therefore the people who requested Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to supplicate for Najd could not have been residents of Iraq. But Najd was conquered by Islamic armies and its inhabitants had accepted Islam. The Najd of Hadith in dicussion is in the direction of East from Madinah, here. Detailed information with numerous old and new maps in connection to Najd can be accessed in the following articles, here. The native lands of Banu Tamim to which Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamim belonged to is said to be on otherside of ad-Dahna: “Apostle of Allah, he did not ask you for a true border when he asked you. This land of Dahna is a place where the camels have their home, and it is a pasture for the sheep. The women of Banu Tamim and their children are beyond it.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B19, H3064] Ad-Dahna is name of dessert in Najd to certify please see the following map, here. And following map depicts Banu Tamim with other tribes, here, here. 2.2 – Conclusion: Khuwaisirah And His Sect Is Group Of Satan’s From Najd: Based on the bare facts: Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamim belonged to tribe of Banu Tamim. Najd is East of Madinah and, native land of Bani Tamim is Najd, Dhil Khuwaisirah and his companions existed during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) -: It can be concluded Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed toward East, in direction of Najd, and told of group of Satan, meaning Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamim and his followers/companions. 3.0 – Group Of Satan Appeared In Syria At Battle Of Siffeen: In the following Hadith it is same Dhil Khuwaisirah who charged Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) of distributing war booty unjustly and also take note Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has told when his group would emerge: “While we were with Allah's Messenger who was distributing there came Dhul Khuwaisira. A man from the tribe of Bani Tamim and said: "O Allah's Messenger! Do Justice." The Prophet said, "Woe to you! Who could do justice if I did not? I would be a desperate loser if I did not do justice." In one Hadith Khalid Ibn Walid and in the following Hadith Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) sought permission to kill Dhil Khuwaisirah but Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not give permission: “Umar said, "O Allah's Messenger! Allow me to chop his head off." The Prophet said, "Leave him, for he has companions who pray and fast in such a way that you will consider your fasting negligible in comparison to theirs. They recite Qur'an but it does not go beyond their throats and they will desert Islam as an arrow goes through a victim's body.” Than Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) goes on to give description of how they will be identified: “The sign by which they will be recognized is that among them there will be a black man, one of whose arms will resemble a woman's breast or a lump of meat moving loosely. Those people will appear when there will be differences amongst the people." [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H807] According to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi and his group would appear as a sect and group near to truth would kill them [and army of Ali radiallah ta’ala anhu killed them at Nahrawan – see H807]: “Abu Sa'id al-Khudri reported that the Messenger of Allah said: A group would secede itself (from the Ummah) when there would be dissension among the Muslims. Out of the two groups who would be nearer the truth would kill them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2325] And another Hadith states the sect [of Dhil Khuwaisirah] will leave one of two Muslim parties: “Abu Sa’id reported the Messenger of Allah as saying: In the event of the dissension among Muslims an emerging sect will emerge one of the two parties that is nearer to the truth will kill it.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B41, H4650] The two parties were of Khalifah al-Rashid Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Amir Muawiyah (radiallaht a’ala anhu): “Narrated Al-Amash: I asked Abu Wail: "Did you witness the battle of Siffin between Ali and Muawiyah?" He said: "Yes," and added: "Then I heard Sahl bin Hunaif saying: 'O people! Blame your personal opinions in your religion. […] "Abu Wail said, "I witnessed the battle of Siffin, and how nasty Siffin was!” [Ref: Bukhari, B92, H411] 3.1 - Section Of Ali’s Deserts Him At Siffin And Heads For Iraq: At Siffin [Raqqa, Syria] Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) agreed to judge the dispute between them on basis of book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And a party of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) agreed with decision and a party of Ali’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) army disagreed. Out of those who disagreed they were in two groups. One group wanted to fight to end the disharmony and for the unity of Ummah and were sincere and true followers of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) – Abu Wail was from this group. And the other group [companions of Dhil Khuwaisirah] disagreed becaused they deemed action of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) against the book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) – man who questioned Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) in the following Hadith was from the second group and from Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi’s companions -: "Narrated Habib bin Abi Thabit: I went to Abu Wail to ask him (about those who had rebelled against `Ali). On that Abu Wail said, "We were at Siffin. A man said, "Will you be on the side of those who are called to consult Allah's Book (to settle the dispute)?" `Ali said, 'Yes." ' Some people objected to Ali's agreement and wanted to fight. On that Sahl bin Hunaif said, 'Blame yourselves! I remember how, on the day of Al-Hudaibiya, if we had been allowed to choose fighting, we would have fought (the pagans)." [Ref: Bukhari, B60, H367] The basis of their disagreement was that it [meaning Dhil Khuwaisirah’s companions] deemed consulting the book of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for a judgement/command as an act of playing Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And they said to Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu): "There is no command but that of Allah." Upon this Ali said: The statement is true but it is intentionally applied (to support) a wrong (cause).” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2334] After the event of arbitration disenchanted members of Ali’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) army [which composed of Dhil Khuwaisirah’s companions aka goup of Satan from Najd] deserted Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and camped at Harura [earning them name Haruriyyah – near Kufah, later became known as Khawarij] and this is evident from following Hadith: “When Haruria (the Khawarij) set out (from Syria for Iraq – Harura) and as he was with Ali bin Abu Talib they …” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2334] And from there the Khawarij Dhil Khuwaisirahs companions began to raid villages of Muslims killing anyone that did not adhere to their sectarian belief. Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) gathered forces to combat them and both armies camped at Nahrawan: "Ubaidah (al-salman) said: ‘Ali mentioned about the people of al Nahrawan, saying: Among them there will be a man with a defective hand or with a small hand. if you were not to overjoy. I would inform you of what Allah has promised (the reward for) those who will kill them at the tongue of Muhammad. I asked : Have you heard this from him? He replied : Yes, by the lord of the Ka’bah." [Ref: Abu Dawood, B41, H4745] 3.2 – Conclusion: Dhil Khuwaisirah And His Companions From Syria To Iraq: In the conclusion of section 2.2 evidence of what preceded it established Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi and his companions were referred by Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as the group of Satan. In section 3.0 it was established that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold; Dhil Khuwaisirah and his companions would appear when there will be difference between Muslims. And it was established the difference was between Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). In section 3.1 it was established that a faction – composing of Dhil Khuwaisirahs companions, or group of Satan - from Ali’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) army deserted him and headed for Iraq and camped at Harura [a village near Kufah]. And due to their raids which resulted in deaths of Muslims Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) decided to confront Dhil Khuwaisirah’s group of Satan and both armies camped at Nahrawan. 4.0 - Dhil Khuwaisirah And His Companions Meet Their End: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was distributing gold amongst the people until a man called Abdullah Bin Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi came said; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has not distributed it fairly. Companions sought permission to kill him and it was refused: “Narrated Abu Sa'id:While the Prophet was distributing something, 'Abdullah bin Dhil Khawaisira At-Tamimi came and said, "Be just, O Allah's Apostle!" The Prophet said, "Woe to you ! Who would be just if I were not?" 'Umar bin Al-Khattab said, "Allow me to cut off his neck ! " The Prophet said, " Leave him, for he has companions, and …” He then described the level of adherance to religious teaching Dhil Khuwaisirah and his companions will have: “Leave him, for he has companions, and if you compare your prayers with their prayers and your fasting with theirs, you will look down upon your prayers and fasting, in comparison to theirs. Yet they will go out of the religion as an arrow darts through the game's body in which case, if the Qudhadh of the arrow is examined, nothing will be found on it, and when its Nasl is examined, nothing will be found on it; and then its Nadiyi is examined, nothing will be found on it.” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) then went on to indicate how Dhil Khuwaisirah and his companions will be recognised: “The sign by which these people will be recognized will be a man whose one hand (or breast) will be like the breast of a woman (or like a moving piece of flesh).” [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] Another Hadith gives bit more detail about Dhil Khuwaisirah:“This man with the crippled hand was on that day with us in the mosque. We would sit with him by day and by night, and he was a poor man. I saw him attending the meals of Ali which he took with the people, and I clothed him with a cloak of mine. Abu Maryam said: The man with the crippled hand was called Nafi` Dhu al-Thadyah (Nafi`, man of nipple). He had in his hand something like a female breast with a nipple at it ends like the nipple of the female breast. If had some hair on it like the whiskers of cat. Abu Dawud said: He was known among the people by the name of Harqus.” [Ref: Abu Dawood, B41, H4752] Another Hadith has unique details with regards to grou of Satan of Najd who had gone to Syria and returned to Iraq after being disenchanted from Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu): “When Haruria (the Khawarij) set out (from Syria for Iraq – Harura) and as he was with Ali bin Abu Talib they said: "There is no command but that of Allah." Upon this Ali said: The statement is true but it is intentionally applied (to support) a wrong (cause). The Messenger of Allah described their characteristics and I found these characteristics in them. They state the truth with their tongue, but it does not go beyond this part of their bodies. The most hateful among the creation of Allah is one black man among them (Khawarij). One of his hand is like the teat of a goat or the nipple of the breast. When Ali bin Abu Talib killed them he said: Search! They searched for him but they did not find it (his dead body). Upon this he said: Go (and search for him). By Allah, neither I have spoken a lie nor has the lie been spoken to me. Ali said this twice and thrice. They then found him (the dead body) in a ditch. They brought (his dead) body till they placed it before him (i.e. Hadrat Ali). 'Ubaidullah said: And, I was present at (that place) when this happened and when 'Ali said about them. A person narrated to me from Ibn Hanain that he said: I saw that black man.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2334] It is also stated in other Ahadith that Dhil Khuwaisirah and his companions were killed by Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and a verse was revealed regarding the man Dhil Khuwaisirah: “Abu Sa'id added: I testify that I heard this from the Prophet and also testify that 'Ali killed those people while I was with him. The man with the description given by the Prophet was brought to 'Ali. The following Verses were revealed in connection with that very person (i.e., 'Abdullah bin Dhil-Khawaisira At-Tarnimi): 'And among them are men who accuse you (O Muhammad) in the matter of (the distribution of) the alms.'” [Ref: Bukhari, B84, H67] And group of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) was closer to truth in comparision to Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu) because his army killed off Khawarij – i.e. Dhil Khuwaisirah and his companions: “Abu Sa'id al-Khudri said that the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) made a mention of a sect that would be among his Ummah which would emerge out of the dissension of the people. Their distinctive mark would be shaven heads. They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures. The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2324] 4.1 - Banu Tamims Khawarij Killed By People Of Iraq: Ahadith describes appearance of Dhil Khuwaisirah as: "He (i.e. the Prophet, ) gives the chief of Najd and does not give us." The Prophet said, "I give them so as to attract their hearts (to Islam)." Then a man with sunken eyes, prominent checks, a raised forehead, a thick beard and a shaven head, came (in front of the Prophet ) and said, "Be afraid of Allah, O Muhammad!" [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H558] “Then there stood up a person with deep snnken eyes, prominent cheek bones, and elevated forehead, thick beard, shaven head, tucked up loin cloth, and he said: Messenger of Allah, fear Allah. He (the Holy Prophet) said: Woe to thee. do I not deserve most to fear Allah amongst the people of the earth?” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2319] Note shaven head was the distinctive mark of Khawarij. Dhil Khuwaisirahs followers – aka group of Satan, or Haruriyyah - shaved their head like their leader and it became a distinctive sign by which they were recognised: “Abu Sa'id al-Khudri said that the Messenger of Allah made a mention of a sect that would be among his Ummah which would emerge out of the dissension of the people. Their distinctive mark would be shaven heads. They would be the worst creatures or the worst of the creatures. The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them. The Apostle of Allah gave an example (to give their description) or he said: … Abu Sai'd then said: People of Iraq. it is you who have killed them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2324] Note the Hadith states, [out of two groups of Muslims disputing amongst themselves –: Ali radiallah ta’ala anhu and Muawiyah radiallah ta’ala anhu] the group closer to truth would kill the companions of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi and this group was none other then army of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) composed of Iraqis: “The group who would be nearer to the truth out of the two would kill them.” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2324] 4.2 – Conclusion: Dhil Khuwaisirah Group Of Satan Killed: Continuing and building upon earlier established position and conclusions – in section 2.2, and 3.2 .It was established in section 4.0 that Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi was the man who is said to have said to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to fear Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi wa’ssallam) intended to indicate emergence of Dhil Khuwaisirah and his companions as a sect. And referred to them as group of Satan. This sect appeared during the battle of Siffin. And abandoned the side of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and returned to Iraq. At Nahrawan this group of Satan met the army of Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and were completely anahilated. Amongst the dead of Khawarij – aka group of Satan – body of Dhil Khuwaisirah was found. And it was his hand which resembelled a woman’s breast. He was part of army of Khawarij and he his companions were killed by the hands of Iraqi army – group near to truth - lead by Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu). 5.0 - Emergence Of Two Groups Of Satan: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said: “The belief is among the Yemenites, and the unbelief is towards the East. And tranquillity is among (i.e. Yemeni’s) those who rear goats and sheep. And pride and tribulation is among the uncivil and rude owners of horses and camels (i.e. in East).” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H88] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) says with regards to Yemeni’s: “It is narrated on the authority of Ibn Mas'ud that the Messenger of Allah pointed towards Yemen with his hand and said: Verily Iman is towards this side.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H83] And with regards to ahlul Kufr (i.e. people of disbelief) in East, the owners of camels Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa alaihi was’sallam) says: “And harshness and callousness of the hearts is found amongst the rude owners of the camels, who drive them behind their tails (to the direction), where emerge the two horns of Satan, they are the tribes of Rabi'a and Mudar.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H83] 5.1 – The Two Groups Of Satan From Banu Rabia And Mudhar: Prophet (sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated: “And harshness and callousness of the hearts is found amongst the rude owners of the camels, who drive them behind their tails (to the direction), where emerge the two horns of Satan, they are the tribes of Rabi'a and Mudar.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H83] In context of following Ahadith: “The sun rises between the two horns of Satan.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B5, H1253] “… and it rises between the two horns of Satan.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B5, H1251] “… then do not pray until the sun has risen, for it rises between the two horns of Satan.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, B5, H1252] The words of - H83 – can mean Banu Rabia and Mudhar are the two horns of Satan and the sun rises between their territorial boundaries. Or it could mean the rude owners of camels/horses are tribes of Rabia and Mudhar and two groups of Satan will emerge from their lands [but not necesserily from them] and sun rises between northern and sourthern boundaries of these two tribes. 5.2 - Why Only Mention Of Two Groups Of Satan aka Khawarij: It should be explained why Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed to emergence of two groups of Satan aka Khawarij when in reality there are more then fifteen which originated from Khawarij of Iraq. The reason is simple, the first sect of Khawarij spawned many variations in their teachings but all had central core uniting them. And the second group of Khawarij would also spawn many variations but like the first one these mutations will share a central core. The only difference would be that second major resurgance of Kharijism will have a core connection which would link them with the first sect of Khawarij. 5.3 – The Sunrises Between The Northern And Southern Boundaries: For a detailed study please also refer to article related to the Hadith of two groups of Satan, here. But do note it is not important, skipping it will not impede your understanding of this article. It is fundamentally important you refer to following map which depicts where various tribes were situated during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam), here. Take note how the two tribes of apart from each other and then compare their location with regards to northern and southern sunrise boundaries, here. If you have paid attention you will realize siutation of these two tribes roughly correlates to northern and southern sunrise boundaries. And this establishes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) intended to indicate boundary of sunrise by using the location of these two tribes. Alhasil the two groups of Satan to emerge would emerge from the Northern and Southern boundaries of sunrise of Banu Rabia and Banu Mudhar: “And harshness and callousness of the hearts is found amongst the rude owners of the camels, who drive them behind their tails (to the direction), where emerge the two horns of Satan, they are the tribes of Rabi'a and Mudar.” [Ref: Muslim, B1, H83] And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) used the location of these two tribes to give general direction from where the two groups of Satan would emerge – between the Northern and Southern boundaries of Banu Rabia and Banu Mudhar – but in another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) precisely pointed the direction from which the group of Satan would emerge: “Narrated 'Abdullah: The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointing to 'Aisha's house, he said thrice, "Affliction (will appear from) here," and, "from the side, where Satan's head will come out." [Ref: Bukhari, B53, H336] And the direction he pointed toward is pretty precisely of al-Uyayna and al-Dirriyyah, here. One is birth place of Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab and other later became his missionary activity centre. 5.4 – Conclusion: Banu -: Rabia & Mudhar Situtated In East In Region Of Najd: It has been established, Banu -: Rabia and Mudhar are situated in East of Madinah, in the direction of sunrise, and in region of Najd. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold two groups of Satan would emerge from the lands of these two tribes. And in light of findings presented in conclusion of section, 2.2, 3.2, and 4.2, Rabia and Mudhar were situated in Najd. And the first group which originated from Najd [and from tribe of Banu Tamim] was of Abdullah, also known as, Dhil Khuwaisirah, the Tamimi. Who along with his seemingly pious/righteous companions was killed by Iraqi’s at Nahrwan. 6.0 – Second Satan’s Group - Near End Of Time - From Dhil Khuwaisirah: It is recording in Hadith: “While we were with Allah's Messenger who was distributing there came Dhul Khuwaisira. A man from the tribe of Bani Tamim and said: "O Allah's Messenger! Do Justice!" [Ref: Bukhari, B56, H807] In another narration it is recorded that he said, Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) should fear Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): “Then there stood up a person with deep sunken eyes, prominent cheek bones, and elevated forehead, thick beard, shaven head, tucked up loin cloth, and he said: Messenger of Allah, fear Allah!” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2319] There are many narrations of this incident each giving slightly different wording. After Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi uttered these words: “There stood up Umar bin Khattab and said: ‘Should I not strike his neck?’ Upon this he said: ‘No! Then he turned away and Khalid the Sword of Allah stood up against him and said: ‘Prophet of Allah! Shall I not strike off his neck?’ He said: No!” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2320] And when Dhil Khuwaisirah noted companions have desired to kill him, and Khalid bin Walid (radiallah ta’ala anhu) is arguing his case a, Dhil Khuwaisirah left the gathering and Ahadith record the following words of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with regards to him: “Upon this the Messenger of Allah said: I have not been commanded to pierce through the hearts of people, nor to split their bellies (insides). He again looked at him (i.e. Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi) and he was going back. Upon this he said: There would arise a people from the progeny of this (man) who would recite the Qur'an glibly, but it would not go beyond their throats; …” [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2319] “Then the Prophet looked at him while the latter was going away and said, "From the offspring of this who will recite the Qur'an continuously and elegantly but it will not exceed their throats. They would go out of the religion as an arrow goes through a game's body." [Ref: Bukhari, B59, H638] In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) indicated the same and verbally demonstrated the desire of killing them: “And then said: A people would rise from his progeny who would recite the Book of Allah glibly and fluently. 'Umar said: I think he also said this: If I find them I would certainly kill them like Thamud." [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2320] " They will kill the Muslims but will not disturb the idolaters. If I should live up to their time' I will kill them as the people of 'Ad were killed." [Ref: Bukhari, B55, H558] This group to emerge from progeny of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi would appear near the end of times and this group would be as if Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi is one of them: "A people will come at the end of time; as if he is one of them, reciting the Qur'an without it passing beyond their throats. They will go through Islam just as the arrow goes through the target. Their distinction will be shaving.” Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) goes on to says group of Satan/Khawarij to emerge from Dhil Khuwaisirah progeny near the end of times will continue to appear [as Isis, Al-Qaidah, Boko Haram, Al-Shabab and in form of various other names, labels] until last of the group join forces with Dajjal - and serves the ultimate Zionist Jewish lobby –: “They will not cease to appear until the last of them comes with Al-Masih Ad-Dajjal. So when you meet them, then kill them, they are the worst of created beings." [Ref: Nisa’i, B37, H4108] 6.1 - Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab’s Geneology Meets Dhil Khuwaisirah: Mawlana Ismail Shaf’ee Malibari (hafidullah) investigated the geneology of Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab in his, Aqeedat us-Sunnah, pages 15/16, presented following brief geneology of Shaykh of Najd: “Muhammad, bin Abd al-Wahhab, bin Sulayman, bin Ali [bin Muhammad, bin Ahmad, bin Raashid, bin Burayd, bin Muhammad, bin Mashraf, bin Umar, bin Mi'daad], bin Ra’ees, bin Zakhir, bin Muhammad, bin Ali, bin Wuhayb, bin Dhil Khuwaisirah, bin Zuhayr, [bin Shihaab, bin Rabee'ah, bin Abee Saud] …” Note additions in brackets is my own to expand the geneology to its full length. Currently I am working on article which will be titled: Kharijism And Wahhabism -: Shaykh Muhammad Ibn Abdul Wahhab Descendant Of Dhil Khuwaisirah - The Infamous Hurqus - Ibn Zuhayr. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits me to complete this article than in due time research with supporting evidence will be published. Long before Shaykh Ismail Shafa’ee (hadfidullah), and myself contempories of Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab such as Shaykh Syed Alvi Haddad Shafa’ee (rahimullah), and Shaykh Syed Ahmad Dahlan Shafa’ee had charged him of being group of Satan to emerge from posterity of Dhil Khuwaisirat at-Tamim and this is nothing new. 6.2 – Conclusion: Shaykh Of Najd - A Descendent Of Dhil Khuwaisirah: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold near the end of times from the progeny of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi a group of Khawarij would [re-appear]. Geneological research of Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab’s reveals he indeed is from the progeny of Dhil Khuwaisirah, also mentioned as, Abdullah in Ahadith of Sahih Bukhari, Hurqus Ibn Zuhayr, in Hadith of Sunan Abu Dawood. 7.0 - If Shaykh Of Najd Not From Progeny Of Dhil Khuwaisirah: If there is no justifiable and evidenced basis to apply the - progeny - prophecy of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) upon Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab than by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) it will not be attempted. Nor a Muslim should apply the prophecy upon Shaykh of Najd if he/she knows Shaykh is not a descendent of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi. It would be unacademic and it would prevent the true culprit of the prophecy to escape recognition. This does not mean Shaykh of Najd would not and is not Khariji, Shaykh surely is Khariji. 7.1 - Shaykh Of Najd From Khawarij To Re-Appear More Then Twenty Times: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: “The Prophet said, "There will emerge from the East some people who will recite the Qur'an but it will not exceed their throats and who will go out of the religion as an arrow passes through the game, and they will never come back to it unless the arrow, comes back to the middle of the bow.” [Ref: Bukhari, B93, H651] "Did you hear the Messenger of Allah making a mention of the Khawarij? He said: I heard him say and he pointed with his hand towards the east that there would be a people who would recite the Qur'an with their tongues and it would not go beyond their collar bones. They would pass clean through their religion just as the arrow passes through the prey." [Ref: Muslim, B5, H2336] In Ahadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has stated: From East [of Madinah] a people would appear who would recite the Quran with their tongues but Quran would not exceed their throats/collar-bone and they will cleanly go out of religion of Islam like an arrow passes through the prey and they will not revert back to true Islamic teachings until it becomes possible for the arrow to return to the bow – or impossible becomes possibe. And about these same people Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated in the following Hadith: “It was narrated from Ibn Umar that: The Messenger of Allah said: "There will emerge people who will recite the Qur'an but it will not go any deeper than their collar bones. Whenever a group of them appears, they should be killed/eliminated." Ibn Umar said: "I heard the Messenger of Allah say: 'Whenever a group of them appears, they should be killed/eliminated.' [He said they will appear] more than twenty times - until Dajjal emerges among them.'" [Ref: Ibn Majah, B1, H174] In light of this Hadith, if impossible becoming possible – i.e. Shaykh of Najd not being from progeny of Dhil Khuwaisirah – than he is from the Khawarij which were to re-appear again and again – more then twenty times – from the direction of East. And undeniable historical fact is; Najd and Banu Tamim consistently have been in fore front of Khariji resurgance who subjected the Muslims with barbaric violence. As a result of their barbarity the Muslim leaders made their mission to completely and utterly anahilate them but only to re-appear again. 7.2 – A Major Sign Which Establishes Kharijism Of Shaykh Of Najd: Anyhow proof of Shaykh of Najd’s Kharijism is his methodology –: applying the verses revealed for disbelievers upon Muslims. And demonstrating this truth is Kitab at-Tawheed of Shaykh of Najd. But the choiciest from many examples is -: Shaykh of Najd applying the verses of Quran upon Muslims of Arabia which were in actuality regarding polytheists who did not believe in judgment day – verses such as; 22:5, 23:33/38, 23:80 - : “He who does not enter in to this religion, nor act upon it, nor provide support to its people, nor show enmity against its opponents, according to us is a disbeliever (kafir) in Allah, and the last day.” [Ref: Durar al-Saniyyah, 1/314, See, here] “It’s known regarding the people of our land (i.e. Najd) and the land of al-Hijaz, that those among them who reject the resurrection [after death] are more than those who accept it and that those [among them] who know the religion are less than those who do not, and those who perform Salah are fewer than those who do not perform it …” [Ref: al-Durar al-Saniyyah 10/43, here] Imam Bukhari (rahimullah alayhi ta’ala) brings a statement of Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) under the heading of – Killing Of Khawarij And Mulhidun. This indicates Imam Bukhari (rahimullah) believed it was with regards to Khawarij, the apostates. Ibn Umar (radiallah ta’ala anhu) indicates applying the verses revealed for disbelievers upon Muslims is habbit of worst of creatures in creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) - Khawarij: “And the statement of Allah: 'Allah will not mislead a people after He has guided them, until He makes clear to them what to avoid.'And Ibn Umar used to consider them (the Khawarij and the Mulhidun) the worst of Allah's creatures and said: "These people took some verses that had been revealed concerning the disbelievers and interpreted them as describing the believers.” [Ref: Bukhari, V9, P49, Chap6: Killing The Khawarij And Mulhidun] Note there are number of other Ahadith in which the Khawarij have been said to be worst of creatures. 7.3 – Conclusion: If Shaykh Of Najd Wasn’t Geneologically Related: If - just entertaining the impossible with this if - Shaykh of Najd was not geneological desecendent of Dhil Khuwaisirah Ibn Zuhayr even then there is no excuse for Shaykh of Najd. He is from Khawarij and part of re-appearing Khawarij destined to resurface more then twenty times. 8.0 – How Second Argument Was Refuted: In section - 0.3 - seven steps were given. In here I will explain the significance of these steps. The first step confirms basic premise (i.e. group of Satan Hadith referrs to Dhil Khuwaisirah who was resident of Najd and from Bani Tamim) on which you argued your case (i.e. Najdi’s from Banu Tamim fought in Iraq – hence they are the group of Satan aka Khawarij, and Hadith of Najd applies to Dhil Khuawaisirah and his companions). Step two establishes from Najd this group of Satan went to Syria (i.e. Siffin) as part of Ali’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) army and were disenchanted by Ali’s (radiallah ta’ala anhu) decision to arbitrate between himself and Muawiyah (radiallah ta’ala anhu). Step three partly confirms an aspect on which your argument was based on (i.e. Khawarij fought in Iraq) and refutes common misconception and the allegation of Wahhabis (i.e. that Khawarij were Iraqi’s). Step four establishes Dhil Khuwaisirah and his companions were killed in Iraq. And implication of all this was; indeed Dhil Khuwaisirah was from the Khawarij, and he along his companions (i.e. members of his tribe) were from group of Satan, and they were in Najd, and from there they fought in Iraq, and were killed, only few survived. This over all establishes Islamic position and confirms the basis of your argument. Steps five, six and seven establish that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold appearance of two (i.e. major) groups of Satan from direction/lands of Banu Rabia and and Banu Mudhar which happens to be toward East of Madinah and region of Najd. First group of Khawarij was of Dhil Khuwaisirah and his companions. And regarding second group Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) said from progeny/posterity of Dhil Khuwaisirah a group of people would emerge who would recite Quran but it will not go beyond their throat. And with this Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) pointed; second emergence group of Satan would be from his progeny/posterity. And geneological datal establishes Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi was ancestor of Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab. And if he was not descendent of Dhil Khuwaisirat at-Tamim even then at very least Shaykh of Najd is most certainly from the Khawarij which were to continously re-appear until last of them would side with Dajjal.[1] 8.1 - Conclusion: Islamic Position And Refutation In Nutshell: It is true; Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi marched from Saudi province of Najd along side his companions to Syria and than to Iraq where he along side his tribes mates fought against Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and were anahilated. But this fact cannot absolve the Shaykh of Najd from being a Khariji. And it should be evident to you why Muslims accuse the Shaykh of Najd of being a Khariji. He is from posterity of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi, or at the very least from more then twenty manifesations to appear [from Najd], and his teachings and actions earned him ascription of being a leader of Khariji sect. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits then twenty plus articles will be produced to show how methodologically and fundamentally Wahhabism and Kharijism are one and the same thing. But for now the connection established between Shaykh of Najd and Dhil Khuwaisirah is suffient evidence of his Kharijism. Conclusion: Dhil Khuwaisirah was from tribe of Tamim and this tribe was situated in East of Madinah in central Arabia and in province of Najd. Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi angered Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) told this man has companions so pious; they would embrass even the companions but they will become disbelievers. After this event some time Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) invoked blessings for Syria, and Yemen and despite repeated requests refused to supplicate for Najd. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) refused to invoke Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) for the inhabitants of Najd stating from Najd the group of Satan will emerge and tribulations. And it should be noted this group of Satan was none other than Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi and his companions. While he was leaving Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold; from progeny of Dhil Khuwaisirah a group of people would emerge who would recite the Quran [but it will not reach their heart] but get stuck in the collar bone, or throat. In another Hadith Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) foretold about appearance of two groups of Satan. The first group of Khawarij seperated from the main body of Muslims – i.e. from Ali radiallah ta’ala anhu – at Siffin and appeared as a distinct sect in Iraq. And this first group was composed of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi and his companions. They fought against the Iraqi army of Hadhrat Ali (radiallah ta’ala anhu) and the Iraqis killed them. Dhil Khuwaisirah and his companions were completely butchered in battle field only few escaping death. The second group of Khawarij was to emerge from Najd as mentioned in the Hadith. And Muslim position based on the explained evidence is Shaykh Muhammad Bin Abdul Wahhab at-Tamimi is from the progeny of Dhil Khuwaisirah at-Tamimi which is corroborated by the geneological records. And even if Shaykh of Najd was not a direct descendent of Dhil Khuwaisirah there is no doubt in his Kharijism because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) had foretold the resurfacing the Khawarij more then twenty times. There is mountain of evidence such as methological ressemblance to Khawarij: Applying the verses of Kafirs upon Muslims, declaring Muslims as Mushriks, permitting the blood and property of Muslims upon himself and his army. Declaring Muslims Kafir/Mushrik for major sins, rebellion against Islamic state and religious order. Going against the majority like the Khawarij, insulting and disrespecting Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) like Dhil Khuwaisirah did. Shaved their heads extremely closely like the Khawarij, fold the trouser or regional equivlent from the waist, killing Muslims but leaving non-Muslims at a time when the British were at their door step in Yemen. And not forgetting Najd and Banu Tamim have played prominent role in insurrections and rebellions of Khawarij through out centuries. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Footnote: - [1] And current Saudi and Wahhabi alliance with minions of Dajjal and Zionist state of Israel proves how Saudi family and their Wahhabi Ulamah would join forces with Dajjal in a bid to prevent Imam Mahdi (alayhis salam) resting the rule from their clutches. And due to Fatwah of ‘Jihad’ issued by the Wahhabi scholars belonging to, Aal al-Shaykh, and in response the Khawarij from Najd and other regions of earth would join forces with their ally -: Al Dajjal and Zionist state of Israel. This is most likely reason why Khawarij would join forces with Dajjal.

Introduction: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness on the day of judgment regarding actions of earlier and his own Ummah. This belief is based on established teaching of Quran; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has witnessed the all the events regarding which he will bear witness and has been sent as a Shahid (i.e. witness). And this understanding is based on principle; a true witness is one who has witnessed with eyes/ears regarding the event/incident regarding which he/she is called to bear witness. In contrast to Islamic teaching Khawarij believe indeed Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Shahid but he will bear witness after being informed by others what had/has transpired before/after him. In other words they believe he is Shahid without being first hand witness, or without actually witnessing anything. Failed Attempt To Seduce Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam): Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) states; Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) was lured to home by a woman who wished to engage with him in illicit sexual activity: “And the woman in whose house he was, allured him not to restrain himself and she closed all the doors - and said, "Come! It is you I address!"; he said, "(I seek) The refuge of Allah - indeed the governor is my master - he treats me well; undoubtedly the unjust never prosper." [Ref: 12:23] Realising the intent of her Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) hurriedly made his way to exist the room and she chased after him in an attempt to prevent him from leaving: “And they both raced towards the door, and the woman tore his shirt from behind, and they both found her husband at the door; she said, "What is the punishment of the one who sought evil with your wife, other than prison or a painful torture?" [Ref: 12:25] Wife of the man claimed Prophet Yusuf had attempted to seduce her but Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) stated it was the woman who made attempt on him: “Said Yusuf, "It was she who lured me, that I may not guard myself" - and a witness from her own household testified; "If his shirt is torn from the front, then the woman is truthful and he has spoken incorrectly. And if his shirt is torn from behind, then the woman is a liar and he is truthful.” [Ref:Kunz Ul Iman, 12:26/27, by Imam Ahmad Raza rahimullah, link] There was a witness observing the events unfold. Some commentators based on Athar (i.e. statements of companions) said the witness was a child in cradle. And another group based on Athar also stated there was a righteous adult with beard who witnessed the events. And due to exceptional wisdom suggested the Kamees (i.e. shirt) is checked as mentioned in the verse. And if it was a child in the cradle then it suggests Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) defended His Nabi by giving a child ability to speak, wisely.[1] Note this established the innocense of Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam): “So when the governor saw his shirt torn from behind, he said, "Indeed this is a deception of women; undoubtedly the deception of women is very great." [Ref: 12:27] And later she admitted her guilt and established Prophet Yusuf’s (alayhis salam) innocense: “The king said: "O women! What was your role when you tried to entice Yusuf?" They answered: "Purity is to Allah! We did not find any immorality in him." [And] Said the wife of the governor: "Now the truth is out; it was I who tried to entice him, and indeed he is truthful." [Ref: 12:51] Alhasil a child/adult bore witness in defence of Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) but there was no other witness, and therefore he suggested the investigation method. This incident establishes a true witness, a witness who had seen the events unfold, bore witness in defence of Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam), and suggested how the innocence of Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) can be established. Establishing Islamic belief; a true witness is one who has witnessed the event regarding which he/she bears witness about. Prophet Yusuf Allegedly Devoured By Wolf: Step brothers of Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) were jealous; their father loved Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) and his younger brother more then them so they schemed to do away with Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam). And to carry out their plan they came to their father and requested Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) is sent with them. Prophet Yaqoob (alayhis salam) anticipated their plan and foretold them the excuse they would employ. But reluctantly sent his beloved son Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) with brothers. And they decided to lower him in a water well instead of killing him. And a caravan traveling for Egypt came and found Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) in the well and pulled him out of well and sold him in Egypt as slave. After lowering him in the well they returned to their father weeping claiming a wolf devoured Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam). Years later Prophet Yusuf had been appointed care taker of resources in Egypt to manage famine and his brothers came to Egypt to buy supplies. He recognised them and told his brothers to bring his blood brother (i.e. Yameen, Binyamen Jewish texts) if they want any supplies. They returned to their father and told him; the supplies were denied to us. When they returned with Yameen Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) instructed a measuring-cup is concealed Yameen’s supplies. Command was given to search all present and measuring-cup was found in Yameen’s belongings. And the step-brothers witnessed; measuring-cup was discovered from belongings of Yameen. He was detained and his brothers were told Yameen is theif and he will become a slave. Their eldest brother refuse to leave Egypt instructed them to tell their father what they witnessed: "Return to your father and then say, ‘O our father! Indeed your son has stolen; we were witness only to what we know and we were not guardians of the unseen.’” [Ref: 12:81] And to convince their father they said to Prophet Yaqub (alayhis salam): “And ask the township in which we were, and the caravan in which we came; and indeed we are truthful." [Ref: 12:82] Alhasil underlined verse establishes the principle; a true witness is one who has gained knowledge with his/her own eyes/ears. In other words, a true witness is one who has seen/heard the events regarding which he/she gives testimony. Coming back to the story when the step-brithers of Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) returned to their native lands Prophet Yaqoob (alayhis salam) did not believe them. He instructed them to return and search for Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) his brother Yameen, and the eldest brother who remained in Egypt due to fear of disappointing his father. The step-brothers returned to Egypt for supplies and Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam) introduced himself to them and told them to take his shirt and to place it on face of their father, and bring his family with them to Egypt. They did as they were instructed, and Prophet Yaqoob (alayhis salam) met with Prophet Yusuf (alayhis salam), and thanked Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) Witness Over His Ummah: At present Catholics, Protestant, with exception of Jehovah’s Witnesses, all churches believe Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) is god incarnate. But in Arabian Peninsula existed a sect of Christianity which had taken Prophet Isa (alayhis salam) and his mother as gods. This sect is called Collyrdianism. Historian Edward Gibbons has mentioned them in his history, The History Of The Decline And Fall Of … stated Collyrdians had given goddess status to Marry. Epiphanious the Bishop of Salamis in his Panarion written around period of 375 AD mentions a sect in Arabian held belief; Mary is goddess. With regards to belief of these people, on the judgment day, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) will enquire from Prophet Isa (alayhis salam): “And when Allah will say: “O Esa, the son of Maryam! Did you say to the people, ‘Appoint me and my mother as two Gods, besides Allah?” And he will respond to Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in state of humility and submission: “He will say: “Purity is to You! It is not proper for me to say something for which I do not have right. If I have said it then surely You know it; You know what lies in my heart, and I do not know what is in Your knowledge; indeed You only know all the hidden.” [Ref: 5:116] Prophe Isa (alayhis salam) further added:“I said not to them except what You commanded me; to worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord. And I was a Shahid over them as long as I was among them; but when You took me up, You were the Observer over them, and You are, over all things Shahid.” [Ref: 5:117] By saying; I was Shahid upon my followers when I was present (i.e. Hadhir) amongst them, he is implying; when I was not present amongst them I was not Shahid over them, and due to my absence and not being Shahid over them I have no knowledge of events that transpired after me. Alhasil this verse indicates; to be a Shahid (i.e. witness) one must be Hadhir (i.e. present) amongst people regarding whom one has to bear witness. And if one is not Hadhir he cannot bear witness [nor he should be held responsible]. And fundamental requirement for a present and true Shahid is first hand witnessing, with eyes and ears. This verse establishes Islamic teaching belief; a true Shahid is one who is Hadhir and has seen/heard the events regarding which he is to bear witness with his own eyes and ears. Conclusion: In the teaching of Quran, one who is Hadhir, and one who has seen the events unfold, with his own eyes, and heard the sounds relating to events, with his own ears, is a a true Shahid. And from this it is clear those who say Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear witness regarding the events mentioned in Quran and Ahadith after being informed by others are accusing the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) of lieing and giving testimony even though he does not fullfil the criteria of true Shahid. This Quranic evidence belies their misguided belief; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will be presented on judgment day as a witness who has not seen/heard anything regarding which he will bear witness. How do they believe he was sent as a Shahid when they believe for him no quality of Shahid? An equivlent example would be Qadiyani’s believing in Quranic word Khatm [Un Nabiyeen] without believing it means last/final. By ascribing to it another meaning and negating its known/established meaning one is guilty of not believing in word Khatm [Un Nabiyeen] even though the person may claim to believe. And one who believes as such is not from Muslims. Alhasil in light of difference between understanding of Muslims and Khawarij it is required to establish; a true witness bearing witness about an event must be an actual hearing/seeing type of witness. And an individual who bears witness to events not witnessed by him/her as a first hand witness is not a true witness but a liar. And neither does Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) accept false testimoney nor will His Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will bear false witness. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi Footnotes: - [1] “And a witness of her household bore witness (saying): "If it be that his shirt is torn from the front...'' not from the back, ”… then her tale is true …“, that he tried to commit an illegal sexual act with her. Had he called her to have with him and she refused, she would have pushed him away from her and tore his shirt from the front, “But if it be that his shirt is torn from the back, then she has told a lie and he is speaking the truth!” Had Yusuf run away from her, and this is what truly happened, and she set in his pursuit, she would have held to his shirt from the back to bring him back to her, thus tearing his shirt from the back. There is a difference of opinion over the age and gender of the witness mentioned here. ‘Abdur-Razzaq recorded that Ibn `Abbas said that, “… and a witness of her household bore witness …”, "was a bearded man,'' meaning an adult male. Ath-Thawri reported that Jabir said that Ibn Abi Mulaykah said that Ibn Abbas said, "He was from the king's entourage.'' Mujahid, Ikrimah, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, As-Suddi, Muhammad bin Ishaq and others also said that the witness was an adult male. Al-Awfi reported that Ibn Abbas said about Allah's statement, “… and a witness of her household bore witness …”, "He was a babe in the cradle. '' Similar was reported from Abu Hurayrah, Hilal bin Yasaf, Al-Hasan, Sa`id bin Jubayr and Ad-Dahhak bin Muzahim, that the witness was a young boy who lived in the Aziz's house. Ibn Jarir At-Tabari preferred this view.” [Ref: Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 12:26, link]

Introduction: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a Shahid and stated he will bear witness in defence of Prophets passed before him. And being sent as a Shahid, and being sent to mankind means he is witness upon actions of mankind. A true testimony requires the witness with his own eyes/ears witnesses the events. Due to this Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Shahid aka Hadhir Nazir upon actions of Jinn and mankind. And testimony without being actual witnessing the events is bearing false witness and Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is the flag bearer of truth and he will not give false testimony. Khawarij accuse Muslims of being guilty of major Shirk for believing Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Hadhir Nazir. The reason they give is; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) alone is Shahid in a manner which you Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to be Shahid aka Hadhir Nazir. In other words they declare the Muslism to be worst type of disbelievers for believing that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) witnesses the deeds of Jinn and Mankind as a first hand witness hears/sees the events unfold in form of sounds and images. And their accusaton is proof of their ignorance of true Islamic belief, and ignorance of principle methodology of determining Tawheed and complete ingorance of principle of determing Shirk. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) permits a detailed explanation will be given in this article. Witnessing Of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam): All natural and supernatural powers which manifested during the life time of Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) including his witnessing of deeds of Jinn and mankind is with permission of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). With power being given by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is completely and absolutely like every creation dependent upon Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) in his essences, attributes and actions. Including his ordinary and extraordinary ability of Hadhir Nazir. Muslims believe this extraordinary ability of Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is of miracolous nature. He is dependent upon existence of creation to exercise his ability of Hadhir Nazir and is limited restricted to creation. And his ability is dependent upon existence of place, direction and time. And as a creation his means of acquiring knowledge are limited restricted to his state of being. And each state has its own limitations and restrictions and in no way possesses his supernatural power of Hadhir Nazir equale to or greater then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). To believe as such would be Shirk. Witnessing Of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala): In comparision, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Shahid in accordance with His Essence. He was/is Shahid independently of anyone and is subsisting in all His attributes. He was/is present (i.e. Hadhir) without a place and was/is hearing and seeing (i.e. Nazir) without needs of created means (i.e. organs). There is no authority above Him controlling limiting His capacity of Shahid and Sami (i.e. hearing) and Baseer (i.e. seeing). And to equate Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) with Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) ability of Shahid and Sami and Baseer in absolute terms would be major Shirk. And Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is knower of all Ghayb that is in perserved Tablet and that will happen in hereafter. In addition to this Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) possesses knowledge of all Mumkinaat (i.e. possibilities). And to equate any being with all knowledge of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), including knowledge of all possibilities, or limitless possibilites, is major Shirk. The Clear Distinction Between Station Two Shahids: The above two sections make it abundantly clear in which way Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) to be Shahid is clearly apart from how Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is believed to be Shahid. But this two sections require intermediate level knowledge of Tawheed and Shirk and good deductive skills to figure out why and how belief of Hadhir Nazir is not Shirk. Therefore it is important to make this topic simpler and make it easier for readers to easily understand the subject. Following sections will attempt to deal with the topic from simple perspective and it should allow readers to properly understand the error of Khawarij. Two Principles One Of Tawheed And One Of Shirk: Tawheed of Sifaat (attributes) and of Afaal (i.e. actions) is extreme perfection beyond which attribute/action cannot be perfected. And Shirk is extremly perfected - unimprovably perfected - attribute/action being given to creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). A person believes Kiraman Katibeen - two angels - witness the actions of entire Jinn and Mankind on earth and then record these good/bad actions. Has this person made these two angels partners with Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? Please read the two rules again and try to figure out before continuing. It is not Shirk because witnessing can be perfected/improved to include moon and entire universe. Hence the believer has not attributed the two angels the attributes of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). A person believes, Gibraeel (alayhis salam) has limitless knowledge. There is no beginning nor end to his knowledge. Is this belief Shirk? It is indeed Shirk because limitless knowledge, without beginning, and without end, such perfection level that it cannot be improved or further perfected. Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) possesses limitless knowledge, which is without beginning and without end and attributing it to Gibraeel (alayhis salam) is an act of major Shirk. Hadhir Nazir In Light Of Two Principles: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Shahid upon actions of Jinn and Mankind. He was witnessing the actions before his birth when he existed in form of Ruh (i.e soul) and witnessed the actions in his life time ordinarily and extraordinarily after his station of Shahid was perfected as much as Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) willed. And continues to observe the actions mankind [including his believing and disbelieving Ummah] after his departure from earthly life. And in light of this belief it should be apparent; perfection of station of Shahid is of such level that it can be improved to include actions creatures of land, see, air, and angels. Hence level of perfection of Shahid granted to Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and believed for him by Muslims is improvable. Therefore Hadhir Nazir is not Shirk of attributes – polytheism in attribute of Shahid. Note we Muslims believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Shahid over all creatures of universe and every spec of universe. And Shahid over the paradise and hell and over all occupants of paradise and hell. In nutshell He is Shahid limitless, timeless, without beginning and without end. His station of Shahid is perfected to a level that it is above improvement. Two Important Points Worth Remembering: Firstly diametric opposite of love is hate, of light is darkness, of good is bad, of sweet is bitter, and of Tawheed is Shirk. As such the description of each is exactly the opposite of the other. To believe in One Ilah (i.e. God/Mabud) is Tawheed. And two believe in many is Shirk. To believe is no Ilah is Shirk and to believe in One is Tawheed. Secondly it is important to point out that belief of Khawarij will be implied based on what we the Muslims believe and by backtracking from their allegations. And it is very unlikely they believe what would be unearthed. Therefore do not charge them of believing it unless they profess it with their tongue. Their principles methodology of determining Shirk is definitely defective which casts doubts on their understanding of Tawheed. Khawarij In Light Of Their Own Accusation: Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) observed the actions of nations - Jinn and Mankind - before him and continues to observe the actions of nations after his earthly life. The Khawarij accuse the Muslims of being guilty of major Shirk due to this belief. And Tawheed is diametric opposite of Shirk. We know what Muslims believe, which the Khawarij declare to be major Shirk. Based on this natural deduction would be; belief of Tawheed of Khawarij regarding attribute of Shahid is; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) only observes the actions of Jinn and Mankind - of people before Prophet’s (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) birth and after his death. And considering this belief of Shahid as Tawheed - the pinnacle of perfection beyond which there can be no perfection - is utterly/absolutely preposterous and nothing less then Kufr. This preposterious beliefe cannot and is not the Tawheed of Shahid, nor it can be, nor it is, criteria on which Tawheed/Shirk can be determined. Allah’s (subhanahu wa ta’ala) station of Shahid is perfected to such extant improvement is impossible. Alhasil in context of Islamic belief and in context of accusation of Khawarij we backtrack to find charge of Shirk is based on defective understanding of Tawheed of Shahid. Conclusion: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Shahid over all things. He witnesses all actions of all creatures: creatures of land, sea, air, angels, Jinn, and wives of paradise (i.e. Hoori’s). And Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) witnesses all universe, paradise, hell and their occupants, every spect, atom, particle, lesser, or greater then these. He was Shahid from eternity, self suffient, independent, perfected beyond improvements … Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Shahid over the actions of those creations of whom he will bear witness on judgment day – including actions of Jinn and Mankind before birth and after his departure from earth. His this extraordinary ability is granted to him by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and it is limited restricted to his actions of Jinn and mankind. He is entirely dependent upon Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). There was beginning and there is end to his station of Shahid. The criteria of determining Shirk for Shahid is; a perfection of Shahid which is beyond improvements. And those who judge Islamic belief Hadhir Nazir to be Shirk have defective understanding of principle methodology of determining Shirk and Tawheed because they employ an understanding of Shahid as criteria of determining Shirk of attributes when it is not. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi.

Introduction: Some say Shahid means witness but Muslims believe in these verses the word Shahid is used in meaning of Hadhir (i.e. present) Nazir (i.e. observing). Objective of this article would be to see what the truth is and where it lies. Note if the meaning of Hadhir Nazir is not believed, and meaning of witness is believed, even then nothing is harmed of Islamic belief. The Verses Subject Of Discussion: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) has stated that He has sent Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as a Shahid which is evidenced by following verses: "We have truly sent thee as a witness, as a bringer of glad tidings, and as warner." [Ref: 48:8] "O Prophet! Truly We have sent thee as a witness, a bearer of glad tidings, and as a warner." [Ref: 33:45] And his station of Shahid is like how Prophet Musa (alayhis salam) was sent as a Shahid to Pharaoh: "We have sent to you an apostle to be a witness concerning you even as We sent an apostle to Pharaoh." [Ref: 73:15] Based on these verses Muslims have come to believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Shahid in meaning of Hadhir Nazir. Shahid As Hadhir Nazir: Classical dictionaries give various meanings of word Shahid. Out of many meanings two relevent to this topic are witness and present. Both these meanings have been used for translation of verse 12:26. Mohsin Khan, Abdullah Yusuf Ali, and Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat have translated it to mean witness but I will only quote of Sayyidi Ala Hadhrat: “Said Yusuf, "It was she who lured me, that I may not guard myself" - and a witness from her own household testified; "If his shirt is torn from the front, then the woman is truthful and he has spoken incorrectly.” [Ref: 12:26, by Imam Ahmad Raza rahimullah] Following translations of Muhammad Assad and certain Unal Ali have translated Shahid to mean present (i.e. Hadhir): “[Joseph] exclaimed: "It was she who sought to make me yield myself unto her!" Now one of those present, a member of her own household, suggested this: If his tunic has been torn from the front, then she is telling the truth, and he is a liar.” [Ref: 12:26, by Muhammad Assad] “He (Joseph) said: "She it was who sought to enjoy herself by me." And one of those present, a member of her household, said: "If his shirt has been torn from the front, she is telling the truth, and he is a liar.” [Ref: 12:26, by Unal Ali] It is undeniable fact; Shahid has been translated to mean Hadhir in context of Ghayb (unseen/absent) in Ahadith narrating Dua recited in funeral prayers: “Abu Ibrahim Al-Ashhali narrated from his father who said: "When the Messenger of Allah would perform the Salat for the funeral he would said: 'O Allah! Forgive our living and our deceased, our present and our absent (i.e. wa shahidina wa gha'ibina), our young and our old, our male and our female.'" [Ref; Tirmadhi, B5, H1024] “It was narrated from Abu Ibrahim Al-Ansari from his father that he heard the Prophet say, when offering the funeral prayer for one who had died: O Allah forgive our living and our dead, those who are present among us and those who are absent (i.e. wa shahidina wa gha'ibina), our males and our females, our young and our old.” [Ref: Sunan Nisa’i, B21, H1988] Do note the Dua states, diametric opposite of each word and as such opposite male is female, living is dead, and therefore Ghayb’s diametric opposite would be Hadhir. Alhasil, Shahid in meaning of Hadhir is established which none but insane would dispute. Point to remember is; healthy being who is Hadhir (i.e. present) must naturally be Nazir (i.e. seeing) and Sami (i.e. hearing). Also note these meanings need to be assumed automatically because these are fundamental part of Shahid. Hadhir without hearing and seeing does not accurately depict the meanng of Shahid and to believe in Hadhir without Sami and Nazir would be distortion of natural meaning of word Shahid. Shahid As Witness: If a witness is not present (i.e. Hadhir) near the location where incident has taken place and was not able to see (i.e. Nazir) the events taking place he cannot be termed as a witness. Any/Every creation, deemed a witness must be Hadhir within the creation of Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) and if a witness has no presence within creation then his/her existence is alleged. And if a creation is Hadhir and is believed to be a witness over y but this witness with his own eyes/ears actually has not seen/heard anything regarding y he/she cannot be a true witness. A true witness must be Hadhir some where within creation and must be Nazir over the events regarding which he is to bear witness. Alhasil it is fundamentally important that a witness be Hadhir Nazir otherwise a person who has been presented as a witness [without being Hadhir and Nazir] cannot be true witness. If Shahid as witness is believed then one has to believe Hadhir Nazir is Tafseel (i.e. detail) and Tafseer (i.e. explanation) of it. Conclusion: If word Shahid is in meaning of witness then Hadhir Nazir and Sami is Tafseel/Tafseer. And if Shahid is taken in meaning of Hadhir then Sami (i.e. hearing) and Baseer (i.e. seeing) is Tafseel/Tafseer. Regardless of what meaning is assigned to Shahid the implications are same and opponents of Islam disputing over it in attempt to bog down the discussion on this subject. Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi

Introduction: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) establishes in his book; Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as Shahid (i.e. witness) to mankind. As result of this Muslims also believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) will give testimony on judgment day regarding events/actions that took place on earth because he has himself witnessed the events/actions as a first hand witness. Khawarij believes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sent as a Shahid but will give testimony on account of being informed by others and not due to being first hand witness. In other words they negate for Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) the qualities which establish him as a Shahid and we Muslims affirm these qualities. Due to disagreement between Muslims and Khawarij it is important to establish Islamic position with combination of Quranic and rationally persuasive reasoning. Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) Sent As A Shahid: Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is reported to have said: “O Prophet, indeed We have sent you as a Shahid (i.e. witness) and a bringer of good tidings and a warner.” [Ref: 33:45] "We have truly sent thee as a witness, as a bringer of glad tidings, and as warner." [Ref: 48:8] “How then (will the sinners fare on Judgment Day) when We shall bring forward witnesses from within every community, and bring thee (O Prophet) as witness (i.e. Shaheed) against them?” [Ref: 4:41] Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent as a Shahid can only be on basis of two facts; i) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) existed as a Prophet before he was sent, ii) Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has qualities which will enable him to be a witness; to be Hadhir (i.e. present) and to be Nazir (i.e. seeing), with ability of hearing. Explanation Of Meaning Of Being Sent As A Shahid: To believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was not sent as a hearing/seeing type of Shahid/Shaheed amounts to; one believes Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sent as a deaf and blind Prophet. Note, Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) stated He has sent Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) as Shahid/Shaheed in the following verses: “O Prophet, indeed We have sent you as a Shahid (i.e. witness) and a bringer of good tidings and a warner.” [Ref: 33:45] One who is sent as a Shahid/Shaheed must have capacity to be a witness – i.e. must be hearing/seeing and living. To illustrate this position, please suppose a certain, intellectual, is acting as a official witness of United Nations, sent to Palestine to document the actrocities and controlled systematic genocide of Palestinians by Nazi state of Israel. Can this person be sent as a Shahid if he/she does not hear, or see? And importantly would United Nations send a blind and deaf person as their representative as official witness? Yet some people believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala), the all-Knower of Ghayb, sent a Prophet to Arabs, as a Shahid and used intense form of Shahid; as Shaheed: “How then (will the sinners fare on Judgment Day) when We shall bring forward witnesses from within every community, and bring thee (O Prophet) as witness (i.e. Shaheed) against them?”, but not as hearing, or seeing type of Shahid and Shaheed. Do you deem the United Nations body to be wiser then Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala)? And believe Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) did not know Arabic? Reason with youtself; if Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) intended to send a representative without hearing and seeing then He would have used words which denote equivlent meanings. And the type of representative He willed, He sent, and expressed it as He intended. Logical And Rational Deductions From Meaning Of Words: A police man is appointed to position of Chief Inspector and sent as a Chief Inspector. A certain intellectual and philosopher argues; Chief Inspector Biggles job description excludes inspection of any/every sort. And with this intellectual and philosopher agrees a regular Joe. Would any sane individual believe Inspector Biggles is inspector but not inspection type inspector? Or there is a manager who has been sent as a manager of a bank but this manager is manager without managing anything? Certain words denote a meanings which cannot be negated. Inspector is with inspection and inspector must be hearing, seeing, intelligent, sane, qualified and same apply to manager. In context of the article words Shahid/Shaheed also have certain meaning which cannot be negated. And these meanings cannot be negated for one who has been sent as Shahid/Shaheed. One who has been sent as a Shahid/Shaheed must be sane, intelligent, and have capacity of hearing and seeing. Otherwise he does not fill the position of Shahid. Believing In Arabic Words Disbelieving In Word Meanings: Those who claim Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sent as a Shahid but not as a seeing/hearing type of Shahid should note this. The Qadiyaniyyah believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Khatm Un Nabiyeen but they do not ascribe to the words and to him finality/end of Prophet-hood due to which they are not Muslims. Is one who believes; Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) is Rabb of the universe a Muslim when he does not believe any known meaning associated with the word Rabb in Quran and in Arabic language but ascribes to Rabb invented meaning? What if one ascribes to Rabb a meaning which is opposite of Rabbs lingustic usage – i.e. instead of Sutainer meaning of Sustained is ascribed? You will agree such a person is from disbelievers and not a Muslim. Then how can your claim is of Islam is valid when you negate that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is not hearing/seeing type of Shahid? Such a person is not from amongst Muslims. The Requirement Of Being Muslim: It is imperative to believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) has been sent as a Shahid and Shaheed in meaning of hearing and seeing type of Shahid/Shaheed. In other words believe that when Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) was sent as Insaan (i.e. human), to Arabs of his own time, then he was Shahid in meaning of hearing and seeing type of Shahid. In this historical context, at the very least, affirmed/believed meaning of Shahid, should be hearing and seeing type of Shahid. One who rejects the meaning of hearing/seeing type of Shahid in this context is upon Kufr, and if one dies upon this beliefe then such a person dies a Kafir. In this regard there is no if, or but. The Disputed Meaning Of Shahid And Its Verdict: As stated earlier, Muslims believe Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is Shahid/Shaheed as hearing and seeing type. And Muslims use this fundamental meaning of verses to expand and interpret these and other verses of Quran in light of each other which results creed which is known as Hadhir Nazir. It is a belief that Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) did not just witness the deeds of people with his eyes/ears in his immediate vinicity but he witnessed the deeds of his then entire Ummah – believing and disbelieving - and has continued to witness the deeds of his entire Ummah – believing and disbelieving - ever since his station of Shahid was perfected. If Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala) wills detail explanations with evidences will follow at the end of introductory article series. This belief is result of Tafsir of Quran with Quranic and this type of Tafsir is considered to be the best form of Tafsir of Quran. And due to this belief not being explicitly stated in a single verse or Ahadith and it being result of combination of verses to disbelieve in this belief of Hadhir Nazir is not Kufr. Scholars Of Ahlus Sunnah On Disputed Meaning Of Shahid: Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) is reported to have said: “Abu Dharr (Allah be pleased with him) reported from the Prophet (Peace be upon him) that,"Two are better than one, and three better than two; so stick to the Jama'ah for verily Allah, Most Great and Glorious, will only unite my nation on guidance." [Ref: Musnad Ahmad, Kitab Al-Ansar, Abu Zar Al Ghaffari, H20776] Out of three two is majority one is minority, and out of five three is majority two is minority therefore the Jamma mentioned in the Hadith composes majority. Hence the following Hadith is explanation of already quoted Hadith: “I heard the Messenger of Allah (subhanhu wa ta’ala) say: ‘My nation will not unite on misguidance, so if you see them differing, follow the great majority.” [Ref: Ibn Majah, Vol.1, B36, H3950] Coming back to the topic, the scholars of Islam have stated to disbelieve in Hadhir Nazir is not Kufr. I specificly sought answer to this question from Shaykh Sayyidi Akhtar Raza Khan Al-Azhari. Apart from agreeing with disbelief of Hadhir Nazir not being Kufr he added one who disbelieves in this creed is not from Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jammah. And this is because Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) stated the Jamhoor (i.e. the majority), the Sawad Al Azam (i.e. group comprimising great majority) cannot be upon misguidance, and on this issue of Hadhir Nazir the majority has reached agreement of Hadhir Nazir being correct. Conclusion: Shahid fundamentally means a witness of hearing and seeing capacity. And Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent as a Shahid denotes he was sent as a hearing/seeing type of Shahid. To negate this fundamental by attributing to Shahid any other meaning then obvious is Kufr which invalidates belief in Islam. Rejection of commonly associated belief of Hadhir Nazir associated with Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa aalihi was’sallam) being sent as a Shahid/Shaheed who witnesses the deeds of his Ummah and mankind in general takes rejector out of Ahlus Sunnah and into misguidede sects. Due to Hadhir Nazir being derivative of Tafsir of Quran and not being explicitly and emphatically being expressed by Allah (subhanahu wa ta’ala). Wama alayna ilal balaghul mubeen. Muhammed Ali Razavi.

Biddat ki do (2) tareefen mashoor hen. Ek toh ahle Sunnat yehni jamhoor ki, biddat hasanah, biddat dhalalah, wali. Jamhoor wali mein joh biddat Quran o Sunnat say joh amaal e saliha ka muraqab heh woh biddat hasanah heh aur joh gunnah o kufr/shirk ka muraqab woh biddat dhalalah kehlati heh. Aur dosri joh Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali aur Mujadid Ali thani wali, in ki tareef mein har amal joh Quran o Sunnat kay amaal e saliha kay khilaaf heh woh biddat heh Joh Quran o Sunnat kay amal e saliha ka majmua heh ussay woh Sunnat kehtay hen (magar Sunnat e RasoolAllah nahin samajtay) aur biddat nahin samajtay. Jissay woh biddat samajtay hen ussay woh Quran o Sunnat mein gunahoon kufr shirk ka muraqab samaj kar biddat kehtay hen. Donoon tareefoon ko agar sahih say samja jahay aur sahih tareekay say apply keeya jahay toh phir yeh donoon tareefen Ahle Sunnat kay kissi amal ka radd nahin karteen. Ibn Rajab wali tareef mein, biddat ussay kehtay hen joh Ahle Sunnat wali mein biddat e dhalalah heh, aur biddat e hasanah ka ko woh lughvi biddat kehtay hen. Mein Wahhabi thah aur abhi bi Wahhabiyon wali biddat ki tareef use karta hoon behas o mubaisa mein magar likh likahi mein Sunniyoon wali. Meray articles hen jin mein, khadam nay Ibn Rajab wali biddat ki tareef ki tanqeed aur ijtihadi khata aur na-muqamal tehraya heh ... magar donoon mein sya kohi bi seekh lenh. Khata tareef kay akhaz karnay mein heh, magar us say masail e fiqha kay samajnay mein kohi kharabi nahin aati.

Jistera aik dua mangi, ya Allah mujjay lakhoon karoroon ka malik bana deh. Dua aik heh, Allah dua qubul farma kar lakhoon karoroon ka malik bana sakta heh. Ya mein dua karoon, ya Allah Parvez Shaykh ko lakhoon ka malik, karoroon ka malik bana deh toh kohi aqal wala ihtiraz karay ga kay mangay lakhoon karoroon magar dua ek mangi? Is'see tara hamari dua heh kay Allah lakhoon salam behjay aur Allah behjta heh, in-nallaha wa malaikatu yu salluna alan Nabi ... wa tasleema ... Allah aur farishtay salat behijtay hen ... momino salat aur tasleem (i.e. salam) behjo.

salam alayqum, bhai yeh kitab das daffa yahan par pesh huwi heh aur itni dafa jawab deh chukay hen. magar keun kay mawad mukhtalif threadss mein heh ... dhoondnay say bi naahin milta ... hona yeh chahyeh kay joh joh ihtiraz thread mein ho us ka jawab wahan bi deeya jahay ... au phir ihtiraz kay mutabiq ek aur thread banaya jahay joh - radd ihtirazat - kay section mein ho aur ihtiraz ko title banaya jahay aur ihtiraz aur jawab donoon ko copy paste keeya jahay. Esa karnay kay wasteh support aur help chahyeh ... ahle ilm jawab denh ... ek aur team un ko title deh kar ihtirazaat kay jawabat kay section mein muntakil karay ... magar kohi bi banda esa karnay pwr tiyar nahin ... deen kay wastay kissi ko time nahin ... mein hoon kay pachaas mamulaat mein tangen pansahi hen aur meray pass time nahin ka esa kar sakoon ... app thori mehnat karen ... is maulvi ka naam forum seach mein dalen yaqeenan niklay ga jawaab

Salam alayqum, Mawlana Murtaza Hassan ki Ashadd ul-Azaab ala musaylma ala panjab, kissi kay pass ho toh share keren please. private mein. Yeh Kitab Deobandiyoon nay ghayb kee huwi heh internet say. Is ka mafooz hona zeroori heh.